Proof that guns are EVIL

“I'm very critical of Bush but this just isn't a story in my opinion. So W is showing off Saddams gun. Of course Saddam didn't use it...he was busy holdong the little piece between his legs.”

“From MSNBC: The magazine quoted a visitor who had been shown the gun, which is kept in a small study off the Oval Office where Bush displays memorabilia. It is the same room where former President Clinton had some of his encounters with former intern Monica Lewinsky.”

“Snake Eyes - you had me rolling over that one!

Bush can have his little souvenir. He'll need something to remember his 4 year term. Unfortunately many other military families only have a flag to remember their loved ones by.”

“"Though it was widely reported at the time that the pistol was loaded when they grabbed Saddam, Bush has told visitors that the gun was empty."”

“I heard on the radio that the military personnel that examined the weapon said that it was doubtful that it had ever been fired. Just FYI.”

“Dunadan, the last time I had a firearms expert under questioning, he told me that an expert could only state if the gun had been cleaned since fired or fired since cleaned. He did say oxidation (rust) in the barrel was an indication that the gun had not been fired recently. I would be curious to know if forensic sciences have progressed to the point that they can determine that a gun had never been fired. Do not most factories test fire their guns before shipment?”

“The answer is 'yes' to all firearms manufacturers' in the US, South America, and Western Europe. Can't speak for Poland, Russia or China. The Chek Republic manufactures quality handguns and probably test fires each before shipping. The Swedes and Finns are better known for their rifles (Seko is one) and I'd bet even money each rifle is test fired before shipping. This is a matter of quality control as well as liability. The weapons are usually test fired at much higher chamber pressures than would be possible for the consumer to duplicate, to assure the weapon meets SAMMI standards. However, the only proof of the soundness of the gun is it's owner. Just like any other mechanical device, if you don't know how to take care of it, the gun will sooner or later cause you problems.”

“like hemmeroids...”

“So when the hemorrhoid has one in the oval office....?”

“Thanks for the laugh strat.

It's probably a good time to start a thread on irresponsible anus ownership.”

“Whether you agree or not, it's an interesting lesson in history.
Something to think about...

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. From 1939 to 1945, 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:
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 the 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.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp


You won't see this data on the American evening news or hear our
president, governors or other politicians disseminating this
information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives
and property and, yes, gun-control laws 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.

If you value your freedom, Please spread this
anti-gun control message to all of your friends

(PS - I didn't research the data here, this is from a mass email)”

“Bush should put the gun on EBAY”

“Always amazes me when people ascribe supernatural or paranormal attributes to an inanimate piece of machinery like a gun.

How can a piece of metal have a personality ? evil or good.

A lot of those same people do not believe a child has any personality until it is born.

An unborn child is an object, and a gun has this aura of evil, give me a break.

BTW, I am a supporter of abortion because I believe it is better to abort than bring an unwanted child into the World.
Abstinence is better than
Contraception is better than
Abortion is better than
Abandonment (adoption=same thing) is better than
Abuse which includes neglect and unloved.”

“How many laws were violated so Bush could have his little trophy?

1) Washington DC law forbids firearms as gifts.

2) Handguns not registered to the current owner prior to September 24, 1976, are unregisterable.

3) Did Bush submit to a trigger lock?

5) It's against the law to possess a firearm in a Federal facility.”

“How many laws were violated so Bush could have his little trophy?

1) Washington DC law forbids firearms as gifts.

2) Handguns not registered to the current owner prior to September 24, 1976, are unregisterable.

3) Did Bush submit to a background check?

4) Think he uses a possess a firearm in a Federal facility.”

“How many laws were violated so Bush could have his little trophy?

1) Washington DC law forbids firearms as gifts.

2) Handguns not registered to the current owner prior to September 24, 1976, are unregisterable.

3) Did Bush submit to a background check?

4) Think he uses a trigger lock?

5) It's against the law to possess a firearm in a Federal facility.”

