*

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

a Brand name and comes in different calibers. The ordnance is what does things to a body, not the gun manufacturer.

Hehe seriouso vato, stick with Sig Sauer or H&K. SA/DA guns just feel right to me.

... although I bought my first poly-fancypants Springfield XD a few days ago. Doubt it will make me give up the East German Stasi Sig P225 as my briefcase gun (yeah, I do that), but it is fun to smack off 16 rounds with the XD.

Saying Glock is just a brand name is like saying Château Lafite Rothschild is just a wine.

Glock or S & W or Remington is just a brand name!
Whatever that wine is you mention is also just a wine, except for the marketing.

They are both used for effect!
It is like the Pope's red shoes---juast shoes of the fisherman!

Something to impress and brag about.

$3 Winking Owl is just as good!

We mustn't let such things interfere with our humility!
Eat some honey and locusts often!

Stay out of the Jakarta Marriott! (5 star)

Like calling my Kimber a Saturday Night Special.. OMG the horrors of it.

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

.. in 2005 St Louis city enabled shall issue concealed carry laws, so people could carry concealed guns in the city, more gun less crime & all that; so what happened since then? St Louis vaulted to become the american city with the HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATE, none higher, at least 2 of the past 3 years.
.. Montana enabled shall issue concealed carry (siccw) in 1991 & her violent crime rate has tripled since then; WVa v-crime rate has doubled since siccw start year; pennsylvania's v-crime rate has never dropped below her 1989 siccw start year; both dakotas v-crime rates doubled since enabling siccw (tho still very low). This while all the other states, since the early 90's have experienced drops in violent crime rates (hawaii remained parity) ... Wha happen to more guns less crime? more like MORE GUNS MORE LIES.
.. detroit & michigan enabled siccw around 2002, detroit's now the murder rate capital of the US, & her v-crime rate hasn't abated.

.. of the 10 states with the highest violent crime rates, 8 of them are pro gun states.
.. of the 25 metro areas with the highest violent crime rates, 20 to 22 of them are pro gun metro areas, the past 5 years at least (morgan quitno dot com).
.. MORE GUNS MORE LIES.

cite your sources.. or are you like most.. just all hot air..

Concealed Gun Permits Deter Violence

GunControl and False Studies

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

in 2005 St Louis city enabled shall issue concealed carry laws, so people could carry concealed guns in the city, more gun less crime & all that; so what happened since then? St Louis vaulted to become the american city with the HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATE, none higher, at least 2 of the past 3 years.

Please cite your source that shows St. Louis as having the HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATE "at least 2 of the last 3 years." I know your source isn't the FBI UCC reports. So, where did you pull that from?

answer.. It's hard to come up with relative data that supports their little "factoids"

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

"After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982."

Oct . 30, 2006 ST. LOUIS .. jumped to first place on a list no one wants to lead: the most dangerous cities in the US.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15475741/

http://www.chacha.com/question/what-are-the-top-ten-highest-crime-rate-cities-in-the-country

.. oh by the way, violent crime in kennesaw georgia, where most all residents are required to own a firearm, is about 25 -35% higher than in morton grove illinois, where a handgun ban was in effect; these are considered two 'sister' cities on each end of the gun spectrum, & guncontrol won again.
(note: kennesaw has 2 zip codes, & morton grove beats them both!):

total crime risk: kennesaw 80 -- morton grove 37
http://www.moving.com/real-estate/compare-cities/zip-selector.asp?State1=11&City1=kennesaw&State2=14&City2=morton%20grove&Zip1=&Zip2=

http://www.moving.com/real-estate/compare-cities/results.asp?Zip1=30152&Zip2=60053&sbmtZIP=Get+Report

.. realize that the 2nd amendment mythology you believe in is just gun lobby propagunda; stop swallowing the armed fantasy doctrine, you're fooling yourselves.

