Hunters and Conspiracy Theorists; Deaths from Guns.

Some people passionately defend gun ownership without restrictions.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has been so successful at projecting itself and gun owners as a majority, Congress and Presidents have been reluctant to impose restrictions on gun ownership.   How did this happen?

Only about one in ten people went hunting last  year.  It is a dying sport.

But, hunters have been able to position themselves as patriots and portray hunting as a patriotic activity.  Any restriction on guns, even if unrelated to guns used for hunting, has been cast as an attack on patriotism.

Hunting is not the only argument for gun ownership.  The case most passionatly made is guns are needed to defend ourselves against our government.

While laws restricting the kind of guns people can own or use doesn’t seem like it would solve all innocent deaths by guns, it does seem to me it would reduce the number.  If it would reduce the number, wouldn’t it be OK to try out some new gun laws?

“Absolutely not,” would be answer of gun rights people.  “The deaths that result from guns are merely collateral damage from the need to protect ourselves from our government.”

There is an argument people need guns to protect themselves and their property.  There are people who need to carry guns, but statistics show these guns often cause deaths of innocent people, including those carrying the gun.

I don’t own a gun for a simple reason.  I’m safer without one.

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years. There is more about me at Wikipedia.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

165 Responses to Hunters and Conspiracy Theorists; Deaths from Guns.

  1. bill says:

    Jon, don’t even go there. Google the kellerman study. The one the gun control nuts always reference. Examine the study group. It pretty much says it all. Of course the liberal media doesn’t give the details of the study. I myself am proud and very hopeful for my country, and for humanity considering the fact that there are 300,000,000 guns in the hands of private citizens in this country and yet you don’t have mass conflict or chaos in the streets as the liberals would have you think, or as you would see in foreign countries through out the world. God bless our founding fathers and the genius of their constitution.

  2. Brad says:

    The problem in this country is gun worship. A gun is the real and true god of a whole lot of phony right wing Christians in this country. They have a whole lot more faith in their AR-15 than they do in Jesus, because unlike Jesus, the gun can provide immediate satisfaction, and it provides instant, magical power. This is what this flag waving, Constitution-thumping phony patriotism is all about. We have a bunch of adults whose intellectual, psychological, and emotional development is stuck at about 3 years old who are using the 2nd Amendment to justify their worship and idolization of guns.

  3. Michael Ross says:

    “I’m safer without one.”

    Easy to say until you need one. Then it might be too late.

  4. Brad says:

    Compare the U.S. to the rest of the world – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

    The U.S. is the 12th highest in gun related deaths. Every other country worse than us is a third world country, and a vast majority of them are Central and South American countries overrun by the drug trade. Countries with much stricter gun laws have much lower gun deaths than us.

    One thing I will say though, massive gun violence does help the weapons and ammo industry, so free market capitalists have a vested interest in keeping this going.

    • bill says:

      You’re so naive.

      • Brad says:

        Recognizing reality is the new “naive”.

        • bill says:

          The problem you have Brad is that you don’t recognize reality. reference Michael Ross’s comment.

          • Brad says:

            I just provided some actual facts, statistics about gun related deaths. And then I pointed out the fact that gun violence is good for the weapons and ammo industry. Call me old school, but facts are pretty valuable elements of reality.

    • Brad says:

      Correction: the U.S. is no. 11 in gun related deaths, not 12.

    • bill says:

      Brad. Who gives a rats ass about the rest of the world? You live here. Worry about here. You have a greater chance of drowning than being shot with a gun. Get real and quit being such a pussy.

      • Brad says:

        Tell that to the parents of the 20 murdered 5-6 year olds. I’m sure they’ll love being told to “get real and quit being such a pussy”.

        • maverick says:

          Oh good gravy.. Get over it already.. It was a horrible tragedy to be sure.. But where are all you nutso gun control advocates on the topics of putting these socially insane people where they belong.. Stop the mainstreaming process that you have forced on this country almost two decades ago and finally admit that they have absolutely no business being allowed out of cages.

          It doesn’t take a weapon to kill a lot of people.. I have airplanes and fertilizer as two very prominent incidents of proof in our history.

