Gun Presence

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by 6Gunner, Apr 30, 2019.

  1. 6Gunner

    6Gunner Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,631
    Likes Received:
    4,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Valid observations from one of the most highly regarded instructors today. Yes, yes, the gun haters will dismiss his view out of hand, but such does not change the truth of the words.

    Gun Presence
    by John Farnam | 30 Apr 2019 | 2019 | 0 comments

    30 Apr 19

    “Both liberal government and liberal media sources are increasingly unwilling to report facts, when the truth is incongruous with their Marxist agenda.”

    Ferris

    The truth: GUN PRESENCE stops “Gun Violence!”

    They’ve painfully discovered in the UK, now that private gun-ownership there is virtually extinct, yet violent crime
    persists, all despite solemn promises that violent crime would be completely eliminated via a ban on private ownership of guns!

    Guns, and now knives, are emphatically denigrated by leftist politicians who want to ban them all- and they have been almost completely successful in the UK.

    Curiously however, the violence-free utopia liberals interminably promised has yet to arrive!

    In fact, quite the opposite has happened. Violent crime in the UK not only persists, it’s growing exponentially worse!

    While there is still violent crime involving guns in the UK, “knife crime” has stolen the headlines!

    Now that guns are supposedly gone, it is knives (in all forms) that liberals want to ban from private ownership.

    These are the same liberals who have already banned guns.

    Grotesquely, their own taxpayer-funded, and heavily-armed (with guns and knives) bodyguards, are hypocritically exempted from sanctimonious gun bans imposed upon everyone else!

    How convenient!

    Given this sad history of ever-increasing violent crime in the UK, is there reason for anyone to believe that a “knife ban” will be any more effective in reducing violent crime than was their failed “gun ban?”

    Conversely over here, the refreshing reality of a “good-guy-with-a-gun” being armed, present, and ready to fight back at a southern CA synagogue last Saturday, almost certainly saved many innocent lives.

    Of course, the phrase, “good-guy-with-a-gun” is regularly mocked, derided, lampooned, and reviled by oh-so pious socialist/progressives and their media lackeys.

    Thank Heaven, last Saturday an off-watch US Border Patrol Agent, who happened to be at that very synagogue, didn’t listen to them!

    You shouldn’t either!

    The answer, the obvious answer and the only reasonable/effective answer, to violent crime (“gun violence” if you want to use that airheaded term) is:

    GUN PRESENCE

    Guns, in a high state of readiness and continuously, courageously born by competent Operators, will stop “gun violence” every time.

    Nothing else will!

    Guns routinely carried by Operators, even when they’re not actually fired, nor even brandished, always represent a powerful deterrent, in fact the sole effective deterrent, to violent criminals and their harmful agendas.

    From decades of bitter experience, Israelis know and understand this fundamental truth better than most, and have acted accordingly!

    Meanwhile, many vociferous Second -Amendment haters here will scream loudly on every liberal mainstream propaganda broadcast (masquerading as “news”) between now and Election Day in November of 2020.

    From behind their heavily-armed cadre of bodyguards, they’ll hypocritically insist that for you to own any kind of gun is “immoral.” Carrying a gun they’ll scream, is a “crime against humanity”

    Like the heroic Border Patrol Agent mentioned above, don’t listen to them!

    They’re talking to you the same way a spider talks to a fly!

    “Gun presence” will preserve your life and health, and that of your family, maybe other innocent bystanders.

    Be assured:

    Nothing else will!

    “We must fight vigorously any attempt to force us to rely solely upon a government for our personal safety, a government who can’t even balance its own checkbook.”

    J Kohler

    /John

    gun-presence

    Use of Violence.jpg
     
    Turtledude, Ddyad and Well Bonded like this.
  2. Galileo

    Galileo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    83
    This is stupid. The UK's gun violence rate is only a tiny fraction of the US's gun violence rate. Additionally, crimes committed with airguns, toy guns, and replica guns get counted as gun crime in the UK so it's hard to know if there has been an actual increase in gun violence by US standards.
     
  3. 10A

    10A Chief Deplorable Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,698
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There's one now!

     
  4. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not stupid at all, the reality is the UK banned guns and their violent crime rate now exceeds ours, all their banning did was make the unarmed weak, against the still armed criminals.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2019
    6Gunner likes this.
  5. 6Gunner

    6Gunner Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,631
    Likes Received:
    4,062
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep. His "this is stupid" is the petulant bleat of a sheep that's been spanked.
     
    Turtledude likes this.
  6. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,475
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The UK had 3.26 homicides per million with cutting instruments and they are calling it a national emergency.
    The US had 4.96 homicides per million with cutting instruments and we had 34 homicides per million with firearms and we can't get excited about it?
     
    Montegriffo likes this.
  7. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Totally false.
     
  8. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which was the case even when firearms were not restricted in the united kingdom. Therefore nothing actually changed.

    The same applies in the united states. If an imitation firearm is used in the commission of a crime, it is cataloged as a crime committed with a real firearm.
     
  9. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the united kingdom chose to implement a total prohibition on handguns after a single incident due to being afraid of the fact that the real world was an unkind, uncaring, violent place to live in. Rather than addressing the fact that individuals who qualify as evil are free in society, they chose to pretend that it is the fault of an inanimate object forcing the individual to commit their acts.
     
