Re: Pro-gun article
 

I never said anything about any US base.
WTF are you on about?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1010368]I never said anything about any US base.
WTF are you on about?[/quote]

Well, see, if it were a US base, it would have been immoral and the lowest form of 2nd Amendment abuse, and obviously child endangerment lawsuits would have to had been filed. But since it's not a US base, that makes it ok, because other countries understand how to restrict guns from the hands of children, and obviously the picture is showing how those kids are being told the evil of gun handling.

Didn't you get that????
Double :doh::doh:

Re: Pro-gun article
 

:laughing2

GiantOne, doing our work for us.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-_3u-YeEc9Xk/T_sBG5kHFeI/AAAAAAAAEVY/VW6QvWRBMCQ/s1600/monkey-shaking-head.gif[/img]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

What if stricter gun control loses(not saves) even one more life?

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/york-city-sees-surge-gun-violence-213722082.html]New York City sees surge in gun violence[/url]

edit:

Actually a bit of a misleading title, as total shootings this year are lower to this point then last year at this time. But they had dropped last year before gun control was enacted as well([url]http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/murders-fall-record-city-article-1.1229273[/url]), so I don't think numbers alone mean anything in terms of effectiveness.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1010349][IMG]http://i44.tinypic.com/351ybh5.jpg[/IMG][/quote]


I remember when we had archery in gym class. Its a wonder no one was ever shot with the lack of supervision we had. It was like here are some bow and arrows you guy have fun now. One day a rabbit was in the field and everyone started shooting arrows at the poor rabbit.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

This is just peachy:

[URL="http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2013/05/31/Police-selling-guns-from-buyback-program/UPI-64641370015272/"]Police selling guns from buyback program[/URL]

[I]ST. CHARLES, Ill., May 31 (UPI) -- A police department in the Chicago suburbs said some of the guns obtained from a buyback program will be sold to a pair of licensed dealers.

St. Charles Police Chief James Lamkin said about 20 firearms obtained through a gun buyback program and seized by courts will be sold to the dealers, the Chicago Tribune reported Friday.

"There's value in these guns," Lamkin said. "They're not illegal guns. Quite honestly, it's a bottom line for us."[/I]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Cool! I think I'll hit him up for some.....Weaponry bargains

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/08/us/california-college-gunman/index.html?hpt=hp_t1]Source: Santa Monica gunman previously hospitalized for mental health - CNN.com[/url]

Whats the positive in giving institutionalized people guns? anybody?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Did somebody say there was a positive?
Is this a trick question?
........

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/08/us/arizona-man-shot/index.html?hpt=hp_t3]Arizona police: 4-year-old boy fatally shoots his father - CNN.com[/url]

amazing how stupid gun owners are.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Actually........
Amazing, how stupid gross generalizations are.
THIS just in!
300 million legally held firearms in this country did......absolutely nothing today.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

100%, nailed on FACT!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Chico23231;1011399][url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/08/us/arizona-man-shot/index.html?hpt=hp_t3]Arizona police: 4-year-old boy fatally shoots his father - CNN.com[/url]

amazing how stupid gun owners are.[/quote]

In the article it doesn't say why the gun was out, just that a friend and the friend's child stopped by unannounced. Maybe he was going to or coming from a gun range, and hadn't put it away, or cleaning it. Not quite sure why it would be loaded, but from the story, it is being treated as an unfortunate accident, no charges filed.

That said, I can't begin to imagine what the child is going to deal with for a long time.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Wow, millions of Americans are stupid.
Bummer!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Gun shouldnt be out around children period. no excuses

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Chico23231;1011409]Gun shouldnt be out around children period. no excuses[/quote]

from the story:
[quote]Justin Stanfield Thomas, 35, and his son [B]made an unannounced trip Friday[/B] to the home of an unidentified former roommate, police said. Thomas had previously lived in the residence, according to investigators.

"This appears to be an accident. There was no conflict in the stories of those in the house," said Prescott Valley Police Sgt. Brandon Bonney. "The resident didn't know his former roommate was stopping by to visit."