        • bill says:

          So your answer is to ban every law abding citizens means of self defense just so you can have some false sense of security? I will tell those parents of any school shooting that their kids would be alive today if there had been a teacher with a gun to defend them. I wouldn’t call them pussys but I certainly am calling you a PUSSY. Your “HA, HA”, statistics are from Wikipedia? Do you understand the concept of Wikipedia? Get real fella. Examine the Kellerman study then get back to me. You need to read it to Jon since you don’t feel safe in your own home with a gun around. I guess you must be a drug using violent criminal with abusive tendencys then huh?

    • Michael Ross says:

      Guns are not the cause of of gun violence. We live in a death culture
      What are the elements of this death culture?

      ~Homosexuality – Just as heterosexual marriage promotes life and procreation, so homosexuality and now gay “marriage” promotes death. It is not a “lifestyle”, it is very much a “deathstyle”.
      ~Abortion – 60 million defenseless unborns have been legally murdered since Roe Vs Wade in 1973.
      ~Continuous “wars of choice” – America has been continually at war since 1991. As many as two million have perished in foreign lands along with thousands of young Americans.
      ~Media violence – Whether graphic video games or TV and movies, violence is everywhere. The same Hollywood celebrities that line their pockets making violent movies are now lining up to promote gun control.

      Jesus on gun control:

      “and if he has no sword, let him sell his cloak to buy one.”(Luke 22:38)

      • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

        Michael 2:32 “Guns are not the cause of gun violence.”

        We could run a little experiment. Try not having so many guns and see if gun deaths drop. It wouldn’t hurt a thing to try.

        • Michael Ross says:

          Let the government have all the guns. We can trust them. Stalin would be proud.

          • Brad says:

            This is why it’s impossible to discuss this issue in any constructive way. The minute someone says anything about gun control, it quickly devolves into charges of taking all guns away, and comparisons to Stalin and Hitler.

        • Stanta says:

          Jon, gun sales are up in the last 10 years, all violent crime is down.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            Stan 12:30 “Jon, gun sales are up in the last 10 years, all violent crime is down.”

            And, Stan, a right to life guy, thinks the number of deaths by guns is just fine?

            First, more regulation might, I repeat might, allow the death numbers to be lower. Second, crime numbers, in general, are at least somewhat related to the age distribution of the population. Remember gangs? When they were said to be rising and were protrayed as an unrelenting force, economists said they would disapate when the bulge in young people passed to a higher age. They did.

            I need to repeat myself. I’m interested in the possibilty more regulation of guns would reduce deaths by guns. It’s quite obvious you, and several others here, do not want to look into this possibility.

      • Brad says:

        Guns are not the cause of gun violence? Wow, this is really getting Orwellian. Yep, and water has nothing to do with drowning either.

        • bill says:

          Brad, that’s because theres nothingto discuss. We have the right to keep and beart arms period. If you don’t like it move to china where the people don’t have guns but the govt. does. ask them how that freedom thing is working out for them. Comparisons made to Stalin and Hitler irritate people like you because the truth just keeps getting in the way of your arguments.

    • Stanta says:

      Remove suicides from that. Japan has ver strict gunlaws but a suicide rate 4 times ours.

    • Jinx says:

      Half of all gun related crimes in Canada are due to US guns smuggled into the country. I don’t recall what the percentage of gun related crimes in Mexico are related to smuggled US guns but it is higher than 50%.

      • Stanta says:

        Citation on the first. The second is bogus. the full auto weapons in Mexico come from deserters or corrupt government officials selling them to the cartels or purchased from other countries in south and central America including Cuba and Venezuela. Why buy expensive semi auto for use in Mexico when they can get $200 full auto AK-47 and 74′s built in China?

        When the Feds ley 2000+ guns cross the border they pretty well skewed those statistics, see Fast and Furious.

  5. Michael Ross says:

    In 1982, the town of Kennesaw, Georgia, passed an ordinance which required all heads of household to have at least one gun in the house. The burglary rate immediately dropped an astounding 89 percent. Ten years after the law was passed, the burglary rate was still 72 percent less than it was in 1981.

    • Brad says:

      That sounds equally as communist – forcing people to have a gun? What was the punishment for not having a gun?

      Personally, I like the freedom to choose whether I have a gun or not. I thought it was a conservative idea to keep the government off our back. So now communism is the new conservatism?

      • Michael Ross says:

        Yes, Brad, I agree that it should be a choice, but the point is that an armed citizenry reduces crime.

