Mr. Day,

Your letter is so thoroughly irrational I hesitated before drafting a response. Attempting to link law abiding gun owners and NRA members to the two tragedies is truly outrageous. Your emotional rant conveniently ignores the fact that concealed carry laws have been on the books in many states for a long time and there is a mountain of empirical evidence that they reduce crime. Proponents of concealed carry have never stated that all crime is eliminated by concealed carry laws only that crime is reduced.

Maybe you just do not follow current events closely, but there are numerous examples of concealed carry permit holders defending themselves with firearms. Perhaps you missed the recent story of the pizza delivery worker shooting a man attempting to rob him at gunpoint? Raising fantasies about mythical Wild West type shootouts is pretty lame considering that it has never happened in the many years of concealed carry.

Attempts to disarm the civilian population have been carried out in the UK and Australia. The gun bans in both of these countries led to large increases in crime. Only law abiding citizens turned in their weapons. Criminals kept theirs to prey on the innocent.

Legitimate debate should be carried out on guns like any other issue facing the country today. Emotional non-fact based rants do not have a place in any honest debate.

Larry,

If this was the Wild West, you would be the little old lady standing on the side line, wringing her hands and wailing “Think of the Children!”

It’s a rough world out there, and clearly you are not man enough to handle it. I recommend you stay indoors, lock the doors and make sure the police are on speed dial. They won’t be able to save you, but at least they will know where to find the bodies when the bad guys are done with you.

The places in our country where handguns are (or were) restricted are the places where handgun crime is the worst. This is not a strange coincidence, Mr. Day.

Perhaps your favorite constitutional amendment is “self-serving” (an oxymoron at best), but my favorite constitutional amendment is designed to keep people like you out of the business of people like me - this is a public benefit, believe me.

It is incredibly foolish to believe that you will be any safer by taking away guns from non-criminals.

News flash: it is already illegal to commit crimes with a gun. this has not served as much of a deterrent to criminals.

Mr. Day,

I agree with what David H said in post #2. I will carry it further. I have a concealed carry permit issued in Alaska that is also valid in Missouri. Missouri’s concealed carry law is relatively new, and not nearly enough people have the CC permits.. Over time and as a result of the senseless slaughter in the 2 incidents hopefully more will be trained and and get permits.

The police have no obligation of any kind to keep some nut from killing you if he chooses to do so. It’s sad that the individuals who were killed.. Police officers were killed, and so were ordinary citizens..

I am trying to phrase this in a way that will not will not be interpreted by anyone to anyone to be, “the victims asked for it because they weren’t armed”.. The time line was such that a police officer was shot outside in one instance. Had the victims been armed, they would at least had a chance to defend themselves.

Look up the stats on the number of violent crimes prevented by ordinary citizens who were armed. You will be stunned.

I have personally apprehended 3., and never fired a shot.

My motto: Never point a firearn at any living thing that you do not intend to kill immediatey”

Mr. Day is one of the bleating sheep that think their personal safety is the responsibility of someone else. I feel sorry for his type.

The pro-gun forces in our country are slowly losing the battle unfortunately because of situations like Kirkwood.

It all comes down to individual freedoms granted by our Constitution. If Mr. Day wants to put his life, and the well being of his family in someone elses hands (ie police, government) so be it. But I don’t have to agree with Mr. Day, and he shouldn’t have the right to tell me how to protect my family. This is the main difference between Conservative and Liberal idealism…Liberals want a “nanny state” to take care of everything for them, and Conservatives want to be in control of their own lives and future.

I personally own dozens of guns and I’ve never killed anyone, or even threatened anyone with a gun. I have been through firearms training and safety courses over the years, and I keep my guns in a safe to which only I have the key. Why should I be punished because Mr. Day thinks guns are “bad”.

Less people have been killed in the last 10 years by “firearms” than are killed in one week by drunk drivers. So tell me Mr. Day….should we ban alcohol or should we ban automobiles?

HEY LARRY
THEY CAN’T STOP ILLEGAL DRUGS, THEY SURELY CAN NOT STOP ILLEGAL GUNS.
ASK THE POLICE IF THEY ARE RESPONCABLE FOR YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY, THEY ARE
NOT. THEY ARE RESPONCABLE FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
THINK ABOUT THAT WHEN SOME ONE IS KICKING YOUR DOOR IN.

Consider for a moment the firearms policy of that sage law-and-order man from Tombstone, Arizona: Wyatt Earp. “No guns, no exceptions.” It’s easy to remember, and fits nicely on a bumper sticker.

Because the easy to remember and fits nicely on a bumper sticker slogan/law of “just say no to drugs” has been so effective?!? Outlawing and banning guns will only serve to leave bad guys with guns and law abiding citizens as prey for them.

Bravo Mr. Day…It’s hard to argue with people who believe guns should be easily accessible because illegal drugs cross our borders.

Since 1996, forty three (43) school shootings in America have claimed 126 lives. There were only 14 school children killed outside America in the same time period (80 countries).

The CDC reports that every 2 years more Americans die from guns than the total number of American soldiers killed during the 8 year Vietnam War…Approximately 30,000 every year.

Last year 3,012 children were killed by guns in the U.S. That’s 50 children every week, 8 children every day, one child every 3 hours….

Guns don’t kill people….Ask the parents of the 8 children who will take fatal bullets to their small bodies today.

