Nearly hit by bottle while shooting...!?!

[Brian K]

Firearms are tools, and useful tools. It's been only three days now since I've had cause to use one for varmint control. Firearms are inherently safer than automobiles, chain saws, and many other tools. Being stupid isn't illegal. If we outlaw firearms, automobiles, chain saws, and the undesirable people who misuse them, where will it stop? I'm old enough to remember a country that began eliminating "undesirable people" in the 1930s. This insanity was finally halted in 1945 at the cost of millions of more desirable lives. It's better to tolerate a few morons in a free society than to lose the freedom to travel, photograph, and make the most of our lives.

Jim, according to the US Dept of Justice, in the period from 1991 to 2001 the number of people killed by firearms in the US was 374,444. That's more people killed in the US by firearms than we lost during ALL of WWII. We lost 58,193 Americans during the 12 years of the Viet Nam war.

In the US during the period from 1991-2001 the yearly average was 34,040 firearm deaths. During the entire 12 years of the Viet Nam war, the average comes to 4849 fatalties per year. We are losing 7 times as many Americans a year at home to gun violence than we lost per year in Viet Nam. These deaths, and the several times number of serious but not fatal injuries also exact a huge cost to the country both financially and in infrastructure ( more hospitals, more prisons, more medical costs, more police).

Coincidently at the start of the Clinton administration in 1993 gun deaths were 39,595, by the end of the Clinton administration gun deaths dropped to 28,663. A 28 percent drop. During the Clinton years tougher gun laws were enacted, waiting periods were enacted and background checks were enacted. During the first year of the Bush II administration, 2001, the number rose to 29,573.

Canada has far fewer deaths by firearms or murder by firearms per capita than in the US. In the US the murder by firearm rate is 8 times higher. In western Europe death by firearms rates are also vastly lower than in the US. In the UK during 1993 the rate per 100,000 population was .52, that is not even one death per 100,000. During the same time in the US the gun deaths per 100,000 was 15.22 (according to the Oxford Journal). Are we 30 times more homicidal than the Brits and Scots? 30 times more indifferent to the value of human life? Or is it that they have far stricter gun control laws. As for the argument that it's guns that protect our rights, well the Brits have MORE rights than we do. They still have Habeas Corpus, they still have protection from wiretap without just cause and court order and they can not be held in prison without due process. Basically they have less guns, vastly less gun deaths and more rights. Am I the only one who thinks there's a gun problem in the US?

BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

[Marko]

hhhhmmmm? 45 sounds good to me. as for the pepper spray comment. in NY pepper spray is considered a deadly weapon because you can die or sustain serious physical injuy. so in the eyes of the law you are in just as much trouble pulling pepper spray (and using it) as you are pulling the 45. some advantages of the 45 over pepper spray are that the wind never blows the lead it back into your face unlike pepper spray. and is it is easier to reload the 45!

but i agree, no matter what you pull you better know the law, your rights, and you better be right. just remember it is always better that the judge only hears your side of the story! double tap! another thing to keep in mind it that it is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

I think you missed my point. I didn't say .45 was bad, not by any stretch. What I sad was:

1. You shouldn't use it if you don't know how.

2. If you kill him, you will do time, unless you can prove he pulled one on you first.

You seem to be saying that it is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, which is fine in theory, but these days they tend to be very liberal with time, so a 15 or 20 years in a brig makes the difference between the two pretty academic.

As for NYC laws, it would have to be one realy unlucky thug to be equally alergic to pepper srpay as most people are to .45...

[Marko]

Jim, according to the US Dept of Justice, in the period from 1991 to 2001 the number of people killed by firearms in the US was 374,444. That's more people killed in the US by firearms than we lost during ALL of WWII. We lost 58,193 Americans during the 12 years of the Viet Nam war.

In the US during the period from 1991-2001 the yearly average was 34,040 firearm deaths. During the entire 12 years of the Viet Nam war, the average comes to 4849 fatalties per year. We are losing 7 times as many Americans a year at home to gun violence than we lost per year in Viet Nam.

