U S Gun Lobby Issues Point-Blank 'no' To Gun Control

[Keesters]

We have effective modern self-defense products available such as Mace, Tasers, stun guns etc. that can disable an attacker without killing them.

Yes there are about 5% of the population who are genetically immune to pepper spray

0% of the population are immune to gun shot wounds.

tasers were banned by the LAPD because they can actually cause death

Guns too can actually cause death so why not ban them as well!

a taser has a very short range ... doesn't have a gun, but has a knife

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser states: Cartridges available to non-law enforcement consumers are limited to 15 feet (4.5 m).

That would have to be some knife to beat the range of a taser.

Regarding heavy clothing you may have a point. However mine still is that there has to be something better than guns for self-defense that would not allow such tragedies as the slaughter of innocent children.

[submaniac]

Lethal force may only be used by a police officer under certain circumstances, and if something is deemed lethal force, you are authorized to use a gun. It wasn't just the taser, it was also the choke hold (blood choke) that was deemed to be lethal force.

The taser is within strike range of a knife. 15 ft. You're talking about those dart tasers. Well, what if you miss with it? Too bad. My firearms have a 10 round magazine (thanks to California law which limits the magazine size) and if I miss with the first, I will follow up. Taser, you get one chance and that is all. If you think that 15 feet is not within striking range of a knife, then imagine a man 15 feet away from you right now. Imagine he has a knife. Imagine that he is charging at you, running as fast as he can with the intent of stabbing you in the heart. Are you sure all you want to have to defend yourself is the taser? When you think about a man with a knife, 15 feet away from you is awfully too close for comfort.

Edited December 25, 2012 by submaniac

[Mosha]

Here's the thing: If more guns made us safer, the United States would already be the safest place on the face of the Earth, instead of being nearer the top of the list for firearms deaths per capita.

[DocN]

Two things:

since when did THIS ...

lib·er·al

adjective

1.

favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religiousaffairs.

2.

( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a politicalparty advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3.

of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.

4.

favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and securedby governmental protection of civil liberties.

5.

favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

...become a bad thing?

and second: Webster, New York...2 firemen shot as they were trying to put out a fire. Because it was too dangerous for other firemen to act, 3 houses burnt down!

Happy Christmas, USA! Happy Christmas, NRA!

Edited December 25, 2012 by Scott

[submaniac]

Why do you think we're all conservative Republicans? I voted for Obama, and am a registered democrat. I consider myself to be liberal on everything, except that I am pro-gun. I also grew up in an area where firearms and hunting were very prevalent and important parts of life, so hence I do not tow the Democratic party line in regards to firearms ownership. And frankly there are alot of Democrats who also do not tow the party line on that either.

[Keesters]

Lethal force may only be used by a police officer under certain circumstances, and if something is deemed lethal force, you are authorized to use a gun. It wasn't just the taser, it was also the choke hold (blood choke) that was deemed to be lethal force.

The taser is within strike range of a knife. 15 ft. You're talking about those dart tasers. Well, what if you miss with it? Too bad. My firearms have a 10 round magazine (thanks to California law which limits the magazine size) and if I miss with the first, I will follow up. Taser, you get one chance and that is all. If you think that 15 feet is not within striking range of a knife, then imagine a man 15 feet away from you right now. Imagine he has a knife. Imagine that he is charging at you, running as fast as he can with the intent of stabbing you in the heart. Are you sure all you want to have to defend yourself is the taser? When you think about a man with a knife, 15 feet away from you is awfully too close for comfort.

So using a gun is lethal force and can only be used by police. Then why guns for citizens. I just don't get it.

If I felt that much under threat, as you seem to be, that I'd need a gun to protect myself there's only one thing I'd do. MOVE. I still believe that there are other effective methods of defense without having one that can kill innocent children. Guns don't always work either. They jam, forgot to release safety, don't have the nerve to pull trigger. Just as many things can go wrong with a gun shooting as can with a taser.

Post #124 really seems to sum it up.

[mania]

So using a gun is lethal force and can only be used by police. Then why guns for citizens. I just don't get it.

