Forum Post: If you believe in gun control & considering the Virginia Tech news today - this article about the Gabrielle Giffords shooting is a MUST READ
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 8, 2011, 7:48 p.m. EST by bensdad
(8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
We'd all be so much safer if everyone carried a gun: from slate:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41018893/ns/slate_com/t/armed-giffords-hero-nearly-shot-wrong-man/
condensed: The poster boy for the pro-gun agenda is Joe Zamudio, a hero in the Tucson incident. "I came out of that store, I clicked the safety off, and I was ready, I had my hand on my gun. I had it in my jacket pocket here. And I came around the corner like this." Zamudio demonstrated how his shooting hand was wrapped around the weapon, poised to draw and fire. As he rounded the corner, he saw a man holding a gun. "And that's who I at first thought was the shooter, I told him to 'Drop it, drop it!'" But the man with the gun wasn't the shooter. He had wrested the gun away from the shooter. "Had you shot that guy, it would have been a big, fat mess," the interviewer pointed out. Zamudio agreed: "I was very lucky. Honestly, it was a matter of seconds. Two, maybe three seconds between when I came through the doorway and when I was laying on top of [the real shooter], holding him down. So, I mean, in that short amount of time I made a lot of really big decisions really fast. … I was really lucky." First, upon seeing the man with the gun, Zamudio "grabbed his arm and shoved him into a wall" before realizing he wasn't the shooter. And second, one reason why Zamudio didn't pull out his own weapon was that "he didn't want to be confused as a second gunman." Zamudio had released his safety and was poised to fire when he saw what he thought was the killer still holding his weapon. Zamudio had a split second to decide whether to shoot. He was sufficiently convinced of the killer's identity to shove the man into a wall. But Zamudio didn't use his gun. That's how close he came to killing an innocent man. He was, as he acknowledges, "very lucky."
We'd all be so much safer if everyone carried a gun
I am for gun control, so I kind of sympathize with gun owners here and what they believe to be their "right" to own guns. Of course that part of the constitution has been misinterpreted today. When it was written it was worded to mean that this newly founded nation had the right to bear arms to defend itself against any invader, and more specifically the British. The Founding Fathers wanted to be clear to potential adversaries. But today people mistakenly believe that the Founding Fathers meant that it was okay for all Americans to own pistols, automatic weapons and so on, then let's go with that. If everyone wants to continue to see murder and mass murder and attempted mass murder by firearms in this country every year, then so be it.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-you-believe-in-pitchfork-control-considering-th/
dude you rule great photo!
Ah yes. Now the Marxist scum want to disarm everyone. Knew this was coming. Yep, it would make us sooo much safer.
The only Marxist scum I recognize here is you.
Yes, that makes sense.
Sorry to say but in this country the same people who post annoying diatribes here are the same ones that own guns and not afraid to use them. The whole gun madness is one put upon us by the gun lobbyists and this is the price we pay for letting that happen.
Yeah...and the founders, as enumerated in the Constitution....
Think of how lucky we would be -
if the gun madness was the WORST WE LET HAPPEN
lets face it, we need to adopt NRA + TP + grover methods
If you are so against the 2nd amendment and our right to bear arms, stand on your principle and post a huge sign in front of your domicile stating "There are no guns in this house!!"... I think we should be required to post a sign in front of our homes to whether we have guns....
hahaha yes let the criminals know there are no guns in here, with a sign then, have a gun ready for them when they line up to rob you. hahahahahaha the gov CAN NOT protect you unless they imprison you. I would rather be free and in danger than a safe slave. But you chose your own fate. Slave to gov or free man? is there really a choice that will take time to decide on?
I don't own any guns and never felt the need to. And I've been on this Earth for 54 years. Former friend of mine who lives in Washington state owns all kinds of weapons. He is the most paranoid person I know. Gun owners are paranoid psychotics. He's waiting for the "class war" that the right-wing media pundits talk about. My former friend can't wait for "all hell to break loose" so he can shoot and kill people who try to trespass on his little house in the ghetto that he lives in. That is no way to live and I really do pity my old friend who grows and smokes his own little weed.
Your friend sounds prepared.
