Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
John Stossel :: Townhall.com Columnist
Guns Save Lives
by John Stossel
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
What would you rather watch?

It's all too predictable. A day after a gunman killed six people and wounded 18 others at Northern Illinois University, The New York Times criticized the U.S. Interior Department for preparing to rethink its ban on guns in national parks.

The editorial board wants "the 51 senators who like the thought of guns in the parks -- and everywhere else, it seems -- to realize that the innocence of Americans is better protected by carefully controlling guns than it is by arming everyone to the teeth."

As usual, the Times editors seem unaware of how silly their argument is. To them, the choice is between "carefully controlling guns" and "arming everyone to the teeth." But no one favors "arming everyone to the teeth" (whatever that means). Instead, gun advocates favor freedom, choice and self-responsibility. If someone wishes to be prepared to defend himself, he should be free to do so. No one has the right to deprive others of the means of effective self-defense, like a handgun.

As for the first option, "carefully controlling guns," how many shootings at schools or malls will it take before we understand that people who intend to kill are not deterred by gun laws? Last I checked, murder is against the law everywhere. No one intent on murder will be stopped by the prospect of committing a lesser crime like illegal possession of a firearm. The intellectuals and politicians who make pious declarations about controlling guns should explain how their gunless utopia is to be realized.

While they search for -- excuse me -- their magic bullet, innocent people are dying defenseless.

That's because laws that make it difficult or impossible to carry a concealed handgun do deter one group of people: law-abiding citizens who might have used a gun to stop crime. Gun laws are laws against self-defense.

Criminals have the initiative. They choose the time, place and manner of their crimes, and they tend to make choices that maximize their own, not their victims', success. So criminals don't attack people they know are armed, and anyone thinking of committing mass murder is likely to be attracted to a gun-free zone, such as schools and malls.

Government may promise to protect us from criminals, but it cannot deliver on that promise. This was neatly summed up in book title a few years ago: "Dial 911 and Die." If you are the target of a crime, only one other person besides the criminal is sure to be on the scene: you. There is no good substitute for self-responsibility.

How, then, does it make sense to create mandatory gun-free zones, which in reality are free-crime zones?

The usual suspects keep calling for more gun control laws. But this idea that gun control is crime control is just a myth. The National Academy of Sciences reviewed dozens of studies and could not find a single gun regulation that clearly led to reduced violent crime or murder. When Washington, D.C., passed its tough handgun ban years ago, gun violence rose.

The press ignores the fact that often guns save lives.

It's what happened in 2002 at the Appalachian School of Law. Hearing shots, two students went to their cars, got their guns and restrained the shooter until police arrested him.

Likewise, law professor Glen Reynolds writes, "Pearl, Miss., school shooter Luke Woodham was stopped when the school's vice principal took a .45 from his truck and ran to the scene. In (last) February's Utah mall shooting, it was an off-duty police officer who happened to be on the scene and carrying a gun".

It's impossible to know exactly how often guns stop criminals. Would-be victims don't usually report crimes that don't happen. But people use guns in self-defense every day. The Cato Institute's Tom Palmer says just showing his gun to muggers once saved his life.

"It equalizes unequals," Palmer told "20/20". "If someone gets into your house, which would you rather have, a handgun or a telephone? You can call the police if you want, and they'll get there, and they'll take a picture of your dead body. But they can't get there in time to save your life. The first line of defense is you."

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Stossel blogs at http://blogs.abcnews.com/johnstossel/ is an award-winning news correspondent and author of Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel--Why Everything You Know is Wrong.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read John Stossel's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Laws
Lets see:
1) We outlawed people coming to this country illegally. How well has that worked?
2) We outlawed cocaine. How well has that worked?
3) We outlawed alcohol (at one point). How well has that worked?
4) We outlawed (you name it). How well has that worked?

These gun free zones make no sense. Do you think the murderers, rapist, and outlaws really pay attention to these zones? When any of the first three are successful then we should go ahead with the gun free zone. Until that time the only law that we should pass is to outlaw gun free zones.

"The United States has by far
the highest rate of gun deaths - murders, suicides and accidents - among the world's 36 richest nations, a government study found."

"The study, done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is the first comprehensive international look at gun related deaths. The U.S. rate for gun deaths is 14.24 per 100,000 people. Japan had the lowest rate at .05 per 100,000. Japan, where very few people own guns, averages 124 gun-related attacks a year, and less than 1% end in death. Police often raid the homes of those suspected of having weapons."

"The study found that gun-related deaths were five to six times higher in America than in Europe or Australia and New Zealand and 95 times higher than in Asia."

The function of the police
is to catch criminals. It is not to stand watch over each and every one of us, an impossible task. For some reason this absolutely escapes the anti-gun crowd.

I've seen the bumper stickers that read "This truck insured by Smith & Wesson".

I've yet to see a "Gun-Free Zone" in anyone's living room window, however.

But I keep hoping...

Will
Statistics, more statistics, and dam*ed lies.

Murder: usually done with illegal weapons in the first place. Gang rivalries and drug dealings come to mind...how 'bout we outlaw baseball bats while we're at it since they too can be used as a lethal weapon?

Accidents: people assuming the 2 yr-old won't find the gun, or wouldn't know what to do with it if found. We have always owned guns, kept them locked up, husband taught the boys how to handle them properly. Why should we surrender ours just because somebody else was irresponsible with his?

Suicide: A gun is only one way among many. Carbon monoxide in a closed garage comes to mind; a friend of mine lost her brother to suicide in just that way.

AliveInHim
Maybe all you evangelicals will be able to pack some heat in Heaven. After all, eternity is a VERY long time & there are bound to be a few bad apples in the bunch up there, especially after a million years or so of singing HIS praises....

This IS really TIRED!!
How long does this debate have togo on. The people who want to outlaw guns are afraid. They're terrified of actually having the means of self-defense at their disposal. They've been inculcated with the notion that guns-kill-people.
They have a morbid fascination/fear of a gun, much like any person with with any other phobia. Guns are nothing more than tools. A hammer, saw, computer. . .etc. It's not enough of an argument to say we should outlaw baseball bats, or autos, or electrical outlets, or swimming pools. . .etc.
How about we mandate gun safety classes in school. Mandatory training for every child beginning at age eight, and, as being a component to successful high school graduation, demonstrating marksmanship and handling procedures successfully. Let more who wish further training take the necessary courses and acquire concealed carry permits in every state, city and locality nationwide. There's such an absolute dearth of common sense behind the gun-control crowds screecings. Have they really been so neutered to be willing victims of fate? Of course the answer is that they have if they're of a liberal mind-set. That ideology has as its' foundation the firmly held belief that every and anyone is a victim of something. If they actually took pro-active measures, such as concealed carry, that would severely negate their fundamental belief structure in the we are all victims land of liberalism.

