Sotomayor's views on guns prompt questions

[BradB08]

You can only kill one person at a time. That's no fun.

And I can't make a guitar out of a handgun. I need something with balls, baby!

I certainly hope that you're joking.

It's an oxymoron as well because I wouldn't feel safer if I knew that my neighbor had assault weapons.

 

[darkdog]

I certainly hope that you're joking.

It's an oxymoron as well because I wouldn't feel safer if I knew that my neighbor had assault weapons.

Dude, I'm joking.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Well, in your words. =/

Liebling´s post
Yes you are right that I can´t understand some Americans´s POV over gun control since I know a lot of innocent people including teenagers/children were being shoot by senseless gun owners and police officers and often use those "accidently" as an excuse... and also many school shooting as well. Yes, I can´t understand why Americans still support gun control which they knew very well that it´s unsafety...

Sorry, I see different because there´re tooo mannnyyyyy shoot due lack of common sense since January 2009.


Yes of course, what I say is correct.

Example of many threads:

7 years old boy was being shot to kill by senseless house owner.

http://www.alldeaf.com/strange-stupid-news/65099-boy-7-dies-apparent-trespass-shooting.html

8 years old boy died due to negligence of his father who is gun owner.

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - Boy, 8, accidentally kills self at gun show

And sooo many shooting threads since January 2009.

I know you are very anti-gun and you certainly didn't like our America gun-friendly policy. What I see... all you did was critically gun system in America, just cos you do think it's a lack of common sense and, probably, you do think it should make it illegal. Well, if the government makes a law to ban guns and force polices (or guardians or whatever) to take all guns from gun owners, leaving them defenseless. So criminals could take a nice advantage for that. Even this - if government becomes an 'evil person' in future, which would force all soldiers to get ruin of what gov'ment dislike about a race. What a beautiful move! =/ I don't want to see guns are taken by under the new law in future...

I can see that you misinterpreted my post. Again, I never say that the gun should be ban but support gun to be restriction.

It doesn´t mean that I am anti-gun because I protect innocent people including children from senseless and irresponsible gun owners and want to see gun restriction and want to make sure that the people who lack of common sense should not own the gun.

Like, you force your cat to have no claws and the cat is not able to protect itself from any creature. If the cat is killed, who will protect it's little kittens?

I don´t declaw all of my cats.

Yeah... If guns are illegal and a woman's husband, who is pro-guns and knows how to use properly (but no guns), is killed by stranger, how would she protect her kids if a woman is completely defenseless against a criminal? Weapons are not always answer, either.

I do not support gun to be illegal.

I don´t feel like to own a gun but I respect people for want to own gun for very good reasons.

Okay. I know you would disagree what I said. That's fine. And, for your information, my pervious post is not completely referred you alone.

Peace.

Honestly, you misinterpreted my post.

Your not thinking correctly...

So, if I don't trust people with guns then you won't trust me?

What would you say about a gun owner who had shoots and kills a teenager for walking across his lawn? What would you say when a gun owner had blew the back of his wife's head off while she was sleeping? What about the Columbine High School shooting?

What is so wrong with keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, children, dangerous and irresponsible persons? I'm not one of an anti-gun people. I do respect the Second Amendment law, I just want to keep those guns out of the wrong hands by limit access to people who should not have guns. And for gun owners to locked up and stored their guns to keep out of reach of children. If we had smart gun technology to prevent others to use guns that belongs to an authorized person, then I wouldn't put up a fight. I would rather to see a reduction in violent crime in this country.

Exactly that´s what I am thinking the same.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

The fact is, governments trying to disarm their citizens is a continuing process, before, during and after WWII. The principle is still the same. An unarmed civil population is at the mercy of an armed military and police force that is controlled by the government.

ref: Death by "Gun Control"

for interesting link.

Accord the link, what I said about Hitler/Nazi and gun history is correction because German gun law is not same as Nazi´s gun law during WWII. Yes I support gun restriction, not gun banned.

Accord the link, some gun banned at different countries. I personally disagree to have gun banned.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

My post does make sense but you just don't understand what I was said.

You will still face serious debate in anytime because you are left wing since other members like Reba is right wing, left wing vs. right wing.

Yes I understand but only said that your post make no sense.

Actually, Reba & I have different POV. We share our debate with agree to disagree and sometimes fix our limit without take our posts each other personally. It´s not just Reba but other ADers as well as long as they know how to handle the debate with agreement to disagreement without take our posts personally.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Strict driving policies wouldn't going be any difference and driving policies in US are administered by state, it means different states can set up the driving exam, some could be tough when compare to other state.

Yes I am well aware that each states of the USA handle their own law differently.

Cell phone and driving at same time isn't DUI.
Driving under the influence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Personally, I think both cell phones & DUI are dangerous for drivers.

