Gun Control

[carlfense]

90% huh???

 

I guess Gallup doesn't ask the right questions of the American people :

 

http://www.gallup.co...w-priority.aspx

Could you specify which question/result you're referring to? And which quote you're responding to?

[rawhide]

Just posting up another in a series of polls. Read in to it what you will.

[Junior]

Gregory Dean, Jr. was pulled over in New Lebanon, N.Y., Sunday for a light on his license plate being burnt out. But what began as a simple traffic stop ended up with Dean being arrested over two bullets in his registered firearm, which put him in violation of the state’s new law, the Journal News reported.

Last month, a provision in New York’s strict gun control laws went into effect, making it illegal to have more than seven rounds in a magazine unless said firearm was being used at a range or in a competition.

http://www.theblaze....s-7-bullet-cap/

 

Totally glad they got this guy off the streets.

 

Me too, it's always a good thing when someone who is breaking the law is arrested.

[carlfense]

Just posting up another in a series of polls. Read in to it what you will.

But I don't see any reference to background checks? Isn't that the 90% number that you seem to be disputing?

[rawhide]

I would definitely dispute 90% of Americans can agree on anything but adding the caveat that they understand what the question means. Doesn't seem to be a priority compared with other more compelling issues. Unless Gallup can't do a poll correctly.

 

 

Good ol Jon S feels we of the tinfoil be-hatted leaning have been wronged:

 

http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/stewart-irs-scandal/ great segment by Jon funny also

there are some innuendos there so pay attention I had to re-watch it several times.

[BigRedBuster]

I would definitely dispute 90% of Americans can agree on anything but adding the caveat that they understand what the question means. Doesn't seem to be a priority compared with other more compelling issues. Unless Gallup can't do a poll correctly.

 

 

Good ol Jon S feels we of the tinfoil be-hatted leaning have been wronged:

 

http://www.capitalis...rt-irs-scandal/ great segment by Jon funny also

there are some innuendos there so pay attention I had to re-watch it several times.

 

That was priceless. Sometimes he nails it.

[carlfense]

I would definitely dispute 90% of Americans can agree on anything but adding the caveat that they understand what the question means. . . . <snip> . . . Unless Gallup can't do a poll correctly.

You seem to be mixing and matching again. The question that polled at roughly 90% approval was not asked in the link that you provided.

 

Unless you're claiming that this poll needs to be "unskewed" (which didn't turn out so well) I don't know where you're going.

 

 

Doesn't seem to be a priority compared with other more compelling issues.

There's quite a difference between approving of something and saying that it's the most compelling issue. Again . . . that doesn't do much to disprove 90% support.

[rawhide]

So when a poll by the "people" indicates they approve by 90% for background checks but another poll asks about more than just gun control their priorities change. It isn't that difficult a concept to understand. Mix and Match; yup the gallup poll does that. And gun control isn't the 90% approved priority compared with other issues.

 

That's all I got. The Gallup poll shows that the people polled (assumed American) that only immigration reform is less important than reducing gun violence. All the other issues on the poll are higher priorities. That is on the page 2 poll.

 

 

This Gallup poll says the 90% is waning:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162083/americans-wanted-gun-background-checks-pass-senate.aspx

[carlfense]

So when a poll by the "people" indicates they approve by 90% for background checks but another poll asks about more than just gun control their priorities change. It isn't that difficult a concept to understand. Mix and Match; yup the gallup poll does that. And gun control isn't the 90% approved priority compared with other issues.

90% approved priority? Huh?

 

This Gallup poll says the 90% is waning:

http://www.gallup.co...ass-senate.aspx

All the way down to 83%?

[Someone]

Gregory Dean, Jr. was pulled over in New Lebanon, N.Y., Sunday for a light on his license plate being burnt out. But what began as a simple traffic stop ended up with Dean being arrested over two bullets in his registered firearm, which put him in violation of the state’s new law, the Journal News reported.

Last month, a provision in New York’s strict gun control laws went into effect, making it illegal to have more than seven rounds in a magazine unless said firearm was being used at a range or in a competition.

http://www.theblaze....s-7-bullet-cap/

 

Totally glad they got this guy off the streets.