Would these same Republican NRA gun freaks allow 8 abortions every day if it made them feel more like a man? Pro-life…my ASSault weapon.

Mrs Garrison, can you provide proof of your numbers? Does your source make a difference between criminal and victim?

Sub Par…just google “Guns Kill People + America”…You’ll find it.

What’s the difference between criminal and victim? When NRA gun-freak Dick Cheney blasted Willmington in the face with a shotgun….did it hurt any less?
At least one of the 8 children who will die today by gunfire will find his daddy’s gun…That senseless death doesn’t count because the gun was purchased to protect the victim?

Famlies that have loaded guns in the house are 43 times more likely to have family members killed by guns than families who don’t…….Google that too.

My kids don’t visit friends who’s tobacco chewing daddy has an NRA sticker on his ‘83 Ford pick-up.

“Outlawing and banning guns will only serve to leave bad guys with guns and law abiding citizens as prey for them.”

OK I have heard this argument enough number of times but never quite comprehended it. If guns were outlawed and banned in the country, where would the “bad guys” (like we have a published list of them) get them from ?

Garrison,

It would take a full time fact checker to correct the numerous errors in your postings. I am going to charitably assume that you are mathematically challenged rather than ententually misrepresenting the facts. Many American’s lack of basic math ability allows many to be mislead by demagogues. I take it you are liberal arts major without much experience with statistics?

Your data on children killed with guns is particularly egregious. The statistics you mentioned would only be correct if you define “children” to mean 24 years old and younger and if you include the numerous instances of gang-banging drug dealers shooting one another. The instances of actual children being injured or killed in the household are extremely rare. More children are killed by poisoning, bicycles and a variety of other items. Guns are the only item that also has the benefits of actually saving far more live than they cost.

BluePlanet,

No country has been successful in banning guns. Check out the experience in the UK or Australia. They have both tried to ban guns with the only result being a huge increase in crime. Also, criminals also commit many violent crimes without guns. A large number of crimes are prevented with the use of guns that do not involve a perpetrator. Most often this is accomplished by the elderly and women. This debate would be far more useful if you, Garrison, and other radical anti-gunners would get some basic education of the facts and view the data with a more open mind.

Another day, another Fascist. Blame the gun instead of the criminal Rip up the constitution, burn the Bill of Rights, arm the criminals, disarm the honest people. …and then make believe we’re safe!

These are the same people that think they can stop drug pushers with laws and we can see how much good that’s doing. Since Reagan’s “War on Drugs” started, they’ve increased nearly three times more than when it started.

People want more laws to make them safe but they never will be totally safe no matter how many laws we pass or enforcement agencies we use to do it. If somebody wants to kill you, gun laws won’t stop them. Besides that, we can’t even enforce present laws forbidding that murderer in Kirkwood from carrying a pistol or the law forbidding him from stealing another from a cop.

#13 Garrison, your children would probably not be invited to this redneck gun owner’s house. You have surely taught them that it is their right to dictate to other children what is acceptable and proper. I’m sure you are passing on your bigotry about ‘83 Ford pickup owners, as well.

Millions of firearms owned by millions of law abiding citizens did absolutely no harm today.

Guns, knives, baseball bats, hatchets, tire tools and rocks are just objects, these objects do not kill people intil some person picks thim up and uses them for a crime.

Garrison,

From Freakonomics book

“In a given year, there is one drowning of a child for every 11,000 residential pools in the United States. In a country with 6 million pools, this means that roughly 550 children under the age of ten drown each year. Meanwhile, there is 1 child killed by a gun for every 1 million-plus guns. In a country with an estimated 200 million guns, this means that roughly 175 children under ten die each year from guns. The likelihood of death by pool (1 in 11,000) versus death by gun (1 in a million plus) isn’t even close”

David H…I know statistics don’t matter to the gun-freaks, even if they’re from the CDC.
I hate posting this stuff…If you’re so educated in “basic math abilities,” why can’t you find the stats?
http://media.www.collegian.com/media/storage/paper864/news/2006/02/22/Opinion/Guns-Kill.People-1709520.shtml

Bb…you’re right. I protect my kids and have taught them to protect themselves…and we don’t have to be a bunch of hillbilly red-necks with guns to feel safe….Unfortunately, stray bullets don’t discriminate…Ask the students at the 43 high schools who avoided gunfire masacres while hiding under their desks….I fear for my children’s safety, just like their parents, because NRA gun-freaks think they have a constitutional right to hunt squirrrels every October.

Mrs Garrison, you used an OPINION piece as a source, and an old one at that.

While I respect Garrison’s views on guns, as he and I have had this conversation in the past, I generally disagree with him on this topic. Garrison’s view is that if there were laws created that would outlaw the production of guns now it would make for a better society in general down the road, say in a 100 years. A noble effort but realistically impractical when you look at it from a common sense perspective. Guns are already in our society and for the most part you could not gather them all up and dispose of them. How would you go about doing that? Explain EXACTLY how you would do that please?

Now remember you have to include all guns, including those law enforcement carry. Granted if the theory holds and all guns are eliminated, the cops would eventually not need guns. Until then guns will exist and if they exist there will always be ways for criminal elements who want one to get one. i.e. stealing, black market, etc. The economics of it all say if there is a demand then a supply will come from somewhere to meet that demand whether it is a legal or illegal source.

