Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 69

Thread: Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    276

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    To let everyone know the gun news... I hope you jump on this wagon

    http://www.mlive.com/opinion/kalamaz..._river_default

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Exclamation

    I found it kind of strange that the article focuses primarily on one source the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. It also centered on stats focusing on proving one side of a two sided argument. There are so many articles proving out the false logic of gun control. My main arguement would be where in constitution does the federal government get the power to by-pass the second ammendment? Day by day our federal govmt is turnover a blind eye to the constitution and socializing our way of life. At some point it has to stop otherwise we'll be no different then a two bit dictatorship. Just my two cents. The stats really aren't important if the constitution isn't. The govmt will do whatever it wants and we'll be forced to abide with a gun in our mouth while they exempt themseleves from the statist laws.

    Mike

  3. #3
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by AAMitch View Post
    To let everyone know the gun news... I hope you jump on this wagon

    http://www.mlive.com/opinion/kalamaz..._river_default
    Done! It is scary reading just how little regard some of my fellow citizens have for their rights.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Actually, this type of research can be used to show that certain gun laws are not mandatory in nature. I cited this same source's data as proof that a specific statue was not mandatory.

    Of course the CDC has a Morbidity webpage that is also useful ... and there are other online (free and pay) sites.



    I agree that laws cannot be passed that violate the 2nd amendment but one can also argue mandatory v. directory nature of laws too and this either allows one to side step the constitutional issue or have it as a secondary reason.

    Unfortunately, little gun studies have been done that focuses on one specific aspect of gun related injuries and fatalities. Its good and bad.

    I have spoken to the director of the Harvard group .. he's very nice and answer my queries and his answers were favorable toward gun rights because (not that he is pro-2nd .. I did not speak to him in depth about his views on this ... I was just asking for data) his data did not show any injuries or deaths related to a gun issue I was investigating.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 12-31-2012 at 03:01 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    Like 425o, 234d, 227, 237, 231a?
    If it was a loophole, it was one spelled out clearly by the Michigan State Police.

    I maintain, that it was in the power of the legislature to pass the laws the way they chose to, and that's what they did. Therefore, no loophole.
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...16#post1865216

    Oh really?!

    I thought you said the legislature can do what they want and that is within their power?
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  6. #6
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    Here are some facts:
    The Brady Campaign (aka Brady Bunch) ranks states based on their gun control laws. They give California the highest ranking of any state. The states of Alaska, Arizona, and Utah all received 0s from the Brady Campaign in regards to gun control laws. If you combine all the firearm murders in AK, AZ, UT they amount to 264. California alone has 1,220. California also leads the country in knife murder, "other weapons", and murders where a person is beat up with no weapon being used. People will kill other people if that is their goal.

    Of the firearm homicides in this nation rifles (including so called "assault rifles") are responsible for about 3.7% of firearm homicides and about 2.5% of all murders. In fact more people are beaten to death by someone with no weapon at all than to killed by someone using a rifle.

    People keep saying there needs to be a comprise made about so called assault weapons because we need to save lives. I don't see an assault weapons ban saving lives. Rifles are already rarely used in firearm homicides so even if we do ban them we will still hear about how we need much stricter gun control in this country. And it will continue to not work. This will only get the ball rolling for more useless gun control laws. If what we're trying to do is "save lives" we'd be far better off banning other things.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  7. #7
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    Here are some facts:
    The Brady Campaign (aka Brady Bunch) ranks states based on their gun control laws. They give California the highest ranking of any state. The states of Alaska, Arizona, and Utah all received 0s from the Brady Campaign in regards to gun control laws. If you combine all the firearm murders in AK, AZ, UT they amount to 264. California alone has 1,220. California also leads the country in knife murder, "other weapons", and murders where a person is beat up with no weapon being used. People will kill other people if that is their goal.

    Of the firearm homicides in this nation rifles (including so called "assault rifles") are responsible for about 3.7% of firearm homicides and about 2.5% of all murders. In fact more people are beaten to death by someone with no weapon at all than to killed by someone using a rifle.

