Jamezz
Well-Known Member
Exactly! You described it better than me, kudos.
Another shooting... California Disability Centre
- Thread starter The Midnight
- Start date
Exactly! You described it better than me, kudos.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....good question....and excellent point! Police estimate that if a household gun is ever used, “it is six times as likely to be fired at a member of the family or a friend as at an intruder,” reported Time magazine. “A wife or mother thinks she hears a burglar and ends up shooting a husband or son coming home late,” said one public-safety commissioner. ‘How, then, should people protect their homes?’ he was asked. “Perhaps the best way to protect yourself is by risking your property rather than your life. Most robbers and burglars are there to steal, not to kill. Most firearms deaths in homes are committed with the homeowner’s gun.
Now consider some overwhelming facts. In the “relatively rare shoot-outs between householders and burglars that do occur, it might easily be the burglar who proves more skilled in handling his gun and the householder who winds up in the morgue,” reported Time magazine. Whatever deterrence a gun might be in the prevention of a crime, it is more than offset by other devastating factors. Consider, for example, suicides. In the United States alone, in one 12-month period, over 18,000 people shot themselves to death!
“THEY have this illusion,” said one prominent police official, “that they’re going to point the gun at someone and they’ll be in control and when it doesn’t work out that way, they hesitate, just as many police officers will hesitate a split second, and they pay for that with their lives. Many people don’t come to grips with the fact that owning a handgun means being prepared to live with the aftermath of killing another human being. If you don’t actually shoot and a criminal fires at you, it is more dangerous to own a weapon than not to have it at all.”
I know that's what you've been told.
Even in Great Britain there is an air of unimportance, politically, around the Royals.
uhhhhmmmm. . . . the fact is, they can if it is their prerogative, insist on some things you might not be told about.
well, it is one layer better "democracy" than say an outright dictatorship. You don't get to vote for the Queen, or the House of Lords in England. In the commonwealth states, Canada, NZ, and AUS there is home rule, except in some "emergency". But that ignores all the fine lines of influence and "connections" where real power flows. Perhaps of more concern is the UN, which I consider a Brit implement for continued leverage in the world. So who decided the "elite" set of nations, say on the Security Council. For that matter name one UN official subject to election, and maybe see if you can research the important figures in the UN. . . . like say the Queens Consort, Prince Phillip, with his influence in the environmental side of things, laying vast tracts of almost every nation aside for "conservancy" or whatever. The King's Forest, man, The King's Forest. All the land is theirs, and the peasantry better not poach a mouse.
If all you know is what you've been told in school, you probably don't know what's important about the way the world works.
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
lol
I know how you feel.. LOL .. we're both pretty lucky to live in a place where civilians don't need to carry guns to feel safe. One Eye is right about the difference between US and NZ, Aus, Canada..etc. Not sure what Babe is talking about with the Queen, etc, she has 0% power over NZ and Aus.. pretty sure she doesn't give a damn what we do or don't do neither. It's really only a formality at this point. Wouldn't be surprised if both NZ and Aus become a republic within the next 10 years.
FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
when's the vote on changing your flag ??
the queen's head is on our 50 cent piece !! ooooohhhhhh
Haha.. the first vote finishes tomorrow deciding the contender, then we have another in Feb for the contender vs Current flag.
Still a lot of old/conservative people here just wanting the status quo though.. it's probably going to end up with us keeping the current flag.
Kinda amazing that this is the most we have to worry about right now considering what else is going on around the world.. LOL..
If a trend lasts for more than 4 years, it's not a surge. It's just what is.
His point was "HURRRR!!!! 'MERICA!"
You're a relatively new poster around here. I'd like to introduce you to babe. He's the second biggest conspiracy theorist we have.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
I'll ask again, because it doesn't seem like anybody has brought it up...but why don't we promote gun safety and education in our schools. Owning guns is a right, not a privilege, but a right. So why wouldn't we educate our youth (and adults for that matter) on how to use them, what they should be used for, and how to make sure accidents don't happen? But instead of education people wanna go right to gun grabbing. That's not logical to me.
I mean, we've had "assault rifles" (they're really just semi-automatics, but again, no gun education here) with the same current ability of today for over 60 years. We didn't have as many issues with this crap 60 years ago (or it doesn't seem like it). So what's the real issue? Availability? The states with the strictest gun laws have the most gun killings. Mental health? People don't wanna touch it.
What I see is too many people that want guns, for a myriad of reasons, but don't have very much knowledge about them. As a gun proponent, that saddens me. So I'll ask again, why don't we run gun education the same way we run sex education? Mandatory in all schools. How would it not help?
I mean, we've had "assault rifles" (they're really just semi-automatics, but again, no gun education here) with the same current ability of today for over 60 years. We didn't have as many issues with this crap 60 years ago (or it doesn't seem like it). So what's the real issue? Availability? The states with the strictest gun laws have the most gun killings. Mental health? People don't wanna touch it.
What I see is too many people that want guns, for a myriad of reasons, but don't have very much knowledge about them. As a gun proponent, that saddens me. So I'll ask again, why don't we run gun education the same way we run sex education? Mandatory in all schools. How would it not help?
Ignoring the blanket collective right/individual right argument, I don't believe there's any evidence that it would actually help. The 2009 Fort Hood shooter was an Army Psychiatrist. Being in the military at all infers firearm safety. That, and 40% of shooters in this link here committed suicide. Most at the scene.
I'm not sure of what a "Gun Safety" course you're imagining entails, but if you draw it up I'd entertain the concept.