Should America have gun control?

CYDdharta

Woman kills jail escapee who kicks in her door

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — An inmate who had escaped minutes earlier from a county jail in South Carolina was shot and killed by a woman after he kicked in her back door, the local sheriff said.

The inmate was still in his orange jail jumpsuit and had grabbed a knife sharpening tool from the woman’s kitchen in Pickens as he headed toward her bedroom around 3 a.m. Tuesday, Pickens County Sheriff Rick Clark said.

“This was a big guy. If she hadn’t had a weapon there’s no telling what would have happened,” Clark said. “I gave her a big hug. I told her how proud I was of her.”

The woman was home alone and had gone through training to get a concealed weapons permit, Clark said.

Bruce McLaughlin Jr., 30, died from a gunshot to the head, Pickens County Coroner Kandy Kelley said.

https://apnews.com/c84c1f16fb414aac990bf71670099070

John_C_87

Does she get a bounty?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

@John_C_87

Did you see the below story?

So the individual in the story, killed 5 innocent people, in a bank.

So 4 or more innocent people killed by an offender who committed a gun violence crime, is a mass shooter, right? 

Your view on "gun control," just got blindsided by another mass shooting, didn't it CYDdharta? 

"Suntrust Bank shooting suspect 'always hated people and wanted everyone to die,' ex-girlfriend says"

"An ex-girlfriend of the man accused of killing five people in a Florida bank says he "always hated people" but that she thought nothing of it when he recently bought a gun.

A judge on Thursday ordered former prison guard trainee Zephen Xaver, 21, held without bond, one day after he barricaded himself in a bank in Sebring and opened fire, then called 911 and announced "I have shot five people."

Xaver recently relocated to central Floridafrom Indiana. Alex Gerlach told WSBT-TV in Indiana she had an on-and-off relationship with Xaver for two years, and had kept in contact every few months since. She said he often talked about wanting to hurt people.

"I never understood where it started," she told the station. "For some reason (he) always hated people and wanted everyone to die." 

She said he bought a gun last week, but that she and others had shrugged it off because he alway liked guns.

“Every single person I’ve told has not taken it seriously, and it’s very unfortunate that it had to come to this,” Gerlach said.

"Sebring Mayor John Shoop said his close-knit community was rocked by the attack and that "tragedies like this are not supposed to happen here."

"Acts like this cannot deter us from living our lives freely from fear and deprivation," the mayor added. "The path turned dark today, but as we move on we will grow stronger." 

The supposed gun control, that has been reiterated on, is pretty much, an apparent, non existent illusion, as long as first time gun violence crimes continue to sadly be committed, along with criminally perpetrated gun violence crimes as well?

No bounty to speak of, but 5 more families in the US, now have 5 funerals to plan.

I wonder how they might view the empty talk, that continues to reiterate, about how gun control, kept that individual from taking the lives of 5 more innocent people? 

 

CYDdharta

John_C_87 said:

Does she get a bounty?

Hopefully, she deserves one.

CYDdharta

@TKDB

Did you see the below story?

So the individual in the story, was almost murdered in her home by an escaped convict.

So an innocent person was saved to live another day because she had a gun, is a mass shooter, right? 

Your anti-2nd Amendment view just got blindsided by another person defending themselves with a gun, didn't it TKDB?

Woman kills jail escapee who kicks in her door

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — An inmate who had escaped minutes earlier from a county jail in South Carolina was shot and killed by a woman after he kicked in her back door, the local sheriff said.

The inmate was still in his orange jail jumpsuit and had grabbed a knife sharpening tool from the woman’s kitchen in Pickens as he headed toward her bedroom around 3 a.m. Tuesday, Pickens County Sheriff Rick Clark said.

“This was a big guy. If she hadn’t had a weapon there’s no telling what would have happened,” Clark said. “I gave her a big hug. I told her how proud I was of her.”

The woman was home alone and had gone through training to get a concealed weapons permit, Clark said.

Bruce McLaughlin Jr., 30, died from a gunshot to the head, Pickens County Coroner Kandy Kelley said.

https://apnews.com/c84c1f16fb414aac990bf71670099070

Supposed gun control would pretty much have been a death sentence for this poor girl, but that's a small price to pay for your feel-good measures, isn't it TKDB?

Possible a bounty to be paid to someone who has earned it, and a funeral for a hardened criminal to plan.

I wonder how they might view the empty gun control talk, that continues but won't solve crime problems; it will only keep law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves?

TKDB

@CYDdharta ;

How about not not taking my words, to help you sell your points of view with?

My words to you: Your view on "gun control," just got blindsided by another mass shooting, didn't it CYDdharta? 

Your words: "Your anti-2nd Amendment view just got blindsided by another person defending themselves with a gun, didn't it TKDB?"

My words: So the individual in the story, killed 5 innocent people, in a bank.

Your words: "So the individual in the story, was almost murdered in her home by an escaped convict."

My words: So 4 or more innocent people killed by an offender who committed a gun violence crime, is a mass shooter, right? 

Your words: "So an innocent person was saved to live another day because she had a gun, is a mass shooter, right?" 

What's the matter, can't debate gun control with your OWN material? 

CYDdharta:

What are your views on the 5 innocent ladies who were apparently shot execution style in the bank?

Do you maybe feel sad and sorry for them?

Do you maybe feel sad and sorry for their families?