    People keep saying there needs to be a comprise made about so called assault weapons because we need to save lives. I don't see an assault weapons ban saving lives. Rifles are already rarely used in firearm homicides so even if we do ban them we will still hear about how we need much stricter gun control in this country. And it will continue to not work. This will only get the ball rolling for more useless gun control laws. If what we're trying to do is "save lives" we'd be far better off banning other things.
    What's the population of Alaska, Arizona, Utah compared to the population of California?

    I bet if you add all those States up they don't equal the population of California…
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    What's the population of Alaska, Arizona, Utah compared to the population of California?

    I bet if you add all those States up they don't equal the population of California…
    Some interesting food for thought concerning population and it's effect upon a society and the individuals therein...

    Although the work of Mr. Calhoun involved mice....

    http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/42/wiles.php

    -snip-
    In 1962, Calhoun published a paper called “Population Density and Social Pathology” in Scientific American, laying out his conclusion: overpopulation meant social collapse followed by extinction. The more he repeated the experiment, the more the outcome came to seem inevitable, fixed with the rigor of a scientific equation. By the time he wrote about the decline and fall of Universe 25 in 1972, he even laid out its fate in equation form:
    Mortality, bodily death = the second death
    Drastic reduction of mortality
    = death of the second death
    = death squared
    = (death)2
    (Death)2 leads to dissolution of social organization
    = death of the establishment
    Death of the establishment leads to spiritual death
    = loss of capacity to engage in behaviors essential to species survival
    = the first death
    Therefore:
    (Death)2 = the first death
    This formula might apply to rats and mice—but could the same happen to humankind? For Calhoun, there was little question about it. No matter how sophisticated we considered ourselves to be, once the number of individuals capable of filling roles greatly exceeded the number of roles,
    only violence and disruption of social organization can follow. ... Individuals born under these circumstances will be so out of touch with reality as to be incapable even of alienation. Their most complex behaviors will become fragmented. Acquisition, creation and utilization of ideas appropriate for life in a post-industrial cultural-conceptual-technological society will have been blocked.

    Perhaps there is a hint in there about why urban centers seem to have entirely different perspectives than rural areas.... or maybe I just spend too much time reading oddball stuff................
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  9. #9
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    What's the population of Alaska, Arizona, Utah compared to the population of California?

    I bet if you add all those States up they don't equal the population of California…
    Source US Census Est. through July1, 2012
    http://www.census.gov/popest/data/st...012/index.html

    AZ = 6,553,255
    UT = 2,855,287
    AK = 0,731,449

    _____________
    Tot 10,139,991

    VS

    CA 38,041,430
    ____________
    Dif 27,901,439
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 01-01-2013 at 05:34 PM. Reason: data link
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  10. #10
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    What's the population of Alaska, Arizona, Utah compared to the population of California?

    I bet if you add all those States up they don't equal the population of California…
    True but when you look at the percentage of firearms used in murders Alaska, Arizona, and Utah are all lower than California. Although from what I could tell having strict firearm laws and firearm murders in the U.S. have little correlation.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  11. #11
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    So CA has 4x the combined population. That helps bring the 5x firearm homicide number into perspective.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  12. #12
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    Although from what I could tell having strict firearm laws and firearm murders in the U.S. have little correlation.

    I've heard this from Mark Edge of Free Talk live as well. John Lott tells a different story. Who to believe?

    Truth, lies, and statistics.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  13. #13
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    I've heard this from Mark Edge of Free Talk live as well. John Lott tells a different story. Who to believe?

    Truth, lies, and statistics.
    I based mine off of FBI stats. From what I can tell a lot of John Lott's "facts" have been discredited, sadly.

    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    221
    Here is a fact. There is no gun control argument without emotion. The Anti's have no facts that backup their weird point of view, they only twist facts and as in the California vs other states use zero actual facts other than they adore dictators, and gun confiscation, and anyone who furthers that goal of total control over the populace, by a Government that would make Stalin or Hitler jealous.

