Guns: how much longer will it take ....

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I fail to see why my statement needs any further clarification,
especially since the first 5 pages I go in to further detail around this point.

But here goes. I'll try to format it in the universal language of mathematics.

The HUMAN COST of the 2nd Amendment = X
The benefits of the 2nd Amendment = Y
Y > X

The HUMAN COST of Driving an Automobile = X
The benefits of Driving an Automobile = Y
Y > X

The HUMAN COST of allowing people to drink alcohol = X
The benefits of allowing people to drink = Y
Y > X

If I did a cost benefit analysis of the 2nd amendment,
the benefits outweigh the costs. THAT is what my statement means.
And it is no more shocking a statement than to if we're talking
about drinking or talking about automobiles (hell, it's even less
shocking since the human costs are so much less).

THAT IS BEAUTIFULLY, BEAUTIFULLY, SET FORTH,
WITH ARTISTIC, n GRAMATICAL RESPLENDENCE.
Thank u.

David

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

gungasnake wrote:

I'll say it again, part of the 2'nd amendment is about food in bad economic times (like we're about to see with Bork Oinkbama in charge...) Six months from now the idea of having a deer and two Canada geese to eat (that three-barreled Krieghoff gun) could easily sound pretty good even to liberals.

I don't disagree with this one bit, and that's the primary reason I
support the ownership of long rifles and shotguns by all Americans.

Cycloptichorn

Very interesting... why do you omit hand guns?

2 Replies

@H2O MAN,

There is a law in Missouri that states that concealed weapons must be less than 5 feet long

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

gungasnake wrote:

I'll say it again, part of the 2'nd amendment is about food in bad economic times (like we're about to see with Bork Oinkbama in charge...) Six months from now the idea of having a deer and two Canada geese to eat (that three-barreled Krieghoff gun) could easily sound pretty good even to liberals.

I don't disagree with this one bit, and that's the primary reason I
support the ownership of long rifles and shotguns by all Americans.

Cycloptichorn

Very interesting... why do you omit hand guns?

For the most part, they are coward's weapons, used to ambush from a position of stealth. They are not for civil defense or hunting, which I consider to be the primary purpose of owning weapons. The vast majority of armed crimes use handguns due to their concealability and most gun accidents in homes are with handguns.

Handguns are difficult to aim... I don't see a lot of purpose in them, personally.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

For the most part, they are coward's weapons, used to ambush from a position of stealth.

Sniper Pistolero?

0 Replies

@H2O MAN,

You only argument seems to be to call us leftists. You are wrong.
You are very bad in mathematics too.
Germany had a pupulation of arond 60 000 000
Germany had a Jewish population of around 600 000
Now if half of the Germans were on Hitler´s side means around 30 million Germans had to be killed.
The Jewish population counted babies, small children, old people, blind, sick, mentally handicapped, so say every able man had to shoot for say 6 others.
That would mean every able male Jew had to shoot about 300 Germans.
I think the Germans would have stopped that faster than you can pull a trigger.

2 Replies

I would frankly go along with the disarming of the citizens if the anti-gun crowd could show me how my turning in my weapons is going to removed weapons from the drug and street gangs or any other criminal elements. As it stand now such a program would be just a safety program for the criminal elements making sure that no citizen would have the means of resisting a home robber or a rapist.

Now what benefits is going to be gain in turn by disarming the citizens and turning them into defendless prey?

The cry about safety problems concerning children and guns in the home is not proven out by a short trip to the CDC website that show that the bathtub and once more material in the kitchen are far more of a risk to children then handguns by a factor of ten or so.

And I am not all that worry about my government disarming it citizens so it can then turn evil. IN needing to fight an evil government most of the arms to do that fighting will come from that very government. See where the Middle Western bank robbing gangs of the 30s got a hold of such things as BARs and hand grenades for example.

My shotgun or my 1911 model-A Colt or SW 357 is not something that would be of great aid in fighting a military force.

1 Reply

@CalamityJane,

CalamityJane wrote:

On the contrary, people like you have given me all the more reason to
be a proponent for gun control.