Gun Zones
How many crimes would be committed in a known "gun zone"? I would feel more comfortable walking around a mall that had signs saying "concealed carry weapons welcome in this facility" than in the "gun-free zones" currently in place now.

Mass murderers may not be in their right mind, but they sure seem to know where to go so they won't encounter anyone with a gun. I doubt anyone will be bothering that church in Colorado anytime soon where a concealed weapon saved many, many lives.

Anti-Gun People are Communists

The anti-gun crowd is free to leave the country to another one where they agree with the gun laws.

Living in a free society does not give anti-gun Communists the right to change laws to fit “their” fears while taking away the rights given to the citizens by our founding fathers.

annie get your guns
None of America's school massacres were perpetrated by criminals, that is, people already convicted of felonious violent crimes, so apparently Stossel is working with the "one is born evil" philosophy, therefore every baby is guilty until proven, uhhh, guilty

so better that everybody is armed so that nobody gets shot.

Better yet, we could just shoot the baby from the start; well, at least babies born to families that make less than 50 grand a year right . . .

You know, that good old would you kill Hitler’s mother conundrum! Hitler, poor people

same thing.

By all means, have an armed thug in every classroom, or at least let our hormone-driven children pack heat at school; leastways they will not fight over last weeks broken heart, bang bang problem solved.

Ahhh, the glory of instant gratification, me-me-me capitalism, and weapon-making profits don’t hurt either; why worry about consequences when the payoff is the bottom line!

Why make peace, when guns just make war

Praise Jesus

Founding Fathers
The reason our Founding Fathers made the right to keep and bear arms a constitutional ammendment had nothing to do with hunting or defense against common criminals. It was a means of holding the state in check.

Never forget the last act of tyranny is to disarm the citizenry. Ask the Cubans, the Russians, or the Chinese.

Culture v Guns
The fact that the US has the highest rate of gun related crime is undeniable, but I believe that blaming it on the amount of guns in the hands of law abiding people is a red herring.

Take away the guns, and criminals will use knives, baseball bats, 2X4s, etc. There is a real problem in American society spawning this criminal element. What it is, I don't know. It could be the general turning away from faith, the consumer/status symbol oriented society, the number of single person house holds lacking the stability of a father and mother, or something else I haven't thought of.

I do know that guns must remain in the hands of the law abiding citizens, that they remain able to protect themselves, their loved ones, and their property from those who would do them harm.

The Col. Jeff Cooper said it best
"The media insist that crime is the major concern of the American public today. In this connection they generally push the point that a disarmed society would be a crime-free society. They will not accept the truth that if you take all the guns off the street you still will have a crime problem, whereas if you take the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem" - Col. Jeff Cooper

What are you smoking empyrius?
Just when you think you've read every stupid thing on the internet you could possibly read, along comes,

"None of America's school massacres were perpetuated by criminals..."

Brilliant! What do YOU call someone who shoots innocent students in cold blood, a law-abiding citizen? That quote sounds like a headline you would read on "The Onion."

"Expert: School shootings not perpetuated by criminals."

I like the leap from Stossel's argument that everyone should have the right to protect themselves to everyone is born evil. How do you come up with this stuff?

I mean, why bother even talking to a leftie, all you get is hysterics in response? But it's like "little girl" hysterics, like when my 7 year old tells me since I won't let her stay up past bed time I must not love her. You know, childish hysterics from a 7 year old, not OK but expected. Childish hysterics from an "adult," well, just pathetic.

Crusader95
That is why "people already convicted of felonious violent crimes"

is so important to that statement.

pax vobiscum

Gun Free Zones
I used to be a teacher in NYC and thought it safe until 9-11. Everthing has changed. Gun free zones are simply target rich environments in which the prey can't return fire. Gun stores and Police precints are never sttacked. Coincindence? I think not. The Gun grabbers simply think they know better but are often professionally protected by armed personel. Sorry I think my life is just as valuable as theirs is. It is to me and my family, well maybe my wife not so much. We have every right to choose to arm ourselves and get training at our own expense. Sorry they don't know better, no matter how much money, power or gravitas they have.

Gun-free zones or fatal crimes?
Gun-free zones are a wise decision Congress should take. Many believe that people who decide to kill will not be discouraged or stopped by gun laws. I believe that by banning firearms, crimes will not stop; however, rates could dramatically decrease. There is a Mexican saying that starts: “the occasion makes the thief”, if firearms would be available to everyone, circumstances are more likely to be present that will lead people to commit crimes, for example, 54% of the situations which led to homicide in 1967, the police noted that the offender or the victim or both had been drinking prior to the homicidal attack. By legalizing the use of firearms, domestic fights can be turned into fatal crimes. Therefore, it is important to consider gun-free zones as a priority in the Congress.

Will's statistics
Will cherry-picks "gun deaths." Why not overall murder or violence rates? And why not include the murder of disarmed European citizens by European governments? Add those deaths and the European murder rate dwarfs anything we've ever seen in the U.S.

After Canada passed draconian anti-gun laws, the number of suicides using guns dropped precipitously. The overall number of suicides was unchanged however - there was 100% substitution. People simply found other ways to kill themselves.

Switzerland and Israel have far higher gun ownership rates than the U.S., and far lower murder and crime rates. Mexico and Russia have draconian gun laws, and much higher violence and crime rates. The murder rate in Japan (with its rabid anti-gun policy) is twice the murder rate of Japanese-Americans in the U.S. (where guns are common). The murder rates in Hawaii, Washington, D.C. and Great Britain all predictably exploded after anti-gun laws were passed.

Want to spot a liberal?
Hand him a gun (only after YOU have checked magazine and chamber to ensure that it's unloaded) and watch. A gunowner will open the action, LOOK in the chamber and remove the magazine (or open the cylinder). The liberal will reflexively pull the trigger.

