Why Gun Control advocates will end up with egg on their face once again...

[virginia mountainman]

Lots of pure BS has been spewing forth from the expected sources since this terrible murder of the young man in Sanford. From all the information I have gathered (which is from MSM), their is almost NO WAY the Florida Castle Doctrine can apply to this situation. Yes, he can claim it, but it will offer no defense... Especially with him chasing the man down and gunning him down in the street.

When you are chasing your "assailant" you are quite obviously not in fear for your life. Mr Neighborhood watch captain is in very hot water. I fully expect him to serve time in prison when all is said and done. Don't believe me? Here is the statute so you can read it for yourself. So if anyone spouts BS about the law, expect for someone to point out that you clearly did not read it.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html


The real issue here is WHY the Police did not arrest him on the spot. When they say the Castle law won't let them, they CLEARLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE LAW... Read if for yourself.... It clearly does not apply in this situation.. Just because Florida law, does not require you to retreat, it DOES NOT allow you to pursue and kill.

That being said, all the gun control advocates are giddy, and think this is a turning point in their movement, LOL. Time for a reality check. I took this photo a while back at a grocery store's magazine rack... This photo shows the entire rack.. If you look closely their is about 17 different publications dedicated to firearms...And not a single "gun control monthly" in sight. They would not be for sale, if their was not a demand.



As much as they may hate it, firearms, are truly mainstream and all the wishing in the world will not change that, and the harder they push, the more we win, The only backlash I can see started in 1994 and it's still going on.

Calls for Gun Control tend to be answered with even LESS gun control, this tends to happen when a vocal minority starts screaming for legislation that a much larger and highly motivated group utterly hates, and the larger group is more than willing to open their wallets, and get in touch with their legislators and remind them of that fact.....So, call away....It helps your opposition win.

Problem is, it tends to be the REPUBLICANS that stand to gain from the calls, and we all pay the price.

[bowens43]

1. The real issue is easy availability of guns and ammo and the attitude that guns are ok.

They are NOT ok and there is no valid reason to allow anyone outside of law enforcement to posses hang guns or ammunition.

Unfortunately people in this country have apparently gone insane. No civilized nation can allow people to walk around with hand guns.

And you're right , the supporters of the death merchants will continue to drag our nation into the third world.

better egg on my face then blood on my hands........

[movonne]

2. Thank you...

[shadowrider]

3. No valid reason. So I guess you're ok with bad guys killing innocent victims

as long as the victims don't have guns with which to defend themselves.

I'm 58 with a slight heart condition. An in shape 18 year old can make mincemeat out of me in a hurry. My carrying a weapon evens those odds, but guarantees nothing.

[era veteran]

15. Dig

I'm 58 and can't low run anymore.
I also refuse to be a victim.

[Atypical Liberal]

4. I think it is ridiculous to think that only agents of the state can save me from harm.

The real issue is easy availability of guns and ammo and the attitude that guns are ok.
They are NOT ok and there is no valid reason to allow anyone outside of law enforcement to posses hang guns or ammunition.

Guns are the best tool for resisting someone intent on violence. It is why police carry firearms. Even police in countries like England, who are not normally armed, carry firearms when up against a truly violent situation where the safety of the public or the officers is in doubt.

Like it or not, the firearm, the handgun specifically, is the most portable, easy-to-use device ever invented that can give nearly any human the power of deadly force.

I think it is terrible, absolutely terrible, to say that people don't have the right to use such tools to defend themselves, and that only agents of the state have that right.

Police are almost never present when violent crimes happen. They almost always show up after the crime has already been committed to record evidence, interview witnesses, and aid in the prosecution of the crime. They are almost never able to use their guns to save civilians from violence.

I refuse to abdicate responsibility for my safety and that of my family. Especially when the tools to insure it are so readily and easily available.

[X_Digger]

44. Nor do they have a legal obligation to 'save' anyone. n/t

[one-eyed fat man]

5. You sound just like....

"Anyone found in possession of a handgun, except a legitimate officer of the law, should go to jail—period!"

After he shoots, with an illegally possessed handgun, a teen-aged kid skinny dipping in the back yard swimming pool of his Washington, DC home. back yard, Carl Rowen called his trial on weapons charges "racially motivated."

"Let... others call me a hypocrite because I fired a gun in a moment of personal peril. I shall still be for strict gun control."

[Upton]

7. "there is no valid reason to allow anyone outside of law enforcement to possess hand guns"

Talk like that is what loses Democrats elections..

[hack89]

9. So why do you think America is enjoying historically low levels of gun violence?

criminal violence of all kinds has been steadily declining for 20 years now. Are declining rates of violent crimes a sign of a third world nation?

[orwell]

22. Could it be...

...an aging demographic.

Old people are less aggressive, less prone to crime.

If you follow the baby boom you will see that most major trends follow their aging patterns.

There is also a theory that post Roe crime started falling about 15 years later as all those unwanted pregnancies did not bear fruit. The theory is that a child raised in an environment where he/she is unwanted results in a greater likelihood for criminal anti-social behavior later in the child's life.

It is very difficult to establish cause effect when social behavior/trends are concerned. Even the previously stated "Roe theory" can be an example of post hoc logical fallacy.

Is Mogadishu safe because guns are readily available?

