First I apologize to BGPers for my part in ruining other threads, so I'm creating this one to maybe catch all the gun argument traffic.

 

Recently with all the terrorist attacks there has been a call for arms or to be armed. Many say the only way this nation will be safer is for all to be armed in contrast to the European nations who have dealt with horrific terrorist attacks.

 

But what happens in the meantime, or in between terrorist attacks, with all of these weapons we have encouraged the masses to get in this hysteria.

 

Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and the NRA - LA Times

 

The above article states that 259 justifiable homicides occurred in 2012, or where people used their weapon to stave off attackers. Who knows how many other times the person was not killed or even the flash of the gun scared the attacker away.

 

However, the flip side is there were nearly 20,000 suicides in the same time period, over 500 accidental fatal shootings, and over 8000 homicides. Again the same thing can be said about the nefarious use of guns, who knows how many people were injured and not killed: I'm sure there's data on that.

 

Point being guns have a place in our society and firearms are guaranteed by the Constitution (I support BTW), but my contention is with the argument "we need them to be safe" doesn't hold water because data tells us the irresponsible and malicious use of guns happens more than self defense: in amateur math about 30-1.

 

Fire away...pun intended.

So what are your answers?

 

 

You think something needs to be done, what is it? You say you support the 2nd amendment, how do you balance that with your desire for an unarmed populace?

I think I already addressed this in another thread a little while back. I'll touch on some of it again.

 

We need to be a lot more careful about handing out psychotropic drugs, I think, for some, they're a bigger problem than what they're being treated for.

 

Proper, sensible background checks (not necessarily what the current administration considers proper and sensible).

 

Mandatory penalty for using a firearm in the commission of a violent crime needs to be stringent. Revolving door justice for criminals MUST stop. Again, punishment needs to be swift, certain and severe.

 

Suicide is a tough one as is mental illness. You don't need a gun to kill yourself. Is there a way we can spot mental illness before one kills themselves or others? I truly don't know the answer to that. Is every mental illness treatable? I don't think all are.

 

We HAVE to somehow put an end to gangs. Another tough one for sure and another one I'm not sure of the answer for. Drugs are a huge part of the homicides, especially where gangs are concerned. Would legalizing all drugs help eliminate those homicides? Perhaps. But then, how many deaths in comparison from overdoses would we have?

 

This is a good thread Hellcats, some things we can answer and some I'm not sure if we can. Looking forward to some other ideas. I will certainly post any other ideas if I come up with any.

I just wanted to end the constant back and forth in the other threads. I think we run folks off with our views. We don't care to go back and forth, but they hate reading it.

 

I'll be adding some of my ideas as we go along.

I think I already addressed this in another thread a little while back. I'll touch on some of it again.

 

We need to be a lot more careful about handing out psychotropic drugs, I think, for some, they're a bigger problem than what they're being treated for.

 

Proper, sensible background checks (not necessarily what the current administration considers proper and sensible).

 

Mandatory penalty for using a firearm in the commission of a violent crime needs to be stringent. Revolving door justice for criminals MUST stop. Again, punishment needs to be swift, certain and severe.

 

Suicide is a tough one as is mental illness. You don't need a gun to kill yourself. Is there a way we can spot mental illness before one kills themselves or others? I truly don't know the answer to that. Is every mental illness treatable? I don't think all are.

 

We HAVE to somehow put an end to gangs. Another tough one for sure and another one I'm not sure of the answer for. Drugs are a huge part of the homicides, especially where gangs are concerned. Would legalizing all drugs help eliminate those homicides? Perhaps. But then, how many deaths in comparison from overdoses would we have?

 

This is a good thread Hellcats, some things we can answer and some I'm not sure if we can. Looking forward to some other ideas. I will certainly post any other ideas if I come up with any.

 

RTS you bring up some good solutions IMHO.

 

The psychotropic drugs are a major problem. As you said, some mental illnesses can't be cured. I also think some drugs are over prescribed. Sometimes I feel they just exacerbate problems by masking many symptoms without treating the problem.

 

As far as handling the gangs, I don't think many in America have the stomach for what it takes to end the drug problem. You have to cut of the head, the cartels, to begin to eradicate the problem. Once you do that, you cut off the major flow of drugs and begin to take back our communities. You have to go in with overwhelming force in these neighborhoods. I don't think that would play well with Liberals in America. As long as we don't violate any Constitutional Rights, I have no problem with it.

RTS you bring up some good solutions IMHO.

 

The psychotropic drugs are a major problem. As you said, some mental illnesses can't be cured. I also think some drugs are over prescribed. Sometimes I feel they just exacerbate problems by masking many symptoms without treating the problem.

 

As far as handling the gangs, I don't think many in America have the stomach for what it takes to end the drug problem. You have to cut of the head, the cartels, to begin to eradicate the problem. Once you do that, you cut off the major flow of drugs and begin to take back our communities. You have to go in with overwhelming force in these neighborhoods. I don't think that would play well with Liberals in America. As long as we don't violate any Constitutional Rights, I have no problem with it.

 

I agree completely with you.

RTS you bring up some good solutions IMHO.

 

The psychotropic drugs are a major problem. As you said, some mental illnesses can't be cured. I also think some drugs are over prescribed. Sometimes I feel they just exacerbate problems by masking many symptoms without treating the problem.

 

As far as handling the gangs, I don't think many in America have the stomach for what it takes to end the drug problem. You have to cut of the head, the cartels, to begin to eradicate the problem. Once you do that, you cut off the major flow of drugs and begin to take back our communities. You have to go in with overwhelming force in these neighborhoods. I don't think that would play well with Liberals in America. As long as we don't violate any Constitutional Rights, I have no problem with it.

