My next gun. Sniper accuracy....done easy

[JustRalph]

I fully suspect a hew and cry to come from the anti gun lobby, very quickly.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/see-the-new-intelligent-rifle-that-claims-to-give-you-a-perfect-shot-every-time/

[Robert Goren]

Just what we need ! A gun that does all the work for sniper serial killer wantabes. When some sniper goes a spree, we will all know who made it easy for him to kill his victims. A sniper is the worst kind of serial killer. Now these low lifes won't even have to spend hundreds of hours on the range to get good enough to do their deeds. Isn't progress wonderful?

[JustRalph]

Just what we need ! A gun that does all the work for sniper serial killer wantabes. When some sniper goes a spree, we will all know who made it easy for him to kill his victims. A sniper is the worst kind of serial killer. Now these low lifes won't even have to spend hundreds of hours on the range to get good enough to do their deeds. Isn't progress wonderful?

Hew or cry?

You choose.

[johnhannibalsmith]

At $20,000, I think I'll just keep saving up for my very own drone.

[fast4522]

I spent two mornings in a DCM clinic and was on target at 600 yards, you get to make friends and have some fun. These anti gun groups have not been able to muster anything that would keep United States senators to stop salivating every time somebody pays his Federal stamp tax moving his class 3 weapon from state to state or in and out of our country.

[JustRalph]

At $20,000, I think I'll just keep saving up for my very own drone.

Quarantee within a year somebody does it tons cheaper.

In fact, just pondering what it does, and current cell phone tech, it might be pretty damn easy.........

[Tom]

At $20,000, I think I'll just keep saving up for my very own drone.

At $20,000, I'll hire Ralph! :ThmbUp::ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

Quarantee within a year somebody does it tons cheaper.

In fact, just pondering what it does, and current cell phone tech, it might be pretty damn easy.........

I venture to say that what will be very hard for gun owners down the road is to pay the federal tax on guns and ammo (especially the latter). I strongly suspect, the IRS will at some point get involved in gun regulation. I predict the government will regulate guns through exceedingly oppressive taxation laws.

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

I predict the government will regulate guns through exceedingly oppressive taxation laws.

Boxcar

I predict the government will regulate EVERYTHING through exceedingly oppressive taxation laws.

johnhannibalsmith

[boxcar]

I predict the government will regulate EVERYTHING through exceedingly oppressive taxation laws.

johnhannibalsmith

That coupled with hyper inflation will bring this country to its knees.

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

...and no way to adjust your holds...

A neat gimmick but just that a gimmick.

[JustRalph]

Weird, my Ipad wants to change guarantee to quarantine every time I try to post in this thread..........that's deep man........

[hcap]

/qE2Vdcv9Q_o?

[atlasaxis]

I like Chris Rock's take on gun control! LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II&feature=player_embedded

[johnhannibalsmith]

I like Chris Rock's take on gun control! LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II&feature=player_embedded

:D

I love that clip... no pun...

[HUSKER55]

got to admit that was good:D

[highnote]

I fully suspect a hew and cry to come from the anti gun lobby, very quickly.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/see-the-new-intelligent-rifle-that-claims-to-give-you-a-perfect-shot-every-time/


The article asks a lot of good questions. It sounds like it uses conventional ammunition. So if the wind is blowing and the object is far away then there is a chance it would miss the target. Still, it probably is an improvement over traditional sniper rifles. Kind of boring if you're a hunter, though -- although, I suppose it depends on what you're hunting.

If you're hunting elk, maybe some of the challenge is taken away. If you're part of a SWAT team, it might be better than a traditional sniper rifle.

[boxcar]

I bet more than few people who saved their own lives, protected others or protected property by using a gun would agree that "happiness is a warm gun".

Boxcar
P.S. Guns aren't evil, 'cap.

[elysiantraveller]

The article asks a lot of good questions. It sounds like it uses conventional ammunition. So if the wind is blowing and the object is far away then there is a chance it would miss the target. Still, it probably is an improvement over traditional sniper rifles. Kind of boring if you're a hunter, though -- although, I suppose it depends on what you're hunting.

If you're hunting elk, maybe some of the challenge is taken away. If you're part of a SWAT team, it might be better than a traditional sniper rifle.

I don't think this really helps you at all its just a pretty cool way to show off new tech.

Two problems. First you have to "shoot" the target with the laser before you shoot it for real. :confused: ...

Secondly just because the cross-hairs are on target does not mean that's where the bullet is going. My POI is anywhere from 3 inches high to 13 inches low between 50-250 yards. That's not accounting for windage.

They actually make portable computers that measure all the above including wind, atmospheric pressure, temperature, and humidity that give you a far greater advantage.

This is just a cool piece of tech showing how far imaging has come along. No one would ever use it hunting or target shooting.

[hcap]

I bet more than few people who saved their own lives, protected others or protected property by using a gun would agree that "happiness is a warm gun".

Boxcar
P.S. Guns aren't evil, 'cap.Hey, why fool around? Howsabout a heat seeker shoulder launched missile? Don't mess with me, I'll track you by all the infra red emissions leaking from both ends.

[Rookies]

I fully suspect a hew and cry to come from the anti gun lobby, very quickly.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/see-the-new-intelligent-rifle-that-claims-to-give-you-a-perfect-shot-every-time/

Two questions.

1) Why would any human being, not named Vasily Zaytsev or his ilk, or an Olympic athlete or a specially trained Swat team member want this weapon other than to engage in terrorism?

2) After this ridiculously powerful instrument comes on the market, how quickly do you think scores of them will be in the hands of Al-Qaeda operatives to slaughter American troops, government employees and citizens?

[hcap]

From Drudge........

http://aka-cdn-ns.adtechus.com/images/188/Ad0St1Sz170Sq0V0Id21887164.jpg

So now you gentlemen can put your gums to use.
Unless the Black Helicopter guys pry them from your cold dead hands of course

[hcap]

Further down on Drudge, after scaring everyone about da Black guy, another major Drudge scary story.

"COPS: Woman tried to kill her husband with tuna sandwich..."

[elysiantraveller]

Two questions.

1) Why would any human being, not named Vasily Zaytsev or his ilk, or an Olympic athlete or a specially trained Swat team member want this weapon other than to engage in terrorism?

2) After this ridiculously powerful instrument comes on the market, how quickly do you think scores of them will be in the hands of Al-Qaeda operatives to slaughter American troops, government employees and citizens?

:bang:

Or you could just move a foot or two to the right or left... :rolleyes:

No operator in the world would want this system... It's doesn't adjust for wind or drop... And you essentially have to shoot the target twice...

It's not scary at all... It's cool imaging stuff put on a gun...

[JustRalph]

Two questions.

1) Why would any human being, not named Vasily Zaytsev or his ilk, or an Olympic athlete or a specially trained Swat team member want this weapon other than to engage in terrorism?

2) After this ridiculously powerful instrument comes on the market, how quickly do you think scores of them will be in the hands of Al-Qaeda operatives to slaughter American troops, government employees and citizens?

The 2nd amendment was included to protect Americans from government agents. I want every advantage available ............and support my fellow citizens right to own it

I don't ever anticipate having to use a weapon against my own government. But I support everybody in their right to arm themselves. You see, I understand that guns don't kill people. if a law abiding citizen wants to possess the best tech available, whether it be shooting or bow hunting, or construction equipment I support their right to purchase it.

It's not the guns etc that are the problem. It's the hearts and minds of mankind that murder. The tools are irrelevant

[JustRalph]

:bang:

Or you could just move a foot or two to the right or left... :rolleyes:

No operator in the world would want this system... It's doesn't adjust for wind or drop... And you essentially have to shoot the target twice...

It's not scary at all... It's cool imaging stuff put on a gun...

I disagree. For long range deer or elk hunting etc, this thing would be a game changer. Especially if you already have decent skills.

In close shots where that 700 Winchester round won't be blown around much this thing would be almost 100% accurate. Either way, adapting this thing will be tricky at first, but with any skills at all this thing makes a novice much better and a decent shooter deadly.

