Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1058155]CRedskinsRule, you put up a link for drowning.

[LIST][*][I][B]Males: [/B]Nearly 80% of people who die from drowning are male.2 [/I][*][I][B]Children:[/B] Children ages 1 to 4 have the highest drowning rates. In 2009, among children 1 to 4 years old who died from an unintentional injury, more than 30% died from drowning.1,2 Among children ages 1 to 4, most drownings occur in home swimming pools.2 Drowning is responsible for more deaths among children 1-4 than any other cause except congenital anomalies (birth defects).1 Among those 1-14, fatal drowning remains the second-leading cause of unintentional injury-related death behind motor vehicle crashes.1[/I][*][I][B]Minorities:[/B] Between 2005 and 2009, the fatal unintentional drowning rate for African Americans was significantly higher than that of whites across all ages.2 The disparity is widest among children 5-14 years old. The fatal drowning rate of African American children ages 5 to 14 is almost three times that of white children in the same age range.2 [/I][/LIST]

From the article GiantOne posted, as it substantiates what I've been saying:

[I]If you look at homicide as a function of age, you’ll see that there is a peak between 18 and 20, Webster said. “So for this very high risk group of 18- to 20-year olds[/I]".

And from another CDC report:

[I]Nearly 800 children under 14 were killed in gun accidents from 1999 to 2010, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

[/I]So I'd hazard a guess that whilst it's a tragedy that 800 kids die, possibly because of their parents' blase attitude to gun safety, it's far from the 3,000 figure and a long way off the 10,000 that's used to scare the uninformed pearl-clutchers.

[I]Research shows that storing guns locked and unloaded reduces the risk of both injuries and suicide by about 70%, according to a 2005 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association.[/I][/quote]


You're onto something. I'm not the best swimmer, I tend to sink because of my low bodyfat...but I can handle a pistol.

I am more afraid of deep water than firearms.


I need this t-shirt.

[img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-NboZqoRGnRo/UPLFt6ajdEI/AAAAAAAAIk8/R5hwpmVB6NE/s1600/ninetymilesuznpr91s2uhj3o1_500.jpg[/img]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Hey, how did they kill so many people without guns?


[url=http://news.yahoo.com/pa-craigslist-killing-suspect-claims-22-others-202532190.html]Pa. Craigslist killing suspect claims 22 others[/url]


[IMG]http://www.harborfreight.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/i/m/image_18653.jpg[/IMG]

[img]http://images.hayneedle.com/mgen/master:WUST083.jpg?is=1200,1200,0xffffff[/img]




[SIZE="6"]BAN POWER CORDS AND REGISTER ALL STEAK KNIVES![/SIZE]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1059681][B]Even if your claims were true,[/B] the best thing parents could do is join the NRA and take advantage of their training courses. The NRA has done more to prevent accidents than any anti-gun law has. They've educated millions on gun safety and proper and responsible ownership.

I'll make my next donation in your name. It's for the children. ;)[/quote](Bold mine)

This latest claim of giantone's is probably a total falsehood. (surprise) Historically, anti-gun groups cite fatalities numbers that include young adults like teenagers age 18-22 in gang related activities, and tout them as "children".

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Buffalo Bob;1059641] The only people who are going to obey more gun laws are law abiding citizens who don't go around shooting people anyway.[/quote]


yeah right .

[url=http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/shooter-loud-music-killing-felt-victimized-tapes-reveal-n33196]Shooter in Loud Music Killing Felt Victimized, Tapes Reveal - NBC News[/url]


All you have to do is say you thought ,he had a gun and you can kill anyone, no proof needed .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059723](Bold mine)

This latest claim of giantone's is probably not a total falsehood. .[/quote]

The NRA taken down in Rhode Island by one student from Brown .


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmaIB_MYSx8[/ame]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1059731]yeah right .

[url=http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/shooter-loud-music-killing-felt-victimized-tapes-reveal-n33196]Shooter in Loud Music Killing Felt Victimized, Tapes Reveal - NBC News[/url]


[B] All you have to do is say you thought ,he had a gun and you can kill anyone, no proof needed .[/quote][/B]

What? You make it sound like he got away with something, the dude is going to get a minimum of 60 years. I would hate to ask what new gun laws you would write if you were the first dictator of the USA. Go ahead and list them and I will tell you how they won't work.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1059732]The NRA taken down in Rhode Island by one student from Brown .
[/quote]

Sam Bell, couldn't get his way using the legislative process, so he looks for the weasel route.

