40 Reasons for Gun Control

[rs7]

Originally posted by bungrider
...maybe the NRA should begin a new push for legalization of ghanja...

Nope, they have to protect ourselves from ourselves. Except for guns

A 14 year old girl gets raped by an escapee from a mental asylum in Ireland. Has to go to Sweden to get an abortion. But can't get there, because the government won't issue her a passport. They were "protecting" her from herself. Gotta love that religious right logic!

Then there is Murray making his usual concise and clear point. Can anyone translate for me?

Originally posted by ElCubano
9 milli just doesnt have the power to stop a crackhead.....7 pellets later and he was coming at him as though he hadnt even been shot.......so yes a 9 milli can be considered a tiny gun.......

And there will never be control of guns for thugs......most the guns purchased by thugs are not legal....

The cop must have been a pretty lousy shot! A guy getting mugged at an ATM would be so close to his attacker, a .22 should be sufficient. There isn't enough crack in the world to enable someone to keep coming with a bullet in the head. Or the heart.

And yes, the guns purchased by thugs are not legal. But they didn't start out that way.

 

[OHLC]

Welcome to the wonderful new society of Rs7 !

Let's be back 3000 years ago as a matter of defense.
I guess every violent criminal is fully aware that stabbing is very difficult (at least more than shooting a human being), so hopefully these people wont use knives to kill. History shows that there was no crime when only knives/swords were available and guns were not invented yet.

Of course, no government would even envision turning into a dictatorship, especially if its citizens are not allowed to bear arms, it would not be fair. History is clear about this, it just never happened before.

Originally posted by rs7

Now I still have a Llama 9mm, but the clip is one place, the gun another, and the ammo in another still. Why I keep it is a mystery even to me.

Maybe it is because you want your children to keep the right to be alive, and to do so in a free country.


OHLC

 

[ElCubano]

If you say so.......lousy shot I dont know...but had he shot him with a .44 mag on the shoulder lets say....stop he would have....remember I am talking stopping power....peace.....

legal or not.....the fact jack is that they are out there and in the wrong hands....period....If they have em' I sure as hell want em...

peace...brother....coming on strong you are

 

[OHLC]

Originally posted by rs7

The cop must have been a pretty lousy shot! A guy getting mugged at an ATM would be so close to his attacker, a .22 should be sufficient. There isn't enough crack in the world to enable someone to keep coming with a bullet in the head. Or the heart.

And yes, the guns purchased by thugs are not legal. But they didn't start out that way.

If you had some experience, you would know that it is much easier to shoot for the center of mass. I guess the crackhead was not wearing a 'I am on crack' t-shirt, so the cop did the right thing tactically. A 22LR wont reach the vitals and stop a cracker, that is fact.

>>
And yes, the guns purchased by thugs are not legal. But they didn't start out that way.
>>

Exactly, they come from other countries, or the same country but from people who would not be affected by regulations on private gun-ownership (ie : the military and law enforcement).
So, barring law abiding citizens from gun ownership would only leave outlaws armed...great achievement.
The number of full auto firearms is at an all time high in Britain.
Hundreds of autos from the former soviet republics are sunk near the shore each week, and retrieved later.

Seems like you just proved by yourself that gun control is only detrimental to law abiding citizens.


OHLC

 

[rs7]

Originally posted by OHLC
History shows that there was no crime when only knives/swords were available and guns were not invented yet.

Well, I will admit that the drive by's were bloodier when someone swung an axe or a sword from their chariot.

Then again, blood quantity doesn't mean a lot. Dead is dead. But how many victims could a bad guy get in one sweep with a sword? And how many bystanders got hit by a stray ricochet of a mis-aimed lance? Hell, miss your target with a mace, and some little kid 3 blocks away gets it in the heart. Great point. Thanks for making me see the light. Guns are good. Nice an clean.

How many people were killed accidently with a 3000 year old weapon do you think? Little child goes into his dad's closet, finds his catapult or bow and arrow, and looks down the barrel and finis! It was always a dangerous world!

 

[rs7]

Originally posted by ElCubano


peace...brother....coming on strong you are

...yeah, but I let Rod Smith get away to you by mistake You got a good eye my friend! I couldn't undo it fast enough

Originally posted by ElCubano
legal or not.....the fact jack is that they are out there and in the wrong hands....period....

