# Nation of Sheep turning in their firearms



## questor (Oct 4, 2011)

Scroll down and watch the video of sheep, turning in their firearms!

http://beforeitsnews.com/survival/2...e-it-is-folks-and-it-is-bad-news-2451190.html

Note: I am not referencing the supposed ban weapons, I am referencing the video from England.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

It's increasingly obvious that nuts with legally purchased guns will make us all suffer.
Hard to argue against national gun registration after a carnage like this.
A total,,, almost unbelievable tragedy!!!! :


----------



## Sam I am (Jan 16, 2011)

The right to bear arms is going to face a full onslaught after today's events. It will be hard, if not impossible, to stave off aggressive gun control measures. I'm a Veteran, a hunter and a full on supporter of the the right to bear arms...but this kind of needless tragedy has to stop.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Today is just sad.....just like when that whacko went into that amish school and killed many.

One thing that has to stop is the media coverage of this. Yes it is good to get the new out. But this is what whackos want. "To be Remembered". I think is part of the problem.

Also the talk about guns.....we will have to see what comes of this.....ie did he get the guns legally? Or was it like the guy in Oregon who stole the gun.

Either way this is making it hard to believe that fellow man is good. I say as a jester everyone go out and do an random act of kindness.....ie pick up someones gas who is behind you in a store.....buy someones meal at the table next to you....Buy a round of drinks for the entire bar....etc. Help bring humanity back to our nation. I know i am going to do this.....if not just to make myself feel better....yes I know selfish but yet in an unselfish way. :beer:


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

PLEASE explain how MORE GUN LAWS could have POSSIBLY prevented what occurred today... more laws would not.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I don't think that more gun laws are needed at all. If a guy wants to kill someone they will....period.

I was making the caparison that people started to cry for more gun laws because of the guy in Oregon.....but that nut job stole the gun from someone. So no gun law will help with that situation.

Now we need to see the details on where the guns came from or how this idiot got them to do this barbaric act.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Sasha and Abby said:


> PLEASE explain how MORE GUN LAWS could have POSSIBLY prevented what occurred today... more laws would not.


OK!
Criminals will always have access to guns.
However, the more stringent the gun laws for the lawful,,, the less chance a nut job will get his hands on one unless he stole it from a criminal! :lol:


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

Since when has a law stopped a crimminal?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

We can pray for the families of those who died, but at the same time we need to pray for our freedom and the future of our nation. For to long liberals have blamed the tool rather than the person. These evil people feel less responsible when no one has held them responsible any time in their life.

I listened to Obama today. I think he is a man with no kindness in his heart. He looks at this as Rahm Emanuel when he stated "never let a crisis go to waste". Likewise the anti gun crowd will not let a tragedy go to waste.

This problem started when we started tearing down the ten commandments.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

The problem started with our techno society that promises if not demands instant gratification.
Morality has nothing to do practicing a certain religion.
And as much as I can't stand Obama, I believe his grief was real in this case.
If you want a true phony,,,look no further than instant gratification Billy boy.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

spentwings said:


> The problem started with our techno society that promises if not demands instant gratification.
> Morality has nothing to do practicing a certain religion.
> And as much as I can't stand Obama, I believe his grief was real in this case.
> If you want a true phony,,,look no further than instant gratification Billy boy.


Actually were on the same thought line. When I watched Obama today I could not help but think about Clinton as he left the funeral of Brown laughing and joking, then when he seen the camera he started to cry. I think Obama is the same type of actor who will not wast a tragedy. 
Related to that, remember the shooting at the national zoo in DC? Bill Clinton got their nearly as fast as the police. He didn't waste a tragedy either or miss a photo op.


----------



## ninjaswede (Sep 3, 2012)

Quick snap up some shares in a company that makes AR style rifles, its about to go crazy


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

ninjaswede said:


> Quick snap up some shares in a company that makes AR style rifles, its about to go crazy


It already has since the election. Primers just took a 25% hike yesterday. If they don't get their gun laws you can expect minimum 100% taxation on firearms and components.


----------



## ninjaswede (Sep 3, 2012)

I saw a post on a news website yesterday that said "Hitler banned guns in 1935 and the world lived happily ever after" :rollin:


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> spentwings said:
> 
> 
> > The problem started with our techno society that promises if not demands instant gratification.
> ...


The Brown clip is an unforgettable indictment of the cigar smoking/inserting joke that is Bill Clinton.
I discussed the shooting today with my liberal eldest son in the cities during our usual Saturday morning chat.
To my surprise he said gun control isn't the answer,,, which made me realize that I might of had a positive influence in life after all. :lol: 
If it is societal,,,then we need to go back to the 50's when men were men, boys and girls were children, and women were women.
Well,,tain't no going back to a time when spousal/child abuse and pedophilia were swept under the rug,,,but at least the mass murder of children was unheard of.


----------



## Sam I am (Jan 16, 2011)

Yep...this is not a gun control problem. It's a human being problem. We're not going to legislate away f**ked up human behavior. The best course of action is raising better human beings...either through parenting or better societal noms. The biggest danger from events such as these is that we as a society become conditioned to the point where this is no longer a surprised or outrage. It's beginning to approach that point. I was surprised and disgusted by the recent shootings, but sadly, I was not shocked. So what's next? Is some other whack job out there going to try and "raise the bar"? I fervently hope not.