I take a practical view of guns in our society. I am a CCW permit holder who practices on a regular basis to the tune of 200-400 rounds per month. I take the responsibility to act and carry safely and it has not failed me to date.

I look at it like this. I live in the now. I recognize there are numerous elements in society who have no regard for life and are willing to kill in an instant. Without a way to defend myself against another person who has a gun, I’m left with no options except to fight back any way I can or just succumb to the inevitable. Some will say the odds on that happening are slim. Well it doesn’t really matter because the finality of it all is I can only die once. Do I want it to be at the end of a criminal’s gun going down without a fight or do I want every available resource I have at my disposal? The state of MO has given me and others, the legal ability to have the latter so I chose it. The cops cannot protect you every minute of every day and generally show up after the fact.

Garrison, if I’ve not relayed the general intent of your arguements agains guns please do so. If I remember right, you said at one time you were the military. If that is the case then I would really like to understand your why you think about weapons the way you do.

Sub Par…it’s an opinion piece about guns which uses factual CDC statistics. Try to seperate the two before you show your ignorance…The piece was written 2 years ago. The number of gun-related deaths in America has increased since then… despite more cowboys carrying concealed weapons.

AJ…To answer your first question…I’ve never proposed “gather-up” all guns and disposing of them…. Let’s reduce the production of handguns this year from 12 million to 11.75 million and continue to reduce production by 4% every year….In Guns will be as common as Model T Fords.

To answer your second question. I served in the military at the close of the Vietnam War. I’ve seen the destruction guns can do to the human body. Many ex-military hold the same opinions I hold…
Most of the 20 year old gun-freaks we’re hearing from today conceptualize the glory of guns with PlayStation 2.

Garrison,

The article you cited is an OPINION piece. It’s even filed that way. The statistics cited are spun -badly. Here is a link to the real CDC data:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf

Check out the top 15 list on page 8. Then move on to page 30-33, this table really shows the brass tacks of what kills people in the US. What you will quickly see is the OPINION piece you referenced only got it’s inflated figures by including SUICIDES. I emphasize this, because all the anti gunners do this.

Why? Because the real statistics show that gun crime is no where near as prevalent as the media makes it seem. It also allows them to make claims like “you are more likely to be harmed by a gun in your house than use it to defend yourself” – because they count Suicides! Of course the anti gunners ignore all the cases where guns stopped crime, prevented crime and saved lives.

PS- you will also discover that including assaults, accidents and “undetermined intent”, firearms killed, 7 children aged 0-1, 73 children aged 1-4, and 241 kids aged 5-14, for a total of 321. How did the anti gunners get the statistics you cited? They include 15-24 year olds as “children” - And – wait for it - included suicides. By the way, a quick perusal of the stats will also show that suicide by gun was not the method of choice for this age group.

Listen - and this applies to any debate you get in - you should never trust the rhetoric. Do your homework, and find and interpret the results yourself. You are fortunate to live in the US, where the government will share Obscene amounts of information with you. No matter the subject, from crime, death to taxes – it’s all there. Don’t take someone else’s predigested diatribe – find out for yourself. If you do, you might see that guns are no where near the threat you think they are, and they are used to help way more often than you have been led to believe.

Garrison,

Double your 20 year olds estimate and you’d be near my age.

Please answer my question however. How would you deal with the guns that are currently in our society today? Even if you stopped gun production now, what would you do with the ones in circulation which all have the ability to kill?

#15 David H: Every evolved society in history has seen specialization - meaning entrusting certain types of people to perform a certain role in society that are most skilled in that role. Even the modern day global behemoths, the holy bastions of Capitalism that you might cheer, excel in specialization. It is strange that security is something that we think should not be a specialized task in present day life. Coming back to the UK and Australia…

“In 2005/06 there were 766 offences initially recorded as homicide by the police in England and Wales (including the 52 victims of the 7 July 2005 London bombings),[17] a rate of 1.4 per 100,000 of population. Only 50 (6.6%) were committed with firearms, one being with an air weapon.[18] The homicide rate for London was 2.4 per 100,000 in the same year (1.7 when excluding the 7 July bombings).[19]

By comparison, 5.5 murders per 100,000 of population were reported by police in the United States in 2000, of which 70% involved the use of firearms.[20] New York City, with a population size similar to London (over 8 million residents), reported 6.9 murders per 100,000 people in 2004.”

Why must it be “concealed carry” why not revealed carry? I think you should only be able to carry a visiable fire arm.

The whole issue is about YOUR right to protect YOURSELF. So don’t give me that standard BS about “guns work best when the bad guys have to guess who is armed and who isn’t “. Why should I have to be part of your game? This is a monster you created.

The truth is, gun guys don’t want the whole world to know that they are too cowardly to walk out in public without a gun. As much as they would like to live in Dodge City circa 1850 they know they would look pretty silly walking around Chuck-E-Cheese circa 2007, with a gun strapped to their hip.

Garrison/BluePlanet,

Anybody can post a link to slanted statistics. I was referring to the inability of either of you to properly interpret what the statistics mean. Mr. Garrison inflates the number of killing of children with firearms by including suicides, individual up to age 24, and ignoring the fact that the vast majority of the killings are criminal gang member shooting one another. BluePlanet seems to not understand that many factors make up the crime rate of a country.