Inside a hundred yards in good conditions, ths thing would be devastating. Btw, I can think of some serious ways of using this thing that would make it as deadly as a bomb.

[elysiantraveller]

I disagree. For long range deer or elk hunting etc, this thing would be a game changer. Especially if you already have decent skills.

In close shots where that 700 Winchester round won't be blown around much this thing would be almost 100% accurate. Either way, adapting this thing will be tricky at first, but with any skills at all this thing makes a novice much better and a decent shooter deadly.

Inside a hundred yards in good conditions, ths thing would be devastating. Btw, I can think of some serious ways of using this thing that would make it as deadly as a bomb.

Light/Laser/radiation travel in a linear path (at least for this application) while bullets do not.

At close range sure you will be basically automatic on a stationary target but I don't think this makes anyone more lethal. You still have to accurately "shoot" the target to tag it so I don't see the advantage. Why not just shoot it the first time?

This type of tech makes a lot more sense for something like a motion detecting automatic sentry or something... That stuff already exists...

Don't get me wrong though I do think its pretty neat... Now all you need is a railgun to mount it on :-)

[highnote]

Weapons will be much more dangerous when they shoot laser beams that will melt or burn whatever they hit.

[JustRalph]

Weapons will be much more dangerous when they shoot laser beams that will melt or burn whatever they hit.

U.S. military already has them. They refuse to deploy them, officially.

They can cut tanks and buildings in half from C-130's already.

This piece is already 5 years old

http://www.popsci.com/node/19965

This system has already been mounted by the Navy too.

[PaceAdvantage]

From Drudge........

http://aka-cdn-ns.adtechus.com/images/188/Ad0St1Sz170Sq0V0Id21887164.jpg

So now you gentlemen can put your gums to use.
Unless the Black Helicopter guys pry them from your cold dead hands of courseThat's not from Drudge. That may have been an ad APPEARING on the website, but it's not something Drudge put out there himself.

You should be more honest in your reporting, lest you become that which you CLAIM to detest (a biased, inaccurate reporter of non-facts).

[hcap]

That's not from Drudge. That may have been an ad APPEARING on the website, but it's not something Drudge put out there himself.

You should be more honest in your reporting, lest you become that which you CLAIM to detest (a biased, inaccurate reporter of non-facts).EXCUUUUUUUUUUUSE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

Drudge is quite a cesspool all by itself. I wasn't implying that all the crap on it is of their creation. They also carry adds that appeal to their literate audience.
Sort of like Faux and Rush and WND.

BTW, the story about the deadly assault by a tuna sandwich was their reporting.

[highnote]

I read about the laser weapons they can mount on battleships, but I was thinking more along the lines of a laser rifle that can be shoulder mounted.

The battleship lasers can burn through 20 feet of steel per second, but it consumes 500 kilovolts of energy.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2011/04/08/navy-showboats-destructive-new-laser-gun/

These seem more dangerous than nuclear bombs. Nuclear bombs are dangerous to those who drop them because of the radioactive fallout.

There really isn't much danger to those who fire laser weapons.



U.S. military already has them. They refuse to deploy them, officially.

They can cut tanks and buildings in half from C-130's already.

This piece is already 5 years old

http://www.popsci.com/node/19965

This system has already been mounted by the Navy too.

[Tom]

Sort of like Faux and Rush and WND.

What is more dangerous, a new, high tech sniper rifle, or being anywhere near hcap when he melts down and explodes? :lol::lol::lol::lol:

[hcap]

What is more dangerous, a new, high tech sniper rifle, or being anywhere near hcap when he melts down and explodes? :lol::lol::lol::lol:
Dish it out but can't take it Tom.

Yeah, melt down with joy at Mr Innocent crying
Tough shit, grow a pair

[boxcar]

Hey, why fool around? Howsabout a heat seeker shoulder launched missile? Don't mess with me, I'll track you by all the infra red emissions leaking from both ends.

I would have no problem with heat seekers in the right context of circumstances. :rolleyes:

Aren't you ashamed that mankind is so debauched and wicked that we humans have filled the world with our horrible weapons? No, of course you're not! (That was a rhetorical question.) Instead of seeing the real problem, which is the human condition, you want to focus on amoral things that we humans use to kill off one another, as if the absence of weapons would really change what we are -- that their absence would somehow miraculously transform us from the inside out. Violence is very much a part of our human nature. This is why the movie industry, for example, has made mega billions over these many decades by producing so many violent movies that act as magnets to our nature.

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

Dish it out but can't take it Tom.

Yeah, melt down with joy at Mr Innocent crying
Tough shit, grow a pairYou should just go back to telling him to STFU. Remember that?

[hcap]

You should just go back to telling him to STFU. Remember that?Actually that abbreviation was reserved for whiny republicans. I could.

BTW, I have no problem with being insulted on a regular basis or being told I am a commie, I just see no reason why I can't return the favor in a similar fashion (particularly after you gentlemen lose and blame the voters, who were "paid off" and were too weak minded to choose objectively.)

My taunts and jabs are what caused you gentlemen to claim I was too annoying. I firmly believe the overall squirm to noise ratio has upticked significantly since I started. Just as you guys have jabbed for years. My turn

Get used to it until I get bored :cool:

[PaceAdvantage]

I just see no reason why I can't return the favor in a similar fashion (particularly after you gentlemen lose and blame the voters, who were "paid off" and were too weak minded to choose objectively.)I implore you to show me one post where I say you can't.

[Tom]

Can't take it?
You have never thrown anything out there that was even remotely an "it!" :lol:

If you ever get any of "it" feel free to fling it at me.

You should be talking to your boy Barry - he's the one still on the campaign trail, even after he won. Instead of rolling up his sleeves and getting to work trying to stop us from a financial disaster looming in 30 days, he does the only thing he has ever known how to do......give speeches and lie and blame others.

If that is leadership, hcap, you can claim a win all you want, but the guy is a pathetic loser fro the get go.

Here's a fun with numbers game.....write down your gross pay and net pay for the last check you receive in 2012.

Do the same for the first one you get in 2013.

Then we will talk.
Feel free to graph the numbers, any colors you like.

[hcap]

I implore you to show me one post where I say you can't.Show me where you have ever lost respect for Tom when he called Obama a traitor. Or Michelle a bitch.

Of course you can't prevent me from making asses of you gents by posting sarcastic comments unless I break the TOS rules, You think for some reason my pokes are somehow dumber than Tom's claptrap when in fact his claptrap is 10x more odious than mine.

Your bias is more subdued than plain outright, but it srtill exists or getting yelled at by the boss would have been done to Tom publicly many many times. But this is moot. I will continue annoying you gentlemen as I see fit. And you will complain that I am not worthy of respect.

[hcap]

Can't take it?
You have never thrown anything out there that was even remotely an "it!"
I have been listing to you babble like a fool for years.
Just because you complain now after the Dynamic Duo lost the election big time, that I am rubbing your nose in your garbage way TOO MUCH, is no reason for me to stop one iota.

[PaceAdvantage]

Show me where you have ever lost respect for Tom when he called Obama a traitor. Or Michelle a bitch.

Of course you can't prevent me from making asses of you gents by posting sarcastic comments unless I break the TOS rules, You think for some reason my pokes are somehow dumber than Tom's claptrap when in fact his claptrap is 10x more odious than mine.

Your bias is more subdued than plain outright, but it srtill exists or getting yelled at by the boss would have been done to Tom publicly many many times. But this is moot. I will continue annoying you gentlemen as I see fit. And you will complain that I am not worthy of respect.You could have saved yourself a lot of typing and simply answered my question with "I can't."

[hcap]

I never said you prevented me from posting. But your right wing leanings allows Tom and others to get a pass posting extremely dumb statements. And somehow not 'lose your respect" It's obvious. But my complaint is not that we post stupid statements. I never favored censorship, but just that you guys think I am doing something that others do not do in spades. Constantly.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have never stated that as a contributor to off-topic, I would be totally unbiased. I have never voted for a Democrat in my entire life.