If I felt that much under threat, as you seem to be, that I'd need a gun to protect myself there's only one thing I'd do. MOVE. I still believe that there are other effective methods of defense without having one that can kill innocent children. Guns don't always work either. They jam, forgot to release safety, don't have the nerve to pull trigger. Just as many things can go wrong with a gun shooting as can with a taser.

Post #124 really seems to sum it up.

Kind of drifting well off the topic now.

He did not say lethal force can only be used by police he said,

"Lethal force may only be used by a police officer under certain circumstances"

Meaning it is available to a police officer to repel a equally lethal threat.

It is the same for citizens.

Look up laws like the "Castle Law"

There are multiple things being discussed all at once here

& it is not surprising confusion is reigning supreme.

Yes like you I would move if I really felt threatened

IF I were allowed to move or able to. Many folks are not able to

move for many reasons or choose not for various reasons.

Yes you or I would & can AND choose too.

For those who don't they have the option to try & protect their

families with force equal to that being used against them.

Edited December 25, 2012 by mania

[metisdead]

An insulting post has been removed. Let's keep the discussion civil, without resorting to insults and flames, thanks.

[hhfarang]

Unfortunately, rationale people with more moderate views tend to be less likely to vote so our policy gets dictated by the whackadoodles.

And those same whackadoodles elect (or re-elect) our politicians...

Maybe we need a new amendment that keeps whackadoodles from voting. Can someone please come up with a whackadoodle test so that they are easy to identify.

Or... national requirement to vote... or ... anyone who voted in the previous election cannot vote in the next one so that at least every other election is not controlled by whackadoodles.

[Digitalbanana]

I also grew up in an area where firearms and hunting were very prevalent and important parts of life, ..

Shouldn't that read import parts of death? Surely guns are created only to remove life?

[simple1]

If the US ever loses it's 2nd Amendment then the rest of you are in a lot of trouble from when Tyranny really starts kicking in doors!

You libs need to jack in the hating and get with freedom before it's too late...

Please explain how a tyrannical government would get into power in the USA.

Same as anywhere else,

It starts by slipping a link onto a chain one link at a time.

Slowly adding links so as to not be noticed.

When the chains are long enough,heavy enough,strong enough

to bind them the citizens have now become subjects.

As the US has a presidential election every 4 years, you're suggesting that these "link" trends will not be noticed by the electorate and the opposition will be of the same caliber? Of course a tyrannical government/dictatorship also requires the support of the military and law enforcement agencies. Not going to happen in the USA unless you're saying the US population is inherently fascist/leftist/ignorant or the economy completely disintegrates.

[mania]

As the US has a presidential election every 4 years, you're suggesting that these "link" trends will not be noticed by the electorate and the opposition will be of the same caliber? Of course a tyrannical government/dictatorship also requires the support of the military and law enforcement agencies. Not going to happen in the USA unless you're saying the US population is inherently fascist/leftist/ignorant or the economy completely disintegrates.

I don't know?

How long does something like instigating fascism take?

Historically how was it done elsewhere?

Is 8 years enough? 4 years? 1 year?

What are the warning signs?

Usually an enemy is identified and rules,laws are changed to supposedly protect you from "Them"

Usually large corporations are protected more & more & left unchecked

Military is glorified as some kind of savior regardless of what they are doing in parts of the world.

Media becomes more & more controlled.

Supposed "Temporary" Laws are made again, due to the threat of "Them", to override any Constitution that pre-existed.

States of emergency are declared to give powers to those already elected that they never should

have for any prolonged period.These "temporary" laws or powers once granted rarely go away

I do not think anywhere that became tyrannically controlled was openly allowed

nor did the citizens know it was in progress till it was too late.

This is why I said, slips a link onto the chains one at a time.

All the above of course is just my opinion not meant to be forced

on you or anyone else.

Edited December 25, 2012 by mania

[Neurath]

Even the anti-gun people in the United States can recognize one singular thing: the genie is already out of the bottle. 300 million guns. 150 million owners. Even if some law was passed banning ALL guns and requiring citizens to turn them in, do you think people would really comply? I for one would rather be a criminal disobeying an illegal law.

There are still other obstacles besides the gun lobby and the 2nd amendment. For one, there's the ex post facto clause of the constitution, meaning laws cannot retroactively create a crime. Another problem is that congress has no general police powers, but only enacts legislation if it affects interstate commerce.

