[Blue]

The gun lobby in the USA (which seems to be about 99% of them) has a quaint little phrase: guns don't kill people, people kill people.
The presumption being that the weapon of choice is immaterial, if a person is going to kill another person, then 100% of the time, they are going to kill, irregardless of whether they put a bullet or two into the victim or beat the victim to death with a dessert spoon.
Perhaps this is so, in which case how do we explain the very disparate levels of homicides in the USA compared to the rest of the civilized world?
A more salient quaint little phrase may be: Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.
It's the only explanation, since the gun isn't part of the equation, only the intent.

See what I mean Wheatfield.

[Blue]

How do you Differentiate between the guy breaking in to steal who happens to unfortunately catch you at home and the psychotic killer then? I can pretty much bet in most cases it's more likely to be the first guy than the second

And a large majority of criminals are willing to shoot and stab to keep from getting caught. There are plenty of dead victims, both store clerks and folks at home to demonstrate that.

[Blue]

We do have that already I believe, but that doesn't help the bigger problem of the illegal gun market.

Like the one the NBPP leader that got busted with earlier this week. It was one of the guys that was on CNN announcing the bounty. He had an FN 5.7mm.

At that point of sale, does the buyer have to be vetted in the same way as if he had bought from a dealer, and register his ownership with the authorities somehow? If that was done every gun (except those smuggled into the country or stolen, and pre-existing black market weapons) would be traceable to the owner, and each person owning a gun would be on a database somewhere. Then if they commit a crime, the authorities could check whether they owned a gun and it could be confiscated and destroyed. All non-registered weapons found by the authorities could be removed in the same way. Could this reduce the flow of guns into the illegal market?

This has been ruled unconstitutional at the Federal level and by many States. That is one of the checks and balances on a Police State.

[metaglypto]

A more salient quaint little phrase may be: Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people. It's the only explanation, since the gun isn't part of the equation, only the intent. See what I mean Wheatfield

How about this, "Typewriters don't make typo's, Canadians do!

[stanleyk]

As a child I fancied myself as the "great white hunter", no racial slur intended. Partly due to pressure from an older brother, I killed a lot of squirrels. One time I shot a chipmunk, and just wounded it. I then tried to save it's life,and just succeeded in prolonging it's agony. Obviously I have not forgotten it. Later in life I went deer hunting, and I have killed two deer. After an ankle injury where I permanently ruptured a tendon, I pretty much have given up hunting. I went with my bro-in-law two years ago, without a license and only a camera. I love venison and can dress and butcher an animal I have not killed, but I find no satisfaction in killing the animal. Strangely, I have discovered my photographic exploits have taught me more about different animal behaviour than hunting ever did.

I stayed with a guide on the Snake River in Hell's Canyon who had been a hunter and trapper in his younger days in both Canada and Alaska. He got out of it because he said he just got tired of all the death and killing and making his living that way. While I do not agree with a lot of things normhead has to say, I agree that killing, even animals, has an emotional and psychological impact on a person.

I live in Texas where the hunting culture is pretty strong. They had ranches down here where they tied up sick exotic animals so people could shoot them. One guy i worked with hunted deer like this: put out a corn feeder, hide in a blind with scent block and camouflage on, wait until the deer walked up to the corn feeder then shoot it with a high powered rifle and scope. I'm sure he felt real macho doing that with his scent blocker and camouflage outfit on. I thought it was kind of pathetic.

[jogiba]

Amid continued controversy over the death of Trayvon Martin, the father of the man who shot Martin lamented what he called "so much hate" coming from all sides - including President Obama.

George Zimmerman's father: "So much hate" coming from Obama - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

You Tube

You Tube

[metaglypto]

I live in Texas where the hunting culture is pretty strong. They had ranches down here where they tied up sick exotic animals so people could shoot them. One guy i worked with hunted deer like this: put out a corn feeder, hide in a blind with scent block and camouflage on, wait until the deer walked up to the corn feeder then shoot it with a high powered rifle and scope. I'm sure he felt real macho doing that with his scent blocker and camouflage outfit on. I thought it was kind of pathetic.

That is not hunting as a sport at all. I do understand hunting as a sport, and some consider that cruel as well, I do not, I just don't enjoy it. What you describe is more like killing cattle at a slaughterhouse. Their is no "hunt" involved, no skill, except the ability to hit a target at 25-50 yards. Probably the only redeeming factor is that the animal likely does not suffer, which is the way a slaughterhouse is supposed to work.

