Talk of The Villages Florida - What if Gun Control Laws were changed?

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- The Villages, Florida, Non Villages Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/)

- - What if Gun Control Laws were changed? (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/what-if-gun-control-laws-were-changed-164993/)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 1124363)

Somewhere around 21,000 of those deaths were suicides. Do you think that if those people didn't have guns that they wouldn't have found some other way to kill themselves?

Also, a percentage of those deaths were justifiable homicide. People were killed either by law enforcement personnel or by citizens defending themselves and a small number were accidents.

So the total number of non suicide, or unjustified homicides is somewhere around 10,000. Is that a lot for a country of 330,000,000 people? It's 0.00003030303 percent of our population.

I'm not sure that we do have a problem.

:agree: It's all uninformed, ignorant political posturing. If I don't like a gun, I won't buy one. If they don't like a gun, they want to ban guns for everyone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cedwards38;112***1

I'm no expert, but:

(1) It's not a false premise.
Gun Show Background Checks State Laws
(2) The CDC is the nation's agency for public health. Some would argue that getting shot is a threat to one's health. Certainly mental illness is a public health issue.
Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violence | Public Radio International
(3) Maybe handguns are a bigger threat and Congress should focus on controlling those but this report states that more than half of all of the mass shootings use assault weapons.
More Than Half of Mass Shooters Used Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Magazines | Mother Jones
(4) Not sure why "the left" gets blamed for impeding institutionalization. Regardless, placing a person in a mental institution or an institution for the criminally insane is not an easy task, and shouldn't be, to protect us all. Regardless, every state in America has a set of standards for involuntary commitment.
Involuntary Treatment Civil Commitment Standards
(5) You're right. Gun buybacks in cities in America have not worked that well, but they worked like a charm in Australia, so maybe we have something to learn from them.
Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted. - Vox

If a woman or an old person needs to defend themselves with the use of a gun then good for them. I don't think you'll find many examples, however, of a woman or old person defending themselves using an assault rifle with a high capacity magazine, but I'd be happy to read about that if you share.

Background checks are nice to have, but probably wouldn't stop anyone from committing suicide.
If you think that Australia has such a great idea, then by all means move to Australia. They also have socialism and high taxes. This is America.
The reason you don't find many examples of persons defending themselves is because you are not looking for it. Statistics have proven that those states with gun carry laws have reduced the amount of gun related crimes against individuals. But, it is convenient to overlook that information, right?

Like I said earlier, out of 218 countries listed, America is not even in the top 100 for gun violence and deaths. So, this is merely a liberal ploy to make the citizen more dependent on the government for their protection and security. More nanny state pushing.

"* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. [1] This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. [2]

* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.[3]

* As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.[4]"

[1] Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun,"
[2] According to the National Safety Council
[3] Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime,"

Admittedly, this information is outdated, but I doubt that you can fault research vs speculation.
[4]Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime

:spoken:

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomwed (Post 1124360)

Why is gun control not considered a political debate? Why is it on this side of the ledger when there is another? Why can't there be an innocuous part of TOTV like before? How is this debate healthy?

Why not just quit reading it if it makes you ill?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr (Post 1124363)

Your objective analysis does not fit the emotionally driven narrative. This type of objective thinking will only result in common sense legislation, and will not do what gun control advocates and the elitist class really want, which is to disarm every American citizen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDLNB (Post 1124150)

I went to the hardware and feed store to purchase some fertilizer but was turned down. I was told that I had to have a special permit to purchase fertilizer because someone had used a fertilizer bomb in OK to blow up a building. If I was to go to a special school on the proper use of fertilizer and get my certification of completion, I could come back and buy my fertilizer. In order to enroll in the state run school, I was first required to get a certifying letter from my doctor stating that I was mentally stable enough to handle fertilizer safely so as not to harm anyone else.
After completing all the requirements, I was able to obtain a 40lb bag of manure, but was instructed that I must keep it concealed so that my neighbors wouldn't get excited. I timed my arrival at home to coincide with dusk, but one of my neighbors observed me unloading the sack of manure from the trunk of my car and called the police. After being jacked up by the arriving police, they slit open my sack of manure and searched through it for anything that might be used to ignite it. Finding nothing, they excused themselves, after lecturing me thoroughly about manure safety and departed. My manure was scattered about my property.

So I am not sure whether I should say this was a case of shooting the bull, bull shooting, or flinging manure about. But, I am BSing you.

That's pretty good. You got the police to spread the manure for you...