How about comparing the crime rate in the UK before and after the enactment of draconian gun laws? Murder is not the only crime committed. How about comparing rates of burglary when someone is at home in the UK to the USA? The rate is much higher in the UK because criminals know they are unlikely to face an unarmed intruder.

Mr. Garrison would do well to stop the ludicrous generalizations and personal attacks. I doubt very seriously that there are many 20 year old posting in this forum. For the record, I am a middle aged executive at a very large firm. I believe that I have been very charitable in placing the blame for his misinterpreting statistics on lack of education rather than malicious intent.

Funny stuff..Lina…..But don’t under estimate these nuts. A lot of wanna-be cowboys would feel 10 feet tough walking into Chuck-E-Cheese dressed like Wyatt Earp.

BluePlanet…the numbers you cite are completely accurate. It’s difficult to understand why some people think we need more guns to solve this national disgrace. The letter writer above compares America to Iraq, but actually, when it comes to gun violence, we would be safer on the streets of Iraq and less likely to be killed by gunfire.

AJ….what can we do with the guns on our streets today? We just have to accept the violence and the Kirkwood type tragedies until guns become obselete….like the hoola hoop.

I always get a kick out of people comparing guns with swimming pools….
People are killed in house fires too…So! that’s why guns are safe..????

I suggested the PD should do an article each year about Permit law, asking how many Permits were revoked/Cancelled/Suspended due to the holders misbehavior with a firearm.

They haven’t. done any article. I suppose they checked the stats and discovered no violations by anyone. That meant there was no story. Alaska has had a CC Permit law for 25 years and nobody has lost their permit yet.. (Note: that is about a year old….When I last checked it was about a year ago.)

Don’t mind Garrison. He would take a knife to a gun fight. He’s harmless, and he can be fun.

I have taught at least a dozen police officers in this area how to improve their marksmanship using the hill in my back yard. ( before you ask,I am qualified to do so)

Just for Garrison’s edification. There is no such thing as “police protection”. There is only “police service” . Want me to explain that to you?

.

Anonaman, you are making a false presumption. Garrison is not intrested in open minded discussion of any topic, especially this one. Garrison is quite comfortable wrapped tightly in his leftist dogma.

Any opinion not in sync with his mentors at moveon and dailyKos is either evil, ignorant, or “redneck.” On any topic from union membership to banning guns, Garrison considers himself righteous enough to decide not only for himself, but for everyone else. He will distort facts and twist reality as much as necessary to sell his snake oil. If the facts still don’t support his views, he’ll use emotions to bury any logic standing in his way.

Garrison despises those of us who think independently and demonstrate self reliance. People like us threaten the relevance of his revered unions and eighty percent of his holy government.

You have provided an excellent synopsis of Mr. Garrison’s technique. It is usually a waste of time to be dragged into a discussion with an ideologue with no interest in logically analyzing a situation based on the facts. I have no problem debating any issue on its merits with both sides learning from the position of the other party. However, with Mr. Garrison I do not believe there is the desire or ability on his part to have that type of discussion

Garrison reminds me of the Code Pink Nazi’s in Berkeley. They are VERY tolerant of people who agree with everything they say, and militant in their hatred toward anyone who disagrees with their agenda/ideals.

Bb….if you knew anything about union members you’ld know never to discuss gun control.
One way to seperate a union member from his union his to threaten to take away his gun.

Union members don’t mind if Republicans steal their [living] wages and pensions, but don’t ever let a Democrat suggest sensible gun laws….That’s how we end up with union members endorsing corporate Republicans…..Take my job to China, but leave my gun alone.

See, I think posts like #36 show Garrison isn’t a total lost cause! I secretly hold out hope that we can convince Garrison to buy a gun and become a CCW holder. A Smith and Wesson M&P would be perfect for him, they are made in Massachusetts by American workers. No out sourced parts for that grand old US firm.

Garrison - Is like the Code Pink Gay Mafia in Berkeley…tolerance and free speech are for the left wing psychopaths only. Conservatives should be silenced and killed.

That pretty much sums up Garrison’s mentality.

You guys are right on track. I am 22, and I can’t wait until I am eligble to register to obtain my CC permit. I don’t plan on carrying it on my hip all of the time, but I do think that the forefathers of our Country intended on law abiding citizens being able to obtain firearms and use them for personal protection. After all, isn’t the old slogan “Guns Don’t Kill People, People Kill People?” Guns do not have a free will, nor do they load themselves, point their barrels at unsuspecting citizens, then pull their own trigger. There comes a time when you must see a tragedy for what it is: A Tragedy. When a tragedy occurs, people often look to point the blame to somewhere. Sometimes, there are just people who go crazy and do things that are unimaginable. That will continue, even if they ban firearms, concealed or not.

Now do you know why we worry about our children? This 22 year old kid can’t wait until he’s eligibel to register and carry……Probably the same kid who waited 14 hours outside “Best Buy” because he couldn’t wait for his new X-Box “Killer Commando Series”.

#36 Garrison, that is an example of how adamant gun owners are about protecting our rights. You oppose guns, so you don’t understand most gun owners. Despite what you’ve seen in the Bambi movie and CBS News’ “Guns of Autumn” propaganda, we aren’t crazy extremists running around the woods shooting everything in sight.