I'm not trying to get in an argument here. I'm just saying that this is a very complex problem that does not lend itself to simplistic solutions.

[hack89]

23. So if it is not guns per se but a particular demographic with guns that is the problem

them perhaps one size fits all gun control solutions are not the answer.

But the actual purpose of my post was simply to point out that Americans have never been safer when it comes to gun violence.

[safeinOhio]

26. Except in most large urban areas

where gun crime is on the rise.

[hack89]

32. They are lower in LA

http://file.lacounty.gov/lasd/cms1_148405.pdf

[hack89]

33. Care to provide some hard numbers. nt

[hack89]

35. Lowest in 48 years for Atlanta

http://losangelesmurderrate.blogspot.com/2011/05/atlantas-2010-murder-rate-was-lowest-in.html

[safeinOhio]

76. update on Atlanta

as low as the 2011 figure is, the murder rate was actually lower just two years ago in 2009, when there were only 80 homicides

[hack89]

36. Murders down 14 percent in Chicago.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/09/chicago-crime-statistics-_n_859337.html

[safeinOhio]

77. That was 2010, this is 2012

http://homicides.redeyechicago.com/

Chicago reaches 100 homicides for the year
By Tracy Swartz posted March 21, 2012 at 12:00 a.m.

Chicago on Wednesday reached 100 homicides for the year—the fastest the city has hit this mark in at least seven years, RedEye and police data show.
Seventeen homicides have been recorded in the last week—including four each on Saturday and Sunday, a RedEye analysis of preliminary police information found.
Chicago has not reached 100 homicides in March since 2004, when the city logged 106 homicides before April 1, according to police data. The city reached 100 homicides last year on April 26, RedEye data shows.

[hack89]

37. Washington DC had their lowest number of murders in decades

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/number-of-dc-killings-on-pace-to-be-lowest-in-decades/2011/10/02/gIQAmQBgGL_story.html?hpid=z4

[safeinOhio]

71. NY NY crime up this year in 34 o 76 precincts.

Up in Toledo, Flint Kansas City Mo.and Detroit as well as these 10 with the highest rise.

http://247wallst.com/2011/11/22/cities-where-violent-crime-is-soaring/2/

[Hoyt]

78. They might be even safer without so many guns.

[hack89]

80. Criminals will always get all the guns they want.

just like they can get all the illegal drugs they want.

[Hoyt]

81. Yea, because the gun obsessed keep buying more and more hoping to satiate some strange needs.

[hack89]

83. Think carefully about my drug reference - it was a clue. nt

[iverglas]

107. yep, we grow the gunz up here in Canada

The pot's in the basement. The gunz, we grow them in the back garden, 'cause they're a root crop so it's easy to hide. Then we ship them over the border packed in bales of pot for the neighbours' consumption.

Because the neighbours are just addicted to gunz and we want to make sure they get their fix!

[X_Digger]

41. *cough* I think you just made his point for him. Bravo! n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

53. Sure thing, shares- or is it Don Caballero?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=294852&mesg_id=294927

Figured out how you're going to get the Mexican and Canadian armies here?

[rl6214]

119. this is extremism and not what the majority in this country want.

[Loudly]

6. There is a demand for child porn too, but that is being dealt with.

The guns and ammo affliction is just going to take longer and require more horror and collective outrage.

That's the way in happened in Australia.

[hack89]

10. No it won't. Americans know enough to look beyond the emotions at the hard fact.

the facts that say we are enjoying historically low levels of violent crime with further declines in the future.

[Johnny Rico]

12. Suuuure it'll happen just as in Australia. Check this out:

[Loudly]

13. That's a dynamic map of a nation heading for a crisis.

More guns in the hands of more people makes the backlash inevitable.

[Johnny Rico]

19. Sounds like a title of a Marvel comic from the '60s...

"Beware...the coming of The Backlash!"

Mind you, there actually is a Marvel villain named "Blacklash"!



No, I don't know why he has a green(!) ponytail.

[Clames]

20. I see it as the spread of liberalism...

...and common sense. Red states turning blue is a good thing.

[Loudly]

27. Blue on that map does not mean Democratic.

It means poisoned with gun insanity.

I have to assume you are aware of that and were just being deliberately obtuse.

[DonP]

39. Can you explain why violent crime is at a 40 year low?

With all the "poisoned minds" and "gun insanity" not to mention record high gun sales, how could crime possibly be so low? Is the FBI and CDC cooking the books?

Wouldn't your "logic" indicate more violence?

And try not to sound like you're too hopeful for more violence in your responses.

[Loudly]

42. Also from FBI.gov

Information collected regarding type of weapon showed that firearms were used in 67.5 percent of the Nation’s murders, 41.4 percent of robberies, and 20.6 percent of aggravated assaults.

So how much better would the crime stats be if firearms were scarce?

Yet more guns and ammo are put forward as a good thing?

[hack89]

52. Gun ownership up while murders are down

there appears to a logical disconnect in your argument.

Imagine how much better crime stats would be if cocaine and heroine were scarce? Perhaps we should make them illegal?

Criminals will always get guns.

[iverglas]

108. moon made of cheese while murders are down

Because I said so, that's why.