You said that St. Louis has had the HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATE in "at least 2 of the last 3 years." According to FBI crime statistics on violent crime, that statement is completely false. Morgan Quinto may have named St. Louis as "most dangerous" in 2006, but besides the fact that the FBI, criminologists and police all have stated how inaccurate MorganQuinto's conclusions are, MQ never said St. Louis had the highest violent crime rate. MQ ranks cities by violent crimes + some nonviolent crimes like theft, and they use the FBI crime stats. So, even though St. Louis wasn't #1 in violent crime rate, the fact that they lead the US in most automobile thefts in 2006 propelled them to the top of MorganQuinto's most dangerous list.

Using chacha as a resource is pretty laughable too. If you ever need to know the true violent crime statistics for any city/state and for what years, go to the FBI's website where it is all there. Or, rely on some BS you stumble upon and represent it as "fact" if you think it will help your argument even though it's not close to being factual.

is what all PropaGANDA is:
"Propaganda is the dissemination of rhetorical information aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense, often presents information primarily in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda."

"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms"

The 2nd Amendment has been ruled on by the Supreme Court.. You know those guys who are SUPPOSED to rule on areas of Constitutionality of the law.. soooo your argument "realize that the 2nd amendment mythology you believe in is just gun lobby propagunda; stop swallowing the armed fantasy doctrine, you're fooling yourselves" is spurious and specious bounded by Ideology… with no foundation in the truth.. In Southern, GUN TOTING, Tea Partying, FED UP TAX PAYING AMERICAN language.. YOU ARE FULL OF $H*T.. Bless your Heart..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

Scalia ruled that [2ndA] protects an individual right to bear arms"

.. well aware, have written many times of this subversion of the bill of rights;.. note that 2008 ruling on 2ndA was a split decision 5-4, on political lines (& scalia contradicts himself by citing 1820's scholar Wm Rawle to support him).
.. BUT, in 1939 the supreme court ruled on 2ndA & ruled it conferred the militia rights interpretation, & the ruling was unanimous, 9-0, in favor of the collective rights interpretation. tha

May 15, 1939 the Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Justice McReynolds, reversed and remanded the District Court decision. The Supreme Court declared that no conflict between the NatFirearmsAct and the [2ndA] had been established, writing:
"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the [2ndA] guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.
Describing the constitutional authority under which Congress could call forth state militia, the Court stated:
"With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the [2ndA] were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

.. There is NO well regulated militia today, as the founding fathers intended in 1791 & in the 1792 militia act; .. there is NO current compulsory well regulated militia comprising age eligible males."

I'm sorry but using Wikipedia as a source is not something people should ever take seriously. Considering some of the other sources I have seen you cite it leaves me wondering how deeply you actually look before posting (see other post I made on Apples and Oranges below) because it seems to me you just look for a number to fit your diatribe and start quoting it without examining what it really means.

Wikipedia is not respected as a reliable source by ANY professional be it a reporter or professor as it is constantly changed by any number of people to say what they want and is not normally corrected until grave errors are brought to the attention of the site. This is due to the fact that there is no way employees can keep up with every post.

As for the finding in 1939, a sawed off shotgun is only good for two uses, murder and robbery. It isn't even good for home defense unless you are willing to get as close as 8-10 feet of the person before firing and at the same time praying he doesn't have a gun himself. The Supreme Court was correct in its decision based on this type of weapon.

Well Damn! Just Damn! I guess you told him--but something tells me it won't deter him from posting more meaningless data that is not factually supported. And don't forget, every now and then, ya gotta throw in 'little pea pickin' as part of the "Bless your Heart" routine.

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

and answer a question..You outlaw guns today, that's our premise. You think it would be safer that way.

Here's your question...How do you get the guns out of the hands of criminals?

However hopeless the task, I will condescend to answering the question the gun nuts are asking, namely how do you take away guns from criminals.

Here’s the answer, boys, so hold onto your britches!

First of all, and pay close attention here, the secret to accomplishing anything, and I mean anything, is believing it can be done. One politician referred to this as the “Yes I Can” attitude. And he did! That’s true for everything in life.