What this means is this: in 1986 congress enacted a law banning the sale of fully automatic firearms for civilian purchase or ownership. Any fully automatic rifle made and registered before enactment of the law is still legal to sell and own. Congress could not get rid of the previous guns sold prior to the enactment of the law. Even if gun control laws were passed, it will do nothing in regards to the guns already sold and on the market

Probably right. But I suppose you could go after the production, distribution and sale of ammunition and do so in the same way that the US does for drugs both illegal and lisenced. Shooters could have their guns and their ammo in the same way that the elderly and the sick can have their medication - the 2nd ammendment would be left untouched, nobody would touch the guns themselves, but those without a proper prescription would/would be prosecuted.

[bangkokrick]

The killings continue.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/firefighters-killed-while-battling-ny-blaze-170854874.html

[Orac]

As the US has a presidential election every 4 years, you're suggesting that these "link" trends will not be noticed by the electorate and the opposition will be of the same caliber? Of course a tyrannical government/dictatorship also requires the support of the military and law enforcement agencies. Not going to happen in the USA unless you're saying the US population is inherently fascist/leftist/ignorant or the economy completely disintegrates.

I don't know?

How long does something like instigating fascism take?

Historically how was it done elsewhere?

Is 8 years enough? 4 years? 1 year?

What are the warning signs?

Usually an enemy is identified and rules,laws are changed to supposedly protect you from "Them"

Usually large corporations are protected more & more & left unchecked

Military is glorified as some kind of savior regardless of what they are doing in parts of the world.

Media becomes more & more controlled.

Supposed "Temporary" Laws are made again, due to the threat of "Them", to override any Constitution that pre-existed.

States of emergency are declared to give powers to those already elected that they never should

have for any prolonged period.These "temporary" laws or powers once granted rarely go away

I do not think anywhere that became tyrannically controlled was openly allowed

nor did the citizens know it was in progress till it was too late.

This is why I said, slips a link onto the chains one at a time.

All the above of course is just my opinion not meant to be forced

on you or anyone else.

The problem here is that the pro-gun argument assumes that they are part of the solution to this potential tyranny whereas history shows that many of these tyrannical regimes have risen up from right wing agendas that are more closely identified with them rather than against them. Be it National Socialism which grew out of nationalism and alienation of immigrants and Jews, the Taliban which base their beliefs on a strict interpretation of a document written in a different period of time and not updated to reflect modern societal values and technological changes or groups like Khymer Rouge with their hatred of the intelligensia.

[whybother]

The killings continue.

http://uk.news.yahoo...-170854874.html

The NRA will release a statement saying that "All firemen should be armed".

[bangkokrick]

The killings continue.

http://uk.news.yahoo...-170854874.html

The NRA will release a statement saying that "All firemen should be armed".

That was my take on it too Whybother. Sad situation but things will never change IMHO.

[chuckd]

Unfortunately, rationale people with more moderate views tend to be less likely to vote so our policy gets dictated by the whackadoodles.

And those same whackadoodles elect (or re-elect) our politicians...

Maybe we need a new amendment that keeps whackadoodles from voting. Can someone please come up with a whackadoodle test so that they are easy to identify.

Or... national requirement to vote... or ... anyone who voted in the previous election cannot vote in the next one so that at least every other election is not controlled by whackadoodles.

The "whackadoodle" test is reserved for the legal profession.

[DocN]

The killings continue.

http://uk.news.yahoo...-170854874.html

The NRA will release a statement saying that "All firemen should be armed".

That was my take on it too Whybother. Sad situation but things will never change IMHO.

"Spengler, 62, had served more than 17 years in prison for beating his 92-year-old grandmother to death with a hammer in 1980 at the house next to where the attack happened."

Another criminal, NEVER allowed to have guns!

[F430murci]

Unfortunately, rationale people with more moderate views tend to be less likely to vote so our policy gets dictated by the whackadoodles.

And those same whackadoodles elect (or re-elect) our politicians...

Maybe we need a new amendment that keeps whackadoodles from voting. Can someone please come up with a whackadoodle test so that they are easy to identify.

Or... national requirement to vote... or ... anyone who voted in the previous election cannot vote in the next one so that at least every other election is not controlled by whackadoodles.

