Turnbull, sorry if that came across as a personal slight on you, it wasn't intended that way. The things is, if you've never needed it for protection in the whole nearly 10 years now you've carried, it kind of tells a story about the need v probability SoCal refers to in his later post. If its concealed, its not deterring would be attackers either.

SoCal, the things you mention aren't designed with the sole intention of killing people, so there's a difference. Arguably, knives, but most knives have an everyday general purpose and most are perfectly legal in your kitchen drawer.

Jim Jeffries nails every single absurd point thats been made, watch the 2 short clips and lets leave it there

http://youtu.be/0rR9IaXH1M0

http://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4

Guns arent going away. Get over it. When its it's your time to go, you go. Whether it be some little kid gets ahold of their irresponsible parents loaded gun or some guy walking tbe street who forgets to look both ways and gets hit by a motorcycle driven by a father and young daughter and all parties end up with sbeets covering them until the coroner arrives. You cant control fait. If it upsets you when peoeple die, I pity you and suggest you volunteer for hospice and learn how to appreciate death. Every second you're alive should be cherished and appreciated. You fucking idiots are worried about gun control? Go protest in front of the white house in regards to global nuclear armaments. My dad taught me when I was young that you cant always get your way. So shut up and deal with it because nobody likes listening to a whiner. As I said before guns are here to stay. I wish that they would invent the fucking hoverboard from BTTF2, but you don't see me complaining to Universal for not getting my way. You just have to keep the faith and maybe one day your dreams will come true. But until you get your way,SHUT THE FUCK UP BECAUSE NOBODY LIKES A WHINER!

Well lets wind it up then, it obviously gets a few peoples panties in a twist when somebody speak their mind, or whine as you say. Ill just remember to keep your advice in mind when the next mass shooting soon comes rolling around - its was just peoples fate so fuck it, as long as they cherished their short time.

And I hope you keep your advice in mind next time you read about the victims of a home invasion, carjacking or rape, or of those killed in a mass shooting when you would have wished you or someone there had a gun to protect you, your family or some poor innocent soul.

My barber wanted me to get his daughter a gun for protection.

I asked him why does she thinks she needs it. He said no reason she just wanted one.

I told him are you sure nothing bad has happened to her.

I told him you better sit her down and talk to her. I am pretty sure something bad has happened to her. No one would ask for a gun for no reason.

I also told him I won't get one for her. If she did use it I would be the first one she would give up. He said she would not. I said who am I to her? She would give me up in a heart beat.

Fergie would want a gun if something happen to her or it. I don't know if Fergie is a girl or and it? Maybe both.

I garauntee in a few generations gun ownership in the USA will change entirley and be viewed as seriously is slavery is these days. Unfortunately it will either be as a result of continued and increasing instances of gun massacres which will eventually change the majority public perception or as a result of some larger scale incident in which the government will have to take immediate action.

Those that then (and now) fantasise to varying extents about subsequently taking part in a "well regulated militia" will no become the witless victim of future and increasingly strict anti-terror laws and no doubt just get cut down by a few drones.

Until then though, I suppose youll just have to keep living in a state of abject paranoid fear about some daily threat of home invasion, murder and rape. That seems to be the recurring thread for owning a gun or 6. Pretty damn sad actually.

What we worry about is a socialist state. First thing they do is take away people's guns. To keep everyone in line they take away the food supply.

I cant see anyone disarming America, its just not going to happen, my god! can you imagine the black market with the buying and selling of guns in this country......

further... the man who shot the pastor in my city, was an ex-marine with no criminal record, or history of violence.

as long as guns are sold things are going to happen, because no one can change some one elses mindset.

but the NRA is going to have to bend on many issues.

The NRA certainly will have to bend...it could maybe start by emblazoning the full sentence of the amendment, rather than deliberately just the latter half over the front of its headquarters...but there's good reason they've done that. I'm pretty sure it wasn't just to save space on the wall either.

Foots, Its a bit of a leap to think once your future kin do have their "right" removed which they will (and won't miss), that the government will then use that as a precursor to begin starving its population. Sure, its been done directly and indirectly across most of central america, parts of south east asia and the middle east over the years and maybe thats why you would conclude that, but Im not sure what would be gained in implementing that type of foreign policy in its own country....

