Dear Gun Control Advocates...

[Doomsday Dallas]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

ATF gunwalking scandal

[QUOTE]"Gunwalking", or "letting guns walk", was a tactic of the Arizona Field Office of the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), which ran a series of sting operations between 2006 and 2011 in the Tucson and Phoenix area where the ATF "purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders and arrest them." These operations were done under the umbrella of Project Gunrunner, a project intended to stem the flow of firearms into Mexico by interdicting straw purchasers and gun traffickers within the United States. The Jacob Chambers Case began in October 2009 and eventually became known in February 2010 as "Operation Fast and Furious" after agents discovered Chambers and the other suspects under investigation belonged to a car club.

The stated goal of allowing these purchases was to continue to track the firearms as they were transferred to higher-level traffickers and key figures in Mexican cartels, with the expectation that this would lead to their arrests and the dismantling of the cartels. The tactic was questioned during the operations by a number of people, including ATF field agents and cooperating licensed gun dealers.During Operation Fast and Furious, the largest "gunwalking" probe, the ATF monitored the sale of about 2,000 firearms, of which only 710 were recovered as of February 2012. A number of straw purchasers have been arrested and indicted; however, as of October 2011, none of the targeted high-level cartel figures had been arrested.

Guns tracked by the ATF have been found at crime scenes on both sides of the Mexico–United States border, and the scene where United States Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed December 2010. The "gunwalking" operations became public in the aftermath of Terry's murder. Dissenting ATF agents came forward to Congress in response. According to Humberto Ben

[FillJackson]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal
This should forever end the debate on gun control.

For all future references....

whenever the issue comes up... and it will... All you have do is say "Fast & Furious"


(Just for the record I do not own a gun,... don't even know how to shoot)

This is terrible logic.

It's like saying the Titanic should forever end the issue of ship travel.

It's like saying we should have laws against child molestation because of Denny Hastert.

[NumberSix]

What's the point? In order to find out where they get their guns, set up a place where they don't get their guns?

[Patrick Chewing]

My newest purchase....


http://www.gunsandammo.com/files/2014/06/Steyr_Arms_L40_A1_F.jpg

[DeuceWallaces]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

ATF gunwalking scandal





This should forever end the debate on gun control.

For all future references....

whenever the issue comes up... and it will... All you have do is say "Fast & Furious"


(Just for the record I do not own a gun,... don't even know how to shoot)

That has nothing to do with the gun control debate. Do you even follow politics? No one claims they end up in the hands of cartel members.

[Doomsday Dallas]

The whole point is the government (in this case, the ATF)... was
caught red handed distributing guns illegally... to very dangerous people.

And yet they want guns off the streets?

Selling guns to the bad guys... meanwhile disarming the good ones.

That's just unacceptable.

[CP3PO]

That has nothing to do with the gun control debate. Do you even follow politics? No one claims they end up in the hands of cartel members.
It shows that looser gun selling laws does lead directly to straw buyers and ultimately more crime. It makes it easier for people to get guns illegally. If you limit how many guns a person may own, they will be less inclined to become buyers who sell their guns to others, thus reducing the number of guns criminals possess.

[NumberSix]

It shows that looser gun selling laws does lead directly to straw buyers and ultimately more crime. It makes it easier for people to get guns illegally. If you limit how many guns a person may own, they will be less inclined to become buyers who sell their guns to others, thus reducing the number of guns criminals possess.
Why would you limit how many guns a person can legally buy?

[UK2K]

Answers please...



If you're the best country in the world, why do you fear your government? Is it because you see them destroying the rest of the world and don't want it to happen to America?

Being the best dick sucker in prison is cool and all, but you're still a dick sucker.

Similarly, we may have the most freedoms (for now, at least) but that doesn't mean I trust our government farther than I can throw them.

And when I say 'our government', I really mean 'our politicians'.

[FillJackson]

The whole point is the government (in this case, the ATF)... was
caught red handed distributing guns illegally... to very dangerous people.

And yet they want guns off the streets?

Selling guns to the bad guys... meanwhile disarming the good ones.

That's just unacceptable.
The whole point is your are taking a single example of something and using it to try to stop debate on a much larger and unrelated issue.

For example, here is a story on a cop who was convicted of criminally negligent homicide while on duty. Does prove we do no need laws against homicide? Or we don't need cops. No it does not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/22/nyregion/officer-guilty-of-negligence-in-03-killing.html

[FillJackson]

That has nothing to do with the gun control debate. Do you even follow politics? No one claims they end up in the hands of cartel members.