OK, so how do you take guns away from criminals? The answer is simple.

There are two kinds of criminals.

First, there are those we have already found out to be criminals. Most of them are in jail right now, and when they walked into the jail they were not allowed to take any guns with them. So we did take guns away from criminals there, did we not?

Second, there are those we don’t yet know are criminals, because they have yet to be caught. We’ll catch them, and we’ll disarm them, one at a time.

Those who have been convicted of felonies are not allowed to possess guns, not only while they are in prison (that ought to be obvious), but after they are released, when they are.

We’ll catch these one at a time too. The June 25 Atlanta paper had an interesting article (page B3) about a Gwinnett County deputy who used a tag-scanning device that identified a stolen tag. He arrested the driver, found out he was a convicted felon, and then found nine guns and over 1200 rounds of ammunition in the car. The deputy took the guns (and ammo) away.

That’s how you take guns away from criminals. One at a time. You don’t have to be Einstein to figure that out.

The real problem is with the nuts. These people don’t commit overt crimes, but they have sick minds and don’t get arrested on account of them. These are tougher to disarm because they are delusional. That’s a tougher nut to crack (pardon the expression), but we ought to work on it or else we’ll get more unfortunate fatalities.

The key to the overall problem is to greatly curtail the availability of handguns. It is not to arm everybody. When guns are scarce, both the nuts and the criminals will have a hard time putting their hands on one, and we’ll be safer.

That's a lovely picture of the world you've painted for us! Einstein is rolling in his grave that his name is mentioned in your post.

Delusional? The only delusion here is that people like you think that only the police and military should be able to have firearms. You keep on believing that, because the very moment the criminal government gets our arms away from us, the military WILL take the streets, and the killing WILL begin, just as it always does.

The 2nd Amendment deters tyranny. Get it through your head: The right to bear arm PROTECTS US FROM the government. That is why it is in the Constitution; the Founding Fathers were pretty smart. Here's a little fact for you: Gun confiscation triggered the first shots "heard 'round the world" of the First American Revolution at Lexington and Concord. The Brits attempted to raid the colonist's armories there.

That's all I have to say about that.

In Liberty,

DarthDubious

And you honestly think your plan would work? Seriously?

I'll add another question, why do you persist in calling folks on here "gun nuts"?

That's what I said--just crack their head and take them----one at a time until the 400,000,000,000 are in the hands of the pooooliceeeze.

Now, them what are NOT criminals now and have over 95% of the guns available is a litle harder to do. We just must assume that everyone is a criminal and take their guns! Search them on the street every day; go to everyone's home and raid it for guns---look in the walls.

When kids are about 9 years of age we ask them every day if they have a gun---if they say yes, we take it and whoop up on them. If they say no, we search them and whoop up on them. Be shore to strip search the girls.

The real problem is with the guns---not the people with the guns! Guns hardly ever shoot unless they are dropped--loaded--or the trigger is pulled. So guns are the problem!

Also, if no one has anything any one else wants, what good are guns? So make everyone have an even amount to everyone else! Problem solved.

I have tried to make this solution as sensible as did maple. Hope I succeeded.

Thank you for "Condescending" to answer us poor misguided fools.. Thank you for showing us that your intelligence is so much greater that you deemed it permissible to share a little of it with us peons..

NOT Let's look at your little missive shall we?

Yes I Can” attitude

Ok.. a good attitude is important, but Attitude does not take Criminals off the street.. Good Police work, A watchful populace and a Judicial system not bent of coddling the Criminals works just fine.

There are two kinds of criminals

Your entire premise is flawed.. There are dozens of “types” of Criminals.. I guess if you want to make a simplistic statement.. I guess Caught/Not Caught works for you, but far below your intelligence.

So we did take guns away from criminals there, did we not?

Short answer NO.. Many Criminals are not caught in the act.. Firearms used in the commission of a crime are recovered approx 57% of the time (FBI crime stats)

We’ll catch them, and we’ll disarm them, one at a time.

