Live by the gun, die by the gun!!

[CanuckHeaven]

Here is a classic example of what happens when a society promotes the "gun culture".

Gun-toting soccer mom found shot dead

LEBANON, Pa. - A soccer mom who gained national attention when she openly carried a loaded gun to her 5-year-old daughter's game was shot dead Wednesday along with her husband in what appeared to be a murder-suicide, police said.

Meleanie Hain and Scott Hain were pronounced dead Wednesday night at their home in Lebanon, a small city about 80 miles west of Philadelphia.

The couple's three children were home at the time but weren't hurt, police said. They were taken to stay with friends and relatives.

Meleanie Hain, 31, and Scott Hain, 33, had been having marital problems for about a week, neighbor Mark Long said. Scott Hain had left the couple's home on Tuesday, and Meleanie Hain didn't know where he was, but he returned Wednesday, Long said.

Autopsies on the Hains were to be conducted Thursday, coroner Dr. Jeffrey Yocum said.

Meleanie Hain made headlines after she attended a children's soccer game in a park on Sept. 11, 2008, with a handgun in plain view holstered on her hip, upsetting other parents.

The county sheriff, Michael DeLeo, revoked her gun-carrying permit nine days later.

Hain successfully appealed the permit revocation, although the judge who restored the permit questioned her judgment and said she had "scared the devil" out of other people at the game.

Live by the gun.....die by the gun?

[Unchecked Expansion]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

[Gift-of-god]

Here is a classic example of what happens when a society promotes the "gun culture".
...
Live by the gun.....die by the gun?

Correlation is not causation.

[Turkish Federation]

Oh the irony. That's a mine of irony.

[F1-Insanity]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

[Unchecked Expansion]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

Running straight to extremes there - with a bad example. The Weimar republic was not a dictatorship, nor did it try to declare one. It however was worried about facist and communist revolutionaries, which it tried to stop from using guns. I believe millitary hardware was being openly used by some political groups - not a situation any government wants
What if a democratic state decided with popular support to ban guns?

[CanuckHeaven]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Hang in there....they are a tough lot!!

[Peepelonia]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

Hah I would say that it is much easyer for the State to declare a dictatorship, if the State controls the States armed forces myself.

[Mando-ade]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

[Peepelonia]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Hang in there....they are a tough lot!!

It is though one of my faves, the old Gun debate.

[Unchecked Expansion]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Hang in there....they are a tough lot!!

Yup, but you invaded them and burnt their capital twice.
I believe that gun ownership is not inherently a terrible idea. However, given that a lot of guns bought legally end up in the hands of criminals, strict limitations on gun ownership is necessary. In England, to own a gun you have to get your house inspected by police to ensure you can keep it securely. Does America have those laws?

[F1-Insanity]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

Running straight to extremes there - with a bad example. The Weimar republic was not a dictatorship, nor did it try to declare one. It however was worried about facist and communist revolutionaries, which it tried to stop from using guns. I believe millitary hardware was being openly used by some political groups - not a situation any government wants
What if a democratic state decided with popular support to ban guns?

That's what I said Weimar did. Weimar banned guns, and the result was that the people who simply ignored the laws ended up taking over, with no one able to resist them. You see, only law-abiding citizens obey laws, the thugs never do.

Banning guns = dumbass solution

[CanuckHeaven]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

It doesn't. Your point?

[Zoharland]

...Her death was moreso the cause of her marital problems and her f'ed up husband, no? I mean, who says he wouldn't have killed her with something else if they didn't have the gun? A knife, or his bare hands?

We should ban both, obviously.

[Zoharland]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

It doesn't. Your point?

...your gloating over another human being's death with a tenous connection to why this wouldn't have happened if they just banned dem ebul guns?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

I hope it was at least an old west style draw.

[Peepelonia]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

I think the point is that gn ownership made it possible to do so.

[Mando-ade]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

It doesn't. Your point?

The OP to me seems like it's trying to correlate the to, and that owning a gun is a silly thing to do.

[F1-Insanity]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

I think the point is that gn ownership made it possible to do so.

Because otherwise, it would've been impossible? *ahem* *cough* knife *cough*

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

I think the point is that gn ownership made it possible to do so.

Chris Benoit didn't need a gun.

[Unchecked Expansion]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

Running straight to extremes there - with a bad example. The Weimar republic was not a dictatorship, nor did it try to declare one. It however was worried about facist and communist revolutionaries, which it tried to stop from using guns. I believe millitary hardware was being openly used by some political groups - not a situation any government wants
What if a democratic state decided with popular support to ban guns?

That's what I said Weimar did. Weimar banned guns, and the result was that the people who simply ignored the laws ended up taking over, with no one able to resist them. You see, only law-abiding citizens obey laws, the thugs never do.
Banning guns = dumbass solution

That is not what you said at all. You claimed that the state could declare a dictatorship if they banned guns, then made an example about the Wiemar republic. You used a bad example in a case where keeping guns out of the hands of political groups would have been wise

[CanuckHeaven]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Hang in there....they are a tough lot!!

Yup, but you invaded them and burnt their capital twice.

Only once.

I believe that gun ownership is not inherently a terrible idea. However, given that a lot of guns bought legally end up in the hands of criminals, strict limitations on gun ownership is necessary.

My exact sentiments.

In England, to own a gun you have to get your house inspected by police to ensure you can keep it securely. Does America have those laws?

The NRA would fight you to death over that proposal.

[Bluth Corporation]

I believe that gun ownership is not inherently a terrible idea. However, given that a lot of guns bought legally end up in the hands of criminals, strict limitations on gun ownership is necessary.

Nope.

Since the whole purpose of civilian weapons ownership is to ensure we're able to revolt against the government if necessary, letting the government have any say whatsoever in who is and is not allowed to own weapons is patently absurd--it defeats the whole purpose!

[Mando-ade]

Were does it show that her owning a gun caused her husband to shoot and kill her and then kill himself?

I think the point is that gn ownership made it possible to do so.

It doesn't say that he shot them both with her gun. I'd like to know which gun the guy used, and if was even a licensed gun.

[F1-Insanity]

I believe the stats do indicate that gun owners are more likely to be shot.
And it does seem likely that access to guns can make unstable situations a lot worse in no time at all.
I'm anti-gun ownership. But I'm also a Brit, and prepared to get shouted down by a wall of yanks

Its so much easier for the state to declare a dictatorship if the people do not have guns.

Weimar republic banned guns, to keep them out of the hands of the nazi stormtroopers. Didn't work.

Running straight to extremes there - with a bad example. The Weimar republic was not a dictatorship, nor did it try to declare one. It however was worried about facist and communist revolutionaries, which it tried to stop from using guns. I believe millitary hardware was being openly used by some political groups - not a situation any government wants
What if a democratic state decided with popular support to ban guns?

That's what I said Weimar did. Weimar banned guns, and the result was that the people who simply ignored the laws ended up taking over, with no one able to resist them. You see, only law-abiding citizens obey laws, the thugs never do.
Banning guns = dumbass solution

That is not what you said at all. You claimed that the state could declare a dictatorship if they banned guns, then made an example about the Wiemar republic. You used a bad example in a case where keeping guns out of the hands of political groups would have been wise

The state did declare a dictatorship, after the same state (Germany) banned guns. I never said it needed to be the same government. One government can ban guns and the next could abuse that ban. This is what happened. Once the new government was in power, they took the old laws and applied them with ruthless efficiency.

And furthermore, the gun bans obviously did NOT result in disarmed political groups. Looks like some folks just ignored the ban, or got around it.