----------



## specialpatrolgroup (Jan 16, 2009)

I dont think there is a question of if, but when, more gun controll legislation is passed. Feinstien has allready vowed to introduce a bill to the senate and the same one will be introduced to the house in January. If it fails they will try again and again until they succeed. Nut jobs like this and the bat man guy are just pouring gas onto the fire. Hopefully there is a special place in hell reserved for wako's like this.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

This is just a bad situation all around.

One thing I think that needs to change is media. Am I blaming the media for this...NO. But this will be on the news for a long time. So when whack jobs want attention they know they will get it. The media is so quick to jump on these story's. Now I am glad they are trying to report this stuff. But let the dust settle before you start reporting "details".

The last two shootings....The one in Oregon and This one.....Both were reported wrong. Oregon....guy bought the guns came out right away...Nope Stole it.....Many people killed....Nope...Two the target and the shooter...... 
This tragedy..... The guy killed his dad at home....nope....He was let into the school....nope.... His mother was the teacher at the school....nope....He had a .223 pistol....nope... What types of gun used....part truth.

Then if you look on MSN there is a blurp about how an old babysitter for this gunman was told by mother to "not turn your back" on him. Well it is already know that he had a mental disorder. But people are jumping on it saying why did they have guns in the home if this kid could not be trusted to "turn his back". Well I grew up with someone who is disabled. You can't turn your back on them when they are young....they could fall down the steps, knock over a candle, knock over a boiling pot, grab a knife or some other sharp object, get into cleaning chemicals, wander out in the street, etc. Then they grow up and learn certain things.....obviously this one didn't learn not to kill. But i hope people get my point on this one. And how the media is trying to spin things.

Now again this does nothing to stop nut jobs. But it might make nut jobs not think that they will get the "publicity" that they are wanting as quickly. IDK...that could help....I hope.

But now on to the "gun control" aspect of this..... Do people need 100 round clips? 50 round clips? 25 round clips? Again I am not saying we need them or don't need them. It is something to think about. Yes I know it is a slippery slope. Does the common need an AR-15? Heck I don't have one but I have shot them and they are fun to shoot. Again... I know a slippery slope. People will talk about "assault rifles".....they don't know what an actual assault rifle is. It is a rifle with an adjustable rate of fire....ie three round bursts to fully auto. THOSE ARE ILLEGAL already unless you have a permit. Now an "assault weapon" is a semi-automatic firearm with a detachable clip that has two or more of these things: Pistol grip, folding or teloscopic stock, flash surpressor or threaded barrel, can attach a bayonet, gernade launcher. So here is an easy example:

Hunting 10/22










10/22 Now an Assault weapon










So do we ban 10/22's????

It is the exact same gun with out cosmetics is all the difference. They both function the same.

Anyway I will get off my soap box. Comment and rip apart. It is all good for debate.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

The lack of media integrity on this event is appalling. The amount of rumors/misinformation/sensationalized "facts" is hard to believe. For up to three hours on Friday multiple news outlets reported the WRONG PERSON! The so called facts have changed multiple times over the past 96 hours.

I understand situations like this are high interest and details are murky as they happen. But perhaps this case should spawns some reviews of professionalism and integrity in journalism.

We have had guns in America for centuries, we have misguided youth for centuries, we have had mental illness for centuries, we have had violent act for centuries......with all that being said, why are violent acts against public places becoming more and more common........media sensationalism!

The sad truth in America is if you want instant notoriety, commit massive acts of violence. By doing so, you can have every media outlet in the world splash your name, interview acquaintances, post your picture, look into your emails/facebook/internet searches/see how you carried out the crime...... Want proof.....tell me 2 victims from Columbine? Can't do it, I bet you can name the gunmen!


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

every school shooter thus far has this in common


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

shaug said:


> every school shooter thus far has this in common


These simplistic but apparently knowledgeable people forgot to mention another correlation to the production of monsters. 
Exposure to 2nd hand smoke in outdoor public places!


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

Speaking of sheep:

" On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs - Dave Grossman
By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of "On Killing."
Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always, even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? - William J. Bennett - in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997
One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:
"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.
Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed
Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial; that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.
But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, cannot and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog that intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."
Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.
Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?
Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.
Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warrior hood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.
There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.
Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.
Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.
There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke
Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.
For example, many officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs. Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.
I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"
Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.
Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"
It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.
Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.
Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling."
Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.
And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...
"Baa."
This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheep hood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth. "


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Jesus Christ,,,really hoping the author of this diatribe/purple prose doesn't have access to firearms. :sniper:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Spentwings, all I heard from you was BAA BAA BAA. You just made one of the points of the book!!! Read it some time.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Never!
And as always Savage260...I know we can respectfully disagree. :rollin:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Of course you won't read it. Your wool is over your eyes. Like it says above, the sheep are afraid of the sheepdog. You use pretty words to try to put the author down, but he knows more than all of us combined on this subject. MAN UP!!! Read the book, so you can make an informed statement, not just putting the guy down because you are afraid of what he is saying. The info in the book is SOLID!


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Savage260 said:


> Of course you won't read it. Your wool is over your eyes. Like it says above, the sheep are afraid of the sheepdog. You use pretty words to try to put the author down, but he knows more than all of us combined on this subject. MAN UP!!! Read the book, so you can make an informed statement, not just putting the guy down because you are afraid of what he is saying. The info in the book is SOLID!