Yes, I have ethically hunted game animals since childhood. I have taught my children to target shoot and spent many quality hours sharing the experience with them and my wife. When my first child began crawling I purchased a semi automatic pistol because it could be stored more safely and loaded more quickly if needed than the revolver I already owned.

The enhanced physical, mental, and emotional development offered by shooting sports and safety training have been assets to me, my children, and now my grandchildren. Our family has benefited from safe, legal, ethical, ownership and use of firearms for generations. The fact that firearms are also misused by those who are negligent, criminal, or insane will not convince me that I should surrender those benefits for future generations.

Anti-gunners portray gun owners as unreasonable thugs. Just the opposite is true; the gun banners are the real thugs.

wrong #40…….I did not EVER own an xbox until aba few years ago. I don’t wait in lines for something like a video game. I don’t have that much time to invest in an alternate reality that doesn’t exist. Here’s the deal: I am just as excited to exercise this right as I was excited to vote when I turned 18. I’m glad that we have the freedom to use a blog such as this to express our opinions. I’m glad that we have the freedom to purchase those xbox games if we desire. I don’t hold any personal grudge against people who don’t believe in guns or firearms or whatever you want to label them as. That is your right. I don’t agree with it, but I don’t have to. That’s my right. Therefore, that’s why I’m happy to be in America. Freedom of speech. At the end of the day, I still have my opinion, and you’ll have yours. Thanks!

I don’t have to understand “gun owners” to know [statistically] my child is more likely to die from a bullet by age 50, than he is to die from cancer….

Sorry, but that worries me.

…and that’s ok. But it’s more likely to have a fatal heart attack than die by the hands of a gun. Approximately 300,000 people die from heart attacks every year (caridologychannel.com). Compare that to approx. 29,000 yearly that perish by gunfire (as according to neahin.com, and I suppose in the US only). Here’s a CDC stat: in 2004, 28,736 people died from gunshot wounds. A staggering 16,603 of them were from suicide. That is a 12,133 incident difference from suicide to outright shooting. So, is heart disease 19x more dangerous than guns are? I plan on keeping my heart.

I don’t want to take anyone’s gun away from them. I enjoy shooting skeet. What is at the core of what ails our society I feel, is the proliferation of guns. I know people who can hook me up with an unregistered gun just as easily as they could a bag of reefer.

#43, Garrison,
“I don’t have to understand “gun owners” to know [statistically] my child is more likely to die from a bullet by age 50, than he is to die from cancer….”

If you understood statistics, you would know that statement was false. Seriously, go to the CDC and check the stats for yourself, it will keep you from making verifiably incorrect statements.

Skippy, I can’t believe what you wrote! Blaming the ills of our country on the proliferation of guns??? You’ve been smoking too much of that reefer. For one thing, how about the lack of personal responsibility as a reason our society is going to hell? You want to blame an object??? Skippy, put the joint down, take a nap, maybe you think more clearly tomorrow.

X-box, did I say smoke reefer? Actually I gave it up long ago, but I know many people who still do. It’s hard to talk about “personal responsibility” when the combination of Ambien, Xanax, and Prozac satart working their magic on a man who legally bought his guns.

Oh my, is Garrison still trying this crap. I slapped him around like a red-headed step child using his own CDC statistics that he resorted to injuries from soft-air and paint ball guns to try to prop up his outrageous claims.

From personal experience, between 1990 and 1993, I knew 10-15 people that were killed by gun violence. I attended Roosevelt High School with all but one of them. Every one of them had two things in common……They were young males and involved in gang activity.

I’m calling Bullspit on Garrison’s service in the military, just like the name of the drug your mother was being denied and you never came up with. Tell us the branch, unit, bases served on, and rank you achieved. Your silence will be an admission of yet another fabrication on your part.

Garrison, if your is out on the streets selling drugs have him stop and “statistically” the odd of him dying from a bullet will drop drastically.

OOPS… Insert “child” after your in above comment. Brain and fingers aren’t connect yet this morning.

CS… Garrison will never acknowledge that many 22 year old “kids” like you have two tours in Afganistan, Iraq, or elsewhere around the globe protecting his self righteous butt. At 22 you already show more maturity and thoughtfullness in your comments than Garrison ever will.

Bb, it’s would be funny if it weren’t so sad. Garrison refers to a 22 year old as a “kid” because the young man wants to get his CCW. Now if CS was raving about what a great candidate Obama/Hillary are, he would be considered an intelligent young man, wise beyond his years in Garrison’s eyes. If CS was touting the importance and strength of Unions/Government programs, Garrison would think he was a genius. But alas, the young man wants to exercise his 2nd amendment rights and he is a stupid kid, probably one of them backwood, tobacky chewing, pickemup truck driving redneck stupid kids.

Garrison also needs 22 year olds classified as children and kids because that falls into the 18-24 age range that he needs to make his “guns kill children” argument stand up. Facts are facts. If you eliminate that category, gun deaths are cut in half. If you eliminate drug connections, gun deaths are cut in half yet again.

Firearms are less deadly to law-abiding people of all ages than about a dozen other products/activities. Garrison will never be smart enough to see or admit that.

Waiting on your service experience, Garrison.

Garrison’s comment #43 is a classic example of the Ronald Reagan observation that it is not that liberals are ignorant, it is just that so much of what they know is not true. It also demonstrates that Garrison has no desire to “understand” the world around him. He’ll just continue to stand in the dark and cry for nanny to come get him.

