Why I favor gun control and will continue to do so

mapleleaf's picture

A 12-year-old Fayetteville boy accidentally shot, and killed, his 10-year-old brother last Saturday afternoon while using his father’s 9mm pistol while his father was at home.

If the father kept the gun “for protection,” he didn’t get it. He got the reverse. A lot of grief and heartache is what he got, for him and his entire family.

News items like this pop up all the time. Very very seldom does it happen that a gun actually protects its owner from becoming the victim of a crime committed by someone else.

The stranglehold that the NRA seems to have on the minds of some of our people needs to be broken. We need to be rational about this and stop promoting gun ownership. It’s more dangerous than it’s worth.

Learn from the mistakes of others. It’s cheaper than learning from your own.

mapleleaf's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sat, 12/19/2009 - 8:00am.

There we go again.

A MARTA police officer sees some guy clip a holstered handgun to the waistband of his pants, pull his shirt over it, and then walk toward the MARTA station.

The cop stopped him, of course. Then he asked for his ID, his firearms license and his Social Security number. By then there was at least one more officer out there helping out. The cops ran a criminal background check on him, to be sure he was not a felon disqualified from carrying a gun, or that there were no outstanding warrants for his arrest.

The guy came out clean, so they let him go, as Georgia now has a law allowing properly licensed people to carry concealed weapons on public transit. But the adventure still cost him thirty minutes of his time.

It seems it also got him frustrated enough to file a federal lawsuit against MARTA. And the first result is in today (Dec. 19, 2009), in the form of a decision by our local Atlanta federal court.

The judge ruled the cops were absolutely justified in everything they did, except for asking him for his Social Security number, which invaded his privacy. He can have a jury trial on that if he wants to.

I am on the side of the cops. Always have been. Had I been one of the cops who stopped this guy, I would have considered giving him a full-blown mental evaluation too.

Now let’s see if any of the gun nuts complains about frivolous lawsuits. They are usually the type who do.

Submitted by Spyglass on Sun, 12/20/2009 - 10:54am.

riding Marta with this "gun toting nut" by my side.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Sat, 12/19/2009 - 11:15pm.

Cop pulls gun at a snowball fight

Now this is a person that truly needs counseling.

NUK_1's picture
Submitted by NUK_1 on Sat, 12/19/2009 - 10:19am.

The guy didn't break any laws at all yet the goofs at MARTA are still upset and haven't accepted the new reality. They fought against the passage of that bill and obviously still think that "their law" trumps the will of the people. It doesn't take 30mins to do a background check on someone.....they are done roadside every day by traffic patrol in under a minute.

Of course you would want a "full-blown mental evaluation" done on someone who is following the law; that's very Big Brother of you. Anyone who disagrees with your opinion needs to be put in the insane asylum which is the same stupid fascist thinking that creates the fanatics who go and form militias and preach anti-government everything.

Submitted by longhair09 on Sat, 12/19/2009 - 10:09am.

yes his law suit was partial frivolous. However the Police did make an error in using the SSN. The guy was a gun carrier but the frivolous lawsuits had no relation.

FT Hood, over 50 law abiding heroes and one confirmed cowardly nut. Just imagine if those 50 also were carrying. How many less Heroes would be gone....how many more heroes would there be to protect your rights.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 8:57am.

Four police officers were shot dead by a lone gunman in Parkland, Washington, Sunday morning (Nov. 29). They each had a gun within easy reach. They knew how to use them. Yet they got killed.

What makes our local gun nuts think that by having a handgun (somewhere in the house, I suppose) they could experience a different outcome if someone came after them?

Why someone would come after them is another question, of course. The point is that the potential for self-defense from owning a handgun is way overrated. If four experienced armed cops couldn’t keep themselves from being killed, what success can an ordinary layman be expected to have?

Our local gun nuts will still rant and rave about the Second Amendment (adopted in the primitive days of 1791) and with slogans about guns don’t kill and only outlaws will have guns if guns are outlawed.

The fact is that the fewer guns there are among our civilian population, the fewer there are to be stolen by the bad elements within it, the fewer there are for children to discover and kill one another with, and the fewer gun accidents there are.

What makes the profession of peace officer so dangerous is that there are so many guns out there. And some nuts.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 3:42pm.

You clearly do not understand subject. Neither do you understand how quickly an experienced shooter can do serious damage in less than a minute. Is the lesson of Ft Hood completely lost on you? The shooter had specific targets in mind when he entered the coffee shop. He was obviously experienced with his weapon, thereby severely reducing the chance of survival for the targets. You should take some comfort (but you won't) in the fact that our Police and Military (you know, those folks who serve only to protect YOU) have shooters who can do the same to bad guys. What we do know is that the mope is now sucking earthworms due to actions of an observant and action-ready Police Officer.

zoes's picture
Submitted by zoes on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 2:34pm.

One of those officers did shoot the bad guy who later died. You must have missed that part.

I don't like to post on issues when people (you) feel so strongly that everyone else is wrong, but you are beginning to irritate me.