-Ray
NRA Life

Weapons
Somehow, the proposal that one should not efficiently protect one's self and those he/she loves has the odor of immorality.

Michael and Will
Will, please read and assimulate Michael's statistics, which make your points about Japan's low firearm death rate irrelevant. I add the fact that in 1927, England had virtually no restrictions on purchase of a firearm. The firearm death rate was virtually nil. the existing prohibitive laws were passed one by one in hopes of reducing crime. No positive effect has ever been seen, but the socialists keep trying. Please inform me, Will, of any instance where a restrictive gun law has reduced gun crime. If you can do so, i will modify my usual statement that no law restricting gun ownership has ever shown to have a positive effect, to ALMOST no such law..etc. In the meantime, consider that all the stupid predictions about the effects of installing the mis-named assault rifle ban, and then its expiration, and all the doomsaying about the proliferation of right to carry laws has turned out to be garbage in direct conflict with the facts.

Guns are a hunk of metal...
...and metal cannot be good or evil,only individual human beings can be those things.If guns are inherently evil,then I want to see all cops banned from carrying guns,either on the job or at home.Then we would see how many police chiefs would testify in front of congress about outlawing guns.

Cars and trucks (also metal) kill people,but societys' answer to that is more training,not banning cars and trucks (which I agree with).I have taught marksmanship to high school students in the 1960's in the midwest while a member of the ROTC,and every high school had it's own rifle team and indoor ranges,and would compete with other high schools just as the football and basketball teams do.

I have been out of that business for many years now and I doubt that this is still the practice.At least I haven't heard of any high school rifle teams in years.Like a drivers license,safety must be taught.

Will
Did you know 97% of statistics are made up on the spot? I believe you suffer from a gullibility that allows you to believe the CDC has nothing but a desire to present empirical evidence of the horrors of guns in our society. I suppose it never occurred to you to see what kinds of gun violence they were including in their study? For example, "children" included anyone up to the age of 21, and also included gang-bangers shooting each other over drugs (also illegal by the way.) They also purposely excluded the millions of times a year that crime prevention by guns are reported. I have a friend that works at the CDC. It's amazing how they twist the logic to conform to the thinking of the politicians running the place. This, by the way, is so the worker bees can keep their jobs. The wrath of the left leaning politicial bosses running the CDC is a dangerous thing to someone trying to feed and clothe their families.

If gun control worked...
...Island nations like England and Australia would have no gun violence period. But that isn't the case.

We have more violence because we have a culture that promotes immorality. Not "allows" mind, but "promotes." The modern crime rate is a direct result of the attitudes of the Hippie culture. We teach people not only that it's OK to do whatever makes you happy, but that the traditional look at moral behavior, developed over the course of 2,000 years or more, should be thrown out the window and regarded as "archaic," "obselete," and "Puritanical." People who stress good behavior in society are called intolerant, backward, bigotted, and "out-of-step."

Crime rates skyrocketed in the 60s and 70s when the Left started putting their idiotic ideas on criminal justice into practice (shorter sentences, focusing on "reform" (which never works,) easy parole, country-club prisons (a prisoner's right to TV, weight rooms, and other recreational activities), crying racism when the prison population matches the demographics of criminals rather than the demographics of society, whining about overcrowded prisons while not funding the building of new ones, and hampering investigations at every turn.

Japan's crime rate is low not because they have draconian gun laws but because they have draconian search and siezure laws and their justice system is far more efficient in finding, charging, and convicting criminals.

Don't be so hard (pun intended) on Will
Like amny of his persuasion, he is Gun-O-Phobic.

Liberals want to blame guns because
it is infinitely more convenient to blame an object than to focus on the perpetrator's accountability. It is emotionally more satisfying as well.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE that gun violence is related to legal firearm ownership. In fact the statistics prove overwhelmingly that the reverse is true. Gun-related violence is considerably lower among legal firearm owners and violent crime drops in states with conceal-carry laws.

Why have we never seen a Columbine or NIU incident at an inner city school? Why are police stations, gun shows and military bases never attacked by gunmen? The answer is so simple that even a liberal should comprehend; it is called the principle of 'Return Fire'.

I will gladly register all my weapons (or turn them in) on the very same day that it is proven that legal gun owners are responsible for 3% of the gun violence.

Until then criminals beware.

Recently
In Columbus, OH, our state capital (which has the second-toughest anti-gun laws in the state, after Cleveland's prohibition) a woman was the victim of a home invasion at 0200. She first hid in a closet while two men ransacked her house, and when she had the chance, she went out a back window into the night.

The local (defiantly anti-gun) newspaper's "lifestyle" columnist praised for "seeking safety instead of confrontation", which the columnist stated proves that nobody needs a gun for self-defense- all you need to do is run away.

The columnist apparently never considered the possibility that in "running away", the victim might have run right into the arms of a lookout or other accomplice of the invaders, who was posted outside for the purpose of preventing her escape. (Home invaders do so to force homeowners to reveal where their valuables are. Plus, rape is increasingly a common feature of the crime.)

This is an example of the triumph of ideology over reality. Something all too common on the "progressive" side.

PS to Will;

It is true that Japan has a much lower murder rate than the U.S. However, in 2005, the last year for which data is available, the suicide rate in both countries was almost identical, at roughly 1.24 per 100,000 population. I would suggest that cultural factors regarding guilt, shame, and aggression have more to do with the rates of wrongful death in a nation than the availability or otherwise of an instrument thereof.


cheers

eon

Nam 65-66
Just to punctuate your point about cars and trucks, in 2004, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), who track this sort of thing, we find the following statistics on cause of death:

Motor Vehicle Accidents killed 43,432 people.

Intentionally inflicted injuries of ANY kind (Homicide and Suicide by any mechanism) killed 49,796 people.

Injuries inflicted by firearms for any reason (Homicide, Suicide, Accidents, etc.) killed 29,569 people, of whom 11,624 were definitely murdered and 16,750 were suicidal.

More people died as an "unspecified" participant in a motor vehicle accident (14,040) than were victims of murder-by-firearm.

Will
I'll make you a deal. YOU wear a sign that asys UNARMED and I'll wear a sign that says ARMED.

Let's see who gets robbed first.

As for your stats, that was a nice cherry pick but no dice.

As far as MURDERS by firearms, we're number 8. We also have a higher population that the top 7!

