Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/28/2006 2:19:24 PM EDT
On another board a woman posted about a husband murdering his wife with a gun. She wants all guns banned because "they are evil".

I responded with "banning guns is foolish because people with commit violence with whatever they have around them".

An angry liberal responded with this:

" 30,000 gun deaths in US every year as compared to under 500 in Canada and a handful in England. Laws don't stop violence, laws restricting handguns obviously reduce gun violence. The NRAs refusal to consider any type of restrictions against any type of firearms including assault rifles and the 50 caliber sniper rifle (it can take down an airplane and pulverize concrete, a favorite weapon of terrorists), now that's what I consider Evil.

If the NRA would support reasonable handgun and assault weapon sales and ownership restrictions the people of San Francisco wouldn't have voted by 58% to ban handguns in The City. We are sick to death of the senseless murders. Where do MY rights come into this, (my name here)? The NRA has an opportunity to help curb the excesses that scare us non-gun-owners, but the wingnuts who run it won't consider any restrictions. Is there no room to work together on this? Call me evil, but too many innocent people, including children, are killed every year by easy access to handguns. I've never heard of a drive-by stabbing.

Facts On Gun Deaths In The USA

The Americans value their constitution and the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment deals with the right to bear arms. Here is the price that ordinary Americans are paying for the privilege

- 8 children a day die in murders, suicides and accidents involving guns (almost 3000 a year)

- since John F. Kennedy was assinated more Americans have died from gunshot wounds at home than died in all the wars of the 20th century

- Osama bin Laden would need at least nine twin towers like attacks each year to equal what Americans do to themselves every year with guns.

- Murder rates in LA, NY and Chigago were approaching the hightest in the world (30 per 100,000) until moves were made in late 20th century to restrict access to guns to teenagers. (The NRA wants these moves reversed)

If Osama bin Laden had had more sense, instead of launching a terrorist attack, he would simply have provided financial backing to the NRA.


Where are the responsible gun owners who will stand up to the NRA to bring common sense to the discussion?
__________________

I've asked her to provide a link to this information and she has not done so. How would you respond to this woman?
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 2:27:51 PM EDT
England, Australia and Canada have seen a huge spike in non-gun violence since their ill-conceived gun bans were put in place. And one year after the ban in Australia, Queensland saw an 87% INCREASE in homicides. Criminals will not be affected by gun bans, and in fact will be helped, since they will have a greater certainty that their victims will be unable to resist them.

Blaming guns for violence is like blaming cars for drunk driving. In either case, you need to go after the illegal activity, not the tool the criminal uses. Why do you want to punish 100,000,000 innocent people for the actions of criminals? You would be more effective if you closed some of the legal loopholes that allow 7 out of 10 people arrested for gun crimes in NYC to never serve a day in jail.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 4:05:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/28/2006 4:08:53 PM EDT by PanzerMK7]

Originally Posted By Annie_Oakley

You need to break down her argument and respond systematically. Like so.


An angry liberal responded with this:

" 30,000 gun deaths in US every year as compared to under 500 in Canada and a handful in England. Laws don't stop violence, laws restricting handguns obviously reduce gun violence.



Please provide sources as these numbers vary wildly from any i've ever seen compiled by a responsible source, leading me to believe they are less than honest. I also find it interesting that you followed the statement "laws don't stop violence", with the statement "laws restricting handguns obviously reduce gun violence" These statements seem mutually exclusive. Do laws prevent violence or don't they, you can't have it both ways.


The NRAs refusal to consider any type of restrictions against any type of firearms including assault rifles and the 50 caliber sniper rifle (it can take down an airplane and pulverize concrete, a favorite weapon of terrorists), now that's what I consider Evil.


Your infamiliarity with the capabilities of the .50 caliber rifle is apparent from your wildly erroneous statements, it has been found by numerous objective studies that the .50 caliber rifle poses no threat to a passenger aircraft, contrary to popular fiction a 1/2" hole punched through an aircrafts skin in flight is not sufficient to cause explosive decompression, and it would take literally scores of hits to such an aircrafts engines to even hope to shut them down, not to mention that these aircraft are designed to safely fly after losing one or more engines. Furthermore your assertion that it is a favorite weapon of terrorists is laughable, seeing as there is not one citable incident involving the use of a .50 caliber rifle to carry out a terrorist attack, please be more selective of your words, and supply sources for future discussion.


If the NRA would support reasonable handgun and assault weapon sales and ownership restrictions the people of San Francisco wouldn't have voted by 58% to ban handguns in The City. We are sick to death of the senseless murders.


