Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 1/5/2012 4:52:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/5/2012 4:52:53 PM EDT by cpermd]
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 4:59:43 PM EDT
Never had more people in my area pro-gun since this last year of violent crime (locally).

Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:02:28 PM EDT
We're in the Golden Era, guys. Enjoy it and live it.
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:06:03 PM EDT
That's not exactly a pro-gun article, more of a bemoaning of stupid Americans and worthless politicians who can't do the right thing and take everyone's guns away.
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:09:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By motown_steve:
That's not exactly a pro-gun article, more of a bemoaning of stupid Americans and worthless politicians who can't do the right thing and take everyone's guns away.

That's how I read it. Very butthurt article - which is nice.

I remember the 90's all too well.
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:10:53 PM EDT
from a comment:

When crime is at record lows, why do so many people think they need to have a gun for protection? Personal guns in homes are still used for suicides and against family members and friends. There is very little evidence that personal guns have prevented any of the crime. Why have one to tempt the dispondent and mentally ill?


Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:11:13 PM EDT
Calling his boss out!
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:24:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Plasteredtex:
from a comment:

When crime is at record lows, why do so many people think they need to have a gun for protection? Personal guns in homes are still used for suicides and against family members and friends. There is very little evidence that personal guns have prevented any of the crime. Why have one to tempt the dispondent and mentally ill?




Or maybe, crime is at record lows BECAUSE people own , carry and sometimes use those guns for self defense?
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:29:04 PM EDT
The old journalist "some say" trick to sneak in their bias:

Some might argue that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms would not be threatened by an absence of 33-round magazines.
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:34:24 PM EDT
After reading about 5 mins of that article.

Link Posted: 1/5/2012 5:38:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chupacabras:
The old journalist "some say" trick to sneak in their bias:

Some might argue that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms would not be threatened by an absence of 33-round magazines.


Read further...
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 6:36:07 PM EDT
I don't think I read the same article other posters in this thread read...
Link Posted: 1/5/2012 6:37:08 PM EDT
What these people miss is that something much larger is changing. Americans are increasingly aware that they have to protect themselves. At least, that 's the ones that understand they are responsible for themselves. We all know some others believe that others are responsible for their well being.

Since 9/11, many people realized that we are all vulnerable no matter how many police or aircraft carriers we have. The feeling of personal protection is no longer anathema to alot of people I personally know, who loathed the idea of guns 10 years ago.

My own parents, 80 and 72, have asked me to teach them to shoot, and shoot we did at the ranch a few months ago. Even my 72 year old mother through it would be a good idea to know how to shoot a .22, and so she did, and she hit targets.

Those of us here might even have made a difference because we showed friends and family safe and responsible use, in a manner that reflected responsible ownership.

Good on all of you that have.
Top Top