What is S.O.P.A ?

[gretsch-o-rama]

Hey! what did the drummer get on his government test? Drool

[Henry II]

Sorry have to disagree. I am a regular citizen and I do not kill people. Anyone who kills someone is not a regular citizen. Once you attempt to gravely harm someone you cease to be a regular citizen. I should not have to jump thru hoops if I want to have a gun in my home in case one of those violent non regular citizens decides my house is a target. nor should I be told that I cannot at all. the violent non regiular citizen does not care about the laws and by nature will circumvent them.

This is utterly meaningless nonesense. What dumbed down alternate universe do you live in. The "regular" universe?

[circh bustom]

How is that utter nonsense? Regular citizens do not go around killing people. I mean really? You would consider a murderer just a regular citizen? What world do YOU live in may I ask? I thought I was pretty clear. Thanks for your intelligent response and retort Henry II. Gun laws do not protect the innocent. If a criminal wants to commit a criminal act, some law made by some group of men in DC is not going to even register in their thinking. If a man or group of men break into my house to do my family and I harm, do you think this person or group of people care about gun laws? No. But I as a citizen as a citizen Im supposed to have my hands tied because people feel guns kill people? Right and the fork made Rosie ODonnel fat. The keyboard made the typo, not me. Im no right wing republican gun toting bible thumping anything. But lets all live in the real world here. I see Morgenthalers point, sort of, with his break down of tools of defense that are accesible, but when we take the words off the paper and put them into play in real life things change. Sure if we all only had our fists, the world would be full of split lips and black eyes and nothing else. Good luck on getting that to happen. Ask Sturla if he wouldnt have minded having a gun the day he was attacked. Better yet, ask him if he wouldnt have minded if the guy who got attacked BEFORE him had a gun. Maybe he would not have had to endure the trauma he went thru. I know people on here want the world to be some big hippie commune Utopia, but it's not. maybe some day, maybe, but not now. Education is the key.

[Henry II]

How is that utter nonsense? Regular citizens do not go around killing people. I mean really? You would consider a murderer just a regular citizen? What world do YOU live in may I ask? I thought I was pretty clear. Thanks for your intelligent response and retort Henry II. Gun laws do not protect the innocent. If a criminal wants to commit a criminal act, some law made by some group of men in DC is not going to even register in their thinking. If a man or group of men break into my house to do my family and I harm, do you think this person or group of people care about gun laws? No. But I as a citizen as a citizen Im supposed to have my hands tied because people feel guns kill people? Right and the fork made Rosie ODonnel fat. The keyboard made the typo, not me. Im no right wing republican gun toting bible thumping anything. But lets all live in the real world here. I see Morgenthalers point, sort of, with his break down of tools of defense that are accesible, but when we take the words off the paper and put them into play in real life things change. Sure if we all only had our fists, the world would be full of split lips and black eyes and nothing else. Good luck on getting that to happen. Ask Sturla if he wouldnt have minded having a gun the day he was attacked. Better yet, ask him if he wouldnt have minded if the guy who got attacked BEFORE him had a gun. Maybe he would not have had to endure the trauma he went thru. I know people on here want the world to be some big hippie commune Utopia, but it's not. maybe some day, maybe, but not now. Education is the key.

If you read all of my posts in this thread, you could have saved yourself a lot of time writing this, largely, moot post. But, your description of "regular" and "non regular" citizens remains one of the most ridiculous characterizations I've ever heard, spoken like a genuine Fox News junky, and has no basis in reality. Ironic for one who seems to think he has some familiarity with "the real world."

[Lucas Ives]

I come down somewhere in the middle of this. Personal responsibility is far too often shirked in our society. But guns and gun violence are glorified, too. +1 on education (let's start by abolishing the teacher's union, shall we?)

Research recently done by Notre Dame shows people carrying guns tend to think others are carrying guns, too. I'm not familiar with the literature, this is just one study, etc., but food for thought given the proliferation of concealed carry laws.

[circh bustom]

Fox news junky? Now you are getting a little out of line. Any chance you could bring a little intelligence in or is resorting to borderline insults with no depth in your post the best you can do? Excuse me if I feel criminals are not regular citizens. I am sure I read your posts but your lack of any substance in your last few posts guarantees that I will not go back and read them. Please feel free to no longer respond to what I post on here. Or throw a tantrum and pound into your keyboard that you will respond to whatever you want on an open forum. I expect the latter.

