The Purpose Of Gun Control

The purpose of gun control is to make sure that only government and other gang members are able to defend themselves.

ScreenHunter_327 Jun. 07 12.47

ScreenHunter_328 Jun. 07 12.50

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to The Purpose Of Gun Control

  1. au1corsair says:

    I forget–was it the American Indian or the Black American first “blessed” with gun control? Slaves were banned firearms for obvious reasons–and the American Indian was an enemy alien.

    Do gun control pundits regard the American citizen as an enemy alien? Are we nothing but slaves? If so, a comprehensive gun ban is right and proper. Besides, under those circumstances there are a lot of livestock to be culled from the herd–culled for being non-productive.

  2. _Jim says:

    Lest we forget in this country, when ‘government’ fails, the responsibility will fall to those who are armed … the ‘poh-leece’ are there to maintain order among the law-abiding …

    Korean store owners defend their business during the 1992 LA riots

    Video comment by uploader:

    Published on Apr 28, 2012

    People ask, why in a modern civilized society do private citizens need to own firearms? Well, here’s a great example. The police were no where to be found, mobs with bricks, bottles, and pipes were looting and burning stores, especially Korean owned stores. Some people were beaten then had their businesses destroyed. Others fled the area and found their stores destroyed when they returned days later. Few stood their ground and were willing to defend the businesses that their families built.

    Most people think that guns lead to violence and chaos, well all the chaos was down the street. I think Hal Fishman and Larry McCormick said it best.
    Larry, “It seems like every man on that roof was armed.”
    Hal, “and thus far there does not seem to be any looting or burning at least right where they are.”

    The store survived the riots and the building still stands 20 years later at Western and 5th.

    Si vis pacem, para bellum

    – – – – – – –

    .

  3. _Jim says:

    Armed force – the ONLY thing that stops looters. Yet to be seen if this is necessary in contemporary America with an increasingly insular and autocratic centralized federal ‘power’ …

    Armed Korean Merchants Protect Stores – 1992 LA Riots

    • Andy says:

      Jim, just out of interest, how many days of the year do you have to worry about looters?

      Not fecking many I can assure you.

      Stop grabbing at straws to defend the indefensible.

      There’s a good man.

      Andy

      • _Jim says:

        Better to ask: How many confrontations have been de-escalated because the woman (yes, women can own forearms in this country as they are not simply chattel as in, perhaps, yours and other’s countries) or man was able to demonstrate the fact ‘armed’ force was available as a defensive option; sadly the FBI does not compile such statistics leaving the gun grabbers and other ninnys to misuse the stats the FBI does compile.

        Perhaps I can demonstrate this option in the use of armed force through the citing of the case of Nick Meli, who confronted the Clackamas Mall shooter back in December 2012 …

        Are you familiar with this case and Nick’s non-use of lethal force which caused the active shooter to withdraw and within a short time take his (the shooter’s) own life?

        Clackamas Town Center shooting: Man says he had shooter in his sights, but chose safety over firing

        He trained his weapon on Roberts but didn’t shoot, he told The Oregonian early Monday outside his home in Clackamas because he was worried about hitting an innocent bystander.

        Authorities confirmed Monday that Meli was seen during the incident, gun drawn, near the entrance to Macy’s inside the mall.

        Roberts sprayed bullets with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle after walking through Macy’s to the mall’s food court, killing Steve Forsyth, 45, of West Linn, and Cindy Yuille, 54, of Northeast Portland. Roberts seriously injured Kristina Shevchenko, a 15-year-old who lives in Southeast Portland with her family.

        Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

        … Meli earlier told a KGW reporter that he heard three gunshots, and then positioned himself behind a pillar in the mall. Meli said he saw the gunman working on his rifle, pulling a charging handle and hitting the side of the weapon.
        Meli said he then pulled out his Glock 22 pistol and aimed it at the suspect. But when he saw someone move behind Roberts, Meli decided against firing, concerned he might hit an innocent person.

        Note the slanted, almost inconsequential role William M Connolley’s associates at Wikipedia assign to Nick’s actions that day:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

      • Gail Combs says:

        I worried about it 24/7

        I woke up with a gun in my face.

        I woke up to someone being murdered outside my window.

        My brother as a college student home from school held two mafia hitmen for the police using a shot gun.

        I woke up to illegals loading my goats into the back of a pick-up at 3 am

        I went for 5 years with my crop of lambs and kids culled by robbers a few weeks before I shipped them to market. My friend had his entire herd butchered in the field leaving blood and gore and the unwanted “cuts” strewn all over his fields for him to clean-up. (we are talking about 70 head so it was a real mess.)

        I have had a Pk-up truck, a car, a horse trailer, two semis (freightliner and peterbilt) a 48 ft refer, a tractor, saddles, bridles, fences, timber, horses, cows, sheep, goats and chain saw and lord know what else stolen. I know who the theives are and the cops will not do a darn thing.

        I FINALLY drove the robbers off by shooting at them and I have not been bothered since.