Pretty words?
If what I commented on was an exert from his book,,,he's unreadable.
Nuts come in many forms,,,,wud this guy do mass killings,,,of couse not,,,but he kills me with his verbosity. 
He doesn't help our cause,,,old buddy! :beer:


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Speaking of authors,,,Jim Zumbo lost a job and was drawn and quartered for questioning the need for the _*black *_gun in regards to *hunting*,,,but _not _ the *shooting* sports in general.
Since then, I've had little patience for the hypocrisy on this issue right or left.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

meth and coke are illegal or banned per say how has that worked out. It is not hard for criminals to get anything all they need is some coin and all is to be had. Now if i am a rober and i know the law abiding people dont have a heater and i gots my 9 i am than robbing in confidence. On the off chance the old man in the house has a 1911 i might just think twice. We have turned into a country of lazy spineless pussys out numbering the hard working do whats right when no one is looking types and it is very sad.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

If I can read it, a guy of your high intelligence certainly would have no problem with it. Read it, in fact, every one should read this book. It will be worth your time!!!

Agree with it or not, read it then you can at least make educated statements.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Savage260 said:


> a guy of your high intelligence .


Another jab?,,,how cud I expect less? :rollin: 
Tell you what,,,you reread it and give me a brief synopsis in 100.000 words or less.


----------



## AdamFisk (Jan 30, 2005)

spentwings said:


> Savage260 said:
> 
> 
> > a guy of your high intelligence .
> ...


In summary, it says the world is mostly full of pussies, with a few crazies and a few of the strong mixed in.... Moral of the story, don't be a *****.

And on that subject, anybody know where there is a S&W Shield in stock in ND, either a 9mm or 40?


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

AdamFisk said:


> spentwings said:
> 
> 
> > Savage260 said:
> ...


 :-? hmmm????
You might be right Savage,,,about my intelligence that is. :rollin:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Not sure what you are talking about with the jab comment, but what ever.

It is about putting up or shutting up. Read the book and comment after, or don't read the book, and either don't comment, or put a disclaimer on your statements about the book/author that you have no clue what you are talking about.

Doesn't seem too much to ask.

The book doesn't have much to do with pussies, but it is full of some very good, and eye opening information. IF you are open minded enough to open the book.

By the way, I am usually right about the things I say or I wouldn't say them.


----------



## shaug (Mar 28, 2011)

-by Thomas Sowell

Must every tragic mass shooting bring out the shrill ignorance of "gun control" advocates?

The key fallacy of so-called gun-control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.

If gun-control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun-control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.

Places and times with the strongest gun-control laws have often been places and times with high murder rates. Washington, D.C., is a classic example, but just one among many.

The rate of gun ownership is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks. For the country as a whole, hand-gun ownership doubled in the late 20th century, while the murder rate went down.

The few counter-examples offered by gun-control zealots do not stand up under scrutiny. Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun-control laws than the United States and lower murder rates.

But, if you look back through history, you will find that Britain has had a lower murder rate than the United States for more than two centuries - and, for most of that time, the British had no more stringent gun-control laws than the United States. Indeed, neither country had stringent gun control for most of that time.

In the middle of the 20th century, you could buy a shotgun in London with no questions asked. New York, which at that time had had the stringent Sullivan Law restricting gun ownership since 1911, still had several times the gun-murder rate of London, as well as several times the London murder rate with other weapons.

Neither guns nor gun control were the reason for the difference in murder rates. People were the difference.

Yet many of the most zealous advocates of gun-control laws on both sides of the Atlantic have also been advocates of leniency toward criminals.

In Britain, such people have been so successful that legal gun ownership has been reduced almost to the vanishing point, while even most convicted felons are not put behind bars. The crime rate, including the rate of crimes committed with guns, is far higher in Britain now than it was back in the days when there were few restrictions on Britons buying firearms.

In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s - after decades of ever tightening gun-ownership restrictions - there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.

Gun-control zealots' choice of Britain for comparison with the United States has been wholly tendentious, not only because it ignored the history of the two countries, but also because it ignored other countries with stronger gun-control laws than the United States, such as Russia, Brazil, and Mexico. All of these countries have higher murder rates than the United States.

You could compare other sets of countries and get similar results. Gun ownership has been three times as high in Switzerland as in Germany, but the Swiss have had lower murder rates. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership and low murder rates include Israel, New Zealand, and Finland.

Guns are not the problem. People are the problem - including people who are determined to push gun-control laws, either in ignorance of the facts or in defiance of the facts.

There is innocent ignorance and there is invincible, dogmatic, and self-righteous ignorance. Every tragic mass shooting seems to bring out examples of both among gun-control advocates.

Some years back, there was a professor whose advocacy of gun control led him to produce a "study" that became so discredited that he resigned from his university. This column predicted at the time that this discredited study would continue to be cited by gun-control advocates. But I had no idea that this would happen the very next week in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> The key fallacy of so-called gun-control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available.
> 
> If gun-control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun-control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive.


