-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why arming everyone with guns is not a good Idea.
- Thread starter bobhikes
- Start date
Only to the person esmith thinks is the "bad guy". And esmith himself acknowledged that differentiating between good guys and bad guys is an area that his training hasn't covered.
In any case, "good guy" and "bad guy" are subject to an interpretation. If, say, a homeowner kills an unarmed burglar to stop him from stealing a TV, who's more the bad guy? In my books, homicide is worse than theft.
tytlyf
Not Religious
What part is wrong?
esmith
Veteran Member
I know you have problems with the truth sometimes but this is a no-brainer.... the NRA doesn't sell firearms. That just make sure we have a voice as loud or louder than the anti-gun zealots. Now they do receive advertising monies from various manufactures and contributions from those that oppose the anti-gun zealots, along with membership dues.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Wouldn't it be more effective to simply ENFORCE the laws that are already on the books?
tytlyf
Not Religious
The NRA is a propaganda outlet. GHWB was right to cancel his lifetime membership when they became that way. The NRA does indeed sell firearms, by scaring people and lobbying congress to remove laws. Think of the NRA as the marketing firm for ammo/gun manufacturers. Their tax documents prove this
The laws are enforced. That's an NRA talking point. As we all know, if there are cops not enforcing the law, they're conservatives who don't agree with the laws. I've already posted sources on that topic.
esmith
Veteran Member
It is possible that I misspoke or your interpreted what I said in a different manner than I meant, if so let me say that I have received training in how to detect a person that presents a danger to me or others. Of course this reasoning probably conflicts with what you consider a threat. So be it.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Shifty eyes or a Hillary Now button?
j/k
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Try Google in regards to the research on whether a loaded gun in one's home is a good idea.
esmith
Veteran Member
No they don't directly receive money for a transfer of a firearm from them to a person. However they do attempt to persuade Congress of the merits of firearms, which is a definition of selling
No they do not need to "scare" us, we already know what the anti-gun zealots want and we are glad we have such a strong voice representing us. Just as your groups do. So he old saying "pot calling the kettle black" is a very relevant here.
esmith
Veteran Member
Google? never heard of that report.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Or a loaded gun owner, for that matter. Jus' sayin'...
McBell
Unbound
You made the claim, either support it of let it be dismissed.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Again you display your complete lack of knowledge on this subject.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
It makes no difference to me what you might believe on this as I have posted several independent studies before only to have them dismissed out-of-hand by those with a vested interest in their guns. After a while, my attitude has become "Why bother". So, go ahead and dismiss what I wrote, as I really gave up on certain posters here on this topic quite a while back. I have better things to do, such as taking my grandson and wife to da beach in about 5 minutes.
McBell
Unbound
dismissed then.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I know. What was I thinking? Granted, background checks could be more rigorous, but more laws isn't the answer.Wont ever happen. That makes too much sense.
What about good old fashioned nationwide PSA's? Getting the NRA behind such PSA's would be huge, but perhaps a bit tricky. I don't know. Spots about gun safety. Proper storage. Responsibility ... etc... Get Hollywood involved... What could go wrong?
Prestor John
Well-Known Member
Disarming the public is one of the first steps of a tyrannical government.
Studies show that as gun ownership decreases violent crime increases.
Look at Sweden, the rape capital of the world.
Studies show that as gun ownership decreases violent crime increases.
Look at Sweden, the rape capital of the world.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
You might read this:
As for the issue of crime, more gun ownership does tend to reduce overall crime but not violent crime: http://www.livescience.com/51446-guns-do-not-deter-crime.html