Police more likely to be killed on duty in states with high gun ownership

August 13, 2015, University of Illinois at Chicago
States with highest and lowest gun ownership and states with highest law enforcement officer homicide rates are shown. Credit: Megan Strand.

Camden and Newark, New Jersey, are perceived as two of the most violent cities in the nation, yet New Jersey's police officers are among the least likely to get shot on the job. Montana, with its serene landscapes and national parks, has among the highest homicide rates for law enforcement officers. Why?

Across all 50 and the District of Columbia, homicides of police officers are linked to the statewide level of gun ownership, according to a new study published in the American Journal of Public Health. The study found that police officers serving in states with high private gun ownership are more than three times more likely to be killed on the job than those on the job in states with the lowest gun ownership.

Previous studies have linked firearm ownership with higher overall firearm death rates in the United States and internationally. Until now, none of the studies have examined the increased risk to law enforcement personnel.

"If we're interested in protecting police officers, we need to look at what's killing them, and what's killing them is guns," says the study's lead author, David Swedler, research assistant professor of environmental and occupational health sciences in the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health.

"We know that 92 percent of police officers killed in the line of duty are killed by guns, three-quarters of which are handguns," Swedler said.

Swedler and his colleagues looked at the homicide rates of police officers by state between 1996 and 2010 using data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation database, which logs every officer killed in the line of duty. Law enforcement homicide rates were calculated as the number of officers killed by guns per number of officers employed in each state.

Statewide gun ownership rates were calculated using the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, an annual nationwide survey that collects data over a wide range of health topics (including household firearm ownership) as well as state-level data on gun-related suicides, which have been proven to accurately reflect gun ownership rates.

Of the 782 homicides of police officers over the study period, 716 were committed using guns; 515 of them with handguns. States averaged one homicide per year, but because states vary in the number of officers employed, some had higher numbers of officer homicides, while other states had none.

On average, the researchers found that 38 percent of U.S. households have at least one gun, ranging from 4.8 percent of households in the District of Columbia to 62 percent in Wyoming.

Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Mississippi and Montana were in the top quintile both for gun ownership and for law enforcement homicides, while Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island were in the lowest quintile for gun ownership and police officer homicides.

"We found that officers aren't being killed in states with high violent-crime rates. While violent crime rates didn't track closely to officer , it was public gun ownership that had the strongest relationship," Swedler said.

"Hypothetically, officers might be put at increased risk if they are more frequently encountering violent criminals, but our data doesn't find that to be the case," said Swedler. "We find that officers are at an increased risk for being killed the more frequently they encounter guns in public settings."

Swedler says that one reason why high gun ownership and killing are so closely linked is that many officers get shot while responding to domestic disturbance calls.

"Research shows that responding to domestic violence calls are one of the most common situations in which officers are killed. In states where firearms are more prevalent, officers responding to reports of domestic violence are more often entering potentially lethal situations compared to officers responding to such calls in states with lower firearm prevalence," Swedler said.

Based on their data, Swedler and his colleagues estimate that a 10 percent higher statewide firearm ownership would have resulted in 10 more officer homicides in each state over the 15 year study period.

"Statewide firearm ownership is definitely a risk factor for police officers," Swedler said. "Higher private increases the frequency with which officers encounter life-threatening situations. If we care about the safety of those officers, then we need to think about them when considering state gun laws."

Explore further: Higher gun ownership rates linked to increase in non-stranger homicide, study finds

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Excavators find tombs buried in Bolivia 500 years ago

November 17, 2018

Archaeologists say they found tombs at a Bolivian quarry containing remains from more than 500 years ago that give an insight into the interaction of various peoples with the expanding Inca empire.

Preventing chemical weapons as sciences converge

November 15, 2018

Alarming examples of the dangers from chemical weapons have been seen recently in the use of industrial chemicals and the nerve agent sarin against civilians in Syria, and in the targeted assassination operations using VX ...

121 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rderkis
2.7 / 5 (9) Aug 13, 2015
More police likely killed in democracy.
So should we give up or freedom for security?
denglish
3.7 / 5 (19) Aug 13, 2015
Citizens own guns. Subjects do not.

I like this one:

"If we're interested in protecting police officers, we need to look at what's killing them, and what's killing them is guns,"

That's BS. People are killing them.

aksdad
4.1 / 5 (13) Aug 13, 2015
Higher private gun ownership increases the frequency with which officers encounter life-threatening situations. If we care about the safety of those officers, then we need to think about them when considering state gun laws.

Utter nonsense. The data don't support this. His comments make sense only if you cherry-pick and willfully ignore contradictory data. Wyoming has the highest rate of gun ownership (59%) and one of the lowest rates of officer homicides (1.15 per 100,000). Alaska has the 2nd highest rate of gun ownership (57.8%) and its officer homicide rate (2.5) is identical to Hawaii (2.45), which has the lowest rate of gun ownership by state (6.7%).

From a data standpoint, the number of officers killed was so low as to be virtually impossible to determine significant trends. For example, during the study period, Alaska had 2 officers killed in the line of duty but it ranks among the top 20% because it has a relatively small police force.
ab3a
4.6 / 5 (11) Aug 13, 2015
First, domestic violence calls are dangerous --period. This is a situation where police have to deal with people at their worst: substance abuse problems, and mental illness are common. More officers are injured or killed in domestic violence calls than anything else.

Second, in rural areas, police have to spend longer times to get to these places. The situation has a longer time to fester and get worse.

Third, in rural areas, more people own guns because they need them. These are places where the nearest cop could be hours away. It is a good idea to be armed and proficient if you expect to survive. There is also a need to hunt to put food on the table.

So to say that gun ownership correlates with higher officer deaths is like saying that crime gets worse because it gets dark. It's not the darkness that CAUSES the crime, it is coincident with it because the people who would commit crimes know that they are more likely to get away when it is dark.
Eikka
4.5 / 5 (24) Aug 14, 2015
. His comments make sense only if you cherry-pick and willfully ignore contradictory data.


And then you go ahead and make the very error you accuse them of doing.

Outliers and exceptions happen because there are more factors than just gun ownership levels. Wyoming for example is a rural state with low population density - evenyone has guns because they're farmers and hunters, which is totally different from some sub-urbia where people have guns because they're paranoid and afraid.

That's why you have to "ignore" individual cases and look at the whole trend. This is not cherrypicking - it's statistical evidence.
ab3a
4.7 / 5 (14) Aug 14, 2015
That's why you have to "ignore" individual cases and look at the whole trend. This is not cherrypicking - it's statistical evidence.


First, identifying gun ownership rates is not trivial.

aksdad points out that the data is so thin that to call it statistical evidence is almost meaningless. You haven't answered that concern.

There are also issues of cause and effect. The nature of rural police work and the distance from good medical care may be a greater factor for gunshot deaths than the coincident presence of more guns. These issues are nearly inseparable. Using "statistical evidence" to make this case looks to me like someone trying to fit meager data to a political agenda.

There isn't enough "statistical evidence" here to suggest, let alone "prove" anything.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (27) Aug 14, 2015
People are killed by gun nuts.

Get rid of guns, and the gun nuts will have to use clubs, and become club nuts.

We'll all have a better chance against them.
ab3a
4.7 / 5 (15) Aug 14, 2015
People are killed by gun nuts.