Or because you're a gun owner, you apparently might not feel sad and sorry for those ladies, and their families, because maybe there's no place for emotions when it comes to you being an individual gun owner right? 

What's the hypothetical probability, that the alleged offender, who allegedly shot those 5 ladies, maybe didn't have any place inside of himself, for emotions either, while allegedly committing his crimes? 

Gun control as you apparently view it, still isn't working very well, is it CYDdharta?

Let's see you use my words, again to craft  your next talking points with? 

TKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Why do you view the below, with the thumbs down symbol?

Do you have any possible counter arguments for the below?

The below points of view were CYDdharta.

How about not not taking my words, to help you sell your points of view with?

My words to you: Your view on "gun control," just got blindsided by another mass shooting, didn't it CYDdharta? 

Your words: "Your anti-2nd Amendment view just got blindsided by another person defending themselves with a gun, didn't it TKDB?"

My words: So the individual in the story, killed 5 innocent people, in a bank.

Your words: "So the individual in the story, was almost murdered in her home by an escaped convict."

My words: So 4 or more innocent people killed by an offender who committed a gun violence crime, is a mass shooter, right? 

Your words: "So an innocent person was saved to live another day because she had a gun, is a mass shooter, right?" 

What's the matter, can't debate gun control with your OWN material? 

CYDdharta:

What are your views on the 5 innocent ladies who were apparently shot execution style in the bank?

Do you maybe feel sad and sorry for them?

Do you maybe feel sad and sorry for their families?

Or because you're a gun owner, you apparently might not feel sad and sorry for those ladies, and their families, because maybe there's no place for emotions when it comes to you being an individual gun owner right? 

What's the hypothetical probability, that the alleged offender, who allegedly shot those 5 ladies, maybe didn't have any place inside of himself, for emotions either, while allegedly committing his crimes? 

Gun control as you apparently view it, still isn't working very well, is it CYDdharta?

Let's see you use my words, again to craft  your next talking points with?  

CYDdharta

TKDB:

What is your view on the innocent lady who used a gun to defend herself from an escaped felon?

Do you maybe feel disappointed with her?

Do you maybe feel mad at her and her family?

Or because you're anti-gun, you apparently don't feel ladies like this have the right to defend themselves and their families from felons with a history of violence, because maybe you're letting your emotions cloud your judgement to the point that you can't see the issue logically?

What's the hypothetical probability, that the potential target, who is facing a violent convicted felon, maybe didn't have time to contemplate the felon's emotional upbringing, but was fortunate to have the means to react appropriately to the situation caused by the violent felon?

Self defense as you apparently view it, still isn't working very well, is it TKDB?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Again using my words right?

What is your view on the innocent lady who used a gun to defend herself from an escaped felon?

Do you maybe feel disappointed with her?

Do you maybe feel mad at her and her family?

Or because you're anti-gun, you apparently don't feel ladies like this have the right to defend themselves and their families from felons with a history of violence, because maybe you're letting your emotions cloud your judgement to the point that you can't see the issue logically?

What's the hypothetical probability, that the potential target, who is facing a violent convicted felon, maybe didn't have time to contemplate the felon's emotional upbringing, but was fortunate to have the means to react appropriately to the situation caused by the violent felon?

Self defense as you apparently view it, still isn't working very well, is it TKDB?

@CYDdharta:

Would it be fair or unfair, to maybe view your points of view, to be, just as emotionless as the individual who committed his gun violence crimes in the bank? 

You being a gun owner, who (reuses other people's words to craft) your points of view with?

Seems kind of like an emotionless response to me, by you? 

Exactly how emotionless, should a gun owner view gun control, after a lawful gun owner, emotionlessly killed innocent people with their guns in the face of the (gun control) that you have reiterated over?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta:

Would it be fair or unfair, to maybe view your points of view, to be, just as emotionless as the individual who committed his gun violence crimes in the bank? 

You being a gun owner, who (reuses other people's words to craft) your points of view with?

Seems kind of like an emotionless response to me, by you? 

Exactly how emotionless, should a gun owner view gun control, after a lawful gun owner, emotionlessly killed innocent people with their guns in the face of the (gun control) that you have reiterated over?

Gun owners (and anti-2nd Amendment proponents like yourself, BTW) should be emotionless.  The best way to solve a problem is with facts an logic, emotion shouldn't play a part.

Killing people tends to be VERY emotional, and it's no different in this case, where the perpetrator dreamed for years about killing people.  And, as usual, this happened in a "guns free" area.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

From this moment on, I view this rhetoric from you, as you having a weapon, pointed at my head.

So as long as you unjustifiably continue to tell me how I get to view the Second Amendment via this quotation from your electronic device 
"and anti-2nd Amendment proponents like yourself, BTW should be emotionless." Thus controlling my freedom of speech with your gun control rhetoric?

You CYDdharta, Have my freedom of speech being held hostage, by your very words, don't you? 

You have my freedom of speech, being unjustly held at gun point because you've decided to speak for me, right? 

So you let me know when I can speak for myself:

Again, I'm pro Second Amendment, pro family, pro community, and pro law abiding.

But, apparently CYDdharta sees my above position differently, according to his gun control points of view? 

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

From this moment on, I view this rhetoric from you, as you having a weapon, pointed at my head.

So as long as you unjustifiably continue to tell me how I get to view the Second Amendment via this quotation from your electronic device 
"do their gun violence deaths, fit into your pro Second Amendment gun extremist mindset?