The "whackadoodle" test is reserved for the legal profession.

That's alright. We make great money and have a realitively easy life so call us whatever you want. I wouldn't chose any other profession.

[gl555]

The killings continue.

http://uk.news.yahoo...-170854874.html

Bitch about it if the gun he used was bought legally.

300 million guns in circulation. He probably got it illegally. So let's have lots of gun control while the bad guys out there have easy access to the 300 million.

[F430murci]

Here's the thing: If more guns made us safer, the United States would already be the safest place on the face of the Earth, instead of being nearer the top of the list for firearms deaths per capita.

Unfortunately, reality, rationality and common sense are not at issue in a debate about guns.

[Baloo22]

The problem here is that the pro-gun argument assumes that they are part of the solution to this potential tyranny whereas history shows that many of these tyrannical regimes have risen up from right wing agendas that are more closely identified with them rather than against them. Be it National Socialism which grew out of nationalism and alienation of immigrants and Jews, the Taliban which base their beliefs on a strict interpretation of a document written in a different period of time and not updated to reflect modern societal values and technological changes or groups like Khymer Rouge with their hatred of the intelligensia.

Why do you think we're all conservative Republicans? I voted for Obama, and am a registered democrat. I consider myself to be liberal on everything, except that I am pro-gun. I also grew up in an area where firearms and hunting were very prevalent and important parts of life, so hence I do not tow the Democratic party line in regards to firearms ownership. And frankly there are a lot of Democrats who also do not tow the party line on that either.

Orac; You are assuming that pro/con Second Amendment arguments are split along left-wing/right-wing lines. That is not true. Read BM submaniac's comment. You also are conveniently leaving out various left-wing / Communist totalitarian regimes. Stalin, Mao, and more.

In the final analysis, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, has served us well. For over 220 years we have held Congressional elections every two years, and elected Presidents every four years. This includes during great national trials such as the four years of our Civil War, the Great Depression, and World War Two. For over 220 years, we have had no dictators and no military coups. Take a look around our world and you will find that this is rare.

If you really want, I can provide some contrasting examples from Europe. (I'm not going to offer them here and now because the last time I did, the post was zapped out of existence within seconds.) I'll stick with our Bill of Rights just as it is.

Edited December 25, 2012 by Baloo22

[Orac]

The problem here is that the pro-gun argument assumes that they are part of the solution to this potential tyranny whereas history shows that many of these tyrannical regimes have risen up from right wing agendas that are more closely identified with them rather than against them. Be it National Socialism which grew out of nationalism and alienation of immigrants and Jews, the Taliban which base their beliefs on a strict interpretation of a document written in a different period of time and not updated to reflect modern societal values and technological changes or groups like Khymer Rouge with their hatred of the intelligensia.

Why do you think we're all conservative Republicans? I voted for Obama, and am a registered democrat. I consider myself to be liberal on everything, except that I am pro-gun. I also grew up in an area where firearms and hunting were very prevalent and important parts of life, so hence I do not tow the Democratic party line in regards to firearms ownership. And frankly there are a lot of Democrats who also do not tow the party line on that either.

Orac; You are assuming that pro/con Second Amendment arguments are split along left-wing/right-wing lines. That is not true. Read BM submaniac's comment. You also are conveniently leaving out various left-wing / Communist totalitarian regimes. Stalin, Mao, and more.

In the final analysis, our Constitution and Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, has served us well. For over 220 years we have held Congressional elections every two years, and elected Presidents every four years. This includes during great national trials such as the four years of our Civil War, the Great Depression, and World War Two. For over 220 years, we have had no dictators and no military coups. Take a look around our world and you will find that this is rare.

If you really want, I can provide some contrasting examples from Europe. (I'm not going to offer them here and now because the last time I did, the post was zapped out of existence within seconds.) I'll stick with our Bill of Rights just as it is.

I have not said that the gun control argument is split over left/right wing lines, what I did say was that the pro-gun lobby identifies more with the right than the left. There clearly will be quite a few that do not fit with the stereotypes.

The three examples I gave for tyrannical regimes were very different with one facism, one religious fundamentalist and one communist - no single ideology has a monopoly on tyranny.

