OT: USA Today Poll on Gun ownership

I am really surprised; 97:2, in a self-selected USA-Today (left-of-center Gannett publication) poll, even.

Pro gun=pro giving every retard a possibility to shoot your kids. Even over here we often have stories in the news about kids shooting somebody by accident or kids getting shot by accident. The story always takes place in de US. Time to hand out some Darwin awards.

Over on your side of the pond they make up for lack of guns by slashing throats or bashing brains with baseball bats. ...Jim Thompson

Helps clean the gene pool. Of course you don't care about the lives saved by the gun.

The local news had a story of a woman who was grabbed outside her house by two men who said they wanted her money. They forced her into her home, then told her to undress. She told them she'd give them all her money. In her purse was also a .38, which made it a bad day for the home invaders, robbers, and would-be rapists; one dead, one critical. Yes, guns help clean the gene pool, and save taxpayers money. .38 ammo is cheap. Buy her a lifetime supply and a shooting coach (she missed one).

Being anti-gun gives you no chance to protect your kids from every retard who doesn't belive the law applies to him. Your logic is terminally flawed, has been proven (over and over) to be wrong, and foolish.

The Darwin nomination goes to 'Nico Coesel' for being a 100% unarmed target ready to take a bullet for safety. Wow, that's logic...

It

ll

"More than half of children's fatal unintentional injuries (55%) occurred in the home, and 43% were caused by motor vehicles."

"Fatal household injuries are not distributed evenly throughout New York City. Low-income neighborhoods house 28% of the city's children, but they experienced 39% of the accidental household deaths. The most common causes included fire or scald burns (51%), falling or being struck by a falling object (20%), asphyxia (15%), drowning (6%), and poisoning (3%)."

Plastic bags kill far more kids. And swimming pools. And cars. Where's the outrage?

-- Cheers, James Arthur

=A0It

all

hed

Some of those 'accidental' in home 'injuries' are parent, using an accidental discharge claim to free them of their child rearing burden.

Folks just do not see that there are a huge number of fratricides these days that never get charged.

one

=A0It

to all

ished

ven

Graph here:

Our European friends' info is sensational, but skewed.

Cheers, James Arthur

Stupid page. Just reload the page and vote again.

Foolish!

If you love your sword, you will get killed by one. But don't care about it, there are enough people in the USA, they better kill themself as killing innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan, or somewhere else!

(ironically spoken) KB

Ah, yes, One of those who can't read and/or remember history :-( ...Jim Thompson

Koning Betweter wrote in news:2010080117111931947- Koning@Stumpernl:

you speak from ignorance.

Europeons seem to have that problem :-) ...Jim Thompson

Oh, and exactly how old are you? This has been going on for many, many years, I saw it in the 1950's, and I'm sure it was happening before then. Your idea of facts is amusing, but flawed.

Fact: if someone with a gun is planning on attacking you, you won't stand a chance with or without a gun because the attacker clearly has the advantage of the surprise (and experience as well).

So if you are really worried about being attacked by someone with a gun you should buy body armour. Pulling a gun and shoot someone already pointing a gun at you only happens in movies.

What you really want is a situation in which a potential attacker has go through a lot of trouble to get a gun. Most people simply aren't worth that amount of trouble.

The well known saying 'live by the sword, die by the sword' is probably unknown to you.

A tazer and/or a can of pepper-spray would have been just as effective and less messy. Who is going to pay for cleaning the carpet? And how about the risk of getting infected with HIV or another nasty desease by blood? And she may get sued to pay for the funeral and/or hospital costs.

You're so clueless of reality. Being armed is particularly useful during attack by a nutcase shooting everyone in his way.

The lowest crime rate in the US is in a town that requires its citizens to be armed. What criminal wants to risk such a situation? ...Jim Thompson

Yes, the gene pool is now better for it.

If these guys let her have her purse without checking it first, well so much the better.

Also, depends on the state. If they were inside her house, its self defense.

Except the one witness.....

hamilton

Old enough to have seen kids that huffed model car glue die in 1967. The proliferance of the behavior was rare then. Now it is ALL THERE IS. Even an idiot can see that the death rate will increase exponentially.

There were not hundreds, if not thousands a year dying from it, and the number that were is not even proportionate in term of population increase either. My point was that what we did is and was benign, and what they have left for kids is all but benign. Even an idiot like you can do that math. It involves a zero. Pot =3D benign Gasoline =3D death

When both were around we had a choice and we chose pot almost unanimously, despite your claim of statistics dating way back when.

NOW, while one is quelled, and only one remains, what do you think the numbers are for kids?

See above. You lose... again. Your idea of facts is pretty much nothing short of dangerous to a civil society.