This particualr argument is so falacious that I don't know how to respond, please elaborate on how the NRA changing it's position would somehow have resulted in the city of San Francisco not banning handguns, all partisan posturing aside, what you really mean to say is that if handguns were banned everywhere, then S.F. would not have had to ban them. This would be a true statement, what you wrote is convoluted and irrational. Also please elaborate on what you believe to be "reasonable restrictions".


The NRA has an opportunity to help curb the excesses that scare us non-gun-owners, but the wingnuts who run it won't consider any restrictions. Is there no room to work together on this? Call me evil, but too many innocent people, including children, are killed every year by easy access to handguns. I've never heard of a drive-by stabbing.


Here again you demonstrate your propensity towards emotional generalizations, why is it mandatory to reference children to make your point? Answer, it is an effective means of bypassing rationale and targeting emotional triggers. But I digress, you claim that too many innocents die each year as a result of access to handguns, yet you provide no evidence to support such claims, what if I said to you that too many innocents die each year in auto accidents, would you disagree, of course not. But by your line of reasoning the natural solution would be to ban automobiles, please take the time to from a more cogent argument in the future before clicking the send button.


Facts On Gun Deaths In The USA

The Americans value their constitution and the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment deals with the right to bear arms. Here is the price that ordinary Americans are paying for the privilege

- 8 children a day die in murders, suicides and accidents involving guns (almost 3000 a year)



You seem to claim that the suicides could be avoided if guns were outlawed, i'm sure even you can admit this is not a true inference, and the inclusion of suicide statistics skews the data you present to the point where it proves nothing but that you are willing to fudge the details if it supports your case. You also seem to argue that the accidents could be avoided, which is unsubstantiated, but I do offer you an alternative option. Why not educate children on the safe handling and responsible ownership of firearms, this would certainly be a far more expedient means of curbing the accidental death rates resulting from firearms. This would only be viable if that is your true goal of course, instead of being motivated by a crusade to outlaw all firearms, using children only as a tool to achieve your ends, you wouldn't do that, would you?


- since John F. Kennedy was assinated more Americans have died from gunshot wounds at home than died in all the wars of the 20th century


I take issue with your use of the imagery of J.F.K., why not just provide a simple numeric date. Again the answer is that it is less emotionally stimulating, further you again fail to state your sources. Which among educated debaters usually indicates that your sources are either faulty or mendacious.


- Osama bin Laden would need at least nine twin towers like attacks each year to equal what Americans do to themselves every year with guns.


I can see a definite theme developing here, so i'll save some time and just ask for sources for all of your claims in this E-mail, as you seem to have forgotten EVERYONE ONE OF THEM.


- Murder rates in LA, NY and Chigago were approaching the hightest in the world (30 per 100,000) until moves were made in late 20th century to restrict access to guns to teenagers. (The NRA wants these moves reversed)


See above request for sources.


If Osama bin Laden had had more sense, instead of launching a terrorist attack, he would simply have provided financial backing to the NRA.


A wholly unsubstantiated statement, you imply that the NRA is somehow responsible for the deaths you reference earlier, another shining example of you inability to provide sources or even a properly formed thought process.


Where are the responsible gun owners who will stand up to the NRA to bring common sense to the discussion?



Where are the responsible non-gun owners who will stand up to the many biased anti-2nd amendment groups to bring the same?
__________________

I've asked her to provide a link to this information and she has not done so. How would you respond to this woman?

You may feel compelled to modify the tone of the response if you mean to be less condescending, but I like to make them feel stupid.
Link Posted: 2/28/2006 4:57:54 PM EDT

Thank you wolfgang12 and panzermk7. I've decided to give her 24 hours to provide sources.

If she does not, I plan on using alot of what you both replied with.

She has until 7:20 AM tomorrow morning.

Link Posted: 3/1/2006 3:54:47 AM EDT
Honestly, nothing you say, or in this case, type, is going to change the way an "anti" feels about guns.

This issue ranks right up there with abortion and evolution as one of the biggest time wasters on the inner-webs to debate.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 3:36:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2006 4:04:59 PM EDT by cnow]
Annie, go to this site....

www.gunowners.org/activism.htm


Go to the bottom left hand of the page and click on GOA HOME.....

and scroll down to the JUST FOR THE SKEPTICS and FACTS SHEET section, and it is all there.

