The NFL and Gun Control

[The emperor has no clothes]

Back to the original topic. There are many falsehoods in it.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/49ers-join-police-unions-donate-500k-to-gun-control-pledge-for-safer-america/

[Robert]

 
 United States Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

The men who penned this phrase understood freedom, equal stature, the ability to live in a cilvilized and caring fashion with each other based on each ones human condition to decide a direction and goal for their own life. A decision that was between them and God.

The more laws you make the more freedom you take away based on one mans blight turns out is anothers boon and balancing that in society with millions of people is not easy or left to one mans lopsided view of one situation.

The issue of death and risk in a society is not a one sided issue. All death is not good if it comes early and yet to balance that so people can live is not easy either. Each man woman and child has the ability to decide the acceptable risks they are willing to take to achieve happiness. That risk as long as it does not hurt others should be considered by government but left in each persons hands.

Life has acceptable risks that should not be defined by one person not deep enough to appreciate another mans needs, desires, wants, and enjoyments and see the value in all life. We all see the stick in our brothers eye but cannot seem to see the log in our own.

Motorcycle riding needs to be banned since its a danger with not much redeeming quality and transportation can be achieved by other safer means. This has been the battle cry for many who do not see anothers life full filling dreams of riding. Dictatorship is any form is dangerous to personal freedom. Since at its very nature its unbalanced lopsided one persons view of what is good and acceptable in life forced upon another.

Anything outside of individual choice in favor of limiting freedom is a statement that each man cannot intelligently decide and respect the boundaries of his life as it relates to his neighbor. This is the reason for law and courts and jails but not the thought police to take away these freedoms before they are used in fear they would be abused by those not able to respect life and live in dignity with each other. 

I consider the many thousands more deaths from abortion much worse than those accidentally or even intentionally by guns. Your answer is take away the right, my answer is jail and fear of punishment. One says you are to dumb to decide, one says if you misuse your freedom you will loose it. You see the constitution as rubbish, I see it as the only guarantee of not having my freedom and rights taken away by people such as yourself that do not respect others life styles. There is no sane argument for gun control based on the numbers killed by guns since the number killed in other ways is exponentially more.

So who gets to decide, that is the reason countries are founded differently. We have seen in this great experiment of life the position of the US, and we also see the position of Canada. Personally I choose the US as many do and hopefully will for centuries to come.

[Skinhead]

As a proud owner of "many" guns, I agree that gun ownership needs to be protected!  I was VERY happy the previous government here got rid of our long gun registration, eliminating one of the 5 pieces of paper we needed to carry just to go hunting! I must say however, I don't understand the fixation on handguns and assault rifles? There is no weapon available to the general public that can actually protect you from the government, (psstt, they have tanks and war planes). The negative simply out weighs the positive.  In Canada, we can own hand guns, we can even own "assault" rifles with the correct license, but they are extremely hard to get and the numbers "out there" are very small.  I believe, as an outsider looking in, that the principles behind the second amendment did not and could not take weapons, capable of killing multiple people per minute, into consideration when written.  They also could not have know that the government would have weapons that make ANY rifle redundant.  Civilians should only NEED guns for hunting and nobody NEEDS an assault rifle to hunt, unless you suck! Leave the military weapon to the military, no matter how much fun they are to shoot (I'll never forget the first belt I fed through a C6 (m60) unreal!!!!).  The risk to innocent people outweighs whatever reward you are thinking about.

I could not disagree more.  The 2nd isn't about your right to bear arms to hunt.  It is about your right to bear arms to defend yourself and your family.  "Assault" (I hate that term) rifles or more correctly, semi automatic weapons are warranted and preferred in cases of multiple assailants/threats.  Why should a citizen be hamstrung?  If you could afford a tank you should be able to buy a tank.  If you use it illegally, you should be severely punished.

[The emperor has no clothes]

 United States Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

The men who penned this phrase understood freedom, equal stature, the ability to live in a cilvilized and caring fashion with each other based on each ones human condition to decide a direction and goal for their own life. A decision that was between them and God.

The more laws you make the more freedom you take away based on one mans blight turns out is anothers boon and balancing that in society with millions of people is not easy or left to one mans lopsided view of one situation.

The issue of death and risk in a society is not a one sided issue. All death is not good if it comes early and yet to balance that so people can live is not easy either. Each man woman and child has the ability to decide the acceptable risks they are willing to take to achieve happiness. That risk as long as it does not hurt others should be considered by government but left in each persons hands.

Life has acceptable risks that should not be defined by one person not deep enough to appreciate another mans needs, desires, wants, and enjoyments and see the value in all life. We all see the stick in our brothers eye but cannot seem to see the log in our own.

Motorcycle riding needs to be banned since its a danger with not much redeeming quality and transportation can be achieved by other safer means. This has been the battle cry for many who do not see anothers life full filling dreams of riding. Dictatorship is any form is dangerous to personal freedom. Since at its very nature its unbalanced lopsided one persons view of what is good and acceptable in life forced upon another.

Anything outside of individual choice in favor of limiting freedom is a statement that each man cannot intelligently decide and respect the boundaries of his life as it relates to his neighbor. This is the reason for law and courts and jails but not the thought police to take away these freedoms before they are used in fear they would be abused by those not able to respect life and live in dignity with each other. 

