HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Dear "take away guns...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:33 PM

Dear "take away guns and only bad guys will have them" People,

Just got this email from a friend.
I post it without comment.
trof

Dear "take away guns and only bad guys will have them" People,

WHO GIVES A S#*T? We are not talking about the guns that "bad guys" have because they aren't the ones killing dozens of people. Of the 62 mass murders committed since 1972 and the 142 weapons possessed by those 62 mass murderers MORE THAN THREE QUARTERS of those weapons (that is more than 75% to the math challenged) were obtained LEGALLY. That is more than 106 of the 142 weapons. Obtained. Legally. We are not talking about guns owned by bad guys. We are not talking about guns stolen, guns smuggled, or guns obtained in illegal ways. We are talking about guns purchased and owned by "good guys".

Another interesting element in the 62 mass murders since 1972? 32 of them, more than half, were committed AFTER the assault weapons ban expired. Now you can claim Constitutional right (which is in itself incorrect) and you can claim that "only bad guys will have guns" and you can attempt to justify, whine, wheedle and threaten all kinds of really stupid things but the correlation is absolutely impossible to deny:

Legal, unfettered access to assault weapons is the reason that the children in Newton are dead. It is the reason the students in Red Lake, MN are dead. The reason the students at VA Tech are dead and the reason the people in Arizona are dead.

An assault weapons ban will not keep these weapons out of the hands of "bad guys". But it WILL keep them out of the hands of "good guys" who have never been in trouble with the the law and who, for whatever reason, decide one day to take an assault weapon with a high capacity clip or magazine into an elementary school, movie theater, mall, place of work or Congressional "meet and greet" and kill as many people as they can before committing suicide or being killed/apprehended by the authorities.

And let's face it, most of you couldn't care less about who the "bad guys" kill. After all, with the exception of bystanders who get caught up in the cross fire, bad guys kill other bad guys...and they do it on "the other side of the tracks" and not one of you cares about that, right? You really don't care about the bystander either. If you did then it would mean you would have to do something about that and what's one more dead drug dealer or prostitute or person who isn't "like" you. Right?

So, cut the crap.

47 replies, 8799 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 47 replies Author Time Post
Reply Dear "take away guns and only bad guys will have them" People, (Original post)
trof Jan 2013 OP
Aristus Jan 2013 #1
upaloopa Jan 2013 #2
trof Jan 2013 #4
etherealtruth Jan 2013 #5
tk2kewl Jan 2013 #3
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #6
harmonicon Jan 2013 #15
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #17
ChirpChirp Jan 2013 #24
Walk away Jan 2013 #29
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #33
Walk away Jan 2013 #38
Fire Walk With Me Jan 2013 #39
Zoeisright Jan 2013 #7
slackmaster Jan 2013 #8
rustydog Jan 2013 #9
slackmaster Jan 2013 #20
Spider Jerusalem Jan 2013 #10
AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #11
another_liberal Jan 2013 #12
aikoaiko Jan 2013 #13
JaneyVee Jan 2013 #26
Bobcat Jan 2013 #14
Bjornsdotter Jan 2013 #16
Milliesmom Jan 2013 #18
crazyjoe Jan 2013 #19
Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #21
tracygl Jan 2013 #41
arcane1 Jan 2013 #43
Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #44
cyberswede Jan 2013 #46
arcane1 Jan 2013 #47
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #22
Pholus Jan 2013 #25
GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #27
Pholus Jan 2013 #32
JaneyVee Jan 2013 #28
SemperEadem Jan 2013 #23
libdem4life Jan 2013 #30
virginia mountainman Jan 2013 #31
Leroy Schaefer Jan 2013 #34
uppityperson Jan 2013 #36
BainsBane Jan 2013 #40
blazeKing Jan 2013 #35
Rozlee Jan 2013 #37
freck Jan 2013 #42
pvrc22 Jan 2013 #45

Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:38 PM

1. Tell your friend: Bravo!



K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:39 PM

2. All bad guys with guns were good guys with guns

until they did a bad thing with their gun .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:40 PM

4. There ya go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #2)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:41 PM

5. Exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:41 PM

6. Police are bad guys. No way they should be the only ones with guns.

 

Unless of course we follow the UK model and disarm the police as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:34 PM

15. In the UK, the police are just about the only people who have guns.

No, they don't patrol around town with them, but they have access to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to harmonicon (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:44 PM

17. I didn't know that. It's not reassuring.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:19 PM

24. They have been rearming them

Englands has had a rashof stabbing and I dont blame the brits for rearmingtheir police.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #6)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:44 PM

29. Finally, the average American will understand that you all are arming yourselves against....

our government! The way you express it I can tell you think it's normal. It's as if you don't get that most Americans think that is dangerous and unstable. But it's good to finally see it out in the open.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:58 PM

33. I don't have a gun. I don't like guns. I hate violence. I hate the violence I've seen cops do

 

to myself and my brothers and sisters in the Occupy movement at the behest of the powers that be. I'm non-violent.

