uncool2pillow Posted June 26, 2013 Author Share Posted June 26, 2013 Put yourself in the NJ housewife's shoes: she was brutally assaulted by a man who is still on the loose. She's also a key witness to the crime, so it's reasonable to conclude that the threat to her safety hasn't yet been removed. Should she have to wait a week or more to be able to be able to protect herself?This is a good point, one I've been thinking about. I suppose to me that it would come down to numbers. How many lives can be saved by having a waiting period in place versus the inability to protect oneself in a situation like this? My guess is a waiting period (for cooling off I think 48 hours is sufficient, not a week or more) would save more innocent lives that it would cost. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Put yourself in the NJ housewife's shoes: she was brutally assaulted by a man who is still on the loose. She's also a key witness to the crime, so it's reasonable to conclude that the threat to her safety hasn't yet been removed. Should she have to wait a week or more to be able to be able to protect herself? have you seen the Real Housewives of New Jersey? I'm not worried. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 This is a good point, one I've been thinking about. I suppose to me that it would come down to numbers. How many lives can be saved by having a waiting period in place versus the inability to protect oneself in a situation like this? My guess is a waiting period (for cooling off I think 48 hours is sufficient, not a week or more) would save more innocent lives that it would cost. Considering what's for the greater good of society over an individual's rights? GTFO with yer goddamned socialist thinking! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 This is a good point, one I've been thinking about. I suppose to me that it would come down to numbers. How many lives can be saved by having a waiting period in place versus the inability to protect oneself in a situation like this? My guess is a waiting period (for cooling off I think 48 hours is sufficient, not a week or more) would save more innocent lives that it would cost.I'd imagine that the lives saved by waiting periods are few, but the notable exception would be potential suicides who might have second thoughts a few days later. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Love Bubba, but this is so spot-on “By overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, the Court recognized that discrimination towards any group holds us all back in our efforts to form a more perfect union. We are also encouraged that marriage equality may soon return to California. We applaud the hard work of the advocates who have fought so relentlessly for this day, and congratulate Edie Windsor on her historic victory,” – former president Bill Clinton, who signed DOMA, insisted it was constitutional at the time, double-crossed the gay activists who originally funded him, ran ads in the South bragging of passing DOMA, doubled the rate of gay discharges from the military and signed the HIV travel ban into law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted June 26, 2013 Author Share Posted June 26, 2013 I'd imagine that the lives saved by waiting periods are few, but the notable exception would be potential suicides who might have second thoughts a few days later.You don't think there's lots of domestic, workplace, or other conflicts where people just boil over? I don't know if there's any way to quantify, so we'll have to agree to disagree. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 You don't think there's lots of domestic, workplace, or other conflicts where people just boil over? I don't know if there's any way to quantify, so we'll have to agree to disagree.I expect that "heat of the moment" decisions to kill someone are made in the moment, using whatever knife/gun/whatever is available. I doubt many people get in the car, drive down to the gun store, pay $500, take a background check and drive back to complete their murderous ambition. California has a 10-day (I think) waiting period for handgun purchases, but it has a higher firearm murder rate per capita than other states that don't. It really all comes down to demographics: the more street thugs, drug dealers, gang members and illegal guns you have on the streets, the more gun crime you have. Those are the people who commit most of our gun crimes and most of them aren't buying their guns legally at gun stores, so waiting periods don't even apply. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Hey, Smith & Wesson is making a ton of money! Yay! They are "job creators," right?http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/06/26/smith-wesson-earnings-rise-heineken-flash-bottles Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Hey, Smith & Wesson is making a ton of money! Yay! They are "job creators," right?http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/06/26/smith-wesson-earnings-rise-heineken-flash-bottlesMost of the major gun manufacturers are in the northeast and governors from gun-friendly states like Texas are trying to woo them (and their money) away. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 How would open- or concealed carry have affected the incident in the video Hixter posted? If you're suggesting that Texas's gun ownership rates are higher than my link suggests (which I think you are), then it seems the cautionary link would have to have an even greater effect (which is already way larger than plausible) on the numbers to reverse the proportion of violent crime rates between the states and get them in line with your position.I guess there is a chance that the thug that busted her door down might have gotten what he deserved. The gun ownership in Texas is much higher than in New Jersey. Surprise. What I found humorous was that the total of people polled for both states was almost 6,000 despite Texas having almost 3 times the population as NJ.The cautionary note on the other link states that, "..caution should be used when making inferences or statements about the states' true values based on a ranking of the estimates."It really doesn't matter because we can all find a poll or study that will reflect exactly what we believe but the fact that I have seen crime and thugs be thwarted by the advantages of a conceal carry law make any poll useless in my eyes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 I guess there is a chance that the thug that busted her door down might have gotten what he deserved. That wouldn't have had a thing to do with whether or not the housewife, who was attacked in her house, was allowed to carry a gun with her while away from home. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 That wouldn't have had a thing to do with whether or not the housewife, who was attacked in her house, was allowed to carry a gun with her while away from home.Not a thing? Not even the likelihood of it being in her purse? Or that she, at the very least, had proper training and a familiarity to a handgun?Not a thing...ok. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Not a thing? Not even the likelihood of it being in her purse? Or that she, at the very least, had proper training and a familiarity to a handgun?Not a thing...ok.Nope, not a thing. If she wants to have a gun and be trained to use it, she is allowed to. Being allowed to carry it in public would not have had an effect on whether or not she had a gun on her person in her own house. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Nope, not a thing. If she wants to have a gun and be trained to use it, she is allowed to. Being allowed to carry it in public would not have had an effect on whether or not she had a gun on her person in her own house.I don't know, 66rebilac, you might be wrong about that. I believe that some of our VC gun enthusiasts are packing heat everywhere they go: in the bathrobe pocket, at the breakfast table...hell, there might even be a waterproof weapon available for the shower! Never know when an intruder will break through your wall and come atcha... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Snowden : Leakers should be “shot in the balls” that shit is classified for a reason it's not because "oh we hope our citizens don't find out" it's because "this shit won't work if iran knows what we're doing." I find this to be utterly amusing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Snowden : Leakers should be “shot in the balls”Hopefully his wish will come true. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 Hopefully his wish will come true. What the hell is that supposed to mean? You want Snowden shot in the junk? Because he told you the government is sifting through your email? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 I'd prefer execution. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 26, 2013 Share Posted June 26, 2013 You want Snowden shot in the junk? Because he told you the government is sifting through your email?No, for stealing classified information and handing it over to our nation's enemies, despite having sworn an oath to the contrary. I'd prefer execution.I'm cool with that. Maybe a doubleheader with Bradley Manning? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KevinG Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 The most important ruling by SCOTUS in decades and this thread has been dominated by the talk of guns. Boo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted June 27, 2013 Author Share Posted June 27, 2013 What is there to say about the SCOTUS ruling except "yay!" and "Mike Huckabee is a tool."? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Hixter Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 The most important ruling by SCOTUS in decades and this thread has been dominated by the talk of guns. BooThe perfect wedding gift for all the soon-to-be-married couples? A gun, of course. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IRememberDBoon Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 No, for stealing classified information and handing it over to our nation's enemies, despite having sworn an oath to the contrary. I'm cool with that. Maybe a doubleheader with Bradley Manning? I love knowing where and why I believe what I believe. I don't even agree with Democratic leaders on this point.do you guys both think Daniel Ellsberg should have been killed?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 It's not too late. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted June 27, 2013 Share Posted June 27, 2013 Snowden was and is basically a kid. Meanwhile, good on the 5 justices who dumped DOMA yesterday. What's with the other four? LouieB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.