That claim that no guns reached mexico was made ATF and then later they had to retract it. (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2011/12/02/143067851/justice-withdraws-inaccurate-fast-and-furious-letter-it-sent-to-congress)

The inspector's general report (https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2012/s1209.pdf) mentions lots of gun recoveries in Mexico dating back to 2007.


H. Summary of Firearms Purchases and Seizures
Of the 474 firearms purchased during Operation Wide Receiver, ATF
Tucson did not interdict 410 of them. Some of the firearms that were not
interdicted were later recovered in the United States and Mexico. For example,
42 firearms purchased during Operation Wide Receiver were recovered in
Mexico between January 2007 and August 2011.
We found that the vast majority of the firearms that were not interdicted
were purchased in transactions demonstrating clear evidence of illegality. This number included 36 firearms that the subjects purchased and took to Mexico while Tucson agents were conducting electronic surveillance, and 59 firearms
that were sold to the subjects by the FFL in 8 transactions between February
12 and May 28, 2007, with minimal or no surveillance by ATF.
In April 2008, a firearm
purchased by Gonzalez was one of 60 firearms found at the scene of a gun
battle between competing factions of the Arellano-Felix Organization in
Tijuana, Mexico, in which 18 people were killed. Another firearm purchased by
Gonzalez was recovered around the same time in Tijuana, Mexico, at the scene of an attempted attack on a Mexican police commander as he attended his
children’s birthday party.
Tucson agents did interdict and seize firearms purchased during
Operation Wide Receiver in limited instances. In addition to the 17 lower
receivers intercepted in the June 2006 UPS shipment to San Diego, seizures
included 32 firearms during the traffic stop of Estrella-Sesma and on
July 12, 2007, and 15 firearms during the border stop of Lacarra-Badilla on
October 5, 2007, after the focus of the investigation had shifted to developing
evidence of drug activity.

[UK2K]

Is this because you've personally witnessed the horrific way the US government treat civilians from other countries (I recall you saying you were a soldier), and can picture them doing the same to their own people in the future?

Its alright you can admit it.

Truthfully, its because I've seen what our government does to OUR OWN people, never mind what is done to others across the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment

Cover-ups, people losing billions and just shrugging their shoulders cause 'oh well' (looking at you HillBilly), the VA system is a disaster but nobody can be fired.

Government has become swollen, out of control. Money over everything and the greed and corruption exists in every branch from the top all the way to the bottom.

I believe what I said because I know that if someone at the top of our government wants something done, it will be, no matter the costs. That's just the way it works now.

[Doomsday Dallas]

I don't want the people of this great nation to have more guns
to protect themselves from the government...

If the Government wants to kill you, they have a billion options at
their disposal.


I want the people to be armed for whenever civil unrest takes place.
Police won't be able to protect you, and neither will the government.
And yet, one day you'll be begging for their help because you don't
have the firepower to protect your family from what's going on outside.

What if all communications go down?... And you're on your own?
And because you gave up your right to bear arms... Or made it
harder for the average citizen to have an appropriate arsenal,
you will become more dependent on Big Brother protecting you.

This is not about protecting ourselves from Big Brother...
But rather becoming less dependent on it to save us.




As a society... you want to always strive for less government.
I know I won't ever be depending on FEMA for anything again.

[FillJackson]

I don't want the people of this great nation to have more guns
to protect themselves from the government...

If the Government wants to kill you, they have a billion options at
their disposal.


I want the people to be armed for whenever civil unrest takes place.
Police won't be able to protect you, and neither will the government.
And yet, one day you'll be begging for their help because you don't
have the firepower to protect your family from what's going on outside.

What if all communications go down?... And you're on your own?
And because you gave up your right to bear arms... Or made it
harder for the average citizen to have an appropriate arsenal,
you will become more dependent on Big Brother protecting you.

This is not about protecting ourselves from Big Brother...
But rather becoming less dependent on it to save us.




As a society... you want to always strive for less government.
I know I won't ever be depending on FEMA for anything again.

When did you depend on FEMA previously?

And do you see now why Fast and Furious is not an a reason not to debate gun control?

[Dresta]

Answers please...
The last one. How could anyone not distrust the US Government? I mean, they're already trying to instil the idea of a cashless society, which would give them total control and completely disenfranchise the citizen, and destroy every decent notion of privacy.

And they aren't so great. The fact people can still own weapons legally, is actually one of the few good things left about America. Ban guns and the place would quickly become a hellish nightmare with no check on the excessive criminality and violence of the American populace and the vast and inhuman urban sprawls that cultivate such nihilistic behaviour..