You TKDB, Have my freedom of speech being held hostage, by your very words, don't you? 

You have my freedom of speech, being unjustly held at gun point because you've decided to speak for me, right? 

So you let me know when I can speak for myself:

Again, I'm pro Second Amendment, pro family, pro community, and pro law abiding.

But, apparently TKDB sees my above position differently, according to his gun control points of view?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the NRA, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well? 

CYDdharta

@TKDB

I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the march for our lives, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

My words: I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the NRA, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well? 


Your words: "I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the march for our lives, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well?"

Still using my words, to create your points of view with?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

Don't you have any counter arguments to make other then your thumbs up response?

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

What are you counter argument points of view? 

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

I think an effort from the jail should be made to lock the door on this matter legally. Outside of exchange of money. The escapee should be criminally charged with murder by committed suicide. Death is a realistic consequence of the escape and was ignored as a trend has been left to take place in how law is enforced publicly. The people deserve equality under constitutional law, and this action will help provide it.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

The question that you need to ask the woman who knew the man is if she had a gun would she have shot him to prevent this action? Otherwise all you are saying is a different tool may have been used in this public tragedy. It has nothing to do with a bounty on an jail escapee. Here again I am admitting I can be wrong but the talk about the 2nd Amendment has me seriously concerned as it does not give the United States Citizen the right to own a gun. It gives them the right to peaceably assemble regardless of the ownership of a gun.

It should be clear what is being ask. We call that whole truth where I come from.

CYDdharta

John_C_87 said:

@TKDB ;

The question that you need to ask the woman who knew the man is if she had a gun would she have shot him to prevent this action? Otherwise all you are saying is a different tool may have been used in this public tragedy. It has nothing to do with a bounty on an jail escapee. Here again I am admitting I can be wrong but the talk about the 2nd Amendment has me seriously concerned as it does not give the United States Citizen the right to own a gun. It gives them the right to peaceably assemble regardless of the ownership of a gun.

It should be clear what is being ask. We call that whole truth where I come from.

The right to keep and bear arms doesn't confer a right to keep and bear arms?

CYDdharta

John_C_87 said:

@CYDdharta ;

I think an effort from the jail should be made to lock the door on this matter legally. Outside of exchange of money. The escapee should be criminally charged with murder by committed suicide. Death is a realistic consequence of the escape and was ignored as a trend has been left to take place in how law is enforced publicly. The people deserve equality under constitutional law, and this action will help provide it.

Why would you want to prosecute a dead guy, particularly a poor dead guy?  Additionally, suicide isn't a crime.

TKDB

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/201510/the-psychology-guns

An excerpt from the article:

"From a psychological perspective, it’s less important whether guns actually make us safer and more important whether guns make us feel safer. But nonetheless, let’s start with some “facts.” The preponderance of available evidence indicates that having a gun in the home is associated with a greater risk of accidental death, homicide, suicide, and a greater risk especially of female and childhooddeath by firearm.3 As a result, the significant public health risk of firearm ownership has become a known dictum in the medical literature. What’s much less well known is whether firearm ownership really prevents violent victimization. Methodologically, it’s extremely difficult to detect a deterrent effect of gun ownership, when preventative outcomes are hypothetical (i.e. in cases of purported gun self-defense, it isn’t really possible to know what would have happened if one didn’t have a gun in the same situation). Nonetheless, a 2013 summary by the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council Committee concluded that “gun ownership protects against serious injury when guns are used defensively.”4 For example, a 2004 study by Jongyeon Tark and Gary Kleck found that:

“self-protection in general, both forceful and nonforceful, reduced the likelihood of property loss and injury, compared to nonresistance. A variety of mostly forceful tactics, including resistance with a gun, appeared to have the strongest effects in reducing the risk of injury…”5

If this leaves things ambiguous, clarity seems to lie in relative risk. Statistically, the risk of accidental death, homicide, or suicide associated with gun ownership appears to be substantially greater than the potential benefit of gun ownership as a deterrent to violent crime in the home.3

But once again, it’s perception that is reality in terms of psychological understanding. According to the 2014 Gallup Poll, 63% of Americans believed that having a gun in the home makes it a safer place – a substantial increase from less than 50% from 1993 to 2006. A older study from 1999 found that those who believed that having a gun makes the home safer were more likely to be young, male, and affiliated with the Republican party; to have no children at home; to have finished 12 years or fewer of education; and to have low levels of trust in police for protection.6

With beliefs firmly in place on either side of the debate, confirmation bias means that individuals pick and choose data, citing studies that support their views while discounting those that don’t. Statistics and studies aside then, the self-defense aspect of gun ownership is vital to understanding the pro-gun stance. Sixty percent (60%) of gun owners in the 2014 Gallup Poll stated that they own guns for self-defense with 49% owning guns for hunting or other recreation. If gun owners are worried about their safety and believe that they themselves – and not a call to 911 – are most likely to provide protection, then gun control legislation that would limited ownership is perceived as an outright threat (if that seems ridiculous, consider that many people do not live within ready reach of law enforcement, and even when they do, a 5 or 10 minute wait for police to arrive on scene can be the difference between life and death in an acutely dangerous situation). If however, as an anti-gun proponent, you don’t feel in particular danger at home, or you feel well-protected by police, then its gun ownership that’s perceived as the threat. With both sides of the gun debate fearful for the lives of their families, it’s no wonder our country is at an impasse."