The CDC counts things like accidents and suicides in with their stats.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-cr ime-murders-firearms-per-capita

Do let me know if you'd like to take that challenge.

eon
Fat lot of good that idea had for Sean Taylor. He didn't get the chance to run. He was shot on sight.

USMC(ret)
Will is Hoplophobic.

That is, afraid of guns.

I myself, would love to see a natural disaster hit anti-gun libs who could then experience the stupidity of their anti-gun stance, as looters, criminals, rapists, and other assorted human flotsam savage them.

"Nothing says "HELL NO to a thug!" like a 12ga pump being racked at zero dark thirty."

To Top Gun
True Comminists as well as Facists, etal HAVE to first disarm the populace, to prevent resistance.

Planting the seeds of fear, envy, lust etc are the means whereby these individuals gain power by offering their political platform as the solution (security blanket and warm fuzzy. However, be careful here when you state....."while taking away the rights given to the citizens by our founding fathers."

Our founding fathers did NOT give us citizens rights. What they did in the bill of rights was recognize the truisms about live, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and stated EMPHATICALLY that these "self evident" human right granted "by the creator" are NOT something that can be legislated out of existance...ergo any PIECE OF LEGISLATION that attempts to do that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ergo NOT a law we even need to abide by in the first place because it has NO foundation.

The second ammendment literally guarantees that "we the people" the foundation of this government have the means necessary to take this nation back from those who would enslave us or oppress us. And, it is that very class of people "potential oppressors" who want to do away with those rights by imposing ILLEGAL pieces of legislation upon us and enforcing it AT THE POINT of their guns.


Guns
Go read the Jonah Goldberg column...you are way ahead of hte game!!

justme
Former Congressman Dornan called the 2nd Amendment a license to hunt politicians. I agree.

Sic Semper Tyrannus

Nee
Thanks. You know, it really IS a heavy burden to be right all of the time!

guns
"People who want to kill are not deterred by gun laws"

How can Stossel make that statement. He doesn't know how many more shootings we would have if we had less strict gun laws. As it is, shootings are more likely to happen in states with loose gun laws, and when gun crimes happen in places with stricter laws, the guns normally originated in places with laxer policies.

It's why New York recently sued Georgia gun stores. A disproportionate number of guns used in crimes in New York were bought--legally--in Georgia.

ALSO, why do all you conservatives so conveniently ignore the mass shooting in Missouri, which killed six people even though there were three trained police officers with guns were only feet away from the killer? Plenty of shootings happen when there are people with guns around.

Conservatives just want to believe that they can somehow make themselves big and strong with a gun and then nothing with ever happen to them. Sorry. Fact is, if you're carrying a gun, you're more likely to be the first the person takes down. Regardless, if your out happy with your family, you are NOT going to be as ready to shoot someone as a maniac whose been plotting his rampage for some time. You will pull your gun, likely hesitate, and die.

Fortunately for you, the chances of being killed in such a shooting are about the same as being struck by lightening, so you can quit wetting your bed about it.

The Most Litigous Society on Earth
Lets set aside the argument of gun control vs gun rights for a moment and look at the reality of living in the US; the most litigous society on the planet. The SECOND you pull a weapon, even on a criminal, suddenly YOU become a target (legally). YOU will have to explain why you pulled the gun, why you fired, why you aimed where you did, why you fired instead of running away, why this, why that, blah blah blah. Gun owners have even been jailed for using their guns when they easily could have escaped the crime scene. The police and municipalities have tons of money to spend on lawyers to protect them (personally) from law suits for excessive force, plus they have a brotherhood. A personal gun owner has NONE of that. If you shoot someone, you had better be prepared to lose EVERYTHING you own in the resulting law suits that will bankrupt you, destroy you, and maybe even land you in jail. THAT is the reality of owning a gun. Not the 2nd ammendment. Frankly, I believe, it's too much of a risk to own a gun for that very reason.

Also
Did you know that death by gunshot is the number one cause of death during the year after a gun purchase?

And that people with guns in the house are close to ten times more likely to commit suicide?

That the majority of gun deaths are not from homicide or self-defense, but from accidents and suicide?

That as a woman, the person most likely to shoot you is your husband or boyfriend (90% of female victims of homicide are killed by an intimate)?

I would never be so foolish as to have a firearm in my house.

Banning would not work


If every fire arm were confiscated tomorrow, it would only be a short time before they were back.

Anti-gunners, educate yourselves.

Google "zip guns" and "weapons of the Viet Cong"

If a Vietnamese peasant could make a firearm using a piece of steel and a file, would could make with his drill press and carbide bits in his garage?

Work on stopping the criminal, not his means.

Guns don't stop crime
'Would-be victims don't usually report crimes that don't happen.'

What utter BS. If you have to pull a gun to stop a crime, who in the world is not going to call the police? Something happened that caused you to use the gun, and that something is almost always going to be reported to the police.

People trot that canard out to hide the fact that guns aren't used to stop crime very often, but it's simply false. Who on this board has ever stopped a crime by pulling a gun and then went their merry way, let the guy go and didn't call the police? If this happens so much, I am sure it must have happened to many of the gun nuts around here...

nick
'Gun stores and Police precints are never sttacked.'

Not true. Guns stores are frequently burglarized because guns are so valuable to sell. Talk to owners of gun stores, they have frequent stick-ups and even more frequent after-hours thefts.

Animalgirl

You critize Stossel's statement "People who want to kill are not deterred by gun laws"
th prove it.

NY has laws against possession. The USA has the Control Act of 1968.

Add in, many of the mass killings were in "gun Free Zones". Why wasn't that "law" obeyed.


animalgirl
Your post is almost too stupid to reply to.

"It's why New York recently sued Georgia gun stores. A disproportionate number of guns used in crimes in New York were bought--legally--in Georgia."

Actually, Mayor Bloomberg was guilty of running illegal sting operations as well as strawman buys in Georgia as well as Virginia and Penn. Of course, our broken CJ system did nothing to him. He LOST those suits BTW and is being COUNTERSUED by gun dealers.

If criminals got a fast trial and a fast execution, I'd be willing to bet that crime would plummet.

Two points of FACT not whiny emotions.

1. Kennesaw Georgia passed a law that EVERY HOUSEHOLD in the city limits WILL have a firearm in the house. Crime plummets.