[URL="http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode-island/2013/07/07/assault-weapons-ban-fizzles-general-assembly/8jQLGDceji910OIZ9lWAPM/story.html"]RI assault weapons ban fizzles in General Assembly[/URL]

[I]In response to the proposals, gun rights supporters held rallies of their own that attracted thousands to the Statehouse to protest what they said were politically motivated attempts to take away their 2nd Amendment rights. Many lawmakers agreed.[/I]

[I]The bills that did pass attracted support from both sides and was pushed through nearly unanimously. Rep. Mike Chippendale, R-Foster, one of the leading opponents of the proposed ban on assault weapons, said he was pleased both sides were able to work together to create proposals that didn’t infringe on gun owners’ rights. He said the more ambitious gun control proposals wouldn’t have stopped gun crime or prevented another massacre.[/I]

Judging by the video it looks like Sam Bell couldn't defend himself from an angry toddler. I'm sure he'll have a stellar career suing people or businesses that he doesn't like.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059723](Bold mine)

This latest claim of giantone's is probably a total falsehood. (surprise) Historically, anti-gun groups cite fatalities numbers that include young adults like teenagers age 18-22 in gang related activities, and tout them as "children".[/quote]

Yup. I've been saying that for years.

When you drill down into the data (which will make you really unpopular with the hippie-tree-hugging-firearms-hysteria group) you'll find the numbers absolutely astonishing.

Of course THAT wouldn't be rational, but why should THAT stop the Unicorn groomers?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1059732]The NRA taken down in Rhode Island by one student from Brown .[/quote]LMAO! RedskinRat already covered this, it's kinda ironic the last two individuals you posted this thread (one fictional telling a story based loosely on reality, and an actual person telling a story based loosely on reality) are both wrong in their respective mediums. :laughing-

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059723](Bold mine)

This latest claim of giantone's is probably a total falsehood. (surprise) Historically, anti-gun groups cite fatalities numbers that include young adults like teenagers age 18-22 in gang related activities, and tout them as "children".[/quote]

So an 18-year old is a child if they get shot but they are adults when they need an abortion or want to smoke pot and drive...makes perfect sense.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1059790]So an 18-year old is a child if they get shot but they are adults when they need an abortion or want to smoke pot and drive...makes perfect sense.[/quote]


...does to any normal person.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Here's a normal person and their take:

[URL="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frenchrevolution/2014/02/18/should-fathers-carry-guns-to-protect-their-families/"]Should Fathers Carry Guns to Protect Their Families?[/URL]

[I]“Hypothesis: the people who most want to carry are the very last people on earth who should be allowed to carry.”In the remote chance that an otherwise-thoughtful person was actually arguing that the people who most want to exercise a constitutional right are the “very last people on earth” who should be allowed to exercise that right, I thought I’d take a moment to explain why a person carries.[/I]

And:

[I]In my experience, those individuals who carry do so because they very consciously do not want to belong to the class of citizens that is inherently helpless — totally reliant upon the state to protect not just themselves but their family, friends, and neighbors. If the choice is between protectors and protected, they choose to be protectors.

This identity is often inseparable from the notion that there is no set of government policies — no utopia — that can eliminate from human society the need for immediate protection. People can and will try to hurt others — using whatever means immediately available — and it strikes us as utterly reckless to be unprepared for this reality.[/I]

And then this description of G1:

[I]The protected class has a different view. The protected class is a dependent class — not economically dependent of course, but dependent on the state in perhaps a more fundamental way (for their very lives) – and like members of other dependent classes, they are terrified of flaws in the state’s protective apparatus. Walled off from gun culture, they read the occasional, aberrant story of (legal) gun-owner stupidity or recklessness and cower in fear of a nonexistent threat. (While of course blithely sending their kids off to far more dangerous activities, like swimming in neighbors’ pools or riding in neighbors’ cars).

To the protected class, private ownership of firearms is the flaw in the system that makes them feel vulnerable. It’s the barrier to the safety they crave but can’t provide.[/I]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1059899]Here's a normal person and their take:

[I].[/I][/quote]


How would you know , your definition of normal and everyone else's is different. .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1059899][B]In my experience, those individuals who carry do so because they very consciously do not want to belong to the class of citizens that is inherently helpless — totally reliant upon the state to protect not just themselves but their family, friends, and neighbors. If the choice is between protectors and protected, they choose to be protectors.