Therefore, I am biased in my contributions here, just like you are.

Now, with that said, I HAVE deleted MANY of Tom's postings in the past. If you don't believe me, just ask him.

I really don't know what you and thaskalos and others expect. But I will continue to voice MY OPINION when I feel the urge.

If and when Tom posts something that I think warrants an opinion from me, I won't hesitate to post that as well.

[elysiantraveller]

I never said you prevented me from posting. But your right wing leanings allows Tom and others to get a pass posting extremely dumb statements. And somehow not 'lose your respect" It's obvious. But my complaint is not that we post stupid statements. I never favored censorship, but just that you guys think I am doing something that others do not do in spades. Constantly.

What you are doing is throwing away the respect some posters on here, myself included, have had for you in the past...

I don't really know whats happened with you but you have gone completely off the reservation.

Now I'm sure you can simply say you don't give a damn what I think and that's fine... if you want to be like Tom that's on you...

Just don't be shocked when you don't get a lot of bites while trolling...

[hcap]

Maybe I have left the reservation for a while. I assure you it is temporary madness. But I kinda enjoy running my mouth like the more vocal righties do 24/7/365. I will eventually get bored, but hey, strike while the iron is hot.

There was quite a bit of ego maniacal boasting before the election---about the last 4 years before that is

Just balancing the books and smiling

[PaceAdvantage]

I have never stated that as a contributor to off-topic, I would be totally unbiased. I have never voted for a Democrat in my entire life.Wait, I take that back. When I was a kid...in 2nd or 3rd grade...in the Weekly Reader poll...I think I might have voted for Carter over Ford... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[johnhannibalsmith]

I have never stated that as a contributor to off-topic, I would be totally unbiased. I have never voted for a Democrat in my entire life.

Therefore, I am biased in my contributions here, just like you are.

Now, with that said, I HAVE deleted MANY of Tom's postings in the past. If you don't believe me, just ask him.

I really don't know what you and thaskalos and others expect. But I will continue to voice MY OPINION when I feel the urge.

If and when Tom posts something that I think warrants an opinion from me, I won't hesitate to post that as well.

Why do we continue to have this discussion about once a week? Who here really can't grasp the fact that you can actually run the site and be a contributor with an actual opinion? I really can't for the life of me grasp why there is some expectation that you are supposed to be some unbiased source of opinion when you are just down here posting like any other member does.

[PaceAdvantage]

Why do we continue to have this discussion about once a week? Who here really can't grasp the fact that you can actually run the site and be a contributor with an actual opinion? I really can't for the life of me grasp why there is some expectation that you are supposed to be some unbiased source of opinion when you are just down here posting like any other member does.Yup...I don't really get it either...like I said, I never proclaimed to be unbiased when posting in off-topic, or anywhere else.

Remember Zenyatta? :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

Hey, 'cappy, I'm posting this for your benefit because I know that all straight-thinking people (which you're not) would applaud this guy's argument. His logic is impeccable.

The following was sent to me by one of my good friends who has multiple gun safes in his home.

As the Supreme Court heard arguments for and against the Chicago, IL Gun Ban, this man offered you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine), that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society.

Interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . . . .
Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the letter....

"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.


In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)

So, the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.

This is worth printing and sharing with others!

I would add this commentary with respect to the second paragraph where the major talks about a "truly moral society". In a truly perfect moral society wherein there is no evil, there would be no reason for guns -- just as there would be no reason for any laws. The prophet speaks to this issue when he prophesied about the new heavens and new earth (Isa 2:4). But...until then, gun ownership makes eminently good sense. We should never allow the government to declare war on law-abiding citizens by granting a gun monopoly to criminals.

Boxcar

[hcap]

Where did I say I want to ban guns? I am just pointing out that the fascination with guns is kinda obscene and intoxicating.

I watch the Military channel I am fascinated with the technology even "Future" weapons. I understand the interest in advanced personal weapons, but also listen to John Lennon's "Happiness is A Warm Gun" who ironically was killed with one. Would he have survived if he was carrying? Would a psychopath been scared of by the possibility that he was?

It is a bit more complicated than only 2 choices Reason or Force. A thousand shades of grey.

[JustRalph]

A thousand shades of grey.

I prefer stainless

[hcap]

I prefer stainlessThe question should be.....

Chapman later said he was incensed by Lennon's "more popular than Jesus" remark, calling it blasphemy,[15][16] and the songs "God", and "Imagine",[16] because of the incongruity between the lyric "Imagine no possessions" and Lennon's personal wealth.[17] Chapman even sang the song with the altered lyric: "Imagine John Lennon dead."[18]
What color did Mark David Chapman prefer?

Tighter gun control and enforcement of existing laws is what many want. Does not have to be an outright ban on personal weapons.

[JustRalph]

The question should be.....

What color did Mark David Chapman prefer?

Tighter gun control and enforcement of existing laws is what many want. Does not have to be an outright ban on personal weapons.

Tighter gun laws don't work

The tightest in the country are in Chicago and Washington DC.

Top of the list for violent crime.

[HUSKER55]

When was the last time you seen a criminal who didn't have a gun, or couldn't find one, or was afraid to incorrectly fill out a form sent to the government?

[dartman51]

Even if the Gov. bans guns, the criminals will ALWAYS be able to get them. They'll just get them from Mexico, after the F.B.I. sends them another shipment. :ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

Where did I say I want to ban guns? I am just pointing out that the fascination with guns is kinda obscene and intoxicating.

I watch the Military channel I am fascinated with the technology even "Future" weapons. I understand the interest in advanced personal weapons, but also listen to John Lennon's "Happiness is A Warm Gun" who ironically was killed with one. Would he have survived if he was carrying? Would a psychopath been scared of by the possibility that he was?

It is a bit more complicated than only 2 choices Reason or Force. A thousand shades of grey.

The fascination with so many of us is not with guns per se, but with protecting lives and property -- from bad people, including the government. So, yes, the issue does boil down to the two choices: Reason or Force. When bad people want you to submit to their will and you don't want to and you cannot reason with them, they will use force. Go live in Chicago, Detroit or New York for awhile and experience that reality. Putting more gun control restrictions on law-abiding citizens puts those people at much higher risk because criminals do NOT play by society's rules.

As I pointed out earlier, Happiness can indeed be a warm gun -- to people who have saved themselves from harm by the use of same. I bet millions are happy because they had to right to own, bear or use a firearm. I would suggest to you that Lennon's song is a wee bit simplistic because it's only looking at one view. He's seeing only the evil that can be done with a gun and not all the good it has also done.

Boxcar

[hcap]

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

Harvard Injury Control Research Center
Homicide

citations for each study are listed


1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review)

....Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide..

2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

3. Across states, more guns = more homicide 1 study

4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2nd) study


Also

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=113&cat=2

Number of Deaths Due to Injury by Firearms per 100,000 Population, 2009

I hate to tell you this guys, but it looks like there is a correlation between red states/more deaths by firearms and blue states/fewer death by firearms.

And

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/23/six-facts-about-guns-violence-and-gun-control/

Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control

[hcap]

More from The Harvard Injury Control Research Center

Att: boxcar

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use


1-3 Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.

Hemenway, David. Survey research and self-defense gun use: An explanation of extreme overestimates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 1997; 87:1430-1445.

Hemenway, David. The myth of millions of annual self-defense gun uses: A case study of survey overestimates of rare events. Chance (American Statistical Association). 1997; 10:6-10.

Cook, Philip J; Ludwig, Jens; Hemenway, David. The gun debate's new mythical number: How many defensive uses per year? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 1997; 16:463-469.

4. Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments and are both socially undesirable and illegal

We analyzed data from two national random-digit-dial surveys conducted under the auspices of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. Criminal court judges who read the self-reported accounts of the purported self-defense gun use rated a majority as being illegal, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and to carry a gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly from his own perspective.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah. Gun use in the United States: Results from two national surveys. Injury Prevention. 2000; 6:263-267.

5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense.