The fact is that the more guns there are among our civilian population, the better we can protect ourselves, since the bad elements already have guns; the more opportunity there are for children to learn what a gun is and what it isn't for; and the fewer gun accidents there are.


"Never love anything that can't love you back."

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 3:46pm.

was not caused by the wound inflicted by one of the dead Officers, but as the result of an encounter with another Police Officer in a different scenario.

zoes's picture
Submitted by zoes on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 3:54pm.

I said one of the officer's DID shoot the bad guy and the bad guy died. I did not say one of the four officers shot and killed the bad guy. I was making the point to the OP that the officers reacted to the bad guy and shot him.


"Never love anything that can't love you back."

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 12/02/2009 - 4:00pm.

OK, I see where you're going and you're right. There was a response, regrettably too late. But admirable in as much as the officer was obviously already shot him/herself and still managed to return fire.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 7:31am.

Where do criminals get their guns?

A report in the Atlanta paper for Nov. 18 (page B-1) states that 120 handguns have been reported stolen this year (so far) from cars parked in the section of Atlanta comprised of downtown, midtown and Atlantic Station. All that through car break-ins.

Is it possible that honest citizens unwittingly help criminals get guns? If you don’t have a gun to start with, no criminal can steal that from you. Just food for thought…

Submitted by skyspy on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 6:31pm.

I think you have come up with the perfect solution.

If the law abiding citizens would stop carrying guns to protect themselves and their families all crime would stop. The criminals would immediately seek jobs and become productive almost human individuals who contributed to society. Yes I think that's it, thats the ticket. It is the law abiding gun owners fault that these poor sub-human bovine manure people choose a life of crime.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 5:50pm.

With that kind of logic, you qualify to be the Intellectual of the month! Be nice if you'd get a grip on reality.

Submitted by Spyglass on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 2:57pm.

but the clothes on my back. That would stop crime TOTALLY. I'm selling all of my earthly goods.

Sometimes, your logic baffles the mind.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 11:50pm.

clothes to some idiot. Make sure to work out and look good and let us know what route you will be taking.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 5:43pm.

All depends on how long your hair is and how you wear it!

meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 10:59am.

Between having a carry permit and guns in my home, one is always close at hand. I would like to notify any criminal who wants to steal guns from me to feel free. It will hopefully be the last act in your worthless life. More food for thought....

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 7:43am.

3 arrested for entering autos at church

If those people hadn't gone to church then the criminals would never have broken into their cars.

Why were these people going to church in the first place?

Now these three innocent people will have to go through the humiliation and shame of clearing their good names all because some people decided to park their cars at a church.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sun, 10/11/2009 - 10:58am.

Here’s another article in the Atlanta paper today (page A7).

Mistake results in fiancée’s death.

A Winter Springs, Fla.., man who thought there was an intruder in his house shot and killed his fiancée the day before they were to be married, police said.

John Tabutt, 62, told investigators he got his gun when he thought he heard an intruder, then fired at a figure in the hallway, according to Police Chief Kevin Brunelle. It was Tabutt’s live-in fiancée, 62-year-old Nancy Dismore.

Tabutt told authorities he thought she was next to him in bed the whole time.

Shoot first, think later. If this guy hadn’t had a gun in the house, this wouldn’t have happened. The first sign of paranoia is getting the gun. The second sign is using it. (To someone with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.)

We’ll see more stories like this. Count on it.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 10:44pm.

Not "Shoot first, think later."

It's people like you that get it back-wards that cause all the problems for us gun nuts.

If you would just spend a little more time on the range, or in Clayton County, you'll begin to understand the difference.

For people like you, it's the 'thinking' part that is slowing your reflexes.

Remember, "aim first then shoot" and you might just live through your next home invasion.

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 8:11am.

“Like most women in this country, I was raised to be a victim. When the existence of guns would come up in my family, I was always told that "guns are bad" and that "only bad people would want to own a gun." I believed it... and that simple mistake has changed my life forever.”

“I drew my handgun, and issued a single command to "freeze where you are." When the intruder not only continued to approach, but made a rude comment about what he was going to do to me, I double checked my aim squarely on his chest. As he crossed the "imminent threat distance," I was forced to pull the trigger. All told, it took two additional shots before he fully understood how seriously I was determined to stop him.”

I see your story and raise you about 50… I got hundreds more.. keep’em coming.

Women brutally Raped saves her own life.. link to other storys

"A Government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have." Thomas Jefferson

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sun, 10/11/2009 - 11:16am.

Source KENS San Antonio 10/08/09

What started early Thursday morning as a home invasion has ended in the death of the alleged intruder.

Just after 5 a.m., Bexar County Sheriff's deputies responded to the scene in the 11400 block of South Foster Road.

Deputies say 24-year-old Cardell Deon Joseph broke through the front door of a home there, and that's when the homeowner shot him once in the intruder's rib cage area.