I consider the many thousands more deaths from abortion much worse than those accidentally or even intentionally by guns. Your answer is take away the right, my answer is jail and fear of punishment. One says you are to dumb to decide, one says if you misuse your freedom you will loose it. You see the constitution as rubbish, I see it as the only guarantee of not having my freedom and rights taken away by people such as yourself that do not respect others life styles. There is no sane argument for gun control based on the numbers killed by guns since the number killed in other ways is exponentially more.

So who gets to decide, that is the reason countries are founded differently. We have seen in this great experiment of life the position of the US, and we also see the position of Canada. Personally I choose the US as many do and hopefully will for centuries to come.

I don't recall the Declaration as you wrote it. This is how I learned it many years ago :

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

[The emperor has no clothes]

As a proud owner of "many" guns, I agree that gun ownership needs to be protected!  I was VERY happy the previous government here got rid of our long gun registration, eliminating one of the 5 pieces of paper we needed to carry just to go hunting! I must say however, I don't understand the fixation on handguns and assault rifles? There is no weapon available to the general public that can actually protect you from the government, (psstt, they have tanks and war planes). The negative simply out weighs the positive.  In Canada, we can own hand guns, we can even own "assault" rifles with the correct license, but they are extremely hard to get and the numbers "out there" are very small.  I believe, as an outsider looking in, that the principles behind the second amendment did not and could not take weapons, capable of killing multiple people per minute, into consideration when written.  They also could not have know that the government would have weapons that make ANY rifle redundant.  Civilians should only NEED guns for hunting and nobody NEEDS an assault rifle to hunt, unless you suck! Leave the military weapon to the military, no matter how much fun they are to shoot (I'll never forget the first belt I fed through a C6 (m60) unreal!!!!).  The risk to innocent people outweighs whatever reward you are thinking about.

I could not disagree more.  The 2nd isn't about your right to bear arms to hunt.  It is about your right to bear arms to defend yourself and your family.  "Assault" (I hate that term) rifles or more correctly, semi automatic weapons are warranted and preferred in cases of multiple assailants/threats.  Why should a citizen be hamstrung?  If you could afford a tank you should be able to buy a tank.  If you use it illegally, you should be severely punished.

I agree it's not about hunting, it's about "the right to bear arms". But I have this question that hopefully can be discussed without a pissing match. You say we should be able to have tanks. Is there a limit at the weaponry you believe we have rights to ? And if so where would you put that limit ?

[Skinhead]

As a proud owner of "many" guns, I agree that gun ownership needs to be protected!  I was VERY happy the previous government here got rid of our long gun registration, eliminating one of the 5 pieces of paper we needed to carry just to go hunting! I must say however, I don't understand the fixation on handguns and assault rifles? There is no weapon available to the general public that can actually protect you from the government, (psstt, they have tanks and war planes). The negative simply out weighs the positive.  In Canada, we can own hand guns, we can even own "assault" rifles with the correct license, but they are extremely hard to get and the numbers "out there" are very small.  I believe, as an outsider looking in, that the principles behind the second amendment did not and could not take weapons, capable of killing multiple people per minute, into consideration when written.  They also could not have know that the government would have weapons that make ANY rifle redundant.  Civilians should only NEED guns for hunting and nobody NEEDS an assault rifle to hunt, unless you suck! Leave the military weapon to the military, no matter how much fun they are to shoot (I'll never forget the first belt I fed through a C6 (m60) unreal!!!!).  The risk to innocent people outweighs whatever reward you are thinking about.

I could not disagree more.  The 2nd isn't about your right to bear arms to hunt.  It is about your right to bear arms to defend yourself and your family.  "Assault" (I hate that term) rifles or more correctly, semi automatic weapons are warranted and preferred in cases of multiple assailants/threats.  Why should a citizen be hamstrung?  If you could afford a tank you should be able to buy a tank.  If you use it illegally, you should be severely punished.

I agree it's not about hunting, it's about "the right to bear arms". But I have this question that hopefully can be discussed without a pissing match. You say we should be able to have tanks. Is there a limit at the weaponry you believe we have rights to ? And if so where would you put that limit ?

In a perfect world that limit would be whatever you are financially capable of.  This would bode poorly for us poor and middle class.  The rich would do well as they always have and do.  Again, the illegal use of ANY weapon, be it knife, gun, nuke, plane, whatever, should have severe consequences.  But in the case of crazies that are willing to sacrifice their life, punishment is not a deterent.  I don't know how to address that.  Practically, I consider the 2nd to cover firearms, not tanks, ships, icbms, or planes.

[cookiedough]

they forgot to include the NFL players beating up women and getting away with it stringing it out in court for months/years and then just getting a slap on the wrist out of it...

the NFL needs to stick with football and keep their nose out of guns.

[Pete]

Is there a limit on hammers?
Limiting tools is an extremely poor way to inhibit criminal behavior.
Limit the (criminal) behavior not the tool.  

[Gavin_Sons]

This is for northernvalk, what constitutes a hunting rifle. What is a assult rifle? Do you know the definition of assult rifle? Or do you just listen to the media and assume every ar-15 is an assult rifle? Why are you against carrying a sidearm? Are you so blinded by your country that you dont see the need to protect yourself? What happens when someone breaks in and is going to kill you and the police are 15 minutes away? I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. Personally I don't really care what you think because, well........ you're not even a citizen of our country but you decided to take on this battle you dont understand. There is no way you can understand if you have never had the right yourself, so do us a favor and quit pretending.