Get rid of guns, and the gun nuts will have to use clubs, and become club nuts.

We'll all have a better chance against them.


Dream on. When you're done, talk to an expert on self defense.

"Gun nuts" to a very large extent enjoy being able to use them in shooting sports. They can't do that from prison, or even after having paid their debt to society. They're not the ones anyone should fear. "Gun nuts" are some of the most law abiding people you'll ever meet.

I say this as one who spends a lot of time at quite a few gun ranges. I'm a youth instructor for shotgun shooting sports (Trap, Skeet, and Sporting Clay ranges). You would do well to at least learn about those who derisively refer to as "Gun Nuts." If you did this to any other interest group, you'd be shouted down as some sort of bigot, and rightfully so.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (27) Aug 14, 2015
You are a responsible gun owner, not a gun nut. The gun nut uses it for ego-protection, as an "equalizer". You can spot him by the "cold dead hands" bumper sticker.

You folk teach the proper use and handling of guns, and it is to be applauded.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (21) Aug 14, 2015
Your definition of a "gun nut" is vague and meaningless. Linking bumper sticker ownership, or gun ownership as a hobby, to a willingness to shoot someone is vacuous and inflammatory.

More "gun nuts" - http://www.fielda...gun-nut.
gkam
1.1 / 5 (27) Aug 14, 2015
Most of us outgrew our fascination with things which make a BIG NOISE.

But for some, their trigger finger comes directly from the brain stem.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (21) Aug 14, 2015
Most of us outgrew our fascination with things which make a BIG NOISE.

But for some, their trigger finger comes directly from the brain stem.


Based on what data or source? Who is most of us? Does most of us mean you, so you transfer that to the general populace? Not everyone is your age.

So you don't even watch fireworks?

Trigger finger from brain stem makes no sense at all explain what the hell you are trying to say. Where else should the trigger finger come from for electrical impulses?

If you are trying to equate gun ownership or gun hobbyists to immaturity you have failed.

There are plenty of mature professional gun owners and hobbyists that enjoy shooting bigger guns just for the noise and feel of it. If you "outgrew" it or aged beyond it, you don't speak for others that enjoy it.
ab3a
5 / 5 (12) Aug 15, 2015
Most of us outgrew our fascination with things which make a BIG NOISE.

But for some, their trigger finger comes directly from the brain stem.


It appears you have some very strongly ingrained biases. I don't think anyone here will ever be able to change your mind. However, you might consider that you're displaying a level of ignorance and hate that doesn't sway anyone toward your way of thinking either.

People who are concerned about the right to bear arms know that these weapons are inanimate objects. We're not discussing the right to use landmines, the right to use atomic weapons, the right to bomb your neighbor or anything of the sort. We're discussing the right to self defense. While it is quite possible for guns to be used offensively, they are also used defensively very frequently. If they weren't, we wouldn't bother arming police officers with them. To discuss this rationally, we need to consider all uses, not just offensive ones.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
Wow, I guess I was wrong about most of us outgrowing that juvenile need. Esteban, I did not even consider you kids.

Sorry.

And no, I do not go watch fireworks.

"We're discussing the right to self defense. " Yeah, like in the Colorado movie theater.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (25) Aug 15, 2015
"It appears you have some very strongly ingrained biases."
-------------------------------------

Yes. They are from strongly ingrained experiences. It is not natural to carry a killing device. Those who do not from service needs are SCARED, and subject to error.

You do not "need" a gun. We arm our police and military, and that's enough.
indio007
3.7 / 5 (6) Aug 15, 2015
The greatest risk to the lives of police is being killed in traffic. You don't see the gov't criminals crying out to stop giving out tickets do you? Less tickets would save police officers lives.

The fact is , police die for revenue more than they die protecting people.

I won't even get into the fact that traffic laws can't be for the purpose of revenue but we all know it is.
indio007
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 15, 2015
For all you anti-self-defence people. Consider this. Police have no duty to protect ANYONE.
So then who is responsible for your self-preservation? YOU ARE!
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
My self-defense requires we keep you folk unarmed. I promise I will not kill you by mistake, but most gun folk cannot make that promise. Please understand we see some of you folk kill us all the time. It is time to end it.
Estevan57
5 / 5 (19) Aug 15, 2015
What an incredibly stupid, self-serving thing to say. Judging by gun ownership levels, your self defense has failed.

And who the hell is "you gun folk"? Hunters? Antique collectors? Target shooters? Boy Scouts?

Perhaps you mean to say gangstas, thugs, hoodlums, criminals.

Welcome to the real world, where people are different than you. And you get to call them kids because they are younger too.

Statistically, you would be better off demanding that noone else drive their cars.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
" Judging by gun ownership levels, your self defense has failed."
---------------------------------------

Judging by my continued existence at age 71, I'd say it has worked pretty well.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (19) Aug 15, 2015
Yes it has. You must be "requiring" enough people to be unarmed.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (25) Aug 15, 2015
Yup. Scared folk are not usually invited into my house. And none with guns.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
Yup. Scared folk are not usually invited into my house. And none with guns
"there is something else about the speech of psychopaths that is equally puzzling: their frequent use of contradictory and logically inconsistent statements that usually escape detection. Recent research on the language of psychopaths provides us with some important clues to this puzzle, as well as to the uncanny ability psychopaths have to move words - and people- around so easily."

-Some examples:

"When asked if he had ever committed a violent offense, a man serving time for theft answered, "No, but I once had to kill someone.""

"A man serving a term for armed robbery replied to the testimony of an eyewitness, "He's lying. I wasn't there. I should have blown his fucking head off.""

-Who wouldnt be scared to visit a psychopath? When THEY commit violence, its not violence.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
Gosh, folks, this issue is scary, since it is so emotional. Most gun owners are good folk, not in need of counseling. It is the fringe, those who "need" killing devices to be "equal" to the rest of us who must not have access to them. So how do we prevent it? As gun owners, you folk should be willing to work with the rest of us to keep rational folk only with these devices.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.4 / 5 (25) Aug 15, 2015
Most gun owners are good folk, not in need of counseling
Most psychopaths are very bad people in need of counciling and constant monitoring.

"Psychopaths just have what it takes to defraud and bilk others: they can be fast talkers, they can be charming, they can be self-assured and at ease in social situations; they are cool under pressure, unfazed by the possibility of being found out, and totally ruthless. And even when they are exposed, they can carry on as if nothing has happened, often making their accusers the targets of accusations of being victimized by THEM."
gkam
1.5 / 5 (25) Aug 15, 2015
My point of needing to keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths has been demonstrated in this thread. Monomania is dangerous. Emotional instability and the inability to deal with issues rationally are prime indicators of the dangerous folk we cannot trust with killing devices.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 15, 2015
My point of needing to keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths has been demonstrated in this thread. Monomania is dangerous. Emotional instability and the inability to deal with issues rationally are prime indicators of the dangerous folk we cannot trust with killing devices.
Sooner or later the psychopath reveals himself.
And you dream of me. You can't help it. Every comment I leave gets under your skin.

You can be played like a cheap kazoo
-Remember when you said this george?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 15, 2015
What does it take to cure your monomania? You really MUST dream of me, because I am all you talk about. It is a fixation, otto, a psychological disease, and you need help.

