Gun ownership in U.S.? It's automatic

Okay, I'll take that bet, chicken little.

The sky isn't falling in all the other states that allow guns in "non-sterile" areas of the airport. Seems like a nice little impediment to domestic and foreign terrorism, to have fathers and mothers carrying around some return fire potential. I'm not leaving my family's safety up to the fat person with the walkie talkie, whether it is at the airport or Wallmart.

Cactus wrote:

I'm not leaving my family's safety up to the fat person with the walkie talkie, whether it is at the airport or Wallmart.

Soon we will see the Texas "pre-emptive" shooting law that will "prevent" the next attack on this guys family. I realize you will never convince these "cowboys" otherwise, but sadly we are going to live in the world that they help create. We are one of the most armed, church-going, murderous society's in the world. Does not this make you question our approach?

Final check in a government system of checks and balances. What is so hard for you lefties to understand?

Every Swiss male over 18 has a fully automatic weapon in his home - are Swiss citizens somehow more deserving of defense?

And by the way, doctors kill 50,000 people per year by mistake - should we ban them?

The pro-gun community is really hoping that the D.C. total semi-auto ban becomes the federal test case for semi-auto guns. We're almost certain to win, and the ripple effect will be huge. If Heller shows up with a Glock, a gun certainly in "common use," and is denied, it's a slam dunk win.

First of all, aside from the fact that even the anti-gun groups admitted before the case was over that the 2nd is an individual right and that no justice said it was collective, it was a Georgia law that changed that allowed firearms into the non-sterile areas of the airport. Get that? The state law changed and the city does not wish to comply.

Even the cities in California must follow state laws.

As for "I pray your wrong", no it does not make us question our approach, you know why? I acutally pay attention to the world we live in, which you obviously do not. Show me the second or third ranked murdering society. Like Japan that has as more suicides than we have so called "gun deaths" and they strickly limit firearms? Nope.

How about a 3rd world nation where its citizens are suffering genocide because the government doesn't allow their people to own firearms. Seems safe to me, or maybe you like the idea of random rapes, deaths and refugee camps.

The bottom line is that your approach of gun free areas is not working and is in fact a magnet for terror. It's high time for you to allow us our approach and you will see that none of your fears come true.

I pray your wrong wrote:

<quoted text>
Soon we will see the Texas "pre-emptive" shooting law that will "prevent" the next attack on this guys family. I realize you will never convince these "cowboys" otherwise, but sadly we are going to live in the world that they help create.

We are one of the most armed, church-going, murderous society's in the world. Does not this make you question our approach?

I don’t know about the most murderous societies in the world. I would not want to be in any of the following.
If you don’t believe look it up as far as places to avoid.

Pakistan
Zimbabwe
Afghanistan
Cote d'Ivoire
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Haiti
Liberia
Papua New Guinea
Russia (Chechnya)
Somalia
Sudan
Zimbabwe
Burundi
Jamaica

I pray your wrong wrote:

<quoted text> Soon we will see the Texas "pre-emptive" shooting law that will "prevent" the next attack on this guys family. I realize you will never convince these "cowboys" otherwise, but sadly we are going to live in the world that they help create. We are one of the most armed, church-going, murderous society's in the world. Does not this make you question our approach?

Hey! In California the rights of the criminal attacker are still revered and the burden of responsibility is mostly on the victim. So you got it like you like it, no? Just don't try and export that mess to the rest of the country and everybody will be happy. Consider this question: If there's just one patrol car available and Tom and Katie report a home invasion at EXACTLY the same time that you do, who's call gets answered first? Be realistic now! In my part of the country it barely matters cuz the home invader can't get past me! We don't live in fear like you do. The coastal media keep a constant message going to the residents to generate fear of the criminal element. The message amounts to "They're coming to get you! They've got guns!" That keeps west coast soccer moms worked up in a panic but in the rest of the country the residents have a response, "We have guns of our own. Let'em come!"