The things she said is way off base. Go to the site i posted and you will have all the facts and all of it is cited and catalogued for easy reference.
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 3:47:16 PM EDT

Thank you cnow!

She has not replied to my request for links to her information or misinformation, so at this point I've decided to not post a reply to her. If she would reply in the next couple of days I will use the information and good ideas posted here.

Thanks again.

Link Posted: 3/1/2006 4:10:10 PM EDT
Her is something else.....

QUICK GUN FACTS

Derived from Gun Facts by Guy Smith

FACT: The non-gun homicide rate for children in the U.S. is more than twice as high than other western countries.

Eight times as many children die from non-gun violent acts than from gun crimes.

* Kids and Guns, 2000, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention



This indicates that the problem is violence, NOT guns !!

FACT: 82% of homicides to children age 13 and under were committed without a gun.

* 1997, FBI Uniform Crime Statistics



FACT: 0.1% of all deaths for children between the ages 0-14 are from firearms, 0.6% are from motor vehicles, 5.3% are from being struck in beatings or bludgeoning, 6.0% from poisoning, and 42.6% from suffocation.

* 1997 National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics Report



FACT: In 1996 there were only 21 accidental gun deaths for children under age 15. About twice as many children under 10 die from drowning in bathtubs.

* Centers for Disease Control



MYTH: 13 Children are killed each day by guns.

FACT: The statistics cited for this myth include "children" up to age 19 or age 24, depending on the source. Most violent crime is committed by males ages 16-24, so these numbers include adult gang members dying during criminal activity.

*FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997



FACT: 18-20 year olds commit over 23% of all gun murders. None of these criminals are allowed to purchase a handgun due to their age under current law.

* U.S. Treasury and Justice Dept. Report, 1999



FACT: During the Clinton administration, federal prosecutions of gun-related crimes dropped more than 44%.

* Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse Univ. 1992-1998



FACT: There are more than 22,000 gun laws at the city, county, state, and federal level.

* BATF estimate, 1992

If gun control worked, then we should be free of crime.

FACT: There are more guns in the U.S. than cars (228,000,000 guns according to the 1998 FBI statistics and 207,754,000 automobiles according to the 1998 Federal Highway Administration registrations). Yet, you are 31 times more likely to be accidentally killed by a car than a gun according to the National Safety Council…despite cars having been registered and licensed for more than 100 years.



FACT: 90% of all violent crime in the U.S. does not involve any gun of any type.

* 1998 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms



FACT: Less than 1% of all guns will ever be used in the commission of any type of crime (much less violent crime).

*FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994



FACT: Two-thirds of the people that die each year from gunfire are criminals shooting other criminals.

* FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994



FACT: The national five day waiting period under the Brady Bill had no impact on murder or robbery, but slightly increased rape and aggravated assault rates by a few percent. For these two crime categories, the major effect was to delay law-abiding citizens from getting a gun for protection. The risks were greatest for crimes against women.

* Dr. John Lott Jr., Univ. of Chicago School of Law



FACT: Guns prevent an estimated 2.5 million crimes a year, or 6,849 per day.

* Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State Univ.

Often the gun is never fired and no blood (including the criminals) is shed.

FACT: Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes per day are prevented just by showing a handgun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually ever fired.

* Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State Univ.



FACT: Every year, people in the United States use a gun to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times- more than 6,500 people a day, or once every 13 seconds.

* Fall 1995, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology

This means that, each year, firearms are used 65 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.



FACT: Of the 250,000,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse.

* U.S. Dept. of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration,

Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979



MYTH: Concealed Carry Laws Increase Crime

FACT: When citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons:

* Murder rates drop 8%

* Rape rates fall 5%

* Aggravated assaults drop 7%

More to the point, crime is significantly higher in states without right -to -carry laws.



TYPE OF CRIME HOW MUCH HIGHER IN RESTRICTIVE STATES (states without Concealed carry laws)

Violent Crime ……………………81% higher

Murder ………………………….. 86% higher

Rape …………………………… 25% higher

Assault…………………………… 82% higher

Robbery………………………….. 105% higher

Auto Theft……………………….. 60% higher

* John Lott, David Mustard: This study involved county level crime statistics from all 3,054 counties in the U.S. from 1977 through 1992. During this time, ten states adopted right-to-carry laws. It is estimated that if all states had adopted right-to-carry laws, in 1992 the U.S. would have avoided 1,400 murders, 4,200 rapes, 12,000 robberies, 60,000 aggravated assaults- and would have saved over $5,000,000,000 in victim expenses.