There appears to be an effort at proof by blatant assertion in your subject line.


http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2011/04/26/One-third-of-US-households-own-guns/UPI-46991303850331/

WASHINGTON, April 26 (UPI) -- Almost one-third of U.S. households report having any guns in the home -- the lowest level ever since the survey began in the 1970s, a survey indicates.

The report by the Violence Policy Center is an analysis of data from the General Social Survey conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. The report says household gun ownership peaked in 1977, with 54 percent of households reported having any guns.

Male gun ownership peaked in 1990, with 52.4 percent of U.S. men reported personally owning a gun, but this dropped to 33.2 percent in 2010. Female gun ownership peaked in 1982 at 14.3 percent and dropped to 9.9 percent in 2010.

(If you have different info about the GSS, or want to analyze the results yourself, feel free to do so.)

The decline has been long and steady.

Not that I would claim this is very closely connected to the observed decline in violent crime, myself.

On that, I might just say there was nowhere to go but down, when you have a consistent 10,000 or so firearms homicides a year in a supposedly developed nation.

Kind of the corollary of how when there are about 50 firearms homicides a year in England and Wales, with a population of about 60 million, it's going to be pretty hard to go any lower.

[Dr_Scholl]

109. The University of Chicago, the VPC, and NORC all recieve funding from the Joyce Foundation.

Yeah, no bias there.

[sarisataka]

110. But

Don't we hear from both sides that gun sales are up? There are so many and so easy to get you can buy a machinegun at Wal-Mart?

<Disconnect>

[iverglas]

111. wouldn't know

Do firearms manufacturers release their sales numbers? Not that I know of.

Are records kept of private sales? Nope.

Do retail sales figures, if there were any, numbers reflect number of people who buy, anyhow? Nope.

As for machineguns at Wal-Mart, perhaps somebody has been having wishful dreams, I dunno.

[gejohnston]

112. if the manufactures are publicly traded

I'm sure they do and is reflected in stock price.

Depends on the state. There are no net gain or loss in private sales. Existing ones move from one to another.

The numbers I have seen were based on number of NICS checks.

Some clown made a youtube video claiming that you can buy machine guns at Wal Mart. Then there was the Al Qaida guy last year.... One semi regular poster claimed you can buy any gun without ID at Wal Mart.

[iverglas]

131. as I was saying

The numbers I have seen were based on number of NICS checks.

That says nothing about number of people buying guns. Really. It doesn't. It might, and it might also say that a few people bought lots of guns.

And seriously: share prices as a measure of sales volume?

Some clown made a youtube video claiming that you can buy machine guns at Wal Mart.

So? Do they post here?

One semi regular poster claimed you can buy any gun without ID at Wal Mart.

Wouldn't know; maybe you can show me.

[sarisataka]

114. Well

Gun sales:

Ruger- unable to keep up with demand
http://www.ruger.com/corporate/news/2012-03-21.html

VPC- Traffickers can stock up on their weapons of choice
http://vpc.org/press/1107traf.htm|

Records- prohibited by law. Would records stop straw man purchases? Not with the current DOJ

Retail sales=number of buyers? No But then there seems to be either a few very wealthy collectors or the NCIS has a virus

Machine guns at Wal mart?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=22017

[iverglas]

132. c'mon back down to earth now

I really didn't mean to confuse you with that moon talk.

Here's the statement I replied to:

Gun ownership up while murders are down

Gun ownership. Not number of guns sold. So lets stick to our muttons, 'k?

Records- prohibited by law. Would records stop straw man purchases? Not with the current DOJ

Well, the registry in Canada sure seems to but a damper on straw sales. We just don't hear of many at all. There was that time some bunch of people tried to buy up a lot of M1 Garands for export to the US disguised as car parts - importation into the US is illegal - and the firearms registry flagged the unusual purchase pattern around the country and the would-be smugglers were caught. (I don't care what the reasons are for the US import ban; the fact is that the Cdn registry identified a trafficking attempt.)

Individual straw sales? What fool with a clean record and a licence would buy a gun for their buddy the criminal, knowing that if buddy is caught with it, it can be traced straight to Mr./Ms. law-abiding gun owner with the tap of a few keys? The odd fool, no doubt. But we just don't hear of any. Crime guns that are traced are found to be overwhelmingly stolen in Canada or trafficked in from the US, in roughly equal proportions.

Ooooh, and that "current DOJ" stuff. That is such a fine hobbyhorse, that one, isn't it?

Retail sales=number of buyers? No But then there seems to be either a few very wealthy collectors or the NCIS has a virus

Actually, I'd suggest there is likely a noticeable block of people who already own firearms buying more. I don't go for silly false dichotomies, myself.

Machine guns at Wal mart?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=22017

Damn those private videos. Now I'll never know what that guy said. Does he post at DU? Or did you think slackmaster was adopting his comments?

[AtheistCrusader]

137. I tend to agree.

A registry will certainly help with trafficking issues.

Sad that we have some domestic examples of registries being used to facilitate confiscation, as most gun owners won't go for it now.

[hack89]

117. So what's the problem then?

fewer murders, less violence, fewer people owning guns ... looks like we are on the right track.

Probably why gun grabbers have had a bad decade - people understand what is actually happening.