This identity is often inseparable from the notion that [SIZE="5"][COLOR="Red"]there is no set of government policies — no utopia — that can eliminate from human society the need for immediate protection. People can and will try to hurt others — using whatever means immediately available — and it strikes us as utterly reckless to be unprepared for this reality.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B]

The protected class (Giantone) has a different view. The protected class is a dependent class — not economically dependent of course, but dependent on the state in perhaps a more fundamental way (for their very lives) – and like members of other dependent classes, they are terrified of flaws in the state’s protective apparatus. Walled off from gun culture, they read the occasional, aberrant story of (legal) gun-owner stupidity or recklessness and cower in fear of a nonexistent threat. (While of course blithely sending their kids off to far more dangerous activities, like swimming in neighbors’ pools or riding in neighbors’ cars).
[/quote]


Amen.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1059913]How would you know , your definition of normal and everyone else's is different. .[/quote][IMG]http://www.quickmeme.com/img/81/8105d3109926ea4abde8a4c77c2117f2741e2132430dacc78d0a7919c8dfe4a7.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[url=http://www.wxyz.com/news/mom-opens-fire-on-home-invaders-in-detroit-to-defend-children]Mom opens fire on home invaders in Detroit to defend children - WXYZ.com[/url]

I think the biggest shock factor in this story is how fast the Detroit police showed up.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059942][IMG]http://www.quickmeme.com/img/81/8105d3109926ea4abde8a4c77c2117f2741e2132430dacc78d0a7919c8dfe4a7.jpg[/IMG][/quote]



And...

[img]http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/3d/58/c6/3d58c6c97c8ab056ac0ca11fdb89b0d1.jpg[/img]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

im just scared that one day i get into a road rage with a guy or some guy tries to cut in line and I say something .... and then the guy pulls out a gun and shoots me bc he felt [I]threatened[/I].

if your packing .... dont be a jerk provoking confrontation and then try and play the victim.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

The far majority of those with carry permits are responsible, law-abiding citizens who do not want to have to ever use their firearm.

If someone does that, they're likely criminals (or capable of being) and damaged people in other ways too.

You can't deny 99.9% of responsible people who follow the law their rights because of the slim chance you'll run into someone who doesn't respect the law or other humans.

I can tell you, most who are "packing" are moral, law-abiding and properly trained. The few loose cannons and idiots give the rest of us a bad name. Of course, you're in Baltimore, a gathering spot for those types so you are justified in being afraid of something happening.

That's why I speak to no one in that city unless I'm ordering food at the Harbor. :D

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059942][IMG]http://www.quickmeme.com/img/81/8105d3109926ea4abde8a4c77c2117f2741e2132430dacc78d0a7919c8dfe4a7.jpg[/IMG][/quote]
wow, nice retort .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1059992]The far majority of those with carry permits are responsible, law-abiding citizens who do not want to have to ever use their firearm.

If someone does that, they're likely criminals (or capable of being) and damaged people in other ways too.

You can't deny 99.9% of responsible people who follow the law their rights because of the slim chance you'll run into someone who doesn't respect the law or other humans.

I can tell you, most who are "packing" are moral, law-abiding and properly trained. The few loose cannons and idiots give the rest of us a bad name. Of course, you're in Baltimore, a gathering spot for those types so you are justified in being afraid of something happening.

That's why I speak to no one in that city unless I'm ordering food at the Harbor. :D[/quote]


Then why do you send out these pictures of yourself ?

[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=QUUowALGLnVENM&tbnid=mHM8-zooR8PYYM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailykos.com%2Fstory%2F2013%2F06%2F25%2F1218636%2F-IQ-Test-For-Gun-Owners&ei=zaEGU-LmCaTksAS3iYGwCA&bvm=bv.61725948,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNFWwfgbq89gBz1bGdEvh0tndAFQsg&ust=1393029857961955"][IMG]http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/37994/large/nfg.jpg?1372190206[/IMG][/URL]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[URL="http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=9yRJcZ-oQi5i0M&tbnid=4N_AsCwvswC-QM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gamespot.com%2Fforums%2Fofftopic-discussion-314159273%2Ffunny-progun-and-guncontrol-memes-29343547%2F&ei=nqQGU8KmNs7hsATthYHoDw&bvm=bv.61725948,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNHlL6i-3xDPqaAPZlDt1-TL11dqPw&ust=1393030416170933"][IMG]http://blu.stb.s-msn.com/i/3F/942F25EFEB6D5FF24BD3674B0AD7C_h316_w628_m5_crSyORIhC.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1059942][/quote]

Really ,how was that insulting ?:laughing-

Re: Pro-gun article
 

Lets get back to the guys with the guns , you know the cowards.