[Doomsday Dallas]

When did you depend on FEMA previously?

And do you see now why Fast and Furious is not an a reason not to debate gun control?

Ask the people of New Orleans when the last time was they had to depend
on FEMA.

Don't worry... they will be reminded shortly (as well as the entire black community) of that event when Will Smith's next movie debuts.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1161401/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_5


Based on actual events, John, a New Orleans native and combat Marine, risks his life in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina for the safety and rescue of 244 people trapped in his apartment building.





And in the grand scheme of things... getting caught distributing 2,000 guns
is a drop in the bucket as what's really going on... but it's little things getting
exposed, like this, that do factor into debates such as gun control.

So, I wish you could see the point I'm trying to make.

[UK2K]

And in the grand scheme of things... getting caught distributing 2,000 guns
is a drop in the bucket as what's really going on... but it's little things getting
exposed, like this, that do factor into debates such as gun control.

So, I wish you could see the point I'm trying to make.

But they didn't just distribute 2,000 guns.

They distributed 2,000 guns right into the hands of the people who turned around and used them against our own Border Patrol.


Since the end of Operation Fast and Furious, related firearms have continued to be discovered in criminal hands. As reported in September 2011, the Mexican government stated that an undisclosed number of guns found at about 170 crime scenes were linked to Fast and Furious.[54] U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (R–Calif.–49) estimated that more than 200 Mexicans were killed by guns linked to the operation.[55] Reflecting on the operation, Attorney General Eric Holder said that the United States government is "...losing the battle to stop the flow of illegal guns to Mexico,"[56] and that the effects of Operation Fast and Furious will most likely continue to be felt for years, as more walked guns appear at Mexican crime scenes.[57]

Those 200 deaths are a direct result of our incompetent government (nothing shocking, they have a lengthy track record), which is why I am amazed to hear anyone in this country suggest more government control is a good thing.

[CP3PO]

Why would you limit how many guns a person can legally buy?
So you can limit re-selling to criminals. Most of the criminal guns in the U.S. start by being purchased legally at gun stores, then are illegally sold among to criminals. If one can only buy 10 guns or so, they can't make a career of buying guns and selling them to criminals. This then makes the black market price of guns go up, and therefore fewer criminals can afford to even obtain guns illegally.

[DeuceWallaces]

People should definitely be allowed to own guns. Like a couple, to hunt, but that's it. I'm sorry, but if it came to a military state or rising up, we don't stand a chance even if we had tanks. There's no point. Look at those dipshits out west. That was just the FBI, not even the marines or whoever.

[FillJackson]

But they didn't just distribute 2,000 guns.

They distributed 2,000 guns right into the hands of the people who turned around and used them against our own Border Patrol.

Those 200 deaths are a direct result of our incompetent government (nothing shocking, they have a lengthy track record), which is why I am amazed to hear anyone in this country suggest more government control is a good thing.
For all the screwups of the ATF and US attorney in Arizona, and there were legitimately numerous screwups, to say they were distributing guns, I think, is off the mark. It was, after-all, intended as a law-enforcement operation. Put it this way, if the ATF wasn't operating in Arizona at all those guns would still be "distributed." The distribution channel was in existence before the ATF got involved.

The distribution channel for these guns : legal gun stores or even private gun dealers knowingly or unknowingly selling to gun buyers who were "straw purchasers" and these purchasers selling them on to the real buyers which might take another few more steps before it got the real bigshots. The only thing that would have prevented these guns from being "distributed" was if the gun dealer thought the the buyer was hinky and refused to sell. In this case, the network trafficking these guns could try another deal or another straw purchaser. Which was the problem arresting the straw purchasers only gets you the little fish.

Like in a drug case, they were trying to get the bigger fish. When cops or the DEA is investigating a drug trafficking network, do we say they are drug dealers?

[Patrick Chewing]

Nobody like my new gun??


:confusedshrug:

[FillJackson]

Ask the people of New Orleans when the last time was they had to depend on FEMA.
So I'm guessing never for you

[UK2K]

For all the screwups of the ATF and US attorney in Arizona, and there were legitimately numerous screwups, to say they were distributing guns, I think, is off the mark. It was, after-all, intended as a law-enforcement operation. Put it this way, if the ATF wasn't operating in Arizona at all those guns would still be "distributed." The distribution channel was in existence before the ATF got involved.

The distribution channel for these guns : legal gun stores or even private gun dealers knowingly or unknowingly selling to gun buyers who were "straw purchasers" and these purchasers selling them on to the real buyers which might take another few more steps before it got the real bigshots. The only thing that would have prevented these guns from being "distributed" was if the gun dealer thought the the buyer was hinky and refused to sell. In this case, the network trafficking these guns could try another deal or another straw purchaser. Which was the problem arresting the straw purchasers only gets you the little fish.

