Oh Government!
Current time: 12-17-2017, 12:34 PM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: Kel
Last Post: zonsb
Replies: 2
Views: 1608

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Oh Government!
06-08-2011, 05:05 PM
Post: #1
Oh Government!
Here they go again with their gun control. It's amazing how blatant they can be and yet people remain blind.

A quote from the article;

"There are many like me, and fewer of them would be alive today were it not for exercise of their gun rights. In fact law-abiding citizens in America used guns in self-defense 2.5 million times during 1993 (about 6,850 times per day), and actually shot and killed 2 1/2 times as many criminals as police did (1,527 to 606). Those civilian self-defense shootings resulted in less than 1/5th as many incidents as police where an innocent person was mistakenly identified as a criminal (2% versus 11%).

Just how effectively have gun bans worked to make citizens safer in other countries? Take the number of home break-ins while residents are present as an indication. In Canada and Britain, both with tough gun-control laws, nearly half of all burglaries occur when residents are present. But in the U.S. where many households are armed, only about 13% happen when someone is home."

Police killing innocent people? Never.

Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to throw in your two cents? Somebody's making a penny here....
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2011, 08:19 AM
Post: #2
Re: Oh Government!
Kel Wrote:Here they go again with their gun control. It's amazing how blatant they can be and yet people remain blind.

A quote from the article;

"There are many like me, and fewer of them would be alive today were it not for exercise of their gun rights. In fact law-abiding citizens in America used guns in self-defense 2.5 million times during 1993 (about 6,850 times per day), and actually shot and killed 2 1/2 times as many criminals as police did (1,527 to 606). Those civilian self-defense shootings resulted in less than 1/5th as many incidents as police where an innocent person was mistakenly identified as a criminal (2% versus 11%).

I believe those statistics come from John Lott's book, More Guns, Less Crime. He originally was a proponent of gun control laws. As a statistician he set out to prove the numbers bore out his beliefs and to give real teeth to gun control laws. Much to his integrity the numbers showed the opposite and he wrote the truth -- that gun control laws harm people and that more guns equates to less crime and injury.

Quote:Police killing innocent people? Never.

Almost everyone is just following orders.The cops, we know are... well, "Just doing my job." And so do "civilians". It''s the law, ya know. It's written right here on this peace of paper so you must abide it. Why? Because it's the written word we call.... the law. Or, it's the word of God (that man wrote). What!? God couldn't find a pencil and paper -- couldn't make his/her own. Sheeesh. I'm just sayin.

About written law. People unwittingly believe, because it's written somewhere, wherever that may be, it must be honored or followed or adhered to. You must do this. You mustn't do that. This is prohibited. This is mandatory... You get the idea.

As far as I know only valid contracts carry the weight of words on paper. No man can obligate another man without his consent to all the relevant facts (meeting of the minds, full disclosure). Contracts are the only valid conceptual law I know of. Any "contract" that violates the non-aggression principle is an invalid contract.

Don't hit, murder, steal, cheat/defraud or assault anyone. People honor and abide the non-aggression principle because it affords them the most opportunities. To violate the non-aggression principle severely limits opportunities. Save for people that want to gain unfair advantages they get a government job wherein it's legal (not lawful, as to be lawful it must not entail initiatory force) to initiate force, threat of force and fraud.

People abide by the non-aggression principle because that's what civilized people do. Not because there's written on paper stating that it's the law.

The thought of how far the human race would have advanced absent initiatory force
staggers the imagination.

THE POINT: Unlike the government thief, a common thief doesn't claim his "craft" is honest.
Lawyer-like dishonesty a point: The common thief is honest when he tells you he's robbing you.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)