jowey

The NRA representative on Hardball, tried to make a point about enforcing the laws that currently exist. We have a failed court system, that is so overwhelmed by victimless crimes that it cannot focus on the relevant capital crimes. If one intends to commit murder they are going to do it, the tool is one of choice, gun, knife, rock or hand.

Given the experiences that we have survived, I know that the cops will be late and I know that somewhere in my house a lethal response is available to any break in. I also know that the court system is corrupt so one living in America must consider its "law enforcement" as unregulated thugs, do not say anything and do what ever it takes to survive any interaction with "law enforcement". Regardless of the situation you will not be believed in court, which means that "presumption of innocence" has been discarded.

__________________

Ptech

Presumption of innocence is one of those "quaint" concepts like Habeas Corpus and Geneva Conventions.

gonzo

Respectfully Jules, a criminal is going to get his/her hands on a handgun whenever they please. No law will ever stop it.

And this is coming from an old police dispatcher that worked in Armed Robbery/CarJack Central aka Tampa Bay, Florida. I have handled urban violence a lot. (Taking the hysterical 911 calls, dealing with my patrol units handling said calls, etc., etc.) One thing I can tell ya about handguns is that most of the guns I "ran" through NCIC (the criminal database) that the bad guys had on 'em were stolen.

Black market guns are a huge market. Huge.

When burglars break into pawn shops one of the first things they go for are the guns.

Malkavian

16th century.

__________________
Woof!

PursuitOfHappinessParty

POI is alive and well if you're rich and famous, or a militant President.

__________________
Its like a finger pointing at the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you'll miss all that heavenly glory. - Bruce Lee in 'Enter The Dragon'

Ptech

A criminal president.

disfigured

Let me make one point here (O.K two):

The context of the ruling was mostly based on the fact that it was a locational ban, not the actual item that was banned. It was the use of the location of one's residence that was deemed "unconstitutional" not the actual weapon itself.

And yeah I have to laugh when most of the NRA nuts who revel in this decision wouldn't step off a bus in DC, regardless of whether they were armed or not. Unless their racial demographic has changed greatly.

A car is not a handgun.

And if a car is similar to a gun, then why doesn't the NRA push for at least the equal amount of regulation, not less then that of a car? Does less control of licensing , usage, insurance and restrictions on vehicles save more lives? Of course not.

A car is a tool who's sole function isn't to fire a projectile dangerously down range at uncontrollable speeds and paths. A vehicle's speed and path can be quite easily controlled via its occupant. In fact they are one in the same, your fate is tied to the vehicles fate. Can't say that about the path of a bullet, can we? It is impossible to use both in a similar fashion, the mind simply can't use a car the same way it uses a gun. Not emotionally, not consciously, and not mechanically. So the vast vast vast majority of the deaths caused by cars are not of the same ilk, categorization, intent, or circumstances then that of a handgun. So to compare the two statistics claiming they are both effected equally by the same influences is entirely flawed logic.

Would you treat your dog the same as your cat because they are both mammals with four legs? In some circumstances, yes, but in others no. It wouldn't be prudent. And neither is comparing handguns and cars.

It's not as if you start a car and it takes off on its own, in the direction it's pointed. But that's what a firearm does as soon as you "use" it. They are two entirely different things , both very dangerous, but with totally different uses. Unfortunately we need cars at very high instance rates in the society we live in. It's very unfortunate the lives lost. But we are constantly working on things that do keep the deaths down. Not blocking anything that would infringe on ownership. In fact it's gotten quite ridiculous in some states, but yet as a society we accept this as being responsible car owners. Why does not the same dynamic apply to some (some mind you) gun owners?

If they are the same then where are the advocates for owning, operating, buying, selling, modifying, with nearly total imunity and no government oversight , the use of cars?

They are very different to argue otherwise won't get us far in a solution to either one's deadliness.

__________________

wayers57

There were hand guns that operated off flint just like the rifles. The reason there is less violence in other countries is because the punishments are more severe and there are fewer appeals tying up their court systems.

BleedingPinky

I can´t believe they made such ugly guns in those days. I mean, look at that handle. Look at those fancy inlays. No wonder Luis XVI wore a wig. Plain disgusting.

Rigged

If it interests you, I can send you the actual opinion.

__________________
It is what they want, after all: "a god to punish, not a man of their infirmity."

"When George W. Bush looked into the eyes of Vladimir Putin, he claimed he saw his soul, when John McCain looked into them he saw the letters K-G-B."

- Economist (on John McCain)