Gun Control: Where are Optometrists on National Issues?

Another case of why we need firearms in our homes

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26326800#26310592

This lady was able to protect herself and her posessions from an intruder because she had a loaded handgun in her home. Without her gun, she probably would not be here today? I bet Ted Nugent invites this lady out to his ranch for a little story time.
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26326800#26310592

This lady was able to protect herself and her posessions from an intruder because she had a loaded handgun in her home. Without her gun, she probably would not be here today? I bet Ted Nugent invites this lady out to his ranch for a little story time.

I think it was great that she was able to protect herself. I wonder though, how many home-stored guns accidentally kill some innocent person in the home versus an intruder.

I have a patient (who recently bounced a check to me ironically enough) that was shot nine times by her husband after she went downstairs to get a drink in the middle of the night and he "thought" she was a burglar.

I own a carry permit and carry. If they banned guns, I'd hand both in.
 
I think it was great that she was able to protect herself. I wonder though, how many home-stored guns accidentally kill some innocent person in the home versus an intruder.

I have a patient (who recently bounced a check to me ironically enough) that was shot nine times by her husband after she went downstairs to get a drink in the middle of the night and he "thought" she was a burglar.

I own a carry permit and carry. If they banned guns, I'd hand both in.

I'd hand mine in too, bullets first.... I know I know... what a whack-o, huh?

But, to your question, here is an interesting look at whether a gun is more likely to be used against your family or yourself, than against an actual intruder:

CLICK LINK

Introduction Some papers in the medical literature have written a homeowner's gun is more likely to kill its owner or family member than kill a criminal, and therefore "the advisability of keeping firearms in the home for protection must be questioned." The most notable (or notorious), and quoted in the previous sentence, is written by doctors Arthur Kellermann and Don Reay, and is titled, "Protection or peril? An analysis of firearms related deaths in the home." (New Engl J Med 1986. 314: 1557-60.)
The oft cited Kellermann paper found a homeowner's gun was 43 times more likely to kill a family member, friend, or acquaintence, than it was used to kill someone in self-defense. Kellermann stated, "for every case of self-protection homicide involving a firearm kept in the home, there were 1.3 accidental deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides, and 37 suicides involving firearms." Florida State University professor Gary Kleck appropriately terms these ratios "nonsensical." (Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control, pp. 177-179, 1997)
Although this study was published in 1986 its findings continue to be uncritically cited in medical journals, government publications, and non-technical periodicals such as health newsletters, general interest magazines, op-ed pieces, letters-to-the editor, etc.
Not only is Kellermann's methodology flawed, but using the same approach for violent deaths in the home not involving a firearm, the risk factor more than doubles from 43 to 1, to 99 to 1. Let's see why this 43 to 1 ratio is a meaningless indicator of gun ownership risk.
2clorbar.gif
Refutation First we need to understand how the ratio was derived.
Kellermann tabulated gunshot deaths occurring in King County, Washington, from 1978 to 1983. Table 1 below is taken from Kellermann's paper (Table 3 on p. 1559).

Table 1. Classification of 398 Gunshot Deaths involving a Firearm Kept in the Home Type of Death No. Unintentional deaths 12 Criminal homicide 41 Suicide 333 Unknown 3

Total 389 Self-protection homicide 9
As we see from Table 1, a ratio of 389 violent deaths to 9 justifiable homicides gives us the famous 43 to 1 ratio.
Let's apply the same methodology to non-gun deaths and non-gun self-protection homicides in the home, for King County, Washington.

Table 2. Estimation of Violent Deaths in the Home Not Involving a Firearm Type of Death No. Unintentional deaths 0 Criminal homicide1 50 Suicide2 347 Unknown 0

Total 397 Self-protection homicide3 4
This ratio of 397 non-gun violent deaths to 4 justifiable homicides reduces to 99 to 1.
So having applied Kellermann's methodology to non-firearm violent death, the risk factor more than doubles from 43 to 1, to 99 to 1.
Please note, the purpose of this exercise is not to show that using a gun in the home is better than not using one. This exercise does no such thing. It is merely to show how deeply flawed Kellermann's study really is. Further, a number of tremendously important factors are left unaccounted.
For example, another way of looking at it is, more martial artists are probably murdered by non-gun methods than they kill in self-defense. Would we conclude that it is best to avoid learning a martial art for self-defense based on such a "nonsense ratio?" Regardless of how the number crunching had turned-out between gun and non-gun violent deaths in the home, we should be able to see that Kellermann's approach contributes nothing towards establishing a general or personal risk factor for a gun in the home.
What is truly sad about the nonsense-ratio is how often it is cited and uncritically accepted.
To decide whether or not to own a gun for self-defense based solely on a "kill" ratio is folly. To estimate the risks and benefits of gun ownership many more factors need to be considered. An example is defensive gun use, which outnumbers homicides, suicides, and accidents, and is ignored in most of the medical research. (See How often are guns used in self-defense?)
For a different approach in critique of Kellermann's study see The 43: 1 Fallacy by Dave Kopel.
For Further Reading