[DonP]

75. And rifles of all types account for less than 2.7% of crimes with guns

But idiot gun grabbers still keep trying to reinstall the ignorant and failed "scary looking" assault weapons ban every year or so anyway.

I also note that you have no answer to the issue of so many more guns in circulation but violent crime has not only not increased, as gun grabbers predicted, it's actually gone way down.

So based on the actual measurable facts and not some pile of faith based crap about how evil guns are, I have to assume it is indeed a good thing. Or did you prefer the higher rate of violent crime when there were fewer guns in the hands of the law abiding out there?

And how much better would the crime stats look if, if, if, if .... if everyone got a pony on their 5th birthday and lived happily ever after in a gingerbread house. Ah, life would be so much better in you imagination land.

Do you actually think you can get the guns out of the hands of the criminals that always have them? Come here to Chicago where they have been banned for decades and go for a walk in Englewood where guns are "scarce". Any other hypothetical crap you want to spew?

[Callisto32]

95. And monkeys MIGHT fly out of my butt.

Hell, the space 2 inches right of may MIGHT spontaneously turn into a fire-breathing dragon-demon that kills us all.

That is hardly a grounds for policy...

On the other hand, More guns =/= more crime.

[krispos42]

30. Nope.

Gun ownership in America has been high the last century or so. We're probably in the range of about 800 guns per 1,000 people. It's creeped up to what is presumably an all-time-high over the past few years, but there's no difference between 600 per capita and 800 per capita.

[iverglas]

133. "gun ownership"?

Gun ownership in America has been high the last century or so. We're probably in the range of about 800 guns per 1,000 people. It's creeped up to what is presumably an all-time-high over the past few years, but there's no difference between 600 per capita and 800 per capita.

(I know you meant "per thousand"!)

That's a rate for guns owned. Not owners of guns.

How does a rate for the objects -- x/100,000 -- tell us how many people own said objects?

It doesn't. And that really is the meaningful information. Not specifically in relation to crime rates, because that is a much more complex relationship. Just in terms of who is really actually involved here, and what is really goingon.

Any reasonably reliable estimates I have seen over the last decade have shown that firearms ownership rates -- the proportion of the population that owns firearms -- in the US have steadily declined over the last 35 years.

In more nuanced terms, the number of people who have firearms, and specifically long guns, for hunting/sports purposes has declined markedly. That has been offset somewhat by the number of people who have handguns, for, well, other purposes.

Firearms owners, in the traditional sense, were a dying breed. Demand for firearms for other purposes, by other people, was then drummed up. What industry would not seek to diversify its product line and broaden its market in the face of a declining market for its traditional products?

High firearms (and other) violent crime rates back around the same time that firearms ownership rates among the public began declining were the perfect opportunity to start the campaign to persuade the public it needed guns - handguns specifically - for "self-defence". Never mind that the people they were defending themselves against were getting their own guns from the same firearms industry directly, or indirectly from the people it sold its products to.

And of course, never mind that the rise of this particular "gun culture" coincided with the backlash to desegregation.

"Your home is your castle; defend it!" cried George P. Mahoney, who championed "gun rights" and fought tooth and nail against housing desegregation in 1968, and was responsible for the Democratic Party losing the Maryland governorship to Spiro T. Agnew ... and just look where that got ya.

[rrneck]

21. When is the last time

anyone defended themselves with child porn? Can you explain how that can be done?

[Loudly]

29. You keep asking the wrong question.

Is it less important to protect children from sexual exploitation than it is to protect them from being shot by estranged husbands, drive-by assailants, each other, and neighborhood watch captains?

[rrneck]

34. Nice dodge.

You compare firearms to child porn. Firearms are used for legitimate self defense. How can child pornography be used for that purpose?

Your position regarding firearms may or may not be right, but the analogy you use does not work.

[Loudly]

93. I see your lips moving, but what I hear is

An unpersuasive argument.

It goes like this:

Children will inevitably be killed or crippled because our right to defend ourselves with guns is that important.

No number of children being killed or crippled outweighs the importance of our having guns.

They can ALL be killed or crippled with guns as far as the United States Constitution is concerned. We must have guns and ammo.

[Callisto32]

96. What about all the parents with infants carrying guns?

HMMMM, what about them.

The handgun provides you with a defense option that can be operated with a minimum of strength, and one hand. This gives another option to people that might oh, I don't know, be carrying children as well.

Think of all the children that banning guns might harm.

ITS FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!1!1!

[Loudly]

100. Carrying a young child is a protective shield in itself.

It generally deters criminal attack.

A gun just adds unnecessary risk to the equation.

But I understand the belitting nonsense which you seek to put forward as your point.

[Oneka]

116. My three month old daughter will

be so glad to hear that she is a better shield against crime, than the pistol i carry.

When she is old enough i will let her know how many muggings, and carjackings, she prevented in her youth.

I think i will double her allowance, right now.

[rrneck]

105. Still dodging.

I'll ask again. How can child pornography be used for self defense? It's a fairly simple question. I haven't addressed your position on firearms, only the analogy you used. Are you not able to intelligently discuss it?

[mazzarro]

8. No surprise about this absurd stupidity that gun nuts always display! -- n/t

[spin]

49. I could reverse that comment ...

and insult you. However I believe that I have facts and statistics on my side of the argument so I don't have to lower myself to that level.