“It always amazes me how people confuse gun control (which is a legitimate public interest) with the abolition of guns.

We will always need some form of gun control. Do we have too much "gun control" now?

I personally don't think so. I tend to think the amount of "gun control" protects a legitimate public interest without being unduly oppressive toward a protected Constitutional Freedom.”

“I know all rules fly right out the window when dealing with someone like the president but standard procedure when receiving a firearm as a gift from the military is to render the firearm unusable. I have a 72mm granade launcher on display that has lead filling in certain places to render it unusable. I've never considered if a firearm rendered inoperable is still under the rules and jurisdition of the ATF. I know you can mail order firearms rendered inoperable (WW II display pieces and such) via mail order without a FFL, which would lead me to beleive that once rendered inoperable all laws pertaining to the control of firearms are rendered null and void.”

“(snip)
2) Handguns not registered to the current owner prior to September 24, 1976, are unregisterable.

4) Think he uses a trigger lock?

5) It's against the law to possess a firearm in a Federal facility."
Violin
10:23:07 AM
06/01/04

Does this mean that all Secret Service personnel are using firearms prior to 9/24/76, with trigger locks, and all stay outside of the White house? or maybe completely off the premises depending on how you define a "facility".

That all Secret Service have been on the job there for 28 years (1976-2004) or they are unarmed?

or this one of those lines from "Mission Impossible" if caught the Secretary will disavow all knowledge of your actions.”

“Yep. Dubya needs to sell it on Ebay to help pay for his war.”

“Great Britian - Gun Control goes into affect. 8 million Brits develop gingivitis and have the worst teeth of all developed nations.

Canada - Since gun control there Canadiens have had to resort to making bad comedy resulting in the decay of moral fiber in North America. Examples - Jim Carrey, Howie Mandel, Mike Myers, Tom Green, 1/2 of Cheech and Chong. At least the Canadien comedian Phil Hartman got to die with dignity at the hands of his phsycho wife who shot him to death.”

“Manuka, Federal Officers are exempted.”

“Jeeze manuka - I provided links to the law for you so you wouldn't look silly. I did all I could.”

“So the President is not a Federal position ??”

“(In my best Reagan voice):
Well... there you go again.”

“The answer to Violin's questions is zero. The reason is the Supremacy clause of the U.S. constitution.”

“It's celebrity death match between Violin and manuka.”

“Article 2 of the constitution grants the president powers as the supreme commander in cheif of all of our armed forces. As the commander in chief he is granted certain privlages as a member of the armed forces, though he does not fall under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ.

2). The following persons are exempt from the registration requirement:

Any law enforcement officer, agent of the government, or any member of the military authorized to possess a firearm "while on duty in the performance of official authorized functions;"

3). Background checks are required only by purchased from a federally liscenced dealers. Since he has not purchased the firearm from a federally liscenced dealer a background check is not required.

4). Except for law enforcement personnel described in section 7-2502.01(b)(1), each registrant [see District of Columbia Registration section] shall keep any firearm in his possession unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device unless such firearm is kept at his place of business.

The president falls under the law enforcement personal exception outlined in Section 7-2502.01(b)(1): Any law enforcement officer or agent of the United States, or any law enforcement officer or agent of the government of any state of subdivision thereof, or any member of the armed forces of the United States, the National Guard or organized reservesm when such an officer, agent, or member is authorized to posess such a firearm or device

5). (d) Subsection (a) shall not apply to -
(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer,
agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political
subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or
supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or
prosecution of any violation of law;
(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a
Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such
possession is authorized by law; or”

“All those laws against guns in DC, and I still hear it's one of the most dangerous towns around, even when the politicians aren't there.”

“"celebrity death match," LOL!”

“Nah, more of a cerebral death match, like brain dead LOL.”

