Don't let them off the Hook.

[Chas]

Hunting? Hunters frequently shoot things other than what they are supposed to be aiming at.

They do, and if/when they do they can be held accountable. Yeah?
(this one is near and dear to my heart...lol, fucking game wardens - you think cops are scary?...try those motherfuckers sometime)

I imagine now we'll get the 'self-defense' claim?

LOL< I stand with my "buy a nice door with a sturdy lock/ and or just accept that you might get your ass beaten some day because you aren't willing to turn into a fucking barbarian on the off-chance that someone hit you in the jaw" theory of self defense. The firearms in self defense bit is fantasy, imo, that people like to foist upon themselves and others. I don;t see that many of us will ever find ourselves in a situation where a guin would be an appropriate response to a threat (but I guess I have a different idea of whats appropriate). Hell, I don't even think that a gun is a very good response to the threat of a gun. Shit...if there was anything you could do to make the situation at least twice as dangerous...immediately....that has to be it.

@Tonus, "Hasta la vista....like the terminator told ya"-HAL

December 11, 2014
Veteran's .45 frightens off thieves, The Gaston Gazette, Gaston County, N.C. 12/05/14

Sixty-eight-year-old disabled veteran Joseph Sapienza was at home in Gastonia, N.C. when he heard a suspicious noise at his front door. Sapienza retrieved a .45-caliber pistol, placed it in a holster attached to a walker he uses to get around, and opened the door. There were two masked men on his porch attempting to get inside. Recalling what happened next, Sapienza told a reporter, “When they saw the .45, one ran one way up the street, and the other went the other way.” Sapienza believes he may have been targeted by the criminals because of his disability.
FULL STORY


December 9, 2014
Pharmacist halts robbery, The Wyoming Tribune Eagle, Cheyenne, Wyo. 12/09/14

A man with what looked like a real gun entered Medicap Pharmacy in Cheyenne, Wyo., pointed it at an employee, handed them a bag, and ordered them to fill it with Oxycodone and Percocet. Pharmacist Jackson Quick became aware of the robbery, and retrieved a gun. As Quick was making his way to another part of the store, ducked behind a counter, the criminal spotted him. Quick responded by standing up and firing at the criminal, striking him, and ending the robbery. The robber is expected to survive. Police have no plans to charge Quick.
FULL STORY

November 14, 2014
Marine stops home invader, KPRC, Houston, Texas, 11/10/14

Dan Reynolds, a former Marine, was at home in Harris County, Texas when he heard the sound of glass breaking. Reynolds responded by retrieving a shotgun and going towards the noise. When Reynolds came upon a man climbing through a window, he fired at him, striking the criminal in the chest and halting the intrusion.
FULL STORY

---

And guns have legitimate uses other than killing or injuring people.

And? Still does not change the makers and the NRA using scare tactics to sell to both the public and police and pit them against each other to keep their flooded market.

This is not about rights, this is about a big business scaring the shit out of everyone to make money.

Apparently they haven't scared the shit out of you.

[The Grand Nudger]

You don't? Go to a pawn shop, go to a big one, just count the number of guns in just that one. Go to another and another and count them.

-Oh good god, I'd rather not. I don't have any particular affinity for hot pistols.

Go to gun shop, and count. If you think there are not too many you are nuts.

Look at all of the different brands of toilet paper on your store shelf. How many variations on the theme of oil and fat do we need in our selection of foods? It's business, you make what people want. People want many strange things. If you see alot on the shelf, sure, that's "too many" - not because you think so or because I think so...but because they are sitting there unsold. Fortunately, they retain their value fairly well - so the cost of this can be shouldered by a business or manufacturer for any number of reasons- all to do with potential profit I'm sure. They can't create a market anymore than you or I...so when we see "x" number of guns.....lets go ahead and assume that "x" is a variable on someone else's production/cost calcs....given the amount of money involved and the level of competence a manufacturer would demand. They're not exactly pumping out guns so fast that they're going out of business. They know their market...you (we) don't....eh?

Gun makers are like any other business. They work for their own profits and like any other business they work to expand the market.

-Exactly....and since they are like any other business...they should be treated as such. Until we sue the manufacturer of every getaway car used in a crime, the little girls who make the shoes the criminals wear...the political refugees who print their tshirts.........