[The emperor has no clothes]

As a proud owner of "many" guns, I agree that gun ownership needs to be protected!  I was VERY happy the previous government here got rid of our long gun registration, eliminating one of the 5 pieces of paper we needed to carry just to go hunting! I must say however, I don't understand the fixation on handguns and assault rifles? There is no weapon available to the general public that can actually protect you from the government, (psstt, they have tanks and war planes). The negative simply out weighs the positive.  In Canada, we can own hand guns, we can even own "assault" rifles with the correct license, but they are extremely hard to get and the numbers "out there" are very small.  I believe, as an outsider looking in, that the principles behind the second amendment did not and could not take weapons, capable of killing multiple people per minute, into consideration when written.  They also could not have know that the government would have weapons that make ANY rifle redundant.  Civilians should only NEED guns for hunting and nobody NEEDS an assault rifle to hunt, unless you suck! Leave the military weapon to the military, no matter how much fun they are to shoot (I'll never forget the first belt I fed through a C6 (m60) unreal!!!!).  The risk to innocent people outweighs whatever reward you are thinking about.

I could not disagree more.  The 2nd isn't about your right to bear arms to hunt.  It is about your right to bear arms to defend yourself and your family.  "Assault" (I hate that term) rifles or more correctly, semi automatic weapons are warranted and preferred in cases of multiple assailants/threats.  Why should a citizen be hamstrung?  If you could afford a tank you should be able to buy a tank.  If you use it illegally, you should be severely punished.

I agree it's not about hunting, it's about "the right to bear arms". But I have this question that hopefully can be discussed without a pissing match. You say we should be able to have tanks. Is there a limit at the weaponry you believe we have rights to ? And if so where would you put that limit ?

In a perfect world that limit would be whatever you are financially capable of.  This would bode poorly for us poor and middle class.  The rich would do well as they always have and do.  Again, the illegal use of ANY weapon, be it knife, gun, nuke, plane, whatever, should have severe consequences.  But in the case of crazies that are willing to sacrifice their life, punishment is not a deterent.  I don't know how to address that.  Practically, I consider the 2nd to cover firearms, not tanks, ships, icbms, or planes.

Thanks  I don't think I'm too far off from that thinking. I would interject though that the guiding principles the Founding Fathers espoused for or country was Freedom and Equality. The rich already have many advantages over us "heads". Giving them virtually unlimited weaponry would tip the scales dramatically.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Is there a limit on hammers?
Limiting tools is an extremely poor way to inhibit criminal behavior.
Limit the (criminal) behavior not the tool.  

If all tools were equal that would make sense. That's not the case.

[Oss]

I feel bad for all the hard working (many hundreds of thousands of them) people who have season tickets or other packages of tickets for NFL games.

What are they supposed to do, just lose their money in order to stay home and protest? Who will reimburse them? What about all the people who work in the stands selling hot dogs, beer etc? and the kids selling t shirts and parking cars ?

Bottom line is the nfl is a cynical profit oriented organization that really cares little for its fans, its players or its own rules, which by the way, state STAND FOR THE NATIONAL ANTHEM

I have no problem not watching on tv, or any assault on off site profits as the networks have been complicit in the erosion of national values such as attacking anyone as racist for 8 yrs plus

As to tanks, they are motorized vehicles and each state DMV has authority over that. I wish there was a national license that was pretty much automatic when you reach draft age and like Switzerland I wish there was free (is it mandatory??) yearly use of rifle ranges and education about firearm safety

To carry or not is a personal decision, like whether to do anything, making childish insults to members does nothing but demean the forum and its users whether Canadians or US citizens or Aussies or whatever.   We want to grow this club, not shrink it yes?

Lets all look in the mirror

Oss

[The emperor has no clothes]

This is for northernvalk, what constitutes a hunting rifle. What is a assult rifle? Do you know the definition of assult rifle? Or do you just listen to the media and assume every ar-15 is an assult rifle? Why are you against carrying a sidearm? Are you so blinded by your country that you dont see the need to protect yourself? What happens when someone breaks in and is going to kill you and the police are 15 minutes away? I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. Personally I don't really care what you think because, well........ you're not even a citizen of our country but you decided to take on this battle you dont understand. There is no way you can understand if you have never had the right yourself, so do us a favor and quit pretending.

You don't care what he thinks but you just addressed a paragraph to him.  

[Gavin_Sons]

This is for northernvalk, what constitutes a hunting rifle. What is a assult rifle? Do you know the definition of assult rifle? Or do you just listen to the media and assume every ar-15 is an assult rifle? Why are you against carrying a sidearm? Are you so blinded by your country that you dont see the need to protect yourself? What happens when someone breaks in and is going to kill you and the police are 15 minutes away? I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. Personally I don't really care what you think because, well........ you're not even a citizen of our country but you decided to take on this battle you dont understand. There is no way you can understand if you have never had the right yourself, so do us a favor and quit pretending.

You don't care what he thinks but you just addressed a paragraph to him.  

Please do not respond to me ever again. Im tired of trying to explain simple things to someone that is not capable of learning or seeing anything from a different perspective. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

This is for northernvalk, what constitutes a hunting rifle. What is a assult rifle? Do you know the definition of assult rifle? Or do you just listen to the media and assume every ar-15 is an assult rifle? Why are you against carrying a sidearm? Are you so blinded by your country that you dont see the need to protect yourself? What happens when someone breaks in and is going to kill you and the police are 15 minutes away? I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. Personally I don't really care what you think because, well........ you're not even a citizen of our country but you decided to take on this battle you dont understand. There is no way you can understand if you have never had the right yourself, so do us a favor and quit pretending.