2. Virginia passes a "shall-issue" law for legal citizens to carry concealed in 1995. Crimes plummets 45% across Virginia as the thugs go back to MD and DC.

Facts and research always win over hand-wringing and hanky-twisting.

The best cartoon ...
...I have seen on this issue is the one that states:"All those in favor of gun control,please raise your hands."It shows Adolph Hitler with his raised right hand in the NAZI salute!

So Animalgal,
let's go wild and consider everything you say is true; what is your solution to gun violence?
-What do you suppose will happen to the 100million (?) firearms in this county?
-Can we rely upon criminals to obey the law and turn them in?
-If they are all (miraculously) confiscated can we expect that no more will be smuggled into the country?
-Would the smugglers be law-abiding citizens?
-Would suicides stop?
-Would murders stop?
-What would we ban next; knives, bats, autos, flamables, etc?

While we are all waiting for your answer we will remain armed and vigilant.

How romantic,
That more citizen would be packing a gun would help reduce crime and is a college setting at that.

Please... we are losing our minds and maybe our souls to idiocy.

animalgirl

Learn the diff between burlary and robbery

here is what happens:
http://legallyarmed.com/gun_store_shooting.htm


Canada vs USA
The US has 3x the guns per-capita than Canada, which has very strict gun laws. Ironically, the US has 3x the gun deaths per-capita than Canada. Unfortunately Canada is an annoying thorn in the gun lobby's side, because they are a near-identical society, with one major difference; strict gun laws. If you want to know what the US would be like with stricter gun laws, you need only look north. That's what it would be like.

Compare their largest cities with our:
Toronto is the same size as Atlanta (5 million people)

Toronto's gun death rate: 2 per 100K people
Atlanta's gun death rate: 26 per 100K people

animalgirl
"He doesn't know how many more shootings we would have if we had less strict gun laws."

Then why do we rarely hear about shootings in the streets of concealed-carry cities? These things always seem to occur in so-called gun-free areas, like malls, schools, churches, and stand-alone stores that have anti-firearm policies.

I think I'll take my chances and go for the loosening (or repeal) of gun laws. The odds for survival look a lot better to me.

animalgirl
Please regale us with the FACTS of how many gun dealers are robbed.

I WORKED in a gun dealer and only someone INSANE would try it. Between us and our patrons, as well as the video link to the PD and the maglocks on the exits, they would not have gotten far.

As a typical liberal, your only stance is hysteria and mewling. Go buy some carbon credits, the Goreacle needs to pay his A/C bill.

animalgirl
meant to add, that DC gun ban (in place since 1974) sure has worked well for them. Just like Chicago's gun ban, Philly's gun ban, Trenton's gun ban..

See where I'm going here?

Alien-putz
I think you just proved the point:

100 gun deaths in a country with 'very strict gun laws'. How could that happen if guns are so heavily regulated? What is wrong with those insensitive, law-abiding Canadians?

Bad guys will always...
have their guns. Tighter gun laws do not apply to anyone who does not respect the law just as locked doors don't prevent robberies.

The old saying, "Locks are only good for keeping honest people out", is true. People intent on robbing you of your possessions or of your life won't be prevented by locks on your house or by laws against guns.

Guns in the hands of people who are themselves law abiding citizens are not the problem. Gun bans will never disarm the bad guys and will only put the good guys at a greater disadvantage.

Commons sense is very uncommon these days. Inanimate objects, whether guns or even rocks, don't become deadly weapons without a human catalyst and humans without a conscience cannot be deterred by gun bans.

Animal girl
You should try and get your facts straight...there is an outside chance your thinking might change as well.
I live in Vermont- the only state in the union where it is legal to conceal a weapon WITHOUT a permit, and we have a very low crime rate here. No one in their right mind would try a home invasion here...the simple fact is that our lack of gun laws deter crime.
Bloomberg tried the same crap- blaming Vermont for guns that show up in NY- as a means to export NY gun laws to VT. Nice try, Mike.
Anyone who can add 2 and 2 can see gun laws DON'T WORK!!!

WARNING! Fact alert!!!!!!
alien_sporez writes: Wednesday, February, 27, 2008 8:16 AM
Canada vs USA
The US has 3x the guns per-capita than Canada, which has very strict gun laws. Ironically, the US has 3x the gun deaths per-capita than Canada.

=================================================
Estimated population for July 2007
Canada 33,390,141
America 301,139,947

Canada is only 11% of the population but has 33% of the gun deaths. So if we were to properly extrapolate....they have nearly 300% of the American gun deaths when brought to the same population levels/proportions.

Thank you - No, I'll not take Canadas' gun laws.

Michael
You're wrong (like most gun nuts).

The American murder rate of .043 per 1000 is higher than any Western European country except for Moldova. It's more than twice as high as France (.017) and three times higher than the UK (.017) or Italy (.013).

Quit making up facts, it doesn't help anything. It helps to source things:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murd ers-per-capita#source

dial 911....
....and wait for the remainder of your life.

Alien-Putz & Acceptreality
"Compare their largest cities with our:
Toronto is the same size as Atlanta (5 million people)

Toronto's gun death rate: 2 per 100K people
Atlanta's gun death rate: 26 per 100K people"

The European-American crime rate is just as low in America as it is in Canada, as is the black crime rate and the Asian crime rate.

USMC
The United States RATE of gun death per capita is three times higher than Canada's. That's PER CAPITA, so the number already adjusts for population differences

animalgirl
"The American murder rate of .043 per 1000 is higher than any Western European country except for Moldova. It's more than twice as high as France (.017) and three times higher than the UK (.017) or Italy (.013)."

You're attempting to compare apples to oranges. Americans of Wester European descent have lower crime rates then Western Europeans.

alien_sporez
Yeah, but you're #5 in rapes worldwide. Guess than gun ban IS working, for the criminals.

What's it like having a sh*tty military and being a subject of the crown like. That's GOTTA suck. But then again, y'all are used to life on bended knee.

GunnyG
I used to be a reporter in Kennesaw. The guns law had ZERO affect on crime in Kennesaw. Hate to burst your fantasy.

Also, judges have allowed the southern gun dealers to proceed with defamation suits against Bloomberg. There has been no finding that his actions were illegal. And there hasn't been a trial, they just didn't dismiss the suits; also, Bloomberg has not yet lost his suits against the gun dealers (which also were not dismissed).