GunCite's critique of Kellermann's "3:1" study. More generally, see GunCite's Gun Control Research.
A criticism of Kellermann's subsequent research, and the bias of the Center for Disease Control's firearm related research: Kates, Schaffer, and Waters, Public Health Pot Shots: How the CDC Succumbed to the Gun "Epidemic", Reason Magazine, April 1997.
Scroll down to part part XV:"Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home": Kates, Schafer, et. al, Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda?. Originally published as 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 (1994).
Letters to the New England Journal of Medicine regarding Kellerman's paper titled: "Guns and Homicide in the Home".
Kellermann responds.
Kleck, Gary, What Are the Risks and Benefits of Keeping a Gun in the Home?, JAMA, August 5, 1998.
A differing view from Kleck's: Peter Cummings; Thomas D. Koepsell, Does Owning a Firearm Increase or Decrease the Risk of Death?, JAMA, August 5, 1998.
Letter to the editor and a response from Kleck, JAMA, July 14, 1999.

Notes: [SIZE=-1]1. Non-gun criminal homicide calculation: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]According to Kellermann, firearms were involved in 45 percent of all homicides in King County.

41 firearm criminal homicides / .45 = 91 total criminal homicides.

Non-gun criminal homicides = 91 / (1 - .45) = 50 non-gun criminal homicides. [/SIZE]​
[SIZE=-1] 2. Non-gun suicide calculation: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]According to Kellermann, firearms were involved in 49 percent of all suicides in King County.

333 firearm suicides / .49 = 680 total suicides.

Non-gun suicides = 680 / (1 - .49) = 347 non-gun suicides. [/SIZE]​
[SIZE=-1] 3. Self-protection calculation: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]According to the 1997 FBI Uniform Crime Report (p. 24), from 1993 to 1997, non-gun justifiable homicides were 13% of all justifiable homicides. 30% was used instead of 13%.

9 firearm justifiable homicides / (1 - .3) = 13 total justifiable homicides.

13 total justifiable homicides - 9 firearm justifiable homicides = 4 non-gun justifiable homicides. [/SIZE]​
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26326800#26310592

This lady was able to protect herself and her posessions from an intruder because she had a loaded handgun in her home. Without her gun, she probably would not be here today? I bet Ted Nugent invites this lady out to his ranch for a little story time.

This is one of my favorite websites.... it chronicles the uses of firearms in self defense situations, primarily...

Civilian Self Defense Blog
 
This is one of my favorite websites.... it chronicles the uses of firearms in self defense situations, primarily...

Civilian Self Defense Blog

Can any of those stories actually be independently verified? I'm all for people carrying guns. I draw the line at heavy artillery. I also think that the issue has become such a political hot potato that there is a lot of dishonesty on both sides of the issue.
 
I have a patient (who recently bounced a check to me ironically enough) that was shot nine times by her husband after she went downstairs to get a drink in the middle of the night and he "thought" she was a burglar.

Now, that's funny! I hope he was charged, though. Bad precedent, otherwise. The "I thought she was a burglar" defense. Husbands would be emptying their clips on wives all over the country.:D
 
Can any of those stories actually be independently verified? I'm all for people carrying guns. I draw the line at heavy artillery. I also think that the issue has become such a political hot potato that there is a lot of dishonesty on both sides of the issue.

Pretty much all are linked to newspaper or tv station reports.
 
Politicians with courage where are you?

The issue of strong gun control legislation has nearly vanished from the public consciousness...until the next mass murders using a firearm.

The following is an editorial in the 12/23/08 edition of the New York Times that should revive conversation on both sides of this important issue...

"Price of Lax Gun Laws

Published: December 23, 2008

For years, the gun lobby has defeated new gun control laws partly by arguing that stronger laws do not deter crime. A study prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group headed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, should finally put that myth to rest.

The study analyzed trace data for guns used in connection with crimes during 2007. The data reveal a strong correlation between weak state gun laws and higher rates of in-state murders, police slayings and sales of guns used in crimes in other states.

Many states have enacted strong gun laws to supplement inadequate federal ones, including mandatory background checks on gun show sales. States requiring the same background checks at gun shows as those required for store purchases show an export rate for guns used in crimes that’s nearly half the national average. This argues for Congressional action to end the gun-show loophole nationally. States with weak gun laws produce different outcomes. More than half the guns recovered in out-of-state crimes last year were supplied by Georgia, Florida, Texas, Virginia and six other states where weak laws make it easy for gun traffickers and other criminals to obtain weapons.

Weak gun laws also put a state’s own citizens at risk. There were nearly 60 percent more gun murders in the 10 states where exports were highest than in the states with low export rates — and nearly three times as many fatal shootings of law enforcement officers.

The study by the mayors’ group isn’t the first to document the link between weak gun laws and gun violence or the “iron pipeline” by which guns flow from states with weak gun laws into states with strong ones. Still, the numbers are startling. They explain why the gun lobby resisted their release, and they provide a powerful retort to those who claim tougher gun laws don’t work."
 
"Guns don't kill people, people kill people." When will this finally sink in with gun control advocates. Right now I can go on the internet and find a recipe for an explosive and create a mass murder situation. Do I? NO If I am a sociopath, I do. A gun is a tool, just like a kitchen knife, which can be used for destruction, just like a kitchen knife. Does banning guns keep them out of the hands of criminals....no way. Perhaps when you are in a situation where a gun saves your life (I have been), you won't be so quick to ban them; a la Rosie's body guard can have one, but if you can't afford a body guard you deserve to be a victim of violent crime.
 