The accident had nothing to do with the fact that her/his hand was holding the phone. It was because her/his mind was distracted from her/his driving between talking and driving a car.

Of course, it's best way to teach teens to how to driving, I would be same thing if I have child.

This is your opinion.

I beleive that my child´s education comes first before learn driving. This is my opinon.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Erm, I thought correctly cos I trust wise people with guns. Secondly, you misunderstood me. The typical stance is "What is the point to have guns? Let's call a police!". It would not helpful at all. If you don't trust guns, and want to call before do something, how would it take a time to bear the high risky situation? The survival chance is so slim for you. That's my point.



Excuse me. I support the responsibility and wise choice people had, besides, I was talked about guns should keep legal. I do think the gun restriction is less effective, and the gun regulation is more effective. Stricter gun laws do not make any better. I stand on that.

Trust gun? Those material has nothing do with trust but person itself. We want to make sure that person who want to be gun owner should be responsible and use their good common sense.

Its about a person, not gun.

The fact is nobody suggest that gun should be illegal.

I support gun restricition.

 

[Cheri]

It would not helpful at all. If you don't trust guns, and want to call before do something, how would it take a time to bear the high risky situation? The survival chance is so slim for you. That's my point.

Who is to say only a gun is a good mean of self defense. My chance of surviving would not be slim if I don't own a gun, I do have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving with a weapon of my choice.

You would also have a 50/50 of a chance of surviving even if you shoot them first before they shoot you.

 

[Hwy99]

Just read half of this thread..

I agree with others that the guns should be restricted. I beleive only people who are good with responibilities with the guns can own it. Let me give some of examples:

I am gun owner, but I decide to return it to my parent's safe in their house because I can't trust my roommates. Who knows if they found my gun and plan to kill me for some reason, maybe if I have to envict them and they already sneak into my room and know where my gun was, they got mad and go to my room again to get the gun to kill me. I feel too much risk for me to keep a gun without secure it from others so I prefer to leave it at my parent's safe at their house.

THIS is the example of good responibilities, to protect myself and others in my house.

Now other example:

My brother have his gun too, me and my brother both got the gun from our great grandfather that died long time ago. He left it in his room on the floor and he never lock his room or even entirely of his home, and one day someone broke in his place and stole everything including the gun. Now my grandpa is in risk because the legal name on the gun is under his name, not my brother. If someone who stole the gun shoot someone, my grandpa will be in because the gun was under his name which could destroy his repubation of owning a gun.

THIS is not the responiblities of owning a gun.

Restricting the guns does not mean that only people who have good common sense that can own the gun, to me, it means just to be sure that people have chance to own a gun till if they broke the law for some reason, I would like their rights to be remove to protect the gun's repubation. That's called, "Privilage", that's exactly the same as learning how to drive and own a car. Now you wonder why governments can suspend people's liscense or to drive after the DUI or whatever. That applies even to those who steals, when they steal, the store will request that person to not come to the store again.

It's the privilage, not freedom of owning a gun. Privilage is the key to keep the freedom.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Just read half of this thread..

I agree with others that the guns should be restricted. I beleive only people who are good with responibilities with the guns can own it. Let me give some of examples:

I am gun owner, but I decide to return it to my parent's safe in their house because I can't trust my roommates. Who knows if they found my gun and plan to kill me for some reason, maybe if I have to envict them and they already sneak into my room and know where my gun was, they got mad and go to my room again to get the gun to kill me. I feel too much risk for me to keep a gun without secure it from others so I prefer to leave it at my parent's safe at their house.

THIS is the example of good responibilities, to protect myself and others in my house.

Now other example:

My brother have his gun too, me and my brother both got the gun from our great grandfather that died long time ago. He left it in his room on the floor and he never lock his room or even entirely of his home, and one day someone broke in his place and stole everything including the gun. Now my grandpa is in risk because the legal name on the gun is under his name, not my brother. If someone who stole the gun shoot someone, my grandpa will be in because the gun was under his name which could destroy his repubation of owning a gun.

THIS is not the responiblities of owning a gun.

Restricting the guns does not mean that only people who have good common sense that can own the gun, to me, it means just to be sure that people have chance to own a gun till if they broke the law for some reason, I would like their rights to be remove to protect the gun's repubation. That's called, "Privilage", that's exactly the same as learning how to drive and own a car. Now you wonder why governments can suspend people's liscense or to drive after the DUI or whatever. That applies even to those who steals, when they steal, the store will request that person to not come to the store again.

It's the privilage, not freedom of owning a gun. Privilage is the key to keep the freedom.

Yes, that´s exact my point what I am trying to say.

Accord your description, you have a very good common sense and responsible gun owner and know how take care of gun.

I´m sorry about your Grandfather, that he cause the problem thru your brother´s senseless. Did your Grandfather report his missing gun to police?

 

[Hwy99]

Yes, that´s exact my point what I am trying to say.

Yeah I read your posts and agree with you at the most.

Accord your description, you have a very good common sense and responsible gun owner and know how take care of gun.

Thanks I am just try my best.

I´m sorry about your Grandfather, that he cause the problem thru your brother´s senseless. Did your Grandfather report his missing gun to police?

Well my brother, my dad and grandpa all reported to the police, but thank god the police haven't found any crime evidence from the gun since it was stolen, but it happened since a year ago so I don't think the police will find the gun. I get the feelings that the gun probably was sold to the pawn shop or something for the money.

 

[Jiro]

Yes, there´re cons and pros about guard dog but most of my friends have family dogs who protect them... The burglar was tried in my friend´s house after midnight. Her family dog bark, wake my friend & her boyfriend up. The burglar tried to hit dog but lucky is my friend´s boyfriend is too fast and catched him and called the police on him. to her family dog.

Yes I personally prefer it.

Family Dog is not a guard dog. it's completely different. A barking family dog is no different from motion-detector flood light. You can program motion detector to make sound. For people who were born deaf - some stores activate an obnoxiously loud sound "DING!" whenever people open the door to enter.

That will scare the intruder away for sure!

 

[Jiro]

Massive internal damage and death from a bleed out are hardly "clean".

it's still a lot cleaner EXTERNALLY than dog bite wounds. At least you will not see flapping tissue hanging onto arm/leg or a chunk of ripped muscle/tissue out of body part or a half-ripped face or whatsoever.

 

[Jiro]

These "thugs" you speak of are still people, whether you acknowledge it or not.

Most of the time, they're victims of poverty and bad judgment. Would gangs exist if poverty didn't exist? Would people still be driven to desperation in a society that valued equality over greed and arrogance?

I love it when people have a one-dimensional view of other people. That's how we're conditioned and until we remove that conditioning, our society will continue to be stuck in a negative, three dimensional rut.

when it comes to basic level - you as the person means nothing to thugs. It's either you or them. They will kill you just for a piece of bread. Their well-being is of no importance to me when they threaten my own life. I'll worry about them after I neutralize the threat. I will do my best to render the medical assistance and call 911 to request for ambulance after I shot them.

I do feel it is my responsibility to help the thug that I just shot because like you said - they are people too. I get disgusted when people kill the thugs in execution-style. They are lower than thugs.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Like, you force your cat to have no claws and the cat is not able to protect itself from any creature. If the cat is killed, who will protect it's little kittens? Yeah... If guns are illegal and a woman's husband, who is pro-guns and knows how to use properly (but no guns), is killed by stranger, how would she protect her kids if a woman is completely defenseless against a criminal? Weapons are not always answer, either.

It´s too late for me to edit to add my post.

I am here to add one more.

Cat´s claw is a natural, not material like gun.

Yeah I read your posts and agree with you at the most.

Thanks I am just try my best.

Yes you have.

Well my brother, my dad and grandpa all reported to the police, but thank god the police haven't found any crime evidence from the gun since it was stolen, but it happened since a year ago so I don't think the police will find the gun. I get the feelings that the gun probably was sold to the pawn shop or something for the money.

I´m glad everything goes smooth.

Therefore yes, they selling the gun for money in black market.

Family Dog is not a guard dog. it's completely different. A barking family dog is no different from motion-detector flood light. You can program motion detector to make sound. For people who were born deaf - some stores activate an obnoxiously loud sound "DING!" whenever people open the door to enter.

That will scare the intruder away for sure!

Of course I know that family dog is not a guard dog. I only shared what I know from my friends that it´s not neccassary to have a guard dog but family dog is good enough.

it's still a lot cleaner EXTERNALLY than dog bite wounds. At least you will not see flapping tissue hanging onto arm/leg or a chunk of ripped muscle/tissue out of body part or a half-ripped face or whatsoever.

Respectfully disagree.

 

[Reba]

...The average homeowner does NOT need a M-16 or other assault weapons. What's wrong with a simple handgun?

How do you know what "the average homeowner" needs? Each person's circumstances are different.

BTW, one does not need to own a home in order to own a gun.

 

[Reba]

And sooo many shooting threads since January 2009.

The reason there are so many shooting threads is because:

1. Shootings are newsworthy, especially when they include unusual or emotional elements.

2. Anti-gun people like to point out any incidences of the misuse of firearms.

Notice that no one is interested in the thousands of examples of people safely and lawfully purchasing, keeping, and using their guns. That would be boring and not worthy of a thread.

 

[dreama]

I'm from England. Nobody here is alowed to own a gun. That doesn't stop them being used though.

I'm all in favor of people getting guns to use in self defence.

 

[dreama]

Let's ban cars first before we ban guns. Guns are much, much safer than cars that are drastically less risk to have.

Good point.

 

[BradB08]

Guns are safer than cars?

Where do people get this insane crap from? The NRA?