Quantcast

POLL: Guns and People!

Makeuptalk.com - Makeup forums and reviews

Help Support Makeuptalk.com - Makeup forums and reviews:

Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
22,667
Reaction score
441
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
NEW YORK A Gallup Poll released this morning reveals that the average American owns 1.7 guns, with the average gun owner possessing 4.4 of them.

Lets start up some controversy!
POLL TIME! (votes are anonymous)

Do Guns kill people or do People Kill People?

But please voice the opinions!

Guess what I voted for LOL


 
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
0
Hey Tony! First and foremost: people kill other people. A person is not going to have an ethical and moral breakdown just because he/she became the proud owner of a Sig. You've got to have issues of ill-intent to begin with to find an illegal use for a gun.

Should there be a ban on concealed weapons or a right to own handguns? Here's some food for thought:

Last week I was stuck with a flat tire on I-75 south, outside of Gainesille, FL. I was on the side of the road, hazards flashing, in a desolate stretch of highway waiting for AAA to show up and help change the tire. I sat there for TWO hours in the setting sun, and wouldn't you believe in this time there was only one cop car that passed, and he didn't stop. I have no idea why, but that's what happened. So, I'm waiting patiently for the tow truck and what if a vehicle pulled up behind me that wasn't familiar? Not a tow truck but a sedan and in it a creepy-looking man. Can a cop get there to protect me before he does me harm? I could call the cops, which I would definitely do at that point, but he can walk to my car in less than 20 seconds and most likely the cops will get there in time to do a clean-up job or post a missing person report.

Do you know what it takes to get a concealed carry permit? Besides being fingerprinted and having your identification run nationally by the FBI to check for a history of crime, you also have to sit through hours of gun SAFETY (not bang, bang, kill kill stuff) and prove your skill on a range. You know what the number one rule of owning a gun is? AVOID situations that get you in trouble. Hear someone break into your home? Call the COPS, barracade yourself in a safe room and use the gun as a last resort. This is the real mentality of a responsible gun owner. We aren't Rambo - we're citizens who respect the laws, view law enforcement as a first line of defense AND take personal responsibility in our own safety.



 
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
644
Reaction score
0
Kitty, I agree with you 100%, wish you had had my phone #, you know I'm just south of G'Ville and would of helped you out any way I could.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
22,667
Reaction score
441
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
She's back! HI! ((HUGS))

And I have to say, thank god nothing happened to you!

Luckily it didn't phew! Yes this could have been serious, but I sure can see how you would have protected yourself





Originally Posted by KittySkyfish

Hey Tony! First and foremost: people kill other people. A person is not going to have an ethical and moral breakdown just because he/she became the proud owner of a Sig. You've got to have issues of ill-intent to begin with to find an illegal use for a gun.
Should there be a ban on concealed weapons or a right to own handguns? Here's some food for thought:

Last week I was stuck with a flat tire on I-75 south, outside of Gainesille, FL. I was on the side of the road, hazards flashing, in a desolate stretch of highway waiting for AAA to show up and help change the tire. I sat there for TWO hours in the setting sun, and wouldn't you believe in this time there was only one cop car that passed, and he didn't stop. I have no idea why, but that's what happened. So, I'm waiting patiently for the tow truck and what if a vehicle pulled up behind me that wasn't familiar? Not a tow truck but a sedan and in it a creepy-looking man. Can a cop get there to protect me before he does me harm? I could call the cops, which I would definitely do at that point, but he can walk to my car in less than 20 seconds and most likely the cops will get there in time to do a clean-up job or post a missing person report.

Do you know what it takes to get a concealed carry permit? Besides being fingerprinted and having your identification run nationally by the FBI to check for a history of crime, you also have to sit through hours of gun SAFETY (not bang, bang, kill kill stuff) and prove your skill on a range. You know what the number one rule of owning a gun is? AVOID situations that get you in trouble. Hear someone break into your home? Call the COPS, barracade yourself in a safe room and use the gun as a last resort. This is the real mentality of a responsible gun owner. We aren't Rambo - we're citizens who respect the laws, view law enforcement as a first line of defense AND take personal responsibility in our own safety.







 
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
0
LOL! I had my trusty Ruger with me with three full speedloaders. I think the only danger I was in was wetting my pants. Two hours and no bathroom when you need it is pretty nasty.

You know, I forgot to add some of the other extremely important aspects of gun ownership that is hammered, time and time again by the NRA:

There is NO such thing as an unloaded gun, aka. "Treat every firearm as if it is loaded."