They say the Joseph then ran from the house and drove away, but he then crashed his vehicle a few blocks away. ...Joseph later died at the scene.

We’ll see more stories like this. Count on it.
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 08/15/2009 - 8:18am.


Any questions?
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sat, 08/15/2009 - 9:25am.

Of course I have questions. I have some answers too.

Do I live in Harlem (a somewhat dilapidated section of New York City)? The answer is No.

What if the old man's shotgun (which had not been fired in 20 years) had just made a simple "click," without firing anything? Wouldn't the old man have been in worse trouble, since one of the assailants was said to have a gun (as in concealable "handgun")?

Did the old man have any kind of alarm system? Did he have access to a phone? Could he have dialed 911 while his staff was distracting the thugs?

Isn't New York City the city where Mayor Gugliani beefed up the police force and reduced crime?

In past weeks, I have refrained from bringing up other stories in the news where innocent people were shot by accident, including a recent Georgia case where one school kid shot another because he thought the gun wasn't loaded.

So, are guns useful in deterring crime sometimes? Yes, especially in crime-prone neighborhoods for people in occupations calling for contact with the public, and more so in late hours.

Are handguns more trouble than they are worth for most people? Yes. Are people obsessed with the idea they've got to have a gun more dangerous than others? I'm afraid so.

I still believe in leaving law enforcement to the police. It's generally considered the better idea. That's why bank tellers just hand the money (after all, they have a picture of the robber).

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Sat, 08/15/2009 - 9:52am.

but only sometimes... How would you have "DISTRACTED" the thugs.. Magic tricks?
How about giving up some booty?
A slow striptease?

Yep I can see it now.. I would say "Hey Mary.. start undressing while I run in back and call the Police"..

The thugs never would have missed me leaving while Mary slowly does a grind..
Come on Maple.. your ascertions are assine at best..

You know America is GREAT.. at least for now... You have the right to your opinions and WE have the right to dismiss them.. Consider yourself DISMISSED..

"Any People who expect to be both IGNORANT and FREE, in a state of CIVILIZATION, expects what NEVER was and NEVER will be."

Submitted by Davids mom on Sat, 08/15/2009 - 9:11am.

Life is about making choices. Four young men made a wrong choice. One older man made a difficult decision - in the act of protecting his life and his business. Many families are in pain. No questions. Life is.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 10:15am.

Recent news reports (AJC, July 23-25) tell us that a 51-year-old woman (admittedly with mental or emotional issues) and her 74-year-old mother were shot to death in Duluth, GA, when a police officer summoned to the scene by the mother saw the daughter brandishing a gun and ended up shooting them both.

It turns out the daughter was suicidal and had even talked about getting herself shot by a cop. The cop who responded to this domestic disturbance call had not been warned about that.

If there had been no gun in the house to start with, that would not have happened. We have plenty of mentally unstable people in this world. Let’s not encourage them to get guns. (What do you think of that, gun nuts?)

Submitted by deltman on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 11:40am.

just because I enjoy my guns, thanks to the 2nd amendment, be it target practice or hunting. I keep seeing how you like to post these occasional situations that come up, but what I'm really curious about is what lead you to this stance. Did something happen to someone you know or is it just a personal opinion?

We don't know how the mom was shot (did she step in front of the officer to try and protect her daughter?), but if the woman had a knife instead the odds are still real good that if she went after the officer she would still be dead and possibly her mom too if she had stepped in the line of fire.

Try checking out http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html for info on defense. I know that it by no means covers all the times that gun defense happens, but it does give a clearer picture.

Submitted by eldergent on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 12:45pm.

Here is a partial list of countries that, in the 20th century, carried out government-sponsored mass murder, termed “democide” by Professor Rudy Rummel: People’s Republic of China (76.7 million murdered); Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (61.9 million); and Nazi Germany (21 million). Other countries listed by Professor Rummel include: Indonesia, Vietnam, Pakistan, and Yugoslavia, et al, resulting in another 13 million murdered by their own governments. Other homicidal countries included Imperial Japan (World War II) and Turkey (1.9 million), who murdered mostly ‘others’ in the name of racial purity and territorial conquest. All told, Rummel estimates that 262 million people were slaughtered by homicidal governments during the 20th Century alone. These numbers are beyond comprehension, as Professor Rummel explains:
But, who can digest a total of 1,000,000 or more murdered. It is near impossible to empathize with the human catastrophe such statistics dimly reflect when we have difficulty getting a feel for numbers greater than six or seven. A murderer tortures and kills three people, and that gets into our gut – three loving, feeling, human beings killed in agony. We can imagine this happening to our family or circle of close friends. But mention 10,000, 100,000, or 1,000,000, and that is beyond imagination and feeling; they are only numbers.
Here is a practical and relevant way to put this in perspective: Between 2001 and 2007, American criminals murdered an average of 16,520 victims per year. This means that it would take 15,860 years for criminal murderers to accomplish what was accomplished in decades by a few insane government leaders.
None of these homicidal governments had any constitutional document providing for civilian firearms ownership. In most cases, any laws on the books allowing civilian gun ownership, at the time the dictator took over, were quickly removed.

