No video as yet, but Hannity had a female competition shooter demo Fri Nite that showed the similarities of semi-automatics: .223 cal AR-15, 30.06 Hunting rifle, 12 GA shotgun with a 'slug' cartridge as well as using a shot cartridge, a 9 mm handgun, & a .45 Cal handgun. The smallest hole was produced by the .223 AR-15, the biggest by the 12 GA shotgun with hunting shot. All fire arms were semi-automatics loaded with 3 shots. The results showed that the std 30.06 hunting rifle caused more damage than the AR-15! And max semi-auto damage was achieved with the std 12 GA shotgun. Also that the 9 mm handgun wasnt an effect intruder stopper as the .45 cal handgun..often used for bear protection in the mtns. Btw, the woman in Atlanta hiding with her 2 children used a .38 Cal (actual bullet size is 9.1 mm), hitting the intruder 5 times, who still managed to run off! She could have used a .45 Cal and STOPPED him...
Thanks for illustrating how personal insults make your point seem more valid.... said no one, ever. Straw purchases like you describe here would be addressed by registration, genius.
Wow, you seem really excited by this one woman in Atlanta... Must feel great to think you've finally got a valid case on your side. Shame you can't illustrate why a taser wouldn't have worked better.
I was referring to gun bans in Britain and Australia. There also have been gun bans in Washington D.C. and Chicago. The bans did nothing to stop crime. It actually increased. - - - Updated - - - I'll go with B in general.
since you've established that many guns are just as dangerous as assault weapons, that's a good argument for banning all guns. - - - Updated - - - britain and australia have far lower crime rates than the US. gun bans in DC and chicago dont work because criminals get the guns from neighboring states with loose gun laws. That's why we need a nationwide ban. .
Britain and Australia have not seen crime rates go down because of gun bans. If we have a nationwide ban, the bad guys obtain guns through the black market, just like drugs.
Thx for showing your true colors by misquoting my post with your own verbiage "blah blah blah".....you truly are desperate in your poor defense of attacking legal self defense and both the damage caused by legal guns as opposed to all the 'assault weapon' hype.....I still cant believe that you ever were a Marine..at best, you washed out in boot camp...
much harder to obtain guns through the black market. less availability = less crimes. Crimes are multifactorial, and you may not see a simple correlation. gun crimes in australia certainly did go down.
Yawn... Sick of illustrating that "violent crime" is a broad category that includes a wide range of offences as minor as placing your hand on someone's shoulder without invitation to do so (assault) through to murder... Whereas gun offences are always on the high end of that scale. Ok, so you don't feel that minimizing the number of guns available to the general public will impact the number of guns in criminal hands? You don't believe in registration of guns even though many guns held by criminals are obtained through straw purchases (which would be negated by registration)? Do you believe it is better to be armed, but surrounded by a mob of armed (possibly lethal) morons - or disarmed, and surrounded by a mob of unarmed (mostly annoying) morons? BTW, it seems to me that NOT being surrounded by morons simply isn't an option.
I disagree with you. More guns equals less crime. The statistics back that up. No guns just embolden criminals, since they know a gun will not be resisting them. More violent crime in Australia despite gun ban. Homicide rates have dropped steadily in U.S. The highest murder rate in national history was between 1846 and 1887, not including Civil War deaths. The rate back then was about 200 per 100,000. Now the rate is about 4.8 per 100,000. We also have way more guns now.
...and they get higher when bans are implemented. You mean straw purchases like the Obama Admin was allowing under Fast & Furious? You also still fail to grasp the idea that criminals would not register their guns. The problem with your fantasy scenario, is that the morons will still have the guns. I'd rather have a fighting chance with a gun.
Actually, many drugs today are manufactured within the United States. The 9mm mini uzi being carried by a 14 year old gangbanger down the street wasn't purchased through extensive ties with some fictional powerful jetsetting arms dealer who wears a white suit and sunglasses indoors like Hollywood portrays, it was most likely purchased by someone else and given to the gangbanger (a "straw purchase", which would be resolved with registration) or stolen from some careless "lawful gun owner". The "black market" isn't like an actual flea market of illegal stuff that cops aren't invited to.... It's just not that easy. Imagine if.... staplers (to pick something random) were made illegal tomorrow and taken off the shelves in stores. Imagine police were confiscating and destroying staplers every time they found one, and they were on the lookout for staples in paper to trace back to the stapler... Let's now say you are a rebellious sort of person who desperately wants a stapler for some reason... Would you instantly know who to contact in order to get access to staplers "on the black market"? Probably not. You don't magically get the ability to gain access to contraband items just by being a criminal.