Here’s a senario lets say your in a public place say the library some dude starts picking folks off, now your a smart guy you have your CC so you save the day and blow this guy to smitherines (nice job) now the police show up and your the only guy holding a weapon ……….now your the gunman. BLAM!!!!!!!!

Once the threat is ended, try reholstering or laying down your weapon and obeying the instructions of the police exactly when they arrive. You give as little credit to police training as you do to citizen intelligence. Oh, that’s right. American citizens are too careless or ignorant to own a tool that launches projectiles. You better start looking at bows and nail guns.

I’ve come to the conclusion that there are a list of topics of national interest that it is virtually impossible to have a rational conversation about. The vast majority of people are so entrenched in their views that any attempt at conversation turns into a continuous repetition of sound bite talking points. This is one of those topics.

I like to think I’m reasonably rational. I have a position on this one, that I think has value. I’ll grant the supporters of the opposite position that they do have a point. And yet, when I state my position, I always wind up experiencing the worst possible responses.

So, I ask this question of the vast majority of posters on this subject, who have seen fit to rip Mr. Day’s head off for voicing his opinion: Are you capable of having a rational conversation on this subject? Can you suggest a solution to the serious problem of crazies going into public places and shooting up the joint other than to have more armed citizens on hand to deal with it when it happens? Can you propose any workable process to disarm the crazies, the children, and the gangsters that you would find acceptable? Do you have any suggestions on dealing with the black market in firearms?

It’s not enough to say, “enforce the laws we have.” Concrete, workable, acceptable proposals are required.

I’d suggest REAL background checks for legitimate firearm purchases, with a waiting period long enough to work AND permanent record keeping. I’d suggest serious enforcement of laws regarding illegal sales and targeting of known firearm black marketers. I’d suggest that if a minor uses a firearm to harm another person, the OWNER of the firearm is legally liable for making it possible. If you don’t have a trigger guard or a gun safe and use it, and your gun is used in a crime, you’re liable.

Bb, thanks for the kind words. I agree with the thought of quickly showing the weapon to police, and keeping in “unconcealed” so to ease tension in that particular situation. A little common sense to go along with intelligence never hurts (as too often this gets mysteriously seperated). We have to show a little thoughtfulness and forethought when having a privilege such as this.

“To whom much is given, much is required”

hs… You see proliferation of guns as the root cause of random violence. I see proliferation of gruesom video games and violent movies as the root cause. How much liberty are you willing to sacrifice and how much censorship would you accept to address the problem?

There is one thing that nobody seems to address and the truth of the matter is when these types of mass killings occur the guns that are used are legally attained!!! In most cases drug dealers with illegal weapons are not going to universities and committing these crimes they kill each other(to the chargrin of many) . It seems to me that legally attained guns kill more than illegal. I don’t need stats I just turn on the tube.

Your last line shows your ignorance.

“I don’t need facts, I saw it on TV.”

“So, I ask this question of the vast majority of posters on this subject, who have seen fit to rip Mr. Day’s head off for voicing his opinion: Are you capable of having a rational conversation on this subject? ”

Yes.

“Can you suggest a solution to the serious problem of crazies going into public places and shooting up the joint other than to have more armed citizens on hand to deal with it when it happens?”

Turn all massacre zones into something resembling maximum security prisons. Large walls, razor wire, few secured entry points. You got a plan?

“Can you propose any workable process to disarm the crazies, the children, and the gangsters that you would find acceptable?”

Nope, not yet.

“Do you have any suggestions on dealing with the black market in firearms?”

Long jail terms.

“I’d suggest REAL background checks for legitimate firearm purchases, with a waiting period long enough to work AND permanent record keeping.”

Now a background check is done by the FBI using NCIC, are you saying they arent good enough? How long of a waiting period do you want, and more importantly, can we have an emergency waiver for it? IE, person applies for a TRO from abusive spouse but still thinks they will be victim of violent crime, I think there should be an emergency waiver so this person can defend themselves.

“I’d suggest serious enforcement of laws regarding illegal sales and targeting of known firearm black marketers.”

Deal.

“I’d suggest that if a minor uses a firearm to harm another person, the OWNER of the firearm is legally liable for making it possible.”

Maybe, but you have to have a “stolen gun” clause, and define minor.

“If you don’t have a trigger guard or a gun safe and use it, and your gun is used in a crime, you’re liable.”

Keeping a trigger lock on or a weapon kept in a safe may render them useless and unavailable for use in home/personnel defense. I will give you without argument, that any weapon that is not for immediate use should be stored properly (locked up)

Are we getting anywhere?

Hs, I honestly have trouble having “rational” discussions on this matter because I find most opposing views to be irrational.

Take the Kirkwood case…..If you could snap your fingers and make all private ownership of firearms disappear, the results of that night would not have been any different. The killer could have just as easily whacked the officer in the head with a bat, brick, or machete. He STILL becomes armed with the officer’s weaponand proceeds to kill.

An adult can and often is charged for failing to secure a weapon after that weapon is used to do harm. I think it is up to the local prosecution to determine charges.

What exactly is a REAL background check or a longer waiting period going to do? Delay a killing? If someone is suicidal/homicidal, there isn’t much that will stop them other than a more powerful force.