        • Brad says:

          Maybe it worked in that particular case, but that doesn’t mean it would work in all cases. And the statistics show that other countries with stricter gun laws have much lower gun-related deaths than we do, so the case can be made that stricter gun laws also work.

          I just don’t want to live in a society where I have to pack heat just to go to the grocery store.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Michael 2:49 We had two sets of friends who moved from here to Kennesaw, GA, and we’ve visited there many times. I was there a year ago. It’s a white suburbs of Atlanta. Do you happen to know how many robberies happened before and after? Was it a number like 10, 100 or 1000? Did the police department grow? Did the other white suburbs around Kennesaw see an increase or decrease during that period and today?

  6. Avatar of Kevin Kevin says:

    Safety is an illusion. You can only reduce risk.

  7. Michael Ross says:

    I have a better idea. Why don’t we just outlaw gun crime like murder and armed robbery? Wont that solve the problem? That’s what we did with drugs. Oh, that’s right, it hasn’t worked so well. Drugs are everywhere.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Michael 3:21 “Why don’t we just outlaw gun crime like murder and armed robbery?”

      Certainly, you are correct, laws against guns will not stop people from killing each other with guns. I admitted that in my blog. Speed limits do not stop people from getting killed while speeding.

      We would probably all have to agree laws against murder and armed robbery prevent some of those. What i’m suggesting is we if gun laws would reduce innocent and accidental deaths.

      • Stanta says:

        More children drowned in back yard swimming pools each year Jon. More die in car accidents. More people are killed by boots and fists then rifles of all types. Hammers and blunt objects kill more people the rifles of all types.

        More lives are probably saved each year by defensive use of firearms each year in which the gun is never fired. Try googling defensive gun use and see how many women and elderly are actually shooting at criminals. I dare you to try it.

  8. Stanta says:

    In the last three years I have faced down a meth head who shot up the house next door. A resident of our apartment building using a steel folding chair to batter down a different apartments door in a drunken rage. They arrested a murder suspect two blocks away using flashbangs and a dynamic armed entry. Now last week we had another guy only a block away arrested for terroristic threats with a crossbow. Friday wer had four squads and an ambulance idling outside my apartment building along with a SWAT truck. All winter we have had people driving by and popping shot into the air.

    This is in peaceful St. Cloud, yet you want to remove guns from the hands if the law abiding. Sorry Jon and the others, some of us can’t afford to live in good neighborhoods like you. Until then I will keep my rifle, pistol and shotgun close by.

  9. Stanta says:

    Brad, Mexico has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. How is that working out. And no they don’t run that many guns over the border, they don’t have to. They buy them straight from China so they can get full auto at a much cheaper price.

    The only places in Mexico where the drug dealers don’t rule is where local malitias have refused entry to both the cartels and fedrales and have taken over their own security. They started out with single shots and shotguns, now they have the rifles the dead cartel soldiers brought.

    • Brad says:

      The gun laws are irrelevant in Mexico because of the drug trade, so your point is moot. Go look at the gun laws in the UK or Sweden, then you will have a valid point to make.

  10. Stanta says:

    The second amendment is not about hunting. It is about defense, personal and otherwise. I know a lot of women with permits because a 125 pound women is rarely a match strength wise to even a 150 pound man, especially if he doesn’t care if he hurts her, which may be the reason for the attack to start with.

  11. Stanta says:

    Brad, what interesting us all of those kids could have been aborted 6 years earlier and Jon would call that choice.

  12. Michael Ross says:

    If we outlaw guns for law-biding citizens, the sales and ownership, it will produce a criminal gun industry, just like drugs. We will have gun lords and gun cartels. Criminal gangs and the government will be well armed and the rest of us will be defenseless. Is this what the founders envisioned when they when they wrote the 2nd amendment?

  13. Stanta says:

    Jon, current laws are concentrating on “assault weapons” could you tell me how many people in Minnesota were killed by them in the last year? Since there were only three murders using rifles in Minnesota in 2012 and none of them were identified as an assault rifle that would give us how many?

    In return they want to make criminals of law abiding citizens for mere possession of one of those so called high capacity magazines. Felony with 5 years and $25,000. You get less time for holding up a convenience store.