I am trying to make you aware of your illness.

Meanwhile, I would not trust you with a gun. Nobody would after seeing your emotional state.
indio007
4.2 / 5 (5) Aug 15, 2015
My self-defense requires we keep you folk unarmed. I promise I will not kill you by mistake, but most gun folk cannot make that promise. Please understand we see some of you folk kill us all the time. It is time to end it.

can we have more ridiculous hyperbole please?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 15, 2015
I have no idea of your mental state, and will not allow you to carry a gun around me. Yeah, I know, it makes us "equal".

But you don't get to do it.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (26) Aug 15, 2015
I have no idea of your mental state, and will not allow you to carry a gun around me. Yeah, I know, it makes us "equal".

But you don't get to do it.


Well it didn't take long to find some more of that ridiculous hyperbole stuffs he asked for.

Skippy, it is not up to you to allow it. I sure would like to see you come down here and watch you tell somebody you don't allow it.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (20) Aug 15, 2015
Careful, indeo007. gkam will take that as a request. Oops, too late.

Knowing your mental state, gkam, I would feel safer with one.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 15, 2015
"I sure would like to see you come down here and watch you tell somebody you don't allow it."
-----------------------------

I've already been "down there". That's why I am "up here".
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
Ira, one of them-there nukey plants went online in Japantown a day or so ago. Now, the local volcano is acting up, and evacuation plans are out and ready.

otto, Willie, estavan and denglish all need a ride on your that-there boat of yours to go help them japanese-skippies. Take indio-cher, too.
Uncle Ira
4.6 / 5 (22) Aug 15, 2015
Ira, one of them-there nukey plants went online in Japantown a day or so ago. Now, the local volcano is acting up, and evacuation plans are out and ready.

otto, Willie, estavan and denglish all need a ride on your that-there boat of yours to go help them japanese-skippies. Take indio-cher, too.


Well Cher, I am sure all that means something because you took the time to write him down. But I don't know what the Japan-Skippys has to do with police getting shot more in some states. Maybe you can clear that one up for me, eh?

The boat I work on can not go to Japan anyway. It is a river towboat. And we don't give peoples rides on the boat because there are insurance rules about that and my bosses would not like it non.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (25) Aug 15, 2015
I've already been "down there". That's why I am "up here".


What happened? Some coonass give you the big slap after you told him what you were not going to allow? Hooyeei, I would have really liked to see that.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (22) Aug 15, 2015
No, Ira, several coonasses asked me to come down and fix their problem for them.

I did.

.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (24) Aug 15, 2015
No, Ira, several coonasses asked me to come down and fix their problem for them.

I did..


Must have been a Texan that got lost that asked you for help. The Cajun is not known so much for asking for help from outsiders.. Choot, you were lost your own self, you thought you were in Looosianna when you were working in Grand Gulf. That is not so surprising though because we call peoples from Mississippi east bank Texans, they are dumb like that.
Estevan57
4.8 / 5 (19) Aug 15, 2015
- east bank Texans... dang that's funny.
kochevnik
not rated yet Aug 15, 2015
@gkam My point of needing to keep guns out of the hands of psychopaths has been demonstrated in this thread. Monomania is dangerous. Emotional instability and the inability to deal with issues rationally are prime indicators of the dangerous folk we cannot trust with killing devices.
You know nothing about psychopaths. They improvise and premeditate. Access to guns is not a determinant in the psychopath's plans. More subdued techniques are usually in order, such as assisting the victim's own demise
KBK
2 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2015
As soon as the creeping fascism is permanently cleared up, then, maybe, people in the USA will think about parting with their guns.

They are dealing with a government that is a cover story for an oligarch class, a potent but subtle fascism..which wants total control over the population and will spread any lie, the more subtle the better..in order to get people to put down their guns and be subjugated. In this case, cleansed, like has been done in country after country - By that hidden oligarchy, via shredding the resource of the fresh USA, for over the past 200 years. (over 200 years of 'distant wars', with .... 900 foreign bases)

The USA is waking up from the dream state they fell into via the propaganda and whatnot, the oligarchy that used them as a weapons against the rest of the world, is now turning on their awakening resource.

Thus wholly directed creeping fascism of the past 50 years, in the USA, to culminate in a totalitarian police state.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 16, 2015
No,Ira, it was you Loozianians who pleaded with me for help with their robots in Shreveport. Remember? I also helped the Ironclad Bag plant there with the same problem: When the lightning strikes the transmission line in Texas, you folk lose operation of equipment. I dealt with the robot designer for that one.

Never been or even seen Grand Gulf. This is close as I ever want to be to that monster. It is a GE BWR, and I tested the safety systems of those sleeping disasters. Do you know three top-level engineers from GE quit telling us they were unsafe? That was around the time we were testing the SRV, downcomers and Suppression Pool conditions.

Those monsters got built because they were cheaper than doing it right,with a Containment which could contain all the residue of trouble. They cheated by putting in a suppression pool, supposed to turn all that nasty highly-radioactive steam back into water, . . until it doesn't. That way, they could use a tiny containment.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (26) Aug 16, 2015
No,Ira, it was you Loozianians who pleaded with me for help with their robots in Shreveport. Remember?


No, glam-Skippy. I don't remember ever pleading with you for anything. And I really do doubt that any self respecting Louisianian would plead with you for anything either. Just another one of you brags that only sound like brags.

Now if you got the picture of you standing in front of the Caddo Parrish courthouse wearing a silly looking hat, and send him to me,,,, I will give you the apology for calling you another liar like I am doing now.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
That "silly-looking hat" is the uniform of those of us who worked in secret, or in danger. You won't believe me, so I suggest you look up your local Vet Center (those words), and go tell them that. I suggest the Anger Management Group.

Not all of us were stay-at-home "patriots", Ira. I enlisted and volunteered. Where did you hide?
denglish
3.9 / 5 (14) Aug 16, 2015
No, Ira, several coonasses asked me to come down and fix their problem for them.

I did.


I suggest you look up your local Vet Center (those words), and go tell them that. I suggest the Anger Management Group.

Oh boy, he's warming up for more lies!

Using an article re: protecting the lives of our Peace Officers in order to spout anti-American gun beliefs, other liberal BS, and finally narcissistic story-telling is reprehensible.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (25) Aug 16, 2015
That "silly-looking hat" is the uniform of those of us who worked in secret, or in danger.


Well if I wanted to do a secret thing, I sure wouldn't be wearing a hat like that. How you keep a secret with one of those standing on your head?

You won't believe me, so I suggest you look up your local Vet Center (those words), and go tell them that.


I give a lot of time and money to local vet groups me.

I suggest the Anger Management Group.


I do not like being angry so I will skippy skip over that one if it's all the same to you.

Not all of us were stay-at-home "patriots", Ira. I enlisted and volunteered. Where did you hide?


I know you mean to say something with that one. But you are the only one who knows what.

I hide at home, and around town, and work and going here and there. I hide in the market and the stores and in my front yard. The reason you think I am hiding is because I don't wear the secret silly looking hat.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 16, 2015
Send your posts to the Vet Center, Ira. You should learn to take responsibility for your words.

Those folk got their conditions in the WAR, goober! You pathetic stay-at-home "patriots" will never understand what that meant.