Submitted by deltman on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 2:32pm.

People have a hard time with numbers of these sizes to really understand. We all realize what they mean but it's almost impossible to put into into perspective.

Submitted by Bonkers on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 2:47pm.

Most of us understand the horror of what the man said.

We simply justify it by saying we were right and had no other way to make our point, or save our self! Write it off as "happened."

Yet, one single murder of a kid by someone evil one with a gun will stay on FOX and CNN forever.

I don't think they ever say about war or dictators, that thousands killed recently is wrong! Just that it is a lot.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 11:21am.

It's a shame that you're not smart enough to figure out that whenever you use the term "gun nuts", you automatically turn off a majoriy of readers. Thats a disservice to your cause, whatever that happens to be.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 8:07am.

Ever since misfit Lee Harvey Oswald shot down President Kennedy in 1963 our American presidents have ceased to ride in open limousines. Then Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme shot at President Ford in 1975, and missed. Later another misfit, John Hinckley, Jr., shot at President Reagan in 1981, wounding him pretty severely.

Because of these misfits, with guns, security has tightened ever more, not only around the president but also in public venues of all sorts. Today, no one can go to an airport to greet arriving visitors at the gate, and those with tickets are searched pretty thoroughly, with petty restrictions on liquids, shoe inspections, etc.

Police officers are apprehensive every time they conduct a traffic stop or respond to a domestic disturbance call. Every time we go to a public building like the state capitol or the local courthouse, we are subjected to inconvenient searches. Of course, buying and operating all these weapon detectors and paying for the security guards cost us tremendously as taxpayers.

Much of this inconvenience is owed to the intransigence and lack of perception of those who promote the ownership and use of handguns. Much of the havoc caused by handguns is due to misfits. See Oswald, Fromme, and Hinckley above.

Another name for misfits is nuts. That’s why I dare refer to gun nuts.

Fayette County may have its share of gun nuts, but I hope many of the citizens who read this will discover some of their neighbors are sane enough to favor gun control and that it is safe for them to voice their feelings about the direction the gun nuts are trying to take us in.

Submitted by skyspy on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 6:14pm.

We do have gun control. The problem is only the law abiding citizens abide by the rules of a background check.

The criminals still get their guns on the black market or by stealing them. The liars( no mistake here) who get the criminals off with no punishment or jail time are also part of the problem.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 12:15pm.

Mapleleaf, I find it odd that you skipped over Lincoln in you list of presidential assassination attempts. I don’t remember there being any whining about ‘Gun Control’ then. Maybe it was because all Americans at the time were being pressed into service to fight a war.

As far as you being inconvenienced at an airport just remember it was razor knives, not guns, that were used to hijack those three planes.

As for you rant, “with petty restrictions on liquids, shoe inspections, etc”, it was a form of plastic explosive molded into the sole of a shoe, not a gun, would-be shoe-bomber Richard Reid was trying to light with a cigarette lighter. Additionally there have been people attempting to board airplanes with gasoline for their chainsaws too.

“Of course, buying and operating all these weapon detectors and paying for the security guards cost us tremendously as taxpayers.”

As per a NYT article:, “During the 2002 Thanksgiving weekend, security screeners seized 15,982 pocketknives, 98 box cutters, six guns and a brick.”

Based on the above I would think you would be going after the knife & brick nuts instead of the law abiding gun owners.

And finally, “Another name for misfits is nuts.” Actually another name for misfit would be oddity, eccentric, oddball, loner, nonconformist or rebel.
Someone who thinks guns are bad is a nut, therefore mapleleaf = NUT.

DarthDubious's picture
Submitted by DarthDubious on Sun, 07/26/2009 - 7:18pm.

'Nuff said.

In Liberty,


Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 10:45am.

The fact remains that the 2nd amendment still prevails. Your posting of news stories is not going to change that.
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Submitted by Davids mom on Fri, 07/24/2009 - 8:43am.

Hopefully this will make criminals realize we're not 'easy' targets!

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 9:47pm.

then carried by 6... I will still carry everywhere I go..

"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

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 9:36pm.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Sat, 07/25/2009 - 10:59am.

That has got to hurt!!!!!
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 3:29pm.

Today's headline: "In a rare win for gun control advocates, the Senate rejects a measure allowing a person with a concealed weapon permit in one state to also hide his firearm when visiting another state." (July 22, 2009)

Think of this for a minute. The gun nuts have the nerve to go to Congress (which ought to be busy working on healthcare reform, unemployment and the economy, etc.) and to ask them to pass a new federal law that would allow them to go from state to state with a concealed weapon, including states that don't want them there.

What has happened to states' rights, gun nuts? Don't you believe in states' rights too?

Submitted by Insayn on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 11:37pm.

Ugh, you can already carry concealed outside of your state...

Its called reciprocity and GA law allows it.