Guns are made like candy and pumped out like candy.

So is candy, and?

[Nope]

I found a Slate article that stated that :

Firstly, British people do have the ability to purchase firearms, but they are strictly controlled. It is not all that difficult to get a shotgun license if you live in the countryside, and I know people who legally own .22 rifles for the purpose of killing rabbits and wood pigeons on farmland. However, handguns were outlawed in 1997, and only the police and military are permitted to carry automatic weapons.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2014/05...tions.html

Does that mean that Parker Tan could still own a gun to kill a dangerous animal if the US had guns laws that were similar to the UK?

I am on the fence about guns. Several people in my family own guns and are responsible. They also hunt and are very big on respecting animals and nature but I have also met a lot of gun owners who are stupid and dangerous. My stepfather didn't even like toy guns because he said that guns were never toys. He also preached that all guns should be treated as if they are loaded. I have had several friends who own guns who have told me that my stepfather's rules were bonkers. They know when their guns are loaded. Of course, whenever someone accidentally discharges a gun, they always say that they thought the gun was not loaded so my stepfather was probably right on that rule. It is too bad you can't separate out the stupid people and refuse to let them own guns.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Guns fire bullets. Perhaps target shooting would qualify as a harmless activity...except people fuck up at shooting ranges too. Hunting? Hunters frequently shoot things other than what they are supposed to be aiming at.

I imagine now we'll get the 'self-defense' claim?

Not from me -- as noted above, I live out in the country and don't have an issue with criminals.

But, it should be noted that even Harvard's Hemenway, noted for his skepticism about defensive gun use, accepts the National Crime Victimization Survey data that guns are used defensively about 100,000 times a year.

According to CNS:

The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-...-deterrent

Like I said, that's not a motivator to own a gun for me, but it has certainly benefitted others, no matter whose numbers you accept. Even Hemenway's 100,000 defensive uses is significant.

[Cato]

And guns have legitimate uses other than killing or injuring people.

And? Still does not change the makers and the NRA using scare tactics to sell to both the public and police and pit them against each other to keep their flooded market.

This is not about rights, this is about a big business scaring the shit out of everyone to make money.

I don't have a comment regarding NRA scare tactics, no information. Most gun owners I talk to are disgruntled with the NRA's approach; not sure what that means in the current context, but thought I'd share.

Unless you have other evidence, I already addressed the seemingly misplaced manufacturer scare tactic argument. I'd let that one go and continue pounding the NRA.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The NRA's objection to smart guns is stupid in the extreme.

[Chas]

The NRA's objection to smart guns is stupid in the extreme.

Doesn't seem stupid to me.

"Smart Guns" is a made-up term for a conceptual firearm that incorporates technology that theoretically permits the gun to be fired only by the authorized user. Failed attempts to develop and market "smart guns" have been going on for years.

NRA does not oppose new technological developments in firearms; however, we are opposed to government mandates that require the use of expensive, unreliable features, such as grips that would read your fingerprints before the gun will fire. And NRA recognizes that the "smart guns" issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunner's agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology.

[Jaysyn]

their marketing.

Any chance of you finally giving us some examples of this "marketing" you keep going on about?

[Brian37]

The NRA's objection to smart guns is stupid in the extreme.

Doesn't seem stupid to me.

"Smart Guns" is a made-up term for a conceptual firearm that incorporates technology that theoretically permits the gun to be fired only by the authorized user. Failed attempts to develop and market "smart guns" have been going on for years.

NRA does not oppose new technological developments in firearms; however, we are opposed to government mandates that require the use of expensive, unreliable features, such as grips that would read your fingerprints before the gun will fire. And NRA recognizes that the "smart guns" issue clearly has the potential to mesh with the anti-gunner's agenda, opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology.

This is not about gun rights. This is no different the obstruction attitude oil had in keeping led in gas. Marketing. Same "rights" issue car companies used to fight safety standards which Nadar fought for and car companies finally adapted. Same "rights tactic tobacco used to justify their no rules market.

It is business justifying "do nothing" because it might hurt profits.

[The Grand Nudger]

Firearms are -already- subject to strict safety standards (both in manufacturing and in operation). Manufacturers seem to take them seriously, John Q and Uncle Sam.........maybe not.