Absolutely right Shaug. I think the zealots are big government worshipers. They want us all dependent on government, and with no teeth to say no. 
Our media should be hung for treason. I remember a show that CBS had (dang memory is failing again) and it was as far from reality as that "Guns of Autumn" That they showed 20 years ago. Anyway, the gist of the show was that there were tens of thousands of handgun murders in the United States each year. Someone on fishingbuddy quoted that from Politico just a day or two ago. Anyway what they don't tell you is that yes its gun deaths, but not murders. They didn't tell people that more than half of those deaths were self defense and often by police. Also they claimed our murder rate was so much higher than other countries like England, France, and even Brazil. What they failed to mention there was that in England the favored murder weapon is poison. Leading cause of death in Brazil was men beating their wives to death. So as far as murder rate we are actually under many countries.
I was listening to Rush today and he was talking about how the media is all over this. Yes it's a tragedy, but the average murders in Chicago is 41 per month. Far greater than what's happening in Connecticut. It doesn't make it any less tragedy, but why all the coverage? Because the media wants to help Obama with gun control. That or because the deaths in Chicago are in poor black neighborhoods they don't care. Maybe the media is racist.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Are you seriously making the claim that the media's coverage of the murder of 26 people in an elementary school is a conspiracy to help Obama push policy?

Perhaps, the media covered this event b.c of the murder of 26 people, including 20 first graders by a person that had absolutely no connection to the victims.

Truly a new low for you.....


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Gooseguy, we all know it isn't the ONLY reason or even the MAIN reason for the media coverage, but if you don't think the anti gun sheep won't milk this for all they can get(yea, even at the expense of the poor folks who lost family and friends) you are as dumb as a box of rocks.

They will even use a little menthol or what ever to get some tears going as they turn toward the camera and try to shove the new gun laws down our throats.

The only thing that will stop a freak with a gun is another person with a gun who is not willing to be a victim. Be it a cop, a teacher, or just some person who happened to be in the wrong place at the right time.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Gooseguy were you addressing me? You bet the media is actively involved in helping push gun control. Why else would they have shows like "Guns of Autumn"? Because they are also ant hunting. In that show they showed hunters shooting a mother polar bear from a helicopter and the little ones laying on her. The problem was those were biologists tranquilizing a bear, but they said it was hunters. The entire show had no integrity.

Oh, no one said it was a conspiracy. That's what one normally hears from liberals. They try paint the opposition as nut jobs. However, they perch like vultures waiting for tragedy. They nearly wet their pants with joy before they showed us the tears. It's a stage for them. How often do they report anything good? The worse it is the bigger the news.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

One thing we had before these mass killings became common place were easy commitments for the
mentally ill and places to put them.

In the name of humanity, mental institutions nation wide were closed. 
Now these psychos are left to their own devices or treated with meds in an attempt to integrate them into society.

Sadly, until we once again lock these people up,,, the killings will continue.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Spent, the problem is finding these people. From what I understand most of these "psychos" never hurt a fly before then ended up killing people. How can we know which people are going to snap and kill? If we can, I am all for it, but seems like most people these days have some sort of Dr. prescribed illness and are on zoloft or what have you.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

That's what makes institutionalization especially sad and controversial,,,the seriously mental ill wud all have to be locked up.
Like killing a fly with a baseball bat,,,overkill,,,but it would be the the only way.

_Back in the day,,,when I was young enough to think I cud make a difference,,,I worked for a year as a medical night supervisor 
at a Minnesota State Hospital.

One locked unit for paranoid schizophrenics was particular interesting. 
These people were heavy medicated and yet threatened me and fellow staff with everything including murder on a daily basis.

So where did they go after that hospital closed?
I suppose the super dangerous went on to ST Petersburg,,,for the criminally insane. But where are the others?_


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

So the voices told you "worked" at a MSH??? :wink: :lol:

Sorry, couldn't pass that one up!


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Savage260 said:


> So the voices told you "worked" at a MSH??? :wink: :lol:
> 
> Sorry, couldn't pass that one up!


Maybe,,,but for sure it was a time when I still half way believe in God and only drank a half pint of Canadian a day. :bartime:

The killing has to stop,,,and although we may agree gun control ain't the answer,,, what is????
Surely not Plain's Ten Commandments and prayer.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Savaage....are you sure we all know why the media is covering this event? Re-read Plainsman's last paragraph regarding news media coverage of the event. His thoughts are fairly well laid out. The coverage of the event isn't due to the slaughter of 26 peple in ten minutes but rather the coverage is to promote a liberal agenda.

As far as the drug analogy......your logic is that they are illegal and can still be found on the streets? So by that token, should we most drugs legal? Also, answer this question, how much more drugs would be around without drug enforcement?

To me it is interesting many on the far right cite the use of car deaths as a counter example to gun deaths. The flawed logic gets them in trouble often. Better used should be alcohol. How many people die as a result of reckless alcohol use? Cars are now a necessity in our culture, alcohol is not.

Finally, unfortunately both sides prey off of tragedy. Lefties are doing it right now. But you don't have to look any further than invasion of Iraq as proof that it goes both ways. The ability for righties to tie 9/11 to Iraq (War on Terror, WMD's) might be the best example in history of promoting an agenda based on tragedy. Plainsmen, funny you mention that liberals mainly promote conspiracy.....can I see your birth certificate?


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Goose, again, we ALL know gun control isn't the MAIN reason, but it isn't far behind the MAIN reason.