Stevepidge
1 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2015
. His comments make sense only if you cherry-pick and willfully ignore contradictory data.


And then you go ahead and make the very error you accuse them of doing.

Outliers and exceptions happen because there are more factors than just gun ownership levels. Wyoming for example is a rural state with low population density - evenyone has guns because they're farmers and hunters, which is totally different from some sub-urbia where people have guns because they're paranoid and afraid.

That's why you have to "ignore" individual cases and look at the whole trend. This is not cherrypicking - it's statistical evidence.


Paranoid and afraid? NOW THAT IS AN ASSUMPTION!! How about because people don't like being slaves, or victimized by rampant violent crime in Urban societal cancer centers.
Stevepidge
1 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2015
You are a responsible gun owner, not a gun nut. The gun nut uses it for ego-protection, as an "equalizer". You can spot him by the "cold dead hands" bumper sticker.

You folk teach the proper use and handling of guns, and it is to be applauded.


You realize its a dog eat dog universe right? If you wanna be a coward pussy fine.
Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
Send your posts to the Vet Center, Ira.


I am non different there than I am here. They seem to like me just fine. They laugh with me while I laugh at me silly self. Mrs-Ira-Skippy calls me her "Droll Little Tribulation".

You should learn to take responsibility for your words.


I do take responsibility for my words and deeds Cher. And I don't try to take credit for things I never did.

You pathetic stay-at-home "patriots" will never understand what that meant.


You keep saying that Over and over and over some more overs. What does that mean Skippy? That is nothing more than a silly way of puffing up your self by pointing at somebody else,,,, What? You thought it was so sneaky nobody would notice that?

My papa was in the Vietnam wars. Skippy I was not borned until 1977 so how I qualify for stay at home anything?
denglish
3.9 / 5 (11) Aug 16, 2015
I don't wear the secret silly looking hat.

I lol'd

Sheep, Sheepdogs, and Wolves.

Those that think Americans should be disarmed put more value into being sheep...and wolves.
ab3a
5 / 5 (10) Aug 16, 2015
You do not "need" a gun. We arm our police and military, and that's enough.


...and this is where your arrogance gets the better of you.

Even in urban areas, police response times are measures in minutes. EMS response times to get people to the hospital within the "golden hour" are stretched thin. In rural areas, it's much worse.

You presume to know what's good for the rest of humanity. I think you're DEAD wrong. Even the Supreme Court has made rulings that pretty much dismiss your point of view. I have a right and a duty to defend myself and my family. You would have me wait for the police to arrive. We'll all be dead by then.

Furthermore, nations that arm only their police and military often succumb to totalitarianism in just a couple generations. Every tyrant in history has disarmed his populace "for the good of the people" prior to going on a rampage.

There is a word for people who think like you: Hopolophobia. Look it up.
Stevepidge
1 / 5 (4) Aug 16, 2015
Some people here would do well to read " the way of men" by Donovan. Life is a battle, I will never understand the utopian my little pony society the western world seems to want to bring to fruition. What a bunch of weak morons, no honor, no courage, no sacrifice. Seat belts for computer chairs on the horizon? Idiots.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
"What a bunch of weak morons, no honor, no courage, no sacrifice. "
-------------------------------------

I'm a Vietnam vet, jerk. I enlisted and volunteered. What did you do except use your big mouth?

Urban gun owners are SCARED folk. And when they get SCARED, we get the Bush Police State.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
I have no idea of your mental state
-But we are well aware if yours. You come here to lie, to make up facts, to use these topics as an excuse to talk about yourself, and to play people like cheap kazoos.
and will not allow you to carry a gun around me.

But you don't get to do it
-So now the psychopath thinks he can supercede lawful carry permits and the 2nd amendment. How are you proposing to disarm people george? At gunpoint? Have you threatened any neighbors yet?

And let me remind you. What I dream of is a day when psychopathic predators like yourself no longer exist.

Until then the best we can do is dog you and demonstrate just what you are.

Funny how you persist in using an obsolete 19th century term monomania, even when you were told about it. It's the same with your refusal to use the quote button.

So your debility is colored by compulsive neurosis yes?

WHAT are the shrinks treating you for down at the VA? YOU brought it up. Now please elucidate.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
No,Ira, it was you Loozianians who pleaded with me for help with their robots in Shreveport. Remember? I also helped the Ironclad Bag plant there with the same problem: When the lightning strikes the transmission line in Texas, you folk lose operation of equipment. I dealt with the robot designer for that one
Huh. ANOTHER job. What are we up to now - 21, 22 jobs you lost during your train wreck career?

PLEASE post your entire CV along with hire and fire dates on your very professional-looking website so as to clear up any confusion.

Thanks loads.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 16, 2015
Monomania. That's you,otto. You follow me around for these silly comments.

It is fun to watch, unless you get violent. I do not trust hard-line right-wingers who seem to favor extreme measures, but hide their own identity out of cowardice. Like you bragged earlier, you post as variations of "otto" (tooti?), to play "games " with the rest of us.

Unable to admit you lost your own game, you now have a fixation I actually find somewhat flattering. But I have to warn you about making fun of those of us in the VA. It not only betrays your character, it puts you in jeopardy if you mouth off to the wrong one of them.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (27) Aug 16, 2015
I'm a Vietnam vet, jerk. I enlisted and volunteered.


Let me translate that into coonass for you. Skippy was about to lose his "Stay Out of the Draft" free card because he had been jumping around three different colleges and finally threw in the towel. So not wanting to be in the Army or Marines, he thought it would be better to be in the Navy, but they were all booked up so he settled on the Air Force.

What did you do except use your big mouth?


Okayeei, I will give you credit for that one. You did earn a BIG MOUTH engineering expert honorary degree.

Urban gun owners are SCARED folk. And when they get SCARED, we get the Bush Police State.


That's about as witty and smart as any of your other lame bumper sticker slogans. But what does it mean?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 16, 2015
And I TOLD you goober, monomania hasn't been used since the mid-1800s.

How fucking dense ARE you?

And sorry I'm not toot/tooti/lite et al. Lots of people here want to get rid of you. Youll note that most of your rates are 1/5 now. People are learning exactly what you are, and are beginning to check the bullshit you post.
gkam
1.5 / 5 (25) Aug 16, 2015
It means when folk get scared, they allow extreme measures. That is how folk get into power.

When the draft-dodgers were screaming "WMD!" from their Undisclosed Locations, many of us veterans knew how to look up the facts. I knew about "Curveball" and the Office of Special Plans long before the invasion.

Those inventions are where we got our "intelligence", stovepiped straight to those who arranged it, so the real professionals could not stop it. Read about Lt Colonel Kwiatkowski, then wonder why you did not know about it back then. The Bush Crew played our goobers like a cheap kazoo.

We tried and tried to tell you folk you were being mislead, but you called us traitors.
denglish
3.3 / 5 (14) Aug 16, 2015
We tried and tried to tell you folk you were being mislead, but you called us traitors.

This is the same person that says the US sold Nuclear Secrets to North Korea and Pakistan.

