Yeah I heard that and I believe being a taxi cab driver was second.
And yes... I was almost a victim of a home invasion about 30 years ago. I was alone at home and heard someone break in. I did not want to shoot him and just told him to leave.... He left and was never caught.
Well, during a home invasion a gun is good to have. If you are in a movie theater....what then? Are you justifying having every gun toting citizen to pull their weapon and open fire? This may solve the problem and it may cause as much collateral damage as the single shooter.
Bmac
Loc: Long Island, NY
Gnslngr wrote:
Bmac wrote:
Gnslngr wrote:
Bmac wrote:
the manufacture of guns is stopped
Good idea! :thumbup:
Perhaps, but then the bad folks would use knives or some other weapon. The problem is the bad people. Maybe a solid family unit, being taught right from wrong via the family or religious instruction would help, or is that too radical? 8-)
Not too radical for John Hinckley. Or William Calley. Or a thousand other monsters, some of whom use that very religious instruction to kill, maim and terrorize the innocent. :thumbup:
quote=Bmac quote=Gnslngr quote=Bmac the manufac... (
show quote)
There you go, guess it was too radical. It is probably more conducive to have one parent, struggling to make ends meet and unable to give proper attention to a child, and have no religion teaching right from wrong, generosity, forgiveness etc. etc.
Eugene wrote:
Yeah. I read one time that someone working in these little quick markets have the most dangerous in the U.S. Don't know how true it is but I can believe it.
SteveR wrote:
Eugene wrote:
Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of the owner stopping a criminal every once in a while. Where the criminal wasn't stopped they don't mention whether the owner had a gun or not.
SteveR wrote:
STEVE R Your reply makes sense in your historic situation. BUT didn't the same or similar circumstances apply in countries such as Canada, Australia, etc., without giving rise to the same end results?
We're not talking about the crime wave in Bemudgy, Idaho are we? Aren't we pretty much talking urban areas? There is a complete difference in the populations of the U.S. and Canada. The United States also has a large demographic of disenfranchised people which Canada and Australia do not.
I'd also like to bring up another question to the group. How many times do you hear of a homeowner stopping a break-in with a gun? Very seldom. I think that you're more at risk from the gun that you have for your own protection than the criminal you fear.
STEVE R Your reply makes sense in your historic si... (
show quote)
Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of the owner stop... (
show quote)
I can understand store owners having guns.
quote=Eugene Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of ... (
show quote)
Yeah. I read one time that someone working in thes... (
show quote)
I worked for the City and at one time was at the Dallas Zoo. One of the parking lot cashiers was named Vasudev Patel. He was Indian. After 9/11, some maniac wanted to kill a Muslim and went into the store and killed Vasudev because he was dark. Vasudev, of course, was Hindu, I believe. He was married and had a couple of kids.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/mesquite/headlines/20110720-mark-stroman-executed-for-dallas-area-911-revenge-shootings.ece
Donaldaq wrote:
Well, during a home invasion a gun is good to have. If you are in a movie theater....what then? Are you justifying having every gun toting citizen to pull their weapon and open fire? This may solve the problem and it may cause as much collateral damage as the single shooter.
Which is better, one guy shooting at twenty people or twenty people shooting at one guy?
SteveR wrote:
Eugene wrote:
Yeah. I read one time that someone working in these little quick markets have the most dangerous in the U.S. Don't know how true it is but I can believe it.
SteveR wrote:
Eugene wrote:
Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of the owner stopping a criminal every once in a while. Where the criminal wasn't stopped they don't mention whether the owner had a gun or not.
SteveR wrote:
STEVE R Your reply makes sense in your historic situation. BUT didn't the same or similar circumstances apply in countries such as Canada, Australia, etc., without giving rise to the same end results?
We're not talking about the crime wave in Bemudgy, Idaho are we? Aren't we pretty much talking urban areas? There is a complete difference in the populations of the U.S. and Canada. The United States also has a large demographic of disenfranchised people which Canada and Australia do not.
I'd also like to bring up another question to the group. How many times do you hear of a homeowner stopping a break-in with a gun? Very seldom. I think that you're more at risk from the gun that you have for your own protection than the criminal you fear.
STEVE R Your reply makes sense in your historic si... (
show quote)
Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of the owner stop... (
show quote)
I can understand store owners having guns.
quote=Eugene Hey Steve. In Nashville you hear of ... (
show quote)
Yeah. I read one time that someone working in thes... (
show quote)
I worked for the City and at one time was at the Dallas Zoo. One of the parking lot cashiers was named Vasudev Patel. He was Indian. After 9/11, some maniac wanted to kill a Muslim and went into the store and killed Vasudev because he was dark. Vasudev, of course, was Hindu, I believe. He was married and had a couple of kids.