"And what we are is an insane society that will tolerate 30,000 shot-up citizens a year"
How many of those shooters were law abiding with gun permits? Oh ya, zero.
Who commits more crime, cops or licensed gun owners? Cops
I hope I didn't confuse anyone with facts.

I pray your wrong wrote:

<quoted text> Soon we will see the Texas "pre-emptive" shooting law that will "prevent" the next attack on this guys family. I realize you will never convince these "cowboys" otherwise, but sadly we are going to live in the world that they help create. We are one of the most armed, church-going, murderous society's in the world. Does not this make you question our approach?

But the armed and church going are the ones who keep the murderers at bay... Case in point - Colorado Springs, December 2007.

Ted Johnson wrote:

"And what we are is an insane society that will tolerate 30,000 shot-up citizens a year"
How many of those shooters were law abiding with gun permits? Oh ya, zero.
Who commits more crime, cops or licensed gun owners? Cops
I hope I didn't confuse anyone with facts.

Not to mention that armed citizens stop more crimes than the police do. And armed citizens have a lower error rate (shooting innocents) than the police do also. Armed citizens 3% error rate to police 11% error rate.

Trin Tragula wrote:

<quoted text>
Not to mention that armed citizens stop more crimes than the police do. And armed citizens have a lower error rate (shooting innocents) than the police do also. Armed citizens 3% error rate to police 11% error rate.

And you get these stats where? The NRA?

its amusing.
the left accepts kelo and roe as the law of the land because 'the court has spoken.'
and now the court dont count?

any eigth grader can read the 2A, and come to the same conclusion as the court majority.
only in liberal educated circles does the ability to misread the english languge exist.

I pray your wrong wrote:

<quoted text> Soon we will see the Texas "pre-emptive" shooting law that will "prevent" the next attack on this guys family. I realize you will never convince these "cowboys" otherwise, but sadly we are going to live in the world that they help create. We are one of the most armed, church-going, murderous society's in the world. Does not this make you question our approach?

And yet for as many concealed carry permit holders in the US, none of what you predict has come to light.
So for you, exercising a Constitutional right is bad.

What kind of newspaper would let this mis-imformed columnist work for them and print garbage like this. Just another limp wristed coward who is afraid of something he knows nothing about.....and wishes to impose his fear and weakness on others.

Those Georgia politicians aren't as dumb as they look.

If carrying guns everywhere is so great, why ban them at political rallies? Afraid someone might get shot?

Lou wrote:

<quoted text>
And you get these stats where? The NRA?

The daily news, imbecile! Now run down to Hollywood Blvd. and find a politically correct celeb you can service on your knees, you've earned your carbon credits today!

John wrote:

Those Georgia politicians aren't as dumb as they look.
If carrying guns everywhere is so great, why ban them at political rallies? Afraid someone might get shot?

Stupid criminals are in jail, smarter ones are lawyers, and really smart ones are politicians. They have to protect each other.

John wrote:

Those Georgia politicians aren't as dumb as they look.
If carrying guns everywhere is so great, why ban them at political rallies? Afraid someone might get shot?

Secret Service has jurisdiction at many rallys and political events and they generally set the guidelines with respect to admission.

You make your point with a list of third world/quasi democratic nations ..... I would think this makes my point and not yours. The notion that protection & hunting (which I both agree with) has morphed into assault rifles, concealed weapons & "amour piercing" bullets shows how "unbalanced" & illogical the arguments have become. We spend half the military budget of the world, imprison the largest % of our population in the world....& everyone is STILL playing the fear card to support their point. At what point do reflect on the efficacy of our positions?

Not Liberal wrote:

You make your point with a list of third world/quasi democratic nations ..... I would think this makes my point and not yours. The notion that protection & hunting (which I both agree with) has morphed into assault rifles, concealed weapons & "amour piercing" bullets shows how "unbalanced" & illogical the arguments have become. We spend half the military budget of the world, imprison the largest % of our population in the world....& everyone is STILL playing the fear card to support their point. At what point do reflect on the efficacy of our positions?

We're a rough and tumble country, always have been. We'll never accept the yoke of socialist oppression.