> > > Since we've yet to try it seems stubborn to claim that.
> >
> > So by tacking on more laws that criminals pay no attention
> > to, we are going to stop them from getting guns? Ok.
>
> Exactly - that's what I meant. Because the reason we do enact laws is
> so that criminals can pay no attention to them.
>
> So, any law that is ever flouted is a bad law?
>
No, but based on the statistics of how many guns are used in crimes that are
illegally obtained, see your stats below, what are more laws going to do to
stop these people? You still haven't answered that question. Except that,
oh we haven't tried it yet. Well we haven't tried national healthcare yet
either. You don't see us rushing to do that either do you.
> > > > > Sounds fishy to me.
> > > >
> > > > Anything sounds fish to a leftist gun control advocate
> > except more
> > > > gun control.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the label. But I think that I'll refuse it.
> >
> > If the shoe fits...
>
> Not sure how it can... Since I'm a gun owner myself (tho not a regular
> user). My father spent several years teaching firearm and hunting
> safety and taught my brother and I well.
More people should be taught well, rather than not allow them to own guns.
I don't know how you
cannot consider yourself a gun control advocate.
> >
> > I don't know anyone that has guns for "full scale drawn out
> > combat" Everyone I know has them for either hunting, their
> > job, or personal protection. If you and your family were at
> > home late at night and someone broke into your home and had a
> > gun. What would you do? Call the police and hide in a
> > closet? Hope they don't find you? Not me. As soon as that
> > person hears the shotgun rack, he is either going to run or
> > walk to where the sound came from and I guarantee the next
> > sound he hears would be the last.
>
> By that statement I meant that people tend to stockpile both weapons and
> ammunition unreasonabuly. There is no legitimate reason for private
> citizen to have thousands od rounds of ammo.
I don't know anyone that has thousands of rounds of ammo. If they do so
what. They can't fire them all at once? I don't see why you are against
people having ammo? The ammo itself doesn't do any harm.
>
> In any case, if your guns are stored properly then there's very little
> chance that they will do you any good in a late-night burglary attempt
> (although most burgulars would be scared away simply by you being
> awake).
Mine are stored properly. I would store them differently if I didn't have a
child in the home to worry about.
>
> If you store your guns locked and unloaded with ammo separately locked
> then they just can't serve that purpose. If you store them loaded and
> in the open (such as a gun cabinet) then it's pretty likely that a
> stealthy burgalar could reach them before you do.
I have most of my guns in a gunsafe in the basement. Keypad activated. He
could get to it but unless he knows my pin, he ain't getting in. I have a
small gunsafe by my bed, fingerpad activated. I can be in that safe in
under 30 seconds. And yes it is loaded. All I have to do is chamber the
round.
>
> Of course that doesn't even mention the fact that others may also - your
> children for example.
They don't know any of the combos (he's only 2 now anyway) and they won't
know them when they are older. By that time I will buy a case that is
fingerprint accessible. They will also use them and know that they are not
toys.
>
> Basically if a gun is kept so that it will do me any good in an
> emergency situation then it's a greater threat to my family than to the
> (very unlikely) criminal.
Rubbish. I am just one example and I am sure there are quite a few more
people like me. I can think of four off the top of my head.
>
> > > You claim different, legitimate uses. Fine. So what's the line?
> > > There are people (many people) with hundreds of guns and
> > thousands if
> > > not tens of thousands rounds of ammo.
> >
> > There is no line, it's their right to have them too. Most
> > people that have that many guns are collectors. You see that
> > with anything, I mean look at people that have hundreds of
> > cars, or baseball cards, or toys, or whatever.
>
> Fine. So again, why would those collectors need massive amounts of
> ammo? The guns in my family are collectable heirlooms, for the most
> part. Which means they are kept in as good as condition as possible:
> rarely fired and kept in pieces (clips removed and empty, etc).
Collectors are just one example. Enthusiasts are another. They like to
fire their weapon. People who compete have many different guns and ammo.
Why limit what these people are allowed to do.
>
> > > If you're buying a gunfor defense of home and body then do
> > you really
> > > need more ammo than the gun can hold at one time? What defensive
> > > emergecy would require more than one clip?
