Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 121. (Read 450471 times)

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-23/prescription-pain-killers-far-riskier-gun-ownership

People are simply starting to recognize that the top end of government is full of crooks and potential criminals. If we are going to have war all the time, let's at least have a fighting chance, and let's direct the war against the crooks and criminals.

Lego Sets Are Becoming Much More Violent
A new study found that the number of Lego weapons has skyrocketed since 1970.









    In what may be a sad reflection of society as a whole, a new study has found Legos have become increasingly more violent in the last 30 years.

    The study, conducted by the University of Canterbury, looked at the number weapons included in Lego kits produced since 1978 (the first year weapons were available) and the perceived violence in imagery created by the company. It found an “exponential increases of violence over time” in both categories.

    While the iconic, brightly colored toy blocks have existed since 1949, the first weapons weren’t introduced until 1978, when a castle kit included “a sword, a halberd, and a lance.”

    The number of Lego weapons overall has increased greatly since then. Researchers found that nearly 30 percent of all Lego sets sold today now include at least one weapon. In 1978, that figure was under 5 percent.

    The researchers only looked at smaller, pre-manufactured weapons that are one brick large (guns, cannons, swords, etc.) and excluded larger weapons that have to be assembled.

    That means the Death Star — which by conventional standards is “certainly a weapon,” the study concedes — isn’t included in the total weapons count. The light saber introduced in the “Star Wars” kit, however, is considered a weapon.

    The study also looked at imagery produced by Lego that accompanies the sets, and found it has become more violent as well.

    Today, close to 40 percent of all the images in the Lego catalog contain some sort of violence, the study found, with the fastest growth occurring in cases of shooting.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lego-sets-violent-study_us_57431aa5e4b0613b512ac4c4?mkwm7mqat169cz0k9

What is "legal?" All legal is, is some people telling some other people what to do.

If you want to be a person who adheres to legal, all that means is that you want the right to tell others what to do and to be told what to do by others.

It is lawful for everyone to own guns, even though it might not be legal.

What gives anyone the right to tell anyone else what to do with their lives or property? Nothing.

Every legal action is unlawful in some ways, even though it might be lawful in other ways. Legal has to do with taking the rights away from some people while enhancing the rights of others.

Owning guns might be illegal in some areas or ways, but it is lawful.

GSW mortality rate is low and the majority of the time survivable, period. Guns aren't made to kill, otherwise no GSW would be survivable whether you were shot in the toe in a highest-level GSW trauma-certified emergency room, or in the early days of surgery. Many have been shot in the head and lived productive lives, too.

Maybe they can lighten the photos of the gun in Photoshop to make it look white and claim the gun is racist.

Then gun makers have roundly failed, as most GSWs (not fired by a master sniper and/or at a forcibly restrained target) are survivable and have been for centuries.

http://www.local10.com/news/weird-news/florida-man-finds-bullet-hole-in-arm-3-days-after-accidentally-shooting-self?source=wplg

The wailing and gnashing created by the auction is a thing of beauty.   

Behold:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525719/-He-murdered-Trayvon-and-now-he-seeks-to-auction-the-bloody-gun

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525767/-George-Zimmerman-announces-plan-to-auction-the-gun-he-used-to-kill-Trayvon-Martin

The low information types living in their tribal reality bubble just can't understand why

A. the gun isn't a murder weapon because the jury (and DOJ) declined to indicate GZ committed murder, and

B. it's the height of hypocrisy to advocate lynching GZ "BECAUSE CIVIL RIGHTS."

Tray-Bon Nebber Hert Nuffen^®   

Shooting a gun in order to use it to defend yourself is not necessarily required, so your logic is flawed. You can also make the same argument about cars, but no one is screaming to ban them (yet).

guns are made only for the purpose to kill either human or animal.Bullets does not recognize person it only enters in to the body.its impossible that if u use gun and use it perfectly every time, only one miss can cause severe damage.

I bet Gun Broker is kicking itself now after seeing the taste they could have got of that $65 mil. As a former Gunbroker.com customer, next time I buy a gun online, it will not be there.

Zimmerman gun bids reach $65M on second auction site



 Bidding for the handgun George Zimmerman used to shoot and kill Trayvon Martin in 2012 topped $65 million after Zimmerman moved the sale to a new auction site.

Zimmerman moved the auction to United Gun Group, an online firearms marketplace, on Thursday after it was rejected by Gunbroker.com. The starting bid of 5,000 quickly escalated to $65 million by 6 a.m. Friday

CNN reported United Gun Group initially put out a statement it would pull the auction, but later said it would give it more consideration. Todd Underwood, United Gun Broker founder, said it would release an official response by 10 a.m. Friday.

“We may still run it,” Underwood said.

Zimmerman, 32, was acquitted of manslaughter and murder charges after Trayvon’s February 2012 shooting, sparking a nationwide debate over Florida’s so-called “stand your ground” laws and race relations.

In the online listing, Zimmerman called the weapon an “American Firearm Icon.”

He said his gun is “fully functional as the attempts by the Department of Justice on behalf of B. Hussein Obama [President Barack Obama] to render the firearm inoperable were thwarted by my phenomenal defense attorney.”

Zimmerman said the sale date marked the one-year anniversary he was allegedly shot by Matthew Apperson during a dispute.

He said a portion of the proceeds would be used to “fight [Black Lives Matter] violence against law enforcement officers, ensure the demise of Angela [Corey’s] persecution career and Hillary Clinton’s anti-firearm rhetoric. “

Corey was appointed special prosecutor by Florida Gov. Rick Scott to investigate Martin’s death.

Gunbroker said it pulled the auction because, “We want no part in the listing on our web site or in any of the publicity it is receiving.”

“Listings on the GunBroker.com web site are user-generated, exactly like social media posts,” the company said. “Mr. Zimmerman never contacted anyone at GunBroker.com prior to or after the listing was created and no one at GunBroker.com has any relationship with Zimmerman. Our site rules state that we reserve the right to reject listings at our sole discretion, and have done so with the Zimmerman listing.”

Zimmerman said the auction was removed from Gunbroker because it was not “prepared for the traffic and publicity surrounding the auction of my firearm.”



http://www.breitbart.com/news/zimmerman-gun-bids-reach-65m-on-second-auction-site/

Gun control is about control. It isn't about guns.

Originally in the world, control was imbedded in respect for other people. The respect has withered so that control has been lost.

Probably in America (and many other countries) gun freedom should be re-introduced gradually. People will die, of course. But they are dying anyway. Guns aren't the cause of death. Lack of control is.

Once there is gun freedom, the people who don't respect others will die off. Respectful people will live on in peace.

Think about it. If we could remove all guns from the world like poof!, people would simply start making them again. Do you trust the police and military to be the only ones to have them? Better to arm all the people to the hilt, and let the disrespectful ones kill themselves off.

We don't want a world full of people who are a threat to society. The best way is to get rid of governments and banks. In the past we couldn't do this. But if we keep the technology we have, we can do it now, because everyone can be his/her own government in our world.

Let people all have guns. Most people, if they had a gun, would not harm others except in times of great need... like self defense. "Most" is way bigger than "least." Soon the "least" (the crooks and criminals who would use guns to harm people) would be dead. Or they would have joined the "most." There would be peace.

With the world as it is, there will always be trouble. People will always die from something. But guns would be the least of our problems if everybody had them. So, to avoid more bloodshed than necessary in killing off the crooks and criminals who won't live peacefully, let us gradually initiate a program, over, say, 5 years, to get guns and ammo out to everyone. Phase it in slowly, so that people learn to respect each other, and to keep their mouths shut with derogatory statements against each other, so that there will be peace.

I think background checks could be a safety measure ex criminal or mentally disable persons should not be allowed to get the guns ... So we should check the roots of the crime such as poverty we dont want a world with full of people who are dangerous to society

Correct, the criminal government won't let us live by "gun controlling" us out of our human right to self-defense.

Gun control is very necessity in nowadays . if we don't take action now the criminal won't let us live in this world.

If you want to learn more about this, search for Karl Lentz on Youtube.

This is the thing that nobody seems to understand. The United States is a corporation, just like any other corporation. Like every corporation, it has control over the people who are part of the corporation, BY THEIR AGREEMENT.

Words are important, especially in a contract. There is no place that the people who set up the U.S. government way back when, ever gave themselves over to it. But if you have signed paperwork stating that you have done this, it is your own doing. According to standard contract law that has been around long before the U.S. government, you can get out of the agreement, because there was no meeting of the minds. But if they changed the terms without telling you, they broke the contract. However, if they didn't break the contract by changing the terms, you can still get out by rescinding your signature off whatever docs you agreed to.

The government corporation people would like it if they could be dictators. But because of the structure of government, the only way they could come close is to dissolve the government. And there are too many of them that don't want to do this for it to happen.

Here is key. Let them rule as they want until they become a real threat or actually harmful to you. Then, take the man or woman to court for repayment. Make the court your court, and hold court at, not in, the standard court building. You may want to take government to court as well. But litigate the human being who did the harm to you.