Like in a drug case, they were trying to get the bigger fish. When cops or the DEA is investigating a drug trafficking network, do we say they are drug dealers?

And if they had shipped a truck load of cocaine into downtown Chicago during a drug enforcement operation, and lost that truck, and that cocaine was scooped up by random people and used, would your response be the same?

Keep in mind, this cocaine is directly related to 200+ deaths. Is your opinion still 'meh'?

[bballnoob1192]

The whole point is the government (in this case, the ATF)... was
caught red handed distributing guns illegally... to very dangerous people.

And yet they want guns off the streets?

Selling guns to the bad guys... meanwhile disarming the good ones.

That's just unacceptable.

The "good" guys? please gimme some story of normal non military background people using guns to kill bad guys and saving the day. real life is not a ****ing movie. you know what the average joe does with a gun? shoot himself in the leg.

How many reports are there of idiots shooting themselves compared to someone shooting a criminal and saving people?

[UK2K]

The "good" guys? please gimme some story of normal non military background people using guns to kill bad guys and saving the day. real life is not a ****ing movie. you know what the average joe does with a gun? shoot himself in the leg.

How many reports are there of idiots shooting themselves compared to someone shooting a criminal and saving people?
http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/05/gun-control-owners-criminals/


283 in the past year, not including people who DIDNT need to fire because simply having a gun was enough to make someone think twice.

Are you serious? Lol

Shit like that is in the news every day.

Young people used guns for self defense as well. In September of 2014, an 11-year-old Oklahoma girl awoke around 4 a.m. to find that a man had broken into her home and stabbed her mother. The girl grabbed a handgun and shot the man twice, saving her mother’s life. The mother said she had just taught the daughter how to use the gun for self defense the week before.


It's sad youd rather this girl be dead.

Gang violence and suicide make up nearly 70% of gun related incidents so that whole 'X number of gun deaths' the Obama administration is true, but not. Which is a pretty common theme during his presidency.

[Dresta]

The "good" guys? please gimme some story of normal non military background people using guns to kill bad guys and saving the day. real life is not a ****ing movie. you know what the average joe does with a gun? shoot himself in the leg.

Can you seriously be stupid enough to believe this to be true? That in a country with over 300,000,000 guns, there has been no incidences of everyday people using their gun to successfully fend off an intruder or criminal? Really? In a place with as much violent crime as America? You have to be kidding...

Or your mind has simply been ruined by propaganda.

[~primetime~]

I don't own a gun because I am worried about the gov/military/etc....I own a gun because if someone breaks into my home I am going to blow their head off.

There are plenty of men out there who are bigger/stronger than myself, and I am not an MMA fighter, I work at a computer every day. If you are a threat to me or my family, I don't want to fist fight, you're getting fckin shot.

And any stats out there showing accidents vs defense or things of that nature do not apply to me. I am a responsible and sober adult, what other idiots out there are doing with their guns means nothing to me really.

[Dresta]

I don't own a gun because I am worried about the gov/military/etc....I own a gun because if someone breaks into my home I am going to blow their head off.

There are plenty of men out there who are bigger/stronger than myself, and I am not an MMA fighter, I work at a computer every day. If you are a threat to me or my family, I don't want to fist fight, you're getting fckin shot.

And any stats out there showing accidents vs defense or things of that nature do not apply to me. I am a responsible and sober adult, what other idiots out there are doing with their guns means nothing to me really.
Exactly. Aggregated statistics are not a justification for forcing people's security (and that of their families) out of their own hands.

[UK2K]

I don't own a gun because I am worried about the gov/military/etc....I own a gun because if someone breaks into my home I am going to blow their head off.

There are plenty of men out there who are bigger/stronger than myself, and I am not an MMA fighter, I work at a computer every day. If you are a threat to me or my family, I don't want to fist fight, you're getting fckin shot.

And any stats out there showing accidents vs defense or things of that nature do not apply to me. I am a responsible and sober adult, what other idiots out there are doing with their guns means nothing to me really.
Done and done.

Accidentally happen, but if you look up the statistics, as I pointed out, 3/4 of gun related deaths are suicide and gang violence, neither of which apply to me.

So I couldn't care less what the statistics say.

[FillJackson]

And if they had shipped a truck load of cocaine into downtown Chicago during a drug enforcement operation, and lost that truck, and that cocaine was scooped up by random people and used, would your response be the same?