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/mesquite/headlines/20110720-mark-stroman-executed-for-dallas-area-911-revenge-shootings.ece quote=Eugene Yeah. I read one time that someone w... (
show quote)
Is that suppose to be a reason for me to not own a gun?
If O.J. Simpson did not have a knife then Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman would still be alive today.
I would not want to get into a knife fight - think I better get a gun.
Some sensible comments here.
Someone hit the nail right on the head - but it is not a matter of preventing policemen from carrying handguns rather one of preventing the other (bad?) guys from having them. Step 1 could be to ban the manufacture/distribution of the things. Thereafter ban ownership/possession. That is what we did here in the UK in 1997 (not 1977 as I mistakenly typed in an earlier note ) Result - declining numbers of gun crimes. Like someone else said, the majority of these cases happen in the big towns - London is not a happy example I am afraid. BUT gun crime even there is minimal compared with what you good folk have to tolerate. I don't agree that Canada is so very different from the USA. They have big cities in Canada also you know. The essential difference is that in Canada ownership/possession of guns is very tightly regulated. It seems that in the USA it is a matter of "open house". Canadians got used to not wishing to follow the USA many, many years ago - not least when the USA invaded Canada !!!! My Canuck friends have very long memories - right back to 1812 !!!
Have a good one Folks I enjoy corresponding with you.
Drugs are illegal to manufacture, possess or sale in the U.S.However, drugs are still a huge problem here. I just don't think it would work as well here as it aparently has in the U.K...I don't know what the difference is.
John Evans wrote:
Some sensible comments here.
Someone hit the nail right on the head - but it is not a matter of preventing policemen from carrying handguns rather one of preventing the other (bad?) guys from having them. Step 1 could be to ban the manufacture/distribution of the things. Thereafter ban ownership/possession. That is what we did here in the UK in 1997 (not 1977 as I mistakenly typed in an earlier note ) Result - declining numbers of gun crimes. Like someone else said, the majority of these cases happen in the big towns - London is not a happy example I am afraid. BUT gun crime even there is minimal compared with what you good folk have to tolerate. I don't agree that Canada is so very different from the USA. They have big cities in Canada also you know. The essential difference is that in Canada ownership/possession of guns is very tightly regulated. It seems that in the USA it is a matter of "open house". Canadians got used to not wishing to follow the USA many, many years ago - not least when the USA invaded Canada !!!! My Canuck friends have very long memories - right back to 1812 !!!
Have a good one Folks I enjoy corresponding with you.
Some sensible comments here. br Someone hit t... (
show quote)
Guns do kill people. That's what they are for. In the 14th Century an arab invented the first man portable firearm. It made a change from bows and arrows. People will argue that guns don't kill people, people kill people. That is an ultracrepedarian argument really because people kill people with guns knives and whatever else they can get their hands on.
Ha That's it.... lets ban hands.
Then we will start kicking each other to death..LOL.
jbslord wrote:
Guns do kill people. That's what they are for. In the 14th Century an arab invented the first man portable firearm. It made a change from bows and arrows. People will argue that guns don't kill people, people kill people. That is an ultracrepedarian argument really because people kill people with guns knives and whatever else they can get their hands on.
Ha That's it.... lets ban hands.
That's what I love about yoiu Eugene - you're such an optimist.
Eugene wrote:
Then we will start kicking each other to death..LOL.
jbslord wrote:
Guns do kill people. That's what they are for. In the 14th Century an arab invented the first man portable firearm. It made a change from bows and arrows. People will argue that guns don't kill people, people kill people. That is an ultracrepedarian argument really because people kill people with guns knives and whatever else they can get their hands on.
Ha That's it.... lets ban hands.
Thanks. I did mean that in fun.
jbslord wrote:
That's what I love about yoiu Eugene - you're such an optimist.
Eugene wrote:
Then we will start kicking each other to death..LOL.
jbslord wrote:
Guns do kill people. That's what they are for. In the 14th Century an arab invented the first man portable firearm. It made a change from bows and arrows. People will argue that guns don't kill people, people kill people. That is an ultracrepedarian argument really because people kill people with guns knives and whatever else they can get their hands on.
Ha That's it.... lets ban hands.
That's what I love about yoiu Eugene - you're suc... (
show quote)
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.