Are personally owned guns a net negative for modern society?

Kellermann's study also indicated that living alone had a 37% higher risk associated with homicide in the home than having a firearm did and that renting had a 63% higher risk of homicide than having a gun in the home did. See Table 4.

Need some new laws about living arrangements.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199310073291506

 

Pretty sure that the Founders didn't create Amendments V and VI to apply only when there was economic gain to society.

 

For the Greater Good you must spoon with your assigned bunkmate

 

According to Kellermann on average you're safer with an armed felon as a roommate than living alone.

 

My guns have never harmed anyone. If you don't want one, don't have one. My aunt was killed in a car accident. Do I have the right to take your car away from you? Oh yeah... I forgot... that's different.

 

Implying that the man they knew wouldn't have murdered them if they did not have a gun??

 

It's clearly not an issue to you, that is unless it is a criminal getting killed or injured.

But that's a typical anti-gunner's attitude.

 

It's a false theory based on data collected by those with an agenda to prove a predetermined outcome.

You keep on repeating the same false narrative hoping for a different result, do you have any idea what that is called?

 

Are you out of your mind, a justifiable homicide is a clear advantage, someone saved their life by killing some one who was going to harm or kill them.

Why do you support the criminals in society while trying to weaken the law abiding?

 

I am not thinking of anyone in particular but it's been my observation that most people who want to disarm lawful and sane American citizens are:
- advocates for the criminal element
- cloistered celebrities and politicians who have armed bodyguards to protect them
- individuals who are supportive of totalitarianism
- individuals who have not been mugged
- timid hoplophobes who have an irrational fear of guns
- victims of a deceptive MSM who can't see through its anti gun bias

 

Guns are no more dangerous than automobiles. If they are outlawed people will find a way to own one....legal or not. But I do think....like alcohol and tobacco ....it should be restricted in some ways. Do you really need a gun in your glove box?

 

Yes.

 

You should have to take a firearms safety course on an annual basis and be investigated for any abusive behavior. or olicit drug use. Or retired or active duty law enforcement.

 

You must think handling a gun is rocket science.

 

So explain school shootings and why fewer guns there don't mean fewer homicides?

Let's look at the number of homicides in gun stores or at gun shows or shooting ranges. How come they aren't happening there more where there are more guns than in schools where their are fewer to almost no guns?

Seems you claim is bogus.

no way. How many crimes don't happen because people can defend themselves? I doubt you can even begin to quantify that.

You're issue doesn't seem to be with guns it seems to be with crime. Control crime by controlling the criminal not everybody else.

 

Making sure they can't defend themselves would probably increase that.

So more defenselessness is better?

 

This reminds me of a case in which a determined killer wanted to murder his ex girlfriend but couldn't get a gun.

Of course the killer didn't simply give up or use a knife but he fabricated a crude WMD that killed not only his ex girlfriend but 86 additional people(*)

I think that it is additionally noteworthy that this determined killer managed to kill more people with only one dollar's worth of gasoline than anybody has managed to kill with any type of firearm.

The lesson, of course, is that if and when a gun is not readily available, a determined killer will simply resort to using any number of far deadlier home made bombs or similar crude WMDs using Anthrax, explosives, Bio-Chem weapons etc that kills more people than simply the targeted individual.

Finally, the deadliest school mass killing also was not done with any firearm but with a home made bomb.(1)

Therefore, making firearms less available may very well lead to more homicides, not fewer.



(*) "Happy Land fire"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

EXCERPT "González went to an Amoco gas station, then returned to the establishment with a plastic container with $1 worth of gasoline.[2][4] He spread the fuel at the base of a staircase, the only access into the club, and then ignited the gasoline.[5]

Eighty-seven people died in the resulting fire."CONTINUED


(1) "The 1927 Bombing That Remains America’s Deadliest School Massacre"

"Ninety years ago, a school in Bath, Michigan was rigged with explosives in a brutal act that stunned the town"

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...chool-massacre-180963355/#KSipwm4IUrIbB9uc.99

EXCERPTS "In the end 44 people died, 38 of them students. It wasn’t the first bombing in the country’s history—at least eight were killed during the Haymarket Square rally in Chicago in 1886, and 30 when a bomb exploded in Manhattan in 1920. But none had been so deadly as this, or affected so many children."CONTINUED

 

So you should be treated like a criminal for exercising your rights? Why?

 

You cannot restrict someone's rights based on what you think they might do. To seize someone under the 4th amendment requires probable cause to suspect a crime which is not present in your fantasy.
Do you think cops somehow don't break the law? Fully 40% of law enforcement are domestic abusers. And that's WITH the whole 'thin blue line' bullshit going on where their friends are the ones investigating them.
Let that sink in.

 

Yes, in Florida that is a legal vehicle storage location.

 

training shall never be required as it can and has been used as a method of preventing law abiding people from owning firearms.

 

Bet he's a fan of voting tests too

 

Gun control laws preceded the rise of the Nazi regime in Germany. Big Bad Government is always the greatest threat to human live and peace. Gun control laws kill.

"The general disarming of citizens and a generic gun law was imposed by the Allies after World War I. The law was introduced by the Weimar Republic; actual enforcement was not stringent, and there was no general disarmament immediately after the war. After incidents including the 1920 Kapp Putsch and the 1922 assassination of Walther Rathenau, the law was enforced more strictly. The Weimar Republic saw various Freikorps and paramilitary forces like the Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold, Der Stahlhelm and the Nazi SA.

The requirement for trustworthiness of the owner and need for the special purpose of the user (e.g. hunting, sport or self-defence) has been included in German gun laws since then.[3]" Wiki

 

I am. Voters should be able to pass a basic civics and economics test before their vote counts. It's unconstitutional, of course, but a man can dream.

 

One thing that should be considered is that you can’t adequately prove how many crimes are prevented by simply the possibility that the intended victim is armed.

But we can draw inferences by looking at the crimes that criminals prefer to commit.

Examples:

Residential burglary committed while the home is occupied by the resident, and home invasion robberies, happen far less often than residential burglaries while the residents are not home.

Auto theft is usually committed when the car is unoccupied. Carjacking (car is occupied by the owner) happens far less frequently.

Convenience store robberies are common. Bank robberies are fairly common because criminals know that bank tellers will comply and not fight back. Gun store robberies, where the proprietors are openly armed or likely to be carrying a concealed firearm, are rare.

Criminals know that in the U.S. it is exceptionally dangerous to attempt a burglary or robbery at an occupied residence.

Criminals also know the same thing about attempting to steal an occupied car.

Criminals almost always choose to rob victims they expect to be unarmed rather than people who are likely to be armed.

But unfortunately, although we can see the inferences clearly, we cannot quantify all the crimes that don’t happen because of the fear that the intended victim will fight back with a gun. We can’t count things that didn’t happen. But if we could, I think it would completely change the conversation.