Quantcast
Opinion

Letter: Need more instruction about gun safety, not fewer firearms

Comments

Return To Article
  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:57 a.m.

    Columbine had armed guards.

    That did not shop the shooting.

    Ft. Hood had armed guards.

    That did not stop the shooting.

    The colorado shooter purchased literally 6,000 rounds of ammunition and no one did anything.

    That did not stop the shooting.

    Gabriel Giffords had armed security and three men with concealed weapons.

    That did not stop her from being shot.

    Trevon Martin did not have a gun.

    He was shot by a neighborhood watch, who was armed with a gun

    The logic that guns 'stop' shootings has been proven false, over and over again.

    It is like claiming MORE water...prevents drownings.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 5:57 a.m.

    Without comprehensive background checks, how do you know who the law abiding citizens are?

    And for the record, Obama's plan includes more education on firearm safety - and the NRA opposes it.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Jan. 22, 2013 6:35 a.m.

    There is NO total gun ban proposed! So your argument that criminals will always have guns is meaningless rhetoric.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 22, 2013 6:59 a.m.

    Elsie, please tell me what is the probablity that you will ever in your life time be confronted with a criminal brandishing a gun. Then take that probablity and tell me further what is the probablity that the criminal holding a gun on you intends to kill you with that gun. Now compare that probablity to the probablity that you will be killed in a car accident the next time you drive on the interstate..a probablity I presume you take willingly, and tell me why it's a tragedy the President wants to restrict guns because criminals have guns. Then consider the fact that most criminals get their guns legally or at least lillegally get guns that were first purchased legally.

    We can argue about the constitutionality of gun ownership and restrictions there on but this whole criminals have guns argument is just childish.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Jan. 22, 2013 7:22 a.m.

    A simplistic view Elsie. How would have a gun safety course have helped at Sandy Hook? Your comment is like an Ostrich burying his head in the sand.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 22, 2013 7:34 a.m.

    "What we need is more organizations like the National Rifle Association to promote and teach gun safety."

    People have the right to keep guns in their house for self protection.
    And, with additional training and licensing, they can carry in public.

    The problem is that in order to get a CCP in Utah, one must go to a 4 hour class.
    No range time is required. No proficiency with the weapon needs to be demonstrated.

    Seriously, does that make sense to anyone? Do you really want people around you and your family in public with virtually no training?

  • Bergbub Midway, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 8:20 a.m.

    News flash to Elsie: It IS OK for law abiding citizens to have and use guns. Even if all of the President's proposals are enacted, it will still be OK for law abiding citizens to have and use guns. Wouldn't we all be better off if we take a few extra breaths, calm down, quell our fears and get informed on these important issues from a variety of news sources?

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 8:42 a.m.

    There are many incidents daily, weekly, where a legal gun owner stops a bad guy. These stories are often kept from the news by anti-gun biases, but a few get through. An honest police officer has said they are much more frequent than people think.

    Kaysville, a 'bad guy' shot someone, and was emptying his gun in the man after he was down. A concealed carrier shot the "bad guy" dead, and the victim of the 'bad guy' was able to get medical care and lived. Others have shot home intruders wielding a gun. There is no opportunity for police to help in these cases. They could never get there until after it is too late.

    It is hard to measure how many are saved in this way, but undoubtedly some, since we have incidents where the homeowner is shot and killed all too frequently.

    In the case of mass shootings, meeting armed resistance after the first shooting, may save the 2nd or the 70th person.

    Educating gun owners to lock up their guns, or an armed person in the school, could have saved Sandyhook. The no-gun policy and lock-down buzz-in security system didn't.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 8:48 a.m.

    The NRA has had a long time to make things better. It's time to recognise that they may not want to make the changes needed, and go ahead without them. Let the dog wag the tail again.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 9:37 a.m.

    Christian, I'm still waiting for some good documentation of the claims you keep making.

    How about a link to anything that documents the story you tell of an incident in Kaysville?

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 22, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    "There are many incidents daily, weekly, where a legal gun owner stops a bad guy."

    probably true. However, for every one of those that you can cite, I can come up with 10 where guns were used in the home against family members.

    Rather than look at isolated, anecdotal incidents, one would be better served looking statistically at the issue.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    Last Saturday, five people were accidentally shot at gun shows. Sadly, far more guns kill or maim people by accident or are used in suicides than are used in defense of self or property.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:02 a.m.

    Since there are few, if any, “law abiding” citizens in America, we must deal with the reality of the world as it is.