Yup, that's the problem. Just too many guns. I don't have the answers. Never claimed to. I just think that if restrictions are tighter, MAYBE the problem will eventually diminish. But of course, there are so damn many guns around now, that it could take hundreds of years to legislate them out of existence. All I really mean is that if NOBODY had guns (in a perfect world), we would be safer. Ideals and reality are not the same. I know that, and I don't disagree with how you feel. Something keeps me from getting rid of that one gun. But fortunately, I have never felt the need to use it. Maybe I have just been lucky. Hope I never have to change my mind.

peace,
rs7

 

[OHLC]

Originally posted by rs7

Little child goes into his dad's closet, finds his catapult or bow and arrow, and looks down the barrel and finis! It was always a dangerous world!

Do you see any difference between looking down a loaded barrel and looking the quarrel side of a loaded crossbow ??
I dont. In both cases the results and responsabilities are the same.

I guess you now think crossbows should be banned

First you resort to unaccurate facts and wrong argumentation.
Now you are getting into emotional statements.

I guess in the next post you will end up rethinking the issue, and maybe questioning the control freaks brainwash you have been fed with.


Peace,

OHLC

 

[bungrider]

Again, I'm not anti-guns. There's a place for quality hunting rifles...

I think the cop who needed 7 shots to stop the crackhead should take shooting lessons. Hit the head or the chest cavity with a 9mm hollowpoint and the game is over. You can't attack someone with 1)a close range gunshot to the head; 2)one lung, and the other lung deflated and filled with blood; 3)a damaged heart of any major artery leaving it. THAT's THE TRUTH!!!

The OBVIOUS thing that you're ignoring is that the cop still stopped the crackhead, 7 shots or not. What if he blew clean thru the crackhead with a .44?? The stray bullet winds up in someone's head in a supermarket 200yards away, and the crackhead is still coming because the bullet went thru him...now the cop has to fire another 2 magnum rounds which may end up 200 yards away to stop the crackhead when they finally hit something that stops them.

If you still want to argue, smoke some crack, give me a 9mm, and attack me. I'll bet my life I can stop you with 3 rounds. You can even surprise me when you attack.

It's like the pro-gun people have been playing Resident Evil, and live in this world where there are these imaginary monsters that need 10 shots to be stopped...stop smoking crack, kids...

 

[ElCubano]

Relax dont do it......I have never shot anyone so I wouldnt know...this is a true life experience that was told to me.....ask a gun expert and he/she will tell you that a 9 milli has no stopping power...hey in the heat of the moment if you can shoot like a sharpshooter then hey u da man....But a hit in the shoulder by a .44 mag will put u on the floor....peace......OHLC has hit the nail right on the head....gun control will keep the guns out of the right hands and put them into the wrong hands....

 

[OHLC]

Originally posted by bungrider
I think the cop who needed 7 shots to stop the crackhead should take shooting lessons. Hit the head or the chest cavity with a 9mm hollowpoint and the game is over. You can't attack someone with 1)a close range gunshot to the head; 2)one lung, and the other lung deflated and filled with blood; 3)a damaged heart of any major artery leaving it. THAT's THE TRUTH!!!


The OBVIOUS thing that you're ignoring is that the cop still stopped the crackhead, 7 shots or not. What if he blew clean thru the crackhead with a .44?? The stray bullet winds up in someone's head in a supermarket 200yards away, and the crackhead is still coming because the bullet went thru him...now the cop has to fire another 2 magnum rounds which may end up 200 yards away to stop the crackhead when they finally hit something that stops them.


It's like the pro-gun people have been playing Resident Evil, and live in this world where there are these imaginary monsters that need 10 shots to be stopped...stop smoking crack, kids...

First part : right but it is much more difficult to shoot for the head, and a cop is not supposed to know who is on crack, so he shoots for the center of mass. 2 and 3 are right, but it takes a bit of time, more than enough to get yourself shot/stabbed (which is what you try to avoid, remember ?).

7 shots is much too long.
The 44 mag is inappropriate, but a 10mm with proper ammo will do the job, without reaching outside.



OHLC