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use. We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense. All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.

Hemenway, David; Azrael, Deborah. The relative frequency of offensive and defensive gun use: Results of a national survey. Violence and Victims. 2000; 15:257-272.

6. Guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime.

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, we investigated how and when guns are used in the home. We found that guns in the home are used more often to frighten intimates than to thwart crime; other weapons are far more commonly used against intruders than are guns.

Publication: Azrael, Deborah R; Hemenway, David. In the safety of your own home: Results from a national survey of gun use at home. Social Science and Medicine. 2000; 50:285-91.

7. Adolescents are far more likely to be threatened with a gun than to use one in self-defense.

We analyzed data from a telephone survey of 5,800 California adolescents aged 12-17, which asked questions about gun threats against, and self-defense gun use by these young people. We found that these young people were far more likely to be threatened with a gun than to use a gun in self-defense, and most of the reported self-defense gun uses were hostile interactions between armed adolescents. Males, smokers, binge drinkers, those who threatened others and whose parents were less likely to know their whereabouts were more likely both to be threatened with a gun and to use a gun in self-defense.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Gun threats against and self-defense gun use by California adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. 2004; 158:395-400.



8. Criminals who are shot are typically the victims of crime

Using data from a survey of detainees in a Washington D.C. jail, we worked with a prison physician to investigate the circumstances of gunshot wounds to these criminals. We found that one in four of these detainees had been wounded, in events that appear unrelated to their incarceration. Most were shot when they were victims of robberies, assaults and crossfires. Virtually none report being wounded by a "law-abiding citizen."

May, John P; Hemenway, David. Oen, Roger; Pitts, Khalid R. When criminals are shot: A survey of Washington DC jail detainees. Medscape General Medicine. 2000; June 28. www.medscape.com


9-10. Few criminals are shot by decent law abiding citizens

Using data from surveys of detainees in six jails from around the nation, we worked with a prison physician to determine whether criminals seek hospital medical care when they are shot. Criminals almost always go to the hospital when they are shot. To believe fully the claims of millions of self-defense gun uses each year would mean believing that decent law-abiding citizens shot hundreds of thousands of criminals. But the data from emergency departments belie this claim, unless hundreds of thousands of wounded criminals are afraid to seek medical care. But virtually all criminals who have been shot went to the hospital, and can describe in detail what happened there.

May, John P; Hemenway, David. Oen, Roger; Pitts, Khalid R. Medical Care Solicitation by Criminals with Gunshot Wound Injuries: A Survey of Washington DC Jail Detainees. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 48:130-132.

May, John P; Hemenway, David. Do Criminals Go to the Hospital When They are Shot? Injury Prevention 2002: 8:236-238.

[boxcar]

'cap, you're so hopelessly ignorant -- and I believe it's by choice. You are willfully blind! Read and weep.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=409

'cap, try hard to understand this. If all gun ownership by Joe Private Citizen were to be outlawed (can't possibly get any better or stricter gun control than this, right?), do you really believe that the criminals would obey the law? Do you believe for a nanosecond that criminals would not be selling illegal weapons to other criminals? Do you believe that removing guns from a society would transform human nature? Do you think the absence of firearms would enable the leopard to change its spots, or the Ethiopian to change the color of his skin?

As pointed out previously, go live for a while in any Gun Control Utopia of your choice. There are many such areas in the U.S.: D.C., Trenton, NYC, Detroit, Chicago, etc. and tell me how non-violent those areas are. Tell me how peaceful and tranquil life is. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[hcap]

'cap, you're so hopelessly ignorant -- and I believe it's by choice. You are willfully blind! Read and weep.

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=409

As pointed out previously, go live for a while in any Gun Control Utopia of your choice. There are many such areas in the U.S.: D.C., Trenton, NYC, Detroit, Chicago, etc. and tell me how non-violent those areas are. Tell me how peaceful and tranquil life is. :rolleyes:

Your link says this.......

A review of the areas in the U.S. with the most restrictive firearm laws, including such areas as Washington, D.C., Chicago, IL, New York, NY, and the state of California, shows that these areas have some of the highest crime and especially violent crime rates in the U.S.


I quoted The Harvard Injury Control Research Center

...Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide..


And this map (http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=113&cat=2) which is more than just a few high crime rate areas showing percentage of firearm deaths.

The South is the most violent (\http://www.kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2012/07/21/assault-deaths-within-the-united-states/) region in the United States in terms of assault and the above map shows a correlation with firearm deaths.

So evidently your and other gun advocates are mistaken. And apparently have been running with faulty data. The data source for the map is the The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

So ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. :)

[fast4522]

As long as the perpetrator is the one on the slab.

[hcap]

John Lennon maybe?


Does not go back further than '99

September 1999 - a gunman opened fire at a prayer service in Fort Worth, Texas, killing six people before committing suicide.

October 2002 - a series of sniper-style shootings occurred in Washington DC, leaving 10 dead.

August 2003 - in Chicago, a laid-off worker shot and killed six of his former workmates.

November 2004 - in Birchwood, Wisconsin, a hunter killed six other hunters and wounded two others after an argument with them.

March 2005 - a man opened fire at a church service in Brookfield, Wisconsin, killing seven people.

October 2006 - a truck driver killed five schoolgirls and seriously wounded six others in a school in Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania before taking his own life.

April 2007 - student Seung-Hui Cho shot and killed 32 people and wounded 15 others at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia, before shooting himself, making it the deadliest mass shooting in the United States after 2000.

August 2007 - Three Delaware State University students were shot and killed in “execution style” by a 28-year-old and two 15-year-old boys. A fourth student was shot and stabbed.

September 2007 - A freshman student at Delaware State University shot and wounded two other students at a campus dining hall.

December 2007 - a 20-year-old man killed nine people and injured five others in a shopping center in Omaha, Nebraska.

December 2007 - a woman and her boyfriend shot dead six members of her family on Christmas Eve in Carnation, Washington.

February 2008 - a shooter who is still at large tied up and shot six women at a suburban clothing store in Chicago, leaving five of them dead and the remaining one injured.

February 2008 - a man opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University in DeKalb, Illinois, killing five students and wounding 16 others before laying down his weapon and surrendering.

July 2008 – A former student shot three people in a computer lab at South Mountain Community College, Phoenix, Arizona.

September 2008 - a mentally ill man who was released from jail one month earlier shot eight people in Alger, Washington, leaving six of them dead and the rest two wounded.

October 2008 - Several men in a car drove up to a dormitory at the University of Central Arkansas and opened fire, killing two students and injuring a third person.

December 2008 - a man dressed in a Santa Claus suit opened fire at a family Christmas party in Covina, California, then set fire on the house and killed himself. Police later found nine people dead in the debris of the house.

March 2009 - a 28-year-old laid-off worker opened fire while driving a car through several towns in Alabama, killing 10 people.

March 2009 - a heavily-armed gunman shot dead eight people, many of them elderly and sick people, in a private-owned nursing home in North Carolina.

March 2009 - six people were shot dead in a high-grade apartment building in Santa Clara, California.

April 2009 – An 18-year-old former student followed a pizza deliveryman into his old dormitory, and shot the deliveryman, a dorm monitor, and himself at Hampton University, Virginia.

April 2009 - a man shot dead 13 people at a civic center in Binghamton, New York.

July 2009 - Six people, including one student, were shot in a drive-by shooting at a community rally on the campus of Texas Southern University, Houston.

November 2009 - U.S. army psychologist Major Nidal Hasan opened fire at a military base in Fort Hood, Texas, leaving 13 dead and 42 others wounded.

February 2010 – A professor opened fire 50 minutes into at a Biological Sciences Department faculty meeting at the University of Alabama, killing three colleagues and wounding three others

January 2011 - a gunman opened fire at a public gathering outside a grocery in Tuscon, Arizona, killing six people including a nine-year-old girl and wounding at least 12 others. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was severely injured with a gunshot to the head.

