Who are the 'defensive gun users' using their guns against? Other gun users.
vic shot man with knife trying to break into car
Man shot other man who was charging at him
Resident shot intruder;1 gun involved.
Those are the first three hits on Gun Violence Archives many defensive gun use pages.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
This sort of tragedy is far more frequently the outcome of gun ownership than the oft told fable of "the good guy with a gun".
there are far more defensive gun uses per year than there are accidental gun deaths.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
and begs the question, why did you selectively exclude cars from the quote?
2 ( +5 / -3 )
Lmao right, because cars are used to murder thousands of Americans every year. There are incidences of Americans being mowed down with cars each and everyday. Smart.
and heres a car attack that resulted in more deaths and more injuries than a shooting involving two suspects. Guns and cars are both tools and cause about the same number of deaths per year in America.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
And yet most homicides are committed using guns. Not knives, ropes, computers or chairs. I wonder why that is?
You left out 'cars' from the quote you replied to. smart. anyway:
"The mass shooting early Saturday is the biggest mass casualty incident that Austin has seen on Sixth Street since a driver plowed through a crowd during the South by Southwest Music Festival in 2014...
During that incident, four people died, and 20 others were injured when a man drove through a barrier and into a crowd of people."
3 ( +6 / -3 )
*sorry, 23 pages.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
and not to mention the lives that have been saved
Just link to GVAs defensive gun use page. you'll find nine pages of examples for this year. defensive uses that were reported on in the media so not counting those that werent.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
according to Japan’s National Police Agency, crossbows/bow guns were involved in 37 reported crimes that took place between 2010 and 2020,
wow, so fewer than four crimes a year. in a country of 125,000,000. sounds like they really need to crack down. Forget the white collar fraud, embezzlement and bribery. It's crossbows that's the problem.
6 ( +7 / -1 )
What a backward country. I guess NZ does not have any early warning equipment. Hello Kiwis, volcanic eruptions can be predicated now.
you know what 'surprise' means, right? anyway, They knew the risks, White islands volcanic activity is pretty well documented. that's kind of why they were there. not like most Japanese who are deathly afraid of their own shadows and seldom venture beyond their tour buses and air-conditioned hotel rooms.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
shouldn't the story read: unsecured guns jumped into the hands of a 12 and 14 year old and started shooting themselves at police?
there is a definite problem here, and its not the unsecured firearms.
-3 ( +3 / -6 )
Must be a real serious issue if you only have d to go back 40 years to find an example.
"She has never recovered,” he said. But sure. Be glib.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Keep at it, you will eventually crack the quiz.
I know! took me exactly 0.5 seconds to google, based on what you said. But then I'm not into deflecting, misrepresenting or insulting instead of engaging properly.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Ban all guns. It works literally everywhere else
If only there were countries in the world where guns were banned,
Mexico or Venezuela. If you mean countries that are economically, politically and socially similar to America, then say that. You'd have a point.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
If only there were countries in the world where guns were banned, where we could look at the number of shooting incidents per capita to see how effective banning guns is.
like Mexico or Venezuela?
Mexico’s gun laws are similar to those in countries like the United Kingdom that do not allow citizens’ possession of certain lethal firearms.
Venezuela has brought a new gun law into effect which bans the commercial sale of firearms and ammunition.
both have more shooting deaths than the States. both are countries in the world.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
Ban all guns. It works literally everywhere else
ALL guns? no military/police/armed security personnel?
whats all guns? air pistols and rifles? no olympic shooting, then. starter pistols or blank firing guns? easily convertible to live fire. ghost guns? they don't even know how many of those there are, let alone take them all in.
and what if they pass a law saying all guns are banned? what about the 3 to 4 hundred million already in circulation? who will you send out for those? your disarmed national guard? against their own country people? because you know theres lots of Americans who aren't going to just give up their guns.
and wheres 'literally everywhere else?' and when/how did they 'ban' guns? You need to be specific with that one, because it's not entirely true.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Or as we like to call it in non-war zones, "sanity".
Seems the Supreme Court disagreed, when striking down DC's similar law in 2008,
Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
But what percentage of mass shootings? It seems pretty regular that these mass shooters are reported as using AR15s.
"Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 144 different handguns being used in 96 incidents between 1982 and April 2021. These figures are calculated from a total of 123 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 78 percent of mass shootings."
"The research team found that (mass shooting) events with a handgun were associated with a higher percentage of people killed, whereas events involving a rifle were associated with more people shot. About 26 percent of those shot with a handgun had more than one fatal wound, versus two percent of people shot with a rifle. Handguns were also more likely to be associated with brain and heart injuries."
0 ( +3 / -3 )
Jim Mischel, of Sheridan, Oregon, provided written testimony to lawmakers describing how his wife woke up when he was away one night in 1981. She heard a noise, went to investigate and saw a stranger in their home.
She tried to get a pistol that was in a locked gun box in the nightstand out but was unable to before the man got into the bedroom and threatened her with his gun, Mischel said.
mandating that a weapon should be stored in a safe and/or bound with a trigger lock is called infringing on the right to keep and bear arms.
