Open Carry

[Greenheadrocker]

Simple question: Did you actually read all the material before your knee jerked?

NO KNEE JERKING HERE

This is the Harvard I know of a little left leaning wouldn't you say. Harvard's Unitarian philosophy. Unitarianism is not a revealed religion. It is a social movement based on the notion that man is basically good and morally perfectible, and that all that is needed to achieve this moral utopia is a good secular education. And that is why the Unitarians became the major force in the public school movement. It should also be noted that Unitarian liberalism is at the core of American political liberalism, for the chief practice of Unitarians was and still is social political activism based on the belief that government could solve all of our problems. And that's the liberal political philosophy that prevails today.

[fishinwrench]

Hey, don't drag God into this, Phil will get cranky.

If God had intended y'all to pack heat he would have given you a kangaroo pouch.

[Tanderson15]

The left leaning news does not report the saves of home owners with guns or CC folks. It boils down to wait for the government to protect you or protect yourself. I oppose open carry but always carry.

[rps]

NO KNEE JERKING HERE

This is the Harvard I know of a little left leaning wouldn't you say. Harvard's Unitarian philosophy. Unitarianism is not a revealed religion. It is a social movement based on the notion that man is basically good and morally perfectible, and that all that is needed to achieve this moral utopia is a good secular education. And that is why the Unitarians became the major force in the public school movement. It should also be noted that Unitarian liberalism is at the core of American political liberalism, for the chief practice of Unitarians was and still is social political activism based on the belief that government could solve all of our problems. And that's the liberal political philosophy that prevails today.

I posted scientific material from peer reviewed journals. Seems to me the only such material posted in this discussion. I made zero comment other than "interesting reading." In response, people imply I am a mentally deficient, godless liberal. The term for this kind of response is ad hominem. That is the classic Latin phrase that means the response attacks the man rather than the argument.

If scientific studies proved the guns prevented crimes against property or person, I am sure the NRA would publicize it until we were all convinced. They don't so I know such studies do not exist.

I respect the rights all of you have to own and keep firearms. What I question is the wisdom. When I posted material that seems to support that questioning, it seems I threatened the beliefs of some.

As for the argument that guns make for a safer society and reduce or prevent crime, please make a comparison among the United States, Canada, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand. (I chose those nations so the no one would accuse me of comparing the United States to godless foreigners.) You will discover that in societies comparable to our own where firearms are heavily regulated, the murder and armed robbery statistical evidence proves they are safer.

But then, why would anyone want facts to have anything to do with their opinion.

BTW, I want to make clear that I own guns, I qualified expert when in the military (although I never heard a shot fired in anger), and I support responsible hunting. I know Tanderson and the idea that he carries does not bother me one bit. My points are directed to untrained idiots with handguns. For every Tanderson in the world there 20 or more of the others and they kill or they let their kids kill every day.

Do not bother to respond. I am done with this thread.

[Greenheadrocker]

"Interesting reading" Passing strict gun control laws will not make us all safer. In fact, as you will read about below, even a study conducted at Harvard found that the more guns a nation has the less crime it tends to have. In other words, there is a very strong positive correlation between more guns and less crime. This is the exact opposite of what the mainstream media would have us believe, but it makes sense. You see, the reality is that criminals really, really, really don’t want to get shot. When you pass strict gun control laws, you take the fear of getting shot away and criminals tend to flourish. Just look at what is going on in America today. The places with the highest crime rates are the major cities where strict gun control laws have been passed. In some of those cities the police are so overwhelmed that they have announced that they simply won’t even bother responding to certain kinds of crime anymore. The truth is that the government cannot protect us adequately, and that is one reason why millions of preppers are arming themselves and gun sales have been setting new records year after year. Unfortunately, the mainstream media and many of our politicians seem absolutely obsessed with trying to restrict our constitutional right to own guns. They are waging a relentless campaign to try to convince the American people that guns are bad. But is that actually the case? Of course not. The following are 18 little-known gun facts that prove that guns make us safer… #1 Over the past 20 years, gun sales have absolutely exploded, but homicides with firearms are down 39 percent during that time and “other crimes with firearms” are down 69 percent. #2 A study published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy discovered that nations that have more guns tend to have less crime. #3 The nine European nations with the lowest rate of gun ownership rate have a combined murder rate that is three times greater than the nine European nation with the highest rate of gun ownership. #4 Almost every mass shooting that has occurred in the United States since 1950 has taken place in a state with strict gun control laws… With just one exception, every public mass shooting in the USA since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are banned from carrying guns. Despite strict gun regulations, Europe has had three of the worst six school shootings. #5 The United States is #1 in the world in gun ownership, and yet it is only 28th in the world in gun murders per 100,000 people. #6 The violent crime rate in the United States actually fell from 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992 to 386.3 per 100,000 in 2011. During that same time period, the murder rate fell from 9.3 per 100,000 to 4.7 per 100,000. #7 Approximately 200,000 women in the United States use guns to protect themselves against sexual crime every single year. #8 Overall, guns in the United States are used 80 times more often to prevent crime than they are to take lives. #9 The number of unintentional fatalities due to firearms declined by 58 percent between 1991 and 2011. #10 Despite the very strict ban on guns in the UK, the overall rate of violent crime in the UK is about 4 times higher than it is in the United States. In one recent year, there were 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK. In the United States, there were only 466 violent crimes per 100,000 people during that same year. Do we really want to be more like the UK? #11 The UK has approximately 125 percent more rape victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #12 The UK has approximately 133 percent more assault victims per 100,000 people each year than the United States does. #13 The UK has the fourth highest burglary rate in the EU. #14 The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU. #15 Down in Australia, gun murders increased by about 19 percent and armed robberies increased by about 69 percent after a gun ban was instituted. #16 The city of Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the United States. So has this reduced crime? Of course not. As I wrote about recently, the murder rate in Chicago was about 17 percent higher in 2012 than it was in 2011, and Chicago is now considered to be “the deadliest global city“. If you can believe it, there were about as many murders in Chicago during 2012 as there was in the entire nation of Japan. #17 After the city of Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring every home to have a gun, the crime rate dropped by more than 50 percent over the course of the next 23 years and there was an 89% decline in burglaries. #18 According to Gun Owners of America, the governments of the world slaughtered more than 170 million of their own people during the 20th century. The vast majority of those people had been disarmed by their own governments prior to being slaughtered. Sadly, you rarely hear any facts like these on the mainstream news networks. Instead, they give countless amounts of air time to the radicals that are obsessed with gun control. And did you know that there is now an official propaganda manual that has been put out for gun control advocates? This manual actually encourages gun control advocates to emotionally exploit major shooting incidents to advance the cause of gun control… Democratic strategists have drafted a how-to manual on manipulating the public’s emotions toward gun control in the aftermath of a major shooting. “A high-profile gun-violence incident temporarily draws more people into the conversation about gun violence,” asserts the guide. “We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.” The 80-page document titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging,” also urges gun-control advocates use images of frightening-looking guns and shooting scenes to make their point. “The most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak,” the guide insists. “The debate over gun violence in America is periodically punctuated by high-profile gun violence incidents including Columbine, Virginia Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek. When an incident such as these attracts sustained media attention, it creates a unique climate for our communications efforts.” Do not bother responding I am done with this thread.