Keep in mind, this cocaine is directly related to 200+ deaths. Is your opinion still 'meh'?
I never say my opinion was 'meh.' I said their screwups occurred within the context of a law enforcement operation. It's not like these were rogue agents who were selling guns, the issue is blundering not corruption.

I don't think your example is apples to apples either. They would be the ones shipping a truck would they? They would be tracking a truck driven by criminals.

They didn't do "the shipping" or "the distributing" of the guns. That was being done by an existing criminal network. What they did do was not disrupt this distribution of guns. They did this with legitimate law enforcement goal of learning who directing this network and arresting them. An approach used for decades in drug cases. Their screwup was this was too risky a strategy, because, especially given the size and capabilities of the team was too small to actually ensure they wouldn't lose the guns. Also a bunch of lost AR-15s are riskier than a bunch of lost coke.

My point in this thread, is that this example is completely irrelevant to the debate on gun control.


What is the source for 200 deaths?

[UK2K]

I never say my opinion was 'meh.' I said their screwups occurred within the context of a law enforcement operation. It's not like these were rogue agents who were selling guns, the issue is blundering not corruption.

I don't think your example is apples to apples either. They would be the ones shipping a truck would they? They would be tracking a truck driven by criminals.

Not to the T, but the premise remains the same. It would be apples to apples if they 'allowed' cocaine dealers to sell tainted cocaine they knew was lethal that lead to a string of overdoses.

RPG's are illegal to own, but they can be found all over Mexico, so had they allowed RPG's to be sold (cause they are already bought and sold anyway, right?), would that be a solid plan?


They didn't do "the shipping" or "the distributing" of the guns. That was being done by an existing criminal network. What they did do was not disrupt this distribution of guns. They did this with legitimate law enforcement goal of learning who directing this network and arresting them. An approach used for decades in drug cases. Their screwup was this was too risky a strategy, because, especially given the size and capabilities of the team was too small to actually ensure they wouldn't lose the guns. Also a bunch of lost AR-15s are riskier than a bunch of lost coke.

That's why I had to adjust my comparison so that the coke was as dangerous as a rifle. Had to get the apples to equal the apples.




My point in this thread, is that this example is completely irrelevant to the debate on gun control.

I agree. In my mind, there is no debate, so it's irrelevant. Furthermore, given the track record of government incompetency, this incident was neither shocking nor surprising (though it should have been).



What is the source for 200 deaths?

As reported in September 2011, [B]the Mexican government stated that an undisclosed number of guns found at about 170 crime scenes were linked to Fast and Furious.[54] U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (R–Calif.–49) estimated that more than 200 Mexicans were killed by guns linked to the operation.[55] Reflecting on the operation, Attorney General Eric Holder said that the United States government is "...losing the battle to stop the flow of illegal guns to Mexico,"

According to Humberto Ben

[Riddler]

http://nypost.com/2016/05/21/the-scandal-in-washington-no-one-is-talking-about/

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1118671/pg1



I thought something was up....

[plowking]

People that own guns in here, why do you need them?

[Riddler]

People that own guns in here, why do you need them?


People that own guns in here, why do you want them?

fixed...

I will not let the ISH community fall for your trick question :)

[LootOP]

Look up the #'s of gun related violence, general murders and homicides in countries with control compared to those without control.

[Snarky Narc]

And any stats out there showing accidents vs defense or things of that nature do not apply to me. I am a responsible and sober adult, what other idiots out there are doing with their guns means nothing to me really.
But your kids are not, and if they choose to, they will figure out a way to get a hold of your gun when they are in their teens.

[NumberSix]

Look up the #'s of gun related violence, general murders and homicides in countries with control compared to those without control.
Yeah, the countries with gun control have much higher murder and violent crime rates. When this is pointed out though, the dillusional anti-gunners invariably declare "oh, well you can't include countries like Brazil and South Africa. Those countries don't count". Why exactly they "don't count" is anybody's guess.

[Snarky Narc]

Yeah, the countries with gun control have much higher murder and violent crime rates. When this is pointed out though, the dillusional anti-gunners invariably declare "oh, well you can't include countries like Brazil and South Africa. Those countries don't count". Why exactly they "don't count" is anybody's guess.
I don't know about South Africa, but all citizens in Brazil are allowed to have guns. Brazil does very little to try to remove guns from circulation, so of course they have guns everywhere. :confusedshrug:

Though you are right, they did try to make it so you have to register your guns in 2003, which led to a drop in firearms sold and firearm deaths. Have they solved the problem? No. Did they reduce it? Yes.

[UK2K]

But your kids are not, and if they choose to, they will figure out a way to get a hold of your gun when they are in their teens.

Kids will do dangerous shit regardless.

I was stealing the car and driving around before I even had a permit. Nothing you can do except teach them responsible gun handling.

Unless you don't want guns at all, which is YOUR right. Notice, I said yours.

It isn't your right to not own one, and then demand I don't own one either.

Again, if leftists were all about gun control, they'd let everyone up and down the block know they are anti-gun by sticking a big sign in their yard. I have a sign on my back patio that says 'I don't fire warning shots'... I've got no shame in the fact I own guns.

So be proud of your anti-gun stance and let the world know!

[Snarky Narc]

Kids will do dangerous shit regardless.

I was stealing the car and driving around before I even had a permit. Nothing you can do except teach them responsible gun handling.

Unless you don't want guns at all, which is YOUR right. Notice, I said yours.

It isn't your right to not own one, and then demand I don't own one either.

Again, if leftists were all about gun control, they'd let everyone up and down the block know they are anti-gun by sticking a big sign in their yard. I have a sign on my back patio that says 'I don't fire warning shots'... I've got no shame in the fact I own guns.

So be proud of your anti-gun stance and let the world know!
Right, my point was he was claiming that his guns won't be involved in an accident because he is responsible. My point was, they can be involved in an accident because one of his kids can get a hold of it, thus those stats would apply to his household. Thanks for backing me up though that the kids are likely to do reckless stuff with their parents' belongs. :cheers:

[UK2K]

Right, my point was he was claiming that his guns won't be involved in an accident because he is responsible. My point was, they can be involved in an accident because one of his kids can get a hold of it, thus those stats would apply to his household. Thanks for backing me up though that the kids are likely to do reckless stuff with their parents' belongs. :cheers:

Ahh, well in that case, yes, kids will do dumb shit.

But I wont not put a pool in because my kids may drown. I won't not put up a tree house because my kids may fall.

And I wouldnt not keep a gun because my kid might find it, rack it, and then shoot themselves with it.

[Snarky Narc]

Ahh, well in that case, yes, kids will do dumb shit.

But I wont not put a pool in because my kids may drown. I won't not put up a tree house because my kids may fall.

And I wouldnt not keep a gun because my kid might find it, rack it, and then shoot themselves with it.
That's fine. Just important to evaluate the risk/reward of a situation, and not dismiss stats because you are convinced your sense responsibly makes you immune to the risks. Kind of like how most drivers over estimate their abilities according to most stats. People tend to think they are above average drivers, but obviously not everybody can be above the mean.

[~primetime~]

Right, my point was he was claiming that his guns won't be involved in an accident because he is responsible. My point was, they can be involved in an accident because one of his kids can get a hold of it, thus those stats would apply to his household. Thanks for backing me up though that the kids are likely to do reckless stuff with their parents' belongs. :cheers:
By the time they are in their teens they will have fired guns and be completely aware of the dangers. The more you keep things away from kids, the more attractive it is to them...the forbidden fruit. If I do things correctly they won't even care to play with guns. Part of being a responsible owner is educating your kids on them.

And good luck to them getting into a fingerprint activated gun safe anyway...they will have to pull some mission impossible shit

[~primetime~]

That's fine. Just important to evaluate the risk/reward of a situation, and not dismiss stats because you are convinced your sense responsibly makes you immune to the risks. Kind of like how most drivers over estimate their abilities according to most stats. People tend to think they are above average drivers, but obviously not everybody can be above the mean.
Driving is different...other drivers are out of your control.

With a firearm you are in full control for the most part.

[Snarky Narc]

Driving is different...other drivers are out of your control.

With a firearm you are in full control for the most part.
With your children, you are not in full control.

[Snarky Narc]

By the time they are in their teens they will have fired guns and be completely aware of the dangers. The more you keep things away from kids, the more attractive it is to them...the forbidden fruit. If I do things correctly they won't even care to play with guns. Part of being a responsible owner is educating your kids on them.

And good luck to them getting into a fingerprint activated gun safe anyway...they will have to pull some mission impossible shit
Teens being aware of the dangers does not stop them from engaging in those dangers. We see it repeatedly that teens think the dangers won't affect them.

And by locking the guns away, aren't you creating that forbidden fruit that you were just talking about?

Fingerprint is a good start though.

[UK2K]

Teens being aware of the dangers does not stop them from engaging in those dangers. We see it repeatedly that teens think the dangers won't affect them.

And by locking the guns away, aren't you creating that forbidden fruit that you were just talking about?

Fingerprint is a good start though.

To his point, we had guns unlocked my entire childhood. I knew not to play with them because my dad would beat my ass if I got caught.

But, its a different world we live in today. Discipline is no longer allowed, so people do dumber and dumber things.

[Dresta]

With your children, you are not in full control.
Of your gun? Of course you are.

What are you dribbling about?

[Snarky Narc]

Of your gun? Of course you are.

What are you dribbling about?
My father had about as good of a gun safe as you could get when I was younger, and I figured out how to get in it by the age of 13. He was fully convinced that he had full control. People tend to underestimate the intelligence of children. And they also tend to say, "Well my kids won't do that, I will teach them to be responsible," which we all know kids will do what they do despite parents' wishes (as UK2K did with his parents' car). Primetime is pretty guilty of saying something along those lines just today.

[UK2K]

My father had about as good of a gun safe as you could get when I was younger, and I figured out how to get in it by the age of 13. He was fully convinced that he had full control. People tend to underestimate the intelligence of children. And they also tend to say, "Well my kids won't do that, I will teach them to be responsible," which we all know kids will do what they do despite parents' wishes (as UK2K did with his parents' car). Primetime is pretty guilty of saying something along those lines just today.

Did he teach you responsible firearm safety, or no? Cause my dad did, and I didn't play with guns despite them being out in the open. If he did teach you 'responsible' firearm safety, and you still played with it, you should have had your ass beat.

[Snarky Narc]

Did he teach you responsible firearm safety, or no? Cause my dad did, and I didn't play with guns despite them being out in the open.
Yes. My dad is a hunter and is extremely against people using guns improperly. He is afraid that anybody who breaks gun rules makes a case for people to increase gun control, so he is extra careful. Not only did he teach me, but I went through a hunters safety course. Didn't stop me from being curious if I could get access to his guns, and I did. He also didn't know I was able to do so until about 10 years later. Luckily, I was emotionally stable and had no intent to use the guns.

And yeah, there would have been hell to pay if I got caught. But as other teens, I was convinced I could get away with it without getting caught. I luckily didn't get caught.

[Kblaze8855]

Ban guns and the place would quickly become a hellish nightmare with no check on the excessive criminality and violence of the American populace and the vast and inhuman urban sprawls that cultivate such nihilistic behaviour..


Define "quickly" for me if you dont mind. What do you think happens exactly to just....turn America into a hellish nightmare?

Thus far every single thing in my life ive been told would ruin this country has not. Nothing seems to ruin this country....people just talk about how its being ruined...and we never seem to get there.

This would do it?

[UK2K]

Yes. My dad is a hunter and is extremely against people using guns improperly. He is afraid that anybody who breaks gun rules makes a case for people to increase gun control, so he is extra careful. Not only did he teach me, but I went through a hunters safety course. Didn't stop me from being curious if I could get access to his guns, and I did. He also didn't know I was able to do so until about 10 years later. Luckily, I was emotionally stable and had no intent to use the guns.

And yeah, there would have been hell to pay if I got caught. But as other teens, I was convinced I could get away with it without getting caught. I luckily didn't get caught.

I never had the desire to play with a gun, but they were also available to me any time I wanted as long as I asked. Even before I was a teenager, I was taking them out and shooting them in the woods behind my house. But if I wasn't shooting them, I wasn't playing around with them in the house either.

I also didn't tempt fate by doing what I wasn't supposed to either... not sure what kind of discipline your father dished out, but mine punishments were bad enough to erase any temptation I ever had.

[~primetime~]

Accidental child shootings are pretty rare...looks like there were only 83 in 2015 (18 and younger), and I bet all 83 could have been prevented or involved an irresponsible owner. I would also bet only a tiny fraction of them, if any, involved a safe being cracked into.

I imagine the bulk of them took place in trailer parks/ghettos...where the gun owner left his firearm out, next to an empty liquor bottle and a pack of zig-zags...and that isn't me.

[Snarky Narc]

I never had the desire to play with a gun, but they were also available to me any time I wanted as long as I asked. Even before I was a teenager, I was taking them out and shooting them in the woods behind my house. But if I wasn't shooting them, I wasn't playing around with them in the house either.

I also didn't tempt fate by doing what I wasn't supposed to either... not sure what kind of discipline your father dished out, but mine punishments were bad enough to erase any temptation I ever had.
It was more the confidence in knowing I wouldn't get caught. He had a near hour commute to work, and worked until 5, so when I got home from school at about 4, I knew I had 2 hours before he was home. This meant that the only remaining person I had to fear catching me was my mom, but if she went grocery shopping or something, I knew that was 30 minutes plus.

Even in your case, it worked out great obviously. But all it would have taken is some bullying at school for you to have aggression towards others, and you could have been another kid on the news. You obviously weren't, and maybe if you were heading down that path, your parents would have taken alternative action to keep the guns out of your hands. But, you were still a kid, and you had access to a gun. That inherently has risk to some level.

[Snarky Narc]

Accidental child shootings are pretty rare...looks like there were only 83 in 2015 (18 and younger), and I bet all 83 could have been prevented or involved an irresponsible owner. I would also bet only a tiny fraction of them, if any, involved a safe being cracked into.

I imagine the bulk of them took place in trailer parks/ghettos...where the gun owner left his firearm out, next to an empty liquor bottle and a pack of zig-zags...and that isn't me.
Well, that is good info to learn. Decent amount of assumptions following the stats, but still better stats in general. How many non-accidental shootings?

I disagree with the bottom lines though. I've known many other non "trailer park/ghetto" kids who got their hands on a gun no problem. That is just blatant stereotyping.

[UK2K]

It was more the confidence in knowing I wouldn't get caught. He had a near hour commute to work, and worked until 5, so when I got home from school at about 4, I knew I had 2 hours before he was home. This meant that the only remaining person I had to fear catching me was my mom, but if she went grocery shopping or something, I knew that was 30 minutes plus.

Even in your case, it worked out great obviously. But all it would have taken is some bullying at school for you to have aggression towards others, and you could have been another kid on the news. You obviously weren't, and maybe if you were heading down that path, your parents would have taken alternative action to keep the guns out of your hands. But, you were still a kid, and you had access to a gun. That inherently has risk to some level.

In eastern Kentucky in the 90's, you just beat people you didn't like. Nobody really cared. There were no bullies at our school. :oldlol:

It's the softies you gotta be worried about now a days. The ones who wear pink and dont have friends and aren't athletic and have no friends. Those are the ones who go nuts.

But guns are so easily available now that I could get one if I wanted to... I mean, if I was in the same high school now (outside of Louisville) guns and drugs and pretty much anything you wanted was only a phone call away.

[Riddler]

We are at war.... you guys realize this right?

Every state should do what they feel is necessary... but as long as
we (TEXAS) got drug cartels right below our feet... I'm all about
keeping our right to bear as many guns as we want.

For all we know...

There may come a day you wish your 12 year old boy was carrying
a gun while he plays outside. $hit... in some places with extreme
wild life... you'd be an idiot not to have a gun with you.

Lions, Tigers, Bears... and Drug Cartels (armed by our own government).

[UK2K]

Well, that is good info to learn. Decent amount of assumptions following the stats, but still better stats in general. How many non-accidental shootings?

I disagree with the bottom lines though. I've known many other non "trailer park/ghetto" kids who got their hands on a gun no problem. That is just blatant stereotyping.

Your post got me curious...

http://www.marketplace.org/2013/11/04/wealth-poverty/income-upshot/behind-data-gun-ownership-and-income

Thought that was interesting. I'd have thought it would have been less as you go up, but, I was wrong.

[Snarky Narc]

Your post got me curious...

http://www.marketplace.org/2013/11/04/wealth-poverty/income-upshot/behind-data-gun-ownership-and-income

Thought that was interesting. I'd have thought it would have been less as you go up, but, I was wrong.
Got to be able to afford a gun to buy a gun :cheers:

[Snarky Narc]

We are at war.... you guys realize this right?

Every state should do what they feel is necessary... but as long as
we (TEXAS) got drug cartels right below our feet... I'm all about
keeping our right to bear as many guns as we want.

For all we know...

There may come a day you wish your 12 year old boy was carrying
a gun while he plays outside. $hit... in some places with extreme
wild life... you'd be an idiot not to have a gun with you.

Lions, Tigers, Bears... and Drug Cartels (armed by our own government).
Guns while hiking make a lot of sense to me if you are in an area with dangerous animals. However, why would drug cartels be interested in you? :biggums:

[~primetime~]

Well, that is good info to learn. Decent amount of assumptions following the stats, but still better stats in general. How many non-accidental shootings?

I disagree with the bottom lines though. I've known many other non "trailer park/ghetto" kids who got their hands on a gun no problem. That is just blatant stereotyping.
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/ChildGunDeaths4_1.png

this is homicide but it backs up the notion that hood kids have more access to guns...you can call it stereotyping, I'll call it being realistic.

[Snarky Narc]

Access or use? There are definitely some areas where violence rates are higher, including areas with high gang activity.