The violent crime rate in the United States has dropped dramatically during the same time frame that firearms sales skyrocketed and "shall issue" concealed carry swept across our nation. This may not be positive proof that more guns equals less crime but it does prove that more guns does not equal more crime and also disproves the allegation that "shall issue" concealed carry will turn the U.S. into the "Wild West" with shootouts at every traffic intersection and at high noon on Main Street.

[ileus]

11. Let's hope for continued progress for peoples 2A civil rights.

[Loudly]

14. Your imaginary 2A rights threaten to deprive you of all your genuine rights.

By murdering your stubborn hide.

[era veteran]

16. I am wondering

Who gets to decide for me what's a 'genuine right' ? Is it you?
We don't have pick and choose boutique Constitution.

[Pacafishmate]

17. You can choose not to take advantage of a right.

Don't force your choice on other people.

[Hoyt]

84. Why? We don't tolerate air polluters, smokers are banned in a lot of places -- why not guns?

Guns should be viewed as polluting society (especially those who keep buying more and more hoping to satisfy some strange need). Guns in public should become as unacceptable as someone smoking a stinking cigar in a hospital waiting room.

[Pacafishmate]

134. Smoking is not a right, smoking directly harms other people.

My carrying of a gun doesn't harm anyone. Gun collectors don't pollute society any more than coin collectors pollute society.

[Hoyt]

135. Like adding more guns to society doesn't.

[Clames]

18. Imaginary?

Seems you are the one imagining things since the 2A is very real and very much a protected individual right in this country.

[Loudly]

28. Sure, just like not having to share the bathroom with black folks was.

Until the nation was dragged kicking and screaming into modernity on the subject.

[hack89]

38. Yet the odds of me being murdered have never been lower.

how do you explain that?

[Loudly]

45. Will that be any consolation to you when the bullets are entering your body?

I think not.

[hack89]

51. There are many other things that are more likely to kill me first

getting shot is very low on that list.

If you had to power to change 10 things in America with the only criteria being you had to save the most lives, guns would not be on that list.

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

Drunk drivers are what scare me most - the odds are astronomically higher that I will be killed by a drunk before I get shot.

Put the fear aside.

[beevul]

54. How about...

Dieing of uncontrollable hysterical laughter, laughing at a ressurected PPR poster that thinks nobody sees him/her?

[beevul]

43. PPR (tombstoned) posters are not allowed to return, shares.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?q=sharesunited+child+porn&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&domains=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en


"There is a demand for child porn too, but that is being dealt with." loudly


"By murdering your stubborn hide." Loudly

"By killing your hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=277573&mesg_id=277577

"By killing that wooly hide of yours." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x252047#252251


"Now, let's weigh her hide against the 2A dead." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x267127#267178


"As such, the RKBA endangers all your other rights by killing your insistent and misguided hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=281789&mesg_id=282313

"And that means bullets in innocent bodies, including your old hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=415908&mesg_id=415919


"So is not having bullets enter your hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=400631&mesg_id=400663

"You CAN force me to take a bullet in my hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4294235#4295239

"And based solely upon your determination that bullets should GO in their hide?" sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=378807&mesg_id=379353


And then later in this very thread:

"Until the nation was dragged kicking and screaming into modernity on the subject."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117223802#post28

Once again, the federal courts will need to bring the People kicking and screaming into modernity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=352368&mesg_id=352462


Oh, just a coincidence, I'm sure.

Beyond the fucking pale, is what it is.

Mods, dish that pizza out please, someone apparently needs another serving.

[Loudly]

47. Whoever that person is or was, we obviously agree.

And I like the cut of their jib.

(Originally a sailing term.)

[beevul]

48. Clearly.

Transparently, even.

[Oneka]

118. apparently there is much to aggree on.

Need to make 'em scarce.

Sharesunited- Tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=421899&mesg_id=421976

So how much better would the crime stats be if firearms were scarce?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117223802#post42

[rl6214]

120. Well done

[X_Digger]

46. Ahh, nvm, I see I wasn't the first to notice PPR'd Resurrection. n/t

[ileus]

50. So you're saying anti's are going to murder me?

[Loudly]

94. How does that possibly follow from what I've said?

Opponents of guns and ammo aren't in favor of making the means of convenient murder easily accessible and widespread.

By definition, it is those who favor an imaginary right to conveniently murder who are trying to do you in.

[Callisto32]

97. Define "right."

[Loudly]

101. A claim to a freedom, power or immunity?

Which others either willingly or are obliged to respect?

[HockeyMom]

24. "What are you looking at?"

"Nothing." "What do you mean nothing?" "Get out of my face, or I will make you get out of my face!" "Hey, Stop pushing me." "Sorry." "You want a FIGHT?" "Get away from me." "I have nowhere to GO".

I have heard these kinds of "conversations" every day riding the NYC subway during rush hours. Threat? STAND YOUR GROUND? It all in the eye of the beholder. Yes, I have seen fights break out in some of these situations. Bystanders have usually called the transit police. I suppose if these commuters were armed they wouldn't to call the police? Somebody in the crowd could just SHOOT. I wonder how many innocent people in the CROWDED would die in a situation like that.