The 2nd amendment in its very name is a change to the original constitution albeit a couple of years after the original and is subject to interpretation which is where I see the similarity with the talibans interpretation of the Koran ignoring societal changes and influences of the modern world.

[Chicog]

\"Spengler, 62, had served more than 17 years in prison for beating his 92-year-old grandmother to death with a hammer in 1980 at the house next to where the attack happened."

Another criminal, NEVER allowed to have guns!

No argument there. Why is someone who can beat an old lady to death with a hammer *ever* allowed back on the streets?

[Potosi]

I don't know?

How long does something like instigating fascism take?

Historically how was it done elsewhere?

Is 8 years enough? 4 years? 1 year?

What are the warning signs?

Usually an enemy is identified and rules,laws are changed to supposedly protect you from "Them"

Usually large corporations are protected more & more & left unchecked

Military is glorified as some kind of savior regardless of what they are doing in parts of the world.

Media becomes more & more controlled.

Capitalism can become as repressive as fascism. From the outside the US looks more like a tyranny of the rich than a democracy. While communism and fascism are similar in many regards, the defining divide is that the communists go for the redistribution of wealth, and fascists don't. It took 14 years from the birth of the fascist party in Germany to rise to power. Like in Italy and elsewhere, they were created by the wealthy to counter the threat of communism. Germany in the twenties was a dysfunctional democracy with a new government and chancellor every year. Unable to protect the Germans living in occupied lands, who suffered under severe repressions. Usually prohibited to speak German and to follow German customs, pogroms in Poland and the Sudetenland, and Lithuania even occupied a piece of German land between the wars, the Memelland. National pride was at a all-time low. On top of it, the mother of all economic crises. When Hitler took over, most Germans actually felt a sense of liberation. The US is nowhere similar now, and fascists by name not needed to counter communists which don't exist there. Not even socialists, despite the media hurling this designation plenteous. The media is a mess however. "A media system wants ostensible diversity that conceals an actual uniformity". Goebbels said this, and isn't it the state of the media in the US? They are supposed to check politics and politicians, but in the US and elsewhere, they make them.

To say something on the headline; even the Roman Empire banned citizens from bearing arms.

[Jim walker]

Who in there right mind would send their child to a school that needed an armed guard at the door possibly in Iraq, Colombia Brazil or Mexico never in the USA and they are still stupid enough to say we need more good guns to sort out the bad guns GET A GRIP. Typical 3^rd world thinking a country ruled by the gun not the people.

[simple1]

Who in there right mind would send their child to a school that needed an armed guard at the door possibly in Iraq, Colombia Brazil or Mexico never in the USA and they are still stupid enough to say we need more good guns to sort out the bad guns GET A GRIP. Typical 3^rd world thinking a country ruled by the gun not the people.

Have to agree, I would live, nor not raise children in a country that necessitated armed guards at school/university. Must be appalling for parents to have this issue in front of mind, will my child return home today because some maniac has a gun?

Edited December 25, 2012 by simple1

[chuckd]

Who in there right mind would send their child to a school that needed an armed guard at the door possibly in Iraq, Colombia Brazil or Mexico never in the USA and they are still stupid enough to say we need more good guns to sort out the bad guns GET A GRIP. Typical 3^rd world thinking a country ruled by the gun not the people.

Have to agree, I would live, nor not raise children in a country that necessitated armed guards at school/university. Must be appalling for parents to have this issue in front of mind, will my child return home today because some maniac has a gun?

From today's Drudge Report:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SCHOOL OBAMA'S DAUGHTERS ATTEND HAS 11 ARMED GUARDS

by AWR HAWKINS 24 Dec 2012 531

Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.

The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.

If you dismiss this by saying, "Of course they have armed guards -- they get Secret Service protection," then you've missed the larger point.

The larger point is that this is standard operating procedure for the school, period. And this is the reason people like NBC's David Gregory send their kids to Sidwell, they know their kids will be protected from the carnage that befell kids at a school where armed guards weren't used (and weren't even allowed).

http://www.breitbart...-Secret-Service

[Cardiff1963]

History will judge you...I guess, in 2 months or so!

Uhhhh...what happens in 2 months? I didn't get the memo.

It may be beneficial for you to relax a little more. I find target shooting helps calm my nerves. You should try it.

Well 2 months was an overestimate, another nutter shooting firemen now