[URL="http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2014/02/jordan-davis-killer-michael-dunn-was.html"]The Rude Pundit[/URL]

Florida's the land of cowards because so many gun-fellaters want permits that the NRA is [URL="http://jacksonville.com/news/2014-02-17/story/fla-senate-panel-approves-processing-concealed-weapons-permits-tax-collector"][COLOR=#b4445c]pushing[/COLOR][/URL] a bill that would allow people to apply for licenses to carry at tax collection offices. Why? Because there's a six-month backup for processing permits and because sometimes people have to drive up to two hours to go to the gun permit office.

The guns are the problem. Take the gun out of the hands of Michael Dunn, and he backs the fuck up and drives away. See, if you have time to reach in your glove compartment and get your semi-automatic pistol out, you have time to shift into "reverse." If the semi-automatic pistol ain't there, all you got is a car that moves in various directions. Without his gun, George Zimmerman sits in his fuckin' car and waits for the cops. Without his gun, Curtis Reeves goes back to his fucking seat and watches a shitty movie. Because these men, and so many others, are pussies who would never push things to a confrontation without having the gun readily available.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1060017]
The guns are the problem. [/quote]

And yet.......

[quote=Giantone;1060017] Because these men, and so many others, are pussies who would never push things to a confrontation without having the gun readily available.[/quote]

Your irrationality is showing, again.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1060020]And yet.......



Your irrationality is showing, again.[/quote]


How is that ,these guys had not had guns people would still be alive today. You must be one of them ,your courage is in the clip .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1060013]wow, nice retort .[/quote]Thanks. And thanks for proving my point since the original post. Insults, fear, and already refuted fallacies are all you have left. "Your courage is in the clip", lol. Yet you're wanting a constitutional right taken away for your fear.

[URL="http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm"]Giantone[/URL]
[IMG]http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/Assets/ferrouscranus.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1059992]The far majority of those with carry permits are responsible, law-abiding citizens who do not want to have to ever use their firearm.

If someone does that, they're likely criminals (or capable of being) and damaged people in other ways too.

You can't deny 99.9% of responsible people who follow the law their rights because of the slim chance you'll run into someone who doesn't respect the law or other humans.

I can tell you, most who are "packing" are moral, law-abiding and properly trained. The few loose cannons and idiots give the rest of us a bad name. Of course, you're in Baltimore, a gathering spot for those types so you are justified in being afraid of something happening.

That's why I speak to no one in that city unless I'm ordering food at the Harbor. :D[/quote]

lol you talk about respecting people .. then in the same breath use a broad brush to paint baltimore as "those types".

you want me to not associate all responsible gun owners with the nut jobs just because of a few headlines ....... but have no problem labeling all of baltimore as a gathering spot for "those types" bc of a few headlines....

i am surprised that white people living 4 hours from any major city feel the need to carry a gun bc of crime in that far off city.

i dont know why im even really typing in this thread. idc about guns.

i dont have a prob w people owning guns. ak 47s seems a little odd and excessive for someone to want to own but im cool with it.

i am surprised this country doesnt require gun and ammo registration. that doesnt seem unreasonable to me.

if you want people to look past the .1% of crazy gun owners, maybe you should look past the .1% of crazy city folk? idk, live and let live.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1060017] Because these men, and so many others, are pussies who would never push things to a confrontation without having the gun readily available.[/quote]

when did the men of this country become so afraid to take a punch?

Re: Pro-gun article
 

We do have to register our guns, at least in PA.

Some states like NY require your carry permit to list EVERY gun you own. I recently saw a retired cop's permit from NY and it took the front and back of one card and a second card front to list his collection. :D Every time he buys another, he has to pay the State of NY another fee for an updated card.

The bureaucracy of ammo registration would be impossible. President Obama has insinuated about it but his intentions would be to prevent anyone from being able to get any ammo, not to track it or for safety reasons. So instead, he's just having DHS buy billions of rounds and literally dry up the supply in the popular calibers. It's very difficult to find some types and when you do, the price has gone sky high. It's a very underhanded way of implementing gun control without having to write or follow laws.