Evil Elvis's picture
Submitted by Evil Elvis on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 7:55pm.

O Mapleload,

Let's only acknowledge driver's and marriage licenses in the state of origin, too.

Nah, you're right. Cars and spouses never hurt nobody.

Whatever you are, it probably rhymes with L A R D.

Submitted by Spyglass on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 6:49pm.

your really show how low your credibility is. Just a thought....if you want people to actually listen and have an intellectual debate, calling them "nuts" right off the bat isn't way to do it.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 6:09pm.

Mapleleaf, just so you, the Brady group and the rest of the panty-wipe types understand. I’ve been carrying a gun since the day I bought my first pistol, some 30 years ago, and I take it, concealed, wherever I wish.

I’m licensed to carry a concealed weapon in the great state of Georgia and that’s good enough for me.

Do you honestly think I'm going to stop and ask a cop in N.Y. or N.J. if it's alright for me to carry my gun in their state?

I like to think of it as my own personal ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ policy.

I'll deal with the 'mother-may-I' issues after I've emptied a clip or two into one or more of their fine upstanding thugs.

I have a constitutional right to protect myself and my family from any perceived threat of violence anywhere in this great country. I really don't care what some local ordinance may or may not allow me to do. Federal laws trump state laws every time.

When those committing crimes are made to abide by the same laws that I’m supposed to abide by, I’ll revisit the idea.

Just remember, it’s always easier to ask for forgiveness than to beg for permission.

Submitted by eldergent on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 6:22pm.

Anywhere there may be a threat, I carry. I'll take a chance in a brightly lit courtroom before I'll take one in a dark parking lot.

Submitted by eldergent on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 5:55pm.

Actually, the mere fact of this measure being voted on by the full Senate is a giant step forward for people who respect the 2nd Amendment. We have lost nothing we previously had and the next time this is voted on....

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 4:41pm.

This measure was defeated by only two votes with Prince Reid and 19 other Democrats along with 38 Republicans voted for the measure. It is suspected that Reid voted that way due to concerns over his upcoming re-election campaign. I hope the good citizens of Nevada will send him back to Vegas. That way, he can gamble using his own money not ours.
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 8:01pm.

Cy, a Las Vegas friend tells me that Dingy Harry just may be in trouble next turn around the voting booth!

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 9:12pm.

We can only hope!
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 4:04pm.

It's clear that all you want to do is throw rocks. If you had done your homework, you'd know that it was not a "new federal law", but simply a change to the US Code---and you would also have known that the individual still would have had to comply with each state's laws, thereby protecting those states rights. Just another uninformed post, but not surprising. Glad to see that both GA Senators supported the requested change (made by a North Dakota Senator by the way.)

meanoldconservatives's picture
Submitted by meanoldconservatives on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 4:19pm.

Well said. MapleNut is obviously misinformed. Currently, Georgia has reciprocal carry agreements with 23 other states.

matt.barnes's picture
Submitted by matt.barnes on Wed, 07/22/2009 - 5:09pm.

So, just to be clear. This vote had nothing to do with the existing reciprocal carry laws and I can still keep my gun under my seat when I go on road trips to Florida.

Submitted by allegedteacher on Mon, 07/20/2009 - 6:48am.

I was defended from a home invader by my gun-wielding father when I was eight years old and my sister was three. I remember the incident to this day, some 40 years later. I grew up around guns, learned to shoot them, and I learned to RESPECT them. My father taught me that they were dangerous tools, not toys, and to steer clear of anyone who indicated they felt differently. I don't own a gun myself, but I hold that responsible (I'm not sure how we could legally define responsible) American citizens should retain the right to own guns. The irresponsible and criminal will always find ways to get their hands on guns and to use them stupidly and/or for illicit purposes. Stricter gun-control laws will not deter them; such laws will only limit the rights and protection of law-abiding citizens.

Silence Dogood's picture
Submitted by Silence Dogood on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 7:30am.

And thank God I still am. Look at the surge in violent gang activity and ask yourself how safe you feel right now with the police looking after you.

I doubt that I would be alive today if not for a handgun being in the possession of my family.

G35 Dude's picture
Submitted by G35 Dude on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 10:15pm.

I too am alive today because a family member was armed and could defend us. Now I'm armed and trained.

Submitted by MacTheKnife on Thu, 07/16/2009 - 1:39pm.

I am sure you will discount this but:

A 3 year old cannot cock or load a 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Nor did the 3 year old climb out of his mother's bed (at 3am) walk to the laundry room and turn on the light, climb on top of the laundry basket, then climb on top of the washer, reach up to the shelf and find the 9mm and then cock it (pulling back against the recoil spring)and then shoot himself in the stomach.

I know this is what is being reported and I know why- but it didn't happen this way and common sense alone would tell you that.

Besides, hypothetically speaking, if this gun would have been properly stored it certainly would not have happened.

