As a Democrat, I can say that most democrats don't give a crap about guns when compared to real issues. We care FAR more about domestic security, the economy, education, welfare reform, health care reform, environmental issues, and international relations. Someplace down around 42nd on the list is gun control.
Don't believe everything Fox News tells you, okay? Oh, and it is "their," not "thier." Duh.
Ah yes the forum spell checker. **** off.
You are of course wrong. Gun control is huge to the left.
Anyone who thinks legal gun ownership is an issue is just miss educated. Armed citizens stopped 2 million crimes last year (this is an older study below, but the numbers are even greater now in crimes stopped vs accidental deaths).
Myth No. 1: Guns cause crime. A careful review of 18 academic studies shows that there is no relationship between the number of guns and the amount of crime in the United States. International evidence tells a similar story.
Myth No. 2: Gun control laws reduce crime. The nation already has 20,000 gun control laws, and the police arrest 220,000 people a year on weapons violations. Yet the violent crime rate is at an all-time high. Moreover, considering that fewer than 1 percent of all guns are involved in a crime and only 12 percent of all violent crimes involve a gun, gun control laws could have only a modest effect on crime - even if they worked exactly as intended, which they don't. For example, New Jersey, Hawaii and Washington, D.C., experienced sharp murder-rate increases after passing tough gun control laws. Canada, Taiwan and Jamaica reported similar experiences.
Myth No. 3: Guns are of little help in defending against criminals. In fact, guns are a big help. Each year, potential victims kill from 2,000 to 3,000 criminals and wound an additional 9,000 to 17,000. And mishaps are rare. Private citizens mistakenly kill innocent people only 30 times a year, compared with about 330 mistaken killings by police. Criminals succeed in taking a gun away from an armed victim less than 1 percent of the time.
Myth No. 4: Killing someone is the only reason to buy a handgun. The vast majority of gun owners cite protection from crime as one of the main reasons they own a gun. And for good reason. Americans use guns for self-protection about one million times a year. In 98 percent of the cases, they simply brandish the weapon or fire a warning shot.
Myth No. 5: People who buy guns are more prone to violence and crime than are other people. Violence and crime are higher among black than white, lower-income than middle- or upper-income, young than middle-aged, single than married, and urban than rural individuals - all contrary to the pattern of gun ownership.
Myth No. 6: Criminals mainly have guns in order to commit crimes. The number one reason criminals acquire guns is for self-protection against other criminals. Fewer than half of felons think handguns are important for use in committing crimes.
Myth No. 7: Killings and other violent crimes were prevalent in the Old West because guns were so plentiful. Much of the violence on the frontier involved clashes with Indians, bandits and foreigners. Even so, the frontier was a lot safer than America is today. There was very little ordinary crime - less than in most cities in the East.
Myth No. 8: Gun controls keep criminals from obtaining guns. In surveys of prisoners, a majority said that prior to imprisonment they had owned a handgun. But fewer than one in six guns had been purchased from a retail dealer. Three-fourths of the felons said they would have no trouble obtaining a gun when they were released, despite legal prohibitions.
Myth No. 9: Required waiting periods would prevent some of the most vicious crimes. If the Brady bill were law, it would not have saved Jim Brady. Nor would it have prevented the Killeen, Texas, massacre or the slaughter at McDonald's in Stockton, Calif. However, an instant records check (to identify felons when they try to purchase guns from retail dealers) and better enforcement of existing laws (to turn criminals into convicted felons) might well prevent some vicious crimes.
Myth No. 10: Most murders are committed by people killing friends or family members. The actual number is about one out of five. Most in-household killings are not crimes of passion. They're the culmination of years of abusive behavior, and often it is the abuser who is killed.
Myth No. 11: The availability of guns contributes to crimes of passion. In about 90 percent of "crime-of-passion" domestic homicides, the police had been called in previously to break up violence. In half the cases, the police had been called in five or more times. There is no evidence that a significant number of homicides occur simply because a lethal weapon is handy.