July 2012 - Masked gunman opens fire at midnight cinema screen of new Batman film The Dark Knight Rises, killing 12 and injuring 58. Suspect James Holmes is arrested by oplice and awaiting trial.

August 2012 - Gunman kills six people at SIkh temple in Wisconsin before being shot dead by police. Suspect is named as white supremacists Wade Michael Page.


.................................................. .........................................

How many would have died if only knives were used? Yes, all psycho's, but it seems guns facilitated what they were able to do.

[PaceAdvantage]

You've convinced me hcap. Time to get rid of the guns.

And after this week, it's clear we need to get rid of subway trains as well. Combine the tragic pushing death with all those who use subway trains as easy suicide machines, and, well, I think you'll agree 100% that they need to be taken out of society... :rolleyes:

[hcap]

Lame.

[sammy the sage]

http://sidestreets.freedomblogging.com/2010/05/14/bet-this-guys-neighbor-wishes-he-had-covenants/6579/

Caps' neighbor

[hcap]

http://sidestreets.freedomblogging.com/2010/05/14/bet-this-guys-neighbor-wishes-he-had-covenants/6579/

Caps' neighborAnything of substance Mr Sage?
I didn't think sol

[HUSKER55]

in our neighborhood we help proect each other and yes we are armed, except for a couple doors down from us. He has a pair of Rotweihlers named Bismark and Zeus. Now for the pun, "they take a bite out of crime".

I think the man showed respect for his neighbors wishes, which would require a considerable amount of constraint considering the consequences of "no action".

I think it is proper to convey his action or in this case in-action prior to any incident to protect himself from litigation by some lawyer down the road should any tramatic event happen to this mans neighbor when tragety has befallen up on the good neighbor.

[boxcar]

So ignorance is in the eye of the beholder. :)

And Harvard has a very large eye. Their stats make no sense whatsoever. Take away guns from the good guys only gives the bad guys a free license to rob, rape, pillage and murder. Criminals don't give two flips about gun laws.

Read and weep:

http://publicsafetyproject.org/blog/2012/07/20/twenty-one-reasons-why-gun-control-increases-violent-crime/

And by the way, you cited some whacko's study about how few criminals check themselves into emergency rooms because they were shot in the commission of some crime. Here's why:

There are about 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms in the U.S. each year, almost always without shooting the attacker. Mere possession and display is almost always an adequate defense.

Makes perfectly good sense. Once the playing field is leveled and the good guys have guns, the vast majority of time, brandishing a weapon will be sufficient to get the crook's spine to fold up like an accordion . Most criminals are brave when they are the only ones with the weapon.

Boxcar

[hcap]

And Harvard has a very large eye. Their stats make no sense whatsoever.

http://publicsafetyproject.org/blog/2012/07/20/twenty-one-reasons-why-gun-control-increases-violent-crime/

There are about 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms in the U.S. each year, almost always without shooting the attacker. Mere possession and display is almost always an adequate defense.


I'm calling bullshit on this from a righty vested interest website you linked to:
There are about 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms in the U.S. each year, almost always without shooting the attacker. Mere possession and display is almost always an adequate defense

I used Harvard and the CDC and the Census. You used a righty small gov website. I checked out their "Mission Statement"

Sorry, I doubt seriously the 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms. Dio you have corroboration from a neutral source?

[hcap]

From Harvard

Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.


From the Original study by Hemenway on why that number is not correct

http://www.stat.duke.edu/~dalene/chance/chanceweb/103.myth0.pdf

[johnhannibalsmith]

On the subject of guns, politicians, and stupidty... in other words, Chicago...



CHICAGO (Reuters) - An Illinois state senator running for former Democratic U.S. Representative Jesse Jackson Jr.'s seat in Congress was released on bond on Thursday, following his arrest for trying to bring a gun onto an airplane.

...

Trotter, a Chicago Democrat, is a gun control advocate who once voted "no" on a measure that would have allowed state residents to carry concealed weapons in 1995.

...

Prosecutors said Trotter's handgun was not registered with the city of Chicago, as required by municipal ordinance.

http://news.yahoo.com/illinois-lawmaker-running-congress-bond-gun-charge-024620350.html

[JustRalph]

From Harvard

Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

We use epidemiological theory to explain why the "false positive" problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.


From the Original study by Hemenway on why that number is not correct

http://www.stat.duke.edu/~dalene/chance/chanceweb/103.myth0.pdf

Don't tell this guy
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2012/12/burglary-suspect-calls-911-after-springtown-homeowner-holds-him-at-gunpoint.html/

[hcap]

Don't tell this guy
http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2012/12/burglary-suspect-calls-911-after-springtown-homeowner-holds-him-at-gunpoint.html/For ages the 2.5 million has been bandied about as FACT.
Of course there are instances where the perpetrator is defeated or scared off by an armed citizen, and I applaud that if the citizen knows what he/she is doing. The 2.5 million is exaggerated, BUT the gun culture accepts as the be all end all in this debate.

It turns out a proper study calls that into question and puts into perspective all the problems associated with gun use---- including mass murders that would not have been the same if the perp had access to say only knives.

Guns are facilitators of either end of this debate. Self defense, or accidental and purposeful use by psychopaths, loonies and criminals

[sammy the sage]

Anything of substance Mr Sage?
I didn't think sol

http://www.gunfacts.info/

[sammy the sage]

I think ALL THESE people are MUCH smarter than you...."Hcap"... or I..

Words From The Wise

"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." - United States Constitution, Amendment II Bill of Rights

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government." - Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed" - Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824

"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the "high powers" delegated directly to the citizen, and 'is excepted out of the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power." - Texas Court Decision - Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)

"We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution." - Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)

"The framers gave us the Second Amendment not so we could go deer or duck hunting but to give us a modicum of protection against congressional tyranny." - Walter E. Williams (b. 1936)

"That is why our masters in Washington are so anxious to disarm us. They are not afraid of criminals. They are afraid of a populace which cannot be subdued by tyrants." - Jeff Cooper

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military." - William S. Burroughs

"Gun Control is not about guns, it's about control." - Anonymous

"The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions." - North Carolina Court Decision - State vs. Kerner

"By calling attention to 'a well regulated militia,' 'the security of the nation,' and the right of each citizen 'to keep and bear arms,' our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy... The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country.
For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important." - John F. Kennedy

"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a 'right' attributed to 'the people' refer to anything other than an individual right. What is more, in all six other provisions of the Constitution that mention 'the people,' the term unambiguously refers to all members of the political community, not an unspecified subset... The Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms... The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it 'shall not be infringed." - Justice Antonin Scalia - District of Columbia v. Heller, June 26, 2008

"The nation's murder rate is near a 40 year low and the number of privately owned guns in the U.S. is at an all-time high and rising by about 4.5 million annually. Right-to-Carry states had lower violent crime rates on the average than the rest of the country. Total violent crime in Right-to-Carry States was 24% lower; murder 28% lower; robbery 50% lower and aggravated assault 11% lower. The cities with the highest murder rates were cities with severe gun control." - FBI Crime Report 2007

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Plato (428 B.C. to 348)

"The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." - Thomas Jefferson

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Cesare Beccaria (1735-1794) quoted in Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776

"Laws can't control the lawless." - Wayne LaPierre

"This battle for 'common-sense' gun control laws pits emotion and passion against logic and reason. All too often in such a contest, logic loses. So, expect more meaningless, if not harmful, 'gun control' legislation. Good news - if you're a crook." - Larry Elder

"In recent years it has been suggested that the Second Amendment protects the "collective" right of states to maintain militias, while it does not protect the right of "the people" to keep and bear arms... The phrase "the people" meant the same thing in the Second Amendment as it did in the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments - that is, each and every free person..." - Stephen P. Holbrook

"Just as the First and Fourth Amendment secure individual rights of speech and security respectively, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. This view of the text comports with the all but unanimous understanding of the Founding Fathers." - John Ashcroft

"The provision in the Constitution granting the right to all persons to bear arms is a limitation upon the power of the Legislature to enact any law to the contrary. The exercise of a right guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be made subject to the will of the sheriff." - Michigan Court Decision - People vs. Zerillo, 219 Mich. 635,... 1922

"The Second Amendment is not about duck hunting, and I know I'm not going to make very many friends saying this, but it's about our right, all of our right to be able to protect ourselves from all of you guys [politicians] up there." - Suzanna Gratia Hupp (b. 1959) Testimony before Congress about the Assault Weapons Ban

"The usual road to slavery is that first they take away your guns, then they take away your property, then last of all they tell you to shut up and say you are enjoying it." - James A. Donald

"No matter how many speeches a politician gives in favor of gun control, it's a safe bet that his own bodyguards are still packing heat. Even if he's giving a speech at a school or post office or other gun-free zone. The Secret Service and other professional-bodyguard types apparently don't trust the ability of "No guns allowed" signs to keep shooters from hitting their targets. That's the difference
between public servants and the public they serve. Our servants' lives are considered much too valuable to risk in a gun-free zone." - Jennifer Abel - "Who has advantage in a gun-free zone?" Middletown Press (My notation, the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado was a "Gun Free" Zone.)