FACT: 92.7% of law enforcement officials believe that citizens should be able to purchase firearms for self-defense and sporting purposes.

* 1999 Police Survey, National Assoc. of Chiefs of Police



MYTH: Police are our protection, and people don't need guns.

FACT: The courts have consistently ruled that the police do not have an obligation to protect individuals. In Warren v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Dept.,

444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981), the court stated: 'Courts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community.'



FACT: After Canada's 1977 gun controls prohibited handgun possession for self defense, the "breaking and entering" crime rate rose 25%, surpassing the U.S. rate.

* Pat Mayhew, Residential Burglary: A Comparison of the United States,

Canada and England and Wales (Nat'l Inst. Of Just., Wash., D.C., 1987)

MYTH: Japan has strict gun control and a less violent society.

FACT: In Japan, the murder rate is about 1 per 100,000. In the U.S., there are about 3.2 murders per 100,000 each year by weapons other than firearms.

* United Nations data



the site she got for her absurd "facts" is this.......http://neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm
Link Posted: 3/1/2006 4:23:55 PM EDT
Just the facts, ma'am.
Link Posted: 3/2/2006 1:06:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cnow:
Annie, go to this site....

www.gunowners.org/activism.htm


Go to the bottom left hand of the page and click on GOA HOME.....

and scroll down to the JUST FOR THE SKEPTICS and FACTS SHEET section, and it is all there.

The things she said is way off base. Go to the site i posted and you will have all the facts and all of it is cited and catalogued for easy reference.



Great info, I have long intended to create just this type of resource for gun owners to reference, but i'm glad someone else already did it, it looks like alot of work .
Link Posted: 3/3/2006 7:22:24 AM EDT
Regarding Panzers intitial post responding to Annies question. SNAP!!!!
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 1:21:34 PM EDT
try using:

40,000,000 abortions since Roe v. Wade
Link Posted: 3/8/2006 2:42:35 PM EDT
One thing at a time, it will be hard enough convincing her that guns don't just get up and shoot people all by themselves.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 1:07:09 PM EDT

She refuses to post in the thread again. I'm going to print this thread and safe it for later use.

Link Posted: 3/10/2006 10:38:37 PM EDT
Liberal statistics are always dolled up to look worse...the children killed by guns that she is talking about includes gang violence which is often kids between 18-21 . There's actually more killed in the bathtub .
Those exaggerations of gun violence just are not true...their history is flawed and their facts suck. but you can't convince a reprobate...someone choosing to believe a lie.
21st century people like to think themselves civilized and superior to previous civilizations but we are not...there was violence and crime rampant around the world before guns were invented.
African nations kill each other off all the time without firearms to the tune of 100's of thousands.
Canada and Britian have considerably less people than we do and they monitor their borders and don't let every illegal come in to commit crime. They also have laws against crime that is enforced and the criminals don't walk so easy as they do here.
Those anti-gun advocates who want to get rid of guns from the law-abiding are the same people who want to be leanient to the criminal and have rehabilitation and extra comforts given to the incarcerated. They want to abolish the death penalty and they want more rights for the felons.
We can look at Arab countries for a simple comparison here. The Arab people are carrying guns and have high unemployment and poverty...much illiteracy. With the exception of the terroritst factions, Arabs don't commit crimes against their own people. Why, because if you're caught stealing they cut off your hand; if you are caught raping, you are killed. What kind of overcrowding would we have in our prisoners if we killed all the murder and rapists right now?
Death penalty without appeal and without delay would solve much of the random killing problems. Instead, Liberals have faught for years to give the criminals all the comforts of home and all the benefits that a working man cannot even afford for himself and his family; i.e: free medical, free food, free psychiatrist, free cable TV, free college education, etc. etc. What a punishment...what a deterent...

Anti gun people will not even consider anti-criminal because they are irrational, unrealistic and unteachable. They are unwilling to learn from historic facts that their ideas and methods don't work...always trying to do the same thing over and over hoping for a different result; a true sign of insanity.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 11:35:31 PM EDT
www.jpfo.org is a good link to get facts and figures for your discussions.
Link Posted: 3/13/2006 11:10:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/13/2006 11:36:35 PM EDT by ljtag]
Best advice I can give you... Dont talk to liberals! Thats right, even if they are family.

Switzerland, lowest crime around, and mandated by law to own a gun. Every household has a gun.

Look up Hitlers gun ban.

Canada...sucks...They just had some stories on FOX news about all the gun violence from gangs in Canada.