“Of course it doesn't help that you can drive across the bridge and buy them by the bushel in Virginia... LOL”

“WEAPONS OF CHOICE

Pizza man saved by gun,
but fired for packin' heat
Prosecutors call it 'clear case of self-defense,' yet national chain prohibits carrying firearms

Posted: June 1, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern

A pizza deliveryman won't face charges for fatally shooting a would-be robber several times when he was approached in a high-crime area, but his employer, Pizza Hut, has fired him for violating a company policy against carrying firearms.

Ronald B. Honeycutt, 38, who has a permit to carry a concealed weapon, says he's been delivering pizzas for 20 years and has always packed heat on the job.

According to a report in the Indianapolis Star, prosecutors announced Friday the Carmel, Ind., man will not face criminal charges.

"It's a clear case of self-defense," Deputy Prosecutor Barb Crawford said. "He did what the law allows him to do to protect himself."

Jerome Brown-Dancler approached Honeycutt at around 11 p.m. on May 17 just after he had made a pizza delivery in Indianapolis. According to the report, Brown-Dancler pointed a 9 mm handgun at the Pizza Hut employee as he was entering his van.

Brown-Dancler's gun carried a loaded 14-round clip but had no bullet in the chamber, Crawford told the Star. When confronted, Honeycutt pulled his own 9 mm from the back of his pants and fired until it was empty. He says he fired 15 times in about eight seconds. An autopsy revealed Brown-Dancler was hit at least 10 times.

According to the report, Honeycutt insists Brown-Dancler didn't fall until after the last shot was fired.

"The guy kept standing. He knew he was injured when he fell," Honeycutt told the paper. "His concern was he made an error, and the only thing he could say when I was grabbing his gun off the ground was, 'I just wanted pizza.'"

After the encounter, Honeycutt took Brown-Dancler's gun, fearing it might be stolen if it was left with the body. He got in his van, drove to the Pizza Hut restaurant where he worked and told his manager to call police, Crawford said.

"This was late at night. This was a high-crime area," Crawford is quoted as saying. "He left because he wasn't sure whether or not Brown-Dancler had any friends with him. As it turns out, he did indeed have friends with him. They left when they heard shots fired."

Honeycutt says he plans to find another job delivering pizzas.

"Other criminals better think twice, because I'm going back out there," he said, "and I know I'm not alone in the way I think about this."

Some Pizza Hut customers have complained to the company after it fired Honeycutt.

"I hope those of you in the media will realize the incredible unfairness of a huge company telling its employees – in essence – they must agree to die for the company rather than use legal reasonable means to defend themselves," Rick Whitham, an Indianapolis attorney, told WND. He says he saw Pizza Hut's action as "clear discrimination against those who choose to lawfully exercise a legal, heavily regulated right."

Whitham wrote to the company: "I don't spend my money with businesses that openly discriminate against people such as myself who understand that the police have no affirmative duty to protect any particular citizen and that no company is worth dying for – particularly yours."”

“Gun in the hand of armed Robber was evil.
Gun in the hand of Pizza Man was good.
I guess the gun is just an inanimated object and the holder of the gun determines whether it is good or evil.

The Pizza Hut delivery man should practice more, he ONLY hit him 10 times with 15 shots.
With that kind of publicity on his resume, I don't think he will have trouble finding a better paying job, escpecially if his new boss has been robbed recently.”

“Why not just give the guy the pizza and call the cops?”

“Because the law says you do not have to give in to unlawful demands and that you can use deadly force to prevent the unlawful seizure in this situation. Plus it is quicker to give a statement to the police and go home as opposed to giving the robber a chance to go home after killing you, the only witness to his crime.

Put it simply, the armed robber would be alive today if he did not try to take the pizza at gunpoint. Don't blame the crime victim for the consequences of the criminal's behavior.”

“Between 1985 and 1989, under the Reagan & Bush presidencies, the US gave Iraq and Saddam Hussain 5 billion in aide. This money may have been used to purchase the very gun that Saddam was caught with.

So, I guess you can say that GWB's new toy was a gift from Daddy, Uncle Dick, and Uncle Don, funded by American tax payers, of course.”