Now, do you think these people should be ARMED? On a crowded subway car or platform? Of course, NONE of these would EVER pull out a gun in "self-defense" or Stand their Ground.

Nah, NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. ALL gun owners are responsible people who never get MAD, and NEVER snap.

[shadowrider]

31. Nah, NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. ALL gun owners are responsible people who never get MAD, and NEVER snap.

Who, on this board, has EVER said that?

Prove the statement or retract.

[HockeyMom]

40. Here is one from Naples, Florida with 21,000 people

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2011/jul/13/court-records-cordial-greeting-argument-preceded-h/

This man had a history of domestic violence (as did Zimmerman), including towrds his son, but his guns were never confiscated.

This hospital is only about 10 miles from where I live. In fact, my husband has had surgery in this hospital. He was scheduled for surgery just 4 days after this incident happend, on the SAME FLOOR.

When I brought him there days later, the nurses were still very upset. I spoke to one nurse and she said they HID when this happened. She said she hopes NEVER to have to experience that again in her life. I will say that fate was with me and that my husband's surgery was days later. NRA, and the State of Florida, would probably say that STAFF should be armed.

Incidentailly, my husband "joked" at the time that maybe he needed to bring his GUNS with him to SURGERY!!!!! That is not funny at all. It is PATHETIC.

[friendly_iconoclast]

56. That's not *quite* what you said- but that's okay.

We understand that you have shall we say, "different" standards of accuracy...

[HockeyMom]

57. Do you think DISNEY should let their employees PACK HEAT too?

under their Mickey Mouse suits? Do you live in Florida? This was A BIG ISSUE. Disney fought this and WON. Do you think teachers and staff of K-12 and Day Care should be able to bring guns to school for protection?

Tell me about that too. BTW, I have experienced 2 school lockdowns in 2 years in Florida. Oh, ARM THEM TEACHERS.

[friendly_iconoclast]

60. Something wrong with your caps lock?

[HockeyMom]

61. You didn't answer any of my questions.

Why not?

[shadowrider]

63. Nah. Answer my question. It was first.

[friendly_iconoclast]

66. Disney is free to ban guns on its' property. As for school personnel carrying...

...where has it been done?

[rl6214]

121. I don't know of any concealed carry licenses that allow carry in amusement parks

As for schools, my wife taught for 31 years and the majority of teachers I have talked to that she worked with agreed that teachers should have the right to carry on school grounds so it really dosen't matter what you think, you aren't there all day every day.

[shadowrider]

62. Interesting, but you didn't answer the question

Who here has ever said that?

[friendly_iconoclast]

55. Another "you can buy guns at Wal-Mart without ID" statement, it would seem.

[shadowrider]

64. To be more specific

You can walk into Walmart with $100 and buy any gun no questions asked.

[HockeyMom]

67. Irrelevant

Again, not answering the specific question. Domestic violence, resisting arrest, is not enough to confiscate someone's guns? There is a history of violence and breaking those laws. Right to own a gun trumps breaking the law?

I am not going to answer you until you answer all my other questions. Why? Because you can't. I am talking about LEGAL questions. Oh, not. CAPS!!!!!!

[shadowrider]

72. I asked first, you answer first.

[HockeyMom]

73. Answer my LEGAL questions

You don't care about Rule of Law?

[Callisto32]

99. That depends.

There your legal questions are answered.

P.S. I am an attorney. So you can take that to the bank (er, court) at least in PA.

[Lizzie Poppet]

86. All? No.

The vast, overwhelming majority? Yep.

Next?

[TheCowsCameHome]

25. Yeah, right.

[jpak]

58. Zimmerman is alive, free and armed today thanks to "stand your ground"

GOP/NRA fail.

yup

[HockeyMom]

59. He had a history of Domestic Violence and resisting arrest

Just like that case in the Naples shooting. Why weren't their guns confiscated? Do you have be charged with MURDER to get your guns taken away?

[shadowrider]

65. Did Martin have a history of violence (At least at school)?

Who knows. His school records are on lockdown.

[HockeyMom]

74. He was suspended from school once

but having worked in Florida schools that can mean anything. If he didn't submit his homework for a certain period of time, that could be cause of suspension, at least in some schools.

[Cirque du So-What]

89. It was for tardiness

Martin's parents kept a close eye on him, but they didn't have to be too strict, since he stayed out of trouble, Collins said. However, he had recently been suspended from school for five days for tardiness, his English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, told the Orlando Sentinel. School officials did not respond to a request for comment.

Martin's father was not happy and grounded the teen for the duration of the suspension.

Trayvon "knew he was wrong," Horton said.

http://news.yahoo.com/slain-teens-friends-never-picked-fight-175228816.html;_ylt=AqdFghMdg3uRDfqpTkYCzOOs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNsMHI3bzRkBG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBGUARwa2cDNTgxYjBkMjktZjM0Yy0zMDJjLThmZGItYTg1MTA0ZjVlYjcxBHBvcwM5BHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyA2YyZDllZDIwLTc1NGYtMTFlMS1iZThmLWM2OGM3ZWEzZjIwMg--;_ylg=X3oDMTFrM25vcXFyBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3

That's one source of apologia shot all to hell. Mr. 'just the facts' must now resort to making up different shit.