I always ask the commioe liberals that if those other countries are so great why arent they living there? It would sure make the smart americans happy.

If anyone every brings up that so many people die every year from guns, like 3000 kids (bullshit), and use that for the reason we should ban guns, then ask her why we arent banning alcohol since people under the influnce of alcohol kill 10,000 times more people a year than guns do. If she is so stupid to use that argument you should get rid of just about everything there is. Besides when you compare 3000 accidental kid shootings to a 300 million population it does not mean shit, not shit. Look at how many "accidental" deaths happen from drinking alcohol. Over 100,000 deaths from alcohol and over 365,000 deaths a year from tobacco. But hey lets ban guns. Makes alot of sense.
Next time that liberal shows how many gun deaths there were you had better compare apples to apples and look at overall deaths and not what caused that death. Knife murders are rampant in Canada.

Liberals wake the f&^% up!

And remember: liberals are ALWAYS uniformed.
Link Posted: 3/13/2006 11:23:15 PM EDT
You can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.
Link Posted: 3/18/2006 8:34:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By thedoctors308:
You can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.


wow thats worthy of saving to my best quotes list, well said sir.
Link Posted: 3/24/2006 9:24:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/24/2006 9:27:11 PM EDT by Magurgle]
www.sightm1911.com/lib/ccw/rage.htm

good read, might help it has with me in similar situations

The majority of antis put themselves in some sort to victim state, weather they know it or not. Being able to have a gun helps to keep the "victim" in this state. They need to be a victim and guns threaten that.
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 6:47:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/30/2006 6:56:15 PM EDT by MikeWilliamson]

Originally Posted By Annie_Oakley:
On another board a woman posted about a husband murdering his wife with a gun. She wants all guns banned because "they are evil".

" 30,000 gun deaths in US every year as compared to under 500 in Canada and a handful in England. Laws don't stop violence, laws restricting handguns obviously reduce gun violence.
I've asked her to provide a link to this information and she has not done so. How would you respond to this woman?



There has never been a killing in America with a CRICKET BAT. If the UK were to ban CRICKET BATS, its death rate with CRICKET BATS would drop.

There has never been a killing in America with a LACROSSE STICK. If Canada were to ban LACROSSE STICKS, its death rate with LACROSSE STICKS would drop.

What kind of nations allow people to play with deadly weapons that serve no useful purpose? Does anyone NEED a LACROSSE STICK or CRICKET BAT for any reason other than to kill? Aren't there better ways to have fun that don't endanger lives? America is civilized and doesn't pander to the need of extremists who play sports with implements originally designed as weapons of war. The math is simple: no LACROSSE STICKS, no CRICKET BATS, no deaths from LACROSSE STICKS or CRICKET BATS. America is clearly a safer place to live than Canada or the UK.

And feel free to use any of my quotes below:
www.michaelzwilliamson.com/rants/guncontrol.php

www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook
UK Death rate: 10.18 deaths/1,000 population (2005 est.)

US Death rate: 8.25 deaths/1,000 population (2005 est.)

UK Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over _has completed five or more years of schooling_ (THEIR definition--went to school 5 years, not necessarily literate)
total population: 99% (2000 est.)

US Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write (OUR definition)
total population: 97%


UK Population below poverty line: 17% (2002 est.)
US Population below poverty line: 12% (2004 est.)



Also point out as Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership ( www.jpfo.org ) point out, that governments have killed over 20,000,000 people in genocide in this century alone. EVEN IF EVERY KILLING IN THE US WITH A FIREARM WAS NOT COMMITTED WITH ANOTHER WEAPON INSTEAD, it would take more than 2000 years to equal that tally. Since they seem convinced Bush is putting people in concentration camps, they should be arming for the obvious revolution.

You can also tell them that THIS ex-Brit left because of panty-shitting cowardice and socialism turning the nation of my birth into a third-world shithole, and you couldn't PAY me to go back to that ignorance and crime-ridden cesspool. You may quote me. I then went to Canada and decided it was a borderline socialist police state, and more violent crime was committed against me there in THREE YEARS than in the TWENTY EIGHT I've lived in the US.

The International Crime Victims' Survey from Leyden University shows England and Wales to be THE most violent western nation, Scotland second, Canada 3rd. The US was 25th, after Japan and Mexico.

but you're arguing with morons who eat Sarah Brady's shit and vomit it back for debate. You're wasting your time.

Also see the parody site at www.sarahbradycampaign.org
Top Top