Re: Guns possessed by citizens and the State

On 25 Aug 2005 05:52:17 -0700, "Phil Smythe" <smytph@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>
>Charles L wrote:
>> Which is of more concern, firearms in the hands of private citizens or
>> firearms in the hands of the State?
>>
>> Who has the worst record when it comes to the misuse of firearms?
>
>In the US in 2002 12,129 persons died as a result of homicide/legal
>intervention where a firearm was used. Of this total 300 were killed by
>way of legal intervention. http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/
>
>So, in terms of raw numbers, as private citizens were responsible for
>92% of US firearm homicides. I have no doubt this situation would be
>similar in other western democracies and possibly more pronounced.
>
>But if we assume that private citizens hold more firearms than the
>state this might explain that massive discrepancy. It might even be the
>case that 92% of guns are in private hands. Even if that were so it is
>beyond dispute that the weapons held by law enforcement are far more
>liley to be used in situations where a death might result than those
>guns held by private citizens.
>
>Based on this I'd say that firearms in the hands of private citizens
>are of more concern than firearms in the hands of the State.

And, like trevor, you seem to think that a fatality must occur for a
gun to be used defensively.

Try doing something original like thinking....


>
>>
>> By whom is citizen's liberty more effectively protected?
>
>Clearly the state which is a major reason why states exist, to protect
>liberty.

Taking away liberty to protect liberty?


> Sadly some states, like some people, do not go along with
>this.

Correct: 38 states permit good citizens to carry concealed firearms.


>Be glad if you live in a state that does, which about 99% of
>those in this newsgroup would be part of.




>
>>
>> Is the State frightened by citizens being armed? If so, why?
>
>No, therefore part 2 of the question is irrelavant.
>
>>
>> If firearm ownership by citizens is banned or hampered with onerous
>> restrictions (which amounts to the same thing really) can citizens trust the
>> State with it's firearms?
>
>Poor question as banning and hampering with onerous restrictions are
>clearly not the same thing.

Yes they are - you just choose to believe otherwise.


> Flying a commercial airliner is highly
>restricted with many strict regulations that must be adhered to, but it
>is not banned. Based on this fact your question is a classic strawman.

Gee, did you say commercial? Quite a bit different than private
ownership.
--

Glenn
In the heart of the Ozarks
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Guns possessed by citizens and the State
    ... >>> Which is of more concern, firearms in the hands of private citizens or ... >>> firearms in the hands of the State? ... >>case that 92% of guns are in private hands. ... >>Clearly the state which is a major reason why states exist, to protect ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Guns possessed by citizens and the State
    ... > Charles L wrote: ... >> Which is of more concern, firearms in the hands of private citizens or ... >> firearms in the hands of the State? ... However such regulations serve to facilitate the ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Guns possessed by citizens and the State
    ... > firearms in the hands of the State? ... So, in terms of raw numbers, as private citizens were responsible for ... Poor question as banning and hampering with onerous restrictions are ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Guns possessed by citizens and the State
    ... >> Charles L wrote: ... >>> Which is of more concern, firearms in the hands of private citizens or ... >>> firearms in the hands of the State? ... However such regulations serve to facilitate the ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Rick Stanley SB-206 Guns/Cars/Parking Lots
    ... > Every gunowner who comes to Florida as a tourist or visitor or on ... SB-206 Protect Possession of Firearms in Vehicles in Parking ... > who visit our state by motor vehicle and who carry firearms in their ...
    (talk.politics.guns)