Also, by "those types"...you can't deny Baltimore or any major city has a higher criminal element. The chances of getting mugged or carjacked there is much greater than if you drive to a rural town or even smaller city like Hagerstown or Frederick. You can't really argue that, can you? You do have to be aware of your surroundings a bit more in a city. That's all I was saying. I live in the country and work in the city so I see both words daily.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=over the mountain;1060118]when did the men of this country become so afraid to take a punch?[/quote]


Since feminism rose up in the 1960s and neutered the male gender.

This country's men (mostly the liberal ones like our friend from NJ here) have become so feminized. They're afraid to step up and be a man. They'd rather watch a woman get mugged than protect her. In a way, it's what the feminists wanted, to be treated equally and thought of as "strong like men" but truth is, the male sex is the stronger one and should be more protective. The females are the nurturing ones. It's not discrimination, it's just nature. We all have our roles and none are more important than any other. We're not equal and trying to equalize the genders only weakens both. Kids need mothers AND fathers...not a mother trying to be a man and a father who has had his manhood decimated.

Very sad.


Don't even get me started on how women want to be in combat roles but don't want their daughters registered under selective service when they turn 18. They want all of the glory with none of the responsibility.

[QUOTE=over the mountain;1060118]when did the men of this country become so afraid to take a punch?[/QUOTE]

You have to blame Matty, JR and their ilk. True story.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=over the mountain;1060118]when did the men of this country become so afraid to take a punch?[/quote]


Bingo , and if you don't want confrontation walk away ,change your seat at the movie , get in your car and drive away , CALL A POLICE OFFICER .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1060120]Since feminism rose up in the 1960s and neutered the male gender.

This country's men (mostly the liberal ones like our friend from NJ here) have become so feminized. They're afraid to step up and be a man. They'd rather watch a woman get mugged than protect her. In a way, it's what the feminists wanted, to be treated equally and thought of as "strong like men" but truth is, the male sex is the stronger one and should be more protective. The females are the nurturing ones. It's not discrimination, it's just nature. We all have our roles and none are more important than any other. We're not equal and trying to equalize the genders only weakens both. Kids need mothers AND fathers...not a mother trying to be a man and a father who has had his manhood decimated.

[/quote]

LOL, wow ! In another thread you accuse me of spreading fear bur here you insinuate that unless I defend a women "WITH A GUN" I'm not a man .


MD, your babbling again.

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Monkeydad;1059962]And...

[img]http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/3d/58/c6/3d58c6c97c8ab056ac0ca11fdb89b0d1.jpg[/img][/quote]

Dude, this one made me spit my ice tea all over my monitor and desk, thanks a lot!

[QUOTE=Giantone;1060155]LOL, wow ! In another thread you accuse me of spreading fear bur here you insinuate that unless I defend a women "WITH A GUN" I'm not a man .


MD, your babbling again.[/QUOTE]

Please point out where MD said 'with a gun'?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=RedskinRat;1060158]Please point out where MD said 'with a gun'?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk[/quote]


Nice try .

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[URL="http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/19/FBI-Report-Shows-Violent-Crime-Decreased-As-Gun-Purchases-Increased"]FBI Report Shows Violent Crime Decreased as Gun Sales Increased[/URL]

[I]Violent crime fell during the first six months of 2013--at the same time the number of gun purchases was expanding.

According to preliminary FBI stats, "All offenses in the category of violent crime" fell during the first six months of 2013, compared to the same time period in 2012.

UPI reports that this included "murder, non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, [and] aggravated assault and robbery." Specifically, "murders declined by 6.9 percent, forcible rapes declined 10.6 percent, aggravated assaults decreased 6.6 percent and robbery offenses were down by 1.8 percent."

On January 6, 2014, Breitbart News reported that background checks for gun purchases had skyrocketed in 2013, particularly in the early part of the year, which coincides with the period of time in which, according to FBI stats, crime fell.

Throughout 2013 as a whole, there were 21,093,273 background checks, compared to 19,592,303 in 2012.

[/I]Mmmmmmm, smug!

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[IMG]http://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/t1/1506973_638629442852603_1129995980_n.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Pro-gun article
 

[quote=Giantone;1060040]How is that ,these guys had not had guns people would still be alive today. You must be one of them ,your courage is in the clip .[/quote]Yeesh. I guess in G1's fantasy land, stupid people having arguments never reach for knives, crowbars, etc......

MD was right about posts like that.
[IMG]http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/3d/58/c6/3d58c6c97c8ab056ac0ca11fdb89b0d1.jpg[/IMG]