You don't care what he thinks but you just addressed a paragraph to him.  

Please do not respond to me ever again. Im tired of trying to explain simple things to someone that is not capable of learning or seeing anything from a different perspective. 

The ignore list is free for all to use.

[Gavin_Sons]

This is for northernvalk, what constitutes a hunting rifle. What is a assult rifle? Do you know the definition of assult rifle? Or do you just listen to the media and assume every ar-15 is an assult rifle? Why are you against carrying a sidearm? Are you so blinded by your country that you dont see the need to protect yourself? What happens when someone breaks in and is going to kill you and the police are 15 minutes away? I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy. Personally I don't really care what you think because, well........ you're not even a citizen of our country but you decided to take on this battle you dont understand. There is no way you can understand if you have never had the right yourself, so do us a favor and quit pretending.

You don't care what he thinks but you just addressed a paragraph to him.  

Please do not respond to me ever again. Im tired of trying to explain simple things to someone that is not capable of learning or seeing anything from a different perspective. 

The ignore list is free for all to use.

Of course you couldn't be a man and just not say anything to me ever again. 
Consider this our last conservation

[Pete]

Is there a limit on hammers?
Limiting tools is an extremely poor way to inhibit criminal behavior.
Limit the (criminal) behavior not the tool.  

If all tools were equal that would make sense. That's not the case.

I never thought it would make sense to you and that was never my intent.

[Jess from VA]

Here's another take on someone's personal feelings on gun control.  (besides the constitution)

I have twice in my life faced a committed effort to kill me.  One lasted at least 20 minutes, and he easily had me by 40+ lbs (no guns or weapons, just fists and feet) (he started by announcing he was going to kill me, then tried real hard to do it).  The other was shorter, but was 2-3 Libyans trying to kill me and everyone at my wedding in the Middle East (not with guns, with hand grenades).  I also got very very close to being mugged in the quarter in New Orleans.  Twice, on other occasions, I showed a pistol (not pointed, just showed) to stop someone coming right at me with evil intentions.

In none of these cases was I the bad guy or the guy who's attitude contributed to the escalation.  They each just happened out of the clear blue sky while I was minding my own business.

These kind of life experiences can put things in perspective.

[Psychotic Bovine]

I didn't see the statistic brought up, but to answer the 1 in 1 billion bs.  Average time a firearm is used in self defense in the US is about 2 million times a year.
Actual murders by firearm in the US is around 6,000.  The big number that the antis quote is all deaths by firearm (police shooting, suicides, accidents, etc).
Why do I own an ar-15?  Because I want to.  And it's my right.
Why do I carry a handgun most of the time?  Because I feel the need to be able to defend my life and others around me, rather than waiting for someone to do it for me. And it's my right.
High capacity firearms and rapid-fire weapons were available or in development at the time of the writing of the Constitution, so today's modern weapons were easily imagined.
However, what could not have been imagined was the Internet and broadcast media allowing a few media owners to spread lies and other things the 1st Amendment does not cover.  The 1st Amendment specifically says freedom of the press.  That is the printing press.  And freedom of speech and peaceable assembly.  Using the antis same "logic" means that everything spoken or printed with a printing press are the ONLY protected actions covered by the 1st Amendment.  Northernvalk, you have a right to your opinion.  You even have the right to wish for the citizens of the US to have their lawfully purchased, owned, and protected arms confiscated (not saying you are wishing that, but just saying you can have that opinion).  I, however, have the right to refute your misinformation.

[Psychotic Bovine]

Also, I feel the need to address "the government has planes, and tanks, and nuclear weapons, and drones, and... all that."  First, under posse comitatus the government cannot use the military against it's own citizens.  Second, it's highly unlikely you would get more than 1/10th of the soldiers to follow an illegal order to fire on civilians.  And third, the weapons in private hands are not to take out tanks, and planes, and death rays from satellites, and whatnot.  It's to take out the soft targets:  the people calling the shots.  And even 1% of the gun-owning population armed with small arms is MORE than enough to do that.
And THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
This ends the lesson for today.

[Pete]

Also, I feel the need to address "the government has planes, and tanks, and nuclear weapons, and drones, and... all that."  First, under posse comitatus the government cannot use the military against it's own citizens.  Second, it's highly unlikely you would get more than 1/10th of the soldiers to follow an illegal order to fire on civilians.  And third, the weapons in private hands are not to take out tanks, and planes, and death rays from satellites, and whatnot.  It's to take out the soft targets:  the people calling the shots.  And even 1% of the gun-owning population armed with small arms is MORE than enough to do that.
And THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
This ends the lesson for today.

