Quote:
Originally Posted by
Darthtang AW http:///t/397599/great-time-to-be-in-public-schools-in-san-antonio/20#post_3544408
Based off that logic slavery would never have been abolished. The women's right to vote would never have happened...etc.....Same with prohibition and it's subsequent overturning.
And if the Conservatives back then had the same mindsets as they do today, those Amendments would've never happened. The 2nd Amendment has always been taboo. Even though anyone with common sense can comprehend the true intent of that Amendment, the gun nuts created their own interpretation, and the power of the gun lobbyists keep it that way.
You already own a shotgun in your home. That is sufficient for self defense. Sorry, you can't have the handgun. See how justification works.
I'd have no problem with it. My wife is the one who wanted the handgun for protection when I was out of town. She felt the shotgun was too heavy and cumbersome to move around if she had to get to it in the middle of the night. As least I'm not paranoid to the point I have to justify owning a military-grade weapon for home protection. If you can't hit someone within 10 yards with one or two shots, then you have no business owning a gun in the first place. She how logic works.
10% of women that have an abortion regret the decision for the rest of their lives and wish they wouldn't have done so. I am not equating the so called rights of a woman's body. I am equating your 30 day "cool down " period to irrational decisions or rushed emotional thought.
Where do you get your statistics? Oh that's right, the Pro Life sights where they claim they interview all these woman who have abortions. I'm sure women want to come out and fill out some survey explaining their rationalizations and justification for wanting that procedure. Most anti-abortion states already force women into making emotional decisions when they force them to take sonograms or have vaginal probes push up their hoohas, then see pictures of the fetus before being allow to make a final decision on whether they want an abortion or not. Most women who choose abortion have already had 30 days to think about it. They don't even realize they're pregnant until they miss their next period. Then realization kicks in, and they weigh the pros and cons as to whether they should have the baby. Sometimes it's medical reasons, sometimes financial, and most of the times it is emotional because they have to deal with the father. You watch too many Maury Povich shows.
That is not what the law states. So if your daughter was caught with a dwi you should serve jail time as well? What if your child took a kitchen knife from home and went on a stabbing spree. Are you at fault and should be charged as well?
Yes. You are the primary caretaker of that juvenile. You are responsible for ANY of their actions until they become an adult. If parents were held liable for their incompetent parenting skills and decisions, maybe these irresponsible kids that perform these kind of acts would become less prevalent.
So a nation wide ban would curtail this? It is illegal to purchase a gun from out of state without a legal transfer and background check. So you are telling me, that DC high murder rate under the ban was a direct result of all those gang bangers and criminals buying guns out of state? Then when the ban was overturned the murder rate dropped significantly. So it must have been the illegal guns killing people on their own?
What part of a person who commits a crime with an illegally purchased weapon could care less they are breaking the law purchasing that gun don't you comprehend? Some interesting facts:
The combination in Washington of strict gun-restriction laws and high levels of
gun violence is sometimes used to criticize gun-restriction laws in general as ineffective. A significant portion of firearms used in crime are either obtained on the second-hand market or in neighboring states.[sup]
[44][sup]
[45] Results from the
ATF's
Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiative indicate that the percentage of imported guns involved in crimes is tied to the stringency of local firearm laws.[sup]
[44]
The number of homicides per year in Washington, D.C., peaked at 479 in 1991,[sup]
[13][/sup] followed by a downward trend in the late 1990s. In 2000, 242 homicides occurred,
[11][/sup] and the downward trend continued in the 2000s. In 2012, Washington, D.C. had only 92 homicides in 91 separate incidents, the lowest annual tally since 1963.
[14][/sup] The Metropolitan Police Department's official tally is 88 homicides, but that number does not include four deaths that were ruled self-defense or justifiable homicide by citizen.
[14][/sup] The cause of death listed on the four case records is homicide and MPD includes those cases in tallying homicide case closures at the end of the year.kipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Washington,_D.C.#cite_note-homicidewatch.org-14">[14]
As Washington neighborhoods undergo , has remained steady (even slightly increasing in some areas) as poorer residents move out of the city into the nearby suburbs because of rising housing costs.[sup]
[15] However, the influx of more affluent new residents in the city has also led to an uptick in robberies and property crimes in gentrifying areas, including
Columbia Heights,
Adams Morgan,
Mount Pleasant,
Dupont Circle,
Logan Circle, and
Shaw. There was an average of 11 robberies each day across the District of Columbia in 2006,[sup]
[5][/sup] which is far below the levels experienced in the 1990s.
[16][/sup]
At the end of the day, it's an effort in futility to try and rationalize the reasons why limiting access to guns can result in the reduction of gun crime with a gun zealot. You have this false sense of security that arming yourself to the teeth with all the firepower you can muster, will make your life safer and free from becoming a victim of crime. You can walk around in plain view with a gun strapped to your side, and someone could walk up behind you and pop a cap in the back of your head before you could put your hand on the grip. You can have your 50-round AR-15 next to your bed, and someone could break in through a back window and slice your throat before you come out of your deep sleep. The only time you have the advantage with a firearm is when you know the confrontation is heading your way. Any other time, you're nothing more than a sitting duck with an overpriced piece of metal in your pocket.
The first link the woman was planning this for several weeks. Cooling off period would not have helped.
The second link someone bought the gun for a known felon. 30 days later it would have been given to the felon still...
The third link as pointed out was an officer...pretty sure he owned a gun already.
4 and 5 were the same story. But were a valid story.
the sixth the state failed in their duty to protect the citizens with the restraining order. Had the state done their job the restraining order would have prevented the purchase.
In closing I leave with the news of your area. Somehow you missed this I am guessing.
http://www.khou.com/news/crime/Armed-good-Samaritan-comes-to-the-aid-of-purse-snatching-victim-257091061.html
