Posts
600
Joined
8/21/2012
Location
Mountain Home, AR
US
Edited Date/Time
1/4/2013 6:02pm
http://www.baxterbulletin.com/article/20130102/NEWS01/301020004/Man-hel…;
He used a claw hammer and knife. Would she be less dead if he used a gun? Crazy people will do crazy things.....
He used a claw hammer and knife. Would she be less dead if he used a gun? Crazy people will do crazy things.....
https://youtu.be/DtXeiRYK8jA
You do realize that there is literally no difference between the two below guns, don't you?
Thanks for reminding us all how awesome America, and our freedom, really is!
The Shop
Those guys lose their rights for good once convicted.
Most people couldn't tell the difference between these.
Tactical looking Mini 14.
or this Ruger AC 556 .
Most would think the top one was the most effective for laying down fire.
In all reality there is a big difference.
That AC 556 costs $5,000+ more then that tactical looking Mini14 and the AC is a true "assault weapon",full on reliable machine gun.
I don't arm myself because I live in constant fear of being attacked (virtually no Americans do), that straw man argument was played out long long long ago...it holds no water, makes no sense, and is more appropriate for the stage at a comedy club than in a discussion about gun control...look, the assertion that Americans own guns because we live every day in constant fear just isn't true!
I own guns because I like to shoot them, because I like to hunt on occasion, because they've allowed me to protect livestock from predators...and THEN way down the list for home/personal protection. I expect to use guns to protect myself about as often as I use the fire insurance policy on my home (likely never). But, I don't see you making the argument that because Americans have fire insurance on their homes that we live in constant fear of arsons burning our homes down. We have fire insurance NOT because we are scared of fire, but because shit happens and its better to be prepared than not...the same applies to guns.
Pit Row
Here's a thought to warm some of your hearts....
From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia
... Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real
figures from Down Under.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to
surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayers
more than $500 million dollars.
The first year results are now in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria.....
lone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.(Note that
while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not
and criminals still possess their guns!)
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady
decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins andassaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.
Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public
safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in 'successfully ridding Australian society of guns....' You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.
The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the
hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note Americans, before it's too late!
Will you be one of the sheep to turn yours in?
WHY? You will need it.
Post a reply to: From my local news today...