John_C_87

Again I am going to describe a basic principle. Guns are a cause of death. We have gun control either by constitutional law, or by use of rule of law, rule of law is not working. The question is raised why gun control is not working. Why? Why? The answer given is we do not have a law to control these type guns over those type guns and this is not the whole truth.

Killing is a declaration of independence on Constitutional statement. Constitution a common defense for the general welfare in a statement of basic principle and legal precedent.

We have laws set against death as murder and those law are not working either, the two are directly related. The speed of criminal prosecution is not speed of judicial separation. The State of the union is on independence not constitution.

CYDdharta

Guns Save Lives — Armed Citizens Thwart Active Shooters 94 Percent of the Time

It’s a testimonial as to why “gun control” should mean hitting your target. While a study shows that 98 percent of mass shootings occur in “gun free” zones, a more recent study indicates how these events can be thwarted: by armed citizens. In fact, it finds that when such Americans are present, they have a 94-percent success rate at stopping or impeding active shooters.

As the National Sentinel reports, referencing the FBI:

A report by Jacob Paulsen at ConcealedCarry.com found that in 94 percent of cases, armed citizens successfully intervene during what the bureau calls “active shooter events,” which is defined by the FBI as, “One or more individuals actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area.”

Paulsen notes that the FBI has published three reports that detail active shooter events between 2000 and 2017. The first covers event between 2000-2013; the second from 2014-2015; and the third from 2016-2017.

… He notes … that the FBI does not include domestic shooting incidents or gang-related shootings in its reports.

Also, “For the FBI to define an incident as an Active Shooter incident both law enforcement personnel and citizens have to have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses to the situation,” he writes.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/30766-guns-saving-lives-study-armed-citizens-thwart-active-shooters-94-of-the-time

CYDdharta

@TKDB

Interesting that you didn't quote this part of your article;

The more you actually know about guns, the more complicated rational gun reform becomes. But we need a complicated analysis of effective remedies to gun violence, not emotion-based, knee-jerk responses.

TKDB

@CYDdharta

Why no commentary on the below?

Are you making a conscious gun owner effort, to not elaborate any more on the below?

My words: I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the NRA, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well? 


Your words: "I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the march for our lives, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well?"

Still using my words, to create your points of view with?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

Don't you have any counter arguments to make other then your thumbs up response?

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

What are you counter argument points of view?  

@CYDdharta

So now you want to focus on this instead?

"Interesting that you didn't quote this part of your article;

The more you actually know about guns, the more complicated rational gun reform becomes. But we need a complicated analysis of effective remedies to gun violence, not emotion-based, knee-jerk responses."

@CYDdharta:
Is this how the individual gun owner psychology in your mind works, when it comes to how you view gun control?

Restating, the previous questions:

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner? 

Or might you pick another random set of words to pick from the article that I shared, to state another pro gun owner point of view with?

TKDB

@CYDdharta

What are you doing now, pro gun article shopping?

"Guns Save Lives — Armed Citizens Thwart Active Shooters 94 Percent of the Time"

It would appear to be the case?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Sure, I don't like it.  But you have YET to suggest anything that would keep such a heinous act from ever occurring again.

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner?

Cold and emotionless?  Oh, you mean logical.  No, I've always been logical, that's my nature.  Guns have nothing to do with it.

Or might you pick another random set of words to pick from the article that I shared, to state another pro gun owner point of view with?

If you don't like a "random set of words" in an article you post, then maybe you shouldn't post it; or better yet, you should heed the advice of the article you posted.

What are you doing now, pro gun article shopping?

"Guns Save Lives — Armed Citizens Thwart Active Shooters 94 Percent of the Time"

It would appear to be the case?

LOL, you keep shopping for anti-gun articles, but then again, that's fitting with your anti-2nd Amendment stance.

TKDB

https://articles-mlive-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/articles.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2018/04/what_women_who_carry_or_dont_c.amp?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s

Some excerpts from the article:

"What women who carry or don't carry guns say about personal safety: 'Guns: An American Conversation'"

"Today's topic: How do women protect themselves against potential danger?

There are differing numbers of just how many women are packing heat in America.

The Pew study states that 22 percent of women personally own a gun compared to 39 percent of men. Other sources have much lower rates.

Consider a 2016 article by Trace , an online publication devoted to gun issues, which claims that many of the trend stories in the past decade declaring an uptick in female gun ownership were based on slanted stats. The article cites a study conducted by the General Social Survey at the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center, which put the percentage of gun-owning women at 11.7 percent in 2014.

The Pew study also shows women who own firearms are less involved in gun culture than their male counterparts. For instance, women are less likely to go to the shooting or gun range, go hunting or watch television shows about hunting and shooting.

Women gun owners are also more likely to support gun control measures.

Sixty percent of Republican or Republican-leaning women who own guns support a ban on assault weapons compared to 28 percent of their male counterparts, according to the Pew study. Women also support a federal government database to track all gun sales more than men, 57 percent to 35 percent, the study states.

Women were slightly less likely to be victims of violent crimes in 2016, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The rate of total violence per 1,000 people 12 or older was 1.54 for males and 1.49 for women, according to the BJS Crime Victimization Report.

Women also die from firearms at a much smaller rate than men. In 2015, 418 men died from accidental discharge of a firearm, while only 71 women died, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In that same year, men used a firearm 18,910 to commit suicide, while women did only 3,108.