Wrong again.. Many crimes are crimes of opportunity.. one timers. These criminals are rarely caught other career criminals commit multiple crimes and 1 in 3 are never caught..

Those who have been convicted of felonies are not allowed to possess guns, not only while they are in prison (that ought to be obvious), but after they are released, when they are.

Maple.. they are CRIMINALS do you think once out of prison they stop being a criminal?? 2 of 3 Criminals return to a life of crime (FBI Stats) Many of these people are repeat offenders thus not able to own a gun legally anyway.. So your statement is ludicrous at best..

That’s how you take guns away from criminals. One at a time. You don’t have to be Einstein to figure that out.

Let me show the magnitude of your little scenario..

If you want to get a rough idea of how many guns there are out there just look at how many people you see out there then multiply by a factor of estimated ownership. The last best guess was about 350,000,000 Total. That would be 1 weapon for every man woman and child. The average gun enthusiast owns several firearms which includes pistols, shotguns, and rifles of all makes and models. It is often estimated that about 1 in 4 people own any firearms and on average firearms owners own 4 guns each.

One at a time Maple? Wake up like I told Jimmy.. In Southern, GUN TOTING, Tea Partying, FED UP TAX PAYING AMERICAN language.. YOU ARE FULL OF $H*T.. Bless your Heart..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

If we adopt mapleleafs non-thinking view of ‘one-at-a-time’ we can extrapolate that it would take a little over 2,500 years to take all the guns away form just the current criminal element in the U.S.

Go read the FBI’s stats on current U.S. prison population.

Empirical evidence as to how well ‘gun control’ hasn't worked so far.

Knife crimes in the UK:

* In or about 2006, there were about 60 million (actually closer to 58M, but we'll use the rounded-up number to be kind to hopolophobes) people in the UK as a whole, including Scotland.
* In England and Wales alone — discounting Scotland — there were over 163 thousand knife crimes.
* By the end of 2006, there were more than 300 million people in the US as a whole.
* In the US as a whole, there were fewer than 400 thousand gun crimes.
* In the UK, based on these numbers, there was one knife crime committed for every 374 people (rounded down).
* In the US, based on these numbers, there was one gun crime committed for every 750 people — less than half a gun crime per 374 people (about 0.4987 gun crimes per 374 people, actually).
* That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.

Australian gun ban results:

OBSERVABLE FACT, AFTER 12 MONTHS OF DATA:

* Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%
* Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6%
* Australia-wide, armed-robberies are up 44% (yes, FORTY-FOUR PERCENT)
* In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300%
* Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in homicides-with-firearms (changed dramatically in the past 12 months)
* Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in armed-robbery-with-firearms (changed dramatically in the past 12 months)
* There has been a dramatic increase in breakins-and-assaults-of- the-elderly
* At the time of the ban, the Prime Minister said "self-defense is not a reason for owning a firearm"
* From 1910 to present, homicides in Australia had averaged about 1.8-per-100,000 or lower, a safe society by any standard.
* The ban has destroyed Australia's standings in some international sport shooting competitions
* The membership of the Australian Sports Shooting Association has risen to 112,000, a 200% increase, in response to the ban and as an attempt to organize against further controls, which are expected.
* Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no improvement in "safety" has been observed after such monumental effort and expense was successfully expended in "ridding society of guns". Their response has been to "wait longer".

bad ptc: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2%

.. right, the first year saw this slight uptick, but badptc LIES with statistics, since a 3.2% increase in Australia (Oz) might be about 10 more homicides, from 300 to 310, what might occur in detroit city alone in a year.
.. moreover, murder stats in Oz declined AFTER the first year, esp gunhoms: "[2004]Australians are less likely to be killed by a firearm now than 15 years ago ... yearly trends, the current year recorded the lowest number of incidents [288] and victims. The year 2001-02 recorded the highest, with 354 incidents"
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/rpp/66/02_summary.html

.. so what badptc touts is merely a slight fluctuation upward the year after Oz' gunbuyback & what badptc FAILS to reveal is what happened the year after up till now.

