Resolution Calling for Repeal of Gun-Free Zones Passed by Georgia's 12th Congressional District Republicans

With their bullets!

Just kidding... I absolutely agree.

...law abiding, firearms bearing citizens...

No one is law-abiding all the time. In fact, all mass-shootings are done by people who were at one point law-abiding. People snap. People make mistakes. It is better that, when they do so, they don't have a loaded gun readily available to them.

Either everyone should carry a gun, or no one should carry a gun. The uncertainty of the matter is what allows people to perform these mass-shootings in the first place.

I'm not sure that someone snapping can be considered a "mistake".

No one is law-abiding all the time. In fact, all mass-shootings are done by people who were at one point law-abiding. People snap. People make mistakes. It is better that, when they do so, they don't have a loaded gun readily available to them.

Either everyone should carry a gun, or no one should carry a gun. The uncertainty of the matter is what allows people to perform these mass-shootings in the first place.

There will always be people who snap and commit horrible crimes. You can't change that. But apparently the point is lost on you that others (the 99.99% of people who DON'T commit these crimes... or 'snap' as you put it) should have the right (and duty) to protect themselves and others from these crimes.

...the 99.99% of people who DON'T commit these crimes... or 'snap' as you put it) should have the right (and duty) to protect themselves and others from these crimes.

It sounds to me that people like you have completely given up on preventing these types of crimes, and would rather simply decrease the body count.

Cutty, then why is it that America, with the easiest access to firearms also happens to have the highest number of firearm deaths per year? Why is it Japan, in which citizens have no firearms, that has less than 40 firearms per year? Are Americans just worse people than the Japanese? Maniacal killers that shouldn't be allowed to roam free? Or perhaps when a Japanese person wants to kill someone, they have to think about it first - because they can't just pull a gun out and go on a killing spree - like an American would.

It's people like you that continue to believe that we live in a Utopia. I strongly supported the libertarian movement, until I realized that most people are uneducated fools that can not be trust with their own safety, let alone mine.

Cutty, then why is it that America, with the easiest access to firearms also happens to have the highest number of firearm deaths per year?

Possibly for the same reason that the country with the easiest access to swords would be expected to have the highest number of "deaths by sword" in the world-- and if there are countries where firearm ownership is next to zero-- most of the deaths would, in all probability, not be caused by firearms! And-- I would guess that automobile owndership in parts of the heart of Africa is low-- so there fore there is not a whole lot of deaths in car accidents. And... countries that are predominantly desert have a very, very low incidence of death by Piranha bites-- or other dangerous water-dwelling creatures...

In fact, all mass-shootings are done by people who were at one point law-abiding.

Henry, come on, man.

All drunk driving accidents are committed by "people who were at one point law-abiding." All incidents of shoplifting are committed by "people who were at one point law-abiding." All ax murders, rapes, convenience store robberies are committed by "people who were at one point law-abiding."

There isn't anything in this country that isn't committed by "people who were at one point law-abiding."

People snap. People make mistakes. It is better that, when they do so, they don't have a loaded gun readily available to them.

But when that person does snap, or as you put it, make that mistake of shooting a lot of people randomly in a public place, why should I be restricted in my ability to defend myself?

Either everyone should carry a gun, or no one should carry a gun.

Just stupid, Henry. You are better than this. This isn't that black and white. No one is making anyone carry a gun, except in Kennesaw, GA. And in Kennesaw, the total violent crime rate is .15 times the national average.

What we are talking about is preventing those who follow the rules, or the law, from defending themselves from those who break the law. That is wrong. If you are planning on killing a lot of people, a gun-free zone proclamation isn't going to cause you to pause.

If anything, it tells you that you are about to kill a lot of people.

Why is it Japan, in which citizens have no firearms, that has less than 40 firearms per year?

Um, does culture factor into your thinking at all Henry? For example:

The Swiss Federal Police Office reports that, in 1997, there were 87 intentional homicides and 102 attempted homicides in the entire country. Some 91 of these 189 murders and attempts involved firearms (the statistics do not distinguish firearm use in consummated murders from attempts). With its population of seven million (which includes 1.2 million foreigners), Switzerland had a homicide rate of 1.2 per 100,000. There were 2,498 robberies (and attempted robberies), of which 546 involved firearms, giving a robbery rate of 36 per 100,000. Almost half of these criminal acts were committed by non-resident foreigners, which is why one hears reference in casual talk to "criminal tourists."

Sometimes, the data sounds too good to be true. In 1993, not a single armed robbery was reported in Geneva.

In a word, Switzerland, which is awash in guns, has substantially lower murder and robbery rates than England, where most guns are banned.

Why is it that the Swiss, who are awash with firearms, are not killing each other willy-nilly?

I strongly supported the libertarian movement, until I realized that most people are uneducated fools that can not be trust with their own safety

Nanny-state, dead ahead. Henry will be your guide.

Um, does culture factor into your thinking at all Henry?

Um, did you read the next sentence that you failed to quote, Bodhi? I suppose you must agree that the Japanese are simply better people than Americans, as they don't have a "culture" of killing people. Well, that makes me glad I live here.

Why is it that the Swiss, who are awash with firearms, are not killing each other willy-nilly?

Again, it's the all or none dichotomy. If everyone (or at least most people) has a gun, then people will be dissuaded from crimes (other than crimes of passion) and the damage able to be done is diminished. If no one has a gun, people will be dissuaded from crimes (other than crimes of passion) and they damage able to be done is significantly diminished. If guns are simply available to all, the people with guns will be criminals and the paranoid. That isn't enough people to dissuade anyone from committing a crime. You've simply created an unhappy medium that leads to mass killings.

Nanny-state, dead ahead. Henry will be your guide.

Prison-state, dead ahead. Bodhi will be your guide, if you survive that long.

Well Henry, lets get real.

1.7 is a terribly poor argument. There really are no good arguments for gun control... Most of it's proponents sounds like Pro-Lifers outside the clinic.

Care to provide reasons for that, Martin. You can't just say something is a bad argument without saying why it is such. So far, I'll have to assume you just don't have any information to support your side if this argument. The truth hurts, I know.

Also... Pro-Lifers are in the same party as the Gun Nuts, in case you forgot.

Hey, congrats Cutty!

Still ready for the podcast interview, Cutty. I have some evenings open next week if your man wants on.