SO it is better to murder some one with a car than a gun? And how do people get in trouble with making that statement? The car is the tool the gun is the tool. Don't just say the drunk, many people each year are murdered by getting run down with a vehicle. It is no different than a gun in those cases.

Let's blame the people, not the tool used!!!


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

Hell we do not need cars. Let me say that again. We do not need cars, pickup's automobiles in private hands. Sure it would be rough at first but we would make it. I did look it up and a few years ago it was 6 kids 0-14 a day were killed by cars. Now lets talked wounded it was just under 700 aday. Now now can you say those 2,190 kids are nothing? What about the quarter million wounded in cars ever year? Again I supose they are just the cost of needing cars? Lets look at asprine. That stuff kills 3 people a day. Any talk about banning those little white pills? That is 1,095 a year. It is sad that some kids got killed but punishing everyone forever will not fix the problem.

Last time I looked the second amendment was not about hunting and it does say shall not be infringed.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> can I see your birth certificate?


Sure, even though I'm not running for president. Let me know when your coming so I can put on the coffee.



> many people each year are murdered by getting run down with a vehicle


Yup, Guido takes care of them and makes it look like an accident. Actually people in law enforcement are sure this happens at times, but how do you prove it?


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Plainsman, I am not even talking about the ones that look like accidents, I am talking just straight up "I hate you, I am going to run your a$$ over with my car" murders.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Savage260 said:


> Plainsman, I am not even talking about the ones that look like accidents, I am talking just straight up "I hate you, I am going to run your a$$ over with my car" murders.


Yup, that's what I meant by law enforcement is sure it's happening, but how do you prove it. Guido was simply in reference to the old gangster movies. :thumb:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here is some food for thought....

The media is attacking the second amendment with this tragedy.

Why don't others attack the first amendment with this tragedy and how poorly it was reported, how inaccurately it was reported, how the media helps these people gain "fame" by rushing to report it. Because these people who do this are trying to seek fame before they go out. Ask anyone who works in the mental field and say.....why do people do these things. Many will say it is because they want to me "infamous" and be known.

So yes the media is to blame for a certain extent. Do I blame them 100% no not at all. Do I put some blame on our society and the media....yep. Our society wants info so fast that is why the media trys to report it so fast. Then kind of off topic...but our society makes people like Kim Kardashian famous.....why?? The media and marketing is why she is at all famous or considered famous. But that is a whole different can of worms. But again that is spearheaded by media!!

But i don't want to end the first or second amendment. But once someone starts to attack the second bring up points about the first and watch them back pedal.

Go ahead and rip this apart.....it is your first amendment right.... :beer:


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Where the car analogy fails (ie gets in trouble) is like it or not, cars are a necessity of daily life in our culture for many. Guns are not. Meaning, the vast majority of people could live without a gun but could not live without cars. So when people try to make the argument that cars and guns are one in the same....both have deaths, but you can't live without cars. It falls flat. Also, the idea of what each "tool" is used for. For many a car is used for everyday convience. A gun is used for killing. (As a hunter and a gun owner, I know a gun is used for much more than that, but that is the perception of the majority of the non-gun wielding public.) Again, to many it is an apple to oranges comparison.

As I stated earlier, alcohol is a much better analogy. Like guns, alcohol is not a necessity, but it kills innocent people (mainly through impaired driving). Also, we had a 13 year period where it was outlawed (1919-1932). That experiment totally failed. So there is a historical precedent to be cited and hard statistics. I am surprised more people don't use that analogy.

The sad truth is guns are an easy target in this whole ordeal. Americans want to understand something and then blame those who are responsible. In school shootings, there is no way to understand it and (other than the shooter...who is dead), there is no one to blame. People can't understand how to tackle the mental health side of this, nor easily figure out that a lack of parenting (due to many factors divorce, 2 working parents, parenting skills) but then can easily say "outlaw guns."

Finally, the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of gun owners are beyond responsible. Most are guys (like me) who own a few guns to go hunting with and occasionally, go out to shoot clay piegons/targets. I would bet that statement sums up most on this website. However, for the non-gun owning public, we are all blood thirsty, paranoid, anti-government types.

It is going to be a losing battle....perception is everything.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

I really hate that alcohol analogy! :wink:

Negative perceptions aside, the left, even Obama's left, will never win the gun argument.
At one point they thought they cud kill the 2nd Amendment with a thousand cuts,,,and it drives them completely nuts
to finally realize this isn't Europe,,,Australia or Canada,,, it will never happen here.

Having said that,,,I, like Jim Zumbo,,,don't understand the need for the *black* gun for hunting. 
I'll even go beyond that,,,if you want one then get a federal permit like for full auto.

Take this so called bad boy gun off the market for most and then maybe,,,just maybe, we can address the real issues.
Leftist PC bull**** being at the top of the list.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Here is food for thought..... If they would "ban" guns or certain guns in the US.....things would be just like the Fast and Furious issue we just had.....The criminals in the US would just get the guns from mexico. So it would do no good at all. Those "black" guns would still be coming into the US.

And who was behind the Fast and Furious......GOVERMENT.

Food for thought.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

I don't buy that Chuck. 
Take relatively easy access away from the mentally ill and they, in most cases, aren't going to buy/steal the *black *from criminals.
Criminals and the criminally insane may be just as dangerous,,,but they ain't the same animal.
Although a mugger may shoot me dead in NYC,,,I feel at least I'd have a *shot *at reasoning with him. :lol:


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Goose, I don't know which left leaning source you are getting your information from, but LOOK AT THE FACTS!!!