All gun owners are "paranoid psychotics"? Having a gun gives you the opportunity to protect and defend yourself. What is paranoid about that?
Makes sense to me. We should also have to wear neon signs around declaring whether or not we own a gun.
I would wear a sign (for a day or so) but would you believe my sign?
Yes, just cuz you have enough of a humor to wear one. If you do it post a picture somewhere.
I like it!!!
There is a great All in the Family episode [ if you are over 50 ]
when Archie spoke on "guns for all"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLjNJI54GMM
SUPER
Thanks for posting!
I thought over 200 years ago we were given this right.
You thought right but failed to realize what happened during the second bankruptcy in 1871. You waived all your rights and have given implied consent for the State to doll them out to you as privileges.
Keep and bear arms. I only know of a few states where one can carry, concealed or unconcealed, without a state issued permit.
However, just 25 years ago, I rode all over the United States with either a pump shotgun or long gun strapped to the sissy bar of my chopper. You saw gun racks in the windows of trucks everywhere. That doesn't fly anymore unless you like lots of cop hassles.
Carry is not a MAJOR concern of mine. I believe the original purpose of the second amendment was to allow people firearms for protection of their property and to use weapons should "the government" tear up the Constitution by some dictator. The people were given the right to fight against a tyrant.
Keep and bear arms? Whip out a 1828 dictionary and there is no room for thinking what it means. It's very clear.
You are exactly correct that was the original purpose. It was never the intent to allow everyone to carry any firearm in any capacity they chose. As it stands, you can still have firearms in your home to defend your family and property. Carry and particulary concealed carry is a completly different thing.
We were given the ability to carry guns. However, its not a requirement. There are countries now that have this idea enforced and the crime rate is near zero.
"There are countries now that have this idea enforced and the crime rate is near zero."
What countries??
many right to carry states saw the crime rate fall fast after enacting right to carry laws. Check my facts!. The liberals hate that fact and the press will not report it. So what does that tell you? the truth is being covered up by focused hate. The media is bought by mammon, and can not be trusted. They do focus the hate of Americans to their bosses benefits. If I am right they WILL try to discredit me. watch!. I have but one life to give.
It's sad that I can't tell whether this is a parody of a gun nut or an actual reply from one. If it is real, I'm sorry but it just depresses me how hopeless you are.
Not gun nuts, Second Amendment followers. The Constitution.
Apparently, you see the two groups as the same thing. I don't.
You dont believe in the Second Amendment for some reason?
I believe in the Second Amendment. I don't believe in everything gun nuts tell me. You apparently think all gun nuts are advocating the Second Amendment. You're wrong. Perhaps you should spend more time reading about the Constitution than invoking it??
You mean this; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Absolutely. No well regulated militia, no gun.
That's in stark contrast to gun nuts whining about gun registration and the right for everyone to own an unlimited amount of whatever weapon they want.
Men in Switzerland are required to keep their service weapons after they have served in their reserve militia.
That is partly true but, in my opinion, not an example applicable to personal possession of weapons. In principle this is an option, first by the Swiss army and then by the citizen. Secondly, the possible use of weapons by citizens is strictly limited to precise military orders. In no way a citizen can use his gun for personal initiative, for self-defense, to protect his property, etc.. The weapon normally assigned is an assault rifle, not a handgun or whose bearing can be hidden. Finally, all weapons assigned to citizens are carefully registered.
So you would advocate conscription and training for every adult male and invasive inspections for every one of these guns to ensure that absolutely no unauthorized use has occurred??
I always thought 2nd amendment enthusiasts were proponents of freedom. Perhaps you were just misinformed?
Actually you are twisting my words. I just said that there are countries where guns are required and you asked for one and I gave it to you. I was just giving you some background in my response.
I'm just informing you that while gun possession is mandatory for conscripts in Switzerland, unauthorized gun carrying is forbidden. What you posted was just a misconception about Switzerland that I thought you'd like cleared up.
Yes and its perfectly reasonable. I would not give a child a match and not inform him of the ideas beforehand. In Switzerland, it is required to have permit after receiving training relevant to owning and maintaining a gun.
I didn't find much of that first part on Wikipedia so you must be wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription_in_Switzerland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
HELL YES, Gun Controll by the Government!!!!