The most dangerous gun is the one you haven't personally checked.

Always point the muzzle of your firearm in a safe direction.

Always check three times to see if a firearm is unloaded, then check again.

Always keep firearms secured from children. (Yes, this is gospel among NRA members. Remember, we're responsible gun owners.)

Originally Posted by Tony(admin) She's back! HI! ((HUGS))
And I have to say, thank god nothing happened to you!

Luckily it didn't phew! Yes this could have been serious, but I sure can see how you would have protected yourself

 
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
22,667
Reaction score
441
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
Whoa! Very well said! Thanks for posting that....I am a proud member






Originally Posted by KittySkyfish

LOL! I had my trusty Ruger with me with three full speedloaders. I think the only danger I was in was wetting my pants. Two hours and no bathroom when you need it is pretty nasty.
You know, I forgot to add some of the other extremely important aspects of gun ownership that is hammered, time and time again by the NRA:

There is NO such thing as an unloaded gun, aka. "Treat every firearm as if it is loaded."

The most dangerous gun is the one you haven't personally checked.

Always point the muzzle of your firearm in a safe direction.

Always check three times to see if a firearm is unloaded, then check again.

Always keep firearms secured from children. (Yes, this is gospel among NRA members. Remember, we're responsible gun owners.)





 
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
899
Reaction score
0
While it is true that people kill people (since guns don't pull their own trigger), the high homicide rate in our country is partially due to the fact that guns are so prevalent in our society. Really, we have the homicide rate of third world nations.

Take for instance, Japan. Guns are not legal there. The homicide rate there is very low. This may be due to the fact that murdering someone there takes more than just pulling a trigger. It is one thing to murder with a gun. It is a completely different thing to take a knife, walk up to a person and stab them, beat them to death, etc. The gravity of what you are doing and/or what you have done hits you harder when you have to engage your victim.

Moreover, the bottom line is... less guns, less murders. It's not as easy to take a life without a gun. Essence of my opinion: People kill people but guns make it a lot easier for people to kill people.

***edit*** I just want to be clear that I am not saying that guns should be banned in the U.S. I do not advocate the taking away of constitutional rights and never will.

Originally Posted by Tony(admin) NEW YORK A Gallup Poll released this morning reveals that the average American owns 1.7 guns, with the average gun owner possessing 4.4 of them. Lets start up some controversy!
POLL TIME! (votes are anonymous)

Do Guns kill people or do People Kill People?

But please voice the opinions!

Guess what I voted for LOL


 
Joined
Oct 22, 2003
Messages
22,667
Reaction score
441
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
Yep your point is well made! I think I see where you are comin' from.

I also agree on Japan.

Thanks!





Originally Posted by wongy74

While it is true that people kill people (since guns don't pull their own trigger), the high homicide rate in our country is partially due to the fact that guns are so prevalent in our society. Really, we have the homicide rate of third world nations.
Take for instance, Japan. Guns are not legal there. The homicide rate there is very low. This may be due to the fact that murdering someone there takes more than just pulling a trigger. It is one thing to murder with a gun. It is a completely different thing to take a knife, walk up to a person and stab them, beat them to death, etc. The gravity of what you are doing and/or what you have done hits you harder when you have to engage your victim.

Moreover, the bottom line is... less guns, less murders. It's not as easy to take a life without a gun.

***edit*** I just want to be clear that I am not saying that guns should be banned in the U.S. I do not advocate the taking away of constitutional rights and never will.





 
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
1,649
Reaction score
0
The logic that banning guns removes the threat is illogical because a gun ban is a law. Who obeys laws? Law-abiding citizens. Who won't obey the laws are the very ones that would use guns in a violent crime. When I see a law that's actually obeyed by 100% of the community, then I'll consider it 100% enforced. Take heroin, cocaine and pot. Drunk driving. Theft. Rape. Aggravated Assault. These are all illegal and yet it still happens. Death penalties don't seem to have any deterrent effect, either.

If a registration/round-up collection of firearms occurs, it will be obeyed only by the very people who would be the least likely to commit a crime. Washington D.C., by the way, has enforced a strict gun and stun-gun ban since 1976, and since that time murder rates have risen significantly risen.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm

http://www.narpac.org/SJCRIME.HTM

Now, being law-abiding and without a defensive weapon that can disable an attacker at a safe distance (if you can be grabbed, you CAN be disarmed from using a knife, tire iron, etc.), we are left to assume that law enforcement will be there to protect us if we are in need of help. Enter Warren vs. District of Columbia. This is a very long synopsis for this board and I apologize for the intense content and length, but the situation and the resulting ruling further reinforce my belief in being able to take responsibility for protecting myself if the situation arises.