Again, sorry to tamper with your little alternate reality.

GunnyG
Actually, that little lie about Kennesaw basically got out because the mayor (who supported the ban vociferously) basically just made up statistics. It's been shown that the statistics distributed by the mayor did not at all match the official crime statistics.

In fact, studies have shown that places with higher rates of guns have generally higher rates of burglary.

Source: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/01/kennesaw_gun_ordin ance_yet_aga.php

I throw the BS flag on Animalgirl
Tell ya what, sweetie -
Put a sign on your front lawn that says "This house is a firearm free zone" and have your neighbors sign an affadavit that it remains up. Unless others WITH FIREARMS defend your property, you are going to have a visit from the local vermin. Show us a picture - put your actions where your mouth is.

You, like other so-called "anti-gunners" only live in peace because hard people are willing to do violence on your behalf.

(oh, please spare me the whining "I don't ask them to do that...." Yes you do. Every time you say "the police are the only ones who should have guns".)

Thought is required.

Moonkeeper
"You're attempting to compare apples to oranges. Americans of Wester European descent have lower crime rates then Western Europeans."

Cite your source.

It is worth noting...
...that the vast majority of gun violence in this country is in poor, black, inner-city neighborhoods in jurisdictions where guns are illegal.

animalgirl
two things.

One, Doctor John Lott (PhD) has proven over and over that guns DO save lives. About 2.5 million a year. FACT!

Two, maybe you should take yourself down to the local PD and listen to a few 911 calls where the person got to scream into the phone as they were murdered.

You want LESS crime, demand a death penalty for capital crimes, like it used to be.

BTW, you MAY want to research the rise in crime as liberalism took hold in the 60's.

Hint: it doesn't make liberals look too good.

Packrat
I said there was weak evidence for Stossel's statement. You said 'prove it.'

I don't have to prove it. I pointed out there is not significant evidence for that statement, since he can have no idea how many people may have been deterred.

Stossel's statement is like saying that if anyone dies in a car accident while wearing a seatbelt, it's proof that seatbelts don't save lives. If you're only counting one side, you can draw no conclusion.

Animalgal,
Still waiting for your solution and answers to my earlier questions.

.
This one adjusts for background. Note that with similar background comes similar crime rates.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/oracetab.htm

This one shows DC, you know the area that abolished the 2nd amendment back in the 70s, as having the highest crime rate:
http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html

Will -- "The United States by far ...
This post is a textbook definition of a non-sequitur.

John Lott
Is a fraud, who has never produced his detailed data, always saying that it was 'lost.' He used ridiculous methods (he called people up and said 'have you ever used a gun to prevent a crime, not matching up any of these random telephone surveys with real statistics).

John Lott is a joke, sorry to tell you. Many researches have pointed out huge flaws in his work (besides his saying that his dog ate his data...)

animalgirl
Really?

This site says different.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55 288

facts are ALWAYS better than emotion.

This one...
http://66.165.94.98/stories/maskdiv0501.pdf

A study done by a LIBERAL group shows that even the crime rate of Americans of Western European descent that is reported has to be cut in half, effectively destroying Canada's stats.

Gunny,
Facts are indeed stubborn, much to the chagrin of emotional, illogical liberals.

I guess I need to spell it out

One instance is all that's nneded to disprove an absolute statement

From a police report

About the same time, one of the store employees noticed that some handguns seemed to be missing from the display case. While still looking for the handguns, the same employee noticed a tag hanging down from the back of Mr. H###'s shirt. The tag is what Guns & Leather uses to put the information on guns they sell.

The employee fearing that Mr. Hall had a loaded gun on him, drew his sidearm and told Mr. Hall to remove the gun from his pants. A grasp. The glass display counter was shoved back towards the employee and some of the guns in Mr. Hall's pants fell out as did some of the guns in the display case

Shots Fired & Vehicle Searched At The Scene
When Mr. Hall broke loose from the un-armed employee he was struggling with, he moved his hand towards his waistband. The store employee who had drew his sidearm, fearing that Mr. Hall was about to draw a gun to shoot the un-armed employee, fired one round into the side of Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall again reached for his waistband as the un-armed employee screamed "drop the gun". The armed employee again fearing that Mr. Hall was about to draw a gun and shoot the un-armed employee, fired a second shot into Mr. Hall. Mr. Hall fell to the floor face down and that was where Officer Eric Putman saw him when he arrived on the scene. Mr. Hall was transported by Life Flight to Vanderbilt Hospital where he died from his injuries.


Beckie
" Did you know 97% of statistics are made up on the spot? "

Excellent.

I seriously doubt that Will, who as a liberal has an irony deficiency by definition, actually got it.

Good one.

animalgirl
I have a gun in my house.

My husband has NO idea where I keep it.

When the dog hears a noise in the middle of the night, I get the gun and follow the dog around the house, checking, while hubby snoozes. As well he might, since the dog has been wrong every time so far (probably). And so far my gun has never been pointed at any human being.

And I feel safer.

I am pleased that you choose to NOT own a gun. That IS what you've chosen, isn't it?

Proud to say that
at the last gun show I attended (16 Feb 2008) my 10 year old daughter asked for a rifle. We found a .22 bolt action (single shot) rifle and she will begin marksmanship and safe weapons handling as soon as the weather turns reasonable and I let it out of the gun safe.

BTW...I have an indoor range at the High School I teach at. I teach weapons safety and marksmanship there as well.

I suppose there are those reading this and cringing in fear right now. I say to you, you make me sad.

Liberty v Nanny
Some of us (most of us) are willing to accept the elevated rates of gun violence in order to enjoy significant other liberties.

Some (a few of us) would readily relinquish those liberties in order to feel "safe".

Animalgirl

Re:I said there was weak evidence for Stossel's statement. You said 'prove it.'

I don't have to prove it. ....I pointed out there is lives. If you're only counting one side, you can draw no conclusion."
Response :

Have your heard of circumstantial evidence?.
Google " Ronald Clark O'Bryan "
He was convicted and executed based on circumstantial evidence.

You toss your opinions and factiods, but you are reacting, not considering.

While you are googling, try "zip guns"

animalgirl
Let me know how you feel after hearing a woman screaming into the phone (911 tapes) as she is being raped and sliced to pieces.

But please, continue to exercise YOUR RIGHT to NOT own a weapon. In fact, I wish MORE liberals DID NOT own guns so that criminals could prey on them easier.