 

Cap,

Would you be willing to spend Trillions in this hemisphere to battle cartels and drugs? I would, and I'm a liberal.

Cap,

Would you be willing to spend Trillions in this hemisphere to battle cartels and drugs? I would, and I'm a liberal.

 

Wouldn't have to spend trillions. You basically just declare war in them and let the military handle it.

 

Yes, I'm willing to do that and spend the money it would cost.

 

Thats not not what I meant about many not being able to stomach what it takes. War gets ugly.

Wouldn't have to spend trillions. You basically just declare war in them and let the military handle it.

 

Yes, I'm willing to do that and spend the money it would cost.

 

Thats not not what I meant about many not being able to stomach what it takes. War gets ugly.

 

We spent trillions in Iraq to create a larger mess. Would we do that in this hemisphere? Would it be worth more to us to control this side of the world?

First I apologize to BGPers for my part in ruining other threads' date=' so I'm creating this one to maybe catch all the gun argument traffic. Recently with all the terrorist attacks there has been a call for arms or to be armed. Many say the only way this nation will be safer is for all to be armed in contrast to the European nations who have dealt with horrific terrorist attacks. But what happens in the meantime, or in between terrorist attacks, with all of these weapons we have encouraged the masses to get in this hysteria. Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and the NRA - LA Times The above article states that 259 justifiable homicides occurred in 2012, or where people used their weapon to stave off attackers. Who knows how many other times the person was not killed or even the flash of the gun scared the attacker away. However, the flip side is there were nearly 20,000 suicides in the same time period, over 500 accidental fatal shootings, and over 8000 homicides. Again the same thing can be said about the nefarious use of guns, who knows how many people were injured and not killed: I'm sure there's data on that. Point being guns have a place in our society and firearms are guaranteed by the Constitution (I support BTW), but my contention is with the argument "we need them to be safe" doesn't hold water because data tells us the irresponsible and malicious use of guns happens more than self defense: in amateur math about 30-1. Fire away...pun intended.

 

You really want me to show you more facts proving that guns can save lives? Are you going to ignore the report I showed you earlier that was done by anti gun researches who support Hillary Clinton?

 

Do you not care about the 200k women who fight off sexual attacks with guns per year?

 

If someone is banging on your door at 1am to rape and kill a spouse and any daughters you might have, you have 30 seconds to figure out a solution. You're going to tell us all a gun wouldn't make you safer in this situation? You will call 911 and on a good night, if you live in the city you might get a 10 minute response?

 

A gun would not make you safer in this real life scenario?

Edited July 17, 201610 yr by John Anthony

First I apologize to BGPers for my part in ruining other threads, so I'm creating this one to maybe catch all the gun argument traffic.

 

Recently with all the terrorist attacks there has been a call for arms or to be armed. Many say the only way this nation will be safer is for all to be armed in contrast to the European nations who have dealt with horrific terrorist attacks.

 

But what happens in the meantime, or in between terrorist attacks, with all of these weapons we have encouraged the masses to get in this hysteria.

 

Gun and self-defense statistics that might surprise you -- and the NRA - LA Times

 

The above article states that 259 justifiable homicides occurred in 2012, or where people used their weapon to stave off attackers. Who knows how many other times the person was not killed or even the flash of the gun scared the attacker away.

 

However, the flip side is there were nearly 20,000 suicides in the same time period, over 500 accidental fatal shootings, and over 8000 homicides. Again the same thing can be said about the nefarious use of guns, who knows how many people were injured and not killed: I'm sure there's data on that.

 

Point being guns have a place in our society and firearms are guaranteed by the Constitution (I support BTW), but my contention is with the argument "we need them to be safe" doesn't hold water because data tells us the irresponsible and malicious use of guns happens more than self defense: in amateur math about 30-1.

 

Fire away...pun intended.

 

There were 29,989 fatal motor vehicle crashes in the United States in 2014 in which 32,675 deaths occurred.

 

Just throwing that out there. If you think vehicles aren't frequently used as weapons or for suicide you're kidding yourself. While I don't like or agree with suicide, taking peoples guns away simply makes it harder for them to kill themselves, it doesn't prevent it.

How about prosecuting those who use guns in commission of a crime to the fullest....somethings that has decreased in the past 8 years.

We spent trillions in Iraq to create a larger mess. Would we do that in this hemisphere? Would it be worth more to us to control this side of the world?

 

Taking out the cartels is hardly Iraq. Horrible analogy.

You really want me to show you more facts proving that guns can save lives? Are you going to ignore the report I showed you earlier that was done by anti gun researches who support Hillary Clinton?

 

Do you not care about the 200k women who fight off sexual attacks with guns per year?

 

If someone is banging on your door at 1am to rape and kill a spouse and any daughters you might have, you have 30 seconds to figure out a solution. You're going to tell us all a gun wouldn't make you safer in this situation? You will call 911 and on a good night, if you live in the city you might get a 10 minute response?

 

A gun would not make you safer in this real life scenario?

 

Again, I question the survey you refer to. According to studies I've found, there were on about 200k rapes and sexual assaults reported----abou 1/4 of which were by boys/men. Considering the ones that were stopped by self defense with a gun should be in that reported category, the numbers just aren't jiving.

 

Rape & Sexual Assault

 

Granted, in the scenario you posted, a home invasion, a gun would make you safer...assuming you could get it out of its holding place quick enough to use it.

Again' date=' I question the survey you refer to. According to studies I've found, there were on about 200k rapes and sexual assaults reported----abou 1/4 of which were by boys/men. Considering the ones that were stopped by self defense with a gun should be in that reported category, the numbers just aren't jiving. Rape & Sexual Assault Granted, in the scenario you posted, a home invasion, a gun would make you safer...assuming you could get it out of its holding place quick enough to use it.

 

I'll show you another source if I must.