Now, on to your assumptions that this gun was legally obtained, owned, and was somehow in compliance with existing U.S. gun laws ...

or that if a gun were illegally owned, obtained, or kept that these accidents would not occur when you outlaw handguns ...

or your assumptions that criminals will not be able to acquire guns (which they do now) illegally should you outlaw guns for the rest of us...

or, that somehow criminals will rob, rape, murder and kidnap, but only with screwdrivers since guns would be illegal.... (that's always the funniest)

or .... well, you get the idea...

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 07/20/2009 - 4:40am.

Either you like guns or you don't!

Either you will shoot and kill someone or you won't.

Chances of an individual pulling out their gun and saving their life is remote!

It is a threat only.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 4:32pm.

Very very seldom does it happen that a gun actually protects its owner from becoming the victim of a crime committed by someone else.

Here's one that just happen.

Home invader scum gets shot in Cobb County

I hope they find the scum - preferably dead.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Submitted by Bonkers on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 7:09pm.

He actually shot his son in the leg. He was 86 years old.
The perp got away.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Wed, 07/15/2009 - 9:08pm.

I see you are coherent tonight.
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 6:07am.

A news report from Clayton County this morning (July 14) shows that a 3-year-old is in critical condition after shooting himself in the stomach.

Count the number of incidents where a gun saved the life of a potential crime victim (the self-protection argument), and compare it to the number of incidents where a gun accident caused the death of an innocent victim, usually a child.

If we had fewer handguns, we’d have fewer tragedies involving children injured and killed in gun accidents. Think about it.

Submitted by Spyglass on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 12:08pm.

I say you can't. Stupid parents will still be stupid parents regardless of laws.

Cyclist's picture
Submitted by Cyclist on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 5:35pm.

"Hit the Nail on the Head Award"

If you win, you get a free subscription to The Citizen delivered to your driveway every Wednesday.

Good Luck! Smiling
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 8:04am.

Reports from across the Nation on a tragic new development.. Playtime kills..

Tragic Playground deaths

Just as relavent as Mapleleaf's

Do guns protect their owners?

Accidental discharges resulting in deaths

"Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives."

"While there were 28,163 gun deaths in 2000, only 776 were accidental. 16,586 were suicides, and 10,801 were murders."

Stats Maple??

"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

Submitted by Bonkers on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 1:37pm.

6,850 divided by 50 states is 137 a day in Georgia!

Man, I never heard of these guys who shoot someone to protect themself 137 times a day--even in Detroit!

I have got guns in case the guvmint men cum fer me, but I don't carry em!

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 6:33am.

June 24 press reports inform us that legendary Parkersburg, Iowa high school football coach Ed Thomas was gunned down in the morning by a former student, in front of about 50 current students.

It is likely this could have been prevented had not handguns been so readily available.

Submitted by deltman on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 8:54am.

because those that want them to commit crimes are simply going to find a way to get them. Gun control does nothing more than limit law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

The truth is more people die from many different things like car crashes, cancer and heart disease than firearms. Only a little over 1% of all people that die in the US are gun related.


This table lists the 10 most common reason and there is a second table below it that lists accidental deaths and causes. The only thing I don't see is if it is included under total gun deaths.

The reality is that as more and more states passed carry laws, homicide rates have gone down and stabilized.


And I actually got my information from a real source.

yardman5508's picture
Submitted by yardman5508 on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 6:47pm.

"If we outlaw guns then only outlaws will have guns"...so your solution is let's make it EASIER for people to get guns? As I see it, the problem with your position is that there are no statistics on how many crimes have been prevented as a result of gun control laws. I will agree that we (the government) cannot legislate away stupidity, but we CAN make it more difficult for stupid people to attain weaponry. Keep the faith.

Even a dead fish can go with the flow.

mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Mon, 07/20/2009 - 5:56am.

The training should be required and the gun registered with a sample bullet for future comparison test.

Then, and only then, after everyone is armed do you start keeping track of shootings and the crimes that were prevented. After a year or 2 - look at those statistics. You will find a huge drop in crime and a huge increase in arrests or shootings of predators by normal citizens.

There would be very few Virginia Tech or Columbine type shootings and those that did occur would have fewer victims and a quicker ending.

OR, there would be a huge number of accidental shootings and the program would be failure.

To say there are no statistics for a situation that has not occurred is just plain stupid.

Submitted by Bonkers on Mon, 07/20/2009 - 9:12am.

I suppose one would have to be 18 years of age to carry one?
Although one can get into the military at 17 if parents sign, and now can vote and drink beer and smoke.

Usually after shooting someone, the shooter disposes of that gun (and it's rifling) and steals or buys another one!
That is what I would do. I wouldn't carry one that is registered or has it rifling on file.

Now as to all these kids and women and girls, nut-cases, and people without any self-confidence carrying guns, we have a problem, Houston!

I would assume that one could carry a 9mm Glock or equivalent, an A4 or better--non-automatic,of course, and several clips of ammo., if one wanted to do so. A Bowie knife like Crocodile Dundee carried would also come in handy.

