Gun accidents? Guns are dangrous? - Page 11

Metric · #**101** 04-18-2007, 05:36 PM

The "well regulated militia" part is not the part of the sentence that enumerates a right of the people. It is justification in the mind of the writers -- it is not a precondition or proviso on the actual right itself. It could say "George Washington having false teeth, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." and it would enumerate exactly the same right -- you would simply wonder about the logic of the whole thing a bit more.

MoreWineII · #**102** 04-18-2007, 05:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im off to bed now.

In the morning i look forward to reading up on the links you provided showing how many people have been saved by guns compared to how many have been killed by guns.

[/ QUOTE ]

In case you missed it:

Guns save lives and strict laws resticting gun ownership and rights to carry directly result in muders, rapes, aggravated assaults, and robberies:

Concealed carry laws help reduce crime

* Nationwide: one-half million self-defense uses. Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home.9
* Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:
* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;10 and
* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.11

http://www.gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

[/ QUOTE ]

Posting the same study over and over and/or posting studies about accidents when most of us aren't talking about accidents isn't doing anything to help your cause.

NCAces · #**103** 04-18-2007, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no reason that people need to have guns. This isn't the 1800's anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

People don't need lots of things. That doesn't give you any right to take them away.

Do the police and military need to have guns? They're people, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes they do, because it is their job to protect people, not yours. I think the government has a right to take things away that are a danger to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

I challenge you to go talk to any cop and ask them if their job is to proactively protect every citizen in their jurisdiction, and whether they can. The fact is that the police are responders 95% of the time, and rarely are they able to actually stop a crime before or as it happens. If you are going to rely on the police to protect you and yours, you are naive and irresponsible.

NCAces

pvn · #**104** 04-18-2007, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no reason that people need to have guns. This isn't the 1800's anymore.

[/ QUOTE ]

People don't need lots of things. That doesn't give you any right to take them away.

Do the police and military need to have guns? They're people, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes they do, because it is their job to protect people, not yours.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not my job to protect myself?

Can the police be held liable if they fail in their job? No.

I don't know where you live, but in the USA, the supreme court has ruled that the state (and the police specifically) have NO obligation to protect you. Prevention of crime is not their job. They investigate (sometimes). They MIGHT intervene, but they have no DUTY to do so.

[ QUOTE ]
I think the government has a right to take things away that are a danger to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

Governments have no rights.

If you want to surrender your personal rights to some other person, that's fine; please explain why anyone else should have to do so involuntarily.

pvn · #**105** 04-18-2007, 05:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Think of it this way. There are two possible environments in which I have to live - the environment where you own a gun and the environment where you don't own a gun. You don't have the right to force me to live in the environment where you have a gun any more than I have a right to tell you not to have a gun. Our rights are in conflict. This situation cannot be resolved by an appeal to basic rights because that tells us we are both right and both wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is where property rights come in. You make the rules on your property. I make them on mine.

bkholdem · #**106** 04-18-2007, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying don't buy a gun if you don't like me shooting you. I'm saying that if you don't like guns don't buy one.

[/ QUOTE ]

But I also don't like you having a gun. And it's not just because I don't want you to have one. It's because I don't like the implication that you having one has on me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have a hot mistress. I don't want you to have one because of the implication it has on me. (I will be jealous and that is a negative state to be in).

I don't have a swimming pool (because they are dangerous and people drown) and I also don't want you to have one because of the implication it has on me (my kids could be killed by your pool)

pvn · #**107** 04-18-2007, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mean if I "feel endangered" if black people are around, do I have a right to demand all black people stay away from me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you do. And they have a right to say that you have no right to order them to do that. Now that the rights are in conflict, something must be done. What is your proposal? Is it tough luck for you, rough luck for them?

[/ QUOTE ]

Property rights FTW.

bkholdem · #**108** 04-18-2007, 05:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I mean if I "feel endangered" if black people are around, do I have a right to demand all black people stay away from me?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes you do. And they have a right to say that you have no right to order them to do that. Now that the rights are in conflict, something must be done. What is your proposal? Is it tough luck for you, rough luck for them?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not talking about 'rights', you are talking about personal preferences.

PLOlover · #**109** 04-18-2007, 05:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
I mean if I "feel endangered" if black people are around, do I have a right to demand all black people stay away from me?

Yes you do. And they have a right to say that you have no right to order them to do that. Now that the rights are in conflict, something must be done. What is your proposal? Is it tough luck for you, rough luck for them?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this says it all. Unless english is not you're 1st or 2nd language. Obviously anyone who thinks they have a "right" to have the local shopping mall cleared of all black people before they go in so they don't feel "endangered" is out of touch with most people in the world, and all americans.

mosdef · #**110** 04-18-2007, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have a hot mistress. I don't want you to have one because of the implication it has on me. (I will be jealous and that is a negative state to be in).

I don't have a swimming pool (because they are dangerous and people drown) and I also don't want you to have one because of the implication it has on me (my kids could be killed by your pool)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's great. I support your right to be concerned and voice your opinion that your rights are being violated. I happen to disagree that your rights are being violated. What do we do now?