    The fact is that guns are made for killing and are often used to kill people. A gun is an object of opportunity, it provides a whole range of ways to kill that are quick, effective, easy and cheap. Other means used to kill people are not nearly so well suited for the task as a gun.

    The only way to reduce the number of people killed by guns is to limit the number of guns in the hands of people and reduce the killing power of the guns themselves. The notion that some guys, ignorant of what society would become, and fearful of national government, should dictate to us how to run our lives is dumb.

    We can and we must limit, control and infringe on the rights of our citizens for the safety and well being of our people. To further advertise and normalize the ownership and use of guns is contrary to that purpose.

  • PeanutGallery Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:12 a.m.

    Good letter. For many years the NRA has been the major gun safety educational force in America. When law-abiding Americans are able to keep and bear arms, our society is safer. Gun control erodes that safety.

    Re: JoeBlow: Studies have shown that in the U.S. each year guns are used to prevent crimes more than 2 million times, usually without a shot being fired.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    Peanut says: "Studies have shown that in the U.S. each year guns are used to prevent crimes more than 2 million times, usually without a shot being fired."

    And I say again, can anyone show us reliable documentation that that claim is true?

    Simply repeating something someone somewhere said sometime is not reliable documentation.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:26 a.m.

    When law abiding Americans are able to keep and bear Arms, Americans are safer?

    Ask Gabriel Giffords.

    She had not one, not two but THREE men around her with concealed weapons.

    She was shot in the head.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    We need some credible news sources.

    Not more Faux News empty talking points.

  • omni scent taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:29 a.m.

    PeanutGallery: your statistic sounds a little exaggerated. Could you provide this study? I would really like to see their methodology. And just to be fair, let's have JoeBlow provide his study too.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:34 a.m.

    More organizations like the NRA? I'm all for it. The comedic potential boggles the mind. . .

  • merich39 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    No, we need more instruction AND less firearms. Not one or the other but both.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 22, 2013 11:13 a.m.

    "just to be fair, let's have JoeBlow provide his study too."

    an article in the February Southern Medical Journal, official journal of the Southern Medical Association.

    Dr. Lippmann and co-authors conclude that the dangers of having a gun at home far outweigh the safety benefits. Research shows that access to guns greatly increases the risk of death and firearm-related violence. A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder.

    _____

    A study of 626 shootings in or around a residence in three U.S. cities revealed that, for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides (Kellermann et al, 1998)

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    Elsie, Elsie, Elsie. When was the last time a hard core street criminal go into a school and massacre 20 children or a movie theater and start blasting? Why do you and the NRA oppose an attempt to keep military weapons off the street and out of the hands of the unfit? Why do you feel the need for you or your husband to be able to go shopping with your AR over your shoulder? We need to stop these archaic arguments about banning guns, which isn't even in the discussion, and start debating what you will support to keep the Adam Lanzas from access.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    Mike in Cedar City
    Cedar City, Utah
    A simplistic view Elsie. How would have a gun safety course have helped at Sandy Hook? Your comment is like an Ostrich burying his head in the sand.

    7:22 a.m. Jan. 22, 2013

    ===============

    Or
    movie theathers in Aurora CO,
    shopping malls in Portland OR,
    families in New Mexico,

    For crying out loud --
    Last weekend alone, 3 different guns "accidently" went of at 3 differnt guns-shows -- 5 people were nearly killed.
    And this was supposed to be the best of the best of the pro-gun groups, 2nd amendment,on ly the good guys shoudl have guns group.
    Any NRA and more gun safety could have stopped these sorts of "accidents" from happening --
    but to think they address mass assault shootings on unarmed, innocent civilians?
    Gun safety is a ruse, and completely ignores the problem.

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 12:21 p.m.

    Old man,

    search: shooting in kaysville utah 2012 using the. major search engine

    The first 8 results are various news agency reports.

    The copyright infringement rules of this site forbid me saying more or adding any links, as you probably well know. The articles are all over 200 words.

    Published stories are made G-PG rated. The other details I got from a Kaysville insider who has access to police reports.

    You harp on reliable sources. What does that mean? Liberal only I suspect. Or do you want to prove me wrong and accept these sources?

    Ultra Bob
    Cottonwood Heights, UT
    "Since there are few, if any, "law abiding" citizens in America, we must deal with the reality of the world as it is."

    I am sorry you have such a negative world and American view. Most everyone I know is, in fact, a law abiding citizen. If find great people everywhere I go.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:03 p.m.

    ‘Letter: Need more instruction about gun safety, not fewer firearms’

    ==========

    The more I read this, the more ridiculous it becomes.

