patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,384 comments by 15,735 users - TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter online now
Comments 1 - 14 of 45 Next » Last » Search these comments
PeopleUnited
@
2013 Jan 20, 10:10am
Why can't Diane just be honest and say she doesn't want people other than her own bodyguards, and those of the other elites to own firearms?
Maybe she thinks if people don't have guns then she won't need armed bodyguards. Two problems solved.
PeopleUnited
@
2013 Jan 20, 10:58am
Right, because nobody has ever been assaulted or murdered till guns were invented.
People who are the targets of assassination / kidnapping attempts will always need body guards. This includes pretty much anybody who is very famous and most people who are very wealthy.
If regular people didn't have guns, the bodyguards would still be necessary, but they wouldn't need guns.
Anyway, she's a politician, she's just saying what the people who vote for her want. There's a reason why she keeps getting elected.
There's a reason why she keeps getting elected.
Yup, and that speaks volumes about the people in her state!!
Yeah, they don't like guns. This isn't news to anyone, and it doesn't matter. As a senator, she's doing a good job for her constituents, and representing their views. It's that simple.
As a non-californian, I'd much rather have people like feinstein making laws that affect me than ignorant, backwards, fact-challenged dipshits like Inhofe.
Right, because nobody has ever been assaulted or murdered till guns were invented.
Exactly!!
Even today, only 2/3 of murders are by guns, why aren't people screaming out about the other 1/3?? Are those other murders considered O.K.??? Just wondering....
......"Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]"
Because the other things that people are murdered with have practical purposes, and there are many different items. Guns represent a disproportionate portion of murders. If something else was responsible for the most murders, people would focus on that.
The only practical purpose of a firearm is killing. It doesn't matter if it's killing someone in self-defense, killing an animal for food, or killing someone during a bank robbery. It's a weapon.
A knife, baseball bat, hammer, or automobile is not inherently a weapon. There's a difference.
Raw
@
2013 Jan 20, 1:23pm
Where I have a problem is, that these same people who are fearful of guns, ignorant and uneducated about guns want to ban OTHER people's ability to purchase and own them. I don't force MY beliefs on them and tell them what to own or not own, but the anti-gun crowd wants to force their beliefs on others.
Isn't that exactly what Republicans do....force their beliefs on others eg. gay marriage and abortion rights?
Raw
@
2013 Jan 20, 1:25pm
Even today, only 2/3 of murders are by guns, why aren't people screaming out about the other 1/3?? Are those other murders considered O.K.??? Just wondering....
Because 2/3rds is twice as large as 1/3rd and easily stopped with a gun ban.
Raw
@
2013 Jan 20, 1:30pm
Right, because nobody has ever been assaulted or murdered till guns were invented.
It could be because until guns were invented no one has been able to murder 20 kids in 20 seconds. Don't you think our laws should change along with changing technology?
Yes it does matter, A LOT....
Welcome to democracy. If you'd rather live in a country where people with different beliefs than you don't have any influence on the law, try living in Saudi Arabia.
Go take a look at the FBI data...
Please point me at the "FBI data" that says that automobiles, hammers, baseball bats, or knives are weapons. Go on, I'll be waiting.
Right, because nobody has ever been assaulted or murdered till guns were invented.
Exactly!!
Even today, only 2/3 of murders are by guns, why aren't people screaming out about the other 1/3?? Are those other murders considered O.K.??? Just wondering....
......"Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]"
This assumes that many of the so-called suicides are not actually murders. We have about thirty thousand people killed by guns every year. How can all these be properly investigated?
Please point me at the "FBI data" that says that automobiles, hammers, baseball bats, or knives are weapons. Go on, I'll be waiting.
Here- http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11
Please educate yourself about the facts of this issue. People manage to murder each other without firearms.
What is more difficult is protecting your self from violence without them.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime
From this report:
"A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. "
I'm all for stricter car and traffic laws. It should be way harder to get the privilege to drive. All cars should have a breathalyzer deactivation system to prevent drunk driving. Making owning an automobile more difficult would result in more efficient public transportation. There are way too many vehicles on the planet and it is only going to get worse.
Its not a "fact" that any o those things are inherently weapons. A weapon is something that is designed primarily yo injure or kill. A sword or a gun are examples.
An automobile is designed for transportation. Using it to kill or injure someone is using it in a manner inconsistent with its intended purpose.
A firearm is designed to kill (or at least injure). Using it to kill or injure someone is using it as intended.
That's the difference. It's what makes a weapon a weapon in the first place.
"sporting" uses of firearms were invented after the fact. Nobody was sitting around going "man, we have these targets. Now we just need something to hit them with!"
Comments 1 - 14 of 45 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.k3DKuN2ey80
Which Diane do we believe, the one who wants to ban some guns and gun paraphernalia (a list of superficially defined "assault" weapons), or the one who apparently wants to enforce an outright confiscation?