Concise, accurate and thoughtful - good job. Thanks

[MarkT]

Yes.  I have several weapons that are designed to kill people.  Not to hunt.  Exactly as they should be.  To kill tyrants.  And any armed foes killing us on their behalf.  Exactly the intent of our founding fathers.  With "High capacity CLIPS" as the gun banners mis-name, and sniper rifles with sub-MOA (that's Minute Of Angle aka under an inch variance at 100 yds for ignorant gun-banners who think a barrel shroud is a "shoulder thing that goes up") I built for accuracy at a thousand yards. Several are "ghost guns", un-serialized "assault rifles" as the left press likes to call them - that I machined myself. Legally. I was a weapons mechanic in the AF - I loaded and repaired M61 aircraft gatling guns - six barreled 20mm cannons that deliver explosive rounds at 100 rounds per second.  When I wasn't loading and arming bombs and missles.  Holy Smokes, I have been trained by the gov't to build and arm bombs, better watch me close I just might flip out and blow stuff up.  I also have other guns that are better suited for self-defense, others for hunting and some for target shooting for fun at the range or just plinking cans in my back yard.  I'm a gun aficionado, armorer, reloader, gun builder and hobbiest - have been for 50 years.  I wish I had gone to gunsmithing school when I left the service but at the time I was bitter about the whole military thing.  Somehow my guns have never hurt anyone.  Except some game animals which we ate.  I LIKE to blow up glass bottles and reactive targets and noisy gongs at a thousand yards.  Believe it or not, that is very entertaining.  And not harmful to anyone.

Remember the scene in "The Jerk", when Navin said, "THESE CANS ARE DEFECTIVE!" - and his boss yelled, "NO WE HAVE A DEFECTIVE PERSON OUT HERE."  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tcwz8-EfFYE&feature=youtu.be

Don't blame the tool.  The problems we have are with our culture and sick people.

[Psychotic Bovine]

Also, I feel the need to address "the government has planes, and tanks, and nuclear weapons, and drones, and... all that."  First, under posse comitatus the government cannot use the military against it's own citizens.  Second, it's highly unlikely you would get more than 1/10th of the soldiers to follow an illegal order to fire on civilians.  And third, the weapons in private hands are not to take out tanks, and planes, and death rays from satellites, and whatnot.  It's to take out the soft targets:  the people calling the shots.  And even 1% of the gun-owning population armed with small arms is MORE than enough to do that.
And THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
This ends the lesson for today.

Concise, accurate and thoughtful - good job. Thanks

You are most welcome.  Since I was in my teens, I have researched nearly every fallacy the antis dish out, it's all bs.  I particularly dislike the "I own guns, but I see no reason for x, y, and z type firearms".  I hold them in special contempt.

[northernvalk]

Also, I feel the need to address "the government has planes, and tanks, and nuclear weapons, and drones, and... all that."  First, under posse comitatus the government cannot use the military against it's own citizens.  Second, it's highly unlikely you would get more than 1/10th of the soldiers to follow an illegal order to fire on civilians.  And third, the weapons in private hands are not to take out tanks, and planes, and death rays from satellites, and whatnot.  It's to take out the soft targets:  the people calling the shots.  And even 1% of the gun-owning population armed with small arms is MORE than enough to do that.
And THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
This ends the lesson for today.

Concise, accurate and thoughtful - good job. Thanks

You are most welcome.  Since I was in my teens, I have researched nearly every fallacy the antis dish out, it's all bs.  I particularly dislike the "I own guns, but I see no reason for x, y, and z type firearms".  I hold them in special contempt.

I can, and do own firearms. You can and do own firearms. Thousands of innocent people have been killed in your country due to the TYPE of firearms you can own. A few of innocent people have died in my country because of the firearms we can own.  LOTS of people have been killed in my country using illegal weapons from your country....There are statistics to back this up.  I hold a "special contempt" for people who care more about a personal choice than the betterment of society.  We agree to disagree. We have ALMOST the same societies, same wants and desires, same entertainment etc...I don't think American people are pre-disposed to shoot each other, but I think HUMAN propensity for violence is amplified by the options available in the US. There is NO other explanation for the hyper inflated gun death numbers in your country.  Ignorance is bliss....and there are a lot of blissful people in the USA. 
You DIRECTLY contradict your selves FFS,  "the gov isn't allowed to attack us, but we need guns in case the government attacks us...." IF they choose to move against you, they are not going to be nice enough to leave the "big guns" in the armoury LOL!!! Let's just stop this back and forth, you are 100% closed to any conversation on this, and I will not say another word as it in in futility. Good luck......and safe riding.

[Willow]

...  I hold a "special contempt" for people who care more about a personal choice than the betterment of society.  ...

Let me take just a moment to show how ridiculous is that statement.

There were in 2010 some 11 thousand homicides by firearm.  If you want to inflate that number to include suicides there were some 19 thousand suicides.  In 2010 there were about 33 thousand deaths by automobile.

We could reduce the number of automobile deaths to almost zero by simply lowering the speed of vehicles across the country to no more than thirty miles per hour.  People recoil in in ire at the thought of not being able to drive or ride more than thirty miles per hour.

I hold a "special contempt" for people who care more about a personal choice than the preservation of human life.

I'm smart enough to figure out that this argument doesn't change your mind so -

...  We agree to disagree. ...  Let's just stop this back and forth, you are 100% closed to any conversation on this, and I will not say another word as it in in futility. Good luck......and safe riding. 

[Gavin_Sons]

Also, I feel the need to address "the government has planes, and tanks, and nuclear weapons, and drones, and... all that."  First, under posse comitatus the government cannot use the military against it's own citizens.  Second, it's highly unlikely you would get more than 1/10th of the soldiers to follow an illegal order to fire on civilians.  And third, the weapons in private hands are not to take out tanks, and planes, and death rays from satellites, and whatnot.  It's to take out the soft targets:  the people calling the shots.  And even 1% of the gun-owning population armed with small arms is MORE than enough to do that.
And THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
This ends the lesson for today.