.. below badptc LIES with statistics AGAIN:
"In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300%"

.. wrong actually, but note in most other territories homicides with firearms decreased for that same year;
.. as I said, the above nra generated factoid is wrong, since Victoria registered the whopping total of 19 firearm deaths that year, up from 6 the previous year, which is an increase of only 200% so the nra fails math... but more importantly, note the lie with statistics, since an increase of 300% [or 200%] is so much more terrible sounding than the actual figures of a spike of 13 deaths in a year from 6 to 19.
.. the other australian crime figures are cherry picked, half the violent crimes decreased, but the gunlobby only touts the crimes with increases.

.. bad ptc, you're really bad at telling the truth.
.. like I said, stop believing your nra 2ndA mythology.

Like getting rid of the illegals isn't it? We really don't want to.

Oh, it can be done but like Iran is doing it now---bust a lot of heads, chop a lot of feet, blind a lot of noise-makers, etc.
Call it all "to protect religion."

Or, seek thne general population on illegals---pay a bounty...dead or alive.

I left it up almost 3 days, and nothing from the gun control folks.

Comparing these two "sister" cities is off base in a major way.

First, Kennesaw has better than twice the population so therefore there will be a difference.

Second, when comparing the two, Morton Grove crime is approximately 2/3 the amount in Kenessaw. At that rate, if you better than double the residents of Morton Grove to match Kenessaw the odds are that they will have the higher crime rate.

Third, I find nothing in here that delineates whether these stats are all taken from within city limits. If they taken from the location of the crime, in GA it could have actually occurred 5-6 miles away. Look at Fayetteville, if you live on the N end of Fayette, many of those are Fayetteville addresses. Although a crime committed there has nothing to do with the city, it could be counted just because of the mailing address.

Best actually look at other important facts before posting a couple of numbers as an incontroveratable "fact" when the other data, taken as a whole, is so drastically different.

deltman: First, Kennesaw has better than twice the population so therefore there will be a difference

.. huh? in rates? comparing rates compensates for population differences & is done all the time in violent crime studies. You're new at this, eh? I've been studying crime for decades.
.. moreover, the city comparison website listed 2 zipcodes for kennesaw & only one for morton grove, so let's tentatively assume that half the kennesaw pops live in each zip code, & morton grove beats the both of kennesaw's zipcodes, has the lower crime rate. So that buries your argument above, doesn't it?

deltman: Morton Grove crime is approximately 2/3 the amount in Kenessaw. At that rate, if you better than double the residents of Morton Grove to match Kenessaw the odds are that they will have the higher crime rate.

.. YOU fail math too, rates are not indexes (or total crimes); rates measure the rate of crime per a common number of people, usually 100,000 is the base.

deltman: I find nothing in here that delineates whether these stats are all taken from within city limits[blah blah blah]...

.. double double talk talk, weasel words.

deltman: Best actually look at other important facts before posting a couple of numbers as an incontroveratable "fact" when the other data, taken as a whole, is so drastically different.

.. best actually for you to study more on crime & comparions methods, before you make such the fool of yourself online with mistakes & misconceptions.
PS: wikipedia cited 1939 miller case properly & concisely, & is generally spot on, you create a red herring, if a gunnut cited wiki you wounldn't bat an eye.
.. & fbi frowns on morganQUITno making subjective opinions using fbi ucr reports, but MQ's main basis is fbi's violent crime stats.
.. mayors frown on MQ too, since if their city falls in lower 'most dangerous' half, it bodes badly for them come election time. MQ is a reputable source, as is wikipedia (unless subjectivity arises then there definitely could be bias).

Population of Kennesaw - Zip 30144 50,687
Population of Kennesaw - Zip 30152 35,825

This is a total of 86,512 vs 22,344 listed in the zip code of Morton Grove.

This means that there are 64,178 more people in Kennesaw.