And as such, am afraid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #33)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:10 AM

38. I have never heard of a police officer using a gun on any protester. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Walk away (Reply #38)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:21 AM

39. If what I've described is not bad enough to move you...things are bad enough as they are,

 

and to further degrade them would be unthinkable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:45 PM

7. Brilliant.

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 07:47 PM

8. An overwhelming percentage of murder victims are killed in single murders, not mass murders

 

Most murders are committed by repeat violent offenders.

Very few people are murdered with rifles or shotguns.

And let's face it, most of you couldn't care less about who the "bad guys" kill. After all, with the exception of bystanders who get caught up in the cross fire, bad guys kill other bad guys...and they do it on "the other side of the tracks" and not one of you cares about that, right?

I don't need you to tell me what I care about or don't care about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:04 PM

9. the 4_ year old killed by gunfire while watching tv was a bad guy?

pretty dam simplistic and ignorant statement

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustydog (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:59 PM

20. I don't understand how you could have drawn that conclusion from what I wrote

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #8)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:08 PM

10. Misleading and incomplete stats

the FBI statistics on firearm use in homicide includes, IIRC, something like 1800 "type not specified". Some significant percentage of those probably represents rifles, carbines, and/or shotguns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:11 PM

11. Data issues.

Some of those numbers are wrong.

Criminologist:
http://boston.com/community/blogs/crime_punishment/2012/08/no_increase_in_mass_shootings.html

That's just under 20% after the ban sunset. 8 years ago. Which is almost EXACTLY proportional to the span of time specified by the author, of a flat rate.

The AWB didn't do much, and that's to be expected, since it didn't slow gun sales or anything. The rifle used at Sandy Hook Elementary was 1994 CAWB legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:13 PM

12. Great post!

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:13 PM

13. Wasn't the rifle used in the massacre compliant with the CT Assault Weapon Ban?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #13)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:36 PM

26. It was, but their high capacity magazine ban was defeated due to heavy NRA lobbying.

In order for Lanza's AR-15 to have been deemed illegal it would have to have been modified slightly i.e. pistol grip, bayonet mount, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:25 PM

14. Wow!

F---ing spot on!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:39 PM

16. Thank-you for sharing!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:48 PM

18. Watch Jon Stewert from 01/16/2013

It will open your eyes as to why President Obama had to sign so many ex orders.


Also there are many Dems in Senate and Congress who are NRA "A listers" and are not supporting the Presidents push for gun safety, Joe Manchin, even Al Franken, check out your rep in your state and ask him why he is not supporting the gun safety act. Let them know we can vote them out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 08:52 PM

19. "bad guys kill other bad guys...and they do it on "the other side of the tracks"

 

hmm..good point.
You still can't have my shotgun though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:09 PM

21. "We are not talking about the guns that "bad guys" have because they aren't the ones killing dozens

No, they're the ones killing tens of thousands.

Why would you freak out about mass killings and not give a shit (your own words...) about the exponentially greater number of murders that happen at the hands of habitual, career criminals? Is it because a large portion of those victims are themselves criminals? Does that mean that their lives are somehow less important (even in vastly greater numbers)?

Screw that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #21)


Response to tracygl (Reply #41)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:26 PM

43. How can someone fail to get your point when this is your first post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tracygl (Reply #41)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:29 PM

44. Well...

Well...hollering vulgarities in all-caps ("WHO GIVES A S#*T") does indeed fall under my definition of "freaking out." You apparently use the term differently. And I got your point just fine, thanks...I just thought it was a weak one, that's all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tracygl (Reply #41)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 12:49 PM

46. Are you the author of the email? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cyberswede (Reply #46)

Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:00 PM

47. I think we got our answer, of sorts, via the self-delete

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:13 PM

22. But the AWB didn't ban a single gun. Not a one.

All AWB did was require some cosmetic changes to some guns. The manufacturers made the cosmetic changes and continued to sell the same guns. In a few cases they had to change the names of the guns. For example the TEC-9 had the barrel shroud removed and was then sold as the AB-10. (AB=After Ban)

Since the AWB didn't actually ban any guns, it is impossible for it to have had any effect on crime.