        As the DA explained in the case of my stolen freightliner. The theif would only get two months probation so it is not worth their time to prosecute. SNARL

      • tom0mason says:

        Maybe Andy they do things differently in other lands, and perhapse they prove better for their situation. As you are obviously not there can you accurately judge other peoples’ reason, their culture, and the way they chose to live their lives?

        Please remember that for any desired outcome, just because somethings are done differently doesn’t mean they are necessarily done incorrectly.

      • Jason Calley says:

        I have to worry about looters 365 days a year (and 366 every leap year.) Most of the time they wear uniforms or have special I.D., but they are already stealing over half of my pay check. Half my pay check — and that is with me having the right to bear arms! It could be worse… I have read enough history to know what the looters do after their victims have been disarmed. Ask 6,000,000 Jews. Ask 10,000,000 Congolese. Ask 1,500,000 Armenians. Ask 3,000,000 starving Bengali Indians — or the other uncounted millions who died at the hands of their oh-so-civilized masters. Go ahead. Ask ’em.

      • JL says:

        Saw this on a poster: “If we make guns illegal, then nobody will get shot anymore. That’s how we stopped everybody from doing drugs.”

      • squid2112 says:

        Stop grabbing at straws to defend the indefensible.

        Please explain “defend the indefensible”

    • gator69 says:

      Jim, just out of interest, how many days of the year do you have to worry about fires?

      Not fecking many I can assure you.

      Stop grabbing at straws to defend the indefensible.

      Get rid of your fire extinguishers.

      There’s a good man.

  4. Andy says:

    Meanwhile in the UK today a lot less people, including children, were accidentally shot by firearms than the USA

    And a lot less husbands were shot by annoyed wives. Which I am glad of, as mine has gone off in a huff. She didn’t have a gun so did not shoot me.

    Andy

    • Meanwhile, crimes like assault and burglary are much higher in the UK, because people aren’t armed.

    • _Jim says:

      re: Andy June 7, 2014 at 8:31 pm
      Meanwhile in the UK today a lot less people, including children, were accidentally shot by firearms than the USA

      Whew. Thankfully. These headlines must refer to some other ‘UK’ then:

      Culture of violence: Gun crime goes up by 89% in a decade
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1223193/Culture-violence-Gun-crime-goes-89-decade.html

      Handgun crime ‘up’ despite ban
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/1440764.stm

      Gun Crime Soars in England Where Guns Are Banned

      Do Gun Bans Reduce Violent Crime? Ask the Aussies and Brits

      Whew. That was close eh ‘Andy’?

      But Andy, what about ‘knife crimes’?

      1,000 knife crime victims in London each month, shocking new figures show

      I thought you guys were, ummm, you know ‘civilized’ or something like that over there?

      No?

      Then, we have this –

      – – – – – –
      Statistics 101: US Gun Crime vs. UK Knife Crime

      All too often, I find myself reading some line of nonsense about how gun control legislation is important to protect the lives of citizens, all “proven” by gun crime statistics in the US. In one discussion in particular, some hoplophobic idiot tried to tell me that the fact guns account for the weapon of choice in more murders than all other weapons combined means they’re too dangerous to allow people to have. This says nothing at all about the actual murder rate, and the effect of gun control legislation on the murder rate — just that, even if the murder rate is lower in the presence of firearms, guns end up having the largest share of the murder market in the US.

      An alternative theory of the statistic might go something like this:

      1) More guns in the hands of private citizens discourage people from committing murder with knives.

      2) The number of murders with knives declined, and the number of murders with guns remained constant.

      3) The overall number of murders decreased because of the decline in knife murder rates, so the percentage of murders committed with guns increased even though the number of gun murders remained constant.

      I don’t have any idea whether that’s an accurate explanation for the higher rate of gun murders than knife murders in the US. The statistical basis for proving or disproving this kind of theory of the effect guns have on murder rates doesn’t exactly exist. It certainly is a plausible-sounding hypothesis, though, and no less supported by the lone statistic of 68% of murders in the US in 2006 being committed with guns.

      – In or about 2006, there were about 60 million (actually closer to 58M, but we’ll use the rounded-up number to be kind to hopolophobes) people in the UK as a whole, including Scotland.

      – In England and Wales alone — discounting Scotland — there were over 163 thousand knife crimes.

      – By the end of 2006, there were more than 300 million people in the US as a whole.

      – In the US as a whole, there were fewer than 400 thousand gun crimes.

      – In the UK, based on these numbers, there was one knife crime commited for every 374 people (rounded down).

      – In the US, based on these numbers, there was one gun crime committed for every 750 people — less than half a gun crime per 374 people (about 0.4987 gun crimes per 374 people, actually).

      – That means that, based on these statistics, you are more than twice as likely to be a victim of knife crime in the UK as you are to be a victim of gun crime in the US.

      MORE – see link above.
      – – – – – – – – –

      Bolding above mine.
      .

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Andy, you are onto something I discovered decades ago: Rabid, hysterical gun haters know what they are talking about when they scream about gun fights over grocery store parking spaces or domestic murders over a beer bottle left overnight in the sink. They know something about themselves that is alien to normal people and they have to be kept away from guns, knives and blunt objects at all times.