Gun manufacturing is at an all time high in the U.S. There will be a huge black market for them if they are banned.
There is no indication that violent crime gets higher when gun bans are introduced... There is less violent crime per capita in Australia and the UK than there is in the US if you classify firearm homicide into violent crime... Criminals who are identified carrying unregistered guns could be arrested on that basis alone, rather than being allowed to walk and USING those guns before they could be arrested. You've just proven yourself to be one of the morons in my "hypothetical" scenario... I use the quotes because it's really NOT hypothetical, it's just an oversimplification of reality.
if we stop manufacturing them in the US, stop the (currently legal) imports, then the supply in your magical "black market" becomes very slim... This means a "black market" firearm would be extremely expensive... More suited to someone committing a serious crime with huge payday - NOT your standard home invader or mugger. This is especially true when you consider that the existing supply illegal firearms would shrink over time due to police seizing/destroying them faster than the illegal imports can replace them. BTW, no love for my stapler analogy? I thought that was a good one.
I think what you mean to say is that the higher the crime rate the more likely there is gun control. That is the cause and effect, not the reverse you and gun advocates claim is the case. On the whole guns are used to enable crimes more often than they are used to prevent them. Far more - many orders of magnitude more. On the whole then guns are a net detriment to society.
by that logic, the US should have the lowest crime rate of all, since we have the most guns, by far, of any country in the world. clearly not the case.
I personally believe guns do not affect any crime rate. Our society has lost control of any standards. Sex is being sold on the television as if it were a thing for everyone of any age to do, and as a result, we are starting to see generation after generation of babies having babies, with no idea of how it is to guide a child through the most important phases of life, for they themselves are children. Back in the day a child who had a baby would give that baby to an adult, and that baby would be raised correctly. Mentaly ill people used to get put into a community where they were treated, now that is politicaly incorrect and seen as mean so instead they walk the streets. The percentage of gun owners have not changed much, but everything else in society has changed drasticaly for the worse.
I dunno where you get your facts, but they are the opposite of what it true. It is true that sex is now much more commonly accepted in our culture (which I think is a good thing!), but teenage pregnancy and abortions have been falling ever since 1990. mentally ill people used to get put in an institution, but since people are afraid of higher taxes, those institutions were cut. I fully support higher taxes to pay for more social programs and institutions for mentally ill people - but crazy conservatives would oppose such common sense measures.
I think we just found some common ground.... I think the gun control debate should be as it is, a debate until a common solution can be met by both sides, but things like this problem with allowing people who are not safe to walk the streets needs to be addressed imediatly. While young teenagers birth rates are lower, it is still a problem.
well, while I think that we should put mentally deranged people in institutions, I dont think that has much to do with gun violence. Most of the perpetrators of mass shooting do not meet criteria for being locked away in an institution, anyway. But I still think we should provide institutions for these people, not because I think it will help public safety (as most of these people are harmless), but because it's the right thing to do. A lot of things are "a problem" But since teen birth rates are going down, you can't blame the liberalization of sex in our culture as a reason for teen pregnancy.
I think it's so very chivalrous that there are gents out there who care enough to carry a gun for the protection and safety for those of us who cannot do so for themselves; you know, like us who are klutzey, near-sighted, et al. I am reassured to know that with all the guns in circulation, I will probably have some kind of protection, the next time I see a flick or go to the mall.
I am serious. I wouldn't own a gun, but someday I might be saved by someone who is carrying one, rather than be the victim of someone who is also carrying one.
Unless one of the "gents" experiences road rage as a result of being stuck in traffic behind someone who is "klutzey, near-sighted, et al." and uses his firearm to express his anger - OR - one of these "gents" makes ONE mistake (possibly the first ever) and has his weapon accidentally go off - OR - one of these "gents" has his weapon stolen by a criminal who had no other access to them, so that the recently-armed criminal is now able to visit movie theater or mall... - - - Updated - - - Unless one of the "gents" experiences road rage as a result of being stuck in traffic behind someone who is "klutzey, near-sighted, et al." and uses his firearm to express his anger - OR - one of these "gents" makes ONE mistake (possibly the first ever) and has his weapon accidentally go off - OR - one of these "gents" has his weapon stolen by a criminal who had no other access to them, so that the recently-armed criminal is now able to visit movie theater or mall...