How long have cars been around vs. how long firearms have been around.

How many guns are there vs. how many cars.

Do you even realize there are many people in large cities that don't own or drive cars???? C'mon MAN!

No one believes we would perish just because we don't have cars, only an idiot would think that. Life would go on, just at a slower pace, just like it did BEFORE the cars.

You THINK your "logic" is solid, but it is flawed, and we all can see it.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

I think this all misses the point.
Do I care about the gun homicide rate in the US considering most of the victims are gang bangers,,,not really. 
Do I care about DUI related deaths,,,most assuredly and the laws need to get tougher yet.
Do I care about pedophiles that kill children,,, I don't believe in the death penalty except for this sick scum.
Do I care about mass murder of the innocent,,,_*Yeah!*_ 
Analogies to alcohol ,,cars, and eating your sister's apple pie,,,is ??????????


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

Spent it is all about the target. You know that. The target is guns. They think that by taking away guns there will be no more murders. It is stupid, but sadly, true. People are actually that stupid!!!!

Tell me, other than the color and style, what is different between my AR and a semi auto Remmy or any other semi auto rifle? The only difference is the left spun hatred. If they get rid of "black" guns, and hand guns, you know shot guns, bolt actions and single shots will come soon enough. YOU KNOW THIS!!!


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

I know Savage,,,but only to a point.
I'm only saying that if you take away the left's symbol of mass murder,,, they'll have nothing.
Even with Obama's no doubt upcoming changes to the Supreme Court,,, serious gun control in the US will never happen.
There's absolutely nothing that wud cause insurrection in this country like draconian gun laws,,,the left knows and it's afraid. :sniper:


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Even with Obama's no doubt upcoming changes to the Supreme Court,,, serious gun control in the US will never happen.

Wow, how far is your head in the sand. :splat: :koolaid:


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Pretty far at least according to you. :rollin:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I'll go with Zogman. A couple of Obama's supreme court justices and the second amendment will be worthless. Obama will wipe his behind with the constitution and the sheep will let him do it. He stepped all over the constitution for four years and no one did anything. Why we ask?????? Because our coward politicians are more afraid of not being politically correct and called a racist than they are of loosing freedom for all of us. We need a third and fourth party because the two we have less than worthless.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Spent.... They are using this tragedy to get all guns.

I know what you are saying that if an AR is not in a household with a mentally deranged person. They won't go out and get one off the black market or they are less apt to go get one. I get that. But that will do nothing to stop gang violence, drug dealers, etc. They will still get them through other channels. Just like criminals do now.....they steal them or find a source to get them......just like fast and furious!!!

Spent.... I have to ask you do have very valid points about the mentally ill or mentally handicaped. But have you ever lived with someone that has a mental disability? I have and do. He is my brother. He has CP which is a physical and mental handicap. Now back in the day he would have been shipped away to an institution. Now he is not. I understand why you say it is one slippery slope just because of the situation my family has. You also say that "crazies" should be locked up or that is what was used to be done....but are the kids on ADD or ADHD drugs "crazies"??? It is one fine and slippery slope. Also like you mentioned you say that is why they are attacking guns.

But again....why guns??? We will never know if this lady had her guns locked up before all of this happened....or if they were laying right next to the kitchen table. We will never know. But why go after everyone for one persons possible irresponsibility. NOPE....and I think you agree with that.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

> Why we ask?????? Because our coward politicians are more afraid of not being politically correct and called a racist than they are of loosing freedom for all of us.


Amen!!!

Plainsman.... I don't know if you saw what i wrote to my elected officals on this subject. But I added this into my letter (email) "Take your time and do some home work. Because you are making laws for 100% of the nation. Not just the people who voted you in. Our leaders in washington have forgotten that the past few years."


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Chuck Smith said:


> Spent.... But have you ever lived with someone that has a mental disability? I have and do. He is my brother. He has CP which is a physical and mental handicap. Now back in the day he would have been shipped away to an institution. Now he is not. I understand why you say it is one slippery slope just because of the situation my family has. You also say that "crazies" should be locked up or that is what was used to be done....but are the kids on ADD or ADHD drugs "crazies"??? It is one fine and slippery slope. Also like you mentioned you say that is why they are attacking guns.
> 
> But again....why guns??? We will never know if this lady had her guns locked up before all of this happened....or if they were laying right next to the kitchen table. We will never know. But why go after everyone for one persons possible irresponsibility. NOPE....and I think you agree with that.


This is getting a lot deeper than I wud like Chuck...so to make a long painful story short,,,my youngest son was recently
diagnosed with ADHD at age 13. I knew something was wrong with him from age 4.
For years I had been told by teachers, clergy, counselors, my wife and my meddling mother that there wasn't anything
wrong with him but laziness and kids will be kids and even "It's your fault"!!!

I have a difficult time accepting ADHD as an illness especially since my Dad wud of treated it with me over his knee and his Bohemian belt to my bare ***.