Wouldn't that be a sight say in Walmart at Christmas? Just look up and down the aisles at-- oh, say, 2-3,000 fatsos, thinnos, and retards swinging their A-4 on their shoulder and the 9mm on their hip! The Bowie would be in their sheath on their thigh.

Clean up on aisle three announcements would be common!

I'd hate also to be a cop running across a half dozen gang mmembers fully armed whacking a dude for his phone! I'd run like crazy if I were the cop!

To keep track of the shootings, as you say, we wouild need a new federal department of shooting statistics--on--line. A new Czar also.

Yes if all those VA Tech students and teacher had their gats, the poor fellow wouldn't have had a chance. Some of the guys and gals however would have shot each other. It would have taken a month to remove the bullets from the walls. All the college kids would need 2-3,000 bucks to load up for school

Gun maintenance shops would be in every Starbucks and Drug store.
Might even solve the depression!

darrylwd's picture
Submitted by darrylwd on Fri, 06/19/2009 - 12:58pm.

If you are so supportive of gun control, I ask you to do one simple thing to prove yourself. It's either put-up or shut-up, literally. Put up a sign in your front yard, if you have one, that states that you do NOT own a gun and that you don't believe that others should own a gun as well.

If you do this for an extended period of time, then you DO believe and trust in your words, if you won't or don't, you are a hypocrite and if so... then just shut-up.

mapleleaf's picture
Submitted by mapleleaf on Sat, 06/20/2009 - 11:47am.

The Fayette County sign ordinance would require me to get a permit to do what you ask, I’d have to spend money for the sign itself, what the sign would say couldn’t fit the sign size limit and still be readable, and the sign would be as silly as the Ten Commandments signs some of my neighbors have. (One of these commandments is Thou shall not kill, but I never saw Thou shall own a gun.)

Why should I listen to a gun nut anyway?

darrylwd's picture
Submitted by darrylwd on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 11:13pm.

I don't care what you have to go through to make it happen. And the point is not who is a gun nut or not a gun nut, it's about our Rights established and set forth by the U.S. Constitution.

S. Lindsey's picture
Submitted by S. Lindsey on Thu, 06/25/2009 - 6:41am.

for the same reason we listen to a GUN CONTROL NUT...

"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

Submitted by Jimmy the One on Wed, 06/24/2009 - 10:44am.

darryl: Put up a sign .. that you do NOT own a gun and that you don't believe that others should own a gun as well...If you do this for an extended period of time, then you DO believe and trust in your words, if you won't or don't, you are a hypocrite and if so... then just shut-up

.. darryl creates an absurd false dilemma, typical gunnut strategy, that unless I put up a 'gun ban' sign I am a hypocrite & must 'shut up' for supporting guncontrol, whereas it is his side which has the lock on hypocrisy. His very suggestion is the hypocritical premise.
.. I do indeed have a sign tho, which says 'No Guns Allowed' atop my front door, bout a half foot by one foot wooden in black block letters, easy to read when you get to the porch (Police are excepted). This pertains only to preferences to my own house, not to what others keep in their homes, to which I could care less for gunnut adults, but strongly advise parents with young children NOT to fall for the propagunda that a gun protects the children more than it is a threat to them.
.. think the father of the two pre teen boys involved in the fatal shooting above, now thinks his gun purchase such the wise idea?

darrylwd's picture
Submitted by darrylwd on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 11:40pm.

Where do you get that from? Look, it's simple, if a person runs their mouth about a subject matter, but they won't take action(live the life) to support their words, well, that's a hypocrite in my book. No false dilemma, just plain ole put up or shut up.

I'll make this simple for you. Do you own and drive an automobile, for sake of our discussion, I'll assume you do. Each time you buckle up, start your engine and head down the road, you are risking the lives of others, and yes, even pre-teen boys. Every year well over 40K are killed in auto accidents, that's over 40,000. Handgun deaths are dwarfed by auto deaths. Point is, if you are concerned about lives, then go after something that does the most harm.

Now, do you think it's wise to purchase an automobile?

G35 Dude's picture
Submitted by G35 Dude on Fri, 06/19/2009 - 11:00am.

As a teenager growing up I worked at my Dads and uncles tire store. One afternoon as we closed 3 men came in to rob us. I'm convinced that if my uncle had not had a gun I would be dead today.
Also, one statistic that is not captured is how many crimes were averted because the victim produced a gun and the criminal then chose to run away. These are rarely reported and therefore can not be tracked. I would however be in favor of requiring some form of training to get a CCW. Had this childs Dad known how to store his gun properly this accident would not have happened.

Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 10:44am.

Thinking people, especially those who have lived in densely populated areas as well as those who live in isolated rural areas should understand the necessity if they have a gun in their home - to be well trained in the care and use of that instrument. A car, in the hands of an inexperienced driver, is a weapon. One has to have a license and training to use a car. The law should enforce that an owner of a gun have a license and training to use that gun. It is frightening that at SOME gun shows - a person with questionable intent can purchase a number of battle ready guns. (I do realize that many of these transactions are done outside of established gun shows and are illegal.) It is important that we follow closely the implementation of the second amendment regarding states rights regarding gun control. I do not believe that a ‘hunter’ or resident of a densely populated area needs an AK47.