[GeneV]

I live in Texas where the hunting culture is pretty strong. They had ranches down here where they tied up sick exotic animals so people could shoot them. One guy i worked with hunted deer like this: put out a corn feeder, hide in a blind with scent block and camouflage on, wait until the deer walked up to the corn feeder then shoot it with a high powered rifle and scope. I'm sure he felt real macho doing that with his scent blocker and camouflage outfit on. I thought it was kind of pathetic.

Some members of my family in Texas have been on those hunts. Feed the deer every day, and charge people for the privilege of executing them when they come to eat. Frankly, I love venison and buy it from legal vendors, like D'Artagnan. However, I get no joy from killing or butchering my meal.

[normhead]

Yeah, those Florida State University criminologists are renowned for making crap up.

There are so many hole in the first page I can't believe you even bothered posting it.
First of all,, your link is not to the University of Florida or criminologists there as claimed. The "study" is unsupported by raw data therefore impossible to analyze.

Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

So what this survey measures is what people believed. No basis in science whatsoever. The fact that you are a gun owner already gives you a bias towards the belief that a gun will save your life.

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

Wow, we have only established what people believed, the level of actual gun defences has not been determined.

the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.

[Parallax]

There are so many hole in the first page I can't believe you even bothered posting it.
First of all,, your link is not to the University of Florida or criminologists there as claimed. The "study" is unsupported by raw data therefore impossible to analyze.



So what this survey measures is what people believed. No basis in science whatsoever. The fact that you are a gun owner already gives you a bias towards the belief that a gun will save your life.



Wow, we have only established what people believed, the level of actual gun defences has not been determined.

the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.

Didn't figure it would make you a convert.

[Blue]

George Zimmerman's father: "So much hate" coming from Obama - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Zimmerman is a Democrat. I say indict him.

[normhead]

Didn't figure it would make you a convert.

Why would it? It could just as easily prove that gun owners are more paranoid than the general population, that they over-estimate the actual threats to themselves or even that they are delusional. Telephone polling is how polls are done. Not hard research.

If he said 2.5 million Americans believe that in the last 5 years guns saved their lives I'd believe him. Americans are that crazy.I also believe that in many of those instances many non gun owners wouldn't have believed their lives to have been in danger, or would have thought a gun was even necessary. This is easy. Use standard methods to select a control group, and show that there are 2.5 million Americans who didn't own guns, who have been in the same situation but were actually injured or killed. It's so easy, you have to ask why the researcher didn't do it. After all, it is standard practice to have a control group. I suspect it was because it would have supported my suspected causes of the results of his research, not the conclusion he wanted. How would proving that gun owners are delusional paranoids have helped his case?

[metaglypto]

I do not know if there is any fact at all to the following. It has been around a few times.I thought all but the humorless few might appreciate this:

A Connecticut State Police Trooper pulled over an old 1955 Cadillac for a faulty taillight. When the officer approached the car, he noticed a little old lady behind the wheel.
The police officer asked the old lady for her license, registration, and insurance cards; however, when she opened up her pockbook to retrieve those cards, to his surprise he noticed a concealed weapon carry permit.
The trooper took all the documents, looked them over and said. "Mrs. Smith, I see you have a concealed weapon permit. Do you have a gun with you?"
Very sweetly and proudly the little old lady replied, " oh, yes officer, I have a Smith & Wesson 38 caliber pistol right here in my bag. Do you wish to see it?" And before he could reply, the old lady opened her handbag under his nose and sure enough, he immediately recognized the distinctive snub barrel of a Smith & Wesson 38.
Kind of taken aback, as a matter of formality he cautiously asked her, "do you have any other guns with you?"
To which the old lady boasted, " I also have a 357 magnum in my glove compartment", opening its cover and revealing its huge barrel.
The officer, flabbergasted, found himself then asking before any further thought on his part, but not really expecting anything more: "anything else?"
To which she replied, "why, yes, I also have a 44 magnum in my console, and a Mossberg 500 12 gauge shootgun in the trunk."
As you can imagine, at this point the police officer was at a total loss as to why an old lady would have in her possession such an arsenal of weapons, so thinking she was a bit crazy, he bent over, looked her in the eyes, and asked, "Lady, may I ask you what you are afraid of?"
To which the old lady locked eyes with the officer and calmly answered, "Not a damn thing!"

[riff]

"Lady, may I ask you what you are afraid of?"
To which the old lady locked eyes with the officer and calmly answered, "Not a damn thing!"

That would be funny if no one believed it.
Edged Weapon Defense: Is or was the 21-foot rule valid? (Part 1)

[Wheatfield]

See what I mean Wheatfield.

Nope.