    A mass murderer, intending to killing as many innocent people as possible -- DOESN'T need hunter safety!
    He needs to have ZERO access to weapons of mass killing.

    This makes about as much sense as telling Jack the Ripper, Lizzie Borden, or Jeffrey Dahmer not to run with scissors!

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:25 p.m.

    As for the Kaysville shooting, there was later found to be some doubt regarding claims made by others who said they had been involved. That seems not to be unusual. In Washington state a man claimed that he may have been responsible for stopping a mall shooting when he claimed to have drawn his weapon but did not fire. According to him, the shooter then killed himself when he was confronted. But later, it was established that the man claiming to be the hero had not, in fact, been anywhere near the mall at the time.

    Be that as it may, we often hear the claim that "thousands" or "millions" of shootings are prevented by others with guns. But there never seems to be any solid documentation of any of those. Why not?

    And by "reliable," I mean reliable. Not foggy comments from anonymous people who forward emails in endless chains. And certainly not from FOX or any hate radio sources.

    I don't doubt that on some rare occasions things like that do happen. But not "thousands" of times a day. And certainly not "millions" of times every year.

  • Copy Cat Murray, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    LDS Liberal

    "This makes about as much sense as telling Jack the Ripper, Lizzie Borden, or Jeffrey Dahmer not to run with scissors!"

    I love the irony of you naming three of the most frightening serial killers in our history and NONE OF THE THEM KILLED WITH GUNS!!!!

    The true lunacy has been revealed!!!

    Thanks for making a great argument IN FAVOR of GUN ownership.

  • Martin Blank Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 2:58 p.m.

    I have a rock in my front yard that stops criminals from invading my home and shooting me and my family. Ever since I put that rock in my yard, no criminals have invaded my home. It repels millions of criminals every year from coming into my home and stealing my stuff and/or shooting those I love. I base that number on the number of criminals that conceivably could find my home and invade it, times the number of minutes in a day times the number of days in a year. Millions, I tell you. I've been approached to sell the rock, and estimate I could get upwards of a billion dollars for it, but how can you put a price on your family's safety? (It also works against tiger attacks and--less well--against power outages.)

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 3:00 p.m.

    JoeBlow,
    "A gun in the home is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or visitor than an intruder."

    I've cited this statistic a number of times around here and no gun advocate seems to have an answer for it. As far as I can tell, they just pretend it doesn't exist. The killings in New Mexico this week are a particularly terrible example of this. According to the most recent news I've read about it, the 15 year old who did the killing was using the family's firearm. Statistically speaking, the presence of a gun in the house appears to be more of an emotional crutch than a valid defense against home invaders.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Jan. 22, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" and how are you going to stop a person who wants to commit a mass murder from getting weapons?

    You will have to ban hunting knives, swords, axes, chain saws, pick axes, hammers, bows and arrows, lawn pesticides, cars, airplanes, baseball bats, fertilizer and diesel fuel, piano wire, box cutters, and all sorts of things. How do you propose to ban all of that and keep them out of the hands of mentally ill people who have a desire to murder people?

    Once you ban all of that, that leaves the public with a dull spork for eating and preparing their food.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 3:42 p.m.

    Redshirt,
    Most of the items on your list are useless if one wants to commit mass murder, so comparing them to firearms is pointless. There's a reason so many murders and nearly all mass killings are done with semiautomatic firearms: their sole purpose is to enable people of any physical strength to quickly and efficiently kill people. It's the exact reason gun advocates advocate the right to own them.

  • Ford DeTreese Provo, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 3:52 p.m.

    Just for your enlightenment, a rather large percentage of the population suffers from some sort of mental illness. Most of these individuals are not violent. But who can tell when someone will tip over the edge? The psychiatric professionals have a hard enough time just coming up with a correct diagnosis in many cases. Trying to figure out who may become violent and when is well beyond their abilities, particularly when they see patients perhaps every two weeks at most.

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 4:06 p.m.

    one old man says,

    "As for the Kaysville shooting, there was later found to be some doubt regarding claims made by others who said they had been involved."

    Interesting claim. Where is YOUR non-hate, reliable documentation???

    "...we often hear the claim that "thousands" or "millions" of shootings are prevented by others with guns."

    I have never heard or said those numbers. But I do know someone who simply cocked his unloaded gun when he heard someone sneaking in through a window. The "click click" sound spurred a rapid scramble to get back out. We can only guess what was prevented.

    "...But there never seems to be any solid documentation of any of those. Why not?"

    Because criminals don't go report to authorities that they intended to kill someone, but got stopped by a citizen with a gun. duh??!!!