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlaw (Post 1124476)

:agree:

Quote:

Originally Posted by justjim (Post 1124227)

According to a recent report (2013) only seven (7) States required background checks at gun shows. However, we can quote and "spin" statistics all we want to make a point but perhaps we can all agree that there is way too much gun violence in the U.S.

In 2013 there were 33,169 deaths related to guns. In addition, there were just north of 84,000 injuries. I would think any reasonable person would say that is not okay.

Like I said, you can spin it anyway you want but the fact remains that this is the facts. You see---the first thing in solving a problem ----you have to recognize you have a problem to start with. We can't even do that!

That's interesting, since an FDL is a federal license, and the background check requirement is a federal law. Again, I think you confuse the private to private individual sale to the dealer sales. there are some individuals that sell their own gun to another private individual. That can happen at a gun show or at your house, or in a parking lot somewhere. Dealers MUST conduct a background check, period. You keep missing the point that the vast majority of handguns sold at gun shows are sold by licensed dealers, and background checks are conducted for every one of them.

Concealed Carry Permit holders are exempt from background checks. But then, they also do not do mass shootings. They are law abiding citizens that you hope are near you when the next nut case starts shooting. GUN FREE Zones get innocent people killed without any chance to take out the shooter. WAKE UP AMERICA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outlaw (Post 1124476)

Who actually wants to disarm every US citizen? I have never heard anyone make such an unrealistic proposal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725 (Post 1124525)

Who actually wants to disarm every US citizen? I have never heard anyone make such an unrealistic proposal.

I'd like to hear that answer to that question also. All I actually hear are people who want these tragic incidents to stop, and to have a rational discussion about how we might do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cedwards38 (Post 1124530)

I'd like to hear that answer to that question also. All I actually hear are people who want these tragic incidents to stop, and to have a rational discussion about how we might do that.

Try Google. Better yet, listen to Obama.

What does it sound like to you when guns are the claimed reason for deaths in America instead of people? What does it sound like to you when the gov attempts to stop the production of ammunition for guns? What does it seem like to you when the media and liberals attempt to pervert actual statistics on gun related deaths in comparison with other countries. Obviously, any time one of us mentions a fact, all we get back is "let me see proof of that" or where did you get that?" Facts don't support the media and gov led hysteria regarding guns, but some folks gladly jump on the liberal band wagon.

gun control isn't the answer to social & cultural problems. First we need to go back to the institutions and more effective mental illness treatment. We need Mental Illness Control. We have a violent social structure, we have a lack of personal responsibility and lawlessness from the very top down. The city and states with the most strict gun laws are the worst. Gun control is all about getting around the bill of rights. The Second amendment is protection against the government - not hunting and fishing - don't support losing it. A gun didn't kill all those people a nut did - don't ever for get that.

People that don't like guns & I do understand that the ones that had someone they knew that were shot don't like guns but just my opinion, the laws will never ever take guns away from the criminals. Guns are the tools of their trade just like a carpenters tool. Personally I'll never give mine up just because some mentally imbalanced person wants to start killing because they can or they're mad at someone or they're unstable. I did nothing wrong & I won't turn mine over for that reason, besides most of my guns are not registered!

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDLNB (Post 1124470)

Seriously? Are you really suggesting the old desperation ploy of "if you don't like it why don't you leave" argument. Anyone who doesn't agree with you can get out? I'm an American, every bit as much as you are an American. I've always been an American. I'll always be an American. That doesn't mean I have to think the same way as you. And if I see something that I think is wrong about America, then I'll try to change it, and I won't ever leave. Tell me, if gun laws did change, and you didn't like it, would you leave? No. I won't either, and that suggestion is not only insulting, but contributes absolutely nothing to this discussion. Australia dealt with this issue, and that's why I mentioned them, and I think we can and should deal with it too.

You make the claim that gun carry laws reduce crime. Here are a few examples of statistics that demonstrate exactly the opposite is true.

Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

Do concealed weapon laws result in less crime? - The Washington Post

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/09...nt-affect-cri/

No, Concealed Carry Permits Do Not Result in a Lower Murder Rate - Mic

There are many charts that compare how our country stacks up against others in gun violence. Ours is high. But even if it weren't, are you suggesting that it is insignificant? Should we not consider it an issue worthy of our discussion?

Kleck and Gertz is interesting in it's sharing statistics on Americans using firearms to defend themselves. It does not suggest that the best way to do that is with assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Yes, I still speculate that women defending themselves do not do that with an AK 47.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDLNB (Post 1124542)

What is sounds like is a leader who is saying, "I think we have a problem, and can we have a discussion about that?"