[B]Moments after arriving at the home[/B], the boy picked up the small-caliber handgun and asked his father and other adults in the room what it was he was holding, said Bonney.


[B]Seconds later [/B]he pulled the trigger[/quote]

?? this was a few seconds, you (and I) have no idea how it happened, the police have said there was no negligence, and it was a tragic accident. Per the story, it doesn't sound like they were all sitting around smoking and joking leaving a gun out and about. They came in, the 4yo saw it, and before they could stop it his dad was dead. It's just not something you can make a general statement out of.

Given that the father who died was a former roommate, if he knew the guy generally had his guns out and available, then this would be a case where I blame the victim. He could have called and let the gun owner know they were going to show up, and could he make sure his gun(s) were child safe.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Keeps your guns locked up folks. Rule no one with owning a gun, being responsible enough to keep it secure.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Well hey, at least that household is safe, right?

:doh:

Re: Pro-gun article
 

not all tragedies, and this was a tragedy, need to be politicized or propagandized.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[IMG]https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7544196608/h1677B7EA/[/IMG]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

That would actually be banable in some states.
:stop:

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Chico23231;1011411]Keeps your guns locked up folks. Rule no one with owning a gun, being responsible enough to keep it secure.[/quote]
There is not a responsible firearm owner that does not live by this rule...and many more to assure there can be no...accidents. It is the true ZERO tolerance. I can also assure if their should be an incident involving me and a gun, it is not by accident.
The preponderance of the millions of legal firearm owners are not the problem......

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1011439][IMG]https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7544196608/h1677B7EA/[/IMG][/quote]
Looks like it could be an "Assault Stick" to me. Could be trouble......

Re: Pro-gun article
 

A nightstick is all I have to protect my home.

If the day comes when I need an assault rifle, I'm clearly in the wrong neighborhood.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Ask Sean Taylor how that worked out?
Make sure your stick is loaded. An unloaded stick is useless.
BTW, an "Assault Weapon" is basically no different than most other weapons. An American public that knows no better, has just been sold a.....bill of goods

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Hog1;1011477]Ask Sean Taylor how that worked out?
Make sure your stick is loaded. An unloaded stick is useless.
BTW, an "Assault Weapon" is basically no different than most other weapons. An American public that knows no better, has just been sold a.....bill of goods[/quote]

Sorry, should have said if I ever need a gun, didn't mean to get the assault rifle craziness going again, I was just thinking of what was in the pic.

No guarantees a gun would have given ST any better of a chance. But if you sleep better at night so be it.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

AND I do not wish to resurrect the...nonsense surrounding "Assault" mania.....
Guarantee's? No
Odd's? absolutely
As the saying goes.....Never bring a knife to a gun fight.....
HTTR....

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Chico23231;1011409]Gun shouldnt be out around children period. no excuses[/quote]




But the 2nd amendment says they can own one , what about their rights?:twocents:

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Schneed's not here when you need him..
Giants...Suck!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Hog1;1011514]Schneed's not here when you need him..
Giants...Suck![/quote]



Hold on, I'll go find you a tampon and a Midol .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1011597]Hold on, I'll go find you a tampon and a Midol .[/quote]

Just look in your medicine cabinet, I'm sure you have plenty left over from the past football season.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1011597]Hold on, I'll go find you a tampon and a Midol .[/quote]
Appreciate the offer.....you may want to hang on to it as the Midol will help with your headache, the Tampon will help soak up your tears.
the season is just around the corner........

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1011598]Just look in your medicine cabinet, I'm sure you have plenty left over from the past football season.[/quote]

Not the forum jr.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=2[/URL]&

Make Gun Companies Pay Blood Money
GUN manufacturers have gone to great lengths to avoid any moral responsibility or legal accountability for the social costs of gun violence — the deaths and injuries of innocent victims, families torn apart, public resources spent on gun-related crime and medical expenses incurred.