Women were also much less likely to be shot to death in 2015, according to the CDC. Males accounted for 11,029 homicide gun deaths that year while 1,950 were women."

The information that I found to be compelling from the above was this:

(The Pew study also shows women who own firearms are less involved in gun culture than their male counterparts. For instance, women are less likely to go to the shooting or gun range, go hunting or watch television shows about hunting and shooting.

Women gun owners are also more likely to support gun control measures.)

"We asked the women of the group - gun owners and non-gun owners alike - about the measures they take to stay safe. An informal poll revealed that twenty-nine of the women don't have a gun and eight said they carried a firearm.

Here's what they had to say:

Zekiye Salman, of Lansing, Michigan : My behaviors are impacted but I don't carry any weapons. Like I don't go out much at night, don't drink with strangers, etc. But I also don't think it's my job to prevent violence especially gendered violence. I wish the resources going into teaching self-defense would go into educating people and supporting people so violence isn't necessary. I think suggesting women take on this extra work demonstrates the inequity of labor (mental, emotional, and physical) which they should be using to live full lives free from violence. It's another way to uphold the current system and to redirect women's energy by making them responsible for the violence against them

Helene Cohen Bludman, of Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania: While I avoid potentially dangerous areas and keep my street smarts attuned, I do not go about my daily life anticipating violence. I assume my world is essentially a safe place and should I be a victim of violence, it would be a random circumstance of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I would never carry a gun.

Ambar Ramos, of Boston, Massachusetts : I own a Glock (which I can't carry because ((I live in)) Boston) -- I can however, carry knives and pepper spray; I carry both. Oh, and I've taken several self-defense courses. I usually take a couple a year. Also, I like boxing quite a lot; I hear I have a pretty good hook.

Vanessa Kooper, of Slidwell, Louisiana: I am 20 (years old), so not able to conceal carry yet, but I'm counting down the months!

I don't think just carrying a gun is the answer... it won't solve every problem, but there are some situations that could not be stopped any other way. The chances that I will ever need to pull my gun are small, but I don't want to be left without one if the situation did arise. 

Besides that, situational awareness is the best defense against spotting a problem ... it doesn't matter what "weapon," if any, you carry. 

I also have a 125 pound dog, Tiny, that is a good deterrent. 

But ultimately, I put my faith in the Lord. He has the perfect plan for my life and anything He allows will grow me into a better person.

Melanie Jeffcoat, of Homewood, Alabama: I was the victim of a near-abduction as a teen -- and a school shooting, so I had a pretty crappy adolescence apparently. Thankfully I had amazing parents (still do!!) and three brothers. I do not carry a weapon and never will. I am quite sure that I would become one of the overwhelming statistics where a woman's gun was used against her. I've lived in many big cities including NYC and LA and never felt the need for a gun. I've always been pretty wary of my surroundings, make sure that I am walking with others at night and try to avoid places or situations that can become dangerous. I remember walking home at 3 a.m. in NYC and even though it was crowded (the city never sleeps) I still was nervous, so I decided to talk to myself loudly all the way down 5th Avenue. Boy did people avoid me! LOL.

I also spent four years working on a documentary in Bessemer, Alabama (very high crime rate) at night and still did not feel that I would have needed a gun. I have pepper spray but don't carry it. Might teach my college-bound girl how to use it. Although most colleges are seriously working to make campus safety a priority.

Meredith Glick Brinegar, of Bellbrook, Ohio : I have never carried a gun and don't plan to. I think there are many reasons for this. I know that we are living in one of the safest eras. Violent crime is at a relatively low point, despite all the media hype. Also, I think I run optimistic and don't really live my life in fear. I try to adopt an existential viewpoint, where I live my life to the fullest, doing most of what is meaningful to me and consistent with my values, and tolerating the risk of dying, be it at the hands of someone shooting me, or cancer, or a car accident. This isn't to say I don't take precautions. I am a runner. I do run alone, but I don't run in the dark, I run in well-populated areas, only use one ear bud, etc. I am just too familiar with the research that says that gun ownership actually makes people in your household (especially women) more at risk of death, not less. It probably helps that I don't run anxious or paranoid about a home intruder (I am married to a man and that may help), but I truly feel safer without a gun, for me and for my daughter.

Colette Katuala, of San Francisco, California:There is no gun in my home; nor do I carry. I do fear for my safety, at times, as a female. My mother, when living in the Southern states during my childhood carried. I most likely will never carry for protection if I did choose to purchase a gun, but ... giving it some thought now.

Protection of the female from male predators has been (prevelant) throughout our history and part of our present. I don't think carrying a gun will fix our future.

Denise Sellers, of Stratford, New Jersey : I try to be cautious and not put myself in dangerous situations, but I have always enjoyed a full life here in the US and abroad, in cities large and small. I'm not a fool ... I understand that not just as a female, but now as an older, slower, less able person, I need to be cautious. But I refuse to live a life of fear and isolation.

Deza'Rae Collins, of Salem, Oregon: I am not armed. But I have pepper spray and my relatives have recently suggested a Tazer because Portland isn't very "safe" compared to Salem, but even then I am still not sure if I am comfortable with a Tazer. I think the fact that modern society is making me feel like I have to arm myself for protection out of fear is kind of unsettling for me."

I found the article to be educational, because it delves into the perspectives from the various points of view shared by some of the ladies who participated in the article. 