    The facts erase the Anti's points, arguments and emotional drivel. The more we focus on facts the more we win, and conversely the more we accidentally promote the Anti's argument by not bringing facts to the table, the more they win. It is easy to fight their lies, if we have enough attention as they are given. Let's face it the mainstream media is Marxist Communist in mentality and those old enough to remember back in the 1960's and 1970's how the media made it clear they only supported full blown Marxism and excused even the mass murders of their Communist dictators in history. All you have to do is take a look at the Time Magazine man of the year for all the years it ran and you see the worst scum of the Human race glorified by the media, including Stalin, Hitler, Stalin again, and Kruschev (Communist) and it reads like a Who's who of dictators, Fascists, mass murderers, and psychopaths with a few normal people thrown in to not make it look as bad as it really is. I provided a link so you can see for yourself. If you don't recognize
    the names look them up and be prepared to be shocked.

    Fighting gun control is fighting for the lives of future generations, to not fall prey to Genocidal psychopaths like the many Time Magazine and liberal media adores.

    http://history1900s.about.com/od/peo...f-The-Year.htm

    want to know what Leading Democrats think? Read this insane Bas&^rds comments about killing NRA members.

    Texas Democratic Party Official Calls For Murder of NRA Members
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012...f-nra-members/

    John Carburruvius is a Democrat precinct committeeman in Bay Area Houston. He is a well-known Democrat in the state, worked on Noriega for US Senate campaign. He also SERVES ON THE TEXAS STATE DEMOCRAT COMMITTEE. On Friday he urged his twitter followers to murder NRA members and anyone who supports them.
    The Examiner reported:

    On Sunday, we reported that liberals on Twitter called for the murder of NRA members. One of those making the calls was identified Sunday as John Cobarruvias, a blogger, Democratic precinct chairman in the Houston area and a member of the Texas Democratic Executive Committee.

    “Can we now shoot the NRA and everyone who defends them?” he tweeted.

    After reading about the tweets on another site, Yvonne Larsen noticed a familiar name.

    “Among the selection of tweets advocating for the murder of NRA President Keene and all NRA members was a name familiar to me; probably familiar to many readers of Houston’s Liberal blog sites,” she wrote at Big Jolly Politics.

    more on the link provided................


    This is a WAR against FREEDOM and anyone who supports the Constitution and the biggest problem is we are the only ones who fail to see they are at war with us.







    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    Here are some facts:
    The Brady Campaign (aka Brady Bunch) ranks states based on their gun control laws. They give California the highest ranking of any state. The states of Alaska, Arizona, and Utah all received 0s from the Brady Campaign in regards to gun control laws. If you combine all the firearm murders in AK, AZ, UT they amount to 264. California alone has 1,220. California also leads the country in knife murder, "other weapons", and murders where a person is beat up with no weapon being used. People will kill other people if that is their goal.

    Of the firearm homicides in this nation rifles (including so called "assault rifles") are responsible for about 3.7% of firearm homicides and about 2.5% of all murders. In fact more people are beaten to death by someone with no weapon at all than to killed by someone using a rifle.

    People keep saying there needs to be a comprise made about so called assault weapons because we need to save lives. I don't see an assault weapons ban saving lives. Rifles are already rarely used in firearm homicides so even if we do ban them we will still hear about how we need much stricter gun control in this country. And it will continue to not work. This will only get the ball rolling for more useless gun control laws. If what we're trying to do is "save lives" we'd be far better off banning other things.
    Last edited by alphamale; 01-01-2013 at 06:36 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Our nation was founded by a few good men who essentially signed their own death warrants with the declaration of independence, a document which also has been passed down to us with instructions to overthrow our government to save our nation as needed, a fact further proven by the founder's other documents.

    To say that we should be arguing crime stats, to me, is beyond moronic. Our nation was founded on the overthrowing of tyrants either through the democratic process (and the founders hated democracy, that's why we're a democratically represented republic), or violence as needed. If the founders were alive today, I'm sure they'd be encouraging us to own much heavier weapons than we do, so that we could keep up with modern military hardware as best as possible.

    Even though the stats when looked at honestly are almost always on our side, I say all the anti gunners out there can stick their stats and shove them straight up their asses. Crime control is overshadowed by control of government tyranny, and that is the only argument that needs to be made.

    Liberty or death, that is the argument which the founders would have wanted us to make.

