Quantcast

Guns don't kill people......

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,936
3,760
Sleazattle
Don't know the details of this case but you would think that in 26 months more than one person needed killin'. Just think of all those people that need a good killin' but are unable to get a good killin' because they do not live in a free country. Poor oppressed people, we really should liberate you.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,412
0
SF
I did think about this today.

The next big shooting, there will be a backlash against guns, the usual complaints, etc.

The next time a gun is used in self-defense, it won't make a ripple at all.
 

eric strt6

Resident Curmudgeon
Sep 8, 2001
15,033
4,281
directly above the center of the earth

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,412
0
SF
A 66-year-old woman who shot and killed an intruder early this morning in south Redding after he tried to break into her home appears to have been justified, prosecutors say.

The Shasta County coroner’s office identified the man this afternoon as Jesse Edward Theis, 37, of Redding.

Donna Hopper had first fired warning shots at the suspect after she was woken by the sound of him trying to break into her Branstetter Lane bedroom window just before 4 a.m., Shasta County Chief Deputy District Attorney Josh Lowery said.

She shot him when the suspect came back and tried to climb inside the window a second time, Lowery said.

“He meant her lethal harm,” Lowery said. An official determination won’t be made until the DA’s office has a chance to review police and autopsy reports, Lowery said. An autopsy will likely be performed Monday.

UPDATED: Prosecutors say Redding woman, 66, appears justified in killing intruder : Record Searchlight
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
10,219
234
chez moi
I like how you assume those guns were purchased legally
And thus, arguing your talking point regardless of context or reality continues. This is the way of the Internet Gun Control Debate. I think if it ever changes, it's a sign of the imminent apocalypse.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,412
0
SF
And thus, arguing your talking point regardless of context or reality continues. This is the way of the Internet Gun Control Debate. I think if it ever changes, it's a sign of the imminent apocalypse.
Mooshoo's point is very relevant, unless your argument is are all guns bad.

I know that gun wasn't purchased in Oakland, because the last gun shop closed in 2000.

Possibly the gun was sold from San Leandro, considering that shop was closed by the Feds because of faulty records and that several of their guns were recovered in the use of a crime.

This is one of the problems with gun control debates: many of the debaters do not fully understand gun politics and laws, so the debate either becomes ban all guns or let everyone have one.

I believe in a fair amount of gun control, particular at the point of sale. But for legal owners, fewer restrictions should be forced upon them.
 

MikeD

Leader and Demogogue of the Ridemonkey Satinists
Oct 26, 2001
10,219
234
chez moi
Mooshoo's point is very relevant, unless your argument is are all guns bad.

I know that gun wasn't purchased in Oakland, because the last gun shop closed in 2000.

Possibly the gun was sold from San Leandro, considering that shop was closed by the Feds because of faulty records and that several of their guns were recovered in the use of a crime.

This is one of the problems with gun control debates: many of the debaters do not fully understand gun politics and laws, so the debate either becomes ban all guns or let everyone have one.

I believe in a fair amount of gun control, particular at the point of sale. But for legal owners, fewer restrictions should be forced upon them.
It's not that it's not relevant or I don't in many ways agree with him, it's that he's making complete non-sequiturs. He's making up things to argue against that haven't been argued.

Eric: "Here is a link to a news story about a shooting:"

MOOSHOO: "INSERT STANDARD GUN CONTROL ARGUMENT, ALONG WITH MY POSITING ERIC'S POSITION ON THE ISSUE TO BE WHAT I WOULD PREFER TO ARGUE AGAINST."
 

norbar

Turbo Monkey
Jun 7, 2007
9,663
385
Warsaw :/
I would say the biggest gun control fail is the idea that passing gun laws will all of the sudden make criminals start following the law.
Stricter gun laws = less people buying guns legaly = less gun shops and lower gun production = harder to buy a gun legaly or illegaly.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,936
3,760
Sleazattle
How does one exactly acquire a gun illegally? I am only really familiar with Virginia laws but it seems I would have to go out of my way to get one illegally.