The link that you cite, http://www.moving.com/real-estate/compare-cities/results.asp?Zip1=30152&Zip2=60053&sbmtZIP=Get+Report, just compares 30152 to Morton's Grove.

How's that for math so far?

Now, my math was off when I said Kennesaw's population was twice Morton Grove's. My original post should have said nearly 4x the population.

You said "rates measure the rate of crime per a common number of people, usually 100,000 is the base." This is very true, but population does dictate this. It's very simple, the more people that live in an area, the higher the odds that there will be more criminals located there thus higher chances of crime. Most criminals don't stop at one crime, many keep going until they're caught.

deltman: I find nothing in here that delineates whether these stats are all taken from within city limits[blah blah blah]...

.. double double talk talk, weasel words. A simple statement that you must not have been able to defend since you were forced into name calling.

You said ".. best actually for you to study more on crime & comparions methods, before you make such the fool of yourself online with mistakes & misconceptions." Once again, I seem to have hit a nerve, name calling again.

Actually I have over 20 years working with statistics myself, so I have a pretty good idea of how they work.

As far as citing Wiki, I'd call out anyone that used it as the basis for claims of incontrovertable fact. I don't trust anything that anyone can change. I've seen this happen too many times with wikis to have any faith in them. Would you rather cite something that you have 100% faith in or something that you may have 70%, 80% or even 90% faith in?

And please put the name calling to bed, we are supposed to be adults here.

deltman: the more people that live in an area, the higher the odds that there will be more criminals located there thus higher chances of crime.

.. you're simply talking population density, of course the higher the popdens the greater the chance of violent crime; but the nra & gun lobby have few qualms about comparing small popdens states like dakotas with very low vcrime rates, with guncontrol states with high vcrime rates, & implying that guns work & guncontrol doesn't. The 9 stricter guncontrol states all have relatively high popdens, from rhode island (~900 people per sqmile) to new york state (~172 iirc), contrast with dakotas (~35).

.. & stop harping on wikipedia, I simply used it to cite the 1939 supreme court decision, which it cited accurately, & which can be had in 'findlaw' or any reputable supreme court log. Google 1939 miller 2ndA & you will get the very same case synopsis, sheesh, stop with the smoky mirrors already.

I don't run a liquor store. Most people don't run a liquor store. Liquor stores are known to attract elements that could be considered dangerous (like in the part of Peachtree City that might be known as bad_ptc). The guard who got killed at the Holocaust Museum had a gun. It didn't save him.

Perhaps the lesson you should learn from the Roswell liquor store incident is that you should own a cell phone!

Yeah one of the guards died. But what would have happened if the crazy guy was the only guy in the building with a gun? How many people would have died then?

These type of people think that only the Government should have Guns! I wish we had a Time Machine and could send these people back to Germany in 1938 and let them see what it was really like for the Government to be the only one with Guns. My neighbor lived in Germany in those days and the stories he tells are not pretty.

Obama's weapon of Choice!

.. in 1938 Germany, Germans were allowed to own firearms, not just the nazi govt; there were few restrictions on germans (hitler actually extended the permit period for legal ownership), only Jews were disallowed gun ownership.
And there were only ~400,000 Jewish in Jan 1939 in all of Germany, of which perhaps half were women & children who couldn't've used a gun effectively even had they wanted. The remainder of jewish men which could own guns, would've only sealed their families fate by trying to fend off the gestapo & SS with their guns, & tho ultimately doomed, likely extended the lives of themselves & families by a few months, by not using firearms.
.. don't try to bs people by suggesting wwII Jewish could've thwarted nazi war machine, & don't confuse modern guncontrol methods with brutal rules of conquest.

zzzz wrote: 4 million American citizens actively support this [NRA];

.. in other words, since there are ~80 million gun owning americans, approx 76 million gun owners do NOT belong to the NRA.
.. always thot most gun owners were pretty smart.
.. but thanks for the minority report. NRA, go away.