Why isn't the NRA at the forefront of effective gun control...to get the illegal guns off the street; to remove the assault weapons from the general public; to finance discovery programs to root out illegal guns; to create national policies to eliminate assault weapons..etc. etc.,,,,why? because it would take money out of their pockets. Straight up, simple. They survive on gun ownership and don't give a shit about your safety; your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Speaking of Gun control, here is the most insane thing I've ever read. This government approved an undercover operation that sold guns to the Mexican cartels, it was called Fast and Furious, This government approved operation scattered all types of guns all throughout Mexico and the US. First, one of the guns was used to kill a border patrol officer and now one of them was found belonging to El Chapo. Does anybody know what was the outcome of this case and of the fallout if any? Did anybody go to jail or we just armed the Cartels with thousands of weapons including .50 caliber sniper rifles?

http://nypost.com/2016/03/16/rifle-found-at-el-chapo-hideout-tied-to-fast-and-furious/

If they did these things, they would be worthless and wouldn't be doing their jobs.

If anything the NRA is too soft. They should be far more radical in their defense of gun owenrship. I'm not even an NRA member because to me they aren't pro gun enough.

I mean why the Hell would anyone support the NRA if they start pushing more gun control?

SoCal, the NRA for most of its history was in no way interested in a constitutional right to bear arms. Its former president, Karl Frederick, didnt even believe citizens should be allowed to carry weapons. It was a moderate organisation based on the interests of hunting and marksmanship. However, during the 70's and 80's with increasing inner city violence, it was taken over in a coup by hardliners. The organisation morphed into one which started then screaming that gun violence can only be solved with more guns. There then became an obvious and selfish, politically power hungry agenda and the steady increase of gun ownership has correalated directly with gun crime and death ever since, that is a fact and its utter nonsense to think otherwise. The real problem now with any form of gun control is that the US is so far down the path of guns being freely avaiable that any restriction does indeed end up with criminals having the upper hand. But it needs to start somewhere and a hardline approach taken from every angle.

The NRA now have the balls to have also branched out across the globe, targetting their message towards the UN and international arms treaties. They view laws that are designed to reduce armed conflicts as potential burdens on a scewed universal right to own guns. It has also softened public opinion, as a result, of disasterous US foreign policies. The implications are everywhere...

Its become too powerful an organisation with too much to lose and it has successful bred fear and paranoia amongst US citizens in order to maintain this power. Youve got people in there who have immensly benefitted personally and financially from the NRAs message and have to much to lose...don't kid yourself, there's no genuine interest in your civil liberties and stopping gun massacres. Every massacre lines their pockets even deeper...its the biggest slight of hand ever played on the US public...a very clever, extremely capitalist scheme, but entirley devoid of any moral integrity....and millions have sadly been duped by it.

First of all, I'm not a member of the NRA, I don't pay attention to the NRA, and I'm not a constitutionalist. I just hope they don't start to fold even more and start making BS compromises on guns.
I really don't get it. People in the country love their guns and right to own them. It's not because of the damn NRA. This boogie man NRA stuff is silly. The NRA and other organizations are there as a result of millions of gun owners that want it there, it isn't the other way around.

Your bogus claim that increasing gun ownership has led to more inner city violence has been debunked time and time again but you stick to it like a religious fanatic that can't be shaken in the face of the hardest evidence that your religion is a fraud.

Look man, I'm not that old but I'm in my early 30s. I've been around street gangs and have been studying gangs and crime my entire life.
I know about and remember the early 90s.
I remember when crime and murder skyrocketed. I seen first hand the dramatic drop in crime for over a 20 year period.
Don't try to tell me that more guns caused more deaths and crime because it's like telling me don't believe my own eyes, don't believe my own experience and don't believe the actual statistics.
My parents grew up on the east side of LA and in the valley in the 70s and gang murders happened all the time in this days. Nobody used so called "assault rifles" to kill, it was mostly all shotguns small pistols and knives . This idea that "assault rifles" are the real problem is bogus too. You ban one type of weapon and you solved nothing.

Sure, this past year there has been a small uptick in crime again, but that's just this one year. Point is, there's many factors that influence crime and violence. And you people that go after guns are completely worthless when it comes to solving the root causes. You simply don't care about solving the hard problems. You just blame the guns and move on. I can't do that because I care too much.