[jpak]

126. In FL, tardiness + hoodie = capital crime enforced by asshole vigilantes

yup

[gejohnston]

127. since Zimmerman lives in a gated community

the chances of he being actually from Florida is kind of small. Even if he was, his parents wasn't. In other words, maybe he learned his racism in your state.

[jpak]

128. No - they maybe learned it in your state

yup

[gejohnston]

129. most transplants

are from the northeast. The area I live, mostly Long Island and NYC. A few from Mass. I have yet to find anyone else from Wyoming, or any other Rocky Mountain state.
If I can convince the wife snow is cool, this place is in my rear view mirror.

[secondvariety]

106. What are you trying to say?

[gejohnston]

123. was he convicted of domestic violence?

It seems not. If he were, he would be looking at state charges for carrying concealed without a permit and federal charges for being in possession of a firearm.

Please encourage DV victims to press charges and get a conviction.

[eqfan592]

104. "...thanks to the corrupt SPD"

There, fixed it for you. And you know all those times I've said people like yourself only serve to distract from the real issues? This is a perfect example of that.

You (and many other du'ers, sadly) were so desperate to lash out st the SYG law and CCW permit holders that you've backed yourself into a corner. Either it's the law you hate that is to blame for Zimmermans freedom, our the corrupt SPD. You can't really have it both ways because admitting the SPD is at fault is an admission that the SYG law does NOT cover this shooting. Oh, you can try and ignore that and go after both, but it won't save you from looking like your talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[jpak]

125. Stand your ground laws are vigilante enabler and protector laws

they suck

yup

[Oneka]

68. Don't be so sure

Don't be so sure of a conviction or even a prosecution in this case.
The antis, have been salivating for years for a case like this.  The media attention to this case is plenty of proof of that. Many police and DA's don't like stand your ground laws. Don't be surprised if they fail to prosecute this case to further their agenda,  of getting this law repealed.
They will likely use the same law you linked to in the OP.
766-041 (2) B, is the relevant part of the statute.
If Zimmerman asserted that he attempted to withdraw from the use of force, and the kid, didn't stop hitting him, he likely has a good chance of avoiding prosecution at all. 
The cops and DA can very easily stop any prosecution before it  begins, then use the SYG statute, as justification  for doing so. Don't be surprised if Federal pressure, and FBI assistance wane, as they realize what an anti , wet dream, they are sitting on with this case, if only they don't prosecute.
The best thing that could happen in this case , would be for the media blitz to continue. The pressure could force the Florida authorities to do the right thing and prosecute this case.

[friendly_iconoclast]

87. I suspect a few antis would rather Martin's family go without justice...

...if it helped in the fight against the SYG law. A "small sacrifice", as it were...

[jeff47]

69. I don't think that picture illustrates the point you're trying to make.

My first thought is "Gun enthusiasts must be mostly old, since they're still reading magazines".

My second thought is "How absurdly obsessed do you have to be about guns to read "AR-15" Magazine? "Gun", "Rifle", "Handgun" - those at least make sense in that they're covering a wide variety of weapons. "But AR-15"? A magazine devoted entirely to a single model of a single weapon? You're not going to find "Thinkpad x25 magazine" over in the technology section. Methinks the subscribers to that particular periodical aren't the most mentally healthy.

As for the lack of "gun control monthly", did you find "oxygen breathers monthly"? No? Well, clearly breathing oxygen must not be popular.

As for your particular love of firearms, that isn't going to be threatened unless Zimmerman gets off. If he does, there's going to be an anti-SYG backlash, but dumping those laws won't harm responsible gun owners.

[Johnny Rico]

70. A magazine devoted to the AR-15 makes sense in today's marketplace.

In the last 10 years, the AR-15 market has exploded. There are dozens of manufacturers, and hundreds of variants in dozens of calibers. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America, outselling everything else.

[Clames]

90. And for all those manufacturers...

...I'm SOL on buying one at the moment. Any quality AR is sold out in my area. Stag has only a few on hand and they are all lefty models. Local shop is building some nice ones but they are back ordered for the next few months already.

[Johnny Rico]

91. You could always go to Gunbroker.

Granted, you'll have to pay shipping and a dealer fee, but it might beat waiting for months!

[Clames]

92. I did.

Selection is minimal (a lot of CA models, crap) and the few I'd want are overpriced. I can wait.

[Johnny Rico]

102. I didn't know they were that hard to find lately.

I can certainly understand not wanting to get one of lousy California models! I thought that with the glut of AR-15 manufacturers it would be a buyer's market, but demand is obviously outpacing supply.

[PavePusher]

115. Buy a stripped lower and build a custom gun yourself.

Last edited Sun Mar 25, 2012, 10:55 AM - Edit history (2)

They are quite easy and you can save a lot of money that way.

They aren't nicknamed the "tinker-toys" or "erector-sets" of the gun world for nothing.

[rl6214]

122. Build one yourself, they are inexpensive, easy to build and a lot of fun to build

I have built about a dozen of them. I have given one to each of my three sons on their 18th birthdays. They picked out how they wanted them configured and I built them. I have also built for my brother, his wife and I have 6 of them myself, each one different than the other.