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

The point is that guns are a constitutional common defense as right, and matters of safety are an issue of legal Independence not legal constitution. A change must take place on declaration of Independence not order of Constitutions for change to be effective on safety. There is a presentation of a lot of truth but it does not focus on why something is not working. That something is gun control this is my state of the union on the matter.

So you understand the point clearly TKDB the united states Congress, Senate along with President’s have placed woman into an armed service of this United States Nation, we the people, in connection to United States constitution and its representation both abroad and domestically. This was done without clearly defining the legal grounds to why they can be asked of them, to hold the position that all woman are created equal, the position, the use, and application of discharge of gun or weapon is part of the equality. I am not saying a female opinion does not matter I’m saying the difference of independence and constitution are the focus of regulation by basic principle. It did not and is not yet taken place.

Again the 2nd Amendment is not about the right to common defense for the general welfare it is about those who uphold it given the right to gather. You are adding a political justification to continue to make the same mistake without rectification of the problem. Woman had been voted in the Armed services they no longer have the choice it is a united state constitutional right. The right is to be ready as not to need wait to be provided for. 

TKDB

@CYDdharta

And you still continue to keep your gun pointed at my head?

"LOL, you keep shopping for anti-gun articles, but then again, that's fitting with your anti-2nd Amendment stance."

You're teaching my pro Second Amendment supporting stance. how you apparently like to control others with your gun control actions? 

"Cold and emotionless?  Oh, you mean logical.  No, I've always been logical, that's my nature.  Guns have nothing to do with it."

Really, what definion of "Logical" that you know of, includes in it very definition, that a human beings "Logic," makes a person cold, and emotionless?

From what existing dictionary can you share a link to, that states that individual definition of the word "Logical?"

Dictionary.com maybe?

Merriam Webster maybe?

From Wikipedia maybe?

What did you think of this article?

"What women who carry or don't carry guns say about personal safety: 'Guns: An American Conversation'"

Or how do you maybe feel, in regards to this article?

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-are-white-men-stockpiling-guns/

"Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns?"

"The insight Stroud gained from her interviews is backed up by many, many studies. A 2013 paper by a team of United Kingdom researchers found that a one-point jump in the scale they used to measure racism increased the odds of owning a gun by 50 percent. A 2016 study from the University of Illinois at Chicago found that racial resentment among whites fueled opposition to gun control. This drives political affiliations: A 2017 study in the Social Studies Quarterly found that gun owners had become 50 percent more likely to vote Republican since 1972—and that gun culture had become strongly associated with explicit racism.

For many conservative men, the gun feels like a force for order in a chaotic world, suggests a study published in December of last year. In a series of three experiments, Steven Shepherd and Aaron C. Kay asked hundreds of liberals and conservatives to imagine holding a handgun—and found that conservatives felt less risk and greater personal control than liberal counterparts.

This wasn’t about familiarity with real-world guns—gun ownership and experience did not affect results. Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

The last line is telling,

 "Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

What was it that you expressed, about emotions and owning a weapon?

@CYDdharta, Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
 

John_C_87

This is not a debate it is a matter of Republic National Security in a United State Constitutional principle as a common defense to the general welfare of all under United States Constitution. Like it or not. You are describing a woman has a choice to demonstrate an ability, or not demonstrate, to own gun, to not own gun. Why this is so, this is not for her self-defense it is for the legal defense of all woman who are now in harm’s way she asked to kill on her behalf in armed service to this Nation the United States of America.

She may one day need account for use of lethal force Prasedera a woman who speaks on behalf of all woman. See the clarity now?

The burden of military relief of command.

TKDB

@John_C_87

What are you talking about? 

"This is not a debate it is a matter of Republic National Security in a United State Constitutional principle as a common defense to the general welfare of all under United States Constitution. Like it or not. You are describing a woman has a choice to demonstrate an ability, or not demonstrate, to own gun, to not own gun. Why this is so, this is not for her self-defense it is for the legal defense of all woman who are now in harm’s way she asked to kill on her behalf in armed service to this Nation the United States of America."

And the below is what the debate is over:

"Should America have gun control?"

"She may one day need account for use of lethal force Prasedera a woman who speaks on behalf of all woman."

See the clarity now?

"The burden of military relief of command?

I'm sorry, but what are you trying to imply with these words from you?

What do they have to do with the theme of the forum? 

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

"Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns?"

"The insight Stroud gained from her interviews is backed up by many, many studies. A 2013 paper by a team of United Kingdom researchers found that a one-point jump in the scale they used to measure racism increased the odds of owning a gun by 50 percent. A 2016 study from the University of Illinois at Chicago found that racial resentment among whites fueled opposition to gun control. This drives political affiliations: A 2017 study in the Social Studies Quarterly found that gun owners had become 50 percent more likely to vote Republican since 1972—and that gun culture had become strongly associated with explicit racism.

For many conservative men, the gun feels like a force for order in a chaotic world, suggests a study published in December of last year. In a series of three experiments, Steven Shepherd and Aaron C. Kay asked hundreds of liberals and conservatives to imagine holding a handgun—and found that conservatives felt less risk and greater personal control than liberal counterparts.

This wasn’t about familiarity with real-world guns—gun ownership and experience did not affect results. Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

The last line is telling,

 "Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

What was it that you expressed, about emotions and owning a weapon?

@CYDdharta, Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
 

Garbage study, as expected;

Even more telling, when I examined this data set I found that non-whites and blacks who hold these supposedly "racist" views on slavery are also more likely to own guns.