    "...I mean reliable. .... And certainly not from FOX or any hate radio sources."

    But MSNBC's or CC's hate TV are okay?

    I see your spots. They suit you well.

    Thanks for playing. It's been fun.

    @LDS Lib

    If Dahmer had used a gun, the noise would have given him away, saving several years of victims.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 4:08 p.m.

    Copy Cat
    Murray, UT

    @LDS Liberal

    I love the irony of you naming three of the most frightening serial killers in our history and NONE OF THE THEM KILLED WITH GUNS!!!!

    The true lunacy has been revealed!!!

    Thanks for making a great argument IN FAVOR of GUN ownership.

    2:48 p.m. Jan. 22, 2013

    ================

    You didn't read the irony of the fact that "safety classes" isn't going to stop these people...did you?
    Only tighter restricitons, regulations, or out-right banning of some weapons from the mentally ill, criminals via background checks, and carfeul limits will stop it.

    BTW --
    Jack the Ripper [was English] and killed a grand total of 5.
    Lizzie Borden killed 2 {Father and Step Mother = she was later aquitted].
    and Jeffrey Dahmer killed 17.

    However, since you think it worth responding, let's compare choice of weapons
    Assualt rifles --

    Viginia Tech = 32 dead, 17 wounded
    Norway massacre - 77 killed, 319 wounded
    SandyHook Elementary = 28 dead, 2 wounded

    The truer lunacy has been revealed!!!

    Thanks for making a great argument IN FAVOR of some GUN Controls.

    and Thanks for playing.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Jan. 22, 2013 4:08 p.m.

    To "Emajor" actually they are not. In Japan and China there are all sorts of mass murders that used knives, swords, and axes. You forget about the family that lost 2 children to lawn pesticides. If a crazy person got some law pesticides and spread them around a neighborhood, he could kill hundreds. Mc Veigh used fertilizer and diesel fuel to blow up a building. Hijackers killed thousands using 2 airplanes. A single car pileup in Florida killed 10 people. 2 years ago police investigated a murder where a chainsaw was used to kill in Lewisville, TX. Read about the Deltona massacre where some crazies used baseball bats to kill. Just last month a bow and arrow was used to murder people. There are lots of murder stories of people using pick axes. Piano wire has always been a choice weapon for murderers, and so have box cutters.

    Comparing them to guns is not pointless. Just look at Japan. They got rid of the guns, and now have problems with knives and swords. All banning one weapon accomplishes is to change the method of killing.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 4:46 p.m.

    Redshirt,
    I still don't agree. I was talking about mass killings, not 2 people killed in a freak pesticide accident or highly irregular chainsaw murder. If you want to include all those single or double or triple person incidents you could find thousands involving firearms, so that nullifies your point. Large quantities of nitrogen fertilizer are restricted because of Oklahoma city, so if you are arguing for stronger firearm regulations, that's a good example. 9/11 is different for a number of reasons & wouldn't be repeated.

    If i didn't have a life to live outside this board i would happily look up your claims about Japan and swords, so feel free to drop the relevant statistics for me. If not, I'll just take your word that people are getting killed with blade weapons. But I'm guessing if you start running a tally, both of the average death toll of single incidents and a cumulative death toll of all incidents, firearm deaths in the US will make those pale in comparison. We see 15, 20, 30, (77 in Norway) per incident killed by firearms. I'd bet that those staggering numbers are difficult to find for swords, pick axes, etc.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Jan. 22, 2013 5:45 p.m.

    "The more I read this, the more ridiculous it becomes." Amen, thank you brother, hallalula, right on, and thank you. 300 million guns in America, highest murder rate, highest crime rate, and highest gun violence rate in the civilized world and "more guns will make us safer" My word, this is insanity.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 22, 2013 10:59 p.m.

    More Americans have died from domestic gun violence than in any of the wars since 1968.

    The arguments in favor of gun control are now moot.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 1:04 a.m.

    Christian 24-7 Murray, UT 8:42 a.m. Jan. 22, 2013

    There is no reliable evidence on the use of guns because the NRA is opposed to allowing studies on gun violence and compiling statistics on their use. The evidence that "good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns" is essentially non-existant. Anecdotal evidence, notwithstanding, there is nothing to cite in support of the NRA position as an ideal solution to the problem.

    However, that does not stop the gun lobby from releasing undocumented stories which have been created specifically to endorse a particular position. The NRA is not an unbiased source. However, readers can note that recent incidents of violence where a gun was involved appear to be increasing. Yet, if one listens to the pro-gun advocates, this increase is inconsequential if not insignificant.