Isn’t that the same as confiscating someone's guns. What's so modern about that?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

On the brighter side of this gun control debate; my Smith and Wesson stock is up 20% today.

All I have to say is that I hope your not the one that comes to TRY and take My Guns, cause this minority won't give them up with out someone getting the Hot end.

Obama's weapon of Choice!

After seeing PropaGUNDA on every post you posted.. at least spell it correctly..since it seems to be a MANTRA for you... Especially since the REST of us are not as SMART as you..
Oh and by the way its "thought" not "thot".. That LIBERAL education is shining BRIGHT...

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

And three dots make an ellipsis, not two.

Propagunda is funny. Sounds like some two-bit African nation -- The People's Republic of Propagunda. Pro-puh-goon-duh. Sanctimonious spell flames following incorrect usage of its as a contraction for "it is" is ... sad.

HTH

Yep missed it.. It's ok though... message was delivered..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

You can make guns illegal if you want but physically collecting all the guns from the public is a pipe dream. People in favor of disarming the public should stop wasting there time with the idea of getting rid of guns and start looking for ways to increase proper firearm safety education. As for as this holocaust museum thing: Evil people will always exist and do evil things. With or without guns. The thing with the children is terrible but could have been prevented if the boys and their father had known/followed proper gun safety procedures.

that one should own both a cell-phone and a gun.

That way you can call the garbage company to come and hall off the trash once you've shot it several times.

.. I see Lindsey was citing john lott on handgun deaths, the famous gun guru who likes to dress up in drag & praise his books online, ostensibly to promote book sales, or stroke his ego perhaps.

"Mary Rosh [John Lott himself! in drag!] often spoke sweetly of her days as a student of John's, she gave a glowing Amazon review of his book "More Guns, Less Crime," she criticized anyone who questioned John's research or his conclusions, and she attacked other researchers in her ardent defense of Lott's idea that more guns on the streets leads to less crime.
Then a researcher at the conservative think tank CATO Institute discovered the truth about Mary Rosh and undressed John Lott for all the world to see."
http://www.whoismaryrosh.com/

.. by the way, lott's ccw study (with guy named mustard), another gun guru gary kleck debunked it thusly: ... "even Gary Kleck, a criminologist whose work is often cited by John Lott and the NRA, has dismissed Lott's conclusions. Kleck wrote.."more likely the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of [concealed] carry laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled for in the Lott Mustard analysis."
http://www.time.com/time/community/transcripts/chattr070198.html

WISQARS Fatal Injuries: Mortality Reports

Again typical LIBERAL.. attack the messenger IGNORE the message.. well try that one on for size..

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

Seems to go off half cocked for as cock sure as he is. I really want to know what kind of gun control Jimmy was advocating or whether he was for confiscation. When people spout off about a well-regulated militia, they tend to want to centralize the firpower of the country in the hands of the National Guard and Army and confiscate the weapons of the populace. That is decidely counter to the spirit and intent of the Constitution.

I am profoundly curious. Any historical analysis of the 2nd amendment to the constitution will show that any able bodied man between the ages of 14 and 55 (I think from memory) is given the explicit right to have a fire arm. Is a society proliferated by firearms safer when the government confiscates all of the firearms that it can find and legislate the right to carry out of existence? What constitutional gymnastics will be presented to allow this to happen? Would this be a further proof of the consolidation of power at the federal level and a consolidation of the levers of tyranny? I pause to review this historical truth--free men have carried fire arms, slaves were prohibited to carry or possess them.

wedge wrote: Any historical analysis of [2ndA] to the constitution will show that any able bodied man between the ages of 14 and 55 is given the explicit right to have a fire arm.

.. correct, was given the explicit right to have a firearm to serve in a COMPULSORY militia, that is why the WHITE american male, 17 to 45, was given RKBA (right, keep bear, arms);
.. even scalia concedes this above point, when he cited Wm Rawle who wrote in 1829 that the individual RKBA clause was a corollary (consequent) to the well reg'd militia clause.
.. since there is no longer today any compulsory well reg'd militia, any attached right dependent upon it, no longer exists. The 2ndA is obsolete. Scalia footsticks.