> >
> > Any number of things, a rabid dog, there could be more than
> > one. More than one person breaking in. If gun control
> > advocates wouldn't have knocked the number of bullets allowed
> > in a clip down, then I might agree with you. My 9MM only
> > holds 12, used to hold 18. My .22 only holds 10. And you
> > can't just go and buy 10 bullets usually. I can only buy
> > boxes of 20 for my .22.
>
> An, my god, rabid dogs! Do you know how desperate that sounds.
No, I have had to shot a pack (3) of coyote/dogs mix breed that were
attempting to break
into my rabbit cages when I raised rabbits. Any farmer will most likely
have run into a problem like this where they will need more than one clip of
ammo. Once again why limit people? I am yet to see you give a reason other
than they don't need it. You need to have some more substance to your
argument than that.
>
> I'm sorry - but if you're attacked, at one time, by more rabid dogs than
> a single clip could handle - well, just kiss your ass goodbye because
> it's judgement day my friend.
Have you ever shot a dog, like the ones I mentioned above? They are usually
moving and hitting a moving target can be difficult especially if you are
nervous.
>
> People breaking in... Sure. But I thought that the mere prescense of a
> gun was enough to send criminals running? Still - you don't think that
> 12 bullets are enough for any single incident?
Depends. In some cases it might be others it might not. How would you feel
if you had a gun to defend yourself and ran out of ammo for any reason and
your family was killed.
>
>
> > > If you're sportsman then why maintain ammo in the house at
> > all? Leave
> > > the guns empty until you go out and then buy what you need
> > on the way.
> > > Hunting (well, it does depend on what you're huting), for example
> > > (unless you're a drunk hunter) generally requires very little
> > > ammunition.
> >
> > That's pointless. Why would you do that. You don't go to
> > the supermarket to buy food the day you are going to eat it
> > do you? Ammo ain't cheap and I like to buy as much as
> > possible when it's on sale.
>
> Well - some people do. But when the milk goes bad, well - you just
> flush it. A loaded gun in the house has other ramifications.
Not if it is stored properly.
>
> The more ammo kept in the house, the harder it is to keep it safe (in
> other words locked separately from the guns). The more guns kept in a
> house the harder it is to keep them safe.
>
> I'm not saying it's impossible by any means, but it doesn't become more
> difficult.
>
> > I've looked around and can't find numbers that support your
> > "evidence" so I would like to see what you have. Most of the
> > information I found stated that most illegal guns
> > wereinvolved gun trafficking, with stolen guns from private
> > residences being on small component.
>
> You're right that it's definately not "most" - I've seen numbers as low
> as 8% and as high as 20%. Although the figures are almost exclusively
> "one to one" relationships (in other words that man stole a gun then
> used it for a crime).
>From your Previous email
"Since there's evidence that shows many (perhaps even most) illegal guns
on the street are stolen from private residences... Well, I think that
you can see where I'm going..."
So when someone calls your BS you back track...why try to say something that
you know is not true. It's convienent that you left out that part of the
message in your reply.
>
> Many of the illegal gun sellers get their guns from multiple sources
> ("straw" buys - where friends or family buy,
These are legal buys. How would more gun control stop this. If the person
checks out and are ok
you can't stop this from happening with more gun control.
thefts, corrupt dealers,
There are laws on the books to handle this stuff already.
> etc). And it's not just private residences but shops (pawn shops seem a
> big target) and clubs as well.
Once again more gun control will not stop people from breaking in and
stealing guns. Although I think that pawn shops shouldn't be able to sell
guns.
>
> In cases where a gun is stolen, then sold to an illegal dealer then sold
> again the gun is not considered a result of theft, but a result of an
> illegal buy.
Once again more gun control will not stop this. It will only make it harder
for the person
who got the gun legally to get it.
Also the case where somebody takes a gun from a friend or
> family (regardless if their was permission involved) are not counted as
> direct gun theft.
Once again more gun control will not stop this.
>
> According to the department of justice 39.6 of guns used in crimes (from
> a poll of state inmates) were obtained from friends and family, 39.4%
> were obtained illegally.
>
> Also from the DOJ: "341,000 incidents of firearm theft occurred per
> year, 1987-92"
>
> Jim Davis
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