“OK apeman45, in a high crime area how was the pizza driver to know what the person pointing the gun at him wanted ?

A pizza ?
The money ?
The van ?

How was the pizza guy to know if the robber already had 2 convictions and the third would send him away for life so he has a better chance of escaping prison killing the victim and no greater penalty if he does kill.

Will the criminal just let him go and give a description to the Police, maybe, but maybe the criminal does not want his description given to the police. He does have the means of ensuring the Pizza man gives no description to anyone, doesn't he ??

What DID the pizza man know ?

The person was carrying a gun.
The person was breaking at least 2 laws (robbery, threatening with a deadly weapon), most likely 3 laws (carrying without a permit).

He has a known lawbreaker pointing a gun at him with no knowledge of what the gun pointer wants.

OK, choice time

#1. Do I believe in this criminals inate good nature, that he will do me no harm. Give him what he wants.
That was US airline policy too until 9/11.

#2. Defend myself.”

“There was a horrifying killing of Snap-On Tool driver in Wa state. The man was ambushed by 2 young men, near Mt. Rainier, he was killed by them, all he did was pull over to see if they needed help on the side of the road. His truck was cleaned out, and set on fire. They found the victim days later :-(
They killed that man over a truck of tools.
Had the man been armed, he may have had a chance at surviving.
I was coming home on the day of his funeral, near Rainier, and we passed at least 100 Snap_on trucks going to the funeral. In the paper that day, there was a comment about how many of the drivers are carrying concealed now.
I have no qualms over handguns. I shoot reguarly, and have no issue with carrying.
I am well know for that I carry openly in NF's.
Bravo for that pizza man! I will bet that the man who was killed had all intent of killing the delivery man, over a simple robbery.
There is a rule, a simple rule-don't point your gun at anything you don't mean to kill. That delivery driver most likely saved his own life that night.”

“To each his own. I will never own a gun. Nothing I have is worth killing over. I have insurance. Knowing that I am much more likely to survive by turning over my replacable property than to pull a weapon on an armed criminal works for me. It is my choice. I have several acquaintances that carry handguns - some legally. They can't wait for an excuse to pull them out. I know I am much less likely to be killed not carrying a concealed weapon than my armed friends. It's not worth the risk to me. More guns equals more killing - sometimes the bad guy gets it and you get a nice story to tell. Most often the armed good guy gets it. Should I post several thousand of those articles for a "fair and balanced" perspective?

At least the pizza guy knew how to use his gun and completed a successful delivery of his entire clip.”

“N.J. delivery driver 'thrill killer' gets life in prison
* 05 December 2002

MORRISTOWN, N.J. -- Thomas J. Koskovich, 24, who was convicted in 1999 for his role in the 1997 ambush, robbery and murder of two pizza delivery drivers, received a sentence of 30 years to life on Dec. 4 following a November retrial for the crime.

According to multiple news reports, a jury sentenced Kosovich to death in 1999 for murder, but the decision was later overturned by the New Jersey Supreme Court in 2001. In a 4-3 decision, the justices ruled that technical errors were made in the delivery of instructions to the jury in the first trial.

In this latest trial, Koskovich received a life sentence after jurors could not agree on a death sentence after days of deliberation.

The 1997 double murder drew wide media attention when prosecutors alleged Koskovich, then 18, and accomplice Jayson Vreeland, then 17, committed the crime just for the thrill of killing someone.

In the first trial, the teens said they called multiple pizza outlets attempting to get delivery to an abandoned home in rural northwestern New Jersey.

Late that evening, when delivery drivers Giorgio Gallara, 24, and Jeremy Giordano, 22, arrived to drop off the order, Kosovich and Vreeland entered the drivers’ vehicle and shot them multiple times with stolen handguns.

This latest sentence comes in addition to the 45 years Koskovich received for convictions of armed robbery and weapons theft in connection to the double murder.

