The Propaganda Professor put it all together.
The rest of the article is wonderful. He even gave us a mention.All told, these facts shoot a big gaping hole in one of the gun culture’s prime tenets: that guns are used in self-defense more often they are used to commit crimes – some even claim ten times as often or more! In the Phoenix sample, however, the score was 78 to 3 in favor of the Offense. Granted, these were actual shootings and most defenders don’t open fire – but neither do most offenders. While there are only a few hundred confirmed DGUs per year, there are at least 400,000 gun crimes per year.
How do you like that? Please leave a comment.At least one blogger out there is making an effort to chronicle the destructive use of firearms, both intentional and accidental – there are thousands of accidental gun deaths and injuries every year, but I’ve yet to hear of a gun accidentally preventing a death or injury. He seems to be waging a war of anecdotes with the gunsters, but it’s not much of a war. Despite their persistent claims of vastly superior firepower, he’s been blowing their asses out of the water.
I find that with most of the Gun Loon argument, they really don't stand scrutiny as my encounter with LegalEagle45 demonstrated.
ReplyDeleteHe wanted to believe that someone who was on the Supreme Court at the time of the Miller decision, while possibly not involved in actual argumentation of the case, would not have at least been party to the Courts discussions of its final decision.
I think what put paid to him was the fact that he didn't understand the incorporation by reference of Aymette v. State, 21 Tenn. (2 Hump.) 154 (1840) in the Miller decision that made it clear that "the phrase, "bear arms," is used in the Kentucky constitution as well as in our own, and implies, as has already been suggested, their military use...Here we know that the phrase has a military sense, and no other"
The best part of that decision is the statement that:
A man in the pursuit of deer, elk and buffaloes, might carry his rifle every day, for forty years, and, yet, it would never be said of him, that he had borne arms, much less could it be said, that a private citizen bears arms, because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.
Well let try to stay with in reason,
DeleteGun Loon are those who tell you that they need grenade and flamethrower for home defense.
gun control is a balance between protection and responsibly.
in which the law keep guns out of the hands of those who would misuse-them.
Laci The Dog, augment is flaw using a case from Kentucky/Tenn is hardily a root of the phrase bear arms.
the belief in the right to bear arms as when it appear in
September 25, 1789 was a personal right as at the time hunting rifle where interchangeable with military rifle
and the founder of our country saw the strain a standeing
army put on the taxpayers.
United States Bill of Rights,
it is a set of right for all mankind.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
A militia/irregular army is a group of ordinary citizens.
This one amendment is about a individual rights to owning and the reasonable use of arms be it at the time sword or gun.
by allowing the citizens reasonable access to weapons,
the country saved in training and supplying a standing army.
and allowed for common law protections.
as for firearms used in self-defense the self-defense use is passive the Offensive use is active and is bound to occur more often in most cases.
places with stronger gun-control have higher rate in crime
both Britain and Japan.
even it the strictest environments like prisons
firearm still can be made.
so charge criminals to the full extent of the law.
Keep firearm/ammo lock up out of the hand of children.
Hi Laci The Dog
DeleteThe best part of that decision is that the Aymette court held that "citizens have the unqualified right to keep the weapon, it being of the character before described, as being intended by this provision."
Thus proving that the decision in Miller was weapon centric and that if evidence was presented showing that the sawed off shotgun would be of utility if employed in the military, the Miller's right to keep that weapon is protected by the 2nd.
NH resident brings up a good question. Where do we draw the line between reasonable gun enthusiast and whacky gun nut. He said the gun nut is the one who wants hand grenades and flamethrowers. I think I'd draw the line a bit lower, but I would agree that we sometimes use the term "gun nut" a bit loosely.
DeleteThe numbers that I've seen say that there are around a hundred thousand firearms deaths and injuries per year in the United States. That's out of a population of three hundred million. That's one third of one tenth of one percent. Of those, many are suicides, something that we have discussed before. Your magic bullet solutions will take guns away from large numbers of people to solve a small problem.
ReplyDeleteGreg, aren't you forgetting (on purpose) all the illegal uses of guns that don't result in death or injury. You're quick to include them in the DGU count.
DeleteAnd you're quick to deny legitimacy to a defensive gun use.
Delete