Gun Ownership Rights

[BallHawk]

How often are people robbed in their home and saved by a gun?

How often is a person and/or their family killed by their own gun?

FYI, it's more numerous in the latter.

[The Leaper]

How often are people robbed in their home and saved by a gun?

How often is a person and/or their family killed by their own gun?

FYI, it's more numerous in the latter.

We have no idea how often guns might prevent a home from a violent attack. How many times has a criminal decided to not rob a specific home because they KNOW a gun is present? There is no statistic that tracks that...but it is a very real deterrent in some cases.

Sure, people are harmed by their own guns in suicides/accidents all the time. So we should legislate away the right of anyone to own a handgun because of the stupidity/ignorance of a few?

With that logic, you better be campaigning hard to ban alcohol consumption.

[3irty1]

It looks like its not going to happen.

[Partial]

In my opinion, everyone man women and child should have a gun. OK, maybe not women or children. Women because my sexist jokes would then be too risky and children for the obvious reasons.

But for realsies, i bet my risk of getting mugged shrinks massively if I can legally be packing heat and said mugger has no idea if I do or don't have a gun.

I don't think I could ever shoot a person unless the situation was truly dire, but it certainly would make me feel much safer.

[MJZiggy]

How often are people robbed in their home and saved by a gun?

How often is a person and/or their family killed by their own gun?

FYI, it's more numerous in the latter.

We have no idea how often guns might prevent a home from a violent attack. How many times has a criminal decided to not rob a specific home because they KNOW a gun is present? There is no statistic that tracks that...but it is a very real deterrent in some cases.

Sure, people are harmed by their own guns in suicides/accidents all the time. So we should legislate away the right of anyone to own a handgun because of the stupidity/ignorance of a few?

With that logic, you better be campaigning hard to ban alcohol consumption.

Actually you do have an idea of how often guns might prevent a home from violent attack. You look at the number of attempted home invasions (every police dept. keeps records of these--and by the way, last I read about this, they're pretty damn rare compared to the population at large) then look at the number of criminals who get shot trying to invade the home (rarer still). My question to you is, how does the crackhead know before he busts your door down whether you have a gun inside or not? It is a FAR bigger deterrent to robbery and home invasion to have a dog, it barks and lets criminals know it's there. And the criminal isn't gonna shoot the dog because then the whole neighborhood calls the cops and there's no way he gets out of there without getting busted--and no one can accidentally be shot by the dog (unless you feed him too many table scraps but that's a different discussion).

And to the legalize it/don't legalize it debate, Florida many years ago, made it legal to carry and gun violence went down. England never allowed them in the first place and they don't have gun violence at all. Choose your poison.

[3irty1]

Re: Gun Ownership Rights

And what fraction of legal gun owners commit violent crimes with a gun?

I don't think that really matters. The argument against handguns isn't that gun owners are likely or unlikely to commit crimes, it's that handguns are guaranteed to make any crime committed much worse.

Well I'll agree that committing a crime using a gun makes the crime worse... what kind of point is that?

I'm saying that it is unfair to treat anyone who owns a gun or wants to own a gun and is legally able as if they were all going to one of the first time offenders who commit 2/3 of gun crimes. At least not on a national level.

Nobody's talking about a national ban on handguns. The issue was whether the constitution allows a single locality (aka the crime capital of the US) to ban handguns.

You think it's "unfair" that the law labels all handgun owners as potential criminals, but that's really not the point. The law has to weigh individual liberty against collective good. The rationale for the handgun ban is that individual liberty (the right to own guns) is in this case outweighed by the public good (the right to be free from gun violence). If gun violence in DC weren't so ubiquitous (like in much of the rest of the country), individual rights might well outweigh the concern for public safety.

Lets not forget that these are the same people who a few years ago were wearing bulletproof vests to pump gas. I'm glad the supreme court didn't tell them how much/what kind of protection was ok. What is enough for me or you might not let some in DC sleep at night.

[The Leaper]

Re: Gun Ownership Rights

Nobody's talking about a national ban on handguns.

Not yet.

You give them an opening, and the anti-gun crowd won't pass it up. That is basically my entire argument. Allow the government to start infringing on individual rights at your own risk.

[Zool]

So if everyone carries a gun, doesn't the risk of getting shot go up not down? Its simple math really.

More guns+stupid people=more people getting shot

You cant police stupid. How I wish it was possible. Some sort of yearly common sense quiz, and those deemed unfit for the gene pool are neutered or spayed.

[The Leaper]

So if everyone carries a gun, doesn't the risk of getting shot go up not down? Its simple math really.

Not really.

The US and USSR each continually upped their number of nukes...it didn't mean the chances of them being shot off was going up.

Ask the people at Virginia Tech what their chances were in front of a gunman when they had no weapons of their own.

Criminals are going to have guns regardless...they don't care about laws or the innocent. Making laws that illegalize guns only penalizes the law abiding. I favor tighter restrictions on all weapons, but not making ownership of them illegal altogether.

[pacfan]

Re: Gun Ownership Rights

Nobody's talking about a national ban on handguns.

Not yet.

You give them an opening, and the anti-gun crowd won't pass it up. That is basically my entire argument. Allow the government to start infringing on individual rights at your own risk.

BINGO!!! This is what makes me nervous about the whole issue. Its not like the gov't ever needs a reason to interfere in your life, but when the "collective good" is invoked all sorts of shit can be changed, for the common good.

[Deputy Nutz]

I am a huge fan of guns, but I have no use for a hand gun. I believe they cause more grief than protection. I have even less need for the tactical assault weapons and military rifles that they sell at Gander Mountain and all other arm dealerships. It would be cool to own, to go shoot up some targets out at the farm but, I still have no need for one and I can't see any other private citizens having a need for such weapon. Sure neat to have, but where is the need? Again more grief than protection.

I am for all gun rights at this point regardless of my feelings on the topic above. The reason is, the commonly used phrase, "Slippery Slope". Once certain rights are taken away, then more of your gun rights start to disappear to where you can't even have a Browning A-bolt to go hunting with.

[Tarlam!]

I am glad I don't have a gun. I know I would have shot my ex-wife.

Maybe it's different if you grow up with guns (like money), but I would not be prepared to take responsibility for a gun these days.

[Deputy Nutz]

I am glad I don't have a gun. I know I would have shot my ex-wife.

Maybe it's different if you grow up with guns (like money), but I would not be prepared to take responsibility for a gun these days.

I wish more people where like you. Some think that they have a right to bear arms that it means that they need a gun. Don't bother with being a responsible gun owner, or learning how to be one, they just rush out and buy one because their neighbor's car got broken into.

Funny how you just have to wait 7 days for a hand gun approval, but you have to take a hunters safety course which is quite long to be able to go into the woods with a loaded weapon.

[3irty1]

Re: Gun Ownership Rights

Nobody's talking about a national ban on handguns.

Not yet.

You give them an opening, and the anti-gun crowd won't pass it up. That is basically my entire argument. Allow the government to start infringing on individual rights at your own risk.

This sounds like something my grandpa said once. I remember him warning me that we wouldn't lose our gun rights overnight, they'd be taken from us slowly.

This is the same grandpa that for my 10th birthday gave me a Ruger 10/22 and a NRA membership.

[Little Whiskey]

Maybe its time to ramp down production of handguns? Does anyone really need a Desert Eagle or a .50cal?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqOeDW5wu_E

I agree with Leap that you're never going to eliminate guns, but handguns are pretty much designed with 1 purpose and its not target practice.

I've gotta get one of these! ......for pest control and such