In a separate trial in 1999, Vreeland was sentenced to life in prison because he was only 17 at the time of the murders. New Jersey law prohibits the execution of minors.”

“More guns equals more killing - sometimes the bad guy gets it and you get a nice story to tell. Most often the armed good guy gets it.
apeman45
02:18:55 PM
06/02/04

I'd be interested to see some documentation that the armed good guy gets it more often. Not a story that shows where one lost the fight, but some numbers or research that gives us an indication of who usually wins these encounters.”

“Wow that was enlightening! I did a google on gun control and I see where the big money is going. 99 out of 100 sites are pro gun from militia groups to gun clubs to many many NRA sites. Most spent a great deal of effort discounting or skewing statistics in their favor. Pretty amusing and scary at the same time.

Here are some whacko gun control views that seem to support that you are in more danger as a gun owner.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=ccwfaq

I'm done debating on this as I see how hopeless these gun nuts are.

By the way I'm not for banning all guns, although that's how I feel - simply responsible control. Maybe make it as difficult as getting a drivers license and to demonstrate some competency. I don't think that is asking too much.

I'm out...and keeping my head low...”

“Apeman, every man has to know his own limitations. And I can agree with you that you should not carry a weapon.

Professor Lott studied the issue of whether killings went up or down when more people carried concealed firearms. In every case where laws were passed allowing citizens to carry firearms, crime and gun deaths went down. It became safer for everyone.

StickmanWalking, Apeman just made up that statistic about the armed good guy gets it more often. In reality, Americans use firearms for self-defense more than 2.1 million times annually. Of incarcerated felons surveyed by the Department of Justice, 34% have been driven away, wounded, or captured by armed citizens; 40% have decided against committing crimes for fear their would-be victims were armed. When citizens use guns for protection from criminals, the criminal is wounded in about 1 out of every 100 instances, and the criminal is killed in about 1 out of every 1000 instances.”

“Why is it ok to kill someone robbing you of a pizza, but it's not ok to kill Enron execs or any other white collar republican thief who steal millions?”

“Because USA, all 50 state legislatures have passed laws allowing the use of deadly force to prevent an armed robbery, and the law prohibits the use of deadly force to stop a theft. The difference is that the armed robbery imminently endangers the victims life. But you already knew that.”

“"To each his own. I will never own a gun. Nothing I have is worth killing over. I have insurance. Knowing that I am much more likely to survive by turning over my replacable property than to pull a weapon on an armed criminal works for me. It is my choice."
Have you ever burried your child? We have [auto accident]bad guy can have anything material wise he wants no problem. Mess with family or friends WE GONNA DANCE
you DON'T have enough insurance to replace a person!!!!!!!!!! guns are just steel,wood or plastic Its the person operating the trigger that is good or evil”

“Republicans imminently endanger my life by gutting laws intended for clean air and water, safe meat, etc.”

“I asked for documentation to support your claim, and now you see me as a hopeless gun nut? I don't recall anywhere in my request where I espoused one position over the other.

As for your big money claims, it's my opinion that the "big money" is not going to militias. I've had the fortune/misfortune to interact with several militia members in a work related capacity and can state with some certainty that they are not recipients of big money. I'm only familiar with the local gun club, and while not a member, I know many of the members--their money goes to the upkeep of club property and other expenses for classes, competitions, etc. I have never seen them doing any proselytizing. In fact, they're fairly low-profile and restrictive when it comes to membership.
That only leaves the NRA, and part of their mission is advocacy and education, which would include espousing responsible gun ownership and the benefits of firearms ownership.”

“Professor Lott studied the issue of whether killings went up or down when more people carried concealed firearms. In every case where laws were passed allowing citizens to carry firearms, crime and gun deaths went down. It became safer for everyone.

Hmmm...how did he control for significant intervening or contributing variables? Socioeconomic factors affect crime rates greatly. How was he able to isolate the effect of shall-issue laws?”