The issue of strong gun control legislation has nearly vanished from the public consciousness...until the next mass murders using a firearm.

The following is an editorial in the 12/23/08 edition of the New York Times that should revive conversation on both sides of this important issue...

"Price of Lax Gun Laws

Published: December 23, 2008

For years, the gun lobby has defeated new gun control laws partly by arguing that stronger laws do not deter crime. A study prepared by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a bipartisan group headed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York and Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston, should finally put that myth to rest.

The study analyzed trace data for guns used in connection with crimes during 2007. The data reveal a strong correlation between weak state gun laws and higher rates of in-state murders, police slayings and sales of guns used in crimes in other states.

Many states have enacted strong gun laws to supplement inadequate federal ones, including mandatory background checks on gun show sales. States requiring the same background checks at gun shows as those required for store purchases show an export rate for guns used in crimes that’s nearly half the national average. This argues for Congressional action to end the gun-show loophole nationally. States with weak gun laws produce different outcomes. More than half the guns recovered in out-of-state crimes last year were supplied by Georgia, Florida, Texas, Virginia and six other states where weak laws make it easy for gun traffickers and other criminals to obtain weapons.

Weak gun laws also put a state’s own citizens at risk. There were nearly 60 percent more gun murders in the 10 states where exports were highest than in the states with low export rates — and nearly three times as many fatal shootings of law enforcement officers.

The study by the mayors’ group isn’t the first to document the link between weak gun laws and gun violence or the “iron pipeline” by which guns flow from states with weak gun laws into states with strong ones. Still, the numbers are startling. They explain why the gun lobby resisted their release, and they provide a powerful retort to those who claim tougher gun laws don’t work."


Let's look at the statistics:

Top violent crime cities (per this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate)


  1. Detroit, MI
  2. Baltimore, MA
  3. St.Louis, MO
  4. Newark, NJ
  5. Washington, DC
  6. Oakland, CA
  7. Philadelphia, PA
  8. Atlanta, GA
  9. Buffalo, NY
  10. Cleveland, OH
Any trends there?

This is interesting too...
Ncsucr2.gif


And this, a graph of violent crime rates in the US:
800px-US_Violent_Crime_Rate.jpg


There were plenty of guns in the 60's...

Do we blame a pencil for misspelled words?

Do we blame my fork for making me fat?

Do we blame the car manufacturers or the car itself when a drunk driver kills someone?

Guns are not the problem. Society is the problem.

It always boils down to what you think the 2nd Amendment means, and what the founders intended it to mean. I find it curious how we survived for a couple hundred years or so without the cries for "Gun Control", and now because of the societal meltdown in our larger cities, mostly known for progressive thought, we are supposed to throw our rights out the window to appease the very people who are the biggest part of the problem.
 
My dad and brother would take their .22's to school(that's into the school building since they walked! -but not barefoot in the snow uphill both ways ) in the 50's up in Iowa and hunt rabbits after school. I often had a shotgun in a gun rack in my pickup in the school parking lot in the 70's. We or school officials never even thought twice about it. Maybe we need to wall off the metropolitan areas like Escape from New York. Let them fend for themselves since they can't live with others.
 
Let's look at the statistics:

Top violent crime cities (per this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate)


  1. Detroit, MI
  2. Baltimore, MA
  3. St.Louis, MO
  4. Newark, NJ
  5. Washington, DC
  6. Oakland, CA
  7. Philadelphia, PA
  8. Atlanta, GA
  9. Buffalo, NY
  10. Cleveland, OH
Any trends there?

This is interesting too...
Ncsucr2.gif


And this, a graph of violent crime rates in the US:
800px-US_Violent_Crime_Rate.jpg


There were plenty of guns in the 60's...

Do we blame a pencil for misspelled words?

Do we blame my fork for making me fat?

Do we blame the car manufacturers or the car itself when a drunk driver kills someone?

Guns are not the problem. Society is the problem.

It always boils down to what you think the 2nd Amendment means, and what the founders intended it to mean. I find it curious how we survived for a couple hundred years or so without the cries for "Gun Control", and now because of the societal meltdown in our larger cities, mostly known for progressive thought, we are supposed to throw our rights out the window to appease the very people who are the biggest part of the problem.


I bet all those cities voted overwhelmingly democratic. Paul's study is poor at best.
 
Don't be a Tool

"A gun is a tool....you deserve to be a victim of violent crime.

We and our children have been exposed to too much violent death. Every news program, every newspaper and every piece of expose journalism scream out bloody murder.

Do we need to be reminded that we are physically and emotionally fragile? That is the human condition. We hurt easily and die easily from disease, starvation, thirst and at the hand of each other. We have reasons to be afraid. We get it.

We also get it that powerful tools can control pain and prolong life. Nutrition, hydration and medicine are powerful tools – and so is a weapon.