"The ruling class doesn't care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake." - U.S. Sen. Malcolm Wallop

"Expecting a carjacker or rapist or drug pusher to care that his possession or use of a gun is unlawful is like expecting a terrorist to care that his car bomb is taking up two parking spaces." - Joseph T. Chew - Usenet posting in talk.politics.guns

"Laws do not prevent any serious crimes, because serious criminals do not obey laws in the first place! Every nasty criminal activity possible is already prohibited by law, so there's really no further way to legislatively affect the criminal. (Some psychiatrists explain insanity this way: repeating an action over and over again with the expectation of different results. Restrictive laws relating to peaceful American gunowners have never reduced crime, yet with each new law a "different result" of crime reduction is anticipated. Sounds crazy to me!)" - Boston T. Party - Boston's Gun Bible, p. 32/30

"One correspondent, who is into psychology, notes that in his experience people who are hoplophobes are nearly always nutty in other ways, too. Hoplophobia [fear of guns], of course, is not simply an attitude but rather an aberration in which the sufferer clings to an idea which he himself knows to be unsound, such as the idea that inanimate instruments have a will of their own or that lawbreakers abide by the law." - Jeff Cooper (1920-2006) - Jeff Cooper's Commentaries Volume Nine, No 7. 35/73


"They will never outlaw all of your guns at once. But every 'reasonable' control they can impose without your resistance gives them one more bit of leverage to make gun ownership for you and your children and your grandchildren as difficult as possible." - David Kopel

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States." - Noah Webster, 1888 - "An Examination into...the Federal Constitution" 1787

"Our right to keep and bear arms - personally - is the essential element of political liberty, without which we would stand as mere slaves of any current administration, as do most of the people in the world today. We treasure our right to be armed, not only as defense against tyrants, but also as defense against evil men acting alone.

Our right to defend ourselves against felons by force of arms protects not only our liberty but also - and this is often overlooked - our dignity. Dignity is a word not often used in the Age of the Wimp, for by definition a wimp has no dignity. But dignity remains not only desirable but essential to persons of consequence. This concept is rejected by the socialist, who feels that dignity resides solely in the state. But we Americans are not socialists (at least most of us are not) and we prize our unique status in world society." - Jeff Cooper - Jeff Cooper's Commentaries Volume Nine, No. 7 34/73

"Crime is a human behavior problem, not a mechanical problem. Furthermore, if firearms were not very useful for self-defense, then police wouldn't carry them. In a free country, if the government can go armed, so should the citizens, if they so choose." - Charley Reese

"Firearms have been around for over 400 years, yet it is only in the last 20 years that people have begun shouting "gun control". Why then, only recently, has this become such an issue? Moreover, why are there more mass-murderers than at any other time in our known history?

It is not because weapons are more powerful - 200-year-old muzzleloaders have a much greater force-per-round than today's "assault rifles". It is not because weapons are semi- or fully-automatic - rapid-fire weapons have been available for mostof the last century. It is not due to a lack of laws - we have more "gun control" laws than ever. It IS, however, because we have chosen to focus on "gun control" instead of crime control or "thug control."

It IS because only recently has the public become complacent enough to accept, by inaction, the violence present in our society." - Kevin Langston

"But to ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow. ... For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding." - Jeff Snyder - Washington Times, August 25, 1994

"A government that intended to protect the liberty of the people would not disarm them. A government planning the opposite most certainly and logically would disarm them. And so it has been in this century. Check out the history of Germany, the Soviet Union, Cuba, China and Cambodia." - Charlie Reese

"It would also be strange to find in the midst of a catalog of the rights of individuals a provision securing to the states the right to maintain a designated "Militia." Dispassionate scholarship suggests quite strongly that the right of the people to keep and bear arms meant just that." - Justice Antonin Scalia - A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law


"As I have stood in the crosshairs of those who target Second Amendment freedoms, I've realized that firearms are not the only issue. No, it's much, much bigger than that. I've come to understand that a cultural war is raging across our land, in which, with Orwellian fervor, certain acceptable thoughts and speech are mandated." - Charlton Heston

"Registration today always leads to confiscation later. "We're only asking for registration today because we want to be able to trace a gun back to its rightful owner," they claim. That's what the City of New York told it's residents years ago. That's what Great Britain and Australia told their citizens years ago. And in all those places the government went back on its word and banned guns...Naturally compliance has not been 100%, so the government threatens holdouts with 4 years in prison and $100,000 fines. It then uses the registration lists to go house-to-house and forcibly steal private property....leaving the people defenseless against the new violent crimes that predictably followed." - Boston T. Party - Boston's' Gun Bible p. 32/32

"The National Firearms Act fit in perfectly with the systematic creation of government programs and deficit spending that Franklin Roosevelt immediately began to institute the instant he took office. The NFA was a model vehicle for the continued expansion of government power: It was arbitrary (i.e. the 18-inch rule); it gave the government sweeping authority over something very common; it
focused on inanimate objects rather than criminal behavior; it levied draconian taxes on these objects; and most importantly, it created millions of criminals with the stroke of a pen, just as Prohibition had." - John Ross - "Unintended Consequences," 1991 by Accurate Press

"Gun Control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety Locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." - Sammy "the Bull" Gravano - Asked about Gun Control in an interview in Vanity Fair

"If those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravate assaults would have been avoided yearly." - Professor John Lott - http://deepwaterweb.com/gunstudy.htm


"The history of liberty is a history of limitation of government power, not the increase of it." - Woodrow Wilson

[sammy the sage]

Interesting fact tho...Woodrow Wilson who's the ONE person who SOLD us into slavery....by allowing the federal reserve....to come BACK....UFR..... :mad: :bang: :faint:

[hcap]

Sammy, such wisdom. Too bad it does not apply.

[sammy the sage]

Sammy, such wisdom. Too bad it does not apply.

:D good ole attack THE messenger response...pretty much tells everyone who's right...

[fast4522]

The many who have given the ultimate sacrifice before us and who swore to protect the United State Constitution and our bill of rights to ensure that future generations would be protected under both. Those who do not hold dear our United States Constitution and our Bill of right are just common low life filth, and do not deserve our respect.

[hcap]

Regulations are not communistic and do nor destroy our way of life. Nor disrespect those that have given their lives in sacrifice.

Thank you very much Mr Sage and Mr Filth

[sammy the sage]

Regulations are not communistic and do nor destroy our way of life. Nor disrespect those that have given their lives in sacrifice.

Thank you very much Mr Sage and Mr Filth

Really...you sound like THIS...and perhaps YOU are...sad...

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolph Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933

[hcap]

Really...you sound like THIS...and perhaps YOU are...sad...

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolph Hitler
Chancellor, Germany, 1933So Sammy you honestly think it's that bad here? Nazi Germany time? And we are the German resistance?

Maybe you want o be 007 just in case?
Do you look more like Sean Connery or Roger Moore? :)

Just kidding. My family on my Mother's side went trough the Holocaust, what led up to it, and earlier one generation back, pogroms in Russia. I have heard first hand stories of the Nazi regime. I don't think that is the case here and probably never will be.

[sammy the sage]

So Sammy you honestly think it's that bad here? Nazi Germany time? And we are the German resistance?

Maybe you want o be 007 just in case?
Do you look more like Sean Connery or Roger Moore? :)

Just kidding. My family on my Mother's side went trough the Holocaust, what led up to it, and earlier one generation back, pogroms in Russia. I have heard first hand stories of the Nazi regime. I don't think that is the case here and probably never will be.

I quoted 1933...

Yep...just EXACTLY what yore ancestors said AT THE time..

Look human history REPEATS...and rinse...got it...

[Tom]

Sammy-----7
hcap--------0

[hcap]

I quoted 1933...

Yep...just EXACTLY what yore ancestors said AT THE time..

Look human history REPEATS...and rinse...got it...I saw the date but not the parallels to Germany of 33. If your saying it can happen anywhere, you never know, I disagree. You do realize you are proposing all citizens to arm themselves?

[JustRalph]

For ages the 2.5 million has been bandied about as FACT.
Of course there are instances where the perpetrator is defeated or scared off by an armed citizen, and I applaud that if the citizen knows what he/she is doing. The 2.5 million is exaggerated, BUT the gun culture accepts as the be all end all in this debate.

It turns out a proper study calls that into question and puts into perspective all the problems associated with gun use---- including mass murders that would not have been the same if the perp had access to say only knives.

Guns are facilitators of either end of this debate. Self defense, or accidental and purposeful use by psychopaths, loonies and criminals

Ok,,,,,,,,,,now tell these 3 guys the same............

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121210/NEWS/312100038/Police-Robbery-victim-shoots-three-suspects

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121210/NEWS010701/312100036/Police-Gas-station-clerks-shoot-kill-robber

That's 3 in 3 days or so.........it adds up.

I don't care what any study shows. It's a right. It saves lives. End of story.

[sammy the sage]

I saw the date but not the parallels to Germany of 33. If your saying it can happen anywhere, you never know, I disagree. You do realize you are proposing all citizens to arm themselves?

You do realize THAT there ARE a few cities AND a country or two THAT require MANDATORY gun ownership....google is yore friend...

And guess what happened to their violent crime rate...it's WAY lower...imagine that... :p

[thaskalos]

I have never stated that as a contributor to off-topic, I would be totally unbiased. I have never voted for a Democrat in my entire life.

Therefore, I am biased in my contributions here, just like you are.

Now, with that said, I HAVE deleted MANY of Tom's postings in the past. If you don't believe me, just ask him.

I really don't know what you and thaskalos and others expect. But I will continue to voice MY OPINION when I feel the urge.

If and when Tom posts something that I think warrants an opinion from me, I won't hesitate to post that as well.

Thaskalos doesn't expect anything.

He is just a guest here...and he knows it.

[BlueShoe]

BTW, I have no problem with being insulted on a regular basis or being told I am a commie, I just see no reason why I can't return the favor in a similar fashion
:confused: You mean there is actually a difference between a liberal or so called progressive Democrat and a Communist?? Have never been able to tell them apart, and have long felt that liberalism was just another branch of the worldwide communist movement. While admittedly many liberals have become incensed and vehemently disputed this opinion with me, none have convinced me that this position is incorrect.

[Rookies]

:confused: You mean there is actually a difference between a liberal or so called progressive Democrat and a Communist?? Have never been able to tell them apart, and have long felt that liberalism was just another branch of the worldwide communist movement. While admittedly many liberals have become incensed and vehemently disputed this opinion with me, none have convinced me that this position is incorrect.

OMG, you put out the most insanely, humorous shite! :lol: Not sure if I've ever mentioned it to you here Blue, but you remind me of this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubor_J._Zink

This old possessed troglodyte used to drive around as a Con candidate during Federal elections, bleating his fractured anti-Commie gibberish English over a loudspeaker mounted over his car. We used to laugh our arses off at his insane, uber paranoid theorems.

'Natch, he was so nuts, he never got elected.

[Tom]

Democrat and a Communist?? Have never been able to tell them apart

Commies are more honest.

[JustRalph]

Commies are more honest.

Usually taller too

[hcap]

:confused: You mean there is actually a difference between a liberal or so called progressive Democrat and a Communist?? Have never been able to tell them apart, and have long felt that liberalism was just another branch of the worldwide communist movement. While admittedly many liberals have become incensed and vehemently disputed this opinion with me, none have convinced me that this position is incorrect.Part and parcel of the worldwide Communist worldwide/UN/Black Helicopter Conspiracy is to lull unsuspecting true blue Americans into a state of agitated false alarm. Liberals have become our surreptitious means of doing just that. They are subliminally trained to create all sorts of "false flag" operations to provoke the American people into a state of fear about minor phony issues, while we do the real dirty work unseen

For instance, the "Obama Phone". Although the origins of the universal service program date back at least to 1934, the Lifeline program in particular was instituted by a well-known redistributionist by the name of President Ronald Reagan in 1984. A related effort, expanding affordable access to cell phones for low-income Americans, was created by another radical liberal by the name of George W. Bush. NOW, you gentlemen were hoodwinked by the Liberal Mainstream Media into believing Reagan and Bush were heroes of conservatism, they were manipulated in early childhood, both raised in Soviet mind bending schools in Vladivostok, and brought here, records altered, to be activated when the time was right to push for only a minor socialistic federal program.

Meanwhile, and while the Nation Slept, we pulled off the biggest most devious plot to undermine Capitalism for ever. We are instituting this as we speak. Later if my "handlers" allow, I will divulge the glorious plan.

Hint: It involves planting strategic operatives on certain internet sites having an inordinate involvement and fascination watching poor 4 legged creatures running in circles. The reason such sites were chosen, is simply those posting on such meaningless websites would believe anything.

Next on the agenda............................a new devious plot to sneak foreigners into high office. Particularly those from African countries. Surprisingly with shoddy forged credentials and plans to institute the dreaded Agenda 21 while you Capitalist tools/fools are fixated on false flags like Obama Phones.

Proof? You say?

http://muwhahaha.com/

[HUSKER55]

COMMIES ARE NOT GAY

[BlueShoe]

Proof? You say?
The chart, you forgot the chart again!:( Must admit that your last post was quite creative, but we have all become accustomed to your charts, graphs, and tables, and without them, your arguements just lack something.

[hcap]

The chart, you forgot the chart again!:( Must admit that your last post was quite creative, but we have all become accustomed to your charts, graphs, and tables, and without them, your arguements just lack something.Believe me, I have tried, but the Lame Stream Media has blocked my every effort to find graphs or charts proving my last post. They blocked me, a well known counter operative, EVEN THOUGH I know THE SECRET PASSWORDS and secret handshakes. But their complete control does not go back to an issue made famous by such groups as The John Birch Society. I guess I will go back a ways and use well known data PROVING fluoridation was always a Commie plot in lieu of more current plots.

http://ffo-olf.org/images/fluorideVsLeadArsenicToxicity.gif

Although the Lame Stream Media only grew into the behemoth that exists now after your Saint Sarah called it to your attention a few years ago, 40 years ago we only controlled the weather channel. And before the Lame Stream Media grew into a omnipotent socialistic monster, there were groups of patriots that tried to warn the American people. For instance The John Birch Society, that bastion of the American way was one of the first voices to ring the alarm on our sinister fluoridation agenda.

No matter, eventually we subverted the JB Society along with ognizations like the Phone Company anyway, and they became another of our devious Commie organizations and plots to lull American Capitalistic fools into believing we had ONLY infiltrated your silly government, and divert your attention from our true goal.......


..... To completely and totally subvert and CONTROL your most dangerous and only group that scared the hell out of us-----Hollywood!

[fast4522]

Usually taller too

It is legitimate to hate commie's.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_DaMKUP3Og

[hcap]

It is legitimate to hate commie's.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_DaMKUP3OgMake sure your tin foil hat is oriented North/South. Instead of East/west.