Let's Take all the Guns out of the Hands of Americans!
no way will Criminals and Psychopaths be able to get them that way.
Yeee Hawww WE are SOooooo.... SMART!
A perfect fox - you twist sanity into
......Let's Take all the Guns out of the Hands of Americans!
what a perfect tell !
thank you rushseanbillo
The last thing I'd want is for us to give criminals a reason to create a weapons black market.
Don't be stubborn folks, prohibition does not work.
The last thing I'd want is for us to give criminals a reason to create a weapons black market. Don't be stubborn folks, prohibition does not work. . . There is no weapons black market - they manufacture them in DC
I dont believe in prohibition - booze, guns, or drugs As I said before, register the guns, licence the shooters - JUST LIKE CARS
They already do that I think.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Using this situation to make a political point is digraceful. The two people killled were armed: one was a cop the other was the shooter who committed suicide.
could it be a very rich person who wants our guns taken from us paid someone to do this to discredit all gun owners and to focus the public's hate on law abiding gun owners? Is it possible? the only question asked here.
sure guns are evil people gun owners are the whole problem in the US today without gun owners we all would be safe on our streets today I thought over 200 years ago we were given this right. yup and now they want it back. Most gun owners have never done anything with that gun that is illegal. Who is spreading the fear? Why would god spread fear? Good does not spread fear it spreads love. If a gun owner has actually done something then that is different. Something more than speak freely that is. We have plenty of laws to control bad use of guns. Why is the push to remove guns so strong right now? why now? why remove guns from so many people who have been lawful? Why spread hate? evil spreads hate.
An unarmed population is easier to control.
that is the whole point
We would be safer if everyone carried a gun AND was forced to take extensive training for the privilege.
yes true. especially the training not to fire until sure of target and then shoot to injure, stop them, only. The cops CAN be trained to do this SAFELY why not everyone else? No hate escalations allowed. If gun removal is suggested ask the political affiliations of the person. If they tell the truth it will be a foreign (to us) ISM. like Marxist or socialist, or communist all groups that have removed guns from their subjects in the past so to have total control over them. Like a slave master has.
I really don't know. I grew up in a firearms household and from maybe 5-6 years old I had proper firearm use drilled into me. It was to the point I had trouble learning paintball or laser tag because of a physical inability to point a gun at another human being.
If you cannot at least get to the same standards as a police officer, you have no business with a CCW permit.
agree I really do not want to carry a gun. But I love to target shoot its just another skill to learn for a country boy. I really do not see how that is a problem in any way.
The gun rants are all just much ado about nothing. We have the full endorsement of our creators as Constitutional conscripts to possess firearms commensurate with their purpose of defending our Freedom; these words have been preserved and include a mandate to defend that right at all costs. More, we have the Guns... good luck to those who try to take them under the guise of enforcing UN-Constitutional law; this one will be decided only by the survivor and not by any "Supreme" court.
if we all gave up our guns we would be so safe! Let the Gov protect us. Then if the gov wants to enslave us in like tyrants, what do we do? what dribble, the people that would be safe is those that fear those with guns the ones hoping to become the new slave masters in gov.. Those that seek to do evil to us. And produce nothing themselves, such leeches on society, should not be tolerated, removed from gov and given a job producing something of value, like a potato.
Interesting how people on that side of the spectrum
( fox is brilliant at this )
can take a "lefty" statement and twist it into insanity. I - personally - believe in the second amendment and dont want to take anyone's guns. But if we register cars that can kill and license trained drivers that can kill - we MUST register guns and license trained shooters.
once registered how hard will it be to collect them? Are you really that afraid of guns? get shot at a lot? Will you will trade your freedom, your soul, for the offered false safety? They think so. And that has made them bold. They will come for you too unless you have a billion dollars or know someone that does. Those that lose their guns can use butter knives and in French Revolution they used pitch forks to be sure the autocrats made it to the gallows. Maybe they need to ban pitch forks too as the French used them once, and may do it again.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-you-believe-in-pitchfork-control-considering-th/
Funny, "they're coming to take everyone's car" would be worse for most people, but that isn't the threat.