This person is so full of liberal hatred that they throw out anything; hoping it sticks. Couple that with the obsessive lying, and you're looking at a very sick person.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 16, 2015
Your personal attacks cannot save you from your outing here. They can look up Kwiatkowski, the Office of Special Plans, Doug Feith, "stovepiping", and "Curveball" all by themselves.

Add history to that for verification, and you are stuck with personal attack, . . and lying about what I said.
Protoplasmix
5 / 5 (3) Aug 16, 2015
Police more likely to be killed on duty in states with high gun ownership
The work can certainly be difficult and dangerous, but for some perspective, and more a statement about our culture's subsidize-the-rich-and-tax-the-poor economy than gun ownership:

Taxi cab drivers and chauffeurs are more than twice as likely to be a victim of homicide at work than police and sheriff's patrols (source: WaPo analysis of BLS data for 2013).
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
But I have to warn you about making fun of those of us in the VA. It not only betrays your character, it puts you in jeopardy if you mouth off to the wrong one of them
Making fun? YOU said you were being treated down at the VA psych ward. What for?

And just how many dead-end jobs have you had? How many times have you gotten fired?

And youre threatening me again. The last refuge of the impotent.
We tried and tried to tell you folk you were being mislead, but you called us traitors
Well its hard to take 20yo grunts seriously when they claim to be working directly for mcnamara designing, fabricating, and running top secret spy equipt.
and lying about what I said
You said you were an engr but what you sent ira says that this is a lie.

32 weeks of vo-tech school doesnt make you an engr.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
You know nothing about psychopaths. They improvise and premeditate. Access to guns is not a determinant in the psychopath's plans. More subdued techniques are usually in order, such as assisting the victim's own demise
Gkam has proven himself to be a psychopath by what he reveals when he brags about his imaginary accomplishments and makes up facts as he sees fit.

George has first-hand experience. He knows exactly what a psychopath is.

You cant trust a thing he says.

"What makes psychopaths different from all others is the remarkable ease with which they lie, the pervasiveness of their deception, and the callousness with which they carry it out.

"But there is something else about the speech of psychopaths that is equally puzzling: their frequent use of contradictory and logically inconsistent statements that usually escape detection."
gkam
1.5 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
Gun ownership by the goobers is not a good idea. Why arm folk who "need" guns to be equal to the rest of us?

My son-in-law is a police sergeant in Oakland. That's scary enough. If your job does not require them, then you have them for psychological reasons. That should be sufficient to keep you from having them.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
Who gets to have guns? Me? You? otto? Would you trust a monomaniac who follows others around, fixated on character assassination?

This goober is emotionally unstable, and may become violent. Those with no real life of their own often fall for silly missions, like "getting even".

We need to make sure folk like otto do not have ANY access to guns.
Uncle Ira
4.7 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
If your job does not require them, then you have them for psychological reasons.


That is one of the more stupidest things you have said here. It doesn't mean anything and doesn't say anything except you think you have the smarts to bundle up a lot a wisdom into a one sentence slogan. That is for bumper stickers to let people know where your heart is, not for passing on any great wisdom.

That should be sufficient to keep you from having them.


Well golly gee glam-Skippy. That should be sufficient reason to have a constitution to protect us from glam-Skippy's wisdom.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
Did denglish finally get straightened out on the works of AQ Khan? I really enjoyed that.
gkam
1.3 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
Are you a "well-regulated militia"? Those are the ones we allowed to have guns, because we had no standing army, and had to rely on the state militias. We still have them, and you can have a gun if you join up.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
We need to make sure folk like otto do not have ANY access to guns.


You can tell all that by reading some silly postums on the interweb? We need for you to get better control over emotions, you think you can turn on the "umbrage" and make what you say mean more than it does say. Sort of like turning on your "qualifications" to put your musings beyond question.

You really should get away from the slogans and rallying cries. It really makes you look a lot shallow. It hurts your causes and makes the peoples on your side of the stage cringe with embarrassment. You are the Sarah Palin for the liberal side, I can say that because I am a pretty liberal Skippy in my politics.

What I mean is you sound like the guy at bar who gets wittier and wittier with every drink just knows everything he is saying has got to be a good "got-cha"
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
Are you a "well-regulated militia"?


As a matter of fact I am. According to the Supreme Court and the Founders, every free citizen is a member of "the militia". Skippy you should read up on this stuffs before you start pronouncing on it. Arguing from your "it feels right to me so it has to be right" is how you keep losing to Eikka and others on the technical stuffs. The law is clear on the matter.

If you don't like the law, work to change him. If you don't like what the Constitution and the Courts interpretation of him, you need to work to change him. But glam-Skippy trying to wiggle around the words to mean something different that what was and is written it the easy way out.

There is a reason the Founders make him so hard to change. They knew some couyon like you would come along who knows all by himself what is best.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
Who gets to have guns? Me? You? otto? Would you trust a monomaniac who follows others around, fixated on character assassination?
No justice no peace goober.

Youre a lying, cheating psychopath who makes up facts as he sees fit.

The people here need to know this.

I think paul revere had a gun too.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
I suggest Ira look into history, not the NRA for instruction on the conditions when we wrote that. We had no standing army, and needed the "Well-Regulated" militia. You are not. You are a rabble of gun nuts, many with psychological problems.

Can you imagine what happens when folk with obvious psychological problems like otto get weapons? I hope his cowardice overcomes his hate.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
I suggest Ira look into history, not the NRA for instruction on the conditions when we wrote that. We had no standing army, and needed the "Well-Regulated" militia. You are not. You are a rabble of gun nuts, many with psychological problems.

Can you imagine what happens when folk with obvious psychological problems like otto get weapons? I hope his cowardice overcomes his hate.
Apparently the people here can tell who is the psycho. You rarely get positive votes any more while Ive gained 1/10; difficult for someone who has maybe 10k posts.

Youve dropped from 3.4 to 2.3 in less than a month. Do you think its because the people here are tired of your ignorant bullshit and psychotic rantings?

After all Ive never threatened anybody. You threaten lots of people. You threatened me with your posse of psych doctors who would monitor my every post just because you ask them.

How psychotic is that?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 17, 2015
otto, sooner or later, you will be gone. Yeah, I know overwhelming fixations and monomania do not usually fix themselves, and we can only hope you are too scared to get violent. But more Decent Folk will tire of your need for my attention.

Meanwhile, you should NOT be able to own a killing device, based on your emotional instability.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
I suggest Ira look into history, not the NRA for instruction on the conditions when we wrote that


I suggest you try to stay away for the slogans and hyperboliitying. NRA has nothing to do with my opinion. I suggest YOU read the Founders own words on the matter. I suggest you read what the courts have said about the meaning of "well regulated militia".

We had no standing army, and needed the "Well-Regulated" militia.You are not.


The courts have ruled dozens of times every free citizen is a member of the militia as defined by the 2nd Amendment.

You are a rabble of gun nuts, many with psychological problems.


The empty slogan that does not say anything except you think passion can make up for logic and facts.

Can you imagine what happens when folk with obvious psychological problems like otto get weapons?


More?

I hope his cowardice overcomes his hate


A slogan with a double dash of the hyperbolitying stuffs.

TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
otto, sooner or later, you will be gone. Yeah, I know overwhelming fixations and monomania do not usually fix themselves, and we can only hope you are too scared to get violent. But more Decent Folk will tire of your need for my attention.