  14. Stanta says:

    Jon, the town in Georgia, even the police chief credts the law. While it is the law, no one goes around and checks house to house to see if you have one. Unlike the proposed Minnesota law which requires us to permit inspections of storage by the sheriff without benefit of a warrant. Making it unconstitutional via the fourth amendment of unwarranted search.

  15. Stanta says:

    Non, how many kids at Oklahoma City? That was a bomb made from fertilizer and diesel fuel. You are wrong again. There was a day care in the Federal building.

  16. Brad says:

    At the end of the day, the root problem is still gun worship. There are no laws that will change that. As long as this society continues to worship guns and promote the he-man image of gun power and control, nothing will change.

    Alternatively, when society grows up and stops placing guns on a pedestal and worhipping guns as the magical god of power and control, then maybe we can have a less violent society.

  17. Stanta says:

    Brad, since self defense had become outlawed in the UK violent crime besides murder is ; times greater then the Us and rape is three times higher. That will happen here. We have 20,000 gun laws on the books right now, federal, state and local. VP Biden admits we don’t have the resources to enforce then but making some 50 million gun owners instant criminals we can do.

    Where are we going to get the funding to inspect every home with a handgun with the capability to accept a larger then 7 round magazine yearly or the funding to reregister yearly. Criminals will NOT register their guns so it does nothing to stop gun crime. If you want to go house to house do gather in guns that are currently held illegally go ahead. The ACLU would be all over that.

  18. Stanta says:

    Brad, have you got your head in the sand, look at the bill put forth by Dianne Feinstein or the ones proposed by the Democrats in the Minnesota state house. Both would ban the so called assault rifles and most semi auto pistols.

    Don’t try to deny that removing all guns from the hands of law abiding citizens isn’t the object of those bills.

    • Jinx says:

      Why should criminals and citizens be better armed than the average policeman?

      • bill says:

        Criminals shoudn’t. Citizens should be. Tell me. Why do you think that the police should have the means to outgun the law abiding citizens?

      • Stanta says:

        Jinx, the police have full auto in every car almost. I know, my company sold them to them. I also am considered as an expert witness by procecutors in firearms and a known friend of the cops having prevented an ambush on them and helped put the shooter away for 22 years.

  19. Michael Ross says:

    Brad mentioned that many gun owners seem to worship their firearms. I think this is true enough but that is an issue of the sinful heart of man. Anything can be an object of worship: Cars, snowmobiles, boats, RVs. You name it. That doesn’t make any of these objects evil in themselves. Some worship the sun, moon, stars, trees, mountains and other objects made by God. Are these things evil. It is evil because we make them objects of worship, putting them before God who alone is worthy of our worship. When we see a gun as an object of power to dominate, control, and rule over others. This makes a firearm an object of self-exultation not self preservation. Remember Cain, the first murderer. He arose and struck his brother dead. He likely used a rock. A military assault rock no less. Did God condemn rocks? No, he dealt with the crime and the perpetrator. Never the weapon. Just my thought for religious liberals like Brad and his rabbi friend.

  20. Stanta says:

    Interesting, in 2011 485 people died in civil aviation crashes, more the the number of people killed with rifles of all types. Ban civil aviation.

  21. entech says:

    Interesting that so many subjects that seemed interesting to me, with a potential for discussion went quietly by, other subjects seem to be immediately alive and busy.
    Never stop being surprised at what will cock some peoples trigger :lol:

  22. Avatar of Mac Mac says:

    Umm, Jon. The United States is currently #11 in per capita death by firearms.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
    If we’re going to regain our world dominance in everything, we need to add a little more firepower to the mix.

  23. Long John says:

    Two thirds of gun related deaths in this Country ar suicides, which could be accomplished by other means. At the risk of being called a racist; if you take away the gun homicides commited by minorities our crime statistics are not that alarming. North Dakots has a very high rate of gun ownership but a low homicide rate.

  24. Avatar of seaofstories seaofstories says:

    Am I the only one who thinks that the idea of defending yourself against the government with your personal fire arm is completely ridiculous? A government that spends more on arms and military personnel than the rest of the world combined? This notion is completely backward. People feel like they need guns, not because their government is actively out to get them, but because their government is ineffective at protecting them. The 2nd amendment was reinterpreted after the Civil War to include a right to personal protection (in addition to its original purpose of maintaining a well ordered militia) because newly freed slaves had no faith that the local governments were going to protect them from the Klan.