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.
This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.
As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the [URL="http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html"][COLOR=#0066cc]Vaccine Injury Compensation Program[/COLOR][/URL], those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation

Re: Pro-gun article
 

I honestly feel that if people wouldn't get such a hard on for guns or if it weren't a hobby, there would not be a debate on guns. Unfortunately, both sides are unwilling to have a civilized debate about this issue. On the one hand, it is ridiculously to say that they should get rid of all the guns. But on the other had, I find it stupid for someone to say that we need AK-47s to defend your freedom.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1013266][URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=2[/URL]&

Make Gun Companies Pay Blood Money
GUN manufacturers have gone to great lengths to avoid any moral responsibility or legal accountability for the social costs of gun violence — the deaths and injuries of innocent victims, families torn apart, public resources spent on gun-related crime and medical expenses incurred.

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.
This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.
As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the [URL="http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html"][COLOR=#0066cc]Vaccine Injury Compensation Program[/COLOR][/URL], those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation[/quote]

[URL="http://autos.aol.com/article/more-death-by-texting/"]More Death By Texting[/URL]
[URL]http://post.jagran.com/texting-while-driving-increasing-death-toll-on-the-roads-1372071476[/URL]
[URL="http://autos.yahoo.com/news/distracted-walking-3-5-pedestrians-texting-141300347.html"]Yahoo![/URL]
[URL="http://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cell-phone/cell-phone-statistics.html"]Cell Phone Accident Statistics and Texting While Driving Facts[/URL]
[URL="http://www.distraction.gov/content/get-the-facts/facts-and-statistics.html"]Distracted Driving | Facts and Stats | Texting and Driving[/URL]

Will you also advocate the same for Cell Phones....Cars....Pedestrians?
The studies are...Endless and Conclusive....Cell Phones kill
I wonder how Chevy....IPHONE....will feel about paying "Blood Money"?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[URL="http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-findings-on-officers-thoughts/"]What cops think:
[/URL]

PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives

[I]1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime. However, more than 20 percent say any ban would actually have a negative effect on reducing violent crime.

3.) About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.

4.) Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions. Similarly, more than 61 percent said they would refuse to enforce such laws if they themselves were Chief or Sheriff.

5.) More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent).

6.) The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.

7.) More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.

8.) More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.

9.) More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.

10.) When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required. About 42 percent say it should be required for all weapons, with the remainder favoring training classes for certain weapons.

11.) While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.[/I]

But what would they know, eh?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1013266][URL]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=2[/URL]&

Make Gun Companies Pay Blood Money
GUN manufacturers have gone to great lengths to avoid any moral responsibility or legal accountability for the social costs of gun violence — the deaths and injuries of innocent victims, families torn apart, public resources spent on gun-related crime and medical expenses incurred.

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.
This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.
As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the [URL="http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html"][COLOR=#0066cc]Vaccine Injury Compensation Program[/COLOR][/URL], those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation[/quote]

Im surprised they didnt parallel the Victims of Violent Crime Compensation Fund which provides funds for medical bills of victims of violent crimes who can not afford the medical expenses. The fund is funded by "wages" earned in jail by inmates convicted of violent crimes. So if an inmate makes 40 cents an hour cleaning dishes, 30 cents of that goes to the fund.

In CA I got 20k for facial reconstruction surgery. The ER took about 10k and the plastic surgeon agreed to cap his fee at the balance of the fund limit (20k). I was a broke law student at that time and did not have health insurance. (under obamacare I could have remained on my parents plan). If this fund was not around .... I couldnt imagine what the left side of my face would look like.

at least for me, I am a big fan of that fund and who ever thought of the idea. the comparison is not apples to apples though as technically a gun manufacturer hasnt done anything illegal or wrong . . i guess the argument would be that they, in manufacturing the gun as an intended killing weapon, contributed to the act of killing.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[url=http://wtvr.com/2013/08/27/constitutionalist-carries-assault-rifle-protests-obama/]CBS 6 EXCLUSIVE: Police take guns from armed Obama protester | WTVR.com[/url]

These are some of the looneys the Tea Party attracts. Who in their right mind perches up on the overpass with an assault rifle?