Meanwhile, you should NOT be able to own a killing device, based on your emotional instability.
Ive never threatened anybody. You threaten lots of people. You threatened me with your posse of psych doctors who would monitor my every post just because you ask them.

Why is is that anyone who reads that would think youre insane, but you?

Remember. These posts are not for you but for all the honest people here who might be taken in by your bullshit.

They need to know just who and what they are dealing with.

And thats why this is not going to stop.
Uncle Ira
4.2 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
otto, sooner or later, you will be gone


As I have said a lot before I do not always agree or like the way the otto-Skippy says what he's got to say.

But Cher, that is the proof (as if we needed any more that you have already given us) that you are one of the more stupid examples of the type of "I know I can fool them" fools on here. Even Bennie-Skippy and Really-Skippy and Returnering-Skippy are not as stupid to say something as silly as that?

What do I mean by that? Well since you ask me so nice, I will tell you Cher.

otto-Skippy has been here a whole lot longer than you have, and he is still here.He's tangled with a lot of peoples almost as stupid as you, and he is still here.A lot of them have come back as puppets AND GONE, he is still here.

otto, sooner or later, you will be gone


Maybe the nice peoples at physorg will make an exception on the 3 minute take back rule for you because of your mental conditions that make say really stupid stuffs.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
Gosh, Ira, if you do not understand it all, go ask your wife. I sent you "proofs", and you misrepresented them out of a lack of character. I would have sheepishly admitted error, but for some reason you cannot.

This thread regards goobers with guns, and how they put our police at risk.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
if you do not understand it all, go ask your wife


I understand the 2nd Amendment just fine. You are the one who has some new-agey double speaky misunderstandings. Have you read the Founders and courts on the issue?

I sent you "proofs", and you misrepresented them out of a lack of character. I would have sheepishly admitted error, but for some reason you cannot.


I ask for proofs of degrees and diplomas and engineers. You have not sent that. Why?

This thread regards goobers with guns, and how they put our police at risk.


So what does not having proofs for the questions asked have to do with guns? Oh yeah, I almost forget, it is all, everything about glam-Skippy the master scientist engineer super war hero top secret airman who is six kinds of engineer and now a legal scholar who has slogans but no proofs.

Every time you make a point of telling about the proofs you claim I won't admit only draws more attention to you not having any proofs.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
"I understand the 2nd Amendment just fine. "
--------------------------------

Oh, good! Now, what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
"I understand the 2nd Amendment just fine. "
--------------------------------

Oh, good! Now, what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?
Well lets check the actual supreme court decision and ignore the psychotic pissant who thinks hes a lawyer in addition to everything else he isnt.

"District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies to federal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
I sent you "proofs", and you misrepresented them
Your proofs proved you are a liar. Thats easy to see just by reading them.

32 weeks of vo-tech school does not make you an engr you scumbag.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
He's tangled with a lot of peoples almost as stupid as you
Yeah buddy. Even pussytard wasnt as dense as this schizo. Even returners/Lrrrkrrrr isnt as detached from reality as this lunatic is.

How many times do you need to repeat something before people realize youre a compulsive neurotic?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 17, 2015
Now, once again, . . what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?

No more dodging, . . . you can do it, if you can get up the character. Ira quit.
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
"I understand the 2nd Amendment just fine. "
--------------------------------

Oh, good! Now, what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?


Well that's about as sharp as anything you thought was witty so far.

And the courts have ruled, dozens of times that the intent and definition and purpose of "well regulated militia" means EVERY FREE CITIZEN. You might not like it but that is what they have ruled. You pouting does not change that.

That is why the new-agey-quick-emotional-sounds-good-to-me stuffs you like to throw out are making you a couyon. The law backed the Constitution and affirmed by the courts trumps your "wisdom".

We are a country of laws with a Constitution. We are not a country where glam-Skippy gets to pass down what the law is and what he won't allow. You don't like the law? Work to change him. You take exception to the courts' rulings on the Constitution? Work to change him too.
Uncle Ira
4.3 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
Now, once again, . . what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?


The very first phrase is the one the courts have ruled dozens of times to mean EVERY FREE CITIZEN. You want it to mean something else. But to the Founders, to the Framers and every court since then it means EVERY FREE CITIZEN.

Not a group, not a club, not a state run body, not federal regulated body, for the purpose of the law, it refers to individual private citizens.

That first phase you thinks makes your "feeling" a trump card is the very issue that makes your "take" on it wrong. The thing you use for support is actually a issue for your opposition. The courts have ruled contrary to you inner wisdom and you "feel" should be right.

No more dodging, . . . you can do it, if you can get up the character. Ira quit.


Cher, you got throw at least one lie in every postum? I never dodge a couyon, they are one of favorite pastimes.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 17, 2015
" EVERY FREE CITIZEN"
--------------------------------------

Well, don't go all otto on me. You're coming apart just like your hero, The Ottoid.

Screaming won't work.

See, this is why we do not trust you excitable kids with guns.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
" EVERY FREE CITIZEN"
--------------------------------------

Well, don't go all otto on me. You're coming apart just like your hero, The Ottoid.

Screaming won't work.

See, this is why we do not trust you excitable kids with guns.


Well you are the one who was so hung up about the "well regulated militia" thing. And according to the Constitution, civil laws, and common law, the courts have all agreed that "well regulated militia" was and is intended to mean EVERY FREE CITIZEN.

I figured you were hard of hearing because you did not address that, just your "feeling" that "well regulated militia" was to mean what glam-Skippy says it means.
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
Those rulings are recent, and a product of the Political Wing of the Supreme Court.

Be careful with your penile substitutes. Don't shoot anybody.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (8) Aug 17, 2015
This is pretty much duh. It's like saying that people who own automobiles are more likely to be killed in auto accidents. That's not a justification for banning automobiles.

On the other hand, it *is* justification for licensing vehicle operators and registering vehicles.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (24) Aug 17, 2015
Those rulings are recent, and a product of the Political Wing of the Supreme Court..


Recent? Nice try but you blew it.How does 1840 sound for recent? 1858? 1869? 1893? Oh maybe you did not go back further than 1927. Okay, I will give you a star for that. 1934 was recent? 1936 was recent? 1948? 1959? 1968? 1989?

In every one of those years the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed an individual's RIGHT to possess a firearm. In 1996 and 2002 and 2008 and 2010 ruled the same by citing precedent of all those cases you called recent (the ones in the 1800's I mean.)

Making up facts as you go along is what got you the negative attentions Cher. By not catching on to that being a failing tactic HERE after so many tries you have "proved" you are a really, really stupid person. Only a really dumb person would think you are smart, eh? So that makes you pretty stupid.

Be careful with your penile substitutes. Don't shoot anybody


See what I mean?
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
On the other hand, it *is* justification for licensing vehicle operators and registering vehicles.


Yessiree indeedy-roo. That is where the conservatives get to lie about why they are calling a me a "gun grabber". I have no problem with registering and licensing the private ownership of firearms, none what so ever. As long as the "RIGHT" is either honored or repealed. That's how a free people do it. Don't like the "RIGHT", go through the steps for changing it.

The Founders and Framers were really smart peoples, they were wise enough to realize the Constitution might need to changed or expanded in the future, and made two ways of doing that. But they were also smart enough that there would be peoples come along who would change it without deep thoughts so they made sure it was hard to do.