IP 18 would ban the sale of assault-style weapons in Oregon. IP 17 would ban the sale of large-capacity magazines
so is this. 'assault-style weapons' account for about 2% of all gun deaths in the US, but are the most popular sporting rifle in America. California has a high-capacity magazine ban but in San Jose recently, "authorities said the gunman Wednesday used all three (hand)guns to fire off dozens of rounds, freely reloading (12-15 round magazines) as he mowed down his coworkers. Sheriff Laurie Smith noted that reloading a semi-automatic handgun is “very quick.”"
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
rules are made for the guidance of the wise and the obedience of fools. just show up to the press conference, give short, closed, one-word answers, and don't respond to anything other than a direct question about the match or tournament. contract fulfilled, fine avoided, mental health (hopefully) preserved.
9 ( +11 / -2 )
Republican gun nutters.
Yes, no hyperbole here. not every gun owner is a 'gun nutter.' Or even republican. some just believe that people have a right to defend themselves and that some gun control is necessary to keep guns out of ill-willed individuals hands. Floridas state constitution does, too:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law
condolences to the victims' families.
-3 ( +1 / -4 )
which was similar to all other mass murders, in that someone was carrying a loaded weapon,
except of course those carried out with knives, cars, fire, explosives.
-4 ( +1 / -5 )
Sasha had been subjected to harrassment and 'numerous death threats' leading up to this incident.
"Sources in the black civil rights activist movement have said previously that Johnson had faced a number of threats, including having her car windows smashed. These threats had motivated her recently to move from Oxford to London, the Guardian understands."
police say she was an unintended victim, so hopefully she recovers and can shed some light. actually i hope she just recovers.
its a shame British law doesn't recognize self defence as a reason to own a gun and she was left defenseless.
-5 ( +1 / -6 )
Here we go:
The investigation revealed no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242. Specifically, the investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber. Acknowledging the tragic loss of life and offering condolences to Ms. Babbitt’s family, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and U.S. Department of Justice have therefore closed the investigation into this matter.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
You don’t shoot to death unarmed people. Simple.
They didn't know she was unarmed, and applied deadly force which is justified for cops when, among others:
(1) Self-Defense. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to protect a protective force officer who reasonably believes himself or herself to be in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.
(2) Serious offenses against persons. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offense against a person(s) in circumstances presenting an imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm (e.g. sabotage of an occupied facility by explosives).
(b) Additional Considerations Involving Firearms. If it becomes necessary to use a firearm, the following precautions shall be observed:
(1) A warning, e.g. an order to halt, shall be given, if feasible, before a shot is fired.
(2) Warning shots shall not be fired.
seems to be justified in this case.
-4 ( +2 / -6 )
NRA must die.
They are heading that way.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
If you banned guns, gun crime would go down. We know this is the case, because it has worked in every other country on Earth.
Esteemed poster email@example.com will disagree with you on that point.
-5 ( +0 / -5 )
California is a may issue state, meaning that the issue of a permit is left entirely up to the discretion of the local sheriff. California also has universal background checks and Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) also known as red-flag laws. An ex-girlfriend said he was prone to alcohol-fueled mood swings as a result of bipolar disorder and that he had been accused in a March 2009 court filing of rape and abuse, which may have disqualified him from obtaining a firearm. It must be said at this point that, as of now, “Authorities have not determined a motive, nor have they said whether Cassidy was a legal gun owner or what type of firearm was used in the attack.” Of course, none of that would have stopped him from getting Snake down the road to file off a few serial numbers and sell him a banned weapon for $500. In fact, “investigators discovered firearms and a large amount of ammunition” at his home.
Open carry is not legal in California, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Concealed carry is legal with a permit, which is hard to get, and California gun laws also have a concealed carry requirement of at least eight hours of training which must include the teaching of California gun laws, live wire sessions in ranges, and safe handling of guns. I don't know what the rules regarding concealed carry were at his workplace. I assume they were against it. Because of that, chances are these victims (RIP) were basically sitting ducks to an attacker intent on doing harm.
Also, while what kind of weapon he used isn’t known at this point, California has an ‘assault weapons’ ban and a high-capacity magazine ban.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Liberals want people to have the ability to protect their homes if someone breaks in. There are numerous ways to protect a home intruders that does not involve firearms. Here’s the kicker: .
thanks. Can you clarify? 'if someone breaks in' or 'if someone tries to break in.' i get security alarms, dogs, deadbolts, high fences whatever, but what happens when an armed intruder (or two or three) actually manages to get in? those things above are fallible, and unavailable due to cost and living conditions for some. Personally, I'm not sure i would take 'baseball bat' as an acceptable alternative. bear spray and mace? and tasers. Those are good ideas, but could be a good way to get an armed intruder to blindly empty their clip all over your house. not to mention mace is going to affect the homeowner and occupants almost as much, especially in an enclosed space.
Liberals don’t even want to ban firearms
not all of them sure but it's an opinion that exists in some circles.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )