Trayvon Martin

[Jupiter551]

Except that the presence of guns can and does instigate situations and outcomes that simply wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Case in point - would Zimmerman have followed Tray if he hadn't been armed? We don't know but in that circumstance some wouldn't. Would Tray have really critically injured Zimmerman? Again we don't know. The only thing we know *for sure*, is that a kid wouldn't be 6 feet under.

 

[Bocefish]

If they wouldn't have been automatically suspicious of each other, it wouldn't have happened either. If this or if that...

 

[LadyLuna]

Here in America we keep our right to own guns not so we can protect ourselves against each other, but so we can protect ourselves from the government if it comes down to that. Remember- we had to fight for our freedom once. Honestly, I don't see what good guns will do if it ever comes down to that again- bombs are far more destructive. But they will help.

I hope it doesn't come to that, but with our history of kicking all the good presidents out of office and only electing those that want to make the government bigger, I can see it happening.

 

[Jupiter551]

Here in America we keep our right to own guns not so we can protect ourselves against each other, but so we can protect ourselves from the government if it comes down to that. Remember- we had to fight for our freedom once. Honestly, I don't see what good guns will do if it ever comes down to that again- bombs are far more destructive. But they will help.

I hope it doesn't come to that, but with our history of kicking all the good presidents out of office and only electing those that want to make the government bigger, I can see it happening.

Well the second amendment was written with militias in mind - the National Guard pretty much, except it didn't exist then. It doesn't state anywhere that the arms are to be used against the government, if anything it specifies an armed and trained civilian militia should be maintained in service to the state (meaning the nation).

People have and continue to interpret it how they wish but the original statement was fairly simple and fairly obviously worded. It also doesn't mention firearms specifically, or artillery pieces, or battleships...

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
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

 

[Bocefish]

* In 1976, the Washington, D.C. City Council passed a law generally prohibiting residents from possessing handguns and requiring that all firearms in private homes be (1) kept unloaded and (2) rendered temporally inoperable via disassembly or installation of a trigger lock.[171] [172]

* On June 26, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling known as D.C. v Heller, struck down this law as unconstitutional.[173]

* Excerpts from the majority ruling (Justice Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito):

The District's total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of "arms" that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition ... would fail constitutional muster.

Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

The Second Amendment is naturally divided into two parts: its prefatory clause and its operative clause. The former does not limit the latter grammatically, but rather announces a purpose. The Amendment could be rephrased, "Because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

* Excerpts from a minority dissent (Justice Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer):

[T]he words "the people" in the Second Amendment refer back to the object announced in the Amendment's preamble. They remind us that it is the collective action of individuals having a duty to serve in the militia that the text directly protects and, perhaps more importantly, that the ultimate purpose of the Amendment was to protect the States' share of the divided sovereignty created by the Constitution.

As used in the Second Amendment, the words "the people" do not enlarge the right to keep and bear arms to encompass use or ownership of weapons outside the context of service in a well-regulated militia.

* Excerpt from a minority dissent (Justice Breyer, joined by Stevens, Souter, and Ginsburg):

[The Framers were] unlikely then to have thought of a right to keep loaded handguns in homes to confront intruders in urban settings as central. And the subsequent development of modern urban police departments, by diminishing the need to keep loaded guns nearby in case of intruders, would have moved any such right even further away from the heart of the amendment's more basic protective ends.

* The Bill of Rights includes two Amendments other than the Second that use the phrase "right of the people":

Amendment 1: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[174]

Amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."[175]

* In D.C. v Heller, the Supreme Court Justices debated the meaning of the phrase "right of the people" in the Second Amendment. Below are excerpts of this debate:

• Majority Opinion (Justice Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito):

The unamended Constitution and the Bill of Rights use the phrase "right of the people" two other times... The Ninth Amendment uses very similar terminology.... All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not "collective" rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body. ...

... 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.

• Dissenting Opinion (Justice Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer):

The Court also overlooks the significance of the way the Framers used the phrase "the people" in these constitutional provisions. In the First Amendment, no words define the class of individuals entitled to speak, to publish, or to worship; in that Amendment it is only the right peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, that is described as a right of "the people." These rights contemplate collective action. While the right peaceably to assemble protects the individual rights of those persons participating in the assembly, its concern is with action engaged in by members of a group, rather than any single individual. Likewise, although the act of petitioning the Government is a right that can be exercised by individuals, it is primarily collective in nature. For if they are to be effective, petitions must involve groups of individuals acting in concert. ...

As used in the Fourth Amendment, "the people" describes the class of persons protected from unreasonable searches and seizures by Government officials. It is true that the Fourth Amendment describes a right that need not be exercised in any collective sense. But that observation does not settle the meaning of the phrase "the people" when used in the Second Amendment.

• Majority Opinion (Justice Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito):

Justice Stevens is of course correct ... that the right to assemble cannot be exercised alone, but it is still an individual right, and not one conditioned upon membership in some defined "assembly," as he contends the right to bear arms is conditioned upon membership in a defined militia. And Justice Stevens is dead wrong to think that the right to petition is "primarily collective in nature." Ibid. See McDonald v. Smith, 472 U. S. 479, 482-484 (1985) (describing historical origins of right to petition).

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

 

[SweepTheLeg]

What militia do the gun owners of this thread belong to? Or is this just a fun excuse? Well you knowwwwwwww the government is going to make us into it's socialist communist nazi muslim slaves one day,and when they do i'll be ready.

 

[SexyRapunzel]

I know one thing, this whole case has caused a kind of racial rape war in my town with white women around my age being targeted. Four women have been raped since this incident and the local police think this case has something to do with it. I don't know for sure if that's true but I'm not taking any walks around the block at night to find out! And I've started putting my sword in my car every time I go somewhere. They're going to have to shoot me first.

 

[Nordling]

Warning: Extremely offensive language on this site:

http://yfrog.com/09kjsez

The vile message was found in Charles M. Blows voicemail. He was recently a guest on Lawrence O'Donnel's show on MSNBC, and I'm assuming this nasty human is referring to that show. While this POS doesn't represent even a majority of our citizenry it does show how the extremes of one side can react in our country.

 

[LadyLuna]

To be clear- I hate guns. I wish they had never been invented. But since they were, we're stuck with them, and I don't like the idea of "you can't have/use this because you aren't a member of <insert group here>". I *do* like the idea of "you can't have/use this without knowing HOW to use it and when you should and shouldn't use it", because without such things, even more people would get hurt.

 

[Nordling]

To be clear- I hate guns. I wish they had never been invented. But since they were, we're stuck with them, and I don't like the idea of "you can't have/use this because you aren't a member of <insert group here>". I *do* like the idea of "you can't have/use this without knowing HOW to use it and when you should and shouldn't use it", because without such things, even more people would get hurt.

Just guessing but I'm of the opinion that this is the consensus view. Few Americans want to lose the right to own guns, but when pressed, admit that strict controls should be enforced--like training, transporting, storage, etc. There was a time when the NRA was primarily concerned with gun safety but has been pretty much become a "pro gun at any cost" lobby for ALEC and the Koch brothers.

 

[Jupiter551]

Regardless of the rulings of that appeal, which were as you can see, not unanimous, the "right to bear arms" is not carte blanche permission to own and use any and all weapons on the planet.

Your 2nd amendment doesn't prohibit gun control, it has nothing to DO with gun control. You already have gun control: there's a long list of federal laws relating to who can own guns and what type they can have, along with various state ones as well. For instance:

According to the laws of the State of New York, a magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds manufactured after September 14, 1994 cannot be legally possessed by anyone other than a law enforcement officer.

That is gun control. It's quite distinct from gun prohibition.

I'm not arguing that the particular case you quoted ruled you didn't have to be in a militia, but people who (and they do this quite frequently) argue that your government has no right to implement gun control laws because it's unconsitutional, are grossely incorrect.

I suspect the phrase originally was a combination of two things: one being that the states forming the union wanted assurance that they would be able to assert their own rights within the union without having to keep a standing army, and that confiscation of weapons (and this only applies when it's all weapons, not just particular types) is a tool used to oppress citizenry - it's not an original idea, the English considered the right of citizens to have weapons a basic right over a century earlier.

Anyway, it says right to bear arms, not handguns, not bazookas, not intercontinental ballistic missiles - just arms. Which arms, by whom, how they are to be used and so forth is a matter for elected legislators to decide.

 

[sweetiebatman]

To be clear- I hate guns. I wish they had never been invented. But since they were, we're stuck with them, and I don't like the idea of "you can't have/use this because you aren't a member of <insert group here>". I *do* like the idea of "you can't have/use this without knowing HOW to use it and when you should and shouldn't use it", because without such things, even more people would get hurt.

There is a renowned British Historian that believes that The US is a "young" nation and it making some massive mistakes, Gun control? fuck me thats a basic imo. If I even lifted a gun in Europe i'd expect to get double tapped and rightly so, no amount of archaic law make it any better.

Guns dont kill people, idiots do...

 

[Jupiter551]

Guns Idiots dont kill people, idiots do... with guns do.

 

[LadyLuna]

To be clear- I hate guns. I wish they had never been invented. But since they were, we're stuck with them, and I don't like the idea of "you can't have/use this because you aren't a member of <insert group here>". I *do* like the idea of "you can't have/use this without knowing HOW to use it and when you should and shouldn't use it", because without such things, even more people would get hurt.

There is a renowned British Historian that believes that The US is a "young" nation and it making some massive mistakes, Gun control? fuck me thats a basic imo. If I even lifted a gun in Europe i'd expect to get double tapped and rightly so, no amount of archaic law make it any better.

Guns dont kill people, idiots do...

There's plenty of American citizens that agree with said British Historian. I know this is a young country and that we're making plenty of mistakes. I'm just not sure which things are mistakes, which things aren't.

Except making corporations people. That was a major mistake.

 

[Harvrath]

What militia do the gun owners of this thread belong to? Or is this just a fun excuse? Well you knowwwwwwww the government is going to make us into it's socialist communist nazi muslim slaves one day,and when they do i'll be ready.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

I believe in the Heller or McDonnell decision, the Supreme Court said being recognized as Unorganized is Organization and thus the RKBA applies to Unorganized Militia. This could over-turn the 1986 Machine-gun Ban.

As many as 100 million gun-owners. Could be useful if Narco-gangs on the border get really violent, or terrorists are planning Mumbai style terror attacks in the US Heartland and the Federal Government recognizes they cannot defend every potential target.

http://twitchy.com/2012/04/04/don-cheadle-slams-nbc-for-misleading-edit-of-zimmerman-911-tape/ The man body slams NBC for selective editing of Zimmerman's initial call to the Police non-emergency number. New found respect for an actor I always respected.

 

[sorrowfool]

Except that the presence of guns can and does instigate situations and outcomes that simply wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Case in point - would Zimmerman have followed Tray if he hadn't been armed? We don't know but in that circumstance some wouldn't. Would Tray have really critically injured Zimmerman? Again we don't know. The only thing we know *for sure*, is that a kid wouldn't be 6 feet under.

This, 100% None of this would have happened if Zimmerman hadn't been traveling around with a gun.

In my experience, I've never seen a gun save a life. I know a half a dozen people who have been shot (or shot someone in my cousins case) and a lot of those are situations that would have been completely avoided had a gun or guns not been in play. People got jumped all the time and no one died. A black eye, a busted lip, maybe a broken nose, but no one died. Give one person in that situation a gun... whole different story.

 

[sorrowfool]

No and I'm not saying he is. All I'm saying is that my mom and at least 6 of my close friends have been murdered, People get shot and killed where I live all the time and nobody marches for them, they don't get justice and frankly nobody gives a fuck. So as cold hearted as it sounds, I don't really care about some dude in Florida who was shot while he was attacking the dude in the first place.

This is what I don't get. The whole Stand Your Ground thing. At what point was Trayvon allowed to stand his ground? He was the one being pursued by someone with a gun. It wasn't like they were on Zimmerman's private property. Who determines who gets to stand their ground? Whoever is left alive at the end?

 

[Paulie Walnuts]

All I'm saying is that my mom and at least 6 of my close friends have been murdered, People get shot and killed where I live all the time and nobody marches for them, they don't get justice and frankly nobody gives a fuck.

With all due respect... why do you stay there?
There are thousands of very pleasant and peaceful places in the US to live. Pick one and go maybe?

I was in Baltimore once for about a week, I'll never go back. Ever.

My honest answer? I'd leave in a freakin heartbeat however I have a 4 year old daughter and instead of an easier custody situation, she has supervised visits every Sunday for 4 hours with her sperm donor. To me it would be kind of pointless to move away and have to either drive or fly her here for 4 hours a week.

I see.
Sometimes 30-45 min away can make a world of difference.

 

[Harvrath]

Except that the presence of guns can and does instigate situations and outcomes that simply wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Case in point - would Zimmerman have followed Tray if he hadn't been armed? We don't know but in that circumstance some wouldn't. Would Tray have really critically injured Zimmerman? Again we don't know. The only thing we know *for sure*, is that a kid wouldn't be 6 feet under.

This, 100% None of this would have happened if Zimmerman hadn't been traveling around with a gun.

In my experience, I've never seen a gun save a life. I know a half a dozen people who have been shot (or shot someone in my cousins case) and a lot of those are situations that would have been completely avoided had a gun or guns not been in play. People got jumped all the time and no one died. A black eye, a busted lip, maybe a broken nose, but no one died. Give one person in that situation a gun... whole different story.

Sorry, but statistics do not back up what you claim. Kleck and Gertz concluded from analyzing several surveys that .7 to 3.6 million Defensive Gun Uses occur every year. That is several hundred thousand to a few million crimes may have been stopped in progress because of defensive gun use that could be as simple as brandishing a gun.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt This study found at the National Institute of Justice generally backs up K-G numbers.

Guns aren't the real problem. They weren't the real problem in the era of Meyer Lansky and Al Capone but government took the first steps toward Gun Control instead of doing the smart thing and repealing Prohibition which empowered criminals in the first place.

 

[Jupiter551]

What militia do the gun owners of this thread belong to? Or is this just a fun excuse? Well you knowwwwwwww the government is going to make us into it's socialist communist nazi muslim slaves one day,and when they do i'll be ready.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

I believe in the Heller or McDonnell decision, the Supreme Court said being recognized as Unorganized is Organization and thus the RKBA applies to Unorganized Militia. This could over-turn the 1986 Machine-gun Ban.

As many as 100 million gun-owners. Could be useful if Narco-gangs on the border get really violent, or terrorists are planning Mumbai style terror attacks in the US Heartland and the Federal Government recognizes they cannot defend every potential target.

http://twitchy.com/2012/04/04/don-cheadle-slams-nbc-for-misleading-edit-of-zimmerman-911-tape/ The man body slams NBC for selective editing of Zimmerman's initial call to the Police non-emergency number. New found respect for an actor I always respected.

Being unorganized is organization? Thank god for such important court cases to quibble over the meaning of a dozen or so words written 220 years ago.

Wtf does Don Cheadle have to do with anything? He's an actor, he has nothing to do with any of this, or are you posting it because he's black and agrees with you?

Can someone find Ja Rule so we can make sense of all this? Where is Ja??

 

[Jupiter551]

Sorry, but statistics do not back up what you claim. Kleck and Gertz concluded from analyzing several surveys that .7 to 3.6 million Defensive Gun Uses occur every year. That is several hundred thousand to a few million crimes may have been stopped in progress because of defensive gun use that could be as simple as brandishing a gun.

.7 million to 3.6 million? That's some pretty accurate statistics there. And how many of those crimes escalated from something minor to a major incident involving death or serious injury because of guns being involved? or don't they record that?

This is a perfect example of a spurious use of statistics, you can't claim such a stupidly broad figure, label it "Defensive Gun Uses" and then say that each one is a possible something that never happened... :roll:

Apparently human beings walk an average of 10,000 steps per day. That is thousands of ladybugs potentially not stepped on per day, per person!

How many of those gun uses were unnecessary? How many people got shot or killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time down the sights of a paranoid gun owner? Do the statistics show that?

 

[Bocefish]

That's awesome about Don Cheadle! Always liked him, but like him even more now.

Truth doesn't need "help." If Zimmerman is proven guilty of a crime he should be charged accordingly and prosecuted to the full extent.

I pray this kind of bullsh*t doesn't effect the investigation or sway the facts in any way. There needs to be a proper outcome based on fact

 

[Jupiter551]

That's awesome about Don Cheadle! Always liked him, but like him even more now.

Why? You like an actor because he agrees with you on twitter?

 

[Bocefish]

That's awesome about Don Cheadle! Always liked him, but like him even more now.

Why? You like an actor because he agrees with you on twitter?

If you can't figure it out from his quotes that I posted, there's no hope for a rational discussion. Jump to whatever conclusions you want, it won't change the facts. I'm done arguing in circles.

 

[Kradek]

If you can't figure it out from his quotes that I posted, there's no hope for a rational discussion. Jump to whatever conclusions you want, it won't change the facts. I'm done arguing in circles.

The only winning move is not to play.

 

[Harvrath]

What militia do the gun owners of this thread belong to? Or is this just a fun excuse? Well you knowwwwwwww the government is going to make us into it's socialist communist nazi muslim slaves one day,and when they do i'll be ready.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

I believe in the Heller or McDonnell decision, the Supreme Court said being recognized as Unorganized is Organization and thus the RKBA applies to Unorganized Militia. This could over-turn the 1986 Machine-gun Ban.

As many as 100 million gun-owners. Could be useful if Narco-gangs on the border get really violent, or terrorists are planning Mumbai style terror attacks in the US Heartland and the Federal Government recognizes they cannot defend every potential target.

http://twitchy.com/2012/04/04/don-cheadle-slams-nbc-for-misleading-edit-of-zimmerman-911-tape/ The man body slams NBC for selective editing of Zimmerman's initial call to the Police non-emergency number. New found respect for an actor I always respected.

Being unorganized is organization? Thank god for such important court cases to quibble over the meaning of a dozen or so words written 220 years ago.

Wtf does Don Cheadle have to do with anything? He's an actor, he has nothing to do with any of this, or are you posting it because he's black and agrees with you?

Can someone find Ja Rule so we can make sense of all this? Where is Ja??

10USC311 was not written 220 years ago. Keyword is National Guard which were State Militia's reorganized as the National Guard under the Militia Acts of 1903. These laws have since been modified, but Militia has always referred to a subset of The People, not Government employees.

I suggest you look up The Battle of Athens, aka The McMinn County War. To put it simply, the Militia, which was in this case mostly GIs returning from combat in the Second World War, fought public corruption with arms, won and didn't go to jail for it.

 

[Jupiter551]

That's awesome about Don Cheadle! Always liked him, but like him even more now.

Why? You like an actor because he agrees with you on twitter?

If you can't figure it out from his quotes that I posted, there's no hope for a rational discussion. Jump to whatever conclusions you want, it won't change the facts. I'm done arguing in circles.

Yeah but he's an actor, he's a good actor but outside of that his opinion is worth exactly the same as anyone else's.

 

[Nordling]

The Battle of Athens was not about a militia, it was about local corruption and a bunch of GIs taking the law into their own hands in a somewhat disorganized way and throwing the crooks out. It's a nice story but has nothing to do with our discussion in this thread. (their main weapons were stolen from a local National Guard armory, and were not existing private arms, although many of the GIs did own firearms too)

 

[Bocefish]

With the shooting death of Trayvon Martin by a neighborhood watch volunteer who was legally carrying a 9-mm handgun, the familiar wail has arisen from our cultural and media elite:

America has too many guns!

