Father shoots teen boy because of daughter...

[Sweet Pea 50]

Tragic situation.

[876arrow]

That actually isn't the relevant statistic. It doesn't matter that more murders are committed with illegally-gotten guns (of course they are), it matters whether an unacceptable number of murders or accidental deaths result from the use of legally-gotten guns.

Of course it's ****ing relevant. There are people (maybe piggy) who want law-abiding citizens to be disarmed so only criminals have guns, then those law-abiding citizens can't defend themselves against the criminal scum. It's very disingenuous of you to say "more murders are committed with illegally-gotten guns"... the VAST MAJORITY of gun murders are committed by people with guns obtained illegally. Now, when I say "vast majority", it's over 95%.

Keep in mind, I'm not completely anti-gun. I'm just pointing out that the fact you shared with us doesn't matter.


If you make an argument for guns simply in the basis that they "save lives", the logical way of proving this argument to be effective would be to prove that they save more lives in the hands of civilians than they harm in the hands of civilians. Of course, individual cases are going to result in their own debates over whether gun use was justified or not, as well.

In other words, I'm saying that "they save lives" isn't a sufficient argument by itself. The real argument you're looking for is "they save more lives than they harm", or something of that sort.

To clarify my position, I'm for regulation of gun ownership but am much more concerned with gun culture, and would like to see a shift in the way our society thinks about guns and their importance or use. This may sound a lot like the shift you told me you wanted in society with regards to marijuana/drinking, although I am absolutely for the legality of all of these things with certain regulations in place.

It matters. Criminals have guns & they will continue to have them.

My position is that I want good, law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves from criminals. Unfortunately, tragedies are going to happen. But what isn't going to benefit society is if the good people have their guns taken away from them, so only the bad guys have them.

[Russian Crushin]

If only the kid had a gun, he would have still been a live

[White_Knight]

I like to shoot people in the bed.

[-The Glove-]

So the lady that used her rifle on 3 intruders with guns in Detroit was all just a fantasy?

[876arrow]

The vast majority of gun suicides are committed by legal gun owners and the vast majority of murders that are committed out of sheer second amendment stupidity are also committed with legally owned guns.

lol @ suicide argument.

People can commit suicide with rope. So we should ban rope, yes? People can commit suicide by jumping off a bridge, so should we ban people from walking on bridges?

And what is "out of sheer second amendment stupidity"?

The presence of so many guns and the mad culture around them in the US causes a spiralling escalation of violence. Guy gets into an argument in a movie theatre over texting, the argument escalates into pushing and shoving and the guy pulls out a legally owned and carried gun and shoots the other person dead. No gun, no death.

And if you had your way, law-abiding citizens wouldn't be able to protect themselves with guns from the criminals who have guns. Such flawless logic you possess, Mr. Piggy.

Guns are banned in Chicago... and how's that going for 'em?

And how often does that funny little scenario you painted even occur?

Law-abiding gun owners commit a tiny amount of crime, using their legally obtained guns. Criminals with illegally obtained guns commit a massive amount of crime. That's all there is to it.

Guy shoots into a carload of teens killing one of them because they were playing loud music, no gun no death.

Two guys get into a road rage incident, both pull guns, both shoot each other dead. No guns, no death.

And this happens soooooooo often.

Scumbag criminal breaks into home, looking to steal/rape/murder... man pulls out gun, protects family... but you don't want him to be able to do that, do you? What a bizarre little creature you are.

The notion of using a gun to fend off attackers is a FANTASY. You are considerably more likely to murder an innocent person than you ever are to actually use your gun to defend yourself. It's no different than those pot bellied fucks who run McDojo martial arts schools and insist on their techniques' effectiveness on "the street" while practising every move in slow motion with rubber knives. Except that the home defense fantasy puts actual holes in people, instead of just making delusional senseis feel like badasses.

....... oh.......

....... my.......

....... word.......

He wasn't a rapist, he was her boyfriend. She lied about knowing him and now he's dead. Why did she lie? Because her dad is a gun toting moron, that's my guess.

I accept that him being a boyfriend is the most likely scenario, but still, your argument about guns is so warped, I am so glad I do not think like you. You are clearly a demented individual.

[┌∩┐(◕_◕)┌∩┐]

You dumb americans keep shooting each other

its funny.

[TRTboy]

This is what makes it hard for me to assign guilt....to the dad atleast. More than the dad being charged, I'd like to see the daughter be charged with something. When the gun comes out, its not time to lie and play games. But i can't fault the dad, its 2:30 in the morning, one of the kids say theres a man in your daughters bedroom, daughter says she doesnt know the man. Its along the lines of the man of the house protecting his family.

This^^^^^^^^^^

[Sweet Pea 50]

So the lady that used her rifle on 3 intruders with guns in Detroit was all just a fantasy?

This happened three houses down from where I live.

http://southsacramento.news10.net/ne...-theft-attempt

So while some on here think that violent armed intruders are merely a figment of ones imagination, I know better.

To argue with the clueless about it does nothing but raise my blood pressure anymore, so I just leave it.

[samouraļ]

Of course it's ****ing relevant. There are people (maybe piggy) who want law-abiding citizens to be disarmed so only criminals have guns, then those law-abiding citizens can't defend themselves against the criminal scum. It's very disingenuous of you to say "more murders are committed with illegally-gotten guns"... the VAST MAJORITY of gun murders are committed by people with guns obtained illegally. Now, when I say "vast majority", it's over 95%.

It matters. Criminals have guns & they will continue to have them.

What is the rate for guns being used for self-defense against violent crime in the way you're describing? The NRA would tell you they're used upwards of 2 million times a year in self defense, and on the opposite end of the spectrum the National Crime Victimization Survey puts it at around 100,000. I ask because your line about law-abiding citizens defending themselves with guns has vastly different relevance depending upon which statistic you believe.

My position is that I want good, law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves from criminals. Unfortunately, tragedies are going to happen. But what isn't going to benefit society is if the good people have their guns taken away from them, so only the bad guys have them.

Of course I'd like law-abiding citizens to have the ability to defend themselves. However, with the huge number of legal gun owners possibly resulting in an incredibly low rate of actual self-defensive firearm use, but an incredibly high number of guns available for the stealing (or other illegal methods of procuring them), do the benefits actually outweigh the costs?

Of course I've already said I'm for regulation rather than making gun ownership entirely a thing of the past.