Do I worry that Tommy will knife me in my sleep,,,well no. Do I still worry about his future,,,well yes.
I do have some peace with the diagnosis,,,I can be supportive,,,kind and understanding,,,but whether he ultimately floats or sinks has a lot more to do with him than me.
Anyway,,,I really don't have anymore to offer this thread,,,I've expressed an opinion based on some experience and the rest is just conjecture. :bop:


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Savage. I am confused? What flawed logic....that guns are equally a necessity as cars in our socity? They aren't. Also, not quite sure what your graph is supposed to disprove in my argument? That cars kill more people than guns? I agree and have never said that wasn't the case.

I am simply stating that due to daily use, intended use and daily necessity to survive, you will never be able to convince people that guns and cars are equal. In short, society can get along without guns, it can't without cars. So therefore, using that analogy, falls short. Apples to oranges!

Off original topic but out of curiosity, I did some research. There are roughly 230-250 mil cars in the US. Considering we have 310 mil people, that works out, on the average, to 4 cars per 5 people in the US. Pretty high considering the 310 mill includes children and elderly. Even with "not a lot of people in the cities owning cars"....on the average across the US, many do.

Chalk me up as an "idiot" but our society would crumble without cars. It is true that we survived without cars, but in the past 60 years we have totally set up our society around the usage/access to vehicles. Economic livlihood, food distribution, population distribution, product distribution, skill sets....all depend on the vehicles. That wasn't the case before 1950's.

Finally, you asked what has been around longer...cars or guns? It doesn't matter. What matters is which one does our society rely more on now?

As far as guns never being totally outlawed in the US, I agree but you will see a huge increase on restrictions/types that can be owned. Again, perception is not on the side of the gun lobby and because of that the "conversation" will not be well thought out based on facts.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

Cars are not needed in private hands. Just because many think they are does not make it true. Same goes with sports and religion. Heck lets ban all religion. How far do you think that would go? The same goes for firearms. There is a reason there is a second amendment.

I think we tried that alcohol ban thing once. Something about two amendments covering that one. All I have to say is when number two goes away so will 13, 15 and 19. I guess I can give up my guns for a 13.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

A would agree that cars are necessary to a point but one can take that farther and say that a majority of the people who need cars could get by with a Scion instead of a SUV. Larger/heavier vehicles have the potential for more damage so lets mandate that no one can have a car larger than a Scion...at least without a special permit. That should cut down on deaths caused by vehicles...right?......

Guns are just a tool. Take them away and murderers just move on to the next tool. With all the chemicals and internet access available today I'm far more concerned that bombs might become the weapon of choice if guns are outlawed. That sounds like an escalation of force to me....and I doubt most politicians have even considered that.


----------



## Jig Master (Nov 18, 2011)

Do some countries that do not have something similar to our second amendment in their constitutions ( if they have a constitution at all ) have incidences of ethnic cleansing? I think we all know, or should know the answer to that question.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> As far as guns never being totally outlawed in the US, I agree but you will see a huge increase on restrictions/types that can be owned.


I think that goes against the constitution. Why should the average gun owner be subject societies ignorant? I was at Walmart today and there was a half dozen people waiting for the 2:00 shipment that contained two AR15's. Then I sent to the gas station (again today) and the guy behind the counter didn't think anyone should own something that one pull of the trigger sends 100 rounds down range. The guy next to me said "they are a good investment". I tried to explain to the fellow, but he couldn't understand the difference between semi auto and full auto. So because he understands nothing about this we should all throw up our hands and follow his brilliance?


----------



## xdeano (Jan 14, 2005)

Well I'm not going to be a sheep! I took some time and emailed all of our US Rep and US Senators. It might be a feebal attempt but I don't care.

Take some time and do some calling or emailing. This is "We the People", they represent us.

xdeano


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

If anyone has current emails and phone numbers it would be helpful if you would post them. Thanks.

Here is where we will be in ten years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=fGaDAThOHhA


----------



## xdeano (Jan 14, 2005)

*US House of Representatives*
Rick Berg - http://berg.house.gov/ -voted out
Kevin Cramer - http://kevincramer.org/ -elect

*US Senate*
Kent Conrad - https://www.conrad.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm -retiring
Heidi Heitcamp - http://heidifornorthdakota.com/ -elect

John Hoeven - http://www.hoeven.senate.gov/public/ -re-elected

I know that a couple of these guys aren't going to be able to do much as they are lame ducks, but I emailed everyone. If it help, it helps. if not, well boys, we're SOL.

Hope this helps plainsman.

Better to live a day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep. - Mussolini

xdeano


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Thanks Xdeano. I have not called for a while. I have been so discouraged with their performance that at times it appears hopeless. Tomorrow however I will be on the phone and sending emails. I think I will call people beyond North Dakota also. Perhaps some democrats from other states.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

spentwings said:


> I know Savage,,,but only to a point.
> I'm only saying that if you take away the left's symbol of mass murder,,, they'll have nothing.
> Even with Obama's no doubt upcoming changes to the Supreme Court,,, serious gun control in the US will never happen.
> There's absolutely nothing that wud cause insurrection in this country like draconian gun laws,,,the left knows and it's afraid. :sniper:


I believe this thinking to be flawed. Take away handguns and the evil black rifle, in other words, the left's symbols of mass murder and you hand them a victory. They win this, they won't be afraid, they will be empowered. Then they will go after every other semi auto rifle because they fire so fast that they too are evil killing machines and not needed for hunting. They win that one and they go after bolt action rifles because they are the tools of a sniper and can kill at long ranges, not needed for hunting.