(That was in case some couyon like glam-Skippy came along and started making up foolishment and asking peoples to ask him what to do.)
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 17, 2015
Once again, be careful with your penile substitute. You do not really believe it will save you from the Commies or the Fascists, do you? Or the Guvmunt?

It just makes you feel powerful. It's an equalizer for those who are not equal to the rest of us.

This thread is about how the goobers and their need for guns costs the lives of the police.
Uncle Ira
4.5 / 5 (25) Aug 17, 2015
Once again, be careful with your penile substitute


Thanks, I will be as careful as I can and still get the job done me.

You do not really believe it will save you from the Commies or the Fascists, do you? Or the Guvmunt?


Them things are not worrying me over much. Are they bugging you?

It just makes you feel powerful


Hooyeei you sure do throw some solid unanswerable logic.How you fit so much in just one little sentence?

It's an equalizer for those who are not equal to the rest of us


Well I just don't know what to say to that. I am sure you were hoping it would say something because you took the time to write him down.

This thread is about how the goobers and their need for guns costs the lives of the police


Write up some more of those really deep thoughtful logical "facts" you are so fond of. Don't let me slow you down.

Speechify on without me Cher, enjoy your silly looking pointy cap, it looks really good on you.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Aug 17, 2015
On the other hand, it *is* justification for licensing vehicle operators and registering vehicles.
Yessiree indeedy-roo. That is where the conservatives get to lie about why they are calling a me a "gun grabber". I have no problem with registering and licensing the private ownership of firearms, none what so ever. As long as the "RIGHT" is either honored or repealed. That's how a free people do it. Don't like the "RIGHT", go through the steps for changing it.
Yep. I don't own any guns and don't plan to, but I'd probably vote against banning them. For that matter, freedom itself is dangerous. I'm not voting against that either.

The Founders and Framers were really smart peoples, they were wise enough to realize the Constitution might need to changed or expanded in the future... they were also smart enough that there would be peoples come along who would change it without deep thoughts so they made sure it was hard to do.
Completely and categorically agree.
h20dr
5 / 5 (1) Aug 18, 2015
Lol, obviously this author did not account for Arizona and Sheriff Joe's posse. Must be an outlier.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 18, 2015
Now, once again, . . what is the VERY FIRST phrase, the one which puts the entire section into perspective? Hmmmm?

No more dodging, . . . you can do it, if you can get up the character. Ira quit.
Everybody here knows you think you are smarter than any real professional including supreme court justices. This is a symptom of your psychopathy.

So it's futile to try to convince you by posting facts.

But for everybody else here, I posted what the highest court in the land decided after many months of deliberation, and consideration of decisions made by lower courts on the subject.

And any sane person would accept this as the definitive interpretation.

Your inability to do so is only another demonstration of the degree of your sickness, here for anybody to see.
gkam
1.4 / 5 (22) Aug 18, 2015
gkam
1.3 / 5 (23) Aug 18, 2015
Handguns: Aren't they just penile substitutes for emotional weaklings?

If your job does not require it, why would you want one? To be "equal" to the rest of us, . . who do not need them?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (7) Aug 18, 2015
Why arm folk who "need" guns to be equal to the rest of us?
@gkam
because, gkam, an 80 year old woman is not capable of taking on a 20 year old thug... and crime is about predation upon the weak and those incapable (or those appearing incapable) of defending themselves. it is a matter of equalizing the odds against the dangers of reality and not thinking or believing in a dream land delusion that cops will always be able to be around to stop crime
If your job does not require them, then you have them for psychological reasons. That should be sufficient to keep you from having them
my current "occupation" doesn't require it, but i own them - and said ownership has helped prevent crime on more than one occasion.

you should be more clear in your arguments, and stop posting unsubstantiated conjecture.

to be continued
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (6) Aug 18, 2015
Are you a "well-regulated militia"? Those are the ones we allowed to have guns, because we had no standing army, and had to rely on the state militias
there is NO requirement to be a part of militia to own weapons...
https://en.wikipe...tates%29

also note, during that time, there WAS a standing army (british) "for protection"

and the MILITIA are pulled from general populace and required firearm ownership
In 1771, the members passed a militia law that was to continue in force for two years. This law...intituled an Act for the better regulating and disciplining the militia--was based on the 1757 militia law... The law stated that all males above the age of eighteen and under the age of sixty were required to be part of the militia...
[sic](see also: http://www.consti..._rev.htm )

militia required people to bring their own arms, powder and shot (IOW- publicly owned personal weapons)
gkam
1.3 / 5 (23) Aug 18, 2015
Yes, and we needed the militias because why? We had no standing army of our own.

The Founding Fathers did not trust a standing military, seeing how they were used by others (Britain, France, Holland, anybody else with a ship), for "foreign adventures". Unlike now, they needed to attack nobody, did not need to kill others, did not have an entire economy based on the grossly-wasteful squandering of resources.
RealityCheck
1.4 / 5 (22) Aug 18, 2015
Hi forum. :) Taking quick break. Can't stay though. So briefly...

It is reasonable to think only those with a legitimate need for work (farming/policing/military/security workers etc) should carry guns. Include also sporting/hunting shooters (but guns should be locked up in local police station armories and signed out as needed and then returned). The NRA-GOP hate/fear-driven propaganda notion that everyone should carry guns is beyond stupid. Because, if one accepts such politically/mercenarily motivated suggestion, it is patently obvious that the only reason for everyone to carry a gun is because the society they run is failing in the face of hate and fear mongering mercenary/political opportunists who put personal power/profit before social sanity and safety from gun nuts. Imagine if most shooting victims were to be NRA or their political frontmen, what would they do/say? Sell more guns! Are NRA/GOP nuts willing to be the targets for gun nuts for greater profits/power??
animah
5 / 5 (3) Aug 19, 2015
the only reason for everyone to carry a gun is because the society they run is failing

This. This is really what baffles us Europeans. The continued failure to reverse the cycle of violence and distrust that makes "packing heat" to go to the movies a reasonable proposition.

Whether you are pro or anti-gun, surely you must ask yourself: How can the country with the highest GDP per capita in the world have the homicide rate of Niger and Yemen, which is double the rate of Norway, triple the rate of Canada, quadruple the rate of Ireland?

https://en.wikipe...ide_rate

I love the States and have had many American friends over the years but on this count, you guys really need to start working on solutions because this is just not good enough.
ditty00
3 / 5 (2) Aug 19, 2015
I haven't responded to a post in ages, but this one really gets under my skin.

@gkam, Earlier in this thread some one mention "Sheep, wolves and sheepdogs". I suggest you google that and read it, it'll be the first hyperlink. It explains that there are "sheep" in this world (you) and there are "wolves" in this world (criminals) and then there are "sheepdogs" (protectors of the sheep from the wolves). Every law abiding citizen with a gun could be considered a sheepdog at some point in their gun ownership.