Dealing illegally in firearms is a major no-no. Big time felony. There are countless laws in effect now for those caught with illegal firearms. Do you want them to be more punitive? Be my guest. You have my support.

Si Vis:

A minor: that one’s simple: How about under the age of 18, unless legally emancipated? Stolen property? You’d have a chance to prove it was stolen in court. If you leave a loaded weapon in your car or on your desk and someone swipes it, then you failed to secure it properly when you weren’t around. Sounds like you’re the one who screwed up…”attractive nuisance” is the legal term, I believe.

An example on how toothless the various laws are: The NIU shooter had actually spent time in a mental institution. When he filled out his FOID card application, he checked “no” on the box referring to inpatient mental heath care. Apparently, no one has either time, energy, funds, or willingness to verify that kind of data.

I guess my feeling on waiting periods is like this: I would suggest it would be a minor inconvenience to the vast majority of purchasers. If one could swear out an affidavit that one was in obvious danger (the domestic violence victim….rare), then exceptions could be granted. It might prevent someone who was intent on a rampage from carrying out his action. There are plenty of laws on the books that create inconveniences to most of us in the name of a higher good. It’s inconvenient for me to obey certain traffic laws (I live on a one-way street), but I see the greater good: it’s a good idea for traffic to move in a clearly understood manner.)

You guys are really funny…..Bb and Sub Par, do you work?
I listed this before…see if you know what it means: 01B40–NCO. SSE-6, 1973-74.

In 2006, there were less cancer deaths among non-smokers under the age of 50 than homicides by gunshots in the same age group….

Garrison,

I reviewed the mortality statistics from the CDC, and the your statement about more gunshot homicides than cancer deaths for under 50 is wrong. Could you provide a link to the data you are citing?

If you have found a nice source for statistics, I would like to check it out.

“Stolen property? You’d have a chance to prove it was stolen in court. If you leave a loaded weapon in your car or on your desk and someone swipes it, then you failed to secure it properly when you weren’t around. Sounds like you’re the one who screwed up…”attractive nuisance” is the legal term, I believe.”

How about they get prosecuted for “Failure to secure an unattended, otherwise legal, now stolen, firearm”? I just cant see charging Joe Blow for murder because he has a Garrison moment and leaves an unsecured weapon on his car seat.

How about we triple the penalties for anyone convicted of stealing a firearm?

#65 Garrison, Although a veteran myself, I don’t consider being a veteran a prerequisite for rights of citizenship. You are excellent proof that veteran status often has no correlation to understanding or defense of the U.S. Constitution.

#61 Ok so when breaking news about a killing spree interrups my favorite program I’m to assume its all boogus info because any belief in this info would be ignorant …………..so I guess 911 never happened!

Tazz don’t be stupid. What the Amazed was saying was, don’t relight just on what news and TV shows report. They report news that grabs attention and viewers. Have you ever noticed that during those news breaks, during shows, they still stop for commercials? The broadcast companies still need to pay the bills too. The more people they have watching means more money. So a story about a person defending themselves with a CCW, without firing, wont get any air time because there isn’t anything exciting about that story. No injuries, no deaths, and no stolen property leads to no viewers.

Thanks Eagle Scout.

Tazz, when was the last time a news caster interrupted your favorite program with a message that 200 high school students volunteered at a senior center?

You are getting one side of a story meant to play on your emotions. It is obviously working. Losing 5 people because a man goes crazy tragic and horrible. An emotional person has a knee jerk reaction and wants all guns banned.

If on 9/11 or 9/12, we would have rounded up and deported/killed all young muslim men and banned any new ones from coming into our country, we would have been making the same argument you, Garrison, and others are making concerning guns.

Ignorant ,stupid its funny how when someone put across opinions other than yours you resort to name calling. Most of what I read from Amazed is very mean-spirited. These issues can be debated w/o name calling,ever herd off anger management.

HS,

I believe what you have done is call projecting. While launching an appeal for rationality (#57), you simultaneously launch into an irrational rant. You probably spend so much time around same thinking individuals that you have no idea about the irrationality of your own opinions.

Waiting periods have never shown to have an effect on crime. They are only intended to inconvenience gun buyers to make the anti-gun crowd feel good. When you wish to restrict a right you need to be able to show some compelling evidence of the benefits of the restriction.

You list a whole list of societal problems that you wish gun owners to solve. Sorry, I do not have a simple answer to eliminating crime. However, there is ample evidence that your solutions with make the problem worse,

Finally, your most radical solution is to make third parties responsible for the actions of criminals. This is analogous to blaming McDonalds for obesity. Do you also want to prosecute car manufacturers for auto fatalities? Do you want to accept criminal liability for people killed in gun free zones because laws you support leave them defenseless? Your proposals would not only turn the entire American system of laws on their head, but also reverse centuries of common law that have made western civilization so great. How about holding criminals responsible for their own actions and letting citizens take responsibility for their own safety.

It is very Orwellian to scold others for the supposed sin of irrationality, while making outlandishly irrational arguments.

The left loves to point out the trampled rights of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. Yet they call for the same type of knee jerk emotional reaction to each new atrocity involving abuse of a gun.

Tazz, I mentioned the word “stupid” because the original post, from amazed, was talking about media bias and you brought in 9-11 conspiracies. I know from time to time these lengthy responses get off topic from the original letter but the whole 9-11 thing came from left field.