    To be clear, I am in no way saying it's time to get violent, only saying that the ability to wage war is the purpose of the second amendment, and we need to protect the bill of rights now so that it doesn't come to that later.
    Last edited by Michigander; 01-01-2013 at 11:58 PM.

  16. #16
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    Like 425o, 234d, 227, 237, 231a?
    And every law that bars "keeping" and "bearing" at any point in time or place?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  17. #17
    Regular Member Ezerharden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Erie, MI
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    Like 425o, 234d, 227, 237, 231a?
    What about people like those convicted of violent felonies? Do they get to legally own and carry guns too?
    Want to keep informed of Open Carry events in your area? Go to www.miopencarry.org/update

    I carry a gun because a Police Officer is too heavy.

    For Drama free gun rights discussion, see http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/

  18. #18
    Regular Member Ezerharden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Erie, MI
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

    BTW, what is it like to be that which you dislike?
    Oh so a person rapes and kills a woman with a gun, serves time, gets out, and gets another gun and does it again. Interesting theory but completely insane. And just FYI I have never been convicted of any crimes beyond a speeding ticket, can you say the same?
    Want to keep informed of Open Carry events in your area? Go to www.miopencarry.org/update

    I carry a gun because a Police Officer is too heavy.

    For Drama free gun rights discussion, see http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/

  19. #19
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezerharden View Post
    Oh so a person rapes and kills a woman with a gun, serves time, gets out, and gets another gun and does it again. Interesting theory but completely insane.
    Yes, the situation you describe would be "insane." I would prefer the justice system be changed to the point that once you serve your time and pay your debt to society then you regain your full citizen status with all rights and privileges restored, even the right to own/possess/carry a firearm...with the caveat that if the person is deemed too dangerous or unstable to exercise those rights and privileges in a responsible manner then they shouldn't be released, ever.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Angry Des Moines Register publishes gun-ban column advocating deadly violence against NRA,

    More facts, less emotion.. hmm tell that to the Des Moines Register and see what they published below.


    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...ines-register/


    Des Moines Register publishes gun-ban column advocating deadly violence against NRA, GOP leaders

    By Tim GrahamPublished January 02, 2013FoxNews.com

    Donald Kaul retired earlier this year. Now he has decided to return to writing occasional opinion columns for OtherWords.org. The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn. brought out all his ugliness.
    In a column that appeared after the shooting with the headline "Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns," he proposed a new liberal agenda: repeal the Second Amendment, declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal, and well, make violent threats to Republican leaders and NRA members. The Des Moines Register published this junk on December 29.

    "I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control," he wrote. Is that a threatening James Byrd reference? "And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures," he continued.
    This was how he spelled out the other agenda items, which included killing NRA members who wouldn't surrender their arms:

    "Here, then, is my “madder-than-hell-and-I’m-not-going-to-take-it-anymore” program for ending gun violence in America:

    • Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.

    • Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me."
    The so-called "news" media love to blame conservatives for the declining civility of our democratic discourse, but the hateful venom spewed by supposedly enlightened liberals like Kaul is as vicious as it gets.
    Publishing death threats is bad enough, but doing so in the name of promoting a more peaceful, compassionate society is beyond sick. But this clown will probably never realize the absurdity of his argument.

    Tim Graham is director of media analysis at the Media Research Center and senior editor of MRC’s blog NewsBusters
    Last edited by mikestilly; 01-03-2013 at 06:50 AM.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Yes, the situation you describe would be "insane." I would prefer the justice system be changed to the point that once you serve your time and pay your debt to society then you regain your full citizen status with all rights and privileges restored, even the right to own/possess/carry a firearm...with the caveat that if the person is deemed too dangerous or unstable to exercise those rights and privileges in a responsible manner then they shouldn't be released, ever.

    Bronson
    I agree fully. If a convicted criminal can't be trusted with a gun then they can't be trusted with a knife, a ball bat, a car, or a rock, and need to be kept in prison and out of society.

    After all... a gun is just something a criminal uses to inflict harm.... and a criminal intent on inflicting harm will use anything including a gun, ball bat, rocks, knives, and even fists and feet, to do that harm.