The NRA have been running a scam since at least the so called cincinatti revolt in 1977 in which hardliners threw out the existing NRA board who were moderate, in favour of hunting and marksmanship and felt it completely removed from the 2nd amendment. There was no mention at all before then of the 2nd amendment. After 77, the NRA began to dupe gun owners, playing on the fear of crime and owners love of guns. It became all about civil liberties and personal protection - thats when the true meaning of the amendment got pissed all over. Now you look at their magazine and your reminded of the 2nd amendment constantly. Why? So readers are drip fed how important it is (to the NRA).

Reagan was against guns until the NRA helped put him in power, then he was pro guns. Theyve become too powerful a political organisation to trust and are answerable to nobody bar their own membership. Local and state politicians are routinely harrassed and lobbied. Again, gun violence is great for the NRA as the membership just increases after every incident...they keep feeding the beast basically. Now, as I said before, theyre even trying to assert some authority with the UN...this was essentially a sporting organisation 40 years ago! You don't think there's any democratic threat? Whoever linked the 2nd amendment to carrying guns for personal safety basically won the lottery...

When I mentioned inner city crime, I'm certainly not saying guns were the cause, far from it, I DO know the deal - the NRA definetly was though saying that though and this is what it used and still does every day to increase people paranoia, gun ownership and in turn, automatic membership to their organisation.

Its really difficult I suppose to argue definitvely that increasing gun availability increases gun violence as you can provide statisitcs which will prove nearly any point you want to make....however, the USA has the largest gun ownership and the largest gun crime rate per head of anywhere in the developed world...thats not really debateable...yes, you could say if theres more cars for instance there might be more car accidents etc...but guns are designed to kill people and they're doing theyre job well...

The american public have been duped, without a doubt and its terrible. Turnbull says he's carried a gun for personal protection constantly for 10 years and never felt required to use it. Perhaps he does have a love of marksmanship and guns anyway which is fair enough, but to feel there's that much of a daily threat that you need to be armed almost constantly (theres no point sometimes being able to defend youself is there, thats like sometimes wearing a seatbelt) is a shame. There's millions more doing the same for no real reason or threat other than whats drip fed through the NRA directly and indirectly.

Irregardless of whether or not the NRA is right or wrong, or what its history is, it's not the only gun lobbying organization out there. Gun Owners of America is another large organization that's even more pro-gun than the NRA.

Second, again irregardless of the above, people have a natural right to self-defense. The biggest non-criminal purpose for firearms is not hunting or collecting, but self-defense/protection (which includes the defense of loved ones/family and friends and employers). The right of self-defense is an inherent right that is codified in the US Constitution, but even if it was not there it doesn't mean it wouldn't exist as a right. John Locke and Montesquieu discussed this right before the American Constitution existed as something that is natural to all living beings. If an animal is attacked by another, that animal is within its rights to defend itself. Humans have a right to defend themselves against criminals who want to harm them. Criminal by choice choose to ignore the law so are able to carry any weapon they want for the purpose of threatening or harming others. Why shouldn't the victim of the criminal be able to fight back with equal or greater force? By banning guns you take away that right UNLESS you take away all the firearms from the criminals first. Please tell me how that is even possible.

+1

Your last point is the most important issue and the first which will need to be answered when people start down the path of reducing sale,and ownership of guns. No one surely likes carrying a gun for self defence and would prefer not to do so.

Frame it initially on misuse, very severe mandatory sentences for crimes in which a gun is used or for people found in possession of a fire arm that shouldnt have one. Total no tolerance approach.

Tackle the culture - vastly increase funding for youth education and diversionary activities. Have the NRA itself and other organisation become far more financially and publicly pro-active in this area, otherwise they are disbanded. Get them into local communities where gun violence is an issue and working with community groups, otherwise they are disbanded. Also get tough political measures in place that take away ANY political influence these groups have or seek to have...harsh prison sentences for individuals found lobbying or bribing government officials.

Itll take a generation of just trying to change the culture before any attempt could be made to reduce the sale and ownership though...

fergie, you don't understand the American legal system.

1) People already are sent to jail or prison for illegal possession of a firearm. Felons are not allowed to own nor possess them. I suppose we could create mandatory minimum sentences of ten years or so for each violation.