Jimmy, greater constitutional minds have beaten this horse and a consensus on individual right seems to be affirmed by the Courts. As an aside, how sad is it that a right that has been in existence for centuries could be taken away by the whim of 5 people? who cannot deny the historical legacy and accuracy of gun ownership, so you must hope for a change in interpretation. That is a sad state for this country that can have people like you have a realistic chance of success in that endeavor. What will happen when you succeed?

A little behind the times Jimmy??

Supreme Court Rules Individuals Have Right to Own Guns

"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms.
Can't seem to get those facts correct Jimmy?

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

The authors of the Constitution knew that should tyranny be shoved upon us again, a well regulated militia would be necessary and it would need to be armed. Are you that trusting of government today? Can't envision the need for a militia? Ever? Why do you bring sex and race into the discussion? Is it your position that Black women shouldn't have the right to gun ownership today? I have no doubt that Detroit city can be a dangerous place, however, I suspect that there is no correlation between the law abiding gun toting citizenry and the amount of ongoing criminal activity. Read: Detroit is just as if not more criminal if guns were outlawed. As an aside, I believe I remember hearing recently that New Orleans was now, once again, the murder capital, not Detroit as you quoted. Are your other facts that rock solid?

.. Lindsey is misleading on all accounts, the usual propagunda.

.. accidental handgun deaths he cites account only for about 25% of all accidental firearm deaths (~1,000) when rifles & shotguns are included, so there are MOREtotal accidental firearm deaths in america than accid bike deaths.
.. but lindsey, there are ~10,000 INTENTIONAL firearm murders yearly, vs approx 0 intentional bicycling deaths (murder by bike, maybe a few).
.. but lindsey, there are spprox 20,000 INTENTIONAL suicide deaths by firearm in america, likely vs less than 20 suicides by bike.
.. explain again, why your silly comparison makes any sense? that we should ban bikes which, on a usage basis, are used thousands of times more often than guns?

.. also, pro gun states have the higher incidence of accidental firearm deaths, than the 9 states with stricter guncontrol. The highest accid firearm death states have 4 times more, on avg, than the guncontrol states.
.. so guncontrol states do better at lowering the accidental firearm death rate, gunworld is reaping the benefits of guncontrol when citing lower figures.
.. MORE GUNS, MORE LIES.

AGAIN WE HAVE ASKED YOU TO CITE YOUR SOURCES.. WE WANT TO EXPLORE ALL OF YOUR "FACTS"..
We get it.. your a gun control nut errr..advocate.. OK.. Make an argument.. Just saying you disagree does not break my argument or make yours...
First I DON"T CITE ANYTHING.. I gave the links to the studies.. you got issues with that TOUGH.. refute them if you can..
We were speaking here of an accidental discharge that killed a child tragic yes.. Mapel used it as a call for banning guns.. I simply linked to the studies for Bicycle deaths vs. ACCIDENTAL Gun deaths.. FACTS ARE EASY TO PROVE.. SO PROVE YOUR CASE STATE YOUR SOURCES...

Stats go both ways Jimmy shall I present the stats.. I think I shall..

Medication Error deaths 7000 per year

25000 deaths per year Alcohol related

43200 Deaths per year from un safe Cars

Doctors KILL more people per year the GUNS

ENJOY.. THIS TIME TRY READING INSTEAD OF THE USUAL KNEEJERK LIBERAL RESPONSE

"When the person who in possession of a government, shall say to a nation, I hold this power in 'contempt' of you, it signifies not on what authority he pretends to say it is..but an aggravation to a person in slavery"..Thomas Paine

Ban something else like.....well, like restaurants with buffets. Get rid of those places and quickly!!!
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Rather have "Jimmy Buffet" , but a good "see"Food buffet will do...

""If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world," Barrack Obama

I will not lower my standards.. So UP YOURS..