We learn early that in defense or aggression, a weapon means control; “I can hurt or kill you, before you can hurt or kill me.” Or, “I have the power to hurt you, or kill you – if that pleases and rewards me.” The choice is up to the “Tool Holder.”

Second only to money, guns just happen to be the most romanticized tool of power in our time. Consider if you will the movies, rap songs, video games and music videos that romanticize guns as the ultimate symbol of power and control. Our kids and the kids of others have been taught, in song and on the screen, that cool/tough men, women and children bust-a-cap when they want things their way…..role models?

The “Tool” argument only goes so far. This “tool” in the wrong hands and in the wrong minds – kills more people than all of the screwdrivers, power drills, shop vacuums and paint rollers combined.

Maybe we’ve become desensitized, or it’s just plain violence that we view through rose-tinted glasses. But, if we are to own guns and truly honor the intent of our Second Amendment, then we need to stop romanticizing guns and talk reality to our children and grandchildren.

Regardless of what they see in the media, teach the kids that guns are not an acceptable path to notoriety. Guns are not fashion accessories, not side-line income generators, not hormone suppliments, not organ enhancers, not political statements or substitutes for intellect.
 
Gun don't kill people etc... really?

Would this madman have done as much damage without an automatic handgun?

As reported in the 12/26/08 edition of the New York Times...

"Man in a Santa Suit Kills at Least 8 at a Party

By SOLOMON MOORE and ANAHAD O’CONNOR

Published: December 25, 2008

COVINA, Calif. — A man in a Santa Claus outfit opened fire on a Christmas Eve gathering of his in-laws in this Los Angeles suburb and then methodically set their house ablaze, killing at least eight people and injuring several others, the authorities said Thursday.

The attack occurred during a Christmas Eve gathering.

Shortly after the attack, the gunman, identified as Bruce Jeffrey Pardo, 45, killed himself with a single shot to the head at the home of his brother in the Sylmar section of Los Angeles, the police said.

In addition to the eight people whose bodies were found in the ashes of the house here, none of whom were identified, at least one other person was thought to be missing, and perhaps as many as three. Among the total of dead or missing were the couple who owned the home and their daughter, the estranged wife of the gunman, the police said.

Investigators continued to search the charred structure Thursday, and coroners said dental records would be needed to identify some of the remains.

The frenzied shooting occurred just before midnight Wednesday at the two-story house, set on a cul-de-sac in this middle-class town about 22 miles east of Los Angeles. Lt. Pat Buchanan of the Covina Police Department said Mr. Pardo, armed with one or two handguns and fire accelerant, had gone to the house looking for his former wife, Sylvia, with whom he was finalizing a contentious divorce after only a year of marriage.

People who escaped the house got out by smashing through glass and jumping. One woman broke an ankle when she leapt from a second-floor window.

The house was owned by James and Alicia Ortega, an elderly couple who were retired from their spray-painting business and who often invited their large extended family over for parties, particularly around Christmas.

Relatives said about 25 people, among them many children, were inside the home celebrating when Mr. Pardo knocked on the door around 11:30 p.m. He had apparently disguised himself as a hired entertainer for the children in order to gain access.

When a guest opened the door, Lieutenant Buchanan said, Mr. Pardo stepped inside the house, drew a semiautomatic handgun and immediately started shooting, beginning with an 8-year-old girl who was hit in the face but who survived, as did an older girl who was shot in the back.

As Mr. Pardo unleashed a barrage of gunfire in the living room, relatives smashed through windows, hid behind furniture or bounded upstairs. Then he sprayed the room with accelerant, using a device made of two pressurized tanks, one of which held pressurized gas. Within seconds, the house was ablaze.

Joshua Chavez of Seattle was visiting his mother’s house, which sits behind the Ortegas’, when he heard a loud explosion. “Then I saw black smoke and this large flame,” he said.

Mr. Chavez ran out to the backyard and heard three girls, including the one who had been shot in the back, trying to climb over his mother’s wall. “There’s some guy shooting in there,” he said one of the girls told him.

“About 20 seconds after that,” he continued, “the house was totally on fire. One girl said that a guy dressed as Santa started shooting.”

Another neighbor, Jeannie Goltz, 51, saw three more partygoers fleeing the burning home. One of them, a young woman, had escaped upstairs from the living room but broke her ankle when she jumped out a second-story window.

SWAT teams arrived shortly after Ms. Goltz had shepherded these three survivors into another neighbor’s house, but by that time Mr. Pardo was on his way back to Los Angeles.

Police officers said they could not recall so horrific a crime in Covina, and neighbors said they would never have imagined anything so grisly on their quiet block.

The Ortegas had lived in the house for more than two decades and were known for their family spirit, their generosity and their dog, which frequently escaped their yard.

“I would generally play Santa for the family every year,” said Pat Bower, a neighbor of the Ortegas for 25 years. “The family was always together. Brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles were always in the house. They were a gigantic family. We all envied them, actually.”

Robert and Gloria Magcalas lived next door to the Ortegas for 11 years but were celebrating Christmas Eve with relatives in Los Angeles. Their own home was barely spared the flames.

“They were a big, loving family,” Mrs. Magcalas said. “We usually exchanged gifts with them today. They gave us tamales and cookies every Christmas.”