It is called the cascade effect and the anti gun organizations make no secret about using it to further their agenda. Keep handing them these small victories and by the time an insurrection occurs it will be ineffective due to a lack of weapons with which to fight.

huntin1


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

I decided to give you some hard figures that show why I believe that spents thinking is flawed.

U.S. Population: 311,000,000 (est.)
U.S. Gun Owners: 80,000,000 (est.)
Guns in U.S.: 310,000,000 (2009 est. *)
Rifles in U.S.: 110,000,000 (ibid)
Handguns in U.S.: 114,000,000 (ibid)
Shotguns in U.S.: 86,000,000 (ibid)
AR-15-type "Assault Rifles" in U.S.: 2,500,000 (est. **)
Shootings in U.S.: 100,000 (2010 est., FBI)
Firearm Deaths in U.S.: 31,513 (2010, FBI)
Firearm Homicides in U.S.: 11,015 (ibid)
Firearm Suicides in U.S.: 19,308 (ibid)
Firearm Accidental Deaths in U.S.: 800 (ibid)

Now, the percentages:

Firearm deaths as a percentage of firearms in the U.S.: 0.01%
Firearm deaths as a percentage of firearm owners in the U.S.: 0.039%
Firearm deaths as a percentage of AR-15-type "assault rifles" in the U.S.: 1.26%
Firearm homicides as a percentage of firearms in the U.S.: 0.004%
Firearm homicides as a percentage of firearm owners in the U.S.: 0.01%
Firearm homicides as a percentage of AR-15-type "assault rifles" in the U.S.: 0.44%
Shootings as a percentage of firearms in the U.S.: 0.03%
Shootings as a percentage of firearm owners in the U.S.: 0.125%
Shootings as a percentage of AR-15-type "assault rifles" in the U.S.: 4.0%

How the numbers defeat the liberal argument:

Even if EVERY shooting in the United States was committed by somebody with an AR-15 (or similar) rifle, that would account for 4% of all of the AR-15s in existence.

Even if EVERY firearm homicide in the United States was committed with an AR-15, that would account for 0.44% of all of the AR-15s in existence.

Even if EVERY firearm death (including suicides and accidents) was committed with an AR-15, that would account for 1.26% of all of the AR-15s in existence.

Gun control advocates seem to think that eliminating or further restricting eight tenths of one percent of the weapons in this country is a start toward a cure for the madness. But even if an AR-15 were used in EVERY single shooting that happened in 2010---which we know is impossible---that would account for only four percent of all of the AR-15s in existence.

* November 2012 Congressional Research Service report found that, as of 2009, there were approximately 310 million firearms in the United States: "114 million handguns, 110 million rifles and 86 million shotguns.

** In 2009, in a declaration made as part of the court case Heller vs. District of Columbia, which challenged D.C.'s assault weapons ban, NRA research coordinator Mark Overstreet reported that, from 1986 to 2007, at least 1,626,525 AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles were produced and not exported from the United States. Overstreet suggested that you could use trends in NICS background checks to project future sales of AR-15-style rifles. As of Nov. 30, 2012, the total number of NICS background checks increased by 50.4 percent since the end of 2007. If the number of AR-15 rifles increased similarly, then that means there are at least 2,446,294 AR-15 rifles currently available in the United States.

FBI Statistics:
2010, there were 31,513 deaths from firearms, distributed as follows by mode of death: Suicide 19,308; Homicide 11,015; Accident 600.

huntin1


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

huntin1 said:


> I believe this thinking to be flawed. Take away handguns and the evil black rifle, in other words, the left's symbols of mass murder and you hand them a victory. They win this, they won't be afraid, they will be empowered. Then they will go after every other semi auto rifle because they fire so fast that they too are evil killing machines and not needed for hunting. They win that one and they go after bolt action rifles because they are the tools of a sniper and can kill at long ranges, not needed for hunting.
> 
> It is called the cascade effect and the anti gun organizations make no secret about using it to further their agenda. Keep handing them these small victories and by the time an insurrection occurs it will be ineffective due to a lack of weapons with which to fight.
> 
> huntin1


 :thumb: x1000


----------



## duckp (Mar 13, 2008)

Yes. :thumb:

Easy contact info: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_i ... rs_cfm.cfm
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

As the ad says,'Just do it!'


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I think I will add this to a letter that I send to my representatives:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyKvTn5B ... e=youtu.be

Maybe this FBI data too:



> FBI: MORE PEOPLE KILLED WITH HAMMERS, CLUBS EACH YEAR THAN RIFLES
> 
> By AWR HAWKINS, Breitbart.com
> 
> ...


Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/gun-rights/20 ... z2GxQ3AS8o


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

With the arrogance of Washington this is perhaps where we are headed. Never heard about this before.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/B ... thens.html


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I sent this email (will follow with a letter) to Cramer and Hoeven. Heidi didn't have a contact at her site. At least I have not found it yet. I will contact her.



> January 10, 2013
> 
> Dear Congressman Cramer,
> 
> ...


----------



## xdeano (Jan 14, 2005)

Plainsman,

I sent mine here;

http://heidifornorthdakota.com/

Don't know if it'll get to her, but it should.

deano


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I used the same one, but it said "to invite Heidi to an event". I'm going to snail mail it to the address in Bismarck.


----------

