Good lord, the gun clerk with the shotgun was an idiot. The story IMO had little merit as well
This is a discussion on 2A - CNN Anti Gun Hit Piece of the day within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Real Title: Five things to know about guns By Tom Watkins, CNN June 29, 2013 (CNN) -- This weekend, Morgan Spurlock's "Inside Man" gives CNN ...
Real Title: Five things to know about guns
By Tom Watkins, CNN
June 29, 2013
(CNN) -- This weekend, Morgan Spurlock's "Inside Man" gives CNN viewers an inside and in-depth look at the issue of firearms -- as viewed from behind the counter of a gun store. Here are five things to know about the debate:
Watch the Video at the link: Five things to know about guns - CNN.com
Good lord, the gun clerk with the shotgun was an idiot. The story IMO had little merit as well
Don"t let stupid be your skill set....
And Shepards we shall be, for Thee, my Lord, for Thee,
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, So that our feet may swiftly carry out thy command,
And we shall flow a river forth to Thee, And teeming with souls shall it ever be,
Not sure exactly how that one was a "hit piece". The reality is that the information that was presented was accurate. Yes, gun are used to kill people, sorry but that is just a fact. Now the reality is that the vast majority of shootings are one criminal shooting another criminal.
The only thing I think they should have presented is the part of the CDC report that said an estimate 500,000 to 750,000 violent crimes are prevented by firearms yearly.
The comments by the gun store clerk(s) are typical comments for the shops in my area. One thing I have observed recently is that most new HD gun buyers are purchasing AR style weapons because of low recoil and increased capacity.
The comment about racking the slide does three things, alerts the bad guy, gives away your position and in most cases gives the bad guy first shot advantage. In the majority of cases a home burglar has prior convictions, and if armed, will do what ever it takes to not be captured. I use a shotgun for HD with a round chambered.......
US Army 1953-1977
We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.
1 -- There is no debate about the impact of gun violence. In 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tallied more than 31,000 firearm deaths in the United States. Each year, some 55,000 violent deaths occur in the country, costing $60 billion in medical care and lost productivity, according to the agency. More than 38,000 people in the country are suicides.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin
Many of these 'buzzwords' the antis use are nonsensical. What is gun control? What is gun violence?
There's already 'violence' going on when a person picks up a weapon and uses it against another. Bat, brick, knife, car, projectile weapon, it is what's handy.
News reports slant the facts - they take rare events or high profile incidents, or tragedies and use them to push some personal agenda, creating a 'spin' which will help them further a career, create a sensation.
Look at Biden jumping on the 'gun control' bandwagon, with his shotgun into the air and that went nowhere besides showing what a doofus he is. Now that he's lost that opportunity, he's jumping on Snowden bandwagon. Though not related to guns, it's how unscrupulous politicians grab a cause and use it to get face time. Do you think they REALLY care about the victims or care to solve the problem. Heck no.
North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permit Instructor
NRA Personal Protection and Basic Pistol Instructor
Have never seen a "violent" gun. Not once, in 40+ years of shooting and 20+ years of carrying. Not a single one. It's hard to have a debate when facts get ignored as the facts they are. No violent guns exist. It's a fantasy, for politically-motivated reasons of citizen disarmament.Originally Posted by From the article
I've seen misused ones, abused ones, forgotten ones (left loaded and unattended, stacked precariously upon a ledge or against a wall). But never a "violent" one. Never, unless a violent person grabs hold of that tool, much like a chainsaw, a hammer, ice pick, rock, bat, tire iron, fist, knee, boot heel, ...
We have a people violence problem, pure and simple. And it occurs for a myriad of reasons, ranging from psychoses to economics, from lack of education to lack of opportunities, from destructive relationships in their lives to bad burritos. Arms aren't the problem. (As cars and imbibing aren't the problem, with drunken drivers. Drunken drivers and their behaviors, their choice to become drunk then driving are the problem.)
Violent felons who believe preying upon others is justifiable, by whatever means they choose, are the problem. Sure, many of them do indeed select a firearm as one available tool, given the utility and effectiveness. But most effective tools in the hands of a violent predator will kill, merely given the lack of compunction and desire to do so. It's not as though violent felons would cease being violent if they were simply lacking this or that tool. And it's not as though erasing citizens' lawful rights to acquire arms (even if that erasure were constitutional or lawful in any way) would have much effect on felons, given the hundreds of millions of available arms on the street right now, and given the ability of felons to simply select from a variety of other tools with which they could still be deadly.