The police said they had found two handguns in the ruins, and an additional two pistols at the scene of Mr. Pardo’s apparent suicide. Officials said they would continue to search the crime scene Friday, seeking information about the identities of the dead."


Solomon Moore reported from Covina, and Anahad O’Connor from New York.
 
He would have done much more damage with an automobile, a pound or two of explosives of his choice. Probably would have done about the same with an axe or sword.

How many did the firearm kill vs. the fire?

Bottom line is that crazy people will ALWAYS be around, and they will do CRAZY things.

I can guarantee you, if this would have gone down in my house, he wouldn't have had to shoot himself. That isn't an indictment of the victims here, don't read me wrong, but what if one of them had saved him the trouble of shooting himself in the head?

Do you guys blame your phoropter for giving out poor prescriptions? :rolleyes:
 
We and our children have been exposed to too much violent death. Every news program, every newspaper and every piece of expose journalism scream out bloody murder.

Do we need to be reminded that we are physically and emotionally fragile? That is the human condition. We hurt easily and die easily from disease, starvation, thirst and at the hand of each other. We have reasons to be afraid. We get it.

We also get it that powerful tools can control pain and prolong life. Nutrition, hydration and medicine are powerful tools – and so is a weapon.

We learn early that in defense or aggression, a weapon means control; “I can hurt or kill you, before you can hurt or kill me.” Or, “I have the power to hurt you, or kill you – if that pleases and rewards me.” The choice is up to the “Tool Holder.”

Second only to money, guns just happen to be the most romanticized tool of power in our time. Consider if you will the movies, rap songs, video games and music videos that romanticize guns as the ultimate symbol of power and control. Our kids and the kids of others have been taught, in song and on the screen, that cool/tough men, women and children bust-a-cap when they want things their way…..role models?

The “Tool” argument only goes so far. This “tool” in the wrong hands and in the wrong minds – kills more people than all of the screwdrivers, power drills, shop vacuums and paint rollers combined.

Maybe we’ve become desensitized, or it’s just plain violence that we view through rose-tinted glasses. But, if we are to own guns and truly honor the intent of our Second Amendment, then we need to stop romanticizing guns and talk reality to our children and grandchildren.

Regardless of what they see in the media, teach the kids that guns are not an acceptable path to notoriety. Guns are not fashion accessories, not side-line income generators, not hormone suppliments, not organ enhancers, not political statements or substitutes for intellect.



I grew up with a loaded gun "handy" in a couple of places in the house. I ran a trap line and carried a "dangerous automatic pistol" almost every day after school; when I was 9 years old. I never believed in a romantacism of violence or of firearms, I used them for their intended purposes. I learned to shoot when I was 5 years old, and will teach my children and grandchildren the same way because the deeply rooted respect I learned for dangerous tools ensured I would never have romanticized ideals.

We speak of children desensitized to violence, but the violence is sanatized. They have no concept of what actually transpires when using a firearm (i.e. killing), until it is too late. Take a kid hunting and the romance and mystique of guns changes when they kill the animal. It brings it into perspective. I know shooting that first rabbit, realizing what it meant, readying it for consumption and then eating it put it all together. Kids these days don't often get to really experience using a firearm as a tool, so they don't get it and they don't respect them. I make it my priority to see that they do get an appropriate education on firearms, so there can be no ramantic ideals. If everyone else would do the same, the glorification you speak of would not exist.

The tool argument really does cover it all because the wrong tool in the wrong hands shouldn't happen if the current gun laws are enforced. More laws will not work if they are not enforced, look at speed limits. Look at Switzerland, every able bodied defender of the country has a FULLY automatic assault rifle in their home. A tool for the defense of the country, and a taught respect for the destructive nature of the tool that keeps the children safe.
 
An optometric comparison...OK

Do you guys blame your phoropter for giving out poor prescriptions? :rolleyes:

However with a trial frame there will be fewer refractions per hour with greater labor.

Single shot weapons for hunting or even self defense a valid argument. Automatic assault weapons? Give me a break!
 
Paul,


Have you ever shot a gun?

What is your direct experience with firearms?

Your argument about automatic assault rifles shows a distinct lack of knowledge in the subject area. In order to own an automatic assault rifle requires special licensing by the BATF. These weapons are highly controlled by both federal and state governments. If a domestic terrorist obtains such a weapon to commit terror, they have broken dozens of laws designed to keep them from getting them. You can ban all guns, the criminals will still get them (reference the UK), but no honest citizens will be allowed to protect themselves----come on!
 
As a matter of fact...

Paul,

Have you ever shot a gun?

What is your direct experience with firearms?

Your argument about automatic assault rifles shows a distinct lack of knowledge in the subject area. In order to own an automatic assault rifle requires special licensing by the BATF. These weapons are highly controlled by both federal and state governments. If a domestic terrorist obtains such a weapon to commit terror, they have broken dozens of laws designed to keep them from getting them. You can ban all guns, the criminals will still get them (reference the UK), but no honest citizens will be allowed to protect themselves----come on!

I had a concealed weapon permit issued by the City of New York. Almost impossible for ordinary citizens to get, but when you have friends...;)

I went to the pistol range and learned to use a 9 mm weapon. The advice from the law enforcement experts was..." If you are stupid enough to carry a concealed weapon learn to use it and be ready to shoot to kill when you draw it. Be certain the caliber is high enough that it not only hits the assailant but will drive them back. They can still hurt you while they're dying.":eek:

I carried for a while but what a nuisance. Larger pants size for a holster etc. I ultimately weighed the risk /benefit. The chances of my being able to defend myself from an armed robbery when there are several individuals involved was small when they have the advantage of surprise. The risk of them relieving you of your weapon great and then having it used on you also increases.

Better to put it away well hidden from kids who love to play with weapons. Make every effort to stay out of harms way by sensible lifestyle choices. Packing may make one feel secure and macho. The reality is that more harm than good wil come out of the exercise.

This an opinion of a urban dweller. I'm certain rural folks have a different opinion. So the debate continues.

As far as requiring special licenses for automatic weapons...I don't think gang members where these are the weapons of choice have heard about these rules.:rolleyes:

Nations with strict gun control laws have lower death rates associated with firearms, whether in felonies, accidents or suicides. There must be a relationship wouldn't you agree?
 
Paul,

I am thankful that you are experienced in firearms usage, too often urbanites are not and are therefore unable to argue more than second hand information.

Your point concerning urban experiences versus rural experiences is spot on. I grew up in rural areas and kids I knew did not "play" with guns. We didn't have to worry about that because we were too well educated on the dangerous nature of firearms and had seen it first hand.

I have carried not in fear of armed robbery, observation and intelligence are better weapons under those circumstances. I have carried to save lives (note: my current state of residence does not issue concealed carry permits, and I do obey the law). We all have to weigh the pros and cons of our individual situations, and thankfully live in a country that allows us to do so. I will agree that less than lethal alternatives (pepper spray, spring billies, stun guns) are often more effective for the masses because they usually can't kill them when turned on them.

Thank you for proving my point about criminals. Gang bangers do not obey firearms laws, or any laws for that matter. So they won't obey the bans either, if you think they won't get guns if they are banned, you haven't been paying attention to the illicit drug problem.

Societies with strict gun laws have lower death rates. Correlation is not causation. These controlled societies often have more (in volume) and more repressive state police forces that skew statistics. The question here is, do we reduce personnal freedoms for the security of a police state?

The debate will continue as we each decide how much more or less oppressive a government we require.
 
The times have certainly changed ...

My brother and I were carrying .22s by the age of 8 ... would never have even thought of pointing a gun at another person. Just about every boy in my 3rd grade class carried a pocket-knife .... for whittling or playing "stretch". Never, ever was there any incident with one boy threatening another - never even thought of it. My brother took his 12 gauge to shop class at high school ... carried it down the hallway without a case. The principal stopped him and said the next time you might want to put it in a case ... nobody dove for cover or called the SWAT team.
 
The times have certainly changed ...

My brother and I were carrying .22s by the age of 8 ... would never have even thought of pointing a gun at another person. Just about every boy in my 3rd grade class carried a pocket-knife .... for whittling or playing "stretch". Never, ever was there any incident with one boy threatening another - never even thought of it. My brother took his 12 gauge to shop class at high school ... carried it down the hallway without a case. The principal stopped him and said the next time you might want to put it in a case ... nobody dove for cover or called the SWAT team.

Whittling?? My God man.....did you vote for Calvin Coolidge in the last election?
:eek:
 
Whittling?? My God man.....did you vote for Calvin Coolidge in the last election?
:eek:

I forgot to add that after school me and my buddies would go down to the general store and get a pickle out of the barrel.
 
Time to visit some nations with strict gun laws

.

Societies with strict gun laws have lower death rates. Correlation is not causation. These controlled societies often have more (in volume) and more repressive state police forces that skew statistics. The question here is, do we reduce personnal freedoms for the security of a police state?

The debate will continue as we each decide how much more or less oppressive a government we require.

Get your passport out and visit Canada, the United Kingdom,Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. There you can ask these citizens in English whether they have a police state.

Then travel to the nations of the European Community. They Also have strict gun laws. Police state? I don't think so.
 
Get your passport out and visit Canada, the United Kingdom,Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. There you can ask these citizens in English whether they have a police state.

Then travel to the nations of the European Community. They Also have strict gun laws. Police state? I don't think so.

And do they have the form of government as us, or do they have language identical in form or function to the 2nd Amendment in their Constitution?

Travel is great. Go for it. But, no matter how hard you wish it, we are not France, England, Switzerland, Australia or any other country.

So, as always, the question boils down to what freedoms are recognized and protected by our Constitution, and which ones aren't. We have a process to amend the Constitution, if it is that pressing and that universally needed, then by all means begin the proceedings. We are a nation under the rule of law, not a nation ruled by what a majority wants or needs or desires from our neighbors. So, whether you like it or not, as it stands our individual right to own and carry a firearm is still intact in this country and protected by the law, not quite as our founders intended, but at least not fully bastardized yet.

I could give a rat's ass what they do in New Zealand, to be honest.
 
I could ask them if they feel they live in a police state, but unless they have known the freedom of being a citizen of the USA, they really wouldn't know.

