Anyone hear that San Francisco voted to ban the sales of all hand guns and ban home owners from having them as well? I heard something briefly about it and wondered if its true. I wouldnt be surprised seeing how they are all a bunch of leftie wackos out there...any truth to this? How can they tell someone they cant have a gun in THIER home for protection!? WTF

hmmmmmmmmmm lets see if they get past the 2nd amendment . Id like to see them ( do gooders ) remove my weapons from my home . guns dont kill people , people kill people .

for those that dont remember what it says
article 2 : A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

they'd rather wear a flower in their hair

The vote passed 58% to 42%...sounds like it's what the people want. I think Chicago and Washington DC already have something similar.

Don't think the Second Amendment really applies here anyway. The states and local governments can do just about whatever they want in the name of public safety.

I don't believe the Supreme Court has ever ruled a gun law unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

-spence

someone is always packing something in sanfran :hihi:

someone is always packing something in sanfran :hihi:
:laugha: :laugha: :laugha:
You beat me to it,
I was going to post something similar!!!

someone is always packing something in sanfran :hihi:


haha aint that the truth!

The vote passed 58% to 42%...sounds like it's what the people want. I think Chicago and Washington DC already have something similar.
-spence

Generally speaking most people are uninformed when it comes to firearms and firearms related issues.Day in and day out year after year its drilled into their heads that "guns are bad" without ever being told why simply because the people telling them don't have a sufficiently reasonably explanation.

Chicago and DC have extremely high crime rates where as in cities that allow CC of handguns the rate is very low.Also for every crime comitted with a firearm there are tenfold as many crimes prevented with one.Its peculiar how "the people" are never given those tidbits of information.

Also for every crime comitted with a firearm there are tenfold as many crimes prevented with one.Its peculiar how "the people" are never given those tidbits of information.
Probably because it isn't true. Care to cite the source?

I'm not a person who thinks guns a bad by the way...just that you don't have any god given right to own one.

-spence

they'd rather wear a flower in their hair

That's because they don't understand gun control.


Learn to shoot with both hands!

Pete

The media is THE biggest problem.Without getting into a log rant, for ex: everytime "assault weapons" are mentioned do you notice they show fully automatic weapons being fired ,as if those are the weapons being kept off the streets, and most people who dont understand guns fall right into it. Ive had people literally ask me, why do you need a "machine gun" anyway?. Media brainwashing. These same reporters also cant tell thhe diff between a revolver and a semi auto handgun if their lives depended on it, yet they are "reporting" the news to us. Makes you wonder how accurate the other news is.
San Fran can ban all the handguns they want,i have no reason to ever live there. I think they prefer Swordfighting anyway.

Probably because it isn't true. Care to cite the source?

I'm not a person who thinks guns a bad by the way...just that you don't have any god given right to own one.

-spence

Spence a Study my a Dr. Lott, forget what university he's from. Google his name and you should find it.

Dr. John Lott of the uber right wing American Enterprise Institute?

I agree there are plenty of gun myths...but I don't believe there's a 10:1 ratio of gun crimes to crimes stopped.

-spence

Reverse that ratio in my last post...Damn edit...

-spence

Probably because it isn't true. Care to cite the source?

I'm not a person who thinks guns a bad by the way...just that you don't have any god given right to own one.

-spence
Hey, did you realize there was a gun in the truck last weekend.....

Hey, did you realize there was a gun in the truck last weekend.....
My pinky finger was stuck in the damn barrel for nearly an hour! It was like a freaking Chinese torture puzzle :wave:

You should really lock those things up :jump1:

-spence

I saw this on the news last night. Am i correct that they said it applies to business owners also? If that's the case that's nuts.

I think it covers just about everyone besides the police and military folks...people who need guns to do their jobs.

-spence

might as well make change out of a bucket on the sidewalk i guess...kind of like the penny tray beside the register.

I saw this on the news last night. Am i correct that they said it applies to business owners also? If that's the case that's nuts.


Of course its nuts its San FranFreako. Those people are just so outta wack its disturbing. They seriosly need mental help. The criminals must be loving this law. They can rob buisnesses and homes knowing the folks are unarmed. Man those people are retarded out there.

It just boggles my mind, although you are right it is SanFanny. I still like the Pa. law about breaking and entering...if they flop out of the door after you shoot them for breaking in grab 'em by the boot heels and drag 'em in. :faga:

The truely pathetic part is that criminals will always have access to guns, and now the residents of San Fran. will not. In Boston where I went to school, I could buy a stolen gun for $20-$100, I would never do it, but I could have. When I turned 21 I jumped thru all of the hoops to get a permit so that I could buy a gun at $300. Does this make any sense?

Spence, I don't know if 10 to 1 was the number he came up with or not, but it was something most people would be amazed at. He has been attacked time and time again by the gun banners, but no one could discredit his paper on the subject and, in fact, it was praised for ti technical merit by several professors at well know colleges. What's the difference if its 5 to 1 or 10 to 1?

I'd still like to read it in context. He may be credible, but he's clearly mega biased...

-spence

I'd still like to read it in context. He may be credible, but he's clearly mega biased...

-spence
But then again...so are you

See if you can follow this...

A Nation of Cowards

http://www.rkba.org/comment/cowards.html

But then again...so are you
Actually I think I have a pretty moderate viewpoint on gun control :devil2:

-spence

A Nation of Cowards
So if I'm robbed at gunpoint, offering up my money is an act of cowardice?

That's pretty absurd.

-spence

So if I'm robbed at gunpoint, offering up my money is an act of cowardice?

That's pretty absurd.

-spence
Try finishing the essay....

You think I can read all that?

-spence

Probably because it isn't true. Care to cite the source?

I'm not a person who thinks guns a bad by the way...just that you don't have any god given right to own one.

-spence

You're right its not true it's actually a larger ratio.I used "tenfold" as a matter of keeping it simple.

The source I use for debunking the myths the antigun crowd likes to use is the Kleck Report.Google the name Gary Kleck.Its some of the only truly scientific research ever done on the gun control issue.

As an atheist I never considered my right to own a gun "god given" but I do
consider it a constitutional one.

So if I'm robbed at gunpoint, offering up my money is an act of cowardice?

That's pretty absurd.

-spence

No but the attitude that "Give them what they want and they won't hurt you"has allowed crime to run rampant in this country.And yes I'll say it that attitude allowed three airplanes to be flown into buildings only the fourth was prevented from doing so because the folks on THAT plane realized it was a bunch of BS.

And no matter how someone might try to analyze the above statement it is absolutely 100% true.

How does this apply to crime?Easy if the thugs knew that they couldn't get what they wanted without a struggle there would much LESS crime.Basically put a gun right back in their face and say "Sorry chump not me,not today".

The correct answer is to
A- give them your $$
then, B- shoot them in the back of the head as they are walking away.
Then C- take your $$ back, plus his $$ and gun.

:buds:

Try finishing the essay....
Ok, I did.

I will say it's pretty interesting, and also full of horse hockey. A brutally extended bout of mental masturbation intended only to reach a foregone conclusion.

Again, I'm not anti-gun and I do believe there are plenty of gun control myths. But the average Joe has about as much constitutional right to own a firearm as they do to drive the kids to school in an F-16.

-spence

But the average Joe has about as much constitutional right to own a firearm as they do to drive the kids to school in an F-16.

-spence

are you drinking agian???

You're right its not true it's actually a larger ratio.I used "tenfold" as a matter of keeping it simple.

The source I use for debunking the myths the antigun crowd likes to use is the Kleck Report.Google the name Gary Kleck.Its some of the only truly scientific research ever done on the gun control issue.
Well, according to my Google research the Kleck survey done in 1993 reported about 2 million defensive gun uses per year by law abiding citizens.

According to the Department of Justice in 1994 estimated this to be closer to 1.5 million defensive gun uses. They also concluded...

"Evidence suggests that this survey and others like it overestimate the frequency with which firearms were used by private citizens to defend against criminal attack."

According to the Department of Justice during the same time there were about 1.3 million nonfatal firearm related violent crime victims, this obviously doesn't include the 15,000 or so that were killed.

So at best it's more like a 1:1 ratio.

This also doesn't include such alarming statistics as the increased probability a gun kept in the home is to kill another family member (43x in 1986) or the increased suicide rate in homes with guns.

But I'm not here to write a book, just that I don't believe the ratio is 10:1 or even 5:1. Given the millions of other things a person can do to keep them self safe, it doesn't seem like all that compelling of an argument.

I'd also note that since those studies, the number of gun crimes has gone waaayyyy down for reasons other than people packing heat.

And more importantly, if giving PIEMMA my money is the best way to save my life, I'll do it every time and not feel my courage is diminished in any way :eek: :usd:

If you have nothing to prove, you take the smart way out...so what do you have to prove?

-spence

are you drinking agian???
Nope...hic...

:hidin:

Just because people think the Second Amendment gives a right to gun ownership doesn't make it a Constitutional right...and the issue to my knowledge hasn't ever been upheld citing the 2nd Amendment in the high courts.

Until then it's just a right granted under current laws and not the Constitution. Or so it appears to me...

-spence

I love you guys.... lol... read it again in the morning :-)

:jump:

-spence