You and your kind are a danger to society at large.

That allegation is statistically in error.

In 1987, a law went into effect in the State of Florida
whereby gun control was rejected
(meaning discriminatory licensure of the right to effective self-defense was ended),
such that anyone who applied for a license to carry a concealed gun
MUST have his application granted by the police,
unless he is a certified lunatic, after a judicial hearning or he
had a bad history of criminal violence. The next year crime dropped.

Since then 36 states have rejected discriminatory licensure
of the right to defend your life, in favor of CCW in which police
have no choice but to grant licensure to carry concealed guns
except to certified lunatics or to criminals
and crime has dropped in each jurisdiction the year after it did that.
It became too dangerous for criminals.

Quad est demonstratum: it is GOOD for society at large
for libertarians to fight against gun control.

HOWEVER, even if such were not the case, and if there were MORE crime
without gun control, every citizen logically shoud prepare for his own individual defense,
REGARDLESS of the effects of society as a whole.

I encourage every citizen to do the BEST
that he possibly can for his OWN individual joy, beauty and contentment
and let the public be damned, as William Henry Vanderbilt put it so eloquently.

David

0 Replies

@BillRM,

bill wrote :

Quote:

Re: hamburger (Post 3618238)
Well my mother is still driving and have a perfect driving record all her long life.

Perhaps when I am ready for a nursing home but short of that great of a decline I can not see myself lossing safety habits that had been drill into my nerve system for many decades.

There are one hell of a lot of objects that surround us in everyday life that can be harmful by the way.

What to bet that far more children are harm or kill by swimming pools or households chemicals then by household guns?

I had not check but I off hand would bet that anyone who care to check the figures will find that is true.

bill :
should we consider the onset of dementia (aka alzheimer's) - which most sufferers are not even aware of - as a disease we should pay no attention to when it comes to driving a car or handling a gun ?

most drivers do have a near pefect driving record ... until the final accident .

it was probably the other driver's problem anyhow if he didn't know that the other guy was suffering from the onset of alzheimer's and that his "motor skills" weren't up to par .
hbg

USA TODAY :
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-03-24-alzheimers_N.htm

Quote:

Every 70 seconds, someone in the USA develops Alzheimer's. The disease slowly erodes the brain and eventually the body and can drag out for years, placing financial burdens on families and the medical system, the report says.

MAYO CLINIC

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alzheimers/HO00046

Quote:

Alzheimer's: When to stop driving
When it's time to stop driving, your loved one with Alzheimer's may resist. Instead of arguing, provide other ways of getting around and maintaining routines.
By Mayo Clinic staff

Driving is a powerful symbol of competence and independence " besides being a routine part of adult life. But the focused concentration and quick reaction time needed for safe driving tend to decline as you get older. Alzheimer's disease accelerates this process dramatically.

More than memory problems
Alzheimer's robs people of their short-term memory, so they get lost easily, sometimes even in familiar territory. Losing your way, however, doesn't necessarily make you a hazard on the road. A decline in visuospatial skills, which help drivers judge distances and predict upcoming traffic problems, plays a large role in making people with Alzheimer's unsafe drivers.

Drivers with Alzheimer's may also have trouble prioritizing visual cues. An irrelevant sight, such as a dog jumping behind a fence, may distract them, so they fail to notice important cues, such as brake lights or traffic signs.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

The cry about safety problems concerning children and guns in the home is not proven out by a short trip to the CDC website that show that the bathtub and once more material in the kitchen are far more of a risk to children then handguns by a factor of ten or so.

Picture the libs outlawing bathtubs and bathing......

0 Replies

@saab,

saab, you seem to be projecting your feelings here... get a hold of your liberal self!

1 Reply

@saab,

saab wrote:

You only argument seems to be to call us leftists. You are wrong.
You are very bad in mathematics too.
Germany had a pupulation of arond 60 000 000
Germany had a Jewish population of around 600 000
Now if half of the Germans were on Hitler´s side means around 30 million Germans had to be killed.
The Jewish population counted babies, small children, old people, blind, sick, mentally handicapped, so say every able man had to shoot for say 6 others.
That would mean every able male Jew had to shoot about 300 Germans.
I think the Germans would have stopped that faster than you can pull a trigger.