So let's get this straight. Blacks who don't believe that slavery in the U.S. is important in explaining how well a black does in today's society hates other blacks and is thus more likely to own a gun?The authors focus on people who are racist being the ones who are more likely to buy guns, but they also speculate: "simply owning a firearm may lead whites to develop more negative attitudes towards blacks. There is some experimental research showing that participants who have recently held a firearm produce enhanced salivary testosterone levels and display increased aggression toward others."Seriously? So are blacks and non-whites also becoming more racist against blacks after they buy guns?The study's lead author, Kerry O’Brien, explained to the New York Daily News that their conclusions are so sensible because: “There had already been research showing that ... blacks are more likely to be shot, so we thought there must be something happening between the concept of being black and some whites wanting guns.”There is an obvious problem with this claim. Blacks, not whites, are killing blacks. Indeed, in 2012, over 91 percent of blacks were murdered by other blacks.O’Brien contends: “we couldn’t make sense of why there would be resistance to gun reform in the U.S.” and that “we found the arguments for opposing gun control counterintuitive and somewhat illogical.”Wrong again. The police can’t protect everyone, instantly, 24-hours a day, seven-days-a-week. And the fact that victims might be able to defend themselves can also deter criminals.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/are-you-a-racist-if-you-own-a-gun

TKDB

@CYDdharta

"Garbage study, as expected;"

Why is it a garbage study? 

"Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

What was it that you expressed, about emotions and owning a weapon?

@CYDdharta, Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
  

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Why no commentary on the below?

Are you making a conscious gun owner effort, to not elaborate any more on the below?

My words: I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the NRA, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well? 


Your words: "I see that you still have your gun, pointed at my head?

I'm becoming educated, in how you manage your individual version of gun control?

So now, not only am I being educated, the rest of the forum, and the website is as well? 

Why not invite the march for our lives, or whatever other websites, that you can think of, and invite them to witness, this display of gun control as well?"

Still using my words, to create your points of view with?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

Don't you have any counter arguments to make other then your thumbs up response? 

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

What are you counter argument points of view?  



That moment when you expect me to counter the five hundred off topic questions

@CYDdharta

So now you want to focus on this instead?

"Interesting that you didn't quote this part of your article;

The more you actually know about guns, the more complicated rational gun reform becomes. But we need a complicated analysis of effective remedies to gun violence, not emotion-based, knee-jerk responses."

@CYDdharta:
Is this how the individual gun owner psychology in your mind works, when it comes to how you view gun control?

Restating, the previous questions:

CYDdharta, You're not disturbed by any of the gun violence crimes? A guy in a bank, shooting 5 innocent ladies, in the back of the head?

Are you not bothered by any that?

Or by you, owning a gun, it in a sense turns a person into a cold and emotionless individual? 

Is this the possible mental status, that happens when some become, a gun owner? 

Or might you pick another random set of words to pick from the article that I shared, to state another pro gun owner point of view with?

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"Garbage study, as expected;"

Why is it a garbage study? 

"Instead, conservative attachment to guns was based entirely on ideology and emotions."

What was it that you expressed, about emotions and owning a weapon?

@CYDdharta, Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
  

I already posted why it's a garbage study.

TKDB

@Zombieguy1987

What are you counter argument points of view?  



That moment when you expect me to counter the five hundred off topic questions.

"Should America have gun control?"

You're expected to argue why you think the United States doesn't need gun control?

Instead of using a meme to argue your points of view for you?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
  

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

What are you counter argument points of view?  



That moment when you expect me to counter the five hundred off topic questions.

"Should America have gun control?"

You're expected to argue why you think the United States doesn't need gun control?

Ah, yes. Because your off topic cringy questions are worthy of countering. Because when I do answer them. YOU ADD MORE QUESTIONS!

So what's the point to counter YOUR arguments/questions/headache cringefest

Instead of using a meme to argue your points of view for you? Oh, look an off topic question 

@Zombieguy1987 ;

Do you maybe feel empowered because you own a gun?
  
Ah, yes. a 17 year old can own a gun...

Since when did a law pass for minors to own firearms

John_C_87

Gun control over public accusation control.

The basic principle behind a strong legal case for the ownership of fire-arms to the people of a Nation against that nation are. The idea is. All Americans do have gun control, as an independent burden, the statement of not having gun control is a lie. The fact, the truth is the gun control in use is not working. Rule of law in not working. This is the gun control in used now.

 I started on a introduction of basic explanation of truth the 2nd Amendment does not give the people/me /you/CYDdharta the Constitutional legal right to own a gun legally. So changing/altering/Amending for the reason stopping ownership is not correct. The 2nd Amendment gives the right of the gun owners/those who buy and own guns a right to gather, to also peacefully assembly. To be, or not be militia, defending a state of no self-cost or appointed-cost.

The basic principle, a legal precedent created by the constitutional right to common defense, all men are created equal, a declaration of truth to be made whole by the telling of truth in some way. To be weighed for use of lethal force during a War. A soldier is told/ordered to use lethal force to uphold a United States Constitution. This is not self-defense it is murder for higher or other wise requires a common legal defense for a general welfare. The common defense can be shared by a general welfare of assembly, the defense can then be applied against accusations against soldiers by some citizen/people in that Nation.