Myth No. 12: Automatic rifles and so-called assault weapons are too dangerous to be left in private hands. Over the past 50 years no civilian has ever used a legally owned machine gun in a violent crime. And despite their repeated use by drug dealers on "Miami Vice" and in the movies, no Uzi has ever been used to kill a police officer. Even gun control advocates concede that so-called assault weapons play a minor role in violent crime.
Myth No. 13: Gun control laws are especially needed to prevent the purchase of "Saturday Night Specials." Inexpensive handguns are involved in only 1 to 3 percent of violent crimes, and criminals are no more likely to use one than any other type of handgun.
Myth No. 14: People don't need guns for self-protection because they can rely on the police. About 83 percent of the population will be victims of violent crime at some point in their lives, and in any given year serious crime touches 25 percent of all households. Considering that, effectively, there is only one police officer on patrol for every 3,300 people, the odds are not likely to improve. And the courts have ruled that government has no duty to protect individual citizens from crime.
Myth No. 15: Gun ownership is not a constitutional right. The Second Amendment reflects the founders' belief that an armed citizenry (called the "general militia") was a necessary precaution against tyranny by our own government and its army. The idea that government has a constitutional right to disarm the general citizenry is totally foreign to the intent of the Constitution's framers.
< Message edited by MK2_GT -- 4/30/2008 6:00:03 AM >
I especially love #14. I had a guy dressed all in black with a mask jump over my back fence and head for the window. His mistake was that I was there having a smoke. My ex called the police and told them I was holding a man at gunpoint and could they please send someone. 15 minutes later she called again.....15 minutes later she called a third time......15 minutes later she called a fourth time and then five cars came flying up the street to respond to the call......50 minutes after the original call. What did they do you might ask.......let him go
While one that Clinton or Obama passes might not be as bad as Canadas, it would still worsen what most of us have to go through.
I would love for you to explain to everybody why Canada's system is so bad. Seriously, this should be great. It's certainly not perfect, but it's objectively better than the bs system you have down there.
I'm in the States a couple of times a year and I always make sure I buy health insurance for the time I'll be there plus a week on the end just in case. It's really sad to think of all the people that live there and can't afford to do this.
Team MF Member #999 Posts: 3249
Joined: 5/27/2006 From: no Status: online
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1987MustangGT5.0
quote:
ORIGINAL: 72MachOne99GT
National healthcare..
*shudders*
While one that Clinton or Obama passes might not be as bad as Canadas, it would still worsen what most of us have to go through.
I would love for you to explain to everybody why Canada's system is so bad. Seriously, this should be great. It's certainly not perfect, but it's objectively better than the bs system you have down there.
I'm in the States a couple of times a year and I always make sure I buy health insurance for the time I'll be there plus a week on the end just in case. It's really sad to think of all the people that live there and can't afford to do this.
...yeah i'd like to read about this too, and how it would be worse than what we have now in the states....
_____________________________
ORIGINAL: MustangMan628
V-6 is for real drivers. Go buy a Jetta if you want gas mileage and a chicks car. Buy a V-8 Mustang if you have no driving ability and need the extra horsepower to compensate and feel like you''''''''re fast.
While one that Clinton or Obama passes might not be as bad as Canadas, it would still worsen what most of us have to go through.
I would love for you to explain to everybody why Canada's system is so bad. Seriously, this should be great. It's certainly not perfect, but it's objectively better than the bs system you have down there.
I'm in the States a couple of times a year and I always make sure I buy health insurance for the time I'll be there plus a week on the end just in case. It's really sad to think of all the people that live there and can't afford to do this.
It's because the american media portrays it as being bad to make the average person believe it is inferior to our system, when in fact, it is not, and is actually far superior IMO. Treatment for ALL > SELECTIVE treatment for some.
It's because the american media portrays it as being bad to make the average person believe it is inferior to our system, when in fact, it is not, and is actually far superior IMO. Treatment for ALL > SELECTIVE treatment for some.