Submitted by AtHomeGym on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 5:05pm.

Just how in the hell do you identify a person with that? And would you also propose that, seeing as you would classify an automobile as a weapon in the hands of an unlicensed and untrained person, one would need some sort of special license or whatever to purchase an automobile? I note the absense of common sense here.

Submitted by Davids mom on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 12:07am.

I would hope that one questions the intent of one purchasing a 'battle ready gun'. What does an honest citizen need with a weapon that in the past our law enforcement officers did not have? Homeland security should have some concerns and strategies for determining the intent of a citizen wishing to purchase a battle ready weapon. (I forgot - Homeland Security didn't question the Saudi's who came to the US and took flying lessons - but didn't bother to take 'landing' lessons. . .hmmmm.) Not much 'common sense' there.

Evil Elvis's picture
Submitted by Evil Elvis on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 12:13am.

Why not do a little reading and realize how well-regulated and restricted Class III weapons have been since the 1930s -- or do you buy into the phony definitions established by our mutual former state of residence about the evil appearance of some guns?

Many Bubbas down here hunt with their sporterized SKS rifles and AR variants. Would you feel safer if they shot wild boars with bolt action rifles only?

I'd take my chances against some tard with an AR over a redneck with an old .30-06 that could reach out and touch me from half a mile away and the experience to do it.

Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 5:31pm.

Doesn't one have to have a license to drive a car off the showroom floor in Georgia? Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

Submitted by Bonkers on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 7:16am.

I don't think I have ever known anyone who was able to drive a new car "off the showroom floor!"

Usually many big doors have to open, other vehicles moved, etc.
They (someone trained in this) will get it out and ready for you!

I have never shown a "license" to drive home a new car. Maybe an Insurance card!

The dealer may require it of some people, I don't know.

Usually they have another car just like the one displayed, or they will get one at another dealer for you.

One is better off anyway to buy a 2-4 year old clean, inspected by a mechanic (independent of the dealer) car. Unless you want bragging rights.
You can save 30-35%. However if you need the free down payment, the so-called cash back (ever get any back into your hands?) or the "free interest) you will have to pay the 30% extra! Not free huh?

CarMax will do all that for you. Dealers are now old-fashioned.

Submitted by MYTMITE on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 9:28pm.

This may be the wrong site but I couldn't locate the correct one. Just wondered if you saw the small article in today's AJC saying that the parents of the children from the Philadelphia daycare have instituted a lawsuit against the club--the lawyer said there might be 60 children and 120 parents involved and they are asking for 'unspecified damages.' Interesting.

Submitted by Bonkers on Sun, 07/19/2009 - 7:24am.

Now, wouldn't it be better and teach the kids something nice if both parties came to an agreement, got the kids together and talked to them together that it had been worked out so they could swim, and apologize to them for acting like dumbasses on both sides?

Then when they came to swim have a well represented parents and staff there to be sure the kids were comfortable and taught the rules of the pool. Don't put up with any violations of rules from anyone. Pools are dangerous.
Maybe someone ought to do an INDEPENDENT pool check of the chemicals also.
If someone poops or pees in the pool get with the parent immediately and go over how to teach them to go to the bathroom.
Then if someone gets angry and praches, throw them out---just them, not the whole bunch.
That is how civilized people make progress and teach a good way to live.

If the pool managers did something the members or board didn't want, that may require them to contribute more to run the pool if they don't want temporary users into their private pool.

Submitted by Davids mom on Tue, 07/14/2009 - 10:18pm.

There's that comment - permanently scarred. I agree with your opinion regarding that - they will survive! I was hoping that the HR Commission would be able to intervene and mediate this situation. I had hoped the children would learn how to resolve an issue without being litigious - but some attorneys smell a 'big' settlement. This sad situation will be interesting to follow. Back in the day - when confronted with similar situations in California - we were taught to 'face the situation' and return and prove that we were equal to any challenge - and could return and act with dignity and without fear! (California had pools where minorities were not welcomed. Our parents paved the way for us to 'integrate' those pools. It was done through adult planning - and most of the time, without overt protest. (And we made a lot of new friends!!)

According to one account, one student from the center had attended this pool with his class (predominantly white) earlier and was well treated.

Maybe the Valley Club Board will resign - but everyone, IMO, is thinking about the 'adults' - and not what is best for the children (minority center children and the children of the club members). This could have had a much better 'ending' - and a lesson learned. There were no ‘thugs’ here – but if adults had planned better, participation with the members of another community could have been a positive learning experience for all children involved. There was one report where a former member of the club expressed his disgust with the situation – and was glad that he and his family had made the decision to leave the club this summer. I would imagine that there are others in the club who have a similar view.

I have friends in the Philadelphia area –and this is still getting a lot of media attention there.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.