I think that after years of being conditioned and or having the position that polititions that are Anti's are just misguided I never gave it much thought and perhaps oversimplified us vs them... They are wrong we are right. But a poster in a poll about gun legislation worded it a way that was slightly different and jarred my "Drone" thinking on the subjust. For whatever reason the chrystalization of the fact that it is truly a disservice and injustice that is done in the name of protecting its people when these legislatures try and pass gun control legislation. Of course this is something I/we all know but I truly liked the idea of taking a politician to task for "failing the public trust"!

 

 

 

"There is no evidence that legally purchased guns are used in crimes or shootings in Jersey City and Newark. Elected officials and law enforcement has failed the public trust by promoting and passing laws that give the public a false sense of believing that gun control laws will stop crimes. Shame on Mayor Healy,mayyor Booker, Chief Comey, Sam Jefferson, Sandra Cunningham and all those who continue to misled the public. Wake up America!"

Gun control is passed for numerous reasons. Some benevolent, some draconian, some purely emotional. If you are looking for, or settled on, a single cause, you've done your research wrong.

I think the point I was trying to get accross is dont stop thinking about why. And dont be afraid to go on the offensive.

I agree Shane. It is always the "why" of an argument that brings it merit.

 

Regretfully, I found myself stumped on the other side of this argument recently. A childhood friend of mine was killed this week in a shooting in Little Egg Harbor. The perpetrator fired his legally owned AR-15 out a window, killing her when she tried to aid another victim. The shooter had no previous criminal record.

 

It is the very rare example of when our precautionary measures fail and the once law abiding citizen commits an act of violence. It is this dilemma that forces me to look at the other side of the coin. Even with CCW, what can a person do against someone who decides to go Enemy at the Gates on his neighbors?

what can a person do against someone who decides to go Enemy at the Gates on his neighbors?

 

Nothing. That's the point. In life not everything can be controlled. Only a foolish person believes that everything can (and should) be controlled.

First let me say that I am truly sorry for the loss of your friend. I really dont even like discussing highly emotionally charged topics on the open forum so I will just briefly say that if the person responding had been a ccw holder, they would have been more likely to recognise the threat and what was going on. To add to that what if the murderer in this situation decided to go active shooter like the gunman in that Church down south. Only a CCW or a Police officer is going to have a chance at ending the threat. Firearms make it in to prisons past guards, searches, metal detectors and screeners. It is simply impossible to remove them from society as it is impossible to remove the mentally unstable. With that being said, in this situation, it would seem to me the impliment made little difference. If not the rifle, it would have been a baseball bat, waffle iron, butcher knife, golf club or whatever other impliment to perpetrate his crime was available. The largest mass murders were comitted with a gallon of gas, some chains, and a match and the other with 2 airplanes. The mode makes little difference to the determined.... it can makes all the difference to those choosing to not be a victim.

 

 

 

Again I am sorry for your tragic loss.

Well stated Shane, Nice to meet you at the last show!

It was nice to meet you as well! Got a little Garand fund going now

Pronoun - I am deeply sorry for the loss of your friend.

 

Cara Ellis was a truly selfless person in that she came to Bryan Muller's aid. I wish her sacrifice was getting more media attention so people truly know how good a person she was. I know Jim Gearhart was talking about her this morning on NJ101.5.

Thanks guys, I appreciate your sentiments. While I admit this tragedy is fresh in my mind, I was just trying to illustrate though that there is frequently a gray area between two viewpoints. There is evidence to support both sides of the spectrum, and understanding all the facts is really the only way to make an informed decision. It's usually the hardest decisions that are the most important.

Pronoun, I agree with you whole heartedly. Unfortunately I find that some on the other side of the table arent interested in facts and logic, their position is entirely fear or emotion based, phobia like, if you will and unreachable..... But for those willing to discuss rationally, I am always willing!

I find that some on the other side of the table arent interested in facts and logic, their position is entirely fear or emotion based

 

Perhaps I'm more cynical, but I believe their position is not motivated out of fear or emotion but rather a need to "control" those around them via legislation. Consider Bloomberg's crusade against transfats, guns, smoking, raison d'être... Are any of these motivated out of reality - perhaps, but only by a shred, and it seems that these rules/prohibitions are enacted without regard for freedom of individuals.

In the context of a bad politicien, that makes perfect sense!