@gkam, I have also seen you state that "most" gun owners are psychopaths.
According to an article at NBC (known liberal media), it is estimated that 1 in 3 Americans own guns and there are 318,000,000 people in the US. I would really like to know how most of 106,000,000 people in US are psychopaths. There are fewer people in this great country that scream no one should have guns than there are gun owners, so how is it the majority, according to you, are psychopaths?
gkam
1.2 / 5 (22) Aug 19, 2015
"@gkam, I have also seen you state that "most" gun owners are psychopaths"
--------------------------------

Go back and re-read it. I said most are NOT, but the very few who cannot tell the difference between the handgun and their penis are the ones I oppose.

I do not like debating gun ownership because it is too emotional for many folk, which proves my point. Emotional immaturity should rule out gun possession.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (25) Aug 19, 2015
@ Oh-Skippy. How you are? I am good thanks for asking.

Hooyeei, it sure don't take you long to catch on. Don't mind the glam-Skippy. He thinks hot-blood and enthusiasm is just as good thinking things through. That's why he says so much silly stuffs and then tries to take them back or change what he said.

That is the reason the nice peoples at the physorg have the 3 minute take it back rule, so if you say something really stupid you can't take him back and try to claim you didn't say it. glam-Skippy's word on stuffs leaves a lot to be desired.
denglish
3.2 / 5 (13) Aug 19, 2015
gkam links people to bi-curious web sites. I'm not saying what he does there is wrong, I'm just I'm not into it, and others should be warned.

That same person has been exposed as lying about any number of things, including education and military service.

That person is a raving-mad liberal, and knows little more than hate speech. One can easily discern that this person hates America more than anything else, while taking advantage of the freedoms at the same time. This understandably disgusts real Americans, and the urge to attack is strong.

The United States Constitution grants the right of gun ownership to Americans.

Case closed.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.3 / 5 (23) Aug 19, 2015

Like repeated use of the words "nuts" "penile" "pathetic" "goobers" and dozens of other ways of calling your fellows beneath you. You seem to think that your are in some way superior and should command a respect you shouldn't be required to give.

Emotional immaturity


Yeppers, your broad-brush hypocrisy is.
Caution: gkam/george kamburoff is a psychopath who continuously lies and fabricates facts in order to further his cause.

"But there is something else about the speech of psychopaths that is equally puzzling: their frequent use of contradictory and logically inconsistent statements that usually escape detection. Recent research on the language of psychopaths provides us with some important clues to this puzzle, as well as to the uncanny ability psychopaths have to move words - and people- around so easily."
gkam
1.2 / 5 (23) Aug 19, 2015
Sorry if I hurt your feelings with the discussion of the psychology of those who need guns to be equal to the rest of us, or for sports, . . the thrill-killing of other living things, for kicks.

As I said, I have a family member in the police, and do not like the fact that gun owners are threats to them.
Uncle Ira
4.4 / 5 (26) Aug 19, 2015
As I said, I have a family member in the police, and do not like the fact that gun owners are threats to them.


Well glam-Skippy, I do not know about anybody else. But I sure wish for you to make up your mind to decide whether it is ALL or SOME and stick with it. This flopping and flipping back and forth is making you look pretty darn silly.
denglish
4 / 5 (12) Aug 19, 2015
As I said, I have a family member in the police

Anyone else not believe this for even an instant?
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Aug 20, 2015
@animah
it boils down to cultural differences... not better or worse, really, just different
but i do agree, there must be a solution. just not one that doesn't address the core problem, which is violence, not gun ownership

we needed the militias ...We had no standing army of our own
@gkam
please remember that:
1) first off- we were a colony of GB, making our standing army British, thus we DID have a standing army (re-read history if you don't believe me)
2) even the militia augmentation for the standing army took the ARMED POPULACE from the public, requiring them to bring shot and powder and weapon
3) after the war for independence, we continued to require militia to take from an ARMED populace
4) it doesn't matter what the forefathers trusted, the basic theme is that militia comes from the ARMED populace, thus to remain able to draw from the public for militia, we required a continually armed public
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (4) Aug 20, 2015
discussion of the psychology of those who need guns to be equal to the rest of us, or for sports, . . the thrill-killing of other living things, for kicks. ...I have a family member in the police, ... gun owners are threats to them
now, i know this is addressed to someone else, but i felt the need to point out some problems:
1- there is no threat by citizens, just criminals
2- there is a necessity - the equalization of differences for defense, etc (see above)
3- most "sport" users i know eat what they kill, and feed the economy (skins, meat, ammo, gear, etc)
4- some people use their guns for groceries
5- you can't plan a defense around a gun club, criminals don't give warning
6- criminals don't obey laws
MOST IMPORTANT
7- a gun is NOT a threat to a cop unless the gun toting individual is a CRIMINAL

I own/carry & never killed a single cop, never committed murder, etc...
the gun is a TOOL- you're not advocating screwdriver, knife, hammer licenses...
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Aug 20, 2015
Guys, my main opposition is to handguns, which are made to kill PEOPLE.

This is an emotional issue with many, and not susceptible to be changed by argument. We all have valid views, except for those armed because of fears.

I understand firearms, grew up with them, but do not trust many folk with them. I trust nobody but authorized, trained, and controlled personnel to have them.

"7- a gun is NOT a threat to a cop unless the gun toting individual is a CRIMINAL" - or some SCARED nut, or somebody making a terrible mistake, or a kid who has it, or, . . .
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Aug 20, 2015
I respect your opinion, Stumpy, but in your former profession you knew how things can go wrong.
viko_mx
1.2 / 5 (5) Aug 20, 2015
The main wepon for mass destruction are the lies and mass deception. Thanks to atheism, fascism and communism - God rebbelion ideologies, are died hundreds of million innocent people. Since people turned their backs on God through the constant efforts of lucifer, the world has not seen lasting peace, justice and prosperity. The truth is we can not find the right way without the God.
Do these peacekeepers will disarm the governments to avoid the prerequisites for abuse of power? Or we again will see disgraceful double standarts that defend the caste system?
jsdarkdestruction
5 / 5 (8) Aug 20, 2015
The main wepon for mass destruction are the lies and mass deception. Thanks to atheism, fascism and communism - God rebbelion ideologies, are died hundreds of million innocent people. Since people turned their backs on God through the constant efforts of lucifer, the world has not seen lasting peace, justice and prosperity. The truth is we can not find the right way without the God.
Do these peacekeepers will disarm the governments to avoid the prerequisites for abuse of power? Or we again will see disgraceful double standarts that defend the caste system?

Lmao. Religions are responsible for countless innocent deaths over the last 10000 years and more.
TheGhostofOtto1923
4.5 / 5 (24) Aug 22, 2015
The main wepon for mass destruction are the lies and mass deception
Well vikos right. Religions foist the lie that people who don't believe in their gods cannot be good. I heard this lie from a radio preacher just last week.

They also claim that the best way to serve god is for women to do nothing but make babies until it kills them.

They also claim that the resulting misery caused by this forced overpopulation is the fault of the heathen, infidel, pagan, etc.

They also DEMAND that this filth not go unpunished, just as the canaanites, philistines, amalekites, et al were ravaged by Joshua and gideon.

These LIES have been the source of all major conflicts in the world.

"Be fruitful and multiply. Fill up the earth (with BELIEVERS)."
gkam
1.2 / 5 (21) Aug 22, 2015
Otto screams in these threads that everyone but he is a liar. Hmmmmm, . . .

But the issue is how an armed populace is a threat to even the police.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.