[jtram]

^^^^^this guy^^^^^

[Old plug]

Guns do not kill peole but the National Attitude is going to kill a awful lot of people and that blood bath is coming on faster all the time.

[Smalliebigs]

No handguns allowed would be a great start on less gun deaths, sandy hook was a horrible thing, but the exception rather than the rule. Every day deaths due to handguns are the rule...they serve no purpose in society and if they were non existent there would be far fewer shootings.

Yeah we better ban everything that is bad that nobody will do that anymore.....like rape or beating people with hammers. Let's ban all guns and all knifes and that way nobody will get shot or stabbed. Most of the country boys here would dung there pants if they had to roll thru north st. Louis and take pics where I have to sometimes......it's bad enough that the picture taking service won't go in there and get them for me. Call me a pussy for carrying a gun in there while you pet your Unicorn sitting in your golden chair underneath the rainbow. If we are banning all guns we need to ban all Muslims in this country while we are at it they seem dangerous and kill people indiscriminately.

[MOBass]

Finally...I think I've made it fairly clear that I'm against a lot of gun control laws, and that I'm happy with the Second Amendment. I think the anti-gun folks are being unrealistic. But other than that and a few other issues, I'd classify myself as liberal, and I rather resent the blanket use by some here of "liberal" as an insult. That's one of the things that scares me the most about the way this country has gotten--to all too many people (no matter what their political persuasion) the other side is either retarded or evil. Issues aren't discussed, they are just excuses to call the other guy names, and anybody who isn't on your side is the enemy. Compromise and cooperation are dirty words. Hey, neither side has cornered the market on patriotism, intelligence, or morality, and absolutely nothing good ever comes of villifying those with whom you disagree.

I don't like the term liberal when referring to those that want a large central government and prefer the correct language of communist, socialist, and secular progressive, all of which are more accurate descriptors. Communist and socialist long ago co opted the word liberal because it was palatable to the masses. You might be more of a classical liberal.

A classical liberal would believe in greater freedoms, less central government regulation, and more issues handled at a lower governmental level. I view myself as a classical liberal and would prefer many issues not to be handled at a national level, but rather at a state, and in many cases local level. It would probably shock some to learn that I don't care what you smoke, who you fornicate with, if you want an abortion or not, less laws would be better all the way around. What I do care about is being told I must compromise my principals to accommodate someone's 'feels'.

As to the use of ridicule and insults. A cursory read of Alinsky will show you the play book very clearly. If you disagree with a secular progressive issue I can assure you that in short order you will be called racist, bigot, sexist, homophobic, and a slew of other unpleasant terms. Those spouting the insults either A) believe them or B - are just following Alinsky in using ridicule to isolate and discredit. That is why you are seeing the death of reasonable social discourse.

Thank you for your time.

[Haris122]

If we are banning all guns we need to ban all Muslims in this country while we are at it they seem dangerous and kill people indiscriminately.

Well, if that were to happen I'd be screwed on both accounts. Let's hold off on that one please. Haven't killed anyone, indiscriminately or otherwise, and don't plan on either.