You don't want to wind up hating Big Bird and Kermit now do you?

Being "hand puppets" of the secret society of Soviet provocateurs is no reason to hold a grudge.

[Robert Goren]

I wonder how many people the Portland Oregon mall sniper would killed with gun.

[elysiantraveller]

I wonder how many people the Portland Oregon mall sniper would killed with gun.

The same or less...

[RaceBookJoe]

I wonder how many people the Portland Oregon mall sniper would killed with gun.

I wonder how many would die if guns were outlawed and he walked in with a few grenades.

[Robert Goren]

I wonder how many would die if guns were outlawed and he walked in with a few grenades.Where would he get the grenades?

[Robert Goren]

The same or less...How do you figure less?

[elysiantraveller]

How do you figure less?

I've covered this a couple of times on here...

1) People move. This only works on stationary targets.

2) The shooter was moving. <see 1>

3) This tech doesn't make you any "deadlier" you still have to accurately "shoot" the target before, while hoping it doesn't move, shooting it again.

No one has answered my question of instead of tagging the target why not just shoot it the first time?

[JustRalph]

The same or less...

Exactly right. This wouldn't be any real advantage on moving targets.

Only very slightly. And that would total luck

[thaskalos]

No one has answered my question of instead of tagging the target why not just shoot it the first time?
If you shoot at the prey and miss...the prey is gone.

If you miss while trying to tag it...you can try again and again.

[elysiantraveller]

If you shoot at the prey and miss...the prey is gone.

If you miss while trying to tag it...you can try again and again.

Prey isn't stationary.

[Robert Goren]

Then this gun is useless except for target practice, right? It certainly has no value in hunting and/or self defense if you can't use it on a moving target.

[JustRalph]

Then this gun is useless except for target practice, right? It certainly has no value in hunting and/or self defense if you can't use it on a moving target.

No. If you are shooting at a target that isn't aware of your presence, elk, deer etc it would deadly.

If you are a sniper using stealth, deception, cover, element of surprise and such then this is one hell of a tool. Especially in good weather

[elysiantraveller]

Then this gun is useless except for target practice, right? It certainly has no value in hunting and/or self defense if you can't use it on a moving target.

As an avid hunter/shooter I would agree with that statement.

[Tom]

Superman is not afraid of bullets, but he don't mess with guns!:eek:

tGf1r8-Snss

[Robert Goren]

No. If you are shooting at a target that isn't aware of your presence, elk, deer etc it would deadly.

If you are a sniper using stealth, deception, cover, element of surprise and such then this is one hell of a tool. Especially in good weatherLike when the elk, deer, etc is licking on block of salt.:rolleyes:

[thaskalos]

I thought hunters were such great sportsmen...

Where is the sport in using a weapon like this?

[elysiantraveller]

I thought hunters were such great sportsmen...

Where is the sport in using a weapon like this?

:bang:

I'm telling you hunter's wouldn't use this! It doesn't give you any advantage. I don't know how many times I can explain this.

For short range I guess you could use it if what you are shooting doesn't move but why bother? The animal takes one step and you are back to square one... Within 100 yards on a stationary target you should be automatic anyway...

And at longer distances this thing would be worthless.

I'm just confused... completely... why you guys can't figure this out...

Its a gun... that you CAN'T shoot, it literally won't fire, at a moving target...

[JustRalph]

They are just pulling chains now. If they don't get it by now, it won't happen

[sammy the sage]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/12/gun-background-checks-surge-across-usa/1765513/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29

""The number of federally required background checks of prospective gun purchasers has nearly doubled in the past decade — a time when violent crime has been in long decline in many places across the USA, according to FBI records.""

Imagine that...HHHHHmmmmmm

[fast4522]

This gun should be a hit with the Mossad.

[HUSKER55]

the people that want one .....have it already and have probably used it. the rest of us wouldn't get one even if we could afford a hundred of them,( unless we thought we could sell them for a profit). :D

Seriously, suppose that gun was on the shelf for $100. How many of you would buy it?

Weapons like that have a very special market and people like us would have a heart attack if we knew what was REALLY out there.

Who goes deer hunting with an AK-47 ? OK, a person who is a bad shot. Seriously, that person is not out hunting deer, more likely...the deer hunter, for whatever reason.

[hcap]

Since this is the case....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/12/mass-shooting-legally.jpg

A free market idea for gun control.

...." Sidestep the entire gun control controversy and instead pass state laws that require anyone who owns a gun to carry insurance. If they have risk factors (like teenagers in the house), their rates go up. If one of their kids sneaks a gun out of the house and gets caught, or uses it to commit a crime, the insurance gets canceled for some meaningful period of time -- say, 10 years.

And if someone steals your gun and you don't report it in a 24-hour window of you finding out, your insurance is suspended for a long time.

If you have a rifle and it's only used for hunting, low rates. If you have a Glock and you carry it in an open-carry town or state, your rates will be very high -- because odds are so much higher that innocent bystanders may get caught in a shootout.

The more training and safety classes you take, the cheaper the premium.

If you've ever been convicted of domestic abuse or are the target of a protection order, you are not eligible for insurance.

Homeowners could be required to carry gun insurance as long as they're still paying on a mortgage, because a gun accident or misuse could result in a large legal judgment against the house.

Oh yeah, and you have to buy coverage for each gun you own."

[johnhannibalsmith]

...pass state laws that require anyone who owns a gun to carry insurance. ...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Oy vey. I'm still a non-gun person, but even more of a non-insurance person. Oddly, this insurance scheme is nothing more than a form of registration/licensing as near as I can tell, so let's just call it that to make it more pallatable to people like me that will oppose anything that populates the world with more insurance schemes.

But frankly, isn't the end result of this much more likely to be the criminalization of people that don't fit the profile of what the actual goal is here? So you revoke a man's "license (insurance)" to own a weapon because he can't pay his premium... but he keeps one anyway because only God or the law is going to take his family's last line of defense by prying it from his cold, dead fingers... and so now this guy, someone that probably represents a large group of gun-owners that actually use the weapons legitimately is a criminal.

Suddenly you create a whole group of overnight criminals, yet, the logic behind restricting their access or trying to coerce their behavior to be more responsible with their own weapon is probably not going to significantly alter the statistical probability of the events like this mass shooting much, if at all. I mean, you'd think telling someone that their premium would go up 1000% if they get a DUI would stop all intoxicated driving if that were the case. You'd think that there would be nobody driving without insurance anymore as heavy handed as the law has become in most places for willfully operating without insurance where mandated.

In the spirit of keeping to sub-Boxcarian length essays, I'll limit my examples and analogies and objections to the theory in case there is a flaw in my understanding. But, this is what gun people fear most about the leeching of a tragedy to go somewhere else with policy - averting the issue at hand in terms of solutions, but using it as a catalyst to approach a completely different problem that affects all gun users, not just the totally maniacal and diabolical.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by hcap
...pass state laws that require anyone who owns a gun to carry insurance. ...


What's next, a permit to speak freely?

[hcap]

What's next, a permit to speak freely?

Actually if you had to carry insurance for ALL 100 gawdzillion of your posts........


Damn Straight!! :lol:

[JustRalph]

at the risk of pissing off a bunch of people..........

Some is graphic..........Warning!!!

New Video from the company making this tracking point tech

rSBhZUeADRs

[johnhannibalsmith]

...New Video from the company making this tracking point tech

...

Is that the safety to the right of the trigger?

Or does that button share the greatest kill shots to facebook and YouTube?

[elysiantraveller]

I fully suspect a hew and cry to come from the anti gun lobby, very quickly.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/see-the-new-intelligent-rifle-that-claims-to-give-you-a-perfect-shot-every-time/

To get back to the OT.

Now THIS is a setup.... You can actually see the vapor trail of the later shots and how high he is throwing those rounds to get them to connect.

The .260 Remington is becoming the king of the distance game.

PLyTT3omAFM