Posted on 11/19/2001 12:49:32 PM PST by Dan from Michigan
By and large, legal gun owners are exceptionally more law abiding than the average citizen. Their children far less likely to be involved in criminal behavior, and a whole slew of positive demographics. Also, on average, they are about half as likely to shoot the wrong person to death as are police (There are several reasons for this, some of which are not relevant for air-marshalls).
if that where the case, there would be zero instances of little kids accidentally shooting themselves with their parent's guns.
Actually, for "little kids" that's down there with choking to death on grapes, and lower than each toilet bowls and buckets.
By and large, legal gun owners are exceptionally more law abiding than the average citizen. I forgot to mention that as of 1990, the only lawfully owned automatic weapon used in a crime had been a police officer.
After all of that, don't think I'm sniping a t police officers. I am not. It's just that those with CCWs and such represent a very law-abiding cross-section.
It's rather self-selecting. If you understand firearms, and expect others to have them as well, generally you will not act in ways that bring them into use. Ever heard of a gun-fight at a gun-show?
Perhaps not, but fear of failure would be up there.
hehehe :)
I know what you mean.
Then why arm the Sky Marshalls?
Tell that to any criminal that has been shot dead.
No problem.
You have the sky marshalls there for the same reaon that you send in trained troops into Afghanistan, and not a bunch of homeowners from Duluth who want to show these idiots what's what.
Intense, specific training. Trained to deal with hostage situations. Professionals.
These terrorists are highly trained commandos, I think that citizens would do more harm than good.
We can debate this endlessly, but neither one of us has real data to throw around. We can discuss all the good that guns do to prevent crime in the streets, I just think that the situation os quite different when you are 35,000 feet in the air, and dealing with trained killers rather than junkies looking for a VCR.
"Actually, for "little kids" that's down there with choking to death on grapes, and lower than each toilet bowls and buckets."
What? No grapes on airplanes? Damn!
Negligence is negligence, and I was responding to someone who used an absolute term in relation with the level of reponsible behavior of ALL gun owners.
"Perhaps not, but fear of failure would be up there."
Maybe, or maybe the gunfight in and of itself was the mission. A few mid-air gunfights between armed passengers and terrorists and people start driving places instead of flying. The true goal of 9/11 was more economic than the murder of the people in the buildings.
LG, Nah. "Those" morons can't afford the plane fare. They spend the loot too fast on booze and drugs. And maybe a bigger gun. Peace and love, George.
LOL!!
True, true...
In fact, in 1998, for every time that a civilian used a handgun to kill in self-defense, 51 people lost their lives in handgun homicides alone. Yet, there have been an increasing number of news reports that women are a prime target for the gun industry as first-time handgun buyers. Left out of those reports is the fact that in 1999 for every one time a woman used a handgun to kill in self-defense, 120 women were murdered with handguns.
This statistic actually shows the NECESSITY of owning firearms. People are being murdered in far larger numbers than they are defending themselves. Don't you think that if more people owned handguns (and knew how to use them), that this homicide to defense ratio would be much smaller?
It's ironic that the very statistics the gun-grabbers use to defend their position actually support the private ownership of guns for self-defense.
"THese people have been twisting the truth for so long that they've become shameless about it."
I wish that he could threaten them with some sort of a law suit, requiring them to do a public retraction...
Mark
It won't happen. They can just call George Soros, the Joyce Foundation, Tides Foundation, Andrew McKelvey, etc and get more money.
It still would be great to put them on defense. The Anti-Self Defense lobby wasted 280,000 here in Michigan on a referendum drive(that was tossed in the courts). Most of the money came from Andrew McKelvey and the Tides Foundation(McKelvey has ties to that as well). That's our problem. These foundations and deep pockets of the McKelveys of the world.
Thanks--I hadn't seen the actual statistics for that specific point--I figured it had to be about that ratio, but I didn't have actual facts at hand.
ROFLAMAO!! You put that SOOOO well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.