    Logic dictates that it isn't the ball bat, the knife, the rock, or the gun, that inflicts harm but is the criminal using those things to inflict harm so how about we finally grasp the concept that gun control doesn't control criminals before they commit a crime nor does it prevent the criminal from finding future victims after they have been released from prison.

    So... the real question isn't whether released criminals should have the right to keep and bear arms and actually the real question doesn't even have anything to do with guns at all.....the question is...

    If the idea is to protect people from being harmed by violent criminals why do we keep releasing violent criminals?
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Ezerharden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Erie, MI
    Posts
    744
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    I agree fully. If a convicted criminal can't be trusted with a gun then they can't be trusted with a knife, a ball bat, a car, or a rock, and need to be kept in prison and out of society.

    After all... a gun is just something a criminal uses to inflict harm.... and a criminal intent on inflicting harm will use anything including a gun, ball bat, rocks, knives, and even fists and feet, to do that harm.

    Logic dictates that it isn't the ball bat, the knife, the rock, or the gun, that inflicts harm but is the criminal using those things to inflict harm so how about we finally grasp the concept that gun control doesn't control criminals before they commit a crime nor does it prevent the criminal from finding future victims after they have been released from prison.

    So... the real question isn't whether released criminals should have the right to keep and bear arms and actually the real question doesn't even have anything to do with guns at all.....the question is...

    If the idea is to protect people from being harmed by violent criminals why do we keep releasing violent criminals?
    Maybe not enough prison space? Maybe poor sentencing guidelines? To be honest, in the "Utopian fantasy land" you describe, there would be no need for guns at all, but that ain't the way it is here in a place most of us like to call "Reality", and in that world it is proven that recidivism runs rampant.
    Want to keep informed of Open Carry events in your area? Go to www.miopencarry.org/update

    I carry a gun because a Police Officer is too heavy.

    For Drama free gun rights discussion, see http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/

  23. #23
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezerharden View Post
    Maybe not enough prison space? Maybe poor sentencing guidelines? To be honest, in the "Utopian fantasy land" you describe, there would be no need for guns at all, but that ain't the way it is here in a place most of us like to call "Reality", and in that world it is proven that recidivism runs rampant.
    So not enough prison space and poor sentencing guidelines are reason enough to release violent criminals from prison?

    And my "Utopian fantasy land" that you referred to has the same need to have guns to protect from the criminal committing his first crime that lands him in prison. (Not to mention the whole idea of the 2nd Amendment of defending from tyranny doesn't go away just because common criminals are put in prison.)

    And let me point out that the part of your post I put in bold is often used to justify not allowing violent criminals that have been released from owning/carrying guns when, in a place most of us like to call "Reality", it has been proven many released criminals still own and carry guns anyway. So... what exactly is the point of not allowing released criminals to own guns?

    The simple truth is... because of recidivism... because violent criminals who do not obey laws that say they are not allowed to have guns still have guns and still use them to commit more crimes after they have been released... is the most logical reason to not release violent criminals from prison!! in the first place.

    In my not so humble opinion... folks who think a law that says a criminal is not "allowed" to have a gun will actually stop that criminal from having a gun is the one using "Utopian world" thinking.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 01-03-2013 at 10:07 AM.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  24. #24
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448

    Gun-control debate could use more facts, less emotion

    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    WTF would a person who rapes and kills someone be doing out of a cage or wooden box?
    Some may ask the same of a person who endangers a child...
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  25. #25
    Michigan Moderator Shadow Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    1,018
    Quote Originally Posted by BoiledFrogs View Post
    This is an intentional and blatant misrepresentation of the facts in an attempt to disparage one of your own. BTW, it's illegal too.

    For the record, it never happened,
    And you know this how? The offender plead out, as I recall. Why would an innocent person plead out? If it never happened, there would be no criminal record....
    'If the people are not ready for the exercise of the non-violence of the brave, they must be ready for the use of force in self defense. There should be no camouflage.....it must never be secret.' MK Gandhi II-146 (Gandhi on Non-Violence)-- Gandhi supports open carry!

    'There is nothing more demoralizing than the fake non-violence of the weak and impotent.' MK Gandhi II-153 (Gandhi on Non-Violence)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •