Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Study Suggests Gun Possession May Not Protect Against Assault

October 21, 2009 by  

Study suggests gun possession may not protect against assaultResearchers from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine have found that guns did not appear to protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault.

The study, which is scheduled to be published in November in the American Journal of Public Health, relied on the review of 677 randomly selected cases of Philadelphia residents who were shot in an assault from 2003 to 2006. The researchers found that 6 percent of victims in these cases were in possession of a gun (such as in a holster, pocket, waistband, or vehicle) when they were shot.

"This study should be the beginning of a better investment in gun injury research through various government and private agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control," says Charles C. Branas, associate professor of epidemiology at the school.

He adds that in the past such agencies have not been legally allowed to fund studies which would affect the passage of specific legislation intended to restrict access to firearms.

Similar studies, however, are unlikely to affect the mission of organizations which claim that access to arms is a constitutional right of every American.

Recently, the Second Amendment Foundation has announced it will be joining in a federal lawsuit to validate the principles and terms of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, which took effect on Oct. 1.

The act declares that any firearms made and retained in Montana are not subject to any federal authority under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to regulate commerce among states.
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19409715-ADNFCR

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Study Suggests Gun Possession May Not Protect Against Assault”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • jerry r. bolton

    Well,how much did that silly survey cost. It will work if a thief or whatever trys to come in my house. Survey says: You’re dead.

    • Blaine Nay

      The study cost over $600,000 — paid for by the taxpayer though the National Institutes for Health (NIH). The study was carefully crafted to skew the results toward an anti-gun bias. When the study group is composed primarily of criminals, the results are predictable. To infer that all gun owners are at the same risk of violence as a bunch of criminals is irresponsible. The researchers should publish a retraction and apology. The NIH employees who funded this should be fired. The members of the media (including http://www.personalliberty.com) who published this garbage without actually reading the study should be ashamed. Regurgitating a press release, as they did, as if it were honest truth is the epitome of lazy journalism.

      • Ellian

        ….duh!

      • Valverde

        No mention was made of any kind of training, either. These dummies all assume that guns have a life of their own, that they will somehow, of their own power, jump up and start shooting. Give me a break. I’ve been a gun owner for all of my life. I know which situations to watch for when I am out with my family and I am competent to meet a situation when it should arise. I bet I’m not as likely to be shot as some criminal who crosses my path with mayhem in mind.

    • Disgusted

      Just another attempt by this administration to take our gun rights away from us. This study was funded with our tax money by the government with a President that stated during his campaign that he would “fundamentally change the United States”. This same President practiced constitutional law and is now fundamentally going to change our country by changing our constitution. If we don’t do something about it we are going to be sorry.

      Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. If we started taking an eye for an eye in this country maybe criminals would see serious consequences to their actions instead of a stint at club fit with free healthcare and education. The problem is much deeper than the “GUNS”.

    • April

      WOW! They’re that desparate.

    • RM

      The Illoustrous state of california has there department of health calling citizens with the premise of asking questions for a survey on health issues and some of the questions were about firearms. They called me and ask me to take the survey which I did until he started asking questions on firearms and mental health I ask him what this had to do with health issues and he said this was part of the survey and I replied the survey and questions are over I’m not for any gun control measures Period nor any anti-gun bs. . I told him to call pelosi she has all the answers.Jerry you are correct my survey says the same YOUR DEAD. Lets all us Gun Owners stand together and get rid of these socialist liberals that are ruining this country.

    • JeffH

      This survey has no relavance whatsoever in determining anything.
      It was a total waste of money that could have been spent wisley in a more needful way.
      I don’t say this because I am for pro-gun rights, but out 677 people in Philadelphia polled, less than 41 people carried a gun? Those figures just jump out at you, don’t they?

  • harold hunter

    I belive the NRA should do a study on some of the medications these QUACKS dispenese and come up with conclusions that would make putting leeches on people for treatment sound like good practice. The medical field should tend the sick and leave the well alone. After all the doctors and inbred medical schools are by and large a disaster for whats wrong with health care.

    • DaveH

      Right on Harold.
      From following website:
      http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2008/11/13/death-by-hospital-is-it-avoidable-part-two-of-a-series/
      “An additional 103,000 Americans die because they have contracted avoidable, drug resistant hospital infections”.

      From Wikipedia:
      “The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, with firearms used in 16,907 suicides in the United States during 2004″.

      So the total deaths by hospitals exceeds the total deaths by guns by several times even when suicides are included. Could it be that the CDC’s time would be better spent addressing the hospital problem?

      • libertytrain

        Re DaveH’s comment: “An additional 103,000 Americans die because they have contracted avoidable, drug resistant hospital infections”.

        From Wikipedia:
        “The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides, with firearms used in 16,907 suicides in the United States during 2004″.

        “So the total deaths by hospitals exceeds the total deaths by guns by several times even when suicides are included. Could it be that the CDC’s time would be better spent addressing the hospital problem?”

        Yes – it would be nice – our hospitals are so dirty they are killing us – and I’m talking the “finest” hospitals in the Country – but that problem is kind of hush-hush – My mom was killed this way by a cutting-edge, fine hospital. And it is unbelievable that it is so acceptable to kill their patients this way.

        • DaveH

          That may be symptomatic of the decline of our entire country. It is very obvious to me that if we continue with our wasteful government spending we are going to become a third-world country.

    • James

      Harold H, My grandfather, back in the early 1930s, had a cancerous infection on his neck. A doctor placed fly larva in the cavity, fly larva eat only dead tissue. The larva completely cleaned the wound and my grandfather lived a long and prosperous life.

      • Thurman Marcum

        James,

        That was surgical flies.It is now used in Europe and England.I could never understand why we couldn’t used this method in the United States.Surgical flies have been used since the mid 1800s.

        • JustaPatriot38

          We can’t use the flies here because the FDA won’t approve anything that is ‘natural’ since it can’t be patented so the pharmaceutical interests can make and sell them at very inflated prices. FDA says ‘only patent medicine can cure diseases’ and most of us know that in the medical world the patent medicines only treat symptoms, not the underlying causes, and mostly just trade one set of symptoms for another. Basically the FDA is not our friend in many ways.

  • http://personalliberty Patricia Keith

    Artical states “Similar studies, however, are unlikely to affect the mission of organizations which claim that access to arms is a constitutional right of every American.” “…access to arms IS a constitutional right of every American.” That isn’t just a claim, that is a Fact.

    • James

      Patricia, our right to bear arms is not a constitutional right, it’s an inherent and inalienable right. That is, the right is not dependent on the Second Amendment for its existence. The amendment’s “shall not be infringed” is simply a restriction the Founders placed upon the national government. Many Supreme Court decisions, including the recent Heller decison, have held that the amendment’s restriction applies exclusively to the national government.

      • JeffH

        James, for god sakes, stop with the “legal mumbo jumbo”! I think most people understand the “core meaning” of the Second Amendment.
        Notice that “guarantees” is used in it’s ruling of DC vs Heller

        A link from SAF (Seond Amendement Foundation)
        http://www.saf.org/default.asp?p=gunrights_faq#1

        . Is gun ownership a “civil right?”

        World Net, from Princeton University, defines a “Civil Right” as a right or rights belonging to a person by reason of citizenship including especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th amendments and subsequent acts of congress including the right to legal, social and economic equality. This makes gun ownership as much of a civil right as freedom of speech, religion and freedom of the press.

        1a. Supreme Court affirms Second Amendment as a fundamental civil right (District of Columbia v Heller)

        The Heller case challenged several laws in Washington DC that constituted a complete ban on the Second Amendment rights for D.C. residents with no exception given for self-defense. In the Heller case, the Supreme court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental individual right to have functional firearms in the home that are commonly owned without being connected to any service of the state or military organization. The Supreme Court also ruled that the Second Amendment is a fundamental part of the bill of rights, which guarantees citizen’s individual rights. Lastly, In this 5 to 4 decision with Associate Justice Antonin Gregory Scalia writing for the majority, The Supreme Court affirmed that Washington DC gun laws violated the Second Amendment Civil Rights of DC residents and to positively restore those rights.

        • James

          JeffH, When the Heller Court said the Second Amendment guarantees citizens the right to bear arms, it was referring to citizens in the District of Columbia, who are under federal jurisdiction. Heller began with: “We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of a usable handgun in the home violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution.”
          The Court said of the amendment: “We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a ‘pre-existing’ right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.”
          The Court quoted U.S. v. Cruikshank (1875) where it “held that the Second Amendment does not by its own force apply to anyone other than the Federal Government. The opinion explained that the right ‘is not a right granted by the Constitution [or] in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress.’ States, we said, were free to restrict or protect the right under their police powers.”
          The Heller Court, in footnote 23, reaffirmed this. The Court also stated: “We conclude that nothing in our precedents forecloses our adoption of the original understanding of the Second Amendment. It should be unsurprising that such a significant matter has been for so long judicially unresolved.”

          • JeffH

            It will all be sorted out with McDonald vs Chicago which means the lawyer and legal eagles will have to honor the Second Amendments protection or “guarantee” if you will.

            The DC vs Heller, “protects” is as good as a guarantee. The only thing related to a non-guarantee is that the peoples “protected” rights will always be attacked by those that want to violate the Second Amendment.
            Last year, the Supreme Court struck down a similar Washington, D.C. ordinance banning handguns. “The Second Amendment,” it found, “protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” But Chicago insisted on keeping its law.

          • James

            JeffH, you are quoting Heller Court dicta that, out of context, agrees with your beliefs. The Court held: “In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. …The District must permit him [Mr. Heller] to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.”
            The Heller decision has no other effect than that. You are ignoring what the Supreme Court held in U.S. v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, and Miller v. Texas, which the Heller Court reaffirmed.
            Earlier this year, the 9th Cir. Ct. of Appeals (in Nordyke v. King) held that the Second Amendment can’t be “directly incorporated” into a state because of those precedents.
            In McDonald v. Chicago, the 7th Cir. Ct. of Appeals held that the Second Amendment does not apply to state and local governments. The Illinois Constitution, Article I, Section 22 reads: “Subject only to the police power , the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
            That is what protects and guarantees the right of citizens in Illinois – not the Second Amendment.

          • James

            JeffH, I would just add that the Chicago ordinance is in violation of the Illinois Constitution, and Mr. McDonald’s inalienable right. He should have filed his suit in an Illinois State court, and so-claimed.

    • DaveH
  • Klaus J Christoph

    What is a School of medicine doing conducting a study like that? Too many of these anti-gun liberals try to run our lives. This is just another veiled attempt to make something like this ‘study’ sound legitimate. The NRA is much more qualified to conduct a real study of something like this.

    • Marauder

      All the gun-grabbing activity starts to make sense when one realizes that the dimlibs are striving to disarm us for a globalist takeover ushered in by the UN. That also lifts the veil on the mystery of the gargantuan spending on bailouts and stimuli, as well as the takeover by the fed of the entire health care segment of our economy: Same goal; chaos leads to government control.
      These DUI (Damned Utopian Idiots) mean business: They want ultimate power and control, but can’t achieve it fairly, so they must resort to these kinds of methods. That’s why it doesn’t do any good to argue logic with these dimlib fools.

      • Joe Cool

        They want my guns, they can take them. Over my dead body!

  • Rick

    Perhaps the study should include those people who WERE NOT shot because they were armed. I can do a study to show you what ever aswer you want.

    • DaveH

      Those stats would be very difficult to compile because nobody in their right mind, after successfully scaring off an attacker with a gun, is going to report the incident to the police. If they do they can count on being a victim twice.

    • Sharon Carter

      Right on! No different than those that count the votes, control the election.

    • American Citizen

      If 6% of those carrying a gun were shot, then 94% of those carrying a gun were not. If all incidents are not reported, then it’s impossible to say what the numbers really are.

      • Lisa G

        This is where academia and the media to not mix well. While the study may have met academic requirements (I can’t say for a fact that it did or did not), the media, in its complete lack of educational background simply prints the “sound bites” and does not explain to the ever ignorant-by-choice public the parameters of the study and that the results are confined to said parameters. It is a disgrace for the media to perpetuate such nonsense. Shame, Shame, Shame

  • Dennis Barker

    I’m sure our government will do all it can to convence the public that guns are bad. I have the right to protect me and my family against attack. Just like any situation, I may win or I may loss. But without an equal weapon, I don’t even stand a chance. An unarmed person is automatically a victim. You can do any study and with the selection of partisipants and situations, you can make the results whatever you want. More BS!

    • James

      Dennis B, any American who believes the Second Amendment is the source of his right to bear arms, has unwittingly already placed his right under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Welcome to the real world.

  • Blaine Nay

    The study was based on data carefully selected to dramatically skew the results toward a perceived need for gun control and away from truth. In concert with other anti-gun studies, this study carefully cherry-picked the study and control samples, rejecting majority populations that contradict their goal of denigrating guns and gun owners. When a study population consists of gang-bangers, at this one did , the results are very predictable. But, the study infers that all gun owners have the same risk of violent injury as do the criminals in the study. News reporters and editors around the world gleefully regurgitated everything the “researchers” said in their press release word-for-word as if it were entirely truthful without taking even a second to read the study, examine its egregious flaws, and question its methods. This parrot-style reporting is another example of the profoundly lazy, biased, and dangerous reporting in today’s news media. The news media’s repetition of this article (anti-gun propaganda) would make any legitimate researcher, statistician, news reporter, or editor blush with shame. Instead of recycling propaganda as news simply because it feels good, I expect news reporters and editors to do thorough research before going to press.

  • Byron Davis

    It’s not the gun that protects people. It is the gun and the knowledge, education and preparation to use it. People that think getting a gun and getting their license is all it takes. It takes mental preparation, hand steadiness, focus and practice. Even then nobody knows whether or not they are ready to defend themselves. All a person can do is focus, practice and find something that is comfortable and rely on avoiding certain situations. If a certain situation does arise. Then the Boy Scout motto is the best method… “BE PREPARED”

    • JeffH

      Well said. Gun control is hitting what you aim at!

    • JohnW

      Truer words were never spoken. Simply having a gun(s) in some drawer is not preparedness – it’s a recipe for disaster. Good training and many hours of practice are basic necessities – including that required to stay in tune as bodies and reflexes change. Personally, I love the racket and the recoil and the precision and the ever-smaller patterns – practice is entertainment over a lifetime.

      Intelligent practice, on the other hand, is not sufficiently stressed, in my opinion. In an emergency, there may be little chance of striking a traditional firing pose, so it helps to do oddball angles and stances so as to learn how to hit a target in less-than-ideal circumstances. It’s not about Tex and GI Joe and cojones, it’s about basic competence.

      The most difficult, in my opinion, is the mental preparedness. It’s one thing to talk tough, and entirely another to be prepared to fire without hesitation, regardless of outcome. Those who haven’t the stomach should sell their arms before they hurt themselves. It IS possible to mentally rehearse some pretty nasty things to the point of creating preparedness – if the simple act of no longer being repulsed may be characterized as being contributory to being prepared.

      During WWII, a Japanese general swore that he would never invade the U.S. because “there is a gun behind every blade of grass.” True story. Well, as I see it, if anyone from within or without threatens my person or my family, I’m the old guy with the grass stains….

      An aside:
      This is my first visit to this discussion, and I must say that I feel as though I’m in good company. Glad you’re all out there. Hope we don’t need to meet.

      • libertytrain

        JohnW – I enjoyed the read – thanks.

        • JohnW

          Oooops – sorry Libertytrain – I missed acknowledging your cordial encouragement. Thank you.

      • JeffH

        Welcome aboard JohnW. I have been a wingshooter for over 45 years and pulled off a shot with me 22LR Henry last Saturday that I thought only exhibition shooters could do. While out hunting Grey Squirrels I was challenged to shoot a Crow out of the air. Having “snap” shot many quail, I “snap” shot a Crow from overhead. I was surprised, but it was my shooting instincts that prevailed. I doubt I could do it again.

        • JohnW

          Thanks, Jeff. You and Spiff have both cordially responded, and taken the edge off walking through a new doorway, so to speak.

          That was some shot! Luck or no luck, you couldn’t have done it without good natural “point” – bet you’ve fired that Henry more than a few times. In any event, congratulations/

  • Anti-Left

    Now that’s credible research. Rahm’s brother the head of this school?
    Get real

  • jeSSica

    OK let me get this straight:
    Of 100 people who were shot 6 had guns.
    or is it:
    Of 100 people who owned guns only 6 were shot.
    or is it:
    Of all the people who didn’t have guns all of them were shot.
    I’m CONfused

  • Bob

    The conclusion of the gun study is bogus, biased and nonsense. I live in Florida. This is not the state to visit if crime against a “typical” citizen is on your agenda!

  • John Hull

    The NIH has been trying for years to get guns declared a health issue, and ultimately ban private gun ownership. This is just another lame attempt masquerading as science toward that goal.

    Kleck and others have long since proven that mere possession of a gun deters criminals to the tune of 2.5 million confrontations a year, using the government’s own figures. Most of those confrontations don’t even require shots being fired. The NRA publishes press reported cases of guns protecting people and property every month in its various publications, and has done for decades.

    This study is so much BS and anybody with half a brain knows it.

    • DaveH

      Unless their brain is the subject of intense propaganda received from our public schools at an early age.

  • American Citizen

    Is there anything in this study that gives the percentage of people whose gun protected them during an assault? The question has to work both ways. 6% doesn’t sound like a lot of people. Surveys are only as good as the questions asked and the people who are questioned. I don’t believe polls or surveys as the number of people in them is usually too small and in too concentrated an area to be believable.

  • CJ

    The survey implies that having a gun will give an owner an “impervious shield of defense” which keeps them from being a victim. WRONG! I’m tired of surveys, government (fed and state) and the media dictating to us, as if we are required to live as victims and not allowed to defend ourselves! And like Byron says, we need to be prepared, especially mentally, to do WHATEVER is necessary to stop the aggressors, including killing them if necessary. We don’t choose the conflict, it chooses us, and we have to be willing to go ALL THE WAY to stop it without feeling guilty afterward. Government has conditioned us into accepting this “victim” status. We have to resist it and not feel quilty for doing what we have to when the unthinkable happens. You may be victimized, but you shouldn’t feel guilt from it!!

  • David Ferrera

    If only 6% of gunshot victims had guns then it follows that 94% of gunshot victims DID NOT have guns, thereby making the unarmed majority vulnerable to criminal predators.

    • DaveH

      David,
      It’s estimated that over 30% of the citizens in the US own guns.

      • JeffH

        March 27, 2008
        Public Believes Americans Have Right to Own GunsNearly three in four say Second Amendment guarantees this right

        A solid majority of the U.S. public, 73%, believes the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the rights of Americans to own guns. Twenty percent believe the amendment only guarantees the rights of state militia members to own guns.

        • DaveH

          Jeff,
          The Liberals wore out the militia misinformation, so now they are trying to promote the idea that the 2nd Amendment only applies to the Federal government. They will twist and turn every which way to justify banning guns. If indeed the 2nd amendment only applies to the federal government, why did the founders even put it in the Bill of Rights? Since the Federal Government is only given certain powers in the Constitution, and controlling guns was not one of the powers, it would have been redundant to create the 2nd Amendment. Oh wait, maybe our forefathers knew that the Liberals would interpret the commerce clause to allow the Feds to do whatever they damn well pleased. Sure.

          Another point I’d like to make is this. How come the Liberals don’t say the right to free speech only applies to the Feds? How come they don’t say the search and seizure protections apply only to the Feds?

          Our founders tried really hard to protect us from power-seekers, but unfortunately the only real protection must come from the citizens and many of them have been successfully brainwashed by the Liberal MSM.

          It may be too late already to turn around. Too many pigs at the trough.

          • JeffH

            DaveH, I truly believe that right will prevail over wrong in time. It may come down to a power struggle between the people, meaning us, and the politicos that mis-govern this country. Should it come to another “revolution”, god forbid, then we must count on the strength of the will of the people. My hope is that Obamas agenda will be curtailed by the moderate conservative Democrats lack of support. I think we are starting to see traces of that happening. I also hope that at some point, we can gain the legal ground to stop this damnation before it is too late.

          • JohnW

            I add an “AMEN” to JeffH’s comments. No one can afford to believe that evil will conquer or that it’s too late. Besides, the remarks appearing in this discussion reveal a lot of like-minded people who’ve never heard of one another. We’re just coming out of the woodwork to fumigate the place.

  • Sam

    I am leery of any research done by someone with a result in mind prior to the conducting of selective persons portrayed as random. Certainly the use of criminals in such a survey is not to be considered as valid. These people have enemies that know they are carrying a gun and seek to overcome this advantage through stealth and surprise. A honest citizen who is armed for his protection is not often the target of the stealthy criminal but the robber or assaulter who is likely not anticipating an armed adversery. In fact the anticipation may be on the part of the honest gun carrier. Research implies blind studies and random selection without a wished for outcome. This study fails the definition of a study and is a waste of $600,000 of hard earned tax money.

  • George

    What’s the % of liberals who were shot?

    • DaveH

      Probably 0% because the criminals felt sorry for them.

    • JeffH

      More likely 100%, as the liberals probably started with their usual phyco-babble of “you poor misguided sole” or “did you have a lousy upbringing” or “I understand your drug addiction, maybe I can help you” or ” I don’t think you are a bad person”. Then it would have been a mercy killing! LOL!

      • DaveH

        LOL.

  • Tim Marshall

    This is exactly the kind of liberal funded hypocrisy BS that will assist in getting people really killed. I suppose these same liberal biased idiots will be against our military and law enforcement bearing arms next as they march in lockstep with their UN anti firearms, Brady Lobbyist, and Obama Administration cronies. I am a disabled veteran and I have long carried legal permitted concealed firearms which have saved both mine and others bacon on numerous occasions. The only persons dumber than the agenda oriented publishers of this BS are the poor Darwinian nitwits that believe such sources. I suggest they look at the real statistics of the herded sheep in Europe, Australia and else where that surrendered their rights to bear arms and see how their real statistics in the wake of such actions effected the disarmed individuals against the armed criminals that just love such ranting that promote their next supply of easy victims. – Live Free or Die!

    • DaveH

      Tim,
      I don’t think Socialists are against guns as long as they are in the hands of the leaders they support. I also don’t think they would have any problem with violence against conservatives. History has shown us how Socialists deal with their opposition.

      • JeffH

        DaveH, how can you make such a bold statement about our current government, as that is how it was intended! (tongue in cheek)
        My ole pappy used to tell me TRUST IS A MUST OR YOUR GAME IS A BUST!
        I don’t trust this Soros run administration or his puppets! I think I agree with you.

  • Dennis

    HA!

  • Keith E.

    This all goes to show why we are in the situation we’re in. Libs always enjoy using someone else’s dollars to provide a study skewed to their particular point of view. The money continues to be available to them. Whenever we are smart enough to discontinue their funding, this nonsense will stop…. they’ll be much less likely to reach into their own pockets for the cash to propagate a devious ideology…. right now it’s a free ride for them. Let’s quit enabling them… “Congress do you hear us?”

  • Kathie

    Shame on you for publishing this. Doesn’t sound like personal liberty is on the mind of those who completed this study. Oh, I see…it’s public welfare, not personal liberty. I get it! With public welfare in mind, I personally think we should get rid of all motorized vehicles. How many people die in car wrecks every year? Oh, and what about those nasty ladders? I think I read that falls are one of the leading causes of death in this country. And then there is the issue of diet. Do you know how many people die each year because their eating habits? Guess we’d better ban everything but fruits and vegetables and prosecute anyone who sells any sort of packaged food. Oh yes, has anyone seen the statistics about people who die in hospitals each year because of inappropriate drug dosages and physicians’ mistakes? Better get rid of those things too! I am sure the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine research team is all over that topic. Yeah, right…..

    • American Citizen

      How many people die of AIDS? We should also get rid of sex. That’ll teach those liberals.

    • DaveH

      Kathie,
      Personal Liberty is just trying to make us aware of the attacks on our freedom. And it’s a good thing. If we didn’t have Foxnews, Personal Liberty, and other conservative sources revealing what the Liberals are trying to get away with, then the Liberals would surely succeed.

      • libertytrain

        Nicely said by DaveH.

      • JeffH

        Once again, you hit the nail on the head. At first I thought it a rather odd post, but after reading it over again, the message of the post is very clear.
        Thanks Personal Liberty News Desk and Personal Liberty Digest once again.

  • Gerald Spencer

    What percentage of the 6% were shot while committing a felony, were making a drug transaction, and/or were not licensed to carry a handgun. The majority of the 6% probably had criminal histories.

    • Gerald Spencer

      What percentage of the 6% were shot by the police during an arrest?

      What percentage of the 6% were shot by armed citizens while attempting to burglarize, car-jack, rape, rob or otherwise trying to victimize an innocent armed citizen?

      What percentage of the 6% were retarded, insane, and/or had mental health issues.

      What percentage of the 6% were shot were licensed to carry citizens?

      This study is of very little scientific value, unless it is un-biased and objective.

      The US government should demand return of the money until the study has scientific value.

  • ONTIME

    Why in hell was a gun study put into the health journal? I know why, because these slime balls are trying real hard to tie guns and health together. Maybe they think guns aren’t good to eat or don’t contain enough calcium but they do contain lead and that will ward of the thief or clod that threatens your safety, trust me on this. You take care of your legal gun and it will take care of the criminal if they can’t take a hint.

  • DaveH

    The only political party that respects the freedoms that our founders worked to establish:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eh2a2Uqsebk&NR=1

  • Oldman & prepared

    I don’t want to shoot to kill, but I will to stay alive. Twice in my life being prepared helped. Save all the study money, give it to the disabled veterans…

    • JeffH

      Oldman & prepared, one must shoot to kill when assaulted with a weapon to avoid the lawsuits by the criminals, and overzealous DA’s that would decide to prosecute you for protecting yourself. You can sleep better knowing you have saved more lives by removing the violent criminal who might have more lawful protection than yourself.

      • DaveH

        Unfortunately I think our Criminal Justice system has become a 3-ring circus that is more about employment for the Justice system than about punishing criminals. The Police benefit from criminals, the Lawyers benefit from criminals, and the Jailers benefit from criminals. Oh yeah, I forgot about the Media. Why would they want to put an end to crime? They are making a fortune from it.

    • JohnW

      I agree that I’d rather not have to, but would urge you to re-think shooting to wound. JeffH pointed out elsewhere that it’s the only option. Here’s the argument offered to me by a law enforcement professional (chief, actually):

      1) Any shooting will wind up in a judge/jury scenario. Judges and jury members have seen about 341 too many cowboy movies in which the good guy shoots the gun from the baddie’s hand – and they will ask “why didn’t you just shoot him in the leg?” or some other grossly uninformed query. Hexxx – at that stress level you’re lucky to have hit him at all.
      2) Judges and juries are comprised of emotional human beings, and they’re not always too pretty bright. Regardless of right, an emotional plea from the bad guy could sway proceedings in your disfavor.
      3) In any court situation there are two stories – defendant’s and accuser’s. You obviously want for yours to be the ONLY story.

      Lesson -
      Don’t shoot unless it’s a necessity.
      If you must shoot, shoot to kill.
      If you don’t kill, shoot again.

  • Dennis P

    Imagine my surprise to read this agenda driven garbage in “personal Liberty” Have they drank the Kool Aid? My 1st Freedom magizine from NRA gives me all the stats I need. The newest one has a great article on The Armed American. My wife and I at 64 yrs old both have our CHL and are crack shots. I won’t be part of this victim thing. Get them while you still can, problem, come to Texas

  • Greg Danneels

    I wonder if the folks featured in the “Armed Citizen” column in the NRA monthly magazine would agree.

    • Cribster

      Love that section!

      Which brings to mind, why is there NEVER any stories in the media of innocent lives that were saved by guns? They probably occur daily.

      I’ve asked that question of many media outlets through multiple e-mails and never received even one reply.

  • Don G

    This is just plain stupid even an idiot like this should know there are times nothing helps but if you have nothing you have no chance. I have no doubt Their pretend study was well fixed. Just like the Obama plan the fix is already in to get their own way and screw the United States, the US Constitution and anyone who won’t kiss their butt’s.

  • Sonny

    Obama would love to take our guns away then being the socialist he is he could try to become Americas first dictator. Give up your gun then give up your freedom. Wake up America, vote these socialist out office in 2010 and 2012 before we lose our country.

  • Paul

    How many people were shot because their state would’nt let them have a gun to protect themselves ?

    • DaveH

      Paul,
      I believe they are ‘accessories to murder’ when they deprive people of self-defense.

    • Thurman Marcum

      Paul,

      Too many.Women and men should carry their guns concealed.A lot of women have their guns in their purses,which is not a very wise thing.A Purse can be snatch away and men carrying them out in the open can be disarm by a experienced criminal.

      • JeffH

        …or just maybe a criminal would avoid the open carry citizen. Don’t start with you liberal “reasoning”. Or maybe the lady has some real training and doesn’t put herself in the position to become a statistic! Woulda coulda shoulda?

        • DaveH

          Jeff,
          I agree with Thurman on this point. Concealed carry would give the victim a little better odds due to the element of surprise. Also, concealed carry eliminates a lot of the emotional problems with bystanders since “ignorance is bliss”.

        • JeffH

          No criminal, in his wrong mind, would consider an attack on someone that shows “open carry”, as that situation would make the crime too risky. The purse scenario is more realistic in thought. I do disagree as each situation would be differant and probably without any real studies or stats.

          • JeffH

            Just a note, I prefer concealed carry also. No need to make anyone nervous.

      • JeffH

        Thurman Marcum, I apologise. I misread your comments.

      • JohnW

        The good guys pay a fortune for their arms, while the punks in general get them otherwise. There is rational implication, I think, that the good guys can/should therefore also afford a variety of carry devices.

        One needs a selection of holsters, etc. for every carry piece so as to be able to carry efficiently in differing social and weather situations, types of clothing, etc. ad infinitum. Owning all of those goodies will do no good unless they and their owner are well broken-in, eh?

        I live in an open-carry state (WA), but it’s just inviting panic and false 911 calls to go running around with a 1911 hanging out. I choose to carry concealed, and religiously practice access and draw from every holster (need to be pretty good at it – would prefer to retain all 10 toes and still get the bad guy….)

        Aside:
        [ Have we some kind of nut here? I prefer to think not. I just think that if I intend to carry, then I'd d..d well better know how to do it, just as is the case with any other pursuit. Gun toters get shot when they don't know what they're doing. Carpenters lose fingernails if they can't handle a hammer. ]

        Similarly, a single piece is limiting. A variety of choices can be helpful, and even provide a backup for the scary places. Something akin to 1911 + PPK/S + derringer, coupled with a selection of holsters will allow useful choices for nearly any situation. (Not advocating carrying an arsenal, but having a selection so as to carry one or two appropriately in varying conditions.) A 3″ Taurus mag is a great choice among the big ones, but can be intimidating to fire for some people; will require a lot of practice for acclimation.

        Aside:
        Son and son-in-law have S&W and Ruger 9mms. Both fire smaller rounds than my Kimber 1911, and both have nastier recoil. In my opinion, if you’re serious, then a 1911 is preferable as the largest practical carry pistol, and with HPs is formidable. PPK/S is about the largest useful for ankle and pocket holsters, and a natural in the hand. I don’t see the need for a magazine with a boxful of cartridges – if 7 ain’t enough, why are you carrying? Come to think of it, if 7 ain’t enough, it’s time to boogie, no matter what Arnold can do. (Obviously, I’ve a preference for pistols, primarily because they’re slimmer and more easily carried in a variety of contraptions.)

        For women, there are good cover choices such as purpose-made fanny packs and some very attractive purses. “Purpose-made” is the key – a gun fettered by Kleenex and pocket linings is just a boat anchor being carried around. Purpose-made goodies are designed for proper access and withdrawal. Traditional holsters are of course a choice, depending on clothing style. Revolvers are tougher to hide because the round cylinder is wider than a pistol body, but are easier to use.

        I think that for many women a dual action revolver may be a better choice, as they have no heavy slide springs to overcome. After hand and wrist are strengthened through practice with a smaller piece, I’d suggest a short .357 mag as a good ultimate weapon.

        Even for a small piece, Hydra Shoks add significantly to stopping power. Assassins use .22HPs, which I consider to be a pointed argument in favor of practice, accuracy, and acquired competence. One needs expertise and an accessible piece, not a cannon. With that expertise AND a cannon, then every round will do some serious damage, regardless of failure in pinpoint accuracy.

        Didja see the Denny Crane episode in which he responded to an armed thief by drawing a piece and shooting 3 times – “Knee! Foot! Other foot!” … ? Hilarious and perfect – except that there were ultimately two stories.

  • Gene Hankins

    Give up your guns and you will give up your freedom. Wake up America, vote these socialist out office in 2010 and 2012 before we lose our country. -AMEN!-

  • Bob Butters

    As it takes about 10 seconds to draw your gun from a holster, waistband or other concealed carry position us NON CRIMINALS with licenses to carry should be allowed to carry in plain view. That would be a deterrent as well as save lives. I also recommend carrying a knife with one hand opening as this can help stop the criminals faster.

    • DaveH

      Bob,
      I respectfully disagree. I think the element of surprise is in our best interest. To know you are armed gives the criminal a big edge. That’s why I advocate concealed carry. The criminals do it anyway whether legal or not.

    • runthatbymeagain

      My dad had a 95lb doberman and a hurling stick. If the stick didn’t work the dog surely would. Then again, guns do a much cleaner job when it comes to defending yourself from criminals. Just make sure you go to the practice range often.

    • JeffH

      Bob, I disagree with your 10 second theory, and it is a theory? A gun can be drawn in less than 2 seconds, easily, if the victim has done any prep practice at all, 3-4 seconds if unprepared. You can fire off a 15RD clip in less than 10 seconds.

  • Robin from Indiana

    6% over 3 years…. mmmm…. that’s 2% a year. Not even worth doing a study on!

  • c.lee

    I say the study was bull shit, I dont beleive in sugar coating it. In my life I was in the military and later a police officer. The police cant protect you because there would have to be a cop for every citizen to do so. The police are here to clean up the mess so to speak. They investigate and make arrest but does that help you while your being robbed or beaten or raped or murdered. I say every person in this country is responsable for your own safty as well as that of your loved ones and anyone else you may witness being victomized. So here in Kentucky we have the right to bear arms conceled as well as open carry. So if anyone out there is considering comming here to do your crime you better hope you dont cross paths with any of our citizens of like thinking.

  • Beepster

    If you believe that the “health institute” is trying to outlaw guns, try H.R.45 currently in the House of Representatives. Some representatives they are!!

    • DaveH

      I think the ‘Squeaky Wheels’ are getting the grease. We need to become ‘Squeakier’ so the representatives get the message. Go to:
      http://gunowners.org/
      and pick the ‘Take Action’ tab and then type in your zip. You will get a list of your Representatives both on the state level and the federal level. Select the Congressman you want to contact then pick the Contact Tab. I like the Web form method to contact them. Make sure you copy your message so it is easy to send a similar one to your other Reps.

      • JeffH

        DaveH, just renewed my membership. Still have 2-3/4 years left with the NRA.

        • Thurman Marcum

          Jeffh,

          I am a member of NRA. I have been member for ten years.I got a permit and so do my wife.We always carried them concealed.I wouldn’t leave home without it.I got two colts and she got a 22 claiber that resemble the old western Derringer. It was her father’s. He gave it to her fifty-two years ago.She said two shots all she needs.

          • JeffH

            Kudos to you and your wife. Are you familiar with SAS, a grassroots national organization with representation in all 50 states. Second Amendment Sisters, also known as SAS, was formed in response to the Million Mom March. It was our founders’ belief that the Million Moms should not and would not represent all American Women.
            http://www.2asisters.org/

  • Gerald Spencer

    Are the Socialists and the Environmentalists trying to un-arm the public in anticipation of riots and insurrections, ala the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution, after they have destroyed all hopes of employment for US citizens, and when the US citizens find their situations economically hopeless. I believe that mass unemployment will foster mass civil unrest, crime, anger, riots, revolution, etc.

    The government will have a more difficult task to control armed citizens than to control unarmed sheeple.

  • http://none John Basden

    10/21/09 PM

    A gun in my possion helped a lot in Houston, Texas several months ago when I pulled it out and the man ran like hell, He knew from looking in my face he was going to be shot.

    That is the third time in my lif where a Gun saved me.

  • Gerald Spencer

    If the current proposals to ban handguns becomes the law in the U.S., then we could awake to a situation similar to India, Africa, Russia, Bosnia, or similar to New York City during the earlier part of the 20th century when privately owned firearms were prohibited. Many New York City residents have since been licensed to carry firearms, and my NYC friends say that this probably is the main reason or maybe the only reason for the demise of the protection businesses in New York City.

    If private ownership of firearms had been allowed in Yugoslavia, the various opposing Police Forces could not have committed so many rapes, murders, beatings, and other atrocities upon the various people belonging to races and religions that they did not like.

    One of the first actions of each despot is to disarm the population so that they cannot object to his actions. In Africa various groups cut off one arm of political opponents after asking if they want long sleeve or short sleeve (meaning to cut off the are at the forearm or at the bicep).

    • JeffH

      Hopefully you people in NY City will fight Bloomberg and his anti-gun filth to the end. He has spent millions to take all of our guns away, across the nation.

  • Gerald Spencer

    Most (maybe all) of the latest mass murderers have been under psychiatric care for any reason whatsoever. People that visit any psychiatrist should be listed on a computer list that is publicly accessible to the police and the general population, so that the public can know and beware of those who might be a potentially dangerous mass murderer. This could be similar to the convicted sex offenders lists.

    • VTrobert

      Great idea if the courts would only follow through on their charge. Cho was adjudicated for “in-house” (read hospitalization)psychiatric examination. A judge set aside the hospitalization. Had Cho been hospitalized, this would have shown up on the NICS check and he would never have been able to purchase those weapons he unleashed on Virginia Tech.

      • DaveH

        I have to agree with Linton. I had been divorced in California many decades ago. At one point my lawyer told me that my ex had accused me of stalking her in the town where she lived and was trying to get a restraining order on me. I told the lawyer “That’s a dam lie, I don’t want to be anywhere near that *****”. So she said “Okay I will ask the Judge to put mutual restraining orders on both of you”. I didn’t think much about it until I was purchasing a gun years later and one of the questions on the background check was “Are you currently under a restraining order?”. You see the government has a way of finding every little excuse to keep us from our gun rights. When push comes to shove they could care less about our right to protect ourselves.

        • DaveH

          Sorry, I hadn’t seen the Liberal’s other posts when I gave that comment.

    • Linton Dawson

      Hmmmm….sounds like GUN CONTROL to me!!!!

    • JeffH

      I am a big believer in the death penalty, and have an idea that might deter some killers, save the states some money and raise money for victims. If one is convicted of a crime that would carry a death sentance, with total, un-argueable guilt, then one should die by public stoneing. Sell the stones for a fixed amount, and let them fly at a pre-determined time and location. Videotape and allow the video to be viewed for all to see, including all potential killers.
      Yes, it would be a horribley painful way to kill anybody, but it just might deter some criminals.

      • DaveH

        Jeff,
        I like the very undignified method of hanging in the public square.

        • JeffH

          I agree, anything public would do.

      • JohnW

        Jeff, I beg to differ. Slightly. It seems to me that each of them who’ve been incarcerated should be removed from our pocketbooks, but I’d like to see an eye for eye – each should suffer his victims’ agony twice over before being dispatched by bullet, rope, stone, or disembowelment. They once drew and quartered – another grisly entertainment. Suffice it to say that elimination would be my goal, with delayed (very delayed) discussion as to what might have been the less offensive approach.

        Publicity isn’t an issue. Give me open season and a license and they just start to disappear. That in contrast to the present practice of holing up minor 3-timers forever while releasing child molesters, rapists, and murderers to live in the same neighborhoods as our kids and grandkids. Parole, my axx.

        • JeffH

          I cannot argue with reason.

  • LES

    Any individual can walk up to another individual by (SUPRISE)and brandish a leathal weapon.The deterance that gun owners are claiming is ususally directed toward home invasion.We all have to walk the streets trusting more or less in our surroundings unless we are at war.This insane article based on this inconclusive study is nothing more than a left wing trashing of the need for our 2nd amendment rights.Let’s do a study on thwarted home invasions due to private gun ownership, I think you will be amazed or studies on third world countries where private citizens are murdered by the thousands due to corrupt governments trying to take over the private sector. Think this is an overreaction,open your eye’s people this is coming.

  • VTrobert

    Why does the anti-gun lobby continue to ignore real world data like Kennesaw, GA? A municipality of over 30K that as of 2007 (last data I could find) had not had a single firearm related fatality. The salient part of this comment…1982 local ordinance requires that all residents legally capable of owning a firearm have one in their domicile.

    It is a documented fact that gun ownership is a deterrent to crime. This is simply more Obamania and Eric Holder trying to put their spin on the 2nd Amendment.

    • DaveH

      Good Point VT.

  • Willie Stoker

    Well, I guess that settles it. of 6% of the victims were armed and unable to react soon enough, then there should be no reason for anybody, except the criminals to carry guns, because they are the only one in the scenario that knows what’s going to happen, and if the victim wasn’t armed, there wouldn’t be any reason for a surprise attack.

    On the other hand if all decent citizens were armed then there would be a lot less assaults in the first place, coward don’t like to assault somebody who is going to fight back.

    Kennesaw, Georgia’s law, that all citizens are required to have a gun has proved that.

    I wonder if their research included any assaults that were thwarted by a citizen carrying a gun. That is something that they don’t like to talk about.
    About the only place to will hear about that would be from the NRA. They have several account every month in their 1st Freedom magazine.
    The first thing I read when I receive it.

    • JeffH

      In 1981, Kennesaw, Georgia approved an ordinance requiring a gun in every home (later amended to exempt conscientious objectors). Just so the libs know, nobody is forced to own a gun!
      Nevertheless, the gun control lobby wants the residents of Kennesaw, and every other U.S. city and town, disarmed. The strategy is to proceed one step at a time.
      The ACLU is also contemptuous of the 2nd Amendment, and has called for the registration of firearms and the licensing of gun owners and dealers. When authorities in Morton Grove, Illinois passed a law banning all handguns in 1981, the ACLU refused to come to the defense of those who attempted to assert their rights to gun ownership. But when, in that same year, authorities in Kennesaw, Georgia passed a law requiring a firearm in every home (with exceptions for convicted felons, the physically disabled, and those with religious beliefs that conflicted with the law), the ACLU filed suit seeking to have the ordinance declared unconstitutional.
      After the law went into effect in 1982, crimes against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981 and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982. And the crime rate has stayed impressively low. In addition to virtually non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.14 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.7, 30.2, 20.6, and 1.6 through March of this year.

  • DaveH

    They have one and only one goal – gun confiscation. Everything else is just a step in that direction.

  • DaveH

    I want to add that I have never heard of any society which having banned guns has later reinstated that right. So, if you are straddling the fence, think about that. If you side with the gun grabbers and you turn out to be wrong, you are probably going to be stuck with that decision for the rest of your life.

    • JeffH

      Another point is if you allow this freedom to be removed, what other of your freedoms are you willing to give up until there are none left.
      Some might not like Fox News, but they are protected by law and a constitutional right. The MSM sits quietly by like the suck ups they have become, while THE WH and Obama conive and try to discredit somethng that doesn’t suit their needs. They did the same thing to Palin, used their friendly press media to try to ruin her. Palin, like a lot of us are doing, is fighting back to protect our Constitutional rights.
      Do not allow this administration, under the tuteledge of anti-American Soros and his socialistic thinking puppet Obama, destroy this country any further.
      Vote wisley in 2010 and keep the flag RED WHITE AND BLUE, not white like the flag of surrender being waved by some.

      • eyeswideopen
      • JeffH

        GEORGE SOROS: Newsmax magazine Reveals:
        George Soros’ Coup Attempt Against George Bush
        http://w3.newsmax.com/a/soros/
        The true story behind Soros’ shocking threat to defeat George Bush at any cost Soros’ involvement in the shadowy 527s helping John Kerry
        Why Soros so hates America and why he vows to “puncture the bubble of American supremacy”
        His eerie delusion of being a New Age Messiah
        The real story of Soros’ philanthropy and how it funds abortion, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, gay marriage, globalization and other radical
        causes
        The dark purpose behind Soros’ $200-million “Project on Death” program
        How Soros’ friendship with the Clintons made him a global power
        Why Soros, a Jew, has shown such disdain for Israel and Jewish groups
        Soros’ British professor and mentor who decried America’s founding ideals
        How Soros really made his fortune and why even governments of mighty nations fear him
        Why the Russians raided and closed down Soros’ Moscow offices with armed paramilitary units
        The Soros Cult: the new semi-secret establishment he has built to take over many East European countries
        Why he says he will force “regime change” in the U.S. if he has to, and blames President Bush’s alleged failings on his Christianity
        Soros’ efforts to realize his vision of a world without God.
        How he made billions from undermining Britain’s economy and how he could do the same thing to America as an “October Surprise” for George Bush

        • eyeswideopen

          Adelson, lobby’s Congress on behalf of China. You don’t have a problem with the biggest, richest donor to the Republican party lobbying for Chinese interests? No, I guess you wouldn’t. Most of our interests have already been sold down the river, so what the difference? Doesn’t matter what you say about Soros, Your guy Sheldon Adelson who is 3 times richer and spends twice the money that Soros does, has more influence and those are just the facts. I know it is hard to admit that one is just as dirty as the other, but the facts are the facts. I do admire that fact that you try to act like only the Dem’s have a rich individual who trys to buy his desires,and it would be alarming, if the Repubs didn’t have one of their very own, who just happens to be richer…….Instead of you trying to throw crap at the wall, why don’t you make a big deal about both men? Haven’t you figured it out, that when you try to make the other party look bad, ghosts come out of the Republican closet and they are equally guilty of the same sins. I am just so greatful that you don’t bring up the sex scandals as the Republicans have 3 times as many guilty and I would get a cramped hand typing that much. So, thanks for the break, appreciate it.

        • JeffH

          You just don’t get it and never will! When and if Soros has his way in America, YOU WILL LOSE AS MUCH AS ANYBODY ELSE and I guess you are alright with that! What part of “ANTI-AMERICAN” don’t you understand.
          Soros hates you just as much as he hate me.

        • JeffH

          You are starting to act like a TROLL again!

          • eyeswideopen

            Adelson, hates you also, don’t you get that? He is working with China in his best interests, not yours and mine. Jeff, there are many bad men with money in this country, just not the Democratic ones. For goodness sake wake up and at least admit that Adelson has enough money to purchase the same amount if not more that Soros does.

  • http://yahoo Manuel S. Enos

    Any study done by any government organization on guns will be skewed to reflect this administrations views on the subject. I guarantee you if you break into my house to steal from me I will shoot you before you shoot me!! If I miss, my neighbors will shoot you because they all carry, this is North Florida very close to Georgia and we take our second admentment rights seriously down here, not like in the liberal big cities of this once great country!!

  • Linton Dawson

    LMAO!!!!

    Why don’t you ask the gun-toting soccer mom if she was helped by having a gun…..LMAO!!!!

    I LOVE it when you goofball rednecks kill each other with the very weapon you claim keeps you safe!

    Here is Miss Piggy – now dead as a door knob…

    Believe me, nobody wants to take your guns….we prefer you have them and use them against each other…..thinning of the gene pool and all……

    Manuel – if someone breaks into your home, hides and waits ’til you come home, he’ll kill you faster than the snot dripping from your adolescent nose.

    KEEP YER DAMN GUNS – I LOVE HUNTING ACCIDENTS!!!!!

    • Banker

      Ever think of taking some anger management courses?

      • Linton Dawson

        Ever think about going to school and learning something?

        • Banker

          School? We don’t need no stinking school! We don’t speak spanish.

      • Linton Dawson

        PS “LMAO” is short for LAUGHING my arse off…….I’m not angry in the least…….I’m happy the soccer mom is dead as well as her gun-loving, moron husband. We actually throw parties to celebrate gun owners being shot by their own guns! Afterall, if Republican thugs can joke about shooting Obama…..I’m having parties to celebrate the death of morons!!!!

        LUVYA!

        Buh-bye now…..bang bang!

        • libertytrain

          Yes, that’s impressive – happy people are dead? Oh yes, I’m terribly impressed by your post —– and your representation of the left?

        • s c

          Let’s see, you’ve already laughed your (WORD REMOVED) off, so no one can call you (WORD REMOVED) – right? Here’s your challenge for the day, Einstein. Not long ago, libs lined up to find ways to ‘do in’ Bush. Apparently, an lsd-slurping lib can do that and get away with it. At the same time, no one else can think about it or express a similar ‘idea’ in any form if they’re not a lib. Now that’s what I call pure, pig sty harvard logic.
          Take a trip to the UK or Australia, and see what happens when the authorities have decided that law-abiding people don’t need weapons. Take a film crew, as the reality will probably be more than your ‘mind’ can absorb. Take notes – if you can read and write.
          It’s a pity you weren’t born in America around 1745 or 1750. What an EDUCATION you would have had. Do the rest of us a favor, and consider moving to an ‘enlightened’ country – like China or North Korea. Look at it this way, chum. You won’t have to bray like a jackass to fit in.
          Good luck learning the language. Public education didn’t do you any favors, did it?

        • Thurman Marcum

          linton,

          I am on the left and ashamed of you.A lot of us liberals are proud gun owners.To make a statement like that,is cold and unfeeling.Those people were human beings.

        • Willie Stoker

          Are the patients normally allowed Internet access in your institution?

          You should run your thoughts by tour care giver, or case worker, what ever you call them there, before you post anything.

          You should just stick to the crayons they give you and don’t try to communicate with normal people on the internet, it just makes you seem crazier that you actually are, or maybe not.

      • DaveH

        You see Folks, as I was saying earlier, these Liberals would have no problem with extermination of their opponents. They will talk nice to us only if they need it to get their way.

        • eyeswideopen

          Before or after the “Civil War” that your side keeps bringing up?

          • DaveH

            My side? Civil War?
            I see you trying to put those words in others’ mouths a lot more than I see it coming from anyone else. Is that part of your “Rules for Radicals”?
            There is no doubt in my mind who you are. I lived with a chronic liar for 13 years and I learned well how her kind operates. It’s very unlikely that you were ever a Republican. You probably aren’t even a female. If you are indeed married and female, my sympathies go to your husband.

          • JeffH

            DaveH, she is TROLLING again!

    • JeffH

      Linton Dawson, “goofball rednecks” One liberal comment and let the stereotyping and name calling begin. Once a fool, always a fool!

  • Robert

    A wise former Surgeon General wearing a salvation army uniform provided the best answer to gun violence. I quote her “What we need to do to reduce gun violence is we have to start making safer bullets.” When I heard that statement, I knew then what Washington had to offer in terms of solving problems our country would face in comming years.

  • Linton Dawson

    VTrobert says: It is a documented fact that gun ownership is a deterrent to crime.

    Yep – Documented by the morons at the NRA…

    WINTER SPRINGS, Fla. – A man who thought there was an intruder in his house shot and killed his fiancee the day before they were to be married, police said Friday.

    “Right now everything points to a tragic accident,” Police Chief Kevin Brunelle told The Associated Press, adding investigators were awaiting forensic results.

    ——

    Randolph man shot his neighbor in the stomach after the two quarreled about dumping leaves, police said.

    Christopher Leonard pleaded not guilty yesterday to armed assault with intent to murder. The 38-year-old was released on $25,000 cash bail following his arraignment in Quincy District Court, according to a spokesman for Norfolk District Attorney William R. Keating.

    Leonard and his neighbor, John Rota, were bickering about a property dispute at about 10 p.m. Friday, police said. Leonard allegedly told Rota he would like to dump leaves on Rota’s lawn, according to police.

    —–

    How does the gun lobby and industry say it? Guns don’t kill or injure people… people do?

    Oh, right. Except when dangerous products (guns) are designed and manufactured without even the most basic consumer product safety standards. Then the whole argument that guns are safe except for the “unsafe people” using them has no merit.

    At a Florida gun range, a 9mm handgun that was being used for target practice became “possessed” and started randomly discharging bullets wounding three people.

    According to the St. Peterburg Times on Oct. 5th:

    Michael Thourot had just pulled his hand away from the warm metal when it started spewing bullets.

    Moments before, Sherri Thourot had watched her husband fire and reload the Jennings 9mm. Then he set it down for her to shoot next at the range.

    That’s when the handgun started firing on its own, she said, spinning around in circles, landing the Thourots and an Irish tourist in the hospital.

    “Nothing like that has ever happened,” said Sherri Thourot on Sunday evening from her room at Lakeland Regional Medical Center.

    “We’ve been around guns all our lives.”

    ———

    A 12-year-old boy in Homer, Michigan is killed by a single gunshot to the head from a gun his father is cleaning.

    A Bronx man is shot and killed by a friend who is showing off his new handgun.

    A concealed weapons teacher accidentally shoots one of his students in the face during a class in Michigan.

    A Missouri man trying to teach his girlfriend about gun safety fatally shoots himself in the head.

    A Phoenix, Arizona mom unintentionally shoots her daughter while cleaning her gun.

    A security guard in Arizona leaving for work, places his gun in his holster and accidentally shoots himself in the buttocks. LMAO!!!!!

    A soldier from Olympia, Washington, about to deploy to Afghanistan, is accidentally shot and killed by his wife as he gives her a lesson on how to handle a gun. LMAO!!!!!

    And the list goes on………………

    Remember these stories the next time you hear someone talking about why we need to push guns into every corner of our country. Think about them the next time your legislator is asked to vote on a bill that will make it easier for more people to carry more guns into more parts of our society.

    Is this really the world we want to live in? OK, Shoot ‘em if ya’ll got ‘em!!!!

    Bang-bang – how fun!!!! (For little jerks who never grew up.)

    • runthatbymeagain

      I guess you are against gun ownership. That’s ok, it your right to free speech and you have a right to your opinion. Just a reminder. We all have the same right to free speech and opinions. Some are for gun control and others are not. That’s what separates America from other countries. We can disagree with one another but we respect their rights. Now if we could just get all the politicans to remember that, we might get something meaningful done. If what I just said bothers you, remember, I still respect your rights as an American. And we have a whole bunch of service men and women sacrificing their live for that. I’m sorry that they have to carry guns. Our enemies would take advantage of them if they didn’t.

    • DaveH

      Oh yeah, that proves your case Liberal. My grandma’s renter ran over her husband twice (once forward, then backed over him). Using your logic we should also ban automobiles. Don’t confuse your Hopes and Dreams with logic Liberal.
      I’ve spoken with enough of you to know you think you are intellectually superior. If that were true, then your kind wouldn’t need Big Government because you would start your own Health Insurance companies, Medical Centers, etc. and all your problems would be solved. Instead your solution is to take the property of others who have done the right things. You are the thugs that we need to protect ourselves from.

    • American Citizen

      How many of those people went through a class on how to handle a gun properly? It seems none of them. As for anyone who shoots someone out of anger, they could use a knife, a baseball bat, a tire iron, etc. Outlaw Them!

    • Thurman Marcum

      Linton,

      I am from the left and most time I don’t agree with these people,but there no way I give up my guns.These accidents are cause by careless people.Guns are not toys,they are like cars and can be dangerous in the wrong hands.With proper training they can be very useful in protecting your family.

      • DaveH

        It’s good to see that you think for yourself, Thurman, and aren’t just led around by the nose like so many Big Government lovers. I also appreciate that you don’t resort to name-calling and ridicule when you disagree with somebody.

    • eyeswideopen

      Linton, as a female gun owner, who also lives in FL. I understand your frustration. It seems as though we have had a rash of gun incidents lately, however,statics show that states and countries who are armed have less violent crime. This is a fact. It is not something that can be skewed. You will find that most gun owners are not violent nut cases running wild. People that own and handle guns realize the imminent danger and are not the ones who you should be afraid of. Please take the time and research the statics which will show you that being armed is not causing more violence.

      • JeffH

        Thanks for your well thought out comments.

    • Bob Kaliski

      Facts can be used to reach any conclusion. There are horror stories about innocent victims of gun use, gun crimes and gun accidents. What does not change is the mere fact that guns in the hands of people intent on doing you harm are, more than likely, going to do their harm to you if you do not have a gun to protect yourself. If I am in my home and someone wishes to break into my house with a weapon to shoot & kill me or my family, I will defend myself with guns that I have in my home – just for that reason. I have never used my guns in anger or otherwise to try to hurt or kill another person in my 40+ years of gun ownership but I will die fighting to protect my right to have those guns available to protect my home and all the people in them. People tend to forget that the Nazis confiscated all the guns from people (after forcing them to register them all) before they started their reign of terror on the Jews. Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it! I say “NEVER AGAIN”!!!

    • JeffH

      The Linton Dawson comments need no responses. Just ignore them and they will go away.

    • Willie Stoker

      I wonder if you ever thought that maybe these people were liberals who, maybe shouldn’t have had guns in the first place.

      Thinning the gene pool, you were talking about should probably apply more to the liberals who kill their on babies before they are born, and sometime as they are being born, intentionally, as opposed to accidental shootings. There are accidents in all that we do, like driving cars, but we don’t outlaw them.

      We should outlaw those who intentionally kill their children because they are inconvenient to them and their lifestyle, and give guns to everybody who is smart enough to use them in the appropriate manner.

      you need to put things in perspective before you start comparing conservatives to liberals.

  • Jim

    The CDC and the American Medical Association, The Enviromental Agency, have not credit worthiness, they supply nothing more than false propaganda. Ask the Left wing Senator from North Carolina who voted for every anti-gun ban to cross his desk, who by the way just shot an intruder inside his house. When a crime is committed, who is the first preson they call to protect them, somebody with a gun, the policeman. Who usually arrives after a crime has been committed. A person has nobody to blame but themselves, for being a victim. There are plenty of measures they could have taken before reaching that point. Take some classes on how not to become a victim, Massad Ayoob is an excellent choice. If they ever try to take away our rights, blood will run on both sides. I was born under these GOD given rights and I wil die under them. At least when I meet my maker, I’ll be albe to proudly stand next to Thomas Jefferson.

    • Linton Dawson

      “A person has nobody to blame but themselves, for being a victim. ”

      YEP – jsut like the DEAD gun-toting soccer mom!
      LMAO!!!!

      Keep ‘em coming, gun boys!

      • DaveH

        Keep talking Liberal. It’s good that you guys can come out of the closet and expose yourselves to the rest of us. Without that, some of our fellow freedom lovers might not know what you people are really all about.

      • Thurman Marcum

        Linton,

        That is horse crap.

      • JeffH

        IGNORE!

      • Thurman Marcum

        Linton

        Jeffh said ignore you.I am going to take his advice.

        • JeffH

          He is here for his own amusement, nothing more, nothing less. Just IGNORE

      • Willie Stoker

        I have a free sign for you if you want a gun free home.
        go here
        http://www.freewebs.com/nogunscommunity/index.htm

        and check it out. The sign is absolutely free and without obligation.

        • JeffH

          The criminals will love this one. Nothing like putting a target on your front door and telling the thugs: take my kids for ransom, rape me, rob me, kill me, do anything you wish, but beware of the rolling pins and butcher knives.
          If anyone should fall for this add, I have some swampland in Florida with a great view for sale. These are being sold strictly for profit, not for any other reason. This guy is a pure scammer!

          • JeffH

            Sorry, ABSOLUTLY FREE! Nothing is free.

  • Ex-Army Ranger

    Well, what about prescription drugs killing about 125,000 people in the U.S. per year. Survey shows they are more dangerous than guns.

    • Linton Dawson

      Well, certainly if drugs cause more deaths than guns we should, by all means, keep guns available to all! That way they can shoot those darned pills!

      And since guns kill more people than a whole host of other causes….what’s your argument going to be next?

      • Banker

        Your just having too much fun. You on happy pills?

      • eyeswideopen

        Linton, did you have someone hurt by a violent crime?

        • Thurman Marcum

          Eyes,

          You are going to like this one.The American Socialist leader,Eugene Victor Debs was a great defender of the second amendment.I posted his statement.

    • s c

      You got it, Ex-Army Ranger. Let’s do the math. 1) bogus research. 2) bogus study. 3) pc-motivated agenda. This ‘study’ has the tell-tale stench of something saul alinsky would throw at America.
      This study has all the character and credibility of al (I deserve to be rich!) gore, comrade obama, no gravitas reid, motormouth biden, queen pelosi, baaaney fwank and van jones.
      What a predictable waste of money this garbage is. Whoever thought up this crap should be cleaning toilets for the rest of their braindead lives (they’ll probably be on the short list for potential health czars).

  • Denny

    A study can be “anything” you want if you look for only the info you want! The results overall are conclusive.. Just ask the people from Britian and Australia…Both of those Countries passed bills to ban ownership of guns! All crime figures have gone up! Read this article!

    A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

    > World Wide Gun History After reading the following historical facts,
    > read the part about Switzerland twice. A LITTLE GUN HISTORY In 1929,
    > the Soviet Union established gun control.. From 1929 to 1953, about 20
    > million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    > exterminated. ——————————
    >
    > In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5
    > million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    > exterminated. ——————————
    >
    > Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total
    > of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were
    > rounded up and exterminated. ——————————
    >
    > China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
    > political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    > exterminated ——————————
    >
    > Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000
    > Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    > exterminated. ——————————
    >
    > Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000
    > Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
    > exterminated ——————————
    >
    > Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one
    > million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
    > and exterminated.. —————————–
    >
    > Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century
    > because of gun control: 56 million. ——————————
    >
    > It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by
    > new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their
    > own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500
    > million dollars. The first year results are now in: List of 7 items:
    > Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent. Australia-wide, assaults
    > are up 8.6 percent. Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent
    > (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, 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 criminals now are
    > guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic
    > increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. 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. The Australian experience and the
    > other historical facts above prove it. You won’t see this data on the
    > US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
    > Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes,
    > gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens Take
    > note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late! The next time someone
    > talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history
    > lesson. With guns, we are ‘citizens.’ Without them, we are ‘subjects’.
    > During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they
    > knew most Americans were ARMED! If you value your freedom, please
    > spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends. The
    > purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defeat.
    > The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more
    > important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is
    > supplemental. SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN! SWITZERLAND ‘S
    > GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE. SWITZERLAND HAS THE
    > LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
    > IT’S A NO BRAINER! DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX
    > DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.
    > I’m a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment! If you are too, please
    > forward. Just think how powerful our government is getting! They think
    > these other countries just didn’t do it right. Learn from history!!!!

    Need I say more???

    • Willie Stoker

      That was an excellent post Denny! This is the stuff that the liberals want to keep quiet.
      Facts are the last thing that they want to deal with.

  • Guy in NM

    God bless all of you. God bless this great country. It’s the second amendment that protects all of the other amendments and the Constitution, and the reason this country is so great.

    A gun toting, law abiding person is free, and helps protect those that choose not to tote.

  • Rod

    A study at a university (funded by, you guessed it, the anti gun establishment) With results that are foretold before the study
    even starts. Boy, these guys will try ANYTHING. I think we can say,
    tell em to put it where the sun don’t shine!!!!

  • Carl Smith

    Denny, You have it nailed. John Hull stated the study was so much BS and anyone with 1/2 a brain knows it. Well John it was the 1/2 brained electorate that has presented us with our present mess. Then we also have to tolerate the public educated Linton’s of the world that still have their brain buried in the sand and get their NEWS from the funny guys on late nite alphabet T.V. . History is repeating itself and NERO is fiddling. Those of us who are really intrested in attempting to return sanity to govt. need to work to get out the vote in 2010 and unseat all incumbents of all parties.

    • DaveH

      I’m with you Carl, except for Ron Paul.

    • Willie Stoker

      I think Bill Mar Mahr was close when he said that the American people were stupid, We just need to narrow that down a little, to only include the Liberal Americans, which, by the way, includes Bill Mahr himself.

      It makes you wonder how this country ever got this far with so many stupid people voting.

      • JeffH

        Willie Stoker, look at it this way, it wasn’t the stupid people voting, it was the people voting stupid. Americans are starting to re-educate themselves about their voting stupidity. Good will triumph over evil, that I am sure of.

        • JohnW

          Yes, my friend, but it won’t triumph over squat if we fail to help it.

  • Bruce Siperly

    JOIN THE NRA!

    • JeffH

      Two is better than one. Join the NRA and Gun Owners of America. They both fight for more than just your Second Amentment rights.

  • Rod

    These JERKS keep thinking the American people rode in on a head of cabbage. They lie, cheat, steal and perform any and all manor of
    unspeakable tripe to get ATTENTION. It’s we the people!!!! Not them,
    the criminals!!!! All we have to do is VOTE! change Congress back to
    people who LISTEN to the people who voted them into office!! LETS
    SHAKE EM UP IN 2010!!!! Put Palosi and people like her in the unemployment line.

    If you are interested in putting Obama where he belongs, go to- -
    IMPEACHOBAMA@IMPEACHOBAMACAMPAINNEWS.COM

    • Willie Stoker

      Rod, I agree 100% but some of these evil politicians are elected in districts where the voters are just as bad as they are. Maybe we could get some real patriots in there and then impeach those that we can’t get voted out.

      I would love to see every one in congress gone and replaced by real citizens, instead of career politicians, who have lost sight of the reason they are up there in the first place.
      They now consider us subjects and themselves, some sort of Royalty who have a free reign to take payoffs from every criminal out there.
      It is strange how they can become millionaires while working in the government their entire lives without ever having a real job.

      • JohnW

        Kudos, Willie – couldn’t agree more on every point.

  • Rod

    Bruce, I am already a member of the NRA and have been for many years.
    Lets get the rest of these guys and lady’s out there to join!! It’s
    a GREAT org. Their Mag’s are doggone good too!

  • http://www.trhshopspot.com Doid

    Why was this lie of an article posted on this website? Are we to crumble into apathy and give up our right to self defense because we may get hurt trying to save our own skin?

    Please apologize for posting this drival and remove it. It flies in the face of what you are trying to achieve with your site.

    • American Citizen

      This is a site for information. It gives us a chance to discuss issues.

  • Rod

    Linton Dawson, If you ever have a problem with a person that wants
    to rob you on the street or a person that breaks into your house
    and takes what belongs to you, PLEASE, don’t call your neighbor
    who owns a gun cause, with your attitude, he might tell you to go
    buy a gun of your own!

  • http://WWW.SKYTALKER.CA JOHN

    CANNOT BELIEVE SUCH A BIASED REPORT. PERHAPS THE REPORT SHOULD SHOW THE FULL AND UNCUT STORIES OF SELF DEFENCE SUCCESSES INSTEAD OF THE SEE-THROUGH ANTI GUN CULT THAT THE STUDY REPRESENTS.

  • Average Joe

    Is Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty? Time is shorter than we think

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40&feature=player_embedded

    • DaveH

      Wouldn’t it be ironic for Obama to put us in a position for the world to distribute our wealth before his own Zombies get any of it?

  • Average Joe
  • Average Joe

    If you wish to read the treaty in it’s entirety, full text in pdf format.

    http://www.globalclimatescam.com/documents/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

    • eyeswideopen

      How do you interpret, The Supremancy Clause, Atricle VI paragraph 2 of the Constitution? Thanks.

    • eyeswideopen

      Calling my Senators first thing in A.M.

    • DaveH

      Average, thank you.

      From the Constitution, Article 2:
      “He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur”.
      I think the Senate has failed to exercise its powers on some treaties, so we need to make sure our senators know we don’t approve.

  • Thomas Bendoraitis

    This article sounds like it’s sponsored by Polosi or sheeple controlling, albeit, fearing cult. Starting to wonder about this site!!

  • Bob Warren

    Compare the number of assaults between Illinois & Tennessee. Tennessee has far less because the dumb crooks are afraid to approach someone in Tennessee, because they could armed. I will probably never pull out my gun and use it, because the morons just are not up to the gamble, unless they are on drugs, including Weed. Unlike Booze persons on Weed do not care about anything, with booze you can get sober real quick, if you have an accident etc. I was born in that garbage hole, called Chicago & in Tennessee are real Americans, not the Obamas & Daleys, all friends of George Soros, who wants everyone disarmed, because it is easier to enslave people, who are without guns.

    • libertytrain

      Bob: re your sentence “I was born in that garbage hole, called Chicago & in Tennessee are real Americans, not the Obamas & Daleys, all friends of George Soros, who wants everyone disarmed, because it is easier to enslave people, who are without guns.”
      I’m from that part of the country as well and moving down South – not counting my, too many, years in Florida – Florida, for the most part, is not like the real South – States like Tennessee – and the others – like where I live- do feel really good – actually liberated -

    • JeffH

      There is a valid reason why BOOZE is known as “liquid courage”.

  • Greywolf

    Warren is right on, cowards are afraid of persons, who may be armed.

  • George d.o.b. 1926

    I’m 83 years old: I suggest we should ALL call 911. Think how much SAFER you will be UNARMED while the person at 911 decides what questions are necessary for you to answer before sending help that will surely get to you within an hour or so, especially in very large cities. If I subscribe to the NIH recommendations I wager I’ll never see 84. Shot guns rule!!!!!

    • JohnW

      Hey, George – and you, too, Oldman -
      You have a few years on me (1943), but it’s nice to be in your company as well as that of the other active members of this discussion.

      Shotgun? Maybe. My “let’s play” shotgun is a 12ga coach which is handy anywhere and vicious with 00 buck. However, I truly believe that pistols, revolvers, carbines and rifles of various sizes all have a place, and that there’s value in learning and practicing with a variety of good pieces. Can’t rationally carry them all at once, but it’s nice to have a choice.

      • JeffH

        So true!

  • Oldman & prepared

    George 1926; is right – Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it…

  • Gerald Spencer

    People who want to live in a country where the average citizen is prohibited from owning handguns or any type of firearm should go to India, where the law-abiding population is totally disarmed (except for the politically connected and the criminals). I have spent some time in India on several different occasions. I have derived the following information from the local daily newspapers that I would read every day. Every business from the large plantations and industries to the Mom & Pop retail stores must pay armed people (gang members carrying pistols) for protection services. The particular local armed gang that claims the area (or the turf like the old New York City Protection Rackets before the New York population was allowed pistol permits) where the business is located requires that the business pay the gang for the protection services. Failure to pay for protection can result in death, rape, fire, theft, or other bad things happening. Turf wars are also a very severe problem in India.

    During October 1998, the Indian Medical Doctors Association (similar to the US AMA) got together and decided not to pay protection. As a result, some of these doctors were dragged out of their offices into their waiting rooms and murdered in front of their waiting patients. The executioner would explain to the patients that this was an example to other doctors that might decide not to pay protection, and they would be allowed to live to spread this message. The main daily issue in the daily newspapers was about the Indian Medical Association demanding that the parliament pass legislation automatically granting a pistol-carrying permit to every individual who has a medical doctor’s license. The medical doctors were threatening to leave the country if parliament did not grant them pistol-carrying permits. I do not know the outcome of this legislation.

    • DaveH

      You gotta love Big Government. NOT!

  • Rod

    Man, We are in big trouble! Blood in the streets? Is that what those 80,000 troops are being trained for – - – Obama’s brown shirts?

    • JeffH

      Can you do me a favor? Is there a web link? I know Obama talked about a “Civilian Army” that would be armed as well as the military, but I can’t find any definitive information about its reality anywhere on the web.
      I’m not going to get too worked up over it because I don’t believe he can pull it off! As he slowly continues to lose support, even in the Democratic party, I believe that one of his supporters will get wise and blow the whistle on him. In the meantime, prepare for the impending storm and hope like heck it never hits.

      • eyeswideopen

        one more time.. sorry, I just looked at it. I searched under civilian army obama and it come up on first web page.
        http://www.youtube.com/Watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s

      • JeffH

        He said “just as powerful, just as strong and just as well funded “… as our military. He means armed! How else could it be?

        Is he promoting another brown shirt army?….

        Barack Obama wants to institute a Civilian National Security Force, a vast militia not unlike Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, a personal army. He knows he would need such a force to protect him and to enforce his will on Americans.

        Americans will have not seen such arbitrary power used against them since the days of the Civil War when Lincoln put the Constitution in the bottom drawer of his desk and set about arresting anyone who opposed his policies to enforce the Union on southern States seeking secession. The moral issue was slavery. The Constitutional issue was states rights.

        If you want to see another civil war, just wait for this new security force to come into being. Obama would need it because the concept of posse comitatus forbids the use of the U.S. military to enforce laws within the nation. An army of domestic followers of “the One” would fill that need, assuming that all other law enforcement agencies failed to resist such a horrendous plan.

        just something I read on the internet…real or not?

        • James

          JeffH, excellent points, we need neighborhood posse groups. I would like to believe such groups will not be used against us, as they were in Little Rock, Arkansas. Jeff, I replied to your above Heller points, which see.

        • eyeswideopen

          Well funded, you think means armed? Wouldn’t that be against his agenda of removing guns from citizens? Funded meant, monies, as the National Guard has been fighting in foreign countries for so long, and the states don’t have adequate money or personnel to handle any emergencies. They expect the Guard enlistment to drop off after we finally end the wars in about 6 years.

  • Dave Little

    Six percent got messed over, what about the 94% that didn’t? I can assure you I have guns and I know how to use them and I will use them if need be. If government comes after them I can, also, assure they won’t get them. Let the cowardly wait for the body bag after the fact, that’s their privilege, some of us won’t do that. Those of us who won’t do that are helping the police far more than they are allowed to admit!

    • eyeswideopen

      Actually, it was 5.45 and they rounded up. I read preface to article.

  • Rod

    You can’t talk to the lefties! They don’t see they can’t hear but,
    guess what? You will be able to hear their SCREAMS above the rest
    of us!

    There’s gonna be trouble in RIVER CITY!

  • Joe

    Another highly educated study. Thats why we are in a deep recession. Let’s get back to common sense. I’ll always try to have my weapon with me. The bad guy needs to know that the victom will be shooting back.

  • Russ in Vegas

    To say gun possession may not prevent assaults is like saying wearing seat belts may not prevent vehicle accidents. Having a firearm may not prevent the assault but having the firearm may alter the outcome of the assault. As for me, I wear seat belts and if assaulted plan to defend myself.

  • Bryan W. Carpenter

    If logic isn’t outlawed, could we do a quick experiment. One house has guns loaded and ready. Another house has none. I’m a criminal so, which house do I try to rob?

    Only persons with no reasoning power at all will be taken in by this rediculous overpriced waste of money.

    There, my study is more reasonable, send me $600,000.

    Do you really think us “unwashed mid-Americans” can be fooled by such crap.

  • Spiff

    Well said JohnW.
    Spiff

  • KurtTheInfidel

    so only 6% had a gun yet this proves that guns do not protect people? sounds like more propaganda to me and i cant believe its on this site.

  • KurtTheInfidel

    and i also need to point out what should be the obvious.

    there is no way to stop criminals from getting weapons. there is an unstoppable black market. telling law abiding citizens they cant own a firearm will increase the crime every time because they know they can roll over us then.

    and remember Japan. they refused to invade because there would be a “gun behind every blade of grass”.

    • JeffH

      KurtTheInfidel, as simple as it is, to the anti-gun advocates your arguement holds no water. But they also believe “the sky is falling”.

  • JohnW

    Y’know, I think the few Liberal gun-owner-bashing intrusions here are pretty funny, and certainly right-on predictable for the type.

    I also think that the comments here are nearly all well-suited, sincere, and useful. Among us, we get it right. Alone, we’ll be run over. I don’t care to be run over. Tea, anyone?

    I don’t favor force of arms, but I also don’t favor socialism, Marxism, or any other ism. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do. Remember when Mao’s name was introduced as Mao Tse Dung? I don’t think OBongo’s a socialist – I think he’s a dungist …. and I see his adgoofistration as a dungheap. [ OBongo?, you ask? Review Ronald Reagan's 1949 movies and you'll understand completely. ]

    I work hard. Rely on me.
    Don’t screw with me, my family, my friends, or my country.
    Now, how complicated is that?

    • JeffH

      Makes sense and sounds pretty simple to me.

  • harold hunter

    Liberty is never free or cheap, just because the part to be free dosen’t appear on your tax bill, don’t think it was free. Someone or several someones over time (like over 200 years) has paid the bill often with their lives, and/or with the lives of family members. Firearms are one of the tools that help maintain our freedom. The goverment should fear the people, people should not fear the goverment.
    Usually in the past when a country is about to lose its freedoms firearms will be the first to go. BUT guns kill people. WWAAAaaa. Yes Virginia they do. but not on the scale Moronic leaders whose countries that have had their guns taken away. Added up, substracted up and the numbers run, belive me noone but noone would want this country to lose the right to bear arms. The second thing a want to be dictator wants to take away from the population is free speech. Such an attempt was tried this week on Fox News. Which freedom is important to you and yours? It may be the next to be attacked. No? Belive me so arrogrant know it all will be screaming about it ain’t fair, how damaging it is to some poor minority, some leftwing Obabanic media will put it on the air, and some screwball congressman or senator will write a bill and that freedom will be lost. This country loaned general firearms to the Brithish during the last two world wars cause they had taken them away from the population, and the homeguard that patroled the streets had no weapon to protect the people, so a cry for help went out and citizens in this country sent everyday firearms for that purpose.

  • Rod

    It’s refreshing to know there are folks out there that still believe
    in FREEDOM! The few that Obama still have fooled, well, I guess that’s their problem.

    I must say however, I have talked to alot of people that voted for Obama that say, NO MORE! Too bad, we wouldn’t have to correct a wrong.
    It won’t be the first time we have had to join forces and come out fighting for our rights!

    • JohnW

      Actually, we are legion. We just don’t know each other well – - yet. Nice to know you, too. My name’s John, and I’m terminally pixxed.

      OBongo’s associations, background, and attitude – the same ones that are promising to wreck the country – were all well-known and truly obvious before the election. Those sorry fools were too stupid to look for the truth then, and I’d not look forward to their doing any better next time. All the lazy bast…s want is a free trip on our dimes, no matter where it goes. God forbid they involve themselves in thinking.

      Think about it – most of them are still showing up for rallies and voting yee-hah in polls. I’d feel sorry for them were they not dangerous. The rest are wishy-washy independents who thought they’d just vote for a Democrat ’cause we needed change. Lord luv a duk. Change into what?

      Look for the newly energized “silent majority” to make a huge difference in the 2010 elections, and thereafter. As one of them, I’m no longer silent by any measure, and am blogging daily in an attempt to help folks to never forget.

      The one thing for which I am personally campaigning is that we throw them all out. Every one of them. No heroes were raising a stink before this all began to come to a head, so we’ve just a gaggle of do-nothings and do-worsers in D.C. Throw them all out, dock their pensions, and put ‘em on group medical coverage – all of ‘em. Deliver the message. I guarantee that were that to happen, whoever went in their places would pay attention. WE ARE COMING

      Anyone familiar with John Galt? Come up to the cabin for a tea party and we can talk this over.

      Some say that this is a normal and predictable shift in the fortunes of any state power. I say “nuts.” The Constitution was carefully crafted to ensure AGAINST state power. We need to get back to basics – there’s nothing wrong with American roots.

      • libertytrain

        JohnW – “Who’s John Galt” – just kidding Ayn Rand is sighing in her grave or maybe smirking at her foresight -

        • JohnW

          It just jacks my jaws six ways from Sunday. History is said to repeat itself, especially if forgotten. Most of current events have been discussed for the past three thousand years, yet our populace snoozes. Humbug. I’d say they deserve it, but I live here too, and don’t want to see the downfall – there’s no guarantee we’d mimic Phoenix and rise from the ashes. Rand pointed the way, and who does the work to get there? It’s easier to live the life of milk and honey, blissfully ignorant of the constant work requisite to its continuance. (I trust you’ve perceived that I maintain a few hot buttons….;-)

          We have the vote as our stick, but have laid it to rest for decades, comfortable in our trust of the good Americans who “represent” us. Never again. I hope that OBongo doesn’t get to his brownshirts, because I’d sooner see us resolve this tragedy at the polls. However, if Rod’s projected fight does come along, I’ll not be hiding in the mountains, but out in the grass. Close. Very close.

      • Rod

        Yes JohnW, We do need to get together cause it ain’t gona happen unless we do. I don’t know John Galt.

        It’s we the people, not them the criminals.

        It’s unfortunate that the far left radicals can look but can’t
        see, they have ears but they can’t hear. They want to take our
        freedom, they even want us dead and out of their way. We are
        like a nail in their shoe. They just can’t believe we won’t just
        lay down and let them have their way. A fight is comming!!

        • libertytrain

          Rod – it’s just a character/saying in a really fine book I would bet you would enjoy if you haven’t had the opportunity. It’s about a million pages of small type – so I’d check into the audio – unless you have good eyes – I don’t any longer — but I promise — you would be glad you did – about from 1957 – Ayn Rand “Atlas Shrugged” -

        • JohnW

          Rod, I apologize to you and any others not familiar with Ayn Rand. She developed a philosophy called Objectivism, and, like libertytrain, I think you’d enjoy her attitude and her writings. Google will provide a lot of background. Try “The Fountainhead” and then “Atlas Shrugged.”

          For an intellectual, she told a pretty good yarn and really got her point across in the process. Her character John Galt is a hero for me – one of those who refused to help the buggars once they’d chased all the capable people out of their “society.” The able ones refused, and went to the mountains to their own well-functioning settlements – it is they who were “Atlas” and they who shrugged. The good guys said “go to hexx,” and it worked.

          I’ve beaten a lot of friends about the head to read this thing, and every one who slogged all the way through was glad to have made the journey.

          • libertytrain

            JohnW – re your comment: “I’ve beaten a lot of friends about the head to read this thing, and every one who slogged all the way through was glad to have made the journey.” ditto -

  • Thurman Marcum

    This from Thurman,

    A fameous Socilist leader said,”The consititution of the United Guarantees to you the right to bear arms…You have the unquestioned right,under the law,to defend your life and and protect the sanctity of your fireside.Failing in either,you are coward and a craven and undeserving of the name of man” -Eugene V. Debs

    • Thurman Marcum

      Thurman,

      I left out States, from the Eugene V. Debs statement.

      • JohnW

        Thurman, please don’t apologize. Your quotation is much appreciated and right on the mark.

  • Dr. Jerry L. Coffey

    I can’t believe you editors were taken in by this statistical fraud perpetrated by the researchers at Penn. As senior mathematical statistician in the Executive Office of the President of the United States for many years (serving both Republicans and Democrats), I was able to spike many similar, politically motivated frauds.

    If you would like to get some hint of what is wrong with this “study”, read the critique posted by Eugene Volokh at http://volokh.com/2009/10/05/guns-did-not-protect-those-who-possessed-them-from-being-shot-in-an-assault/

    As one of the commenters on that site observed — “This is a hor­ri­ble abuse of sta­tis­tics, utterly inexcusable.”

    • JohnW

      Jerry, thanks for the confirmation. It is indeed inexcusable, and but another attempt to keep the smokescreen intact. They’re obfuscating and scuttling about in the background trying to pass legislation while the rest of us look at the smoke. Aint’ workin’. eh?

    • JohnW

      I’m not so sure that the editors were “taken in.” This has certainly become a robust and heartfelt discussion, which I view as having been the object all along. I don’t feel as though I were taken in by fakery or lies, but grateful that the discussion exists.

      • Dr. Jerry L. Coffey

        Sorry John, but a “heartfelt” or “robust” discussion does not justify or legitimize this kind of statistical fraud. I agree that this administration has taken this form of corruption to a new level, but it is primarily a difference of degree. Government-sponsored research has been slipping deeper into corruption for decades (public health and environmental issues have been particularly egregious). The last time I saw any serious effort at reform was EPA’s Science Advisory Board in the 1970s (perhaps the only positive achievement of the Carter administration). And this EPA initiative was defeated within three years by regulatory zeal. I sat in the room nearly 30 years ago when EPA tried to cover a specious monitoring plan by claiming that they had a world famous statistician “on retainer” to fix any problems. The one problem thay neglected to address was that the famous statistician had passed away two years earlier.

        Clever, stimulating debate without any scientific truth is a cancer eating away at our public discourse. My Phi Beta Kappa newsletter did a puff piece about the number of influential judges who were members. I told my wife this is a big part of the problem — too many proud intelligent generalists with little real understanding of science (my university was one of very few institutions that was authorized to elect mathematicians to PBK). I guess the best evidence of that is the Gore global warming boondoggle (in the early 1980s I was the reviewer for the US climate change program). By the way, Gore (through his staff) was the only one of my political bosses who ever asked me to violate my oath of office.

        • libertytrain

          Dr. Coffey – wish you’d do a piece on Global Warming/Climate change — would love to read it -

          • JohnW

            Scour the internet for everything you can find about Lord Monckton, another Brit who has taken the American tragedy-in-the-making seriously and is doing all he can to help. He has as slightly higher regard for Algore than I (who believe that whale excrement is no longer the lowest thing in the ocean.)

          • Dr. Jerry L. Coffey

            Libertytrain –

            My favorite short read on global warming is Lawrence Solomon’s “The Deniers.” I particularly enjoyed the chapter on Ed Wegman since I had a ringside seat when Ed’s analysis got started. Others books you might enjoy are the last couple by Patrick Michaels; Fred Singer and Dennis Avery on the 1500 year cycle; and Spencer’s latest. Most of the books on the subject are complex and almost always incomplete to some degree. One of the points Solomon really nails is the reluctance of real experts to challenge theories that are outside their area of expertise.

            I was depressed to discover in an NAS/NRC meeting last year that most of the people who seemed to understand what was happening were gray-haired old farts like me. (JohnW will probably zing me for admitting that I sometimes attend NAS/NRC meetings.)

            But there may still be hope. My money (if I had any) would be on the latest iteration of the Svensmark Galactic Cosmic Ray theory and the CLOUD9 experiment at CERN.

          • libertytrain

            Thanks so much – I will look into the information you provided -

        • JohnW

          I didn’t say I thought it was justified. I said I didn’t believe that the editors were taken in.

          Let me suggest to you that I suspect there to be others here with impressive credentials of various sorts. Let the value of your contribution speak for you.

          • Dr. Jerry L. Coffey

            John, I think you may have misread my point. A lot of the people I was referring to have impressive credentials, but they are the WRONG credentials. What was missing was not credentials of some sort, but basic integrity.

        • James

          Dr. Coffey, while off-point, I picked up on your ‘Gore’s global warming boondoggle.” The Ice Age is generally conceded to have peaked circa 12,000 BC, at that time North America was glacier bound down to about the Ohio River. Off the Southeast coast of India there was a peninsula, which is now under about 250 ft. of water. Deep sea divers recently discovered it and found the remains of an old temple on what was then the peninsula’s high ground. And off the east coast of South America there are paved roads leading out on the Atlantic floor.
          From all that, and more, I concluded that global warming is history. Galveston is no more in danger than is Colorado.

          • DaveH

            James,
            Global Warming is just a political football.
            The main issue is not whether it is occuring but is it “man-made”?
            There are many books out there that refute the idea that there is enough of a ‘man-made’ factor to warrant government intervention.
            My personal theory is that it has two main groups of supporters – those in other countries who see it as a way to hobble the United States, and those in our own country who see it as a way to force us to accept alternative energy schemes that are currently not economical.

          • JohnW

            Dave – and James -
            The data consistently demonstrate that there’s nothing unusual going on. Pursuit of this boondoggle is about money and power – nothing else. Shoot, Gore was made Penguin King, was he not? There’s a ton of money floating about on Cap & Trade. The list is a pretty long one, and every bit of it can be traced to greed and power. None of this/these fight(s) is about right. If any were, we’d all see it and jump on the bandwagon with a “howdy, and thank you.” The only literal “right” I see is somewhere far opposite the Left ;-)

            I do believe that every one of us bears a responsibility with regard to environmental impact, but the Left, as usual, has made the topic so distasteful that even rational discourse is distasteful. Suffice it to say that my grandkids keep trash in their pockets until they find a waste can – because they view it as a responsibility, not because of the trash police.

      • libertytrain

        JohnW – once again you are correct – re:
        “I’m not so sure that the editors were “taken in.” This has certainly become a robust and heartfelt discussion, which I view as having been the object all along. I don’t feel as though I were taken in by fakery or lies, but grateful that the discussion exists.”

  • JohnW

    Would someone please name for me a single trustworthy individual in this administration? One you’d believe? I can’t either.

    How about naming one adult? Anyone past the emotional age of 6 will do. I thought so. Me neither.

    Surely there’s one you’d name to write school songs?

    Still looking for a border defender….

    I had been appalled. Now I honestly am literally nauseated when I see any of them, including and foremost the Liar in Chief. Repulsed. Revulsion is the byword. They have no idea how much trouble they’re in, and continually marginalize their opposition.

    Stay tuned – this is gonna be fun and is more entertaining with every passing day …. I can’t believe the damfool thinks that no one’s on to him – it’s genuinely laughable and getting better. Foot-in-mouth disease is so nearly ubiquitous that none of them can perceive the illness among them.

    Just keep payin’ out rope. Yee-hah’s coming from another voice sometime soon….

  • JohnW

    libertytrain -

    I’ve long understood that I’m not Eloi, and must therefore be Morlock. Time for lunch.

  • Rod

    Hey John, I just hope you don’t look like them Morloks! UGH! Obama and his “clan” have broken Fed. Laws and Constitutional laws and
    sometimes, being way out here it seems to me they feel they are doing it with impunity.

    What I see here talking with you folks, I get the feeling all is not lost. We have to fight these left wing radicals with every means we have at our disposal. Voting is an absolute MUST! If we can change
    congress back to Democracy, I believe we can neutralize Obama! Same in the Senate! Baucus has abandoned the people in his state that voted
    him into Office. He now thinks he represents Obama. The people in his state have very long memories. I think he is a little bit nervous.

    • JohnW

      Y’know, that’s what puzzles me, too. How in the world these guys can continue to act as though they possess the high ground is a real mystery. Quite an exercise in chutzpah, eh?

      I don’t know attitudes in Montana, but they surely need to get rid of that guy Baucus. For a long time, there was no speed limit – he was the one with his head out the window and his ears flapping, going woof!

      I propose a boycott of Las Vegas and Reno until they get Reid under a rock somewhere.

      I propose we help CA float out into the ocean, whether they dump Pelosi or not. It’s very difficult for me to reconcile Berkeley, Pelosi, etc., with the fact that the Tea Party Express also originates there. Maybe we should save the bus and sink the state.

      • DaveH

        Johnw,
        I like that Vegas boycott idea. I think it would work.

        • JohnW

          Mmmm – paying attention, are we? Good snag.

        • JohnW

          OK, so much for flippancy. Got carried away.
          I think it would work, too, and require nothing of anyone save not going there – no donations, no bus trips, no web sites – just don’t go. They surely did protest OBongo’s remarks, so I’d guess there’d be some squealing about this, too.

          Squeal away. When he’s gone, we’re back.

    • JohnW

      A little more in response, Rod – -
      In my opinion, one of the most difficult challenges lies in the fact that meaningful elections are at least one year away. We must catalog, discuss, understand, evaluate, and remain patient, and all the while keep disseminating information as widely as we are individually able so as to be able to drum up effective enthusiasm and interest when the time DOES arrive for action. Everyone’s hot right now. We need to be able to rekindle the flame when it’s time to raise the temperature again. (On the other hand, this OBongo ship of fools seems to be doing a pretty good job of it with no help from us, eh?)

      I wish this blog would allow us to send emails to participants so we could exchange actual addresses. Would like to know how to contact everyone here as time passes.

    • James

      Rod, we have become a Democracy, that’s our problem. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution reads: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” Remember “I pledge allegiance to the flag and to the Republic for which it stands?” Our Republic, constitutionally, has only those powers that were delegated to it in Article I, Section 8, a Democracy has power to enact whatever the most people want, or whatever the government can convince the people to accept. About 90% of federal legislation is now outside of their constitutional power.

      • JohnW

        Amen, James. Thanks for those comments. We do truly need to clean our house of all of that extraneous legislation. Like many, I looked on in bemusement while some of that silliness went on, and it slid past me/us that the accumulation was becoming burdensome and unseemly for our democracy. Thus we are, methinks, not only affronted by OBongo’s brazen abuses, but also in our anger reflecting long-lived prior abuses.

  • Rod

    Yes John, I too am nauseated when this liar gets on stage and forces me to GRIT my teeth. Then of course there’s Palosi. There is going to be a reckoning!!!! She has a 21% approval rating, but she is not worried. Obama has promised her he will make her another one of his czar’s. Wonder what the czar of all the outhouses responsibility is?

  • Rod

    This Penn. State thing is completely contrived and without any facts
    I think we do have to watch for their smoke screens! You know who I
    mean.

    The thing about CRIMINALS is: They have never been caught doing one smart thing yet!

  • Willie Stoker

    I’m all for gun control, even if you have to use both hands.
    Just control your gun, and make the first shot count.

    • JohnW

      A brother, men.

  • Valerie

    Good then let’s disarm the millitary and police beceause this obviously proves they don’t need the guns either.

    • JohnW

      Now, now, Valerie – no need for anyone to be angry. Just kidding – you’re darn tootin.’

  • DaveH

    Something you may not know:
    http://gunowners.org/a102309.htm

    • JohnW

      Thank you, Dave! That’s a great newsletter. Now I gotta join…

  • DaveH

    Herein lies a problem to our gun rights. Our school children are being indoctrinated to be anti-gun. We need to direct a large amount of energy to de-fanging these public-school propaganda machines. One important step in that direction is to push hard for the Voucher System so that parents can more effectively police the propagandists.
    And we need to get rid of the Department of Education. It has become what it’s opponents feared in 1979. And of course a very left-wing Jimmy Carter signed it into law.

    http://www.hamilton.edu/media/gunsurvey/gun_survey.htm

    • JohnW

      Dave, I agree wholeheartedly, but I think you’ve omitted the primary key to that problem.

      We’ve at least one generation whose parents thought that education began at the school, and belonged at the school, and was the educators’ (I use the term loosely) responsibility, not their own. They then succeeded in refusing teachers the right to discipline, crippling their ability to teach, and stood by while liberal revisionists altered the textbooks to the extent that content of lies and distortions is outrageous.

      They tolerated teacher’s unions, giving incapable teachers lifelong tenure, and stood by as textbooks were wiped nearly clean of truth. As early as the 60′s, my sister was subjected to “New Math”, which I believe to have helped to augment the discouragement of thousands of woulda-been scientists.

      “We must tolerate everyone’s point of view.” I cannot in print explore the range of expletives with which I mentally address that attitude. It’s obvious to anyone capable of breathing and thinking simultaneously that Truth is Truth, not a matter of opinion or faulty science. Only the weak insist otherwise, and it is they whom Galt abandoned. “Think what you like, Doofus, but don’t impose it on me.”

      I am grateful that some of the libs who push for these idiotic “reforms” also typically think they should be able to go hiking and pet the nice kitties out there. Thins the gene pool. They’re the same ones who teach responsibility by allowing their kids to play in the street, and who ride their bicycles in the middle of the d..d road. Boy – the list is long and broad, eh? Grrrrr.

      My own children are responsible citizens and contributors, and there’s every indication that their children are becoming so. And they’re all happy, loving, and physically fit. You can safely wager that those outcomes are not the result of parenthood in absentia.

      We need not a Department of Education, but a Department of Personal Responsibility. Oooops – no department needed. We need government out of our hair. It used to be that liberals and conservatives could live in neighboring homes and each think the other was nuts. Now liberals want to legislate their agendas into our homes and every aspect of our lives. Nope, not this home, and not this life.

    • James

      DaveH, your point illustrates my above statement that most federal legislation is now outside of their constitutional powers. Now is the time to write our congressmen and ask them, by what authority do they regulate state school systems?

  • JohnW

    Upon reflection, I think that last of mine serves only to support your position, which, by the way, I do indeed support. I remain steadfast in the belief that it is a parental responsibility to oversee – and participate in – educational content, regardless of its source.

  • DaveH

    Now that nut-job has declared a national health emergency when there have been less that 6,000 deaths in the entire world from H1N1? This is unbelievable! This guy is totally out of control.

    • JohnW

      I agree unequivocally. This is all so bizarre it seems as though taken from some production for theater of the absurd. He’s not the only nutcase, either. Axelrod, Pelosi, Baucus, Reid and a cast of hundreds make up the strangest mix of communications imaginable. The most frightening aspect lies in being unable to easily discern the difference between what’s afoot and what’s smokescreen. Worse is attempting to divine what’s lurking behind the smokescreen – they are forthcoming about nothing until they think it’s a slam-dunk.

      Some of this makes me very nervous, as it seems that events are moving faster than 2010 and 2012 voting can succeed in controlling. It’s essential to stay in touch with legislators, and to monitor the drumbeats constantly.

      I’m tired of hiding – any of you who would care to be on my distro list or just to correspond can send an EMail via the web site http://www.JPiConsult.com

    • JohnW

      Hmmm – worse, that “cast of hundreds” is attempting to control this “cast of millions” comprised of the remainder of the populace. Bah, humbug. It’s pure chutzpah which must be circumvented and shut down by whatever means are ultimately required.

  • JohnW

    Spiff, where are you? One comment, and you’ve disappeared. If you care enough to be reading all of these entries, I’d like to hear your point of view. That goes for all of you “lurkers” – don’t hold back – fire away!

  • Rod

    Being coordinated in the movement to remove the bad guys from attempting to dismantle the GOOD OLE U.S. OF A. is very important.
    I here us talking the talk but, will we walk the walk? How effective we are is very much up to us!

  • http://clmmorgan@vertizon.net carl morgan

    in england the gov. not only took peoples firearms but the right to own knives

  • BigIron

    Let’s see 6% of 677 = 40 “victims”; not a very large pool, statistically speaking.

    Just how “random” was was the “random” used in selection criteria?
    Were the “perps” also listed in the “victim” group as is often the case with “antis”?

    If the study is supposed to prove that being armed is of no value then the number of times that the intended victim’s being armed thwarted the crime against the “victim” info must also be included in the study?

    And it must also be considered that many times the display (no shots fired) of a firearm by the intended victim to thwart a “perps” actions may go completely unreported.

    The use of this study as an argument that being armed is of no value does not hold up; there is simply not sufficient detail in the design of the study to allow such a correlation to be justified.

  • http://personalguardiandefense.com Val

    We have a person in the white house, that admitted that this was the greatest nation on Earth and he would like to change that. What does that mean for us. I have always been under the impression that if it’s not broke don’t fix it. We did have problems and they needed to be fixed but don’t make it worse. Leave our Constitution alone! These changes are being proposed by a president that didn’t even show up at Arlington Cemetery for Memorial day. This is the most un American President ever to hold office, and I think it is a shame. To be at Arlington on Memorial day is a huge honor, and other presidents have done it honorably and with dignity. This one turns his back on every thing that makes this contry great, and thinks he can improve on it. Shame on you Mr President, for not showing up at Arlington, for Memorial Day. Shame on us for electing him!

  • Charles B

    This is just another example of a phony study that cost tax payers thousands of dollars to prove nothing. I carry concealed and I’m not afried of anyone or thing out there except for the GOVERNMENT!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.