Concise, accurate and thoughtful - good job. Thanks

You are most welcome.  Since I was in my teens, I have researched nearly every fallacy the antis dish out, it's all bs.  I particularly dislike the "I own guns, but I see no reason for x, y, and z type firearms".  I hold them in special contempt.

I can, and do own firearms. You can and do own firearms. Thousands of innocent people have been killed in your country due to the TYPE of firearms you can own. A few of innocent people have died in my country because of the firearms we can own.  LOTS of people have been killed in my country using illegal weapons from your country....There are statistics to back this up.  I hold a "special contempt" for people who care more about a personal choice than the betterment of society.  We agree to disagree. We have ALMOST the same societies, same wants and desires, same entertainment etc...I don't think American people are pre-disposed to shoot each other, but I think HUMAN propensity for violence is amplified by the options available in the US. There is NO other explanation for the hyper inflated gun death numbers in your country.  Ignorance is bliss....and there are a lot of blissful people in the USA. 
You DIRECTLY contradict your selves FFS,  "the gov isn't allowed to attack us, but we need guns in case the government attacks us...." IF they choose to move against you, they are not going to be nice enough to leave the "big guns" in the armoury LOL!!! Let's just stop this back and forth, you are 100% closed to any conversation on this, and I will not say another word as it in in futility. Good luck......and safe riding.

  you're funny.

ignorance is very bliss. 

[northernvalk]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

[Jess from VA]

Because we have more criminals than they do, that's why.

And just to remind you, a whole lot of our firearm deaths are committed by criminals who never follow the laws on guns, or anything else that doesn't suit them.  (forget suicide, which may be a crime, but is almost never prosecuted, for attempts)

Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes.

And most of these crimes are committed with handguns, not semi auto rifles (or full auto for that matter).  Despite a few widely covered exceptions.

[northernvalk]

Because we have more criminals than they do, that's why.

And just to remind you, a whole lot of our firearm deaths are committed by criminals who never follow the laws on guns, or anything else that doesn't suit them.  (forget suicide, which may be a crime, but is almost never prosecuted, for attempts)

Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes.

And most of these crimes are committed with handguns, not semi auto rifles (or full auto for that matter).  Despite a few widely covered exceptions.

Well Jess, I was giving your country the benefit of the doubt, assuming that your natural propensity to commit violent crime was equal to ours.  I guess your right, more Americans are filthy criminals.  However, that is assuming that having access to weapons doesn't IN ANY WAY increase the frequency that those individuals choose to commit those crimes due to the ease of their execution......I believe that assumption to be ridiculous but some people, like you, may disagree. 
And, hand guns ARE the bigger problem, "assault" rifles are not nearly as big a problem.

P.S. Spare the bullshit about "semi" this and "full auto" that.  I have been around guns my whole life and I know how easy it is to "make" a full auto weapon.  Large capacity mags are also an issue.

If you are actually correct, and Americans are more violent and criminal by "nature" then good luck, you will need that .45, I just like to give humanity the benefit of the doubt..............

[Jess from VA]

Americans are more violent and criminal by "nature"

I didn't say that.

I think our vast majority are law abiding (just like yours).

But we have vastly more violent criminals than you do.  And this is very likely related to vastly more big cities/ urban areas (Democrat controlled) than you too.

What I will say is because of our larger violent criminal population, many of us law abiding folks are more tuned in to firearms ownership, training, carrying, and preparation, than our corresponding Canadian law abiding folks.  We also have a much higher number of trained veterans than you do, most of whom are also law abiding folk.

We certainly do have a law abiding gun culture, no question.  And I have proudly been part of it all my life.  My first shot from a family heirloom 1800s Pennsylvania muzzle loader had to be held up by the barrel for me, I didn't have enough strength at 5yo.  I did hit the pie plate though.

And BTW, semiauto rifles are not that easy to reliably alter to full auto, and you would have a hard time finding many of such altered rifles being used in crime in the US. (or even used in target practice for that matter)

[Gavin_Sons]

Because we have more criminals than they do, that's why.

And just to remind you, a whole lot of our firearm deaths are committed by criminals who never follow the laws on guns, or anything else that doesn't suit them.  (forget suicide, which may be a crime, but is almost never prosecuted, for attempts)

Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes.

And most of these crimes are committed with handguns, not semi auto rifles (or full auto for that matter).  Despite a few widely covered exceptions.

Well Jess, I was giving your country the benefit of the doubt, assuming that your natural propensity to commit violent crime was equal to ours.  I guess your right, more Americans are filthy criminals.  However, that is assuming that having access to weapons doesn't IN ANY WAY increase the frequency that those individuals choose to commit those crimes due to the ease of their execution......I believe that assumption to be ridiculous but some people, like you, may disagree. 
And, hand guns ARE the bigger problem, "assault" rifles are not nearly as big a problem.

P.S. Spare the bullshit about "semi" this and "full auto" that.  I have been around guns my whole life and I know how easy it is to "make" a full auto weapon.  Large capacity mags are also an issue.

If you are actually correct, and Americans are more violent and criminal by "nature" then good luck, you will need that .45, I just like to give humanity the benefit of the doubt..............

Thought you were done talking about this?
I have a hard time listening to someone who isn't a citizen of the US about gun issues when the continually prove themselves ignorant of them and our 2nd amendment.

[northernvalk]

Americans are more violent and criminal by "nature"

I didn't say that.