The common defense in explanation or alibi to the general welfare that holds all men as equal, soldier/citizen/equal a share Constitutional right to common defense to general welfare, one of foreign nature, one in domestic state, nature. Both have guns. The citizen is allowed to own, keep, and make ready a common defense to the organized use of lethal force, as so the soldier cannot be singled out as they must be willing and ready to apply lethal use of force.

How this would play out. A soldier is accused by a person in a civil court of murder while defending the accuser’s right to file grievance within a constitutional court of law in the same country. Constitutional rights. The defense attorney of the soldier will always have the ability to call a citizen who shares the burden of gun ownership on a position in whole truth, under oath, will the private citizen if need would apply the same use lethal force. As a united States constitutional common defense has not been offered or return.

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

Why would you want to prosecute a dead guy, particularly a poor dead guy?  Additionally, suicide isn't a crime.

The short explanation would change the idea of direction limited explanations for gun control, as a second means of control over lethal force is to be exposed openly.

TKDB

@Zombieguy1987

What is a 17 year old kid, participating in a debate, when he's not old enough to own a gun of his own?

No wonder, you " debate" the way that you do, it's apparently a joke to your 17 year old self? 

John_C_87

@CYDdharta ;

Why would you want to prosecute a dead guy, particularly a poor dead guy?  Additionally, suicide isn't a crime.

The criminal leaves a felony crime as Will & Testament.

Law is a weapon capable of death. There are restrictions on gun use, car use, and self-medication, which address objects as addition crime, weapons, this to promote negation for political applications in the judicial separation, in precedent of human safety it is appropriate to regulate a portion of some political application including any which involve a weapon of harm with limited allowed  use issued to the public.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;


A person is able to be on the wrong side of a bullet, 17 is old enough to understand the true nature of common defense to the general welfare. 17 is at an age were a choice may be made to defend the united states constitution with lethal force and commitment of service to that purpose in many ways. What does independent ownership have to do with a debate on gun control armed services places the weapons in the hands of those it directs without ownership. 

TKDB

@John_C_87

Are you trying to speak up, or for Zombieguy1987? 

John_C_87

Neither, just trying to figure out translate how you are right. The Amendment's on United States Constitution have little to do with amendments made of legal independence? How is that suppose to work? Where is the connection made? You do it with guns, you do it with people, really how is that suppose to work?
 It is like say we are going to save lives by changing speed limit to save but make car that travel 8 times the speed limit. Save lives by removing cell phones but ignore the car ratio.


There is no realistic goal set in constitution for the limit of law to set a purpose to ever work. It is a political negotiation for the creation of work.

TKDB

@John_C_87

"Neither, just trying to figure out translate how you are right. The Amendment's on United States Constitution have little to do with amendments made of legal independence? How is that suppose to work? Where is the connection made? You do it with guns, you do it with people, really how is that suppose to work?
 It is like say we are going to save lives by changing speed limit to save but make car that travel 8 times the speed limit. Save lives by removing cell phones but ignore the car ratio.

There is no realistic goal set in constitution for the limit of law to set a purpose to ever work. It is a political negotiation for the creation of work."

What does your above points of view have to do with the theme of the forum:

"Should America have gun control?"

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

What is a 17 year old kid, participating in a debate, when he's not old enough to own a gun of his own?

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm… It's to make YOU and stop saying I'm an pro-gun extremist and "empowered" because I own a firearm, when I can't.

No wonder, you " debate" the way that you do, it's apparently a joke to your 17 year old self? 

No, it's because you keep going off topic with unrelated questions and links. Nothing to do with my age,

TKDB

@Zombieguy1987

What does the below have to do with the theme of the forum?

"Should America have gun control?"

"What is a 17 year old kid, participating in a debate, when he's not old enough to own a gun of his own?"

"mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm… It's to make YOU and stop saying I'm an pro-gun extremist and "empowered" because I own a firearm, when I can't."

"No wonder, you " debate" the way that you do, it's apparently a joke to your 17 year old self?"

"No, it's because you keep going off topic with unrelated questions and links. Nothing to do with my age, ." 

Name calling, isn't a part of the debate process, is it, Zombieguy1987? 

Zombieguy1987

TKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

What does the below have to do with the theme of the forum?

"Should America have gun control?"

"What is a 17 year old kid, participating in a debate, when he's not old enough to own a gun of his own?"

"mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm… It's to make YOU and stop saying I'm an pro-gun extremist and "empowered" because I own a firearm, when I can't."

"No wonder, you " debate" the way that you do, it's apparently a joke to your 17 year old self?"

"No, it's because you keep going off topic with unrelated questions and links. Nothing to do with my age, ." 

Name calling, isn't a part of the debate process, is it, Zombieguy1987? 

Oh boy. More off topic questions  

CYDdharta

TKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

What is a 17 year old kid, participating in a debate, when he's not old enough to own a gun of his own?

No wonder, you " debate" the way that you do, it's apparently a joke to your 17 year old self? 

...and just how old are you now?  15? 16?

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

Glad you asked TKDB.

The United States Constitution is not the United States Declaration of Independence, I am trying to figure out how layers who write laws on actions of United States of independence are expecting them to work when any change is only made on people/person defending and preserving United States of Constitution? Any idea?

In saying the question of Should America have gun control is a little like saying should America have cell phone control but leaving the car radio still in the car. Little late aren’t we?

A little like saying. Let’s control people for driving 30 miles over the speed limit and let them buy cars that drive 4 times faster than average speed limit.