David: consider this…if, a few years ago, one of my kids had taken my car in the middle of the night and caused an accident that left someone else dead or injured, I guarantee I would have been sued and held liable for her actions because (a) they were underage and (b) the car was mine.

Shouldn’t the same logic apply to firearms?

Again, you failed to answer the questions, instead, you chose to attack the questioner.

Along the lines of my first paragraph: doesn’t it seem strange that it’s harder for a minor to get hold of a car than it is to get hold of a gun? At least in Illinois, if you’re under 18, you can’t hold title to a car. At what age can a young person legally buy a firearm? I truly don’t know, so don’t call me stupid.

The postings become off topic when the personal attacks begin ………….take a good look around you’ll find its the same ole gang attacking the same ole gang.

I was called ignorant for beliveing what I see on tv thats were the 911 comment came from. I never mentioned a conspiracy I watched the plans hit too.

After rereading My post I was misquoted, I wrote I don’t need the STATS I just turn on the tube. Amazed put his spin on it, ck out #60 &#61

“so I guess 911 never happened!”- Tazz
To me that is bringing in the whole 911 conspiracy. You were called ignorant for doing something similar. By bringing an irrelevant argument into this forum, you show that you don’t have strong arguments. You’re other arguments and statistics have already been shot down, so you resort to the same knee jerk tag lines that are meant to make those arguing agent you look like bullies. I’m afraid not sir.

Ever herd of sarcasim, you need to go back and reread the comment.

HS,

You may be held civilly liable because of the actions of your own child. I think similar liability would apple to your child’s actions with your firearm. You suggested criminal liability and you did not limit it to your child. If you car is stolen and involved in a hit and run, are you willing to face manslaughter or murder charges? This is an accurate analogy. I believe in Missouri the age to purchase rifles and shotguns is 18 and handguns is 21. I merely pointed out the flaws in your logic. This is not attaching you personally. Since I do not know you or anything about you, it would be kind of difficult. I did not call you names (stupid or anything else). I merely do no think your arguments are well thought out or rational.

Where does one lean to spin like that?

more sarcasim.

Tazz, ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, we are all ignorant in many ways.

You are right, you stated that you didn’t need stats because you can flip on the tube. I misquoted you.

My guess is you were watching your episode of American Idol when it was interrupted by the Kirkwood Shootings. You watched all of the news and it re-inforced your already held belief that guns cause killings.

Tragically, people died that night. Tragically, many well intentioned, misguided, and emotional people blamed it on an inatimate object. Truely a tragedy.

learn sorry

Now thats a low blow assuming I watch idol I guess the gloves are off jackass

not sarcasim, well not the last part.

There is no use trying to ‘rationalize’ with the lefty-lunatics. Everything in a liberal’s mind is based on irrational emotions.

Look at this video clip - It’s susan estrich (author of “The Case for Hillary Clinton) trying to defend her policies…the problem is that she doesn’t know anything about hillary

http://youtube.com/watch?v=N6GoiK82eMQ

Typical luney lefty

More name calling

not sarcastic

No, Tazz you are not being sarcastic. You are upset someone called you out in your lack of caring. The definition of ignorance is “The condition of being uneducated, unaware, or uninformed”
When your only source of info is from a biased source the phrase ignorant does seem to fit. In fact we didn’t give you that title you earned it.

If I leave my car out on the street, with the keys in the ignition and the engine running, I have not a leg to stand on if someone steals it and creates havoc. If I lock it and park it in the garage, then someone has to work at it for at least 30 seconds or so to steal it…that’s the difference.

HS,

I am unaware of any situations where gun owners have left their loaded guns in the street. Could you please provide some documentation where this has occurred? Your earlier post would be analogous to a person breaking into your garage and stealing the car even in the crime committed with your car happened years later.

Obviously, you have no intention of engaging in a debate on any sort of intellectual basis. You are unable or unwilling to see through your own biases. If this was on any topic other that guns, I think you would be embarrassed by the silliness of your arguments.

hs, did you know your that you and BMN have the same idea on charging theft victims as felons?
“Obama is proposing to make it a felony for a gun owner whose firearm was stolen from his residence which causes harm to another person if that weapon was not securely stored in that home.”

If the left try to take our guns away, I will buy every gun I can get my hands on and see who has the last laugh. You lefties are complete loons. I travel to Arizona a lot and there is no problem with people who carry guns everywhere. I feel very safe. They have to do so with all the illegals there running wild. Besides, the schools with killings were “gun free zones” and that didn’t stop them. You can’t stop drugs. You can’t stop crime - no matter how socialist you try to be. This isn’t global warming.

Its Monday I felt compleld to respond (I don’t blog on the weekends) Is it just me, or does eagal seem alittle upset, beliveing that guns are the root of many ills of society doesen’t make me uneducated, unaware or uninformed it is an opinion calling me ignorant never upset me. The name calling shows you my friend are irrational and close-minded. Much as you tryed anyone who reads my post can recognize your spin on my words . Once again I never mentioned a 911 conspiracy, but nice try.

Hey all you gun haters who want to ban guns: If gun bans were effective at curbing gun violence, why are so many shootings/murders happening in gun free zones (schools, city halls, etc.) where guns are already banned, but you never hear of any mass murders happening at shooting ranges (including those operated by the state of Missouri) where EVERYBODY HAS A GUN?