-Convince licensed dealer to forgo background check and waiting period for a handgun.
-Steal it
-Buy one I knew was stolen
-Do something illegal with a gun
-Be a convicted felon (outside of a licensed dealer it is up to the felon to self-police when buying from a private owner)


-Conceal without permit
 

SacredYeti

Monkey
Sep 12, 2011
157
0
San Diego, CA
I like how you assume those guns were purchased legally
This is what most no-gun nuts easily overlook. They see the problem with the devices themselves rather than the people that use them. How many people have been stabbed to death with a pencil, key, screwdriver, etc.?

If the problem is the guns and not the people then why are there murders with devices other than a firearm?

My opinion on gun control is: (1) All firearms should be registered to the owner (2) All first time owners must take a mandatory safety class (military/LEO exempt) (3) Classify "assault weapons" for what they are, not because they "look" mean (my synthetic stock SKS is NOT an AK, idiot BLM) (4) Anyone who wishes to own a "special purpose" weapon (i.e. 50bmg, 20mm bolt action etc.) will have to purchase a special stamp and tax receipt, similar to now, but allowing anyone who is clean and properly trained/certified to own it instead of red tape crap.

Idk, there is a gun problem in this country but not with the guns themselves, but rather the people that get them and the how/where they got them.

I'm all for gun rights in every way, but if you have a questionable background or use it in violence then you should lose your rights, not jack it up for the rest of us.

Should you be allowed to own a 20mm gattling gun? HELL NO!!!! (would be fun :D) But there should be more reasonable and common sense leeway when what is too dangerous for the common man and what isn't.

On that note, I have a shotgun that is my first to go for home defense (never needed for that though, just got it so I had a pump action for slugs at the range) and for that reason was going to buy "bean-bag" riot rounds. These are apparently VERY illegal in the PROK, but if I want to use a 2 3/4" slug or 00-buckshot to defend myself that's ok :rolleyes: go figure

In CA, you can't put someone down with cracked/bruised ribs from a bean bag but you can put a 6-9" hole is their chest with a slug... Aye-aye-aye :rofl:
 

norbar

Turbo Monkey
Jun 7, 2007
9,663
385
Warsaw :/
The problem is you can't make people not stupid but you can take the guns from them.

Also my argument still stands - the problem you have with gun violence in the us has nothing to do with people but with the amount of guns in the market. Assuming 5% of guns is illegal in the US and in France they are 2 hugely different numbers. In gun strict countries only organised crime people have acess to guns and if you seen their stashes you would see half of it is older than you with maybe one antique assult weapon if any. The limited number of guns in the hands of such people makes me feel much safer than the chance that I may shoot someone before they shoot me.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,412
0
SF
Stricter gun laws = less people buying guns legaly = less gun shops and lower gun production = harder to buy a gun legaly or illegaly.
Do you know why Oakland's gun shops disappeared? It is not because of a lack of popularity or even gun purchase restrictions.
Any store that sells guns or ammunition must pay the city $24 for every $1,000 made on any merchandise sold, from guns to fishing rods to books.

Prior to the tax's approval, such businesses paid $1.20 for every $1,000 in receipts.
Last Gun Shop in Oakland Closing / Steep tax ruined profits, owner says - SFGate
There are no longer any gun shops in San Francisco as well because of they have been zoned out by city supervisors.

In comparison, the only gun shop in Manhattan has taken a paranoid stance to remain open:
when I visited the John Jovino Gun Shop, the city’s oldest, the mildest inquiry elicited a swift and gruff response. Show me your police identification, I was told, or goodbye. The store does not sell to civilians.

Among the reasons this policy is remarkable is that it isn’t actually true. John Jovino does sell to civilians, as a subsequent phone call confirmed. But apparently it is not eager to do so.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/nyregion/30critic.html
 
Last edited: