When CCW saves peoples lives thread.

[frankenbeemer]

Not CCW, but still an example of lawful self defense with an interesting observation about magazine capacity.

[iamsam]

Here's one that happened recently.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/356100/3/Man-flourishing-gun-is-shot-arrested-in-north-city

Cliffs:

dude #1 threatens a group of people w/ gun
dude#2 in said group pulls gun and shoots dude #1 in arm
dude#1 runs and then is arrested after he calls police to help him
dude#2 has CCW and is not detained

[mrsleeve]

not quite CCW but a home invasion A woman uses a .38 to save her self and her 2 young children from a long time offender arrested 6 times in the last 4 years that had broken into the home. Too bad the shit bag survived his wounds

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/

[mrsleeve]

Nope not in the least. That is in fact one of the very reasons the Constitution is our highest law of the land and why we have protections to keep and bare arms. Keeps the oh so benevolent govt from getting to uppity.

Hows that old saying go???

Those who beat their swords into plowshares, usually end up plowing for those who didn't - Ben Franklin IIRC

[cale]

Ah sorry it slipped my mind, you're expecting the next pres to be a murderous tyrant. I forgot you guys have been preparing for that for the last 200 years. Best of luck.

[mrsleeve]

No I didnt get all warm and fuzzy about references to Stalin purging 25 Million Russian citizens. About as much as I get all warm and fuzzy about Mao doing the same to as many as 70 Million Chinese, or Hitler and 6 odd million jews, Mr Pot and the killing Fields of Cambodia racked up a 2.2 million countrymen purged. All were disarmed under the guise of public safety, before these acts were carried out, and there was no way for those soles to even attempt to defend them selves.

Your 100% welcome to your opinion, and your right your entitled to it. You can bet there were millions of peoples that have died at the hands of their respective states that agreed with you.

I think its funny that Communist party paper is the one publishing said article, more than what it actually contained, when the commies are warning us its kinda telling.

[cale]

Cale even the current Russian Communist party paper agrees with "my opinion".

Read this

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

From Pravda 12/28/12

What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

Did you get all warm and fuzzy, reminiscing of Jefferson quotes whilst reading this?

All that papers proves is there are like minded people out there who side with you. That doesn't make your opinion any more valid to me, it's an opinion. I know there's likely an overwhelmingly large portion of the population who agrees with you, and to that I say so fucking what? An overwhelmingly large portion of the world agrees with me, shall I link articles showing this or do you too find this unecessary? I thought so, I'll save myself the time too.

[joshh]

I've said it endorsing Americans need to be more responsible with locking up their firearms. But that in way should strip Americans their Second Amendment rights. A little firearms education goes a long way.

[mrsleeve]

Cale even the current Russian Communist party paper agrees with "my opinion".

Read this

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/28-12-2012/123335-americans_guns-0/

From Pravda 12/28/12

[cale]

You're right, I don't have a definitive comprehension of something that is not definitive, silly me!

Ps. there's plenty of philosophical reading to do on this subject if you care to. The existence of such literature should tell you that it's not so cookie cutter and that in fact debate about natural rights does indeed exist. Thanks for the condescension!

[mrsleeve]

If you have no comprehension of what natural rights are then I really cant help you, You dont like firearms and feel that I should not have the rights to a means of legitimate defense of my life, my liberty, my property, and that of my family or anyone else I chose to stick my neck out for. WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE to tell anyone such things that lives anywhere else in the world let alone Canada or the USA.

A natural right is one that you would have regardless if there was a system of govt and you were living in lawlessness. You still have them even though your govt denies you access to them, the same is true for most every other nation in the world that wishes it citizens to be more like subjects than free men. A natural is not subject to the whims of the legislature, your society at large that chooses to go along with it is where the problem lies. Kinda like Your failed national registrar, or the rounding up of the jews in 1939. The ideas of Natural rights stem back to ancient Greece.

You wish to stake your life an well being on your police forces and or other agents of the state thats your choice. I hope for your sake your never put into a situation where you will need to call on them to come to your aid, and if you do they arrive in time.

We are all well on our way to various forms of totalitarianism in one flavor or another some are just further along than others, you my friend are a fine product of that agenda. A society with no means to defend them selves is not a society at all you are all subjects to the whims of your rulers. We here in the US are not that far behind, and in some cases further along, though many would not like to realize it.

There is a long long history that spans a couple thousand years that supports "my opinion" this conversation with you stops here as I am done wasting my time on you.

[cale]

Yes they are stolen much of the time to begin with........... once stolen all the original intentions are off. Your gangs commit most of the gun violence in Americas hat just like here in the states and most of that is with hand guns. In 04 112 out of 172 gun murders in Americas hat were committed with a fucking HAND GUN.

Ding ding ding, stolen guns. In other words, the legal market supplies the illegal.

False Presumption is false

Is it? Please see the above admittance that the stolen weapons are largely to blame.

But In my belief Rights and freedoms of free men are not bestowed upon us as gifts of our legislatures or respective govts but are NATURAL RIGHTS of all persons no matter where you live. Self defense is at the top of that list along with free speech (something your govt has taken from you as well)

To me its not an AMERICAN thing its a HUMAN thing. Our founders just had the foresight and benefit of many years of study if previous govts to leave the US. with a document that outlines such things. Even though it being largely ignored in the last 100 years.

You're entitled to that opinion, that doesn't make it true nor is it reality in the rest of the first world other than a few places. We get by just fine without pistols and other unnecessary types of firearms.

What exactly are natural rights? If you want to discuss philosophy that's fine, but you don't get to specify what method of self defence is admissible throughout the world. Your laws let you have a pistol, no "natural right" you think you're entitled to gives you this.

SO again as a free man with legal authority to travel and be where ever you happen to be, why should your rights to defend your self from an aggressor of any type that is intending to do you harm, be bared form a means to effect such a defense??

I do have the right to defend myself, I don't however have the right to choose whatever type of weapon I want to act out that right. Shall we start picking and choosing what is allowable? Well the bad guys have access to firearm X, therefore I need to one up them and have weapon Y. An endless cycle of arming ourselves does nothing but dig us deeper.

[mrsleeve]

They acquire them illegally yes, but how many of those illegal guns were purchased legally with good intentions? There's a reason the gun violence, hand guns especially is much less here than it is there. They're not as common here!

Yes they are stolen much of the time to begin with........... once stolen all the original intentions are off. Your gangs commit most of the gun violence in Americas hat just like here in the states and most of that is with hand guns. In 04 112 out of 172 gun murders in Americas hat were committed with a fucking HAND GUN.

Those who carry are not the problem no, but the weapons you carry do add to the situation in one way or another.

False Presumption is false

Laws give us our rights, and our association in a society give us laws. You do not have a right to carry a gun because you were born on Earth, you have that right because you were born in the US.

While being born and raised in the US has defiantly influenced, my beliefs in this. But In my belief Rights and freedoms of free men are not bestowed upon us as gifts of our legislatures or respective govts but are NATURAL RIGHTS of all persons no matter where you live. Self defense is at the top of that list along with free speech (something your govt has taken from you as well)

To me its not an AMERICAN thing its a HUMAN thing. Our founders just had the foresight and benefit of many years of study if previous govts to leave the US. with a document that outlines such things. Even though it being largely ignored in the last 100 years.

I own the property I live on, I have the right given to me by my country to defend myself with lethal force is necessary on that land. I do not own public land and must comply with their laws, and I do so willingly. I've never once in my life felt fear for my life, nor do I think it occurs often enough in Canada to adopt the lax guns laws the US and problems associated with them.

SO again as a free man with legal authority to travel and be where ever you happen to be, why should your rights to defend your self from an aggressor of any type that is intending to do you harm, be bared form a means to effect such a defense??

Tell me why (other than your govts idea of public safety) your rights to defend your self should be terminated at your property line and your protection be left to that same respective govt agencies whom have no legal duty to help you when you may be in danger. Not to mention the fact that if you can garner their attention they may not be able to respond until long after your aggressor has finished his intended plan and has plenty of time to flee???

That's not what I latch on to, that's what people with agenda's latch on to. I've said time and time again the real issue is the accumulative occurrences of violence associated with firearms have I not? Incidences like this merely bring the topic into the limelight as well as give you a lot of information about the situation that you wouldn't otherwise be aware of.

You cant really take what your getting from the news as fact. CT for instance has been billed as and AR15 crime, well the fact that the AR15 style weapon was LOCKED IN THE TRUNK OF shit heads car. The day it happened the Chief of police initial reports on national TV say that only hand guns were found in the school, and there is Fotage of the cops taking the AR out of the trunk of the fucking car. 2 days latter the ME doing the autopsy work, tells the crowd of reports that all died of gun shot wounds "FROM THE LONG ONE" No mention of caliber or anything form the guy thats supposed to know this shit. A reporter asks "You mean the .223 assault weapon?" ME, Yeah that one.

But with the 24/7 coverage on this, all that comes out in the 1st hours is forgotten and swept under the rug by those with the agenda. You have eaten that line of thinking up.

Canada doesn't have urban areas? Canada doesn't have violent areas?

http://www.bcprogressboard.com/archi...imebyCity.html

Feel free to look at the stat's, our country has a terrible record for both property and violent crime. We do however have overall much lower murder rates, as well as incidences of gun violence. Blaming large cities or more people is not the issue, the ability for a person with bad intentions to reach for a gun is. Again, the ability NOT the gun.

No I didnt say that, like I started this post with, you have your share of crimes mostly committed by your gangs, mostly with hand guns. You population is largely rural and peaceable, just like here in the US.

[cale]

^

We have plenty of legislation that is designed to keep firearms out of the hands of people who should not have them!!! once in a while one slips though the cracks in the system you know when a person that has been squeaky clean their whole lives snaps. What do you want tom cruise and pre-crime division called up to stop those.

The lions share of those that have guns and should not have them GET THEM ILLEGALLY, just they do in Americas hat, Japan, China, Australia, the UK or any other place on the planet. Just because something is baned or highly controlled does not mean you cant get something. Like I said we have plenty of legislation to cover this, enforcement is a little lax in some cases even in my opinion, and how about stiffening the penalties for persons committing crimes with arms rather than trying to take them from law abiding citizens.

Another point that you seem to fail to recognize is that CCW holders comit .3% yes thats POINT 3 % of the gun crimes. Those of us that carry legally are not the problem like you keep trying to insinuate. Not to mention every time a state passed CCW legislation the violent crime rate in general falls at a faster rate for that state than the preceding over all trend that has been in happening since the mid 90's nation wide.

They acquire them illegally yes, but how many of those illegal guns were purchased legally with good intentions? There's a reason the gun violence, hand guns especially is much less here than it is there. They're not as common here!

Those who carry are not the problem no, but the weapons you carry do add to the situation in one way or another.

Do you believe that defending your self from any entity that seeks to harm you or infringe on you, is a fundamental right of your existence on the ball of dirt???

Laws give us our rights, and our association in a society give us laws. You do not have a right to carry a gun because you were born on Earth, you have that right because you were born in the US.

So in using that assumption, if you believe you have a right to defend your self why do you feel that right stops at your door step and you must hand that duty over to the govt. A govt that has NO DUTY TO DEFEND YOU OR PROTECT you from imitate danger of life or limb???? You cant really have your cake and eat it too on this.

A misplaced assumption.

I own the property I live on, I have the right given to me by my country to defend myself with lethal force is necessary on that land. I do not own public land and must comply with their laws, and I do so willingly. I've never once in my life felt fear for my life, nor do I think it occurs often enough in Canada to adopt the lax guns laws the US and problems associated with them.

Violent crime, Actual mass shootings (not what our Meida and Govt have adopted from the Brady's define as a mass shooting (1 shot fired in the "direction of" 3 or more people weather anyone is hurt or not is a mass shooting now)). Gun crime, and Crime in general is on a steady downward tread and has been since 1993 IIRC, we have a few high profile deals that get World Wide coverage for a month or so, and thats all you seem to latch on to.

That's not what I latch on to, that's what people with agenda's latch on to. I've said time and time again the real issue is the accumulative occurrences of violence associated with firearms have I not? Incidences like this merely bring the topic into the limelight as well as give you a lot of information about the situation that you wouldn't otherwise be aware of.

You have to also remember something we have urban areas that have more people in them than your entire province you cram that many people into one small place bad shit is going to happen form time to time.

Canada doesn't have urban areas? Canada doesn't have violent areas?

http://www.bcprogressboard.com/archi...imebyCity.html

Feel free to look at the stat's, our country has a terrible record for both property and violent crime. We do however have overall much lower murder rates, as well as incidences of gun violence. Blaming large cities or more people is not the issue, the ability for a person with bad intentions to reach for a gun is. Again, the ability NOT the gun.

[mrsleeve]

^

We have plenty of legislation that is designed to keep firearms out of the hands of people who should not have them!!! once in a while one slips though the cracks in the system you know when a person that has been squeaky clean their whole lives snaps. What do you want tom cruise and pre-crime division called up to stop those.

The lions share of those that have guns and should not have them GET THEM ILLEGALLY, just they do in Americas hat, Japan, China, Australia, the UK or any other place on the planet. Just because something is baned or highly controlled does not mean you cant get something. Like I said we have plenty of legislation to cover this, enforcement is a little lax in some cases even in my opinion, and how about stiffening the penalties for persons committing crimes with arms rather than trying to take them from law abiding citizens.

Another point that you seem to fail to recognize is that CCW holders comit .3% yes thats POINT 3 % of the gun crimes. Those of us that carry legally are not the problem like you keep trying to insinuate. Not to mention every time a state passed CCW legislation the violent crime rate in general falls at a faster rate for that state than the preceding over all trend that has been in happening since the mid 90's nation wide.

Do you believe that defending your self from any entity that seeks to harm you or infringe on you, is a fundamental right of your existence on the ball of dirt??? (I assume you do since you have expressed a willingness to acquire a shot gun to defend your home someday). So in using that assumption, if you believe you have a right to defend your self why do you feel that right stops at your door step and you must hand that duty over to the govt. A govt that has NO DUTY TO DEFEND YOU OR PROTECT you from imitate danger of life or limb???? You cant really have your cake and eat it too on this.

Violent crime, Actual mass shootings (not what our Meida and Govt have adopted from the Brady's define as a mass shooting (1 shot fired in the "direction of" 3 or more people weather anyone is hurt or not is a mass shooting now)). Gun crime, and Crime in general is on a steady downward tread and has been since 1993 IIRC, we have a few high profile deals that get World Wide coverage for a month or so, and thats all you seem to latch on to. You have to also remember something we have urban areas that have more people in them than your entire province you cram that many people into one small place bad shit is going to happen form time to time.