[Henry II]

Fox news junky? Now you are getting a little out of line. Any chance you could bring a little intelligence in or is resorting to borderline insults with no depth in your post the best you can do? Excuse me if I feel criminals are not regular citizens. I am sure I read your posts but your lack of any substance in your last few posts guarantees that I will not go back and read them. Please feel free to no longer respond to what I post on here. Or throw a tantrum and pound into your keyboard that you will respond to whatever you want on an open forum. I expect the latter.

Yes, Fox News junky. I'm not throwing a tantrum or or pounding my keyboard. I'm speaking the truth.

I've brought a lot of intelligence into this conversation. You've ignored it and dumded down the conversation with the most preposterous premise I've ever heard. Further, all citizens, and non-citizens, criminals or otherwise, have certain Consitutional rights, like it or not. There is no such thing as a regular citizen, non regular citizen, irregular citizen, unregular or whatever ridiculous characterization you might use, despite what you may or may not think. And, there is no classification of citizen, whatever their economic and/or ethnic, racial or religious standing, regular or otherwise, that is immune from criminality, including Fox News junkys.

PS: I'll find the door.

[Josiah]

Research recently done by Notre Dame shows people carrying guns tend to think others are carrying guns, too. I'm not familiar with the literature, this is just one study, etc., but food for thought given the proliferation of concealed carry laws.

And that is what makes (some) "research" truly stupid. The people packing heat tend to think other people are packing heat?! NO?! You don't say?! Did they think they carried guns to protect against sticks and stones? What utter nonsense.

That's called 'Cause and Effect', people don't carry guns to protect against knives. What a truly idiotic result from 'research'. That deserves no thought, other then, what a bunch of morons. Are gun owners more accurately aware of gun violence? Probably, that's probably why half of them bought a gun in the first place.

That's like saying "Cops who wear bullet proof vests tend to think they might get shot at."

Or "Doctors who wear masks and gloves tend to think their patients might have communicable diseases ."

We don't have a shotgun by the door because we THINK there might be bears - it's because there ARE bears! (We use salt rock loads and are not inhumane towards our friendly, yet huge and deadly, neighbors)


Rocks, Slings, Knives, Swords, Bows & Arrows, Muskets and the modern day Gun. Man has armed himself all of known history, probably because man has been violent all of known history. People will be violent and people will try and protect themselves no matter what the medium of weaponry is. 1,000 years ago everyone carried a sword. Now a days people carry guns and knives. In 500 years maybe people will carry laser pistols... or humanity will be wiped out. Or will have learned to get along. I hope for the latter. But that doesn't change the fact there are LOTS of very very bad people lurking about everywhere currently.

[Morgenthaler]

I see Morgenthalers point, sort of, with his break down of tools of defense that are accesible, but when we take the words off the paper and put them into play in real life things change. Sure if we all only had our fists, the world would be full of split lips and black eyes and nothing else. Good luck on getting that to happen. Ask Sturla if he wouldn't have minded having a gun the day he was attacked.

I think - and hope - that if you asked Sturla, he'd say no, he would not like to become a killer - because that would've been the
outcome of your logic.

I can't understand how YOU can't understand that there ARE societies with much less violence and homicides (per citizen),
than the United States. It's not utopia. It's just largely gun-free societies.

These all have one or two things in common:

1 They are largely gun-free.
2 They are secular to a certain degree.

If you want a more peaceful society, make it harder for people to kill each other.
Taking away guns from ordinary citizens is a proven method.

[Lucas Ives]

Research recently done by Notre Dame shows people carrying guns tend to think others are carrying guns, too. I'm not familiar with the literature, this is just one study, etc., but food for thought given the proliferation of concealed carry laws.

And that is what makes (some) "research" truly stupid. The people packing heat tend to think other people are packing heat?! NO?! You don't say?! Did they think they carried guns to protect against sticks and stones? What utter nonsense.

(remaining disdain and condescension elided)

Guessing you didn't track down the abstract.

Here's the nutshell summary: the very act of carrying a gun sets up a different bias than if you had left the gun at home. You're still the same gun owner, you still believe he same things about gun rights/crime prevalence/etc. But having it in your pocket / in your hand makes you react differently to the same stimuli.