    The twin ideas of small government and a broad interpretation of gun rights are a self fulfilling prophesy.

    Here’s a recounting of the silly game of telephone that led to the false notion that more people are killed with baseball bats and hammers than guns.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2013/02/paul_broun_says_hammers_and_baseball_bats_kill_more_people_than_guns_is.html

    • Jinx says:

      Sea of Stories: Am I the only one who thinks that the idea of defending yourself against the government with your personal fire arm is completely ridiculous? The twin ideas of small government and a broad interpretation of gun rights are a self fulfilling prophesy.

      You echo my thoughts on this issue Sea! The 2nd amendment was drawn up when muskets and muzzleloaders were the best technology available. Given the fact that the USA military could now destroy every living thing on the planet, this current day defence of the 2nd amendment is ridiculous.

    • bill says:

      Ask the syrian rebels who are fighting to overthrow their oppressive govt. if that thinking is completely ridicupous.

      • bill says:

        Ask the syrian rebels who are fighting to overthrow their oppressive govt. if that thinking is completely ridiculous.

        • Avatar of seaofstories seaofstories says:

          Ask the Syrian government if they operate a destroyer, let alone an air craft carrier, or 11 carrier strike groups.

          Ask the Syrian government if they operate any 5th generation strike fighters.

          Ask the Syrian government if they have any nuclear weapons.

          Still, with what they do have, the guns the citizens possess are not what’s preventing them from being crushed. It’s mostly the mass defections from the armed forces and a little bit of international repercussions. At some point even the Russians have a line they won’t let Assad cross.

          • bill says:

            The govt. would have to destroy our whole country to stop the citizens from overthrowing it. All the aircraft carriers, strike fighters, and soldiers could not stop 100,000,000 armed citizens.

          • Stanta says:

            They also need TROOPS willing to fire on Americans. Ever hear of the group Oathkeepers? They took an oath to protect the Constitution, not to obey Obama. Rumors that it could be 25-50% of serving soldiers and reserve. Means anyone trying to shoot civilians better watch their back.

      • Brad says:

        Syria doesn’t have the largest and most powerful military on the face of the earth. The U.S. does. And if you think your gun is going to protect you against a government with everything it has at its disposal, then you are living in an alternate reality.

        Ask Gordon Kahl how far he got when he tried to shoot his way to freedom.

        • bill says:

          It would be pretty tough for our govt. to stop 100,000,000 armed citizens from over running it. You seem to forget what happened in the USSR when the people rose up against it’s oppressive govt.. You know? The one with the largest standing army in the world at the time.

          • Avatar of seaofstories seaofstories says:

            I don’t recall anyone shooting anyone during the disillusion of the USSR, but, that wasn’t really a popular uprising.

            The activists in Egypt weren’t armed.

            The ones in Libya were. A lot of them ended up dead.

            What matters isn’t whether or not the people have guns. What matters is the attitude of the government.

            An armed government’s unwillingness to use those arms against its own people is not an argument for gun rights. It’s an argument for humanity. If the government possess a sufficient amount of it it’s people don’t need guns in order to resist it. If the government does not, no private weapons cache will be large enough to prevent a government with a sufficient technological advantage from suppressing them.

            Fortunately, we have these things called free and fair elections. I guess some of us have a little more confidence in our Constitution than others.

          • Brad says:

            I am far more concerned about the non-elected tyrants who are more powerful than our government – the private ownership class. You know, the top 1% who have more wealth than the bottom half of the entire country. The Walton family alone has as much wealth as the bottom 40%. That is a kingdom. These people are unelected, they can’t be voted out of office, yet they rule our lives.

          • Stanta says:

            Alexander Solzhenitsyn wrote that the KGB would have had to be a lot more cautious if they had to worry that there were guns at their backs every time they kicked down a door. That could have been enough to stop them from their purges.

          • James says:

            The reason you still have free elections is because you have an armed citizenry. You’re idea that the people could not replace it’s own govt. by force if it had to is naive and shows that you are weak and misguided.

    • Stanta says:

      I said more are killed by Hammers and blunt instruments then RIFLES. Check the stats and get back to me.

  25. entech says:

    Just an idle thought as people keep quoting figures and proportions of this that and the other.

    What proportion of men who are so vociferous about the need for guns need the guns to make themselves feel like men.