Well, it did ban bayonet lugs in combination with other features. I don't remember any bayonettings during the ban. Of course, I don't remember any since then either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:26 PM

25. Yes, because the letter of the law is far more important than the spirit.

Works for wall street bankers, works for the owners of assault weapons too I see.

And people wonder why I have no sympathy for the 2nd amendment types. It's because they already have had every break they deserve and many they don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #25)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:37 PM

27. The letter of the law IS the law.

If the speed limit is 65, and you are driving 65, are you violating the law?

If your taxes are $1,000, and you pay $1,000, have you done anything wrong?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #27)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:57 PM

32. That's what the bankers say.


So you're in good company.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:38 PM

28. Thats why a high capacity magazine ban is just as important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:16 PM

23. well said!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:52 PM

30. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 09:54 PM

31. ok, how are you going to do it??

How will you deal with the previously law abiding citizens that own these weapons, has owned these weapons legally for years, that simply, "do not comply" with any ban, or restriction.?

What if they live in a community, where practically all their neighbors feel the same way....

What if they view their right to have these rifles, as a civil right?

Who will YOU get to go "enforce the law" on other wise completely upstanding citizens?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:24 PM

34. shooters

My wife who passed away in sept. 2012 was a Psychiatric clinical nurse (got her degree from university of Maryland). She always said when discussing mass shootings etc was because it is very hard to get somebody confined to an institution now because states can't afford it. So now they try to control people with psychiatric problems with drugs. However most all of the drugs have side effects which include homicide and suicidal thoughts. If you go back and check most all of the persons who committed these mass shootings were on some sort of psychiatric drug.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leroy Schaefer (Reply #34)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:29 PM

36. Are you saying people on some sort of psychiatric drug should not have access to guns? Please clarif

clarify if this is what you mean. I am not sure what your point is. Thank you.

Edited to add that I agree there is not nearly enough affordable accessible non-stigmatic mental health care available and there should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leroy Schaefer (Reply #34)


Response to trof (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:29 PM

35. Except that a gun ban will substantially increase the black market trade of illegal guns

 

Mexico..hello?

The fact remains that if a methhead breaks into your home at 3am looking for your wife to have a good time with, you better be armed or you're going to wish you were. This isn't Britain or Norway with far less violent culture, this is America and we are a VIOLENT nation, we promote and we are entertained by it. To be unarmed, especially in some parts of this country, is a very unwise decision. To ban people from protecting themselves is outrageous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blazeKing (Reply #35)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 11:28 PM

37. If a meth head breaks into your home at 3am looking for your wife to have a good time with...

Yeah, being armed would be nice. A .45 or a .22 would do the trick nicely. Got a couple of those in our home. But, we stay away from AR-15s and .223 rounds and any kind of assault weapons. I mean, unless our home is being attacked by dozens of members of a violent street gang, or it's the Zombocalypse, I really don't think civilians need to carry around sophisticated weapons as SWAT teams and the military. And Mexico is getting guns on the black market from us, not the other way around. I'm certainly not advocating that all guns be banned and neither is the president. But, for fuck's sake. It says right there in the Second Amendment. Well regulated...The NRA has fought tooth and nail against any kind of regulation. 50 caliber rifles shouldn't be allowed in the hands of civilians. They could be used to bring down aircraft and their sales should be stringently monitored. Another thing that wasn't brought up is that the overwhelming majority of the mass shooters never had criminal records. So, how was anyone supposed to know they were the "bad guys?" There is no real regulation on firearms in the US. I gave up my M4 when I left the military and was shocked to find that you can buy them easily stateside. Civilians have no business owning weapons designed for warfare. In combat, these arms are mostly offensive and can cause collateral damage. I can't imagine a situation where a civilian in the US would need such a weapon. Not when more conventional ones would do the job just as well and probably not take down some joggers and dog walkers within a 700 yard distance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Original post)


Response to trof (Original post)

Reply to this thread