If O'Blunder and Feinstein Get Their Way...

[EXTXOILMAN]

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun.

You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.
In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask. "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood type pranksters.

As the days wear on, the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.
The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges. The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened…

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term. How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead. The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school. For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released. Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply. Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

WAKE UP AMERICA; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.

"...It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds...”
--Samuel Adams

[Whirlaway]

It is alarming; the power grab, the regulations, the invasions of privacy, the debt, taxation, the growth of government agencies, the never ending nanny statism, NDAA, the Czars, the Executive Orders,,,,,,,,,

Obama is systematically destroying us.

And the GOP sits silently complacent.

[Yssup Rider]

I suppose this story from 1999 is EXACTLY why the Founding Fathers amended the constitution. Damn. those guys were GOOD!

Whirly, How does this 14 year old story from Scotland indicate that Obama is systematically destroying us? How does it illustrate the other bogeymen you mentioned in your rant ... Growth of government agencies, taxation,etc. Or are you just raving in your spare time?

You are the front runner for Dipshit of the Year, Whirlyturd, and that trend is justified!

[EXTXOILMAN]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I suppose this story from 1999 is EXACTLY why the Founding Fathers amended the constitution. Damn. those guys were GOOD!

Whirly, How does this 14 year old story from Scotland indicate that Obama is systematically destroying us? How does it illustrate the other bogeymen you mentioned in your rant ... Growth of government agencies, taxation,etc. Or are you just raving in your spare time?

You are the front runner for Dipshit of the Year, Whirlyturd, and that trend is justified!

What's your point, Assup?? Does the fact that the story is 14 years old take away the truth of it?? If you and your ilk get your way, that is exactly what we have in store for us in the U.S.

And, yes, O'Blunder is carrying on the progressive agenda with glee. Remember his phrase, "fundamentally transforming the United States of America"??

[SpeedRacerXXX]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...loped-country/

As stated in the article:

The United States has by far the highest per capita rate of all developed countries. According to data compiled by the United Nations, the United States has four times as many gun-related homicides per capita as do Turkey and Switzerland, which are tied for third. The U.S. gun murder rate is about 20 times the average for all other countries on this chart. That means that Americans are 20 times as likely to be killed by a gun than is someone from another developed country.

The U.S., according to the chart, has about 3.5 gun related murders per 100,000 people. The U.K. has less than .2 gun related murders per 100,000 people. So which country's gun laws do you think are more effective in preventing gun related murders?

Feel free to present other information to show how much safer citizens are in the U.S. as opposed to other similar countries.

[CJ7]

only an idiot believes there will be door to door gun confiscation.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by CJ7

only an idiot believes there will be door to door gun confiscation.

Fully agree!

[i'va biggen]

This board abounds with idiots so the consensus is it is eminent there will be a knock on your door.

[Laz]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...loped-country/

As stated in the article:

The United States has by far the highest per capita rate of all developed countries. According to data compiled by the United Nations, the United States has four times as many gun-related homicides per capita as do Turkey and Switzerland, which are tied for third. The U.S. gun murder rate is about 20 times the average for all other countries on this chart. That means that Americans are 20 times as likely to be killed by a gun than is someone from another developed country.

The U.S., according to the chart, has about 3.5 gun related murders per 100,000 people. The U.K. has less than .2 gun related murders per 100,000 people. So which country's gun laws do you think are more effective in preventing gun related murders?

Feel free to present other information to show how much safer citizens are in the U.S. as opposed to other similar countries.

If the murder rate per 100,000 by any means is much higher in the US then we should look into that problem. If you just look at murder by guns you get a skewed perspective since the murderer will use the handiest tool. In some countries guns are less handy.

[Whirlaway]

And the murder rate includes suicides and accidental shootings; which I think account for more than half of the total........

misleading statistics........

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Laz

If the murder rate per 100,000 by any means is much higher in the US then we should look into that problem. If you just look at murder by guns you get a skewed perspective since the murderer will use the handiest tool. In some countries guns are less handy.

Valid point. Here is data showing homicides per 100,000 population. U.S. 5.22. U.K. 1.57. Still a 3.3 to 1 ratio.Definitely not as bad for the U.S. as gun deaths but hardly good.

http://chartsbin.com/view/1454

[CuteOldGuy]

How many of those gun deaths were caused by legal gun owners? How many were in self defense? My guess is that premeditated murder by legal gun owners is quite small, and most likely in domestic situations, where another weapon would have been used to get the same result if the gun wasn't available.

Most of those gun deaths, by a wide majority, are gang related, or criminals killing each other.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. You have to know what's behind the numbers before you go spouting them off.

[Whirlaway]

About half of those "murders" are suicides. Another 10% are accidental shootings...and many more are self defense...........

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

And the murder rate includes suicides and accidental shootings; which I think account for more than half of the total........

misleading statistics........

In the first website cited, the data referenced "homicides" not "murders". Homicide is defined as "The deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another".

In the recent second website cited, this statement is made: "This map shows homicide or murder rates per 100,000 population around the world. Homicide is defined as unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person."

If you can give us any DATA that puts the U.S. in a better light, please give it to us. Doubtful that you can. You tend to argue "Fact" with "Opinion".

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

How many of those gun deaths were caused by legal gun owners? How many were in self defense? My guess is that premeditated murder by legal gun owners is quite small, and most likely in domestic situations, where another weapon would have been used to get the same result if the gun wasn't available.

Most of those gun deaths, by a wide majority, are gang related, or criminals killing each other.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. You have to know what's behind the numbers before you go spouting them off.

COG, please read my most recent post and then reply. As I said to Whirly, if you can find ANY data that disputes the data I presented, then I would love to see it. Until then, I will accept what I have presented as FACT and what you have presented as OPINION.

A homicide is a homicide, no matter who was the killer and who was killed, and the OPINIONS that you presented are probably true in each country, not just the U.S.