In the early morning hours of March 16, 1975, appellants Carolyn Warren, Joan Taliaferro, and Miriam Douglas were asleep in their rooming house at 1112 Lamont Street, N.W. Warren and Taliaferro shared a room on the third floor of the house; Douglas shared a room on the second floor with her four-year-old daughter. The women were awakened by the sound of the back door being broken down by two men later identified as Marvin Kent and James Morse. The men entered Douglas' second floor room, where Kent forced Douglas to sodomize him and Morse raped her.

Warren and Taliaferro heard Douglas' screams from the floor below. Warren telephoned the police, told the officer on duty that the house was being burglarized, and requested immediate assistance. The department employee told her to remain quiet and assured her that police assistance would be dispatched promptly. Warren's call was received at Metropolitan Police Department Headquarters at 6:23 a. m., and was recorded as a burglary in progress. At 6:26 a. m., a call was dispatched to officers on the street as a "Code 2" assignment, although calls of a crime in progress should be given priority and designated as "Code 1." Four police cruisers responded to the broadcast; three to the Lamont Street address and one to another address to investigate a possible suspect.

Meanwhile, Warren and Taliaferro crawled from their window onto an adjoining roof and waited for the police to arrive. While there, they saw one policeman drive through the alley behind their house and proceed to the front of the residence without stopping, leaning out the window, or getting out of the car to check the back entrance of the house. A second officer apparently knocked on the door in front of the residence, but left when he received no answer. The three officers departed the scene at 6:33 a. m., five minutes after they arrived.

Warren and Taliaferro crawled back inside their room. They again heard Douglas' continuing screams; again called the police; told the officer that the intruders had entered the home, and requested immediate assistance. Once again, a police officer assured them that help was on the way. This second call was received at 6:42 a. m. and recorded merely as "investigate the trouble" - it was never dispatched to any police officers.

Believing the police might be in the house, Warren and Taliaferro called down to Douglas, thereby alerting Kent to their presence. Kent and Morse then forced all three women, at knifepoint, to accompany them to Kent's apartment. For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of Kent and Morse. Appellants' claims of negligence included: the dispatcher's failure to forward the 6:23 a. m. call with the proper degree of urgency; Page 3 the responding officers' failure to follow standard police investigative procedures, specifically their failure to check the rear entrance and position themselves properly near the doors and windows to ascertain whether there was any activity inside; and the dispatcher's failure to dispatch the 6:42 a. m. call.

Court Decision:

In a carefully reasoned Memorandum Opinion, Judge Hannon based his decision in No. 79-6 on "the fundamental principle that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen." See p. 4, infra. The duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists. Holding that no special relationship existed between the police and appellants in No. 79-6, Judge Hannon concluded that no specific legal duty existed. We hold that Judge Hannon was correct and adopt the relevant portions of his opinion. Those portions appear in the following Appendix.[fn1]

Judge Pryor, then of the trial court, ruled likewise in No. 79-394 on the basis of Judge Hannon's opinion. In No. 79-394, a police officer directed Nichol's companion to cease efforts to identify the assailants and thus to break off the violent confrontation. The officer's duty to get that identification was one directly related to his official and general duty to investigate the offenses. His actions and failings were solely related to his duty to the public generally and possessed no additional element necessary to create an overriding special relationship and duty.[fn2]

http://www.healylaw.com/cases/warren2.htm

 
Joined
May 6, 2004
Messages
10,943
Reaction score
0
Originally Posted by KittySkyfish LOL! I had my trusty Ruger with me with three full speedloaders. I think the only danger I was in was wetting my pants. Two hours and no bathroom when you need it is pretty nasty. OMG i'm LMAO at that comment but thank god you were okay sweetie.. Delighted to see you back posting
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2005
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
i think that people kill people is the correct response to this....anything can made to be a weapon, it just happens that in america its the gun thats become so popular...still, i believe that people that guns are sold to should be strictly regulated....more so than they are now....or just not sold at all.....sadly, i think america has opened a door that can never be closed.....just think if there was a law in the US stating that anyone who murders anyone other than what is judged as self defense will be executed, do u think as many criminals would be willing to use thier gun? i dont.....

 

Latest posts

Top