Absolutely. Thankfully so.Originally Posted by From the article
Tens of millions of citizens have basically awakened to the simple fact that the hirelings they've temporarily placed in administrative and legislative capacities in their states and DC are in gross breach of their sworn oaths to protect and defend the Constitution and are instead seeking to destroy it, circumvent it, sidestep it, weaken it and otherwise obliterate the ability of citizens to keep and bear/carry arms in their own defense.
Those hirelings should focus on one thing, in this area: crime elimination, criminal elimination.
Disarming citizens against crime will only clear the field ahead of criminal predators. Hardly a recipe for success.
Unless, that is, success by these unconstitutional hirelings is measured in terms of how many citizens they can turn into "sacrificial lambs" wholly incapable of defending against predators. Could this be the motive and the measure of success for these hired predators? Ya think?
Sure, because the asinine complex of reasons behind what makes felons felons is not a simple question.Originally Posted by From the article
But having the ability to effectively withstand and survive predation is a timeless concept. You either do, or you don't. It's largely unrelated to why felons act feloniously and violently. And to the extent that one doesn't have any such capability, one can find it decidedly more difficult to survive such violence. Surprise. That'll never change. It's the simple interaction of what occurs in a predator-prey situation the world over. It's Nature's law. No amount of dithering and hand-wringing by liberty-hating hirelings, nor screaming by the ignorant and fearful few, will ever change that.
There have been plenty of "studies" and reports for decades as to causal factors of violence and crime. There just hasn't been much government-funded, government-guided, government-skewed variations of such things. Rightly so, given the liberty-hating policy and goals of our government, to strip citizens of all practical ability to defend themselves against all comers and to defend the Constitution and our sovereign states and nation with all means at our disposal (by force, if need be). It is what it is. And none of that will change the utility or viability of all other research into violence and crime that's done elsewhere.Originally Posted by From the article
Sure. 'Cause the liberty-haters have so far failed to disarm the citizens who've hired them. Crimes against the Constitution are still needed, in order to come anywhere near achieving this. And the first step is to find more ammo for bringing our liberties under heavier fire. It is what it is.Originally Posted by From the article
Yup. That'll never change.Originally Posted by From the article
And violent felons will continue to be violent felons, no matter whether citizens are targeted by their own hirelings or not, whether felons find it more or less expensive to be armed. About the only thing that'll help a targeted victim under an upraised knife is, quite simply, having the practical, effective means on the instant of being under that knife of being able to survive the attack. Nothing else really matters, in terms of the citizen's effective ability at that moment.
One fact remains true: disarming victims cannot reduce the number of victims.
Said another way: What is the point ... crime reduction, or decreasing victims' ability to survive it?
Not hardly.Originally Posted by From the article
Predation hasn't changed. Being under an "upraised knife" hasn't changed. The desire to survive such things hasn't changed. About the only real thing that has changed in the past 20yrs is the vast increase in the number of citizens waking up and smelling the cess pool, realizing nobody but they have the practical ability on the instant of crime to withstand such crime. No real way around that, no matter how much hatred for liberty a person has, or how much evisceration of the Constitution a citizen is willing to sponsor or accept.
Last edited by ccw9mm; June 30th, 2013 at 07:09 AM. Reason: clarity
The info in the article is not accurate - except for the death stats it is based on studies that have been shown to be biased and poorly designed. Why should the same agency that screwed up the studies in the past be given more money for more biased studies.
Notice the language used here: "to injure or kill an intruder in self-defense", chosen VERY carefully to deliberately skirt the statement quoted above. It's all about the agenda, not the facts.Incidents in which a family member is killed or injured by a gun in the home far outnumber the times when a gun is used to injure or kill an intruder in self-defense, Kellermann said.
The antis just don't understand the depth of love & bonding that comes with guns - redbirddog5
2nd AMENDMENT: The gateway drug to freedom addiction.
Why should people own firearms for self defense when the violent crime rate has been dropping since 1993? Contradiction much? The piece first cites that the violent (gun) crime rate is way out of control, then bends back to say that there is no reason to own firearms for self defense since the violent crime rate is so low. How about a correlation between the decrease of violent crime and the increase in the purchase and use of defensive firearms? Once again, figures don't lie, but liars can figure.
With the initial post-Sandy Hook bill, the country showed that it's on to them, which is why the POTUS got so shrill in his little speech. It's going to be interesting to watch the finger-pointing when the health care provisions finally take effect, too - when millions of people see their bills skyrocketing, insurance companies going under, and their employers dropping coverage - hoo boy.
"...there is no arguing with such snivelling puppies, who allow superiors to kick them about deck at pleasure."
The first use of the gun was yo storm the castle in china to free them from the mongols, a much smaller force was able to do this, swords and sheilds would have has many deaths.
Untill people get this things will not get better for guns.
Guns don't kill people, Guns save Lives.
If you want peace, prepare for war