I think our vast majority are law abiding (just like yours).

But we have vastly more violent criminals than you do.  And this is very likely related to vastly more big cities/ urban areas (Democrat controlled) than you too.

What I will say is because of our larger violent criminal population, many of us law abiding folks are more tuned in to firearms ownership, training, carrying, and preparation, than our corresponding Canadian law abiding folks.  We also have a much higher number of trained veterans than you do, most of whom are also law abiding folk.

We certainly do have a law abiding gun culture, no question.  And I have proudly been part of it all my life.  My first shot from a family heirloom 1800s Pennsylvania muzzle loader had to be held up by the barrel for me, I didn't have enough strength at 5yo.  I did hit the pie plate though.

And BTW, semiauto rifles are not that easy to reliably alter to full auto, and you would have a hard time finding many of such altered rifles being used in crime in the US. (or even used in target practice for that matter)

You can't have it both both ways. These statistics are based on PER CA-PITA.  You can't say, "we have more criminals" then say "Americans are not more violent by nature"! Do you hear yourself? Our crime rates in URBAN centers is way less than yours in URBAN centers ie Toronto vs Chicago or Montreal vs Boston..... You are literally arguing both sides at the same time LOL....
It's either
#1 you have a nature propensity to crime...
#2 ease of access to guns facilitates crime...
It's one or the other, stats prove you have more crime and the only difference is guns laws or "nature".

[Jess from VA]

Good bye. 

[northernvalk]

Because we have more criminals than they do, that's why.

And just to remind you, a whole lot of our firearm deaths are committed by criminals who never follow the laws on guns, or anything else that doesn't suit them.  (forget suicide, which may be a crime, but is almost never prosecuted, for attempts)

Gun-related homicide is most prevalent among gangs and during the commission of felony crimes.

And most of these crimes are committed with handguns, not semi auto rifles (or full auto for that matter).  Despite a few widely covered exceptions.

Well Jess, I was giving your country the benefit of the doubt, assuming that your natural propensity to commit violent crime was equal to ours.  I guess your right, more Americans are filthy criminals.  However, that is assuming that having access to weapons doesn't IN ANY WAY increase the frequency that those individuals choose to commit those crimes due to the ease of their execution......I believe that assumption to be ridiculous but some people, like you, may disagree. 
And, hand guns ARE the bigger problem, "assault" rifles are not nearly as big a problem.

P.S. Spare the bullshit about "semi" this and "full auto" that.  I have been around guns my whole life and I know how easy it is to "make" a full auto weapon.  Large capacity mags are also an issue.

If you are actually correct, and Americans are more violent and criminal by "nature" then good luck, you will need that .45, I just like to give humanity the benefit of the doubt..............

Thought you were done talking about this?
I have a hard time listening to someone who isn't a citizen of the US about gun issues when the continually prove themselves ignorant of them and our 2nd amendment.

then don't listen and continue your ignorance....You put forth a point and I rebutted. You hide behind a line on a piece of paper when EVERY statistic paints a picture you refuse to look at.
Like I said, it's one of two things because everything else is equal
#1 Americans are more violent by nature...
#2 Ease of access to firearms facilitate crime...
Choose one...........

[phideux]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

Because we are one of the few countries that allow and actually promote criminal behavior. We reward young girls that get pregnant and drop out of school,we give them checks every month, free rent and utilities, food stamps and EBT cards, free cable and internet, free Medicaid, ObamaPhones and we give them a raise and more benefits when they get pregnant again.
We have generations of babies raising babies, 99% of the time with no family structure in place. The young boys that are running around getting these young girls pregnant pretty much raised themselves with usually no father figure in sight, and usually a dysfunctional mother or a mother that is a child herself. We corral them together into large urban areas and stick them all together to live. We don't punish them or give them consequences when they start dropping out of school. They turn to gangs, they turn to drinking and drugs, they are raised without morals, without scruples, with no sense of right or wrong. They want something, they steal it, or rob someone of the money to get it, they sell drugs for it. When they get caught they are usually slapped on the wrist and turned loose again and again. If they ever do get sent to jail to be "punished", they consider it a right of passage, and we do not punish them in jail at all. In jail they get to hang with their buddies, watch TV, play cards, play games, play basketball, they can hang around and smoke all day, they can get drugs in jail and plot what they will do when they get out.
We need to stop rewarding bad behavior, we need to stop paying people to be non-productive citizens, we need to start punishing people when they do wrong, we need to have a death penalty that works, not one that allows serial criminals to die of old age in jail. We don't have a gun problem in this country, we have a criminal problem.
 Like someone else said earlier,guns are used several million times a year to save a life, but used thousands of times to end one. The legal gun owners in this country own almost 300,000,000 guns, if the legal owners were the problem, you would know it.

[northernvalk]

Good bye. 

I know, hard to bully someone who knows what they are talking about.....

[Chrisj CMA]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

Because we are one of the few countries that allow and actually promote criminal behavior. We reward young girls that get pregnant and drop out of school,we give them checks every month, free rent and utilities, food stamps and EBT cards, free cable and internet, free Medicaid, ObamaPhones and we give them a raise and more benefits when they get pregnant again.
We have generations of babies raising babies, 99% of the time with no family structure in place. The young boys that are running around getting these young girls pregnant pretty much raised themselves with usually no father figure in sight, and usually a dysfunctional mother or a mother that is a child herself. We corral them together into large urban areas and stick them all together to live. We don't punish them or give them consequences when they start dropping out of school. They turn to gangs, they turn to drinking and drugs, they are raised without morals, without scruples, with no sense of right or wrong. They want something, they steal it, or rob someone of the money to get it, they sell drugs for it. When they get caught they are usually slapped on the wrist and turned loose again and again. If they ever do get sent to jail to be "punished", they consider it a right of passage, and we do not punish them in jail at all. In jail they get to hang with their buddies, watch TV, play cards, play games, play basketball, they can hang around and smoke all day, they can get drugs in jail and plot what they will do when they get out.
We need to stop rewarding bad behavior, we need to stop paying people to be non-productive citizens, we need to start punishing people when they do wrong, we need to have a death penalty that works, not one that allows serial criminals to die of old age in jail. We don't have a gun problem in this country, we have a criminal problem.
 Like someone else said earlier,guns are used several million times a year to save a life, but used thousands of times to end one. The legal gun owners in this country own almost 300,000,000 guns, if the legal owners were the problem, you would know it.

Well said.  This week a thirteen year old was shot after an altercation at his bus stop.  If the shooter had no access to a gun the young boy would not have been shot.




maybe he would have been stabbed.





Its not the tool its the human using it

[northernvalk]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

Because we are one of the few countries that allow and actually promote criminal behavior. We reward young girls that get pregnant and drop out of school,we give them checks every month, free rent and utilities, food stamps and EBT cards, free cable and internet, free Medicaid, ObamaPhones and we give them a raise and more benefits when they get pregnant again.
We have generations of babies raising babies, 99% of the time with no family structure in place. The young boys that are running around getting these young girls pregnant pretty much raised themselves with usually no father figure in sight, and usually a dysfunctional mother or a mother that is a child herself. We corral them together into large urban areas and stick them all together to live. We don't punish them or give them consequences when they start dropping out of school. They turn to gangs, they turn to drinking and drugs, they are raised without morals, without scruples, with no sense of right or wrong. They want something, they steal it, or rob someone of the money to get it, they sell drugs for it. When they get caught they are usually slapped on the wrist and turned loose again and again. If they ever do get sent to jail to be "punished", they consider it a right of passage, and we do not punish them in jail at all. In jail they get to hang with their buddies, watch TV, play cards, play games, play basketball, they can hang around and smoke all day, they can get drugs in jail and plot what they will do when they get out.
We need to stop rewarding bad behavior, we need to stop paying people to be non-productive citizens, we need to start punishing people when they do wrong, we need to have a death penalty that works, not one that allows serial criminals to die of old age in jail. We don't have a gun problem in this country, we have a criminal problem.
 Like someone else said earlier,guns are used several million times a year to save a life, but used thousands of times to end one. The legal gun owners in this country own almost 300,000,000 guns, if the legal owners were the problem, you would know it.

If you think for ONE SECOND that you "support" dead beats more than Canada, you are WRONG! Hell, we give them an extra cheque for each kid they pop out!!!!  Numbers don't lie, gun deaths per ca-pita are WAY higher....try again.....

[northernvalk]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

Because we are one of the few countries that allow and actually promote criminal behavior. We reward young girls that get pregnant and drop out of school,we give them checks every month, free rent and utilities, food stamps and EBT cards, free cable and internet, free Medicaid, ObamaPhones and we give them a raise and more benefits when they get pregnant again.
We have generations of babies raising babies, 99% of the time with no family structure in place. The young boys that are running around getting these young girls pregnant pretty much raised themselves with usually no father figure in sight, and usually a dysfunctional mother or a mother that is a child herself. We corral them together into large urban areas and stick them all together to live. We don't punish them or give them consequences when they start dropping out of school. They turn to gangs, they turn to drinking and drugs, they are raised without morals, without scruples, with no sense of right or wrong. They want something, they steal it, or rob someone of the money to get it, they sell drugs for it. When they get caught they are usually slapped on the wrist and turned loose again and again. If they ever do get sent to jail to be "punished", they consider it a right of passage, and we do not punish them in jail at all. In jail they get to hang with their buddies, watch TV, play cards, play games, play basketball, they can hang around and smoke all day, they can get drugs in jail and plot what they will do when they get out.
We need to stop rewarding bad behavior, we need to stop paying people to be non-productive citizens, we need to start punishing people when they do wrong, we need to have a death penalty that works, not one that allows serial criminals to die of old age in jail. We don't have a gun problem in this country, we have a criminal problem.
 Like someone else said earlier,guns are used several million times a year to save a life, but used thousands of times to end one. The legal gun owners in this country own almost 300,000,000 guns, if the legal owners were the problem, you would know it.

Well said.  This week a thirteen year old was shot after an altercation at his bus stop.  If the shooter had no access to a gun the young boy would not have been shot.




maybe he would have been stabbed.





Its not the tool its the human using it

Did you ACTUALLY just say this.....REALLY!!!! What is the chance you die from a stab wound!?!?!?! What is the chance you die from a gun shot!?!?!?!?! If you think the gun doesn't make that situation worse, you are completely ignorant to reality!!!

[The emperor has no clothes]

Fine, then answer ONE QUESTION....why are your gun death numbers so high vs other developed countries that allow gun ownership?

The legal gun owners in this country own almost 300,000,000 guns, if the legal owners were the problem, you would know it.

Stephen Paddocks guns were legal, Adam Lanzas guns were legal, most mass shooters guns are legal.