[DonP]

79. You're right, gun contorollers are so much more "state of the art" people

No dead tree mags for them! Stupid AR-15 shooters, investing thousands of $ in their sport for different rifles for different applications (the most popular center fire rifle in America) using it for everything from hunting to high power target work. Why learn anything new to improve your high power scores 200 or 600 yards or your very expensive hunts.

I'll just get my head right and go over and check out some of the many gun control oriented websites and blogs and engage in a spirited discussion.

Oh wait! There isn't a single, active gun control web site on the entire net, let alone any that allow interaction. How can that be?

Even the crappy Brady site is always closed to any comments.

But you're probably right, there are just so many gun control supporters, there's no need to communicate with each other, that Nixonian vast "silent majority" is right behind you.

They just never seem to get around to fucking voting that way.

There's a reason gun control has become the punch line in any electoral and judicial joke.

[jeff47]

82. You do realize there are people who aren't "gun contorollers" nor enthusiasts, right?

Why learn anything new to improve your high power scores 200 or 600 yards or your very expensive hunts.

It will be difficult for you to claim AR-15s radically change so often that a periodical is necessary to keep up with those changes.

I'll just get my head right and go over and check out some of the many gun control oriented websites and blogs and engage in a spirited discussion.

Again, there are people in the world who aren't enthusiasts for either guns or gun control. The entire magazine industry is collapsing as people abandon magazines for on-line resources. The fact that an entire shelf is full of gun magazines indicates gun owners aren't doing that. The other people not doing that are old.

But you're probably right, there are just so many gun control supporters,

I'm beginning to think this untreated paranoia of yours could be something to be concerned about, especially since you apparently own guns. Either that, or the magazines don't matter since your level of literacy was unable to actually read my post, where I don't call for any 'gun-control' measures. Instead, I point out that saying "there's a lot of gun magazines!!!!!!11!!" isn't necessarily the positive image the OP believed it to be.

[DonP]

85. Actually they do change that much

The OP point was very simple, that there are enough people buying all those different magazines ever month, poor ignorant bastards that we are, that prove the shooting sports are big enough to support several other industries, including a growing segment of publsihing. While gun control, OTOH, has nothing to show for all the Sturm und Drang and manufactured outrage they try and whip up from time to time. That simple enough for you?

But, since you apparently and proudly know nothing about the subject under discussion here, the shooting sports and the people that enjoy them, including many DU members, I don't expect much in the way of advised commentary, and I'm rarely disappointed.

But poorly drafted ad hominem snark like yours is what we've come to expect.

When you get a chance please be sure and post your online psychiatric license for us all. We have a lot of self qualified mind readers like you that visit this forum, then quickly go away when their pet theories are debunked with facts.

[Johnny Rico]

103. +1

[sarisataka]

88. Separate, concurring opinion

I believe the OP may be correct. Not because of the magazines but because the forum of the masses is fickle and has a short attention span.

Yes, this will be news until resolution. Zimmerman will be:

-convicted and imprisoned
-found not guilty and then vanish into hiding
-not charged and vanish into hiding
-killed by someone serving a very ironic justice

Then public attention will turn to next NEXT BIG THING so by the time any meaningful legislation comes up it will be on page three of the local news.

To exemplify my point: What is Casey Anthony up to and what laws have been passed to protect children that have received national attention?

[Kolesar]

113. What a thin, poorly written, and disconnected thesis

Your objective is to tell a great number of DUers that you despise them, and to accomplish that you attempted to tie together seven disconnected paragraphs.

Your weak sentence structure does not help your "writing".

"..." is not punctuation.

[ellisonz]

124. They should put those behind the counter with black wrapping too...

[oneshooter]

130. Why? Do you find the covers and articles obscene?

[thomasprescottjr]

136. Gun Owners Caucus of your state Democratic Party

I am sure that there are some activists in this group.

Do you want to protect your rights? Do you want to hit the GOP, ALEC, and the NRA where it hurts? Do you want to bring back votes to the Democratic Party and candidates that are lost on the wedge issue?

If you answered yes, then realize that Oregon, Texas, and Nevada Democratic parties have gun owners caucuses within them. I am in the process of creating a Gun Owners Caucus of the Arizona Democratic Party. It will be debated and voted on April 21. I have set up a facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/#!/GunOwnersCaucusOfTheArizonaDemocraticPartyproposed . Look forward to posts and visits to the page.

This issue is part of our Constitution, and we appear as treasonists and gun grabbers. The reality is that almost all gun control is pushed for or signed into action by the Republican Party. Anyone remember papa Bush going after the cop killer .38 specials?

We have been silent on this issue and need to let people know Democrats dont want people's guns, we have our own. We need these caucuses to bring back the voters, and to change the composition at every house into blue.

I cannot do this alone I need your help. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Blue-Steel-Democrats-Gun-Owners-Caucus-of-the-Democratic-Party-of-Oregon/356773990456 was the motivation to get me to go into action.

Lets not let ALEC win, we must fight back. Create these caucuses, push for safety, marksmanship, and funding for Dems. Get some commonsense legislation not gun bans, lets keep the people who should not have guns from having an easy time to get them.

Thomas Prescott
Precinct Committeeman, Hall Precinct, LD 28, MCDP
member, Arizona Democratic Veterans Caucus