    What proportion of people that are so vehement about how we need a god and a special creation need them to makes themselves feel special.

  26. Brad says:

    Seeing that there has been over 100 comments on this topic (and growing), I think it can be concluded that gun worship and an insane emotional attachment to guns is prevalent.

    • Jinx says:

      I’m with you on that one Brad!

    • bill says:

      You just don’t get it. You won’t get it until you have a chain attached to your leg which you will willingly allow the govt. to shackle to you. You probably won’t get it even then. It’s not about gun worship. It’s about worshipping at the altar of freedom. The guns are our means of protecting that altar.

      • Brad says:

        Yeah, Bill, your gun will protect your “freedom”. When the government comes with their tanks, armies, and nukes, your gun will scare them off and you will be free.

        • bill says:

          I think what you fail to grasp is that no matter how outgunned the average citizen may be. We will make it so costly for them in blood that the military will back down.

      • Brad says:

        Oh, and by the way, we really don’t have freedom. What we have is the illusion of freedom that gets shoved down our throat by flag-waving Fox News disciples and corporate con artists with smiley face t-shirts and happy meals. We are shackled by the conditions of the planet we were thrown into by no choice of our own. We are shackled by being forced to work for several decades just to survive and possibly save enough to retire once we are too old and worn out to work. We are shackled by the constant threat of violence, disease, accidents, etc, etc. We are shackled by political and religious hustlers who spend billions trying to control us and fleece us for everything we have.

        If we had real freedom, I highly doubt anyone would know what to do with it.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Brad 3:38 “If we had real freedom, I highly doubt anyone would know what to do with it.”

          Great post, Brad. When people toss out this vague word,”freedom”, I like to know who, exactly, will the freedom apply to and when. I don’t think I would feel much “freedom” with a survivalist next door to me with AK 47′s and a bottle of whiskey in his hand. I wouldn’t feel much freedom if there were no speed limits or traffic rules of any kind. I’ve been in a country, Bangladesh, where this is exactly the case. If I lived in a neighborhood like the one Stan lives in, I’d not feel a lot of freedom either.

          I wouldn’t feel a lot of freedom is everyone was armed to the teeth against the coming “government” threat, because I think history has plenty of examples of citizens turning their guns on each other. I think not owning a gun gives me freedom.

          • James says:

            I agree almost completely except I would change the statement to “flag waving MSNBC disciples”

          • James says:

            Sorry to say Jon. But I feel safer in an armed society. An armed society is a polite society. I think non gun owners should just wear a sign that says “victim” on their back. You see Jon what you fail to understand is that your safety and your ability to wander about in society freely and safely eating your Boppas Bagels is a direct result of the freedom to own and use a gun. No one is going to risk accosting you because they have no idea that you don’t have a gun. If you feel so safe without a gun why not try this little experiment . Put a large sign on your front lawn with flashing lights mind you. That says “THIS HOME IS PROUDLY A GUN FREE ZONE.” If you’re so confident in your safety I dare you to do it. That goes for everybody else who’s anti-gun.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            James 9:11 “..you safety and your ability to wander about in society freely and safely eating your Boppas Bagels is a direct result of the freedom to own and use a gun.”

            One thing we do have complete freedom in this country, and, most others, is to make up and believe myths. You are free to believe there is law and order only because people carry guns. That would mean we are completely wasting all out money on our police forces. It would mean Europe, where there are laws against guns, should be a place where everyone is accosted. It would mean ghettos would be safe places because guns are everywhere there. I may believe in some myths myself, but I don’t buy into the myth people mostly behave is because of the guns of others.

            As far as putting a sign in front of my house saying there is no gun inside, I’ve already done that. I’ve said it right here in public, and did it several months ago. My name and address are in the phone book. Except for political protestors parading in front of my house, we haven’t been bothered for 40 years. You could do the same thing, advertise you don’t own a gun and see if anything happens to you.

            Glad to see you Saturday mornings at Boppa’s Bagels. I think we’re safe there because of the police who have bagels there with us. That’s my myth.

          • Stanta says:

            Jon, do you know there are parts of Paris known as forbidden zones? If you are not of the ethic group living in them you take your life in your own hand entering them. Each year in these zones there are riots where hundreds of cars are torched by those peaceful ethnics.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            Stan 10:46 “parts of Paris know as forbidden zones?”