Which means that Americans know their guns and know how to use them much better than most anyone else and certainly better than the Japanese, Vietnamese or the Iraqis.

Perhaps we should have more wars, then? That way we would kill more of our enemies (which seem to be proliferating these days) and less of each other, and besides, wartime laws are much simpler, easier and cheaper to apply and enforce...



(NOTE: This was a sarcasm! Please do not flame!)

Am I the only one who thinks there's a gun problem in the US?

Well, I've been around guns since I was five. I do know how to shoot them, and pretty well if I do say so. That's why I don't have one and probably never will. If I had it, I would sooner or later get myself into a situation where I would have to use it. And if I used it, I wouldn't aim to miss, that's for sure.

Ever seen what a .45 does to a human head? I guarantee you that's something that would haunt you for years, provided you were not a psycho. I definitelly would not want to bear something like that on my conscience simply because having a gun allowed me to not back out of a conflict from which I normally would.

So, no, I think we don't have a gun problem in the U.S., I think we have people problem. Far too many people couldn't care less about their fellow human beings and would kill them as easily as I would slap someone in the face. Banning guns doesn't matter much, they will soon find other ways to harm each other.

To illustrate the point, Switzerland has more guns per capita than almost any other country, including the U.S., most of them legal and many of them the real kind, full automatic assault rifles. Their reservists just keep them at home, believe it or not. And yet, Switzerland is as safe as their banks.

BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

That's all nice and dandy, but when the biggest threat is your neighbour and your city has slightly over 2 (two) police officers per 1,000 people, it's getting close to the Wild West. One way is to educate everybody and we all see where that is going these days, so the other option is to let everybody legally carry. Perhaps then everybody would think twice before pulling, because the other guy might just be better with it.

[Colin Graham]

Racism, guns, the trade deficit, global warming, gas dependency, health care, the war in iraq. Do we have any problems we can fix?

[Frank Petronio]

BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

Bullshit. Iraq alone proves that civilians with handguns can effectively fight a vastly superior Army. Certainly not in a traditional battle, but as a stalling tactic that frustrates the enemy until the cowards at home grow impatient and call the troops home.

More guns in the hands of good citizens reduces crime and evens the odds against the bad guys who would otherwise have an advantage. Every kid should be taking target practice and gun safety classes IMHO.

[Greg Lockrey]

Bullshit. Iraq alone proves that civilians with handguns can effectively fight a vastly superior Army. Certainly not in a traditional battle, but as a stalling tactic that frustrates the enemy until the cowards at home grow impatient and call the troops home.

More guns in the hands of good citizens reduces crime and evens the odds against the bad guys who would otherwise have an advantage. Every kid should be taking target practice and gun safety classes IMHO.

Where I agree with you in principle, but if you really piss off an Army, they'll just drop a big bomb on your neighborhood just to get to you. You can have a "stalling tactic" only with an Army whose hands are tied.

Automobiles kill more people than all methods combined. Even worse rates in other countries than here in the US of A. When are we going to ban the auto?

While we're at it, how about them swimming pools? They kill more kids than the either of the above two.

[Frank Petronio]

i think bicycles are pretty dangerous too, especially those bike messangers

[keith english]

I have had a redneck in a pickup truck yell "Get a job!" while I was shooting LF beside the road. Guess it's just a sign of his lack of intelligence. I figure is he was as smart as me he would be doing LF photography. I think if the cops see anyone throw a bottle out a window at someone thy should be arrested for assault, no questions asked.

[Greg Lockrey]

i think bicycles are pretty dangerous too, especially those bike messangers

Yeah....forgot about them.

[Greg Lockrey]

I have had a redneck in a pickup truck yell "Get a job!" while I was shooting LF beside the road. Guess it's just a sign of his lack of intelligence. I figure is he was as smart as me he would be doing LF photography. I think if the cops see anyone throw a bottle out a window at someone thy should be arrested for assault, no questions asked.

Hey...I got a truck! I resemble that remark...I ain't no redneck neither.