Why would you say that? From the article you linked: "Dean was released without bail" because his violations are misdemeanor charges.

[Someone]

Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop a active shooter before the police arrived?

 

How many lives have been saved because of the average Joe on the street might actually be Rambo?

 

What is the NRA's count on" lives saved because of citizens packing heat" since the Newtown shooting?

Seeing no answers, I went looking and found 16 times in the past ~20 years that a possible mass shooting was stopped with the help of a ordinary citizen and their trusted firearm.

 

Between 1993-2002 ~175 people have been killed as the result of a accidental discharge of a firearm AT WORK.

 

It seems that the chance of AVERAGE JOE RAMBO stopping the next mass shooting is just a fraction of the chance that AVERAGE JOE RAMBO will accidentially shooting a co-worker or an innocent bystander.

 

Do tell the NRA this. The right to carry your weapon everywhere comes at a HELL OF A HIGH PRICE.

The problem with your assertion, is the fact that many of these mass shootings are taking place in "gun free" zones.

Why limit the discussion to mass shootings? Truth be told, there are plenty of mass shooting that have occured in places that aren't gun free.

 

Heck, even the conceal carry weapon permit holders occationally are the shooter in mass shootings and other times, the mass shooting is done is states that don't require a CCW permit. Google: Michael McLendon, Charles Johnston, Guillermo Zarabozo, Paul Michael Merhige, Gerardo Regalado, Omar Thornton, Richard Poplawski.

 

Yesterday, a concealed handgun permit holder shot her ex-husband after he gave her a "mean look and an obscene gesture" she 'shot him until the gun was empty'. There have been 494 private citizens plus 14 members of law enforcement killed by permit holders, or people who legally where not required to have a permit to carry a concealed handgun.

 

The good guys are literally killing us.

Deflect and change the discussion. Straight from the politicians handbook.

 

As you can see based on what I first posted, my questions were never limited to mass shootings.

 

Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived?

 

How many lives have been saved because of the average Joe on the street might actually be Rambo?

 

What is the NRA's count on "lives saved because of citizens packing heat" since the Newtown shooting?

 

Note: None of those 3 questions are limited to just mass shootings. None of the them. If you read the first question again: Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived? and then read this statement I made: Yesterday, a concealed handgun permit holder shot her ex-husband after he gave her a "mean look and an obscene gesture" she 'shot him until the gun was empty'. There have been 494 private citizens plus 14 members of law enforcement killed by permit holders, or people who legally where not required to have a permit to carry a concealed handgun you can see that there is no "Deflect and change the discussion."

[Saunders]

As you can see based on what I first posted, my questions were never limited to mass shootings.

 

Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived?

 

How many lives have been saved because of the average Joe on the street might actually be Rambo?

 

What is the NRA's count on "lives saved because of citizens packing heat" since the Newtown shooting?

 

Note: None of those 3 questions are limited to just mass shootings. None of the them. If you read the first question again: Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived? and then read this statement I made: Yesterday, a concealed handgun permit holder shot her ex-husband after he gave her a "mean look and an obscene gesture" she 'shot him until the gun was empty'. There have been 494 private citizens plus 14 members of law enforcement killed by permit holders, or people who legally where not required to have a permit to carry a concealed handgun you can see that there is no "Deflect and change the discussion."

Lol. You're great. You don't even read what you write, and then when challenged, you change the rules of the discussion.

 

Ask a question, ignore the rebuttal, and change the criteria.

 

Chicanery at its finest.

 

Back to my statement. How many "mass shootings" occurred in "gun free" zones?

[rawhide]

So when a poll by the "people" indicates they approve by 90% for background checks but another poll asks about more than just gun control their priorities change. It isn't that difficult a concept to understand. Mix and Match; yup the gallup poll does that. And gun control isn't the 90% approved priority compared with other issues.

90% approved priority? Huh?

 

This Gallup poll says the 90% is waning:

http://www.gallup.co...ass-senate.aspx

All the way down to 83%?

You do know that that poll was 1k people Is that an adequate sample size??

 

But this typical Husker pbs poll has 45k votes??