Animalgirl

Simply curious:

What is your stance on the death penalty?
Do you think it deters capitol crimes?

Why or why not?

Thanks.

animalbroad
Just keep on avoiding reality. Keep your head in the clouds of liberal pipe dreams of the "perfect" world where all is peace and love.
Most of the rest of us will live in reality where we take responsibility for ourselves and our protection (at least untill the police arrive). You are just blissfully ignorant. Hoping to avoid danger by denying it will ever happen. You do have insurance on your car or your home don't you? Well girlygirl the rest of us have our own insurance. You can live without it if you wish. But, you WILL NEVER take away my insurance.

USMC (Ret)
Bought my 11 y.o. a 1941 Marlin .22lr at a gun show from an old Devil Dog and it was in primo condition. Bolt action and deadly accurate. I had him and four other boys his age, with their parent's permission, schooling them in firearms, and firearm's safety one weekend.


I don't criticize choice
If an animalgirl chooses to not own a firearm, it's ok by me. That would be her choice. But if I choose to own one, that is MY choice. If the government bans them, it ceases to be my choice.

The only time I ever criticized a non-ownership choice was when a neighbor post a sign on his yard "This is a gun free zone." I asked him why he didn't just put a key hook on the sign and directions to where the jewelry was kept.

It does not follow that gun ownership leads to gun violence. The very ambiguity of whether someone is carrying is often enough to deter crime.

Anyone remember the rash of attacks on tourists involving guns in Florida? Florida had a liberal concealed carry law. The criminals were attacking people driving rental cars that were prominently marked as rentals. Why? Because they were pretty sure those driving rentals were out of state tourists who would HAVE NO GUN. Locals were safe because of the ambiguity of whether they had a gun or not. Car Rental agencies stopped marking their cars and the legislature rescinded the requirement that they have special license plates.

It would be like posting an NRA sticker in my car window and on the window of the front door. I wouldn't even need to own a gun; they bad guys would just go to my neighbor's house and his gun free zone.

anmal girl/ T
Animal Girl "In fact, studies have shown that places with higher rates of guns have generally higher rates of burglary"

T-"Put a sign on your front lawn that says "This house is a firearm free zone" and have your neighbors sign an affadavit that it remains up. Unless others WITH FIREARMS defend your property, you are going to have a visit from the local vermin."
---------------------

Las year I went through concealed permit training. It was interesting to discover that gun ownership actually can make you a target if discovered by area "vermin". Guns are a hot market and are easily gotten rid of on the street for meth or drugs etc... They also said that more and more police officers homes are targets as these guys on meth know they have guns in the house. They stake it out and go in when they are gone. So remaining annonymous with gun ownership is always a wise step.

Speaking of home invasion, many states are now adopting tougher laws regarding the definition of home invasion. Some require you to be AT HOME for it to be defined home invasion. Not so anymore in many states. Being home is no longer a requirement for it to be defined as such and the penalty for home invasion is much stiffer than a simple B&E.

tq
As an NRA Life Member, I have a nice sticker plainly visible at my front door. Also, one on my car and the missus.


Firearm Safety


It is a necessity to teach firearm safety to all kids no matter what your view on firearms.

Scouts and NRA have a similar view on kid's finding a weapon.

1 Don't touch.
2. Get an adult.

Whether it be guns or seat belts, many people are killed by their ignorance.

End of lesson.

As Per Usual Liberals Ignore Facts
Your article points out some of the obvious, that crimanals target those easily a victim and go to gun free zones to commit mass murder.

These facts are lost on the mindless liberals who rely on fantasy and ideology to argue with. No matter how many studies point out these obvious facts they still go the other way because it is their root cause to disarm and then control the population with liberal fascism.

What is needed is a national law that is enforced( ha ha) that says basically what we all know. The right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed.... ANYWHERE!!!

Not NY, Not Massachusetts, Not California, Not Michigan, NOT ANYWHERE! Period. Not breaking down your gun for one state or city, no mandatory one year in prison for having a handgun in NY city or Boston, no seperating the clip and ammunition in another... no no no! A national law is already on the books. It's call the Second Amendment in the Bill Of Rights of the United States Constitution.

As a matter of fact, the elected officials who wrote and passed these laws should be in prison, yes a Federal Penitentiary for violating the rights of 300,000,000 + citizens of the United States of America.

Can you imagine that. A class action lawsuit with plantiff that number as large as the population of the U.S.

The Bills of Attainer that these States in question write and pass are illegal and should have action taken against them.

It's Not About Guns
The issue at hand is not guns or our right to carry them. Guns are just tools. The issue is our inherent human right to self defense. That right preceded the U.S. Constitution, every State Constitution, the discovery of the New World, the civilization of the Old World, and even the foundation of the original society among whatever version of our ancestors you profess to believe in.

Even if our government could magically remove the gun from every would-be criminal's hand at the moment that they conceived of a crime to commit, that right to self defense would remain. It is a right which cannot be taken from us. As it is, our government is not run by wizards, and it cannot disarm every criminal before they attack. And because of that, a gun remains, and will remain, one of the best personal defense tools one can own. A baseball bat, a knife, a sword, or even a chain saw are all good weapons, but they are all of little value against a man with a gun who means to kill. Until you can guarantee, with no caveats, that you have disarmed every would-be attacker, you have no right to ask me to disarm myself. And even when you can make that guarantee, you have no right to require me to do so.

GunnyG
Yep. Got the boy his gun (a Rossi with changable .22 and .410 barrel configuration) when he was 11 years. The girls just expressed an interest earlier. He's not a bad shot...I but I think that the girls will out do him.

Also got my wife a .25 handgun. Perfect for the pocket/pocketbook. She is taking heavy chemo and is not capable of "fighting off" anything. Just want her to have a deterrent.

NEConservative
Interesting post and I agree.

The SCOTUS is going to rule on the highly UNConstitutional DC gun ban in March and the libturd's in DC don't have a leg to stand on. It was enacted in 1974 and crime and murder has gone up ever since.

One that illegal ban is gone, the others will go as well.

If we had a speedy trial system followed by a SERIOUS punishment system, i.e, the death penalty, crime overall would drop.

Don't expect an answer from Animalgal
she spews liberal (non)factoids then leaves. So typical of libs when confronted with logic.