    Right is the way and Well Bonded like this.
  10. edna kawabata

    edna kawabata Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2018
    Messages:
    4,475
    Likes Received:
    1,422
    Trophy Points:
    113
    0.48 per million shooting-related murders in the UK.
    https://www.euronews.com/2018/05/05/trump-s-knife-crime-claim-how-do-the-us-and-uk-compare-
     
  11. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
  12. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference does such actually make? The united kingdom has never been known for having exceptionally high levels of firearm-related violence, even prior to its firearm-related restrictions being implemented. It was never recognized as a location plagued with heavy gang-related activity where crossing the street could get someone shot to death, or where it was necessary to avoid bullets in order to take the trash out to the curb.

    Nothing of significance or importance was achieved in the united kingdom by the implementation of its firearm-related restrictions. The only thing achieved was a false sense of security while choosing to ignore the true underlying problem.
     
  13. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And that is the common fault with all gun control laws, they address the symptom, not the problem.

    It's the equivalent of prescribing pain killers to cure cancer.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2019
    modernpaladin likes this.
  14. flogger

    flogger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    63
    UK gun deaths 2017 = 60
    US gun deaths 2017 = 39,779 .... and rising

    The only reason any developed society would tolerate this is because they like it that way :(
     
  15. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You leave out the fact the UK is on the path to having 40,000 knifings in 2019, they eliminated guns but still have the violence problem and that is what happens when short sighted people address the symptom and not the disease.
     
    SiNNiK, 6Gunner and Reality like this.
  16. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What ultimate, meaningful difference does such actually make? The united kingdom has never been known for having exceptionally high levels of firearm-related violence, even prior to its firearm-related restrictions being implemented. It was never recognized as a location plagued with heavy gang-related activity where crossing the street could get someone shot to death, or where it was necessary to avoid bullets in order to take the trash out to the curb.

    Nothing of significance or importance was achieved in the united kingdom by the implementation of its firearm-related restrictions. The only thing achieved was a false sense of security while choosing to ignore the true underlying problem.
     
  17. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There may be exceptions. Most armed criminals like school shooters and Islamic terrorists don't care about their own life. They mostly kill themselves in or after the attack. Therefore they don't fear people carrying firearms.
     
  18. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So why do they specifically seek out locations where there is good reason to believe the victims will be unarmed? Why do the mass shooters who are still alive, flee from the scene at the first sign of trouble, if they simply do not care about their lives?
     
  19. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None the less, the sooner they die, the less carnage they can inflict.

    Take the Pulse nightclub shooting, the gunman went from table to table and room to room shooting people as he found him, had he taken a lethal shot at the first table there would have been a lot less people killed.

    Had the coach at Parkland been armed, Cruz would have only killed 3 people not 17.
     
  20. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In Parkland Cruz had a jam he didn't know how to clear, left his gun in a stairway and walked out of the school to a McDonalds, a lot of these shooters are not suicidal, they just want to get even with whomever they perceive has hurt them.
     
  21. pitbull

    pitbull Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    6,149
    Likes Received:
    2,857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They don't. They prefer big crowds to maximize their bodycount.

    I assume that they want to change the scene to kill more people yet. Mass shooters usually believe that they won't survive. And many of them also don't want to live anymore.
    They see their criminal act as final point in their life.

    BTW: mass shooters choose firearms because they are easy to get. I think they would rather use explosives because explosives can kill more people in less time.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2019
  22. Jimmy79

    Jimmy79 Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2014
    Messages:
    9,366
    Likes Received:
    5,074
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gun deaths is a worthless number since more than half of those are suicide.
     
  23. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Silly Brits.
     
  24. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually that is untrue, most mass shooters as defined by the FBI live and go to trial, only a very small margin of them kill themselves.

    And where firearms are not easy to get the use vehicles, knives, explosives and gasoline bombs.

    And again with guns this all goes back to failing to address the problem and blaming the tool used, a guy takes a truck and kills a dozen or so people we don't hear the anti's calling for the banning of trucks, last I checked pressure cookers are not being banned and no one is calling for the banning of bottles, that can hold gasoline or rocket fuses that can turn those bottles into bombs.

    But use a gun and out of the woodwork come the anti's calling for the banning of guns, why don't they actually go after the root cause, simple they don't care about death, heck they use death as a platform to call for a ban of what they hate and fear, that being guns.
     
  25. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Big crowds that just so happen to coincide with locations that are known to prohibit the legal carrying of firearms by members of the public.

    With exceedingly few exceptions, every single mass shooting in the united states in recent history, has been committed in locations where the victims were disarmed by law. Schools, malls, concerts, movie theaters, etc. One would be hard pressed to find a location in the united states where a mass shooting has occurred that did not signal the people inside were unarmed.

    And pray tell what is the background on the part of yourself pertaining to matters of psychology, that allows for yourself to speak as a source of expertise on the inner workings of the minds of mass shooters in the united states?

    Motor vehicles kill far more individual than firearms, as demonstrated in the city of Nice in the nation of France. Even Stephen Paddock did not come close to that number of victims.
     

Share This Page