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/poll-2/congressional-action-on-guns/16826/ Don't tell me the other leaners don't watch PBS

[walksalone]

Gregory Dean, Jr. was pulled over in New Lebanon, N.Y., Sunday for a light on his license plate being burnt out. But what began as a simple traffic stop ended up with Dean being arrested over two bullets in his registered firearm, which put him in violation of the state’s new law, the Journal News reported.

Last month, a provision in New York’s strict gun control laws went into effect, making it illegal to have more than seven rounds in a magazine unless said firearm was being used at a range or in a competition.

http://www.theblaze....s-7-bullet-cap/

 

Totally glad they got this guy off the streets.

Why would you say that? From the article you linked: "Dean was released without bail" because his violations are misdemeanor charges.

 

hey buddy, becareful, you might step in the

[Someone]

As you can see based on what I first posted, my questions were never limited to mass shootings.

 

Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived?

 

How many lives have been saved because of the average Joe on the street might actually be Rambo?

 

What is the NRA's count on "lives saved because of citizens packing heat" since the Newtown shooting?

 

Note: None of those 3 questions are limited to just mass shootings. None of the them. If you read the first question again: Are there many examples of a CWP holder using his or her gun to stop an active shooter before the police arrived? and then read this statement I made: Yesterday, a concealed handgun permit holder shot her ex-husband after he gave her a "mean look and an obscene gesture" she 'shot him until the gun was empty'. There have been 494 private citizens plus 14 members of law enforcement killed by permit holders, or people who legally where not required to have a permit to carry a concealed handgun you can see that there is no "Deflect and change the discussion."

Lol. You're great. You don't even read what you write, and then when challenged, you change the rules of the discussion.

 

Ask a question, ignore the rebuttal, and change the criteria.

 

Chicanery at its finest.

 

Back to my statement. How many "mass shootings" occurred in "gun free" zones?

 

Here is your answer.

 

If you want the criteria to be mass shootings & gun free zones, perhaps you can help us with some information. Since you demand answers, perhaps you will practice what you preach.

 

Did the killers at Columbine choose their location because it was a gun free zone? Was there an armed security guard on site at the time of the shooting?

 

When a killer shoots up a place, is he or she taking sick revenge based on some perceived wrong or based on a lack of firearms and longer estimated 911 response times?

 

In 20 work place shootings nearly every time, the killer appeared to be responding to being fired or other mistreatment by colleagues.

 

In 11 of the 12 school shootiings, the killer had personal ties to the school that was attacked.

 

Are we to assume that the Sikh Temple in WI was shot up because it was the nearest gun free zone to the shooter? If that is your assumption, you might be wrong because it is legal to bring guns into a Church in WI unless the facility expressly forbids it. Some reports say that no such prohibition was put in place at the Sikh temple in WI.

 

At least 36 mass shooting involved murder suicides or hopeless stand-offs with police where the killer tried to keep killing until he was killed. Wouldn't it be stupid to suggest that a person planning to kill someone else and themselves would pick a safe place where they would not be shot?

 

Are gun free zones patroled by law enforcement and armed security professional? How silly would it be to assume that these professional disarm before going into a business, church, theater or school?

 

We have 100 million guns. We have 49 states that allow people to carry their weapon(s) in public. Where is the evidence that citizens packing heat, ie Joe Rambo, makes us safer?

 

I have provided many, many examples where Joe Rambo leads to lost lives. All make it easy for you to answer the questions I have asked:

 

1. Did the killers at Columbine choose their location because it was a gun free zone?
   
2. Was there an armed security guard on site at the time of the Columbine shooting?
   
3. 
   When a killer shoots up a place, is he or she taking sick revenge based on some perceived wrong or based on a lack of firearms and longer estimated 911 response times?
   
4. 
   Are we to assume that the Sikh Temple in WI was choosen by the killer because it was the nearest gun free zone to the shooter?
   
5. 
   Wouldn't it be stupid to suggest that a person planning to kill someone else and themselves would pick a safe place where they would not be shot?
   
6. 
   Are gun free zones patroled by law enforcement and armed security professional?
   
7. 
   How silly would it be to assume that these professionals always disarm before going into a business, church, theater or school?
   
8. 
   Where is the evidence that citizens packing heat, ie Joe Rambo, makes us safer?