    Although it is not intended to remove all guns from legitimate, responsible gun owners (the 2nd Amendment is not the issue), it appears that the first step is obtaining good, reliable data from which to proceed on the issue. Then reasonable changes can be made (e.g. universal background checks) to increase public safety.

  • Ying Fah Provo, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 1:13 a.m.

    It would be very much in the public interest if law enforcement, responding to a domestic violence call, knew beforehand that a gun was available at the premisis. No police officer should have to knock on a door to be surprised by a person with a gun inside.

    Not only should the police have knowledge going in, but they should know the type and number of weapons available to a potential hostile individual. This is not information necessary to the general community, but the lives of law enforcement people should not be put at more risk than is necessary.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    To "Emajor" lets make this clear so that everybody knows how you think.

    Eventhough I provided evidence that you are wrong, you don't want to accept the truth.

    You deny facts and truth because it does not fit into your belief system.

    While you think on that, think about this.

    Liberals want to teach kids how to have save sex, but when it comes to firearm safety they want to ban guns. Why can't gun safety be included in our kids education along with sex education?

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 23, 2013 10:08 a.m.

    " In Japan and China there are all sorts of mass murders that used knives, swords, and axes."

    Come on Red. Really?

    Japans homicide rate is .83 per 100,000 people.

    In the US it is 4.8 per 100,000.

    If their mass murder rate was all committed by knives, it still pales in comparison.

    I am surprised you would even go there.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 11:05 a.m.

    To "JoeBlow" If you look at the mass murders that have occured in Japan and compare them to the US, you find that their rampages are equal to the US. But then again that would take some reasearch and thinking, which you and your ilk are too busy to do.

    Tell me, what is the mass murder rate in the US and Japan, then we can further discuss the correlation of weapon and murders.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 12:22 p.m.

    paranoia is always a bad thing and right now this gun debate is being driven by the paranoia of ignorant and ideologically left wing people. I have no way of knowing but if I were betting... I would bet the vast majority of the gun banners have zero experience shooting a gun other than on their sons X-BOX. Most adult people in the big cities of the north east (NY, Chicago, Detroit, etc...) know less about a gun than your standard 10 year old boy does in Utah or Wyoming. These people live in the land of fear, ignorance and misinformation with the majority of that misinformation being propagated by the Marxist gun banning left. I of course include Barack Hussin Obama in the list of the ignorant. My grandfather, my dad, me and my son have hunted and owned guns of all varieties for nearly 100 years with ZERO gun accidents. We have all been well educated and trained and have a deep respect for not only hunting but also gun safety. Barack Obama wants to ban guns because it is the socialist thing to do... nothing more.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 23, 2013 4:46 p.m.

    patriot
    Cedar Hills, UT
    paranoia is always a bad thing and right now this gun debate is being driven by the paranoia of ignorant and ideologically left wing people. I have no way of knowing but if I were betting... I would bet the vast majority of the gun banners have zero experience shooting a gun other than on their sons X-BOX.

    ==========

    Then you lost your bet --

    My father was an in the 82nd Airbourne, and later a Green Beret in the Special Forces during Vietnam.
    His unit was the very first to be issued the then new M-16.

    I was in the USAF - working on aircraft and weapon systems delivering converntional, nuclear, bio-logical, Chemical weapons.

    We both have guns, we're both "left-wing" and we're hardly the paranoid type.
    We don't need to publically wear them at the JCPenny's at the mall or rally at the state Capitol with them to cover our insecurities.

    I've never played an X-box,
    and what branch of the U.S. militray did you serve in - patriot?

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 23, 2013 9:57 p.m.

    Redshirt,
    Your last post is disappointing. I thought we were having a civil discussion and exchange of viewpoints. Rather than make a thoughtful response to my last post you took the easy way out and began personally attacking me. In my experience, that's the last resort of someone who cannot muster a decent rebuttal.

    The arguments you presented here were weak, and that's why I kept the dialogue going. Selectively chosen, vague, & devoid of context, your facts did nothing to support your original argument about MASS murders. MASS murders. That was your original argument. You deviated from that. And then ignored every single counter argument I politely made in good faith.

    "You deny facts and truth because it does not fit into your belief system"

    No, Redshirt, I didn't. I conceded that you may be right on some aspects and provided a counter argument with a different interpretation from yours. I tried to keep my arguments on topic with your original claim about mass murders.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 12:33 a.m.

    Equating guns to freedom is like equating inversion to clean air.