If your freedoms have been oppressed for generations, how would you know any differently?

I have traveled abroad and when I am in other countries, I have observed first hand a "police state." In fact, I had a rather unnerving encounter in Italy in 2002. Apparently my accented Italian pegged me as a threat to the military police at the airport. I was wisked aside at baggage claim for a little debriefing. It was cleared up quickly when I declared my US citizenship in English and showed my passport. All the Italians had a good laugh at my language skills and I wasn't too roughed up by the men with HK submachine guns pointed in my direction.

Police state? It all boils down to your perception. I do think so....on this matter we will never see eye to eye.
 
I could ask them if they feel they live in a police state, but unless they have known the freedom of being a citizen of the USA, they really wouldn't know.

If your freedoms have been oppressed for generations, how would you know any differently?

I have traveled abroad and when I am in other countries, I have observed first hand a "police state." In fact, I had a rather unnerving encounter in Italy in 2002. Apparently my accented Italian pegged me as a threat to the military police at the airport. I was wisked aside at baggage claim for a little debriefing. It was cleared up quickly when I declared my US citizenship in English and showed my passport. All the Italians had a good laugh at my language skills and I wasn't too roughed up by the men with HK submachine guns pointed in my direction.

Police state? It all boils down to your perception. I do think so....on this matter we will never see eye to eye.

Well, I grew up in Canada and I'm a US Citizen now and I can honestly say that I have never felt like I lived in a "police state" in either country. I have also been lucky enough (or unlucky enough) to have lived in a few different places in the middle east and it was much more of a police state there.
 
handgun recommendation

Those of you likeminded OD's that own or are thinking of owning a hand gun, I recommend checking out the Magnum Research mini desert eagle .45 cal. This is an Israeli made firearm and I'm really impressed with it's size and feel. I've been eyeing one at Gander Mountain for a month. Still haven't purchased it, but seriously considering. Just FYI
 
I guess people in the UK are feeling oppressed concerning their freedoms and firearms after all.


CGV,

The "baby" eagles are well made, but don't fit my hand well, when it comes to .45 ACP's, I still think John Browning got it "right" in 1911. Better stop waffling or it may get banned.:D
 
CGV,

The "baby" eagles are well made, but don't fit my hand well, when it comes to .45 ACP's, I still think John Browning got it "right" in 1911. Better stop waffling or it may get banned.:D[/quote]

Kids.....need I say more?
 
Guns don't kill people etc... really? Now this!

First a minister was shot in an Illinois church Sunday. Only one killed because the gun jammed. Imagine, if the nut job had an automatic assault weapon.

Yesterday more mayhem in Alabama as reported in the 3/11/09 edition of the New York Times...

"Gunman Kills 10 in Alabama, Then Takes His Life

By SHAILA DEWAN

Published: March 10, 2009

A gunman shot and killed at least 10 people, including several members of his family, on Tuesday afternoon in what officials said was the worst shooting in Alabama.

The gunman led the police on a chase through Geneva County in southern Alabama, firing at officers before fatally shooting himself at a business where he was once employed, law enforcement officials said.

Witnesses of the shootings and their aftermath described a man with multiple weapons who engaged in heavy gunfire, leaving behind blood-soaked porches and bodies.

“It is truly one of the most horrific things that anyone in law enforcement can remember in Alabama,” said Col. J. Christopher Murphy, the director of the state’s Public Safety Department. “We’re still getting victims coming in.”

The Associated Press quoted Robert Preachers, the coroner of Coffee County, just north of Geneva County, as identifying the gunman as Michael McLendon. Mr. Preachers said the man burned down the house of his mother, Lisa McLendon, in Kinston. Officials found the woman’s body inside the house, The AP said.

“He started in his mother’s house,” Mr. Preachers said. “Then he went to Samson and he killed his granny and granddaddy and aunt and uncle. He cleaned his family out.”

In Samson, four adults and a child were found shot to death at one residence and two people were found dead at two other homes, all shot on their porches, the authorities said.

Another person was found dead at a business, Samson Pipe and Supply, and still another at a service station.

A neighbor who would not give her name for publication said the gunman had also killed his girlfriend.

“I heard pop, pop, pop, pop, and my daughter called me,” the woman said. “I’m sickly and old and she said, “Mother, lock your doors and stay inside.’ She said there’s a man on a rampage shooting.”

Another victim was described by a neighbor, Koren Garcia, as a 23-year-old man who had two children and one on the way.

He was walking down the street and stopped to talk to a neighbor as the gunman drove past, she said.

The wife and baby of a sheriff’s deputy were also among the dead, said Sheriff Greg Ward of Geneva County. The mother and child were visiting neighbors when they were shot, he said.

“I don’t know how we’re going to get through this,” Ms. Garcia said. “I have no idea. Nothing like this has ever happened. Everyone is crying.”

Chased by the police, the gunman drove 12 miles to Geneva on Highway 52, then turned onto Highway 27.

The Geneva County coroner, Max Motley, told the Dothan Eagle that he had been called to the Big Little Store on West Main Street in Samson, where he found the body of a woman between the gas pump and the front door. She was found face up with at least one fatal gunshot wound.