Do your eyes bulge from being so full of crap? I work in the health care system here. My Sis works in the field in Canada. I guess being young you haven't had the need to see a specialist in Canada? Good luck. People die waiting to receive specialty care in Canada. The waits are horrid. The quality of care isn't anywhere near what it is in the States. The only media hype going on is the support for the dimwitted libs who are trying to con us into thinking universal health care will improve things. Change, change, change cry the libs.......change for worse is more like it. Why is it so many Canuckers are coming across the border to obtain specialty care?? Oh......I get it.....it's because the media is telling them it's bad and they believe it. Riiiiiggght
its amazing how some folks will jump on what senator obama says and does and what kinda president he WOULD make while turning a blind eye to the president in now and how THAT administration not only misled our country into a war that has not only gotten thousands of our brothers killed but has left them stranded there with sub par equipment and supplies....
_____________________________
F.E.A.R ..... ITS ALL WHAT YOU DO WITH IT:
forget everything and run or face everything and recover "fight everything...conform to nothing"
It's because the american media portrays it as being bad to make the average person believe it is inferior to our system, when in fact, it is not, and is actually far superior IMO. Treatment for ALL > SELECTIVE treatment for some.
Do your eyes bulge from being so full of crap? I work in the health care system here. My Sis works in the field in Canada. I guess being young you haven't had the need to see a specialist in Canada? Good luck. People die waiting to receive specialty care in Canada. The waits are horrid. The quality of care isn't anywhere near what it is in the States. The only media hype going on is the support for the dimwitted libs who are trying to con us into thinking universal health care will improve things. Change, change, change cry the libs.......change for worse is more like it. Why is it so many Canuckers are coming across the border to obtain specialty care?? Oh......I get it.....it's because the media is telling them it's bad and they believe it. Riiiiiggght
Specialty care does not do much good when you can not even recieve regular care. Why is it that so many americans are going to Canada for rx's? I work in a pharmacy, all I know is that insurance companies in this country dictate treatment, not doctors.
It's because the american media portrays it as being bad to make the average person believe it is inferior to our system, when in fact, it is not, and is actually far superior IMO. Treatment for ALL > SELECTIVE treatment for some.
Do your eyes bulge from being so full of crap? I work in the health care system here. My Sis works in the field in Canada. I guess being young you haven't had the need to see a specialist in Canada? Good luck. People die waiting to receive specialty care in Canada. The waits are horrid. The quality of care isn't anywhere near what it is in the States. The only media hype going on is the support for the dimwitted libs who are trying to con us into thinking universal health care will improve things. Change, change, change cry the libs.......change for worse is more like it. Why is it so many Canuckers are coming across the border to obtain specialty care?? Oh......I get it.....it's because the media is telling them it's bad and they believe it. Riiiiiggght
?
In Calgary, a city of a million, like two guys die a year waiting for health care. It is terrible and unacceptable and creates an uproar every time it happens. There are without a doubt some problems in our system that have got to be fixed ASAP.
I had to go to the emergency room about a year ago after I shot crazy glue into my eye (holy **** that hurt ) and I waited about eight hours to see somebody. It totally sucked waiting that long and in pain, but they let the people with serious injuries in before me so what was I going to do? I waited, was treated and paid nothing for my care.
But you know, when something big happens, like when I lacerated my spleen snowboarding and was losing blood internally and basically had no blood pressure, blacked out in the ambulance as I faintly heard the paramedic scream "full lights and siren" to the driver, I had exceptional care. I was instantly put at the front of the line at emergency, had a cat scan a few hours later, stayed in intensive care for three days with a nurse monitoring me 24/7 and came back a few days later for a follow up cat scan and about 20 other tests. Know what all this cost me? $0.
So listen guys, if you sprain your ankle and go to the doctor in Canada you could potentially wait a really long time to get in. If something real happens, though, Canada has your back. I honestly hope all of you will get this kind of care in the States someday.
And why do Canadians go to the States to see specialists? Because the rich here can pay to get to the front of the line down there while poorer Americans either wait or do without. Yeah, sucks to be you. In Canada, it doesn't matter how much money you have, you wait in line like everybody else. How you can think this is an inferior system is beyond me.
Sorry about hijacking your gun-nut thread by the way. I guess conversations just end up going the direction they want.
You should answer your question. The reason people go to Canada for Rxs is money and availability. The FDA is a wonderul agency isn't it? Can't receive regular care eh? How is it all the illegals are getting the finest medical care in the world.......at taxpayer expense? Yes, it truly sucks that insurance companies have the ability to dictate quality of care base on expense......it really pisses docs off. Healthcare reform is way overdue.......not universal healthcare.
Team MF Member #999 Posts: 3249
Joined: 5/27/2006 From: no Status: online
are the life expectancy numbers for all USA/Canadian citizens across the world (strange, yes), or just within the borders?
_____________________________
ORIGINAL: MustangMan628
V-6 is for real drivers. Go buy a Jetta if you want gas mileage and a chicks car. Buy a V-8 Mustang if you have no driving ability and need the extra horsepower to compensate and feel like you''''''''re fast.
You should answer your question. The reason people go to Canada for Rxs is money and availability. The FDA is a wonderul agency isn't it? Can't receive regular care eh? How is it all the illegals are getting the finest medical care in the world.......at taxpayer expense? Yes, it truly sucks that insurance companies have the ability to dictate quality of care base on expense......it really pisses docs off. Healthcare reform is way overdue.......not universal healthcare.
The reason people in the USA go to Canada to get rx's is because THEIR INSURANCE DOES NOT COVER THEM!!!!! Actually you should be thankful we have the FDA, they have saved this country a time or two from some bad stuff. Okbfd do you think ppl in this country dont die while waiting to see a specialist, or how about while they wait for their operation to be approved by their insurance. Like I said Canada must be doing something right, you cannot argue with numbers.
Team MF Member #999 Posts: 3249
Joined: 5/27/2006 From: no Status: online
quote:
ORIGINAL: 1987MustangGT5.0
quote:
ORIGINAL: 99GTvert
are the life expectancy numbers for all USA/Canadian citizens across the world (strange, yes), or just within the borders?
Are you wondering if the war in Iraq say is skewing the American number down?
Not sure if people abroad would make up a big enough number to really affect the stat in any meaningful way.
it's not just the war in iraq, but i do think that our military involvement does have an impact on that number. and to me, a difference of less than two years doesn't really mean much. and are the numbers posted just an average of a few years ago?
_____________________________
ORIGINAL: MustangMan628
V-6 is for real drivers. Go buy a Jetta if you want gas mileage and a chicks car. Buy a V-8 Mustang if you have no driving ability and need the extra horsepower to compensate and feel like you''''''''re fast.
are the life expectancy numbers for all USA/Canadian citizens across the world (strange, yes), or just within the borders?
Are you wondering if the war in Iraq say is skewing the American number down?
Not sure if people abroad would make up a big enough number to really affect the stat in any meaningful way.
it's not just the war in iraq, but i do think that our military involvement does have an impact on that number. and to me, a difference of less than two years doesn't really mean much. and are the numbers posted just an average of a few years ago?
Really though, the best indication of how healthy a nation is shown by the health of its youngest population. Those numbers were from 2006 or 2007. I dont think the ~4,300 we lost in Iraq over however many years would really effect the Life expectancy.
are the life expectancy numbers for all USA/Canadian citizens across the world (strange, yes), or just within the borders?
Are you wondering if the war in Iraq say is skewing the American number down?
Not sure if people abroad would make up a big enough number to really affect the stat in any meaningful way.
it's not just the war in iraq, but i do think that our military involvement does have an impact on that number. and to me, a difference of less than two years doesn't really mean much. and are the numbers posted just an average of a few years ago?
I hear you, but two years isn't exactly chump change. Hopefully sombody can answer your question directly...
Printable Version
RE: Obama and guns - 
) and I waited about eight hours to see somebody. It totally sucked waiting that long and in pain, but they let the people with serious injuries in before me so what was I going to do? I waited, was treated and paid nothing for my care. 
I guess conversations just end up going the direction they want.
we lost in Iraq over however many years would really effect the Life expectancy. 