“Open carry” and “concealed carry” laws should be repealed.

Florida’s “Stand-your-ground” law, replicated in two dozen states, threatens to turn America into the Tombstone of Doc Holiday and Wyatt Earp. This is insane!

The United Nations agrees. This year, the world body takes up the global control of firearms, including small arms in the hands of citizens.

According to Sen. Rand Paul, the U.N. “Small Arms Treaty” will almost surely mandate tougher licensing requirements to own a gun, require the confiscation and destruction of unauthorized civilian firearms, call for a ban on the trade, sale and private ownership of semi-automatic weapons, and create an international gun registry.

No more Colt .45s in the top drawer or M-1 rifles in the closet.

Memo to the U.N.: Lots of luck.

Forty-five Republican and 12 Democratic senators have declared their opposition to any such U.N. treaty, which means it is dead in the water the moment it is launched from Turtle Bay.

For when it comes to Second Amendment rights, Middle America has spoken – at the ballot box and the gun store. And Congress, most state legislatures and the federal courts have all come down on the side of the Silent Majority.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court struck down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, assuring district citizens of their right to keep a gun in the home.

U.S. Judge Benson E. Legg just struck down the section of Maryland’s gun law that left it to local authorities to decide if a citizen could carry a gun outside his house.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, mentioned as a running mate for Mitt Romney, just signed a law striking down a 20-year ban that kept residents from buying more than one pistol per month. In Virginia’s legislature in 1993, McDonnell had voted in favor of the one-gun-per-month rule.

The new law ignited New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg, who calls Virginia “the No. 1 out-of-state source of crime guns in New York and one of the top suppliers of crime guns nationally.”

Two New York cops have been shot this year, one fatally, with guns from Virginia.

But there is another side to the gun story, and University of Houston professor Larry Bell relates it:

“Law-abiding citizens in America used guns in self-defense 2.5 million times in 1993 (about 6,825 times per day), and actually shot and killed two and a half times as many criminals as police did (1,527 to 606). These self-defense shootings resulted in less than one-fifth as many incidents as police where an innocent person was mistakenly identified as a criminal (2 percent versus 11 percent).”

The figures tell the story. Along with rising incarceration rates, the proliferation of guns in the hands of the law-abiding has been a factor in the nation’s falling crime rate.

And that proliferation has accelerated under President Obama.

According to ammo.net, tax revenues from the sale of firearms and ammunition have gone up 48 percent since 2008, with Iowa, North Carolina and Utah registering revenue gains of over 100 percent.

On Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, there were 129,666 background checks of individuals seeking to buy a gun, the highest one-day search in history This exceeded by 32,000 the number of background checks by gun dealers on Black Friday 2010.

Background searches in December broke the all-time monthly record set in November, as 1,534,414 inquiries were made to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System about prospective gun-buyers.

Half a million inquiries came in the six days before Christmas.

Why are Americans arming themselves?

More and more citizens, says the National Rifle Association, fear that if or when they confront a threat to their family, lives or property, the police will not be there.

Reports of home invasions and flash mobs have firmed up the market for firearms. After the 1992 Los Angeles riot, when Californians found themselves defenseless in homes and shops, gun sales soared.

Others argue that a fear of new laws in an Obama second term, or even the possible confiscation of handguns, is driving sales.

Gun-control organizations claim that gun ownership is actually declining, that fewer and fewer people are buying more and more of these guns.

But the numbers seem to contradict the gun-controllers.

A 2005 Gallup survey found that three in 10 Americans own a gun, that 40 percent had a gun in the house, that nearly half of all men own a gun, as do one in seven women. Two-thirds of all gun owners gave as a reason they own a gun: protection against crime.

America is an armed camp, with the South and Midwest the most heavily armed. Yet, still, Americans buy guns in the millions every year.

Why? Whatever the answer, it is our business, not the U.N.’s.

 

[Jupiter551]

I agree it is absolutely your business, but personally I'm thankful I live in a country where you can't buy automatic weapons over the counter, and no one would ever even think to want more than one handgun per month.