Along the way, the gunman’s car was rammed by a police car, and the gunman fired two shots, narrowly missing the officer driving, said Mayor Wynnton Melton of Geneva, whose police officers were involved in the chase.

The police tried to stop the gunman near a Wal-Mart store, where he shot Chief Frankie Lindsey of the Geneva Police Department, grazing his shoulder. The chief’s bulletproof vest protected him, officials said.

When the gunman drove past a nearby grocery store, Sheriff Ward fired at him, officials said.

The gunman continued on Highway 27 to Reliable Products, a metal fabricator, outside Geneva, where he was once employed, Sheriff Ward said.

The sheriff said he did not know how recently the gunman had worked there. In the parking lot, the gunman fired about 30 rounds, officials said, then entered the building, where he fatally shot himself, the police said."

Trymaine Lee and Dana Beyerle contributed reporting.
 
All the more reason to carry concealed.

You gun control guys are nuts. These guys are already breaking all the laws already and you will never get rid of firearms if you outlaw them, just like drugs. I'm all for letting Instacheck check your mental records to keep wack jobs from buying firearms but they can buy them in a dark alley for a hundred bucks. Oh, but the ACLU says that's invasion of privacy.

It is an evil world out there and all you can do is learn to be prepared to fight back and protect your family. The Israeli's now how to do it. It's our culture and it's going to get worse as all these wacked out kids that grew up on Grand Theft Auto and other violent video games can't deal with life in the worsening economy. There is no God, remember, so why not shoot people if I want?

Come to Texas, I'll teach you awareness, tactics and how to shoot.
 
You forgot to include the rampage in Germany, where 15(?) were killed.

Remember they have VERY, VERY, VERY strict gun control laws in Germany.

Was that why you forgot it Paul, or did you just not hear about it yet?

And don't forget, it is 100% illegal for a regular citizen to own an automatic assault rifle.

Sociopaths do not obey the laws!
 
Scissors too!

Foxnews.com

PALATKA, Fla. — An 8-year-old boy was fatally stabbed with a pair of scissors also used to stab a police officer, Putnam County authorities said.
Zachariah Williams, 20, attacked the officer as emergency medical personnel took the child to an ambulance, authorities said. The officer was stabbed in the cheek but able to use a Taser gun on Williams.
Williams was arrested and charged with murder and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon.
The boy, identified as 8-year-old DayQuone Hill, was pronounced dead at the hospital.
The cause of the attacks was not immediately known.
The attack happened at the College Arms apartment complex in Palatka on Tuesday night. Police said it is a "problematic address" for officers constantly responding to violent calls.
 
And Bridges!

Foxnews.com

MOBILE, Ala. — An Alabama man who is charged with tossing his four children to their deaths from a coastal bridge last year withdrew his guilty plea Wednesday while a jury was being selected to hear the case against him
 
And Drugs!

CNN

Toxicology reports showed that King died from a lethal combination of Xanax, an anti-depressant; and Opana, a narcotic painkiller, according to the Army statement. Investigators say they believe some of the pills King consumed were crushed and snorted, overriding their time-release design.
 
Face it Kristopher, they will never get it. The ones that call for more gun control most are the ones that either want power to control the masses (just like Hitler, Stalin, etc. ) or those that are scared of firearms since they have no familiarity with firearms and either too lazy or too big a pansy to take steps to protect themselves or their families. The police aren't going to be there for you and they will admit it.
 
Face it Kristopher, they will never get it. The ones that call for more gun control most are the ones that either want power to control the masses (just like Hitler, Stalin, etc. ) or those that are scared of firearms since they have no familiarity with firearms and either too lazy or too big a pansy to take steps to protect themselves or their families. The police aren't going to be there for you and they will admit it.

I know that some will never get it, but I am belligerent enough to keep it up.

A news blurb concerning the Illinois shooter: Lyme disease

"And now, the disease is being blamed for causing the mental illness of a man accused of gunning down a pastor Sunday at a suburban Illinois church." Fox News

So, it wasn't the gun, but the mental illness caused by Lyme disease. I will sleep better knowing it was mental illness, and also because I have the old Remington 870 at the ready in case a post-Lyme disease psychotic enters my home without express written consent.
 
Anyone else notice there seems to be a high rate of "medication" (assuming anti-depressants) usage by these suicidal murderers?

After my nephew committed suicide, we found out that there is a high rate of suicide in young men on anti-depressants, especially when the medication is stopped or the dosage suddenly changed.

What if there was a link between anti-depressants and extreme violence and suicidal thoughts, exacerbated by stressful life events such as job loss, divorce, etc? Would the pharmaceutical companies want the public to know? Are they hiding something that they already know? Would they say anything?

Perhaps someone should do a study on these people's medical records and see if there is a common link in their medications, specifically anti-depressant usage. After all, more people are on anti-depressants more than ever. When did anti-depressant pharmacology become acceptable and start to really be prescribed? About 40 years ago. Did we see as much violent killings back then. Not very many. I still believe that the loss of moral absolutes and angry, fatherless males growing up watching violent movies/tv/video games are also contributing to the increased violence in America.

It just strikes me as odd that so many incidents included someone on "medications" and "they were recently depressed."