      A bizarre experience several decades ago with a Colorado Democratic state senator was the moment when I learned this important lesson. I’m glad you survived yours.

      Good luck in keeping your wife away from all lethal objects. It would be tragic to lose you.

      • Tel says:

        Who cooks dinner in the Andy house?

      • Jason Calley says:

        You make a good point! One of the things that I find mind-boggling about the gun control nuts is that they always say their purpose is to stop gun violence. And yet if you ask how they will enforce their plans, not one of them ever says, “we will use good example and persuasion to bring people to agree.” No, if you ask them how they will enforce their plan, every one of them, every last one, will tell you (if you press for an answer) that their plan to stop gun violence is to send men with guns to kidnap or kill anyone who refuses to comply.

        They are insane.

        Not insane in a way which prevents them from functioning in most common aspects, not insane in a way which is even obvious to most people — but insane in a way which makes them not only a danger to themselves but to you and me as well. How do you reason with someone who has an irrational fear of violent attack and who then proposes a solution of irrationally attacking other people who have never threatened them?

  5. Jason Calley says:

    Hey Jim! Yes, +1 in my opinion!

    And Andy… nothing personal against you, but you are on stage right now, so I will address part of the following rant toward you.

    So Jim, having said that, I doubt that Andy (and I may be wrong) will be moved to change his opinion of gun control. Here is something I have noticed about subjects like gun control, nationalized health care, seat belt laws, alcohol prohibitions, etc. I have noticed that such subjects are analogous with economics in the following way; In economics, there is something called “the broken window fallacy.” https://mises.org/daily/5593/The-BrokenWindow-Fallacy In its simplest form, a boy breaks a window at the bakery shop. The baker then hires a man to repair the window. The money he receives for window repair is spent buying a suit. The tailor then buys some shoes, etc. In the end, there has been a whole chain of buying and selling set off by the broken window. Hurray! The boy is not a vandal — he is an economic genius who has enriched the whole community! The problem — and the reason why the fallacy sounds plausible — is that people do not see the events that would have followed had the baker been allowed to spend his money on something more productive that simple window repair.

    The same thing happens with other subjects. I actually had a man tell me (regarding “Obamacare”) that if “a single person now has health insurance who didn’t have it before, then Obamacare has been a success!” This was a grown man with extensive life experience! And yet he did not see that millions of people had lost the opportunity to spend their own money on something of more value to themselves than insurance; as far as he was concerned, he saw the benefits but did not see the costs.

    I think that maybe your discussion with Andy will lead to the same outcome. Andy is doubtless correct that there will be specific cases where gun control prevented a death here or there. Well, I guess, hurray for gun control, huh? I doubt that he will acknowledge the overwhelming statistics that show non-gun murders increase, and especially the elephant-in-the-room of periodic genocide inflicted on populations who for whatever reason, found themselves disarmed against their well-armed masters. I predict that Andy will see that HE was not shot by his wife — and will fail to see that thousands of others were attacked and murdered and had no way to defend themselves. For Andy, people need to have their guns taken away — and as for anyone so evil as to try to keep his gun? Well, we can always send uniformed thugs with guns to kidnap them, or (if they resist,) to kill them, right? I honestly think that Andy does not see the ethical and pragmatic consequences of his beliefs.

    • _Jim says:

      To sum it up, Andy looks to put all his trust and faith in government for his protection, and, one would also assume for his overall well being … this has NOT ended well throughout history when you yield your rights to govt as if you were a potted house plant.

      Andy may never have seen or heard this expression before either:

      . . . “When seconds count, the Police are only minutes away …

      .

    • Gail Combs says:

      +1

      Andy has yet to be mugged by his own government or by a thug with an illegal gun

      The gun in my face was in a city with GUN CONTROL BTW.

      These were the laws in force in Washington DC at the time:

      In Washington, D.C., all firearms must be registered with the police, by the terms of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975.

      The same law also prohibited the possession of handguns, even in private citizens’ own homes, unless they were registered before 1976.

      The murder outside my window took place in Boston MA, the state with the “Toughest Gun Laws” just after those laws were past.

      All gun laws do is keep guns out of the hands of honest citizens. Heck our own government allowed 2,000 ASSAULT WEAPONS to be sold to the MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL!

      • Jason Calley says:

        ” Heck our own government allowed 2,000 ASSAULT WEAPONS to be sold to the MEXICAN DRUG CARTEL!”

        A small correction; they did not “allow” the sale; that makes them out to be so passive. They actively approved, planned, arranged and promoted it.

        War — even a drug war — is the health of the state. War — even a drug war — brings money, power, and promotions.

  6. Justa Joe says:

    I don’t think that the idea of the govt rounding up citizens at gun point and shipping them off to re-education camps to meet an uncertain fate would be considered a bad thing by your typical Democrat so long as the people being dealt with with Evangelical Christians, conservatives, or “climate deniers.”

  7. Ron W says:

    Or they would say, “it can never happen here”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s