            Does not every huge city in the world has areas like that? Are there areas of Paris where the crime rate is low or normal? And, if there are is it because everyone in the nice areas packs heat? Or, is it because they do not?

          • Stanta says:

            I wish I lived in a nice upper class neighborhood too Jon. But I can’t afford that. I posted about half of the dangerous incidences above, I do think that I am a steadying influence in the neighbor hood and feel that is one reason I should stay. Since it is dangerous, I would thank you to NOT make arbitrary decisions on how or when I can protect myself and other law abiding residents. Unlike you who has the means to live in a safer local, we have to do the best we can with the tools we have.

            By the way, have you googled fertilizer/diesel fuel bomb, Oklahoma City and day care yet?

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            Stanta 2:24 “I wish I lived in a nice upper class neighborhood too, Jon.”

            I think my house is worth about $140,000, not upper class by anyone’s standards. But, outside of a three or four few burgleries in four decades, it seems quite safe. I can understand you do not feel as safe as I do. I just can’t imagine I would feel safer with a gun, but I’m not there so I can’t say for certain. My position is we should be open minded to regulation, but I don’t know what it should be.

            I know children were killed by the fertilizer bomb in Oklahoma City. Oversite on my part.

          • Stanta says:

            Yes Jon, you are right. You don’t live where I live. So stop deciding on what I can use to defend myself. If you don’t want a gun for goodness sake don’t get one. But waiting for the police is not always an option. Hell, having the time to call the police usn’t even an option sometimes. I have had 911 calls dropped twice and neither time did they try to call back. I could have been dead before they had if the circumstances had been different.

            Self defense is a right!

        • bill says:

          So my next question is this. That if you can see what a corrupt sytem we have and that you can’t trust any of its politicians or its servants in the media, and that they are capable of doing anything to you in order to control you. Why are you against good american citizens having the means to keep them in check if necessary?

          • bill says:

            Because obviously the vote ain’t doing it. Every 2,4, and 6 years we elect the same liars back into office along with a few more new ones.

          • bill says:

            Still waiting for an answer Brad.

          • Brad says:

            Well, if voting is not working, then I guess our great 238 year American experiment has failed. If we have devolved to the point to where we need to take up arms to change the course of our government, then it’s already too late.

            However, it takes far more than just showing up to vote every 2 or 4 years to actually correct what is wrong, and unfortunately it’s a pitifully low percentage of people who are politically active. So that’s part of the problem.

            The larger problem is that the big money interests in the private sector have overtaken our federal government. We essentially live in a corporate controlled kingdom. The banksters, oil barons, insurance thieves, drugsters, and military industrialists have set up a lobbying system that pretty much controls everything going on in Washington. If we really have to take up arms against anyone, it would be them, not the government.

        • bill says:

          Well Jon as they say “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.”

        • bill says:

          The problem is Jon that the average everyday criminal doesn’t read your blog. So in order to get their attention you need to get one of those pink and neon signs with the lights and in large letters “THIS HOMEOWNER HAS NO GUNS IN HIS HOME AND IS UNARMED.” and put it on your boulevard. I mean what the heck? If we can try an experiment in disarming society of all guns, why not try one in just disarming the law abiding citizens?

          • Stanta says:

            If gun owners were as dangerous as they claim thru are, all gun grabbers would be dead.

            How many thousands went to the MN hearings armed and no one died, no one even got wounded!

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            bill 12:58 “NO GUNS IN HIS HOME AND IS UNARMED.”

            You can do that experiement instead of me. Set the bait. See if anyone bites. Then, you can brag about how you took out a theif.

          • bill says:

            I rest my case. I’ll be sending you a shirt with the word “VICTIM” printed in big red letters on the back.

  27. Ed says:

    Jon and Brad…..you are the guys hugging trees back home complaining about your lack of freedoms while guys like Bill are over in Afghanistan ensuring you have the freedoms you whine about.

    It’s a great thing if you never need a gun, but the senior citizen from rural Chafee who happened to surprise a couple meth heads last year sure doesn’t regret keeping a gun handy. Do as you wish. Guys like Bill and I will do the same.

    • Brad says:

      Another fallacy – that fighting over in Afghanistan is ensuring we have “freedom”. No, the fighting over in Afghanistan is ensuring the military industrial complex stays in business.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>