Given that the military has helicopters and missiles, I'm doubtful that guns would matter enough if full suppression of the populace were to occur.
if that is so why do they want our hunting guns? Will you easily give up your car and agree to live in housing right next to the track that takes you to work in their factory? Health care reform is Doctors not doing charity work anymore? Tax reform is the new way to get more out of the slaves? Education so you can produce more for your master?
Vehicles don't need to be registered if they are at the home and the person isn't driving the vehicle. If a person carries concealed, they are trained and licensed. It's already being done, maybe you shold learn more about the process. Also, all people who buy new firearms need to go through a federal background check process before they are allowed to own a firearm.
As I see it, vehicles are registered because they are taxed and they are used in crimes and are the only visible means of determining who may be involved via license plates. Guns can't be traced by any visible means while the crime is being committed. Licensing for vehicles is a two part process, one as a means of identification and two to be sure they can correctly operate a vehicle. A vehicle requires significantly more skill to operate safely than a firearm. Also, a vehicle can bring down buildings, similar to explosives. Much more energy transfer in a vehicle compared to a firearm. At any rate, law abiding citizens who "drive" firearms with general public are both licensed and trained, at a higher level than automobile owners driving in general public.
Bottom line. If 90% of law abiding citizens were armed, there would be much less violent crime because career criminals would look into a new line of work and this has been proven time and time again (e.g. if there is 3 percent of the population that was in violent crime, this value would derate to less than 3%, maybe 0.1%). Canada gave up a long gun registration process because it costed 10x+ the original estimate and didn't lead to any criminal convictions, e.g. it was determined a flop...better off burning the money to keep homeless warm.
Guns don't initiate crime, people do. A person who wants to commit a violent crime with a concealed firearm isn't going to go through the process of getting licensed and increasing their chances of getting caught....they'll buy a firearm off the streets, not to mention, highly probable they can't own a firearm and definitely can't obtain a concealed license due to past offenses. Just because a person has a firearm, they don't turn into a criminal. Are cops criminal? Police officers typically have less training than most licensed concealed carriers....why...they do the minimum for employment and those that have paid money and spent their one resources feel protecting family and neighbors life is important enough to spend their own time and hard earned money.
One of the reasons Japan never considered landing on the US is due to the number of gun owners.
Most police officers will tell you, they don't stop crimes, they find the person who committed the crime after it was committed. Much more crime is stopped by immediate responeders, e.g. you and I on the street or in the are when it occurred. Cops draw lines around the corpse and take pictures. I like to think that I have a right and option to defend myself and family.
Here's some statistics: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
"lethal violence, even in self defense, only engenders more violence." (13)
When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them. (13)(15)
221,443 concealed carry licenses were issued in Florida between October of 1987 and April of 1994. During that time, Florida recorded 18 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. (15)
As of 1998, nationwide, there has been 1 recorded incident in which a permit holder shot someone following a traffic accident. The permit holder was not charged, as the grand jury ruled the shooting was in self defense. (7)
As of 1998, no permit holder has ever shot a police officer. There have been several cases in which a permit holder has protected an officer's life. (7)
Here's the percentage of licensed weapon carriers in Fl. that have committed a firearm offence in the past 25years....0.008%. This is a total of 168 people out of over 2 million licenses. Also, this includes brandishing or carrying in a prohibited area. These 168 weren't even violent crimes, simply firearm related incidents that revoked their right to carry concealed.
Licenced concealed carry people are some of the most responsible people in the country. You are much more likely to be saved by a fellow neighbor if, God forbid, you are ever a victim of a violent crime. I wouldn't ever want to think there weren't people around me ready to help me or my family out in such a situation.
good post I agree
sir - it is a shame that your passion is not directed in support of something more useful than a gun -
say education, tax reform, health care reform
you know something? you are trying to use a negative emotion on me to try to control me, to shame me for not thinking like you. Good does not use negative for change, evil uses negative to make changes. so what does that mean if you try to control with negatives?
useful? keeping freedoms is useful to some free people. As long as the freedom is not abused what is the problem? There is evil waiting to happen and it needs the guns removed first. Like in pre war Germany, before they came for the Jews they came for the guns. Same play book this time. wake up. They came for the guns first and no body did anything. History repeats its self. Will they tattoo my number on my right arm or left?.