USMC(ret)
Sorry to hear that about the missus.

Think about a S&W Airweight .38spl with Hogue grips for her vice the .25cal. Easier to load/reload and manipulate than a semi-auto.

GUN CONTROL FACTS ARE...
...that there is a lot of money to be made for those who are in favor of gun control. From the beginnings as a cottage industry of a few hoplophobes, to a now raging, 501(3)(c) full-blown Wash. D.C. lobby group generating millions of dollars in donations and salaries, gun control is part of the GDP (and the DNC).

The same is true of the homeless lobby and the illegal alien lobby. There are just too many well paying jobs in these organizations funded by philanthropic foundations (with agendas) at stake to allow society to deal sensibly with these issues.

animalgirl
I'm a senior citizen with a disabled wife.
If the situation arises, please tell me who is going to protect us and keep us safe from intruders and other miscreants?

acceptreality
She's just one personal crime away from being a gun-owning conservative.

Too bad so many deluded libs have to suffer before they see the light. But then again, it's their penance for being lib in the FIRST PLACE.

46,000 die in operating room...
annually.

Does that mean we should outlaw surgery?

The following is from this site: http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

"Because the police have no general duty to protect individuals, judicial remedies are not available for their failure to protect. In other words, if someone is injured because they expected but did not receive police protection, they cannot recover damages by suing (except in very special cases, explained below). Despite a long history of such failed attempts, however, many, people persist in believing the police are obligated to protect them, attempt to recover when no protection was forthcoming, and are emotionally demoralized when the recovery fails. Legal annals abound with such cases.

Warren v. District of Columbia is one of the leading cases of this type...."

Please read the full article. It merely points out that the police are not there to protect you. They are there to investigate crome after their deterrence doesn't work.

GunnyG
Thanks.

This DC ban is a good example of the facts liberal fascist ignore. Crime rose 200%. Hard to miss that one. Not to mention the 300% scores in the rise of crime in other countries.

But also it is not enough to reverse a few law in the myriad of bad gun laws.
As I stated in the last post. Action needs to be taken against lawmakers who violate these rights as enumerated in the Constitution or it will be lost cause as they will have no reason to stop without severe punishment.

Cabelas Deer Camp
Cabela's had a full page ad for their Deer Camp. All the necessary equipment, including guns - one would think they know what they are talking about....
http://thefiresidepost.com/2007/10/25/cabelas-deer-camp-no- assault-rifles/

Bucko
For some reason, the ACLU, the Tides Foundation, and George Soreholes Open Society Institute spring to mind.

will
Can your ignorance show anymore? Can your posts be anymore stupid?

Do you have an ounce of common sense?

TH Commentator
Good post.

"He who desires peace should prepare for war."
Vegetius

Mr Stossel
I am one of those people that a gun saved their life.

Thanks to the media it never occurs to criminals that law abiding citizens will actually defend themselves given the opportunity. More and more people don't own guns because the media has taught them to fear guns and they don't want it in the house.

Might as well fear the coffee maker too.

GunnyG
That is the first time I have seen that...George Soreholes. lmao ! In greek soros means - heap or pile. I'm thinking pile of crap.

FACTS gun-grabbers hate:
Trivia question: According to the International Crime Victims Survey, what is the most violent modern civilized nation?

Answer: England.

Another question: According to the International Crime Victims Survey, what is the SECOND most violent nation?

Answer: Australia.

The United States doesn't even rank in the top 10.

Oh, please note that both England and Australia have banned guns. Also note that after banning guns, both England and Australia saw their crime rates SKYROCKET. According to Englands Inspectorate of Constabulary, violent crime in the City of London more than DOUBLED following their gun ban.

But not to worry. Just ban guns here in the USA and everything will be a-ok...for the criminals, anyhow.

The only kind of people...
--
...who want to violate the rights of peaceful, law-abiding private citizens to keep and bear arms for their own self-defense are those who intend to do things to their peaceable, law-abiding neighbors that would give these inoffensive, honest folk good reason to kill them.


Doesn't that tell you all you'll ever need to know about the "gun control" types?





-------
"Violent crime is a solved problem - all they have to do is repeal the laws that keep those intelligent, capable, and responsible men and women from arming themselves, and violent crime evaporates like dry ice on a hot summer day."

-- L. Neil Smith


RE: John Lott
"John Lott
Is a fraud, who has never produced his detailed data, always saying that it was 'lost.'..."

Repeat a lie often enough and stupid people might believe it.

The ACTUAL fact of the matter is he has REPEATEDLY produced his crime statistics data to anyone who wanted it. The only people who have EVER disputed his claims were those who essentially said that 'if you ignore any and all data that supports his claim, then his data doesn't support his claim'.

The so-called "lost" data had to do with a simple survey he allegedly took pertaining to gun ownership, NOT his actual statistical crime data used to conclude that certain anti-gun laws are counter productive.

These RIDICULOUS lies told about Dr. Lott are simply SOP for the fascist left wingers. If they can't prove someone wrong, just lie, lie, lie, and lie some more. Heck, look what they did, and CONTINUE to do to Senater Joe McCarthy!

Sign on my Property .
When entering my Property you will see a large red sign by my long winding drive way coming up to my Big white shack on the hill while you past my well stocked bass pond on the right .Ain't nothing left on my property !
The sign reads .No guard dogs needed !
He would enters without a invitation , thinking of robbing my home , raping my wife and daughters who is a socialist or Liberal or stopping by to act real stupid .Should pay up his Life insurance policy and say goodbye to his family and friends .
We supply all ammo and all ways of getting shot and blown up on my property and Pine Boxes at a $5000.00 a box .
Damn I love Capitalism ! (grin)
Former C ReCon Marine
Sam

love the leftist "logic"
Here is how a leftist thinks:

1. We see someone using a device(called X) to commit a crime.
2. We deduce that restricting X will cause said people to stop committing said crime.
3. We require that anything which is currently a right must be PROVEN to be necessary for the populace to keep that right.

Applying their arguments to a different right should make the idiocy of their position obvious.

People using free speech to defraud consumers.
We should restrict free speech to stop this.
If people cannot prove that free speech helps the general populace they are not entitled to it.

Only with public education can this crap be actually considered by intelligent people.

animalbroad
Looks like animalbroad slithered off to the Kos where she can be around likeminded fools.