2) You can't disband a private organization. In the US Constitution we have something called "freedom of assembly." That means groups of like-minded individuals are allowed to meet unless it's a criminal conspiracy. You can't make the NRA do what you want.

3) Something else to think about: the NRA, which you clearly don't like, has a membership of almost all law-abiding members (I can't say all for statistical reasons). The people who are breaking the law, killing people with guns, are not NRA members. (For the record, I'm not a member of any gun organization.)

Faithful, yes, there must be mandatory minimum sentences. I know this doesn't put hardened crimianls off, but again, its about drip feeding the message through generations.

Its true I don't have time for the NRA, but I honestly am not taking a pop at the vast majority of its membership who I think have just been duped and misled down the years. The NRA (and similar organisations) are directly responsible for the vast increase in gun ownership and, as a result, indirectly for illegal ownership. Thats why they should be pro actively contributing towards reduction in gun crime where in matters. Why should they though I suppose, thats exactly how they increase their membership and feed them propaganda and fear of attack.

If the government focussed its attention after public opinion begins to change, they could disband a private organisation like this. Thats what amendments and executive orders are for I think and its not a stretch to imagine sometime soon after a major incident that this will happen...it has throughout even recent history. The only issue is that the arms trade is hugely profitable to people in power.

And I mean indirectly responsible due to the ongoing message that guns are good, normal and needed for protection...even kids are encouraged to learn the message. Not a great message to send, especially to would be criminals

When we were kids before we got real guns. Toy guns were the toys everyone wanted for Christmas. The ones that kids wanted the most was Mattel guns like the snub nose 38. I had none because Daddio never bought anything for me.

Then someone found out you could make a real 1 shot zip gun out of it. Then all of a sudden you had very young gang members with zip guns.

All the Matel guns that shot plastic bullets like that could be made into a zip gun. Snub nose 38 was the best easies to conceal.

Fergie seems to have a solid hard on for gun control. Why fergie? Did you wake up one day hating guns or did something happen to you or someone close to you involving a gun. You are relentless on this topic. Wait until we can get some lasers like they had in the GI Joe cartoons. Then the guns you so deeply hate will be obsolete like a cassette player. There have been many good points made cor keeping guns. Your points suck and have holes in them. Give it up.

Cassette tapes are obsolete. I even have an eight track player and VCRs

Nearly everyone on this site who is pro-gun control is reluctant to say anything as they know you mostly get shouted down by chest thumping, half paranoid, posters screaming about civil liberties at every opportunity..I don't give a shit about that though to be honest and so i'll say it...someone should. Its a sad day anywhere when nobody feels they can speak out is it not? The 2nd amendment suits, but the 1st seems to get some people shooting in their pants with anger at every turn when its gun control.

Not once, even once, has there been a post from a pro-gun poster in any way acknowledging theres any weight whatsoever in the pro-control side. That's extremely worrying and exposes a huge level of ignorance and selfishness.

Interesting, balanced article...read it...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/15/so-america-this-is-how-you-do-gun-control

Well to be fair I haven't seen much being said about gun control other than ban all guns, I think you would find discussion about gun control less worrying if ways to stop gun violence were actually being discussed instead of, "ban all guns," "you own a gun? What are you compensating for?" " you hunt, you are a monster for hurting animals."

The problem with even raising the topic of gun control is that the pro-gun posters simply cannot budge...as a pro-control poster, I ideally want them banned, but I certainly think there's potential for common ground. If it's for a specific sport and possibly controlled hunting well lets see. Ive already mentioned above what penalties Id like to see if guns are to stay and what Id like gun lobby groups to do in communities blighted by gun violence.

Show me a post from a pro-gun poster that suggests any hint of compromise?

Im certainly no bleeding heart liberal or "whiner" just look at some of my previous posts. No wonder politicians who are pro-control DON'T speak out and progress hasn't been made. Even on website like this you get pilloried for that opinion

When I was very young Daddio had more then one gun.

I would take one of them outside into the iron place horse barn after they left for work.It was a scrape iron business they still use horses to pull their carts back then.

We used to shoot the east river rats that were in that barn. That's where I learned to shoot. It was the same barn where Joe valachi used to live after his family throw him out according to Daddio.

What year was this?