Mr. Saab:
Your reasoning is defective,
in that whereas u discounted the Jewish forces for blind, old, "mentally handicapped" etc.,
u made no effort to do so for the Germans.

It shoud be balanced,
unless u claim that the Germans had no old, blind, etc.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

saab, you seem to be projecting your feelings here...
get a hold of your liberal self!

Leftists r GOOD at doing that.
I don t believe that thay can restrain themselves.

2 Replies

@hamburger,

Sorry but such problems do not tend to run in my family line.

My one grandmother was 96 when she pass away and on her death bed her mind was still very sharp. More then likely sharper then your or mine is now. And this is base onmy talking to her hours before her death.

My mother now turning 88 is still sharp living alone and she more then able to take care of her own affairs. her legs are giving her trouble but not her mind.

None of the males in my family tree live as long as the females however none of them had any decrease in thier intellect either in their last years to my own knowledge going back four generations.

Now as this silliness of people mind going and that is a reason to take weapons away from everyone is that your silly position or that we just should assume that people minds will surely go as they age as a matter of course?

It should need to be proven in a court that someone is no longer of sound mind no matter what their age happen to be before any rights including the right to own guns in taken away from them.

Somehow I had not been reading a great deal about old people going on killing sprees or harming others in great numbers.

0 Replies

@hamburger,

Oh by the way what to bet that for every story about an older driver causing an accident due to conditions cause by old age I could cheerfully give you a few hundreds of accidents cause by the bad judgment of teenage drivers?

And then add a few hundred more of young to middle age drivers who cause accidents because they was misusing drugs or alcohol?

Drivers with conditions cause by old age that cause them problems with driving should be address but not by assuming that all aging driver are in that boat just as not all teenage drivers have poor judgment or all middle age drivers have problem with drugs or alcohol.

I been in the passenger seat when my mother have been driving and had not taken note that because of her age she had become a bad driver in any way or in any manner. She does not happen to own a firearm but she know how to used them and in fact is not a bad shot with my 45 as a matter of fact and I would have no problem with her owning a firearm if she would wish to do so.

If that should change I and her family doctors will take care of the situation.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

saab, you seem to be projecting your feelings here...
get a hold of your liberal self!

Leftists r GOOD at doing that.
I don t believe that they can restrain themselves.

Liberals are quick to cast judgment on subjects/objects they know little if anything about.
It's an emotional reaction that's usually based on an irrational fear of the unknown.

Pictures of guns scare the **** out of most liberals... Shocked

http://www.athenswater.com/images/M14-DC-AKM-1.jpg

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

saab, you seem to be projecting your feelings here...
get a hold of your liberal self!

Leftists r GOOD at doing that.
I don t believe that they can restrain themselves.

Liberals are quick to cast judgment on subjects/objects they know little if anything about.
It's an emotional reaction that's usually based on an irrational fear of the unknown.

Pictures of guns scare the **** out of most liberals...

What is it?
How many rounds?

Caliber ?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

What is it?
How many rounds?

Caliber ?

7.62x39 Norinco Type 56S AKM (Chinese made semi-auto AK47 type).
30 rounds as pictured above, but 75 & 100 round drums are available.

100 round drum pictured below.

http://www.athenswater.com/images/t56shtf-03-14-2009a.jpg

It's accurate and hard hitting out to approximately 300 yards.
This rifle was imported prior to the 1994 Crime Bill and less than 80 rounds have been fired.
It's 100% legal, rare, quite valuable and very collectible.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Thank you David.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

No I did not have to balance at all.
You suggested that Jews should have killed Nazi Germans. Anything according to your logic. As you could not tell who was a Nazi and who was not the killing would have been rather undiscriminating. Probably killing also None Nazis.

3 Replies

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know