I am curious about something, and this seems to be the place for it: In my mind, it seems that it is likely that there have been more incidents of defense with a gun in the home, and more instances of defense with some other kind of weapon out in the world. Anyone know how that breaks down?
Woof dreatx,
You will probably have trouble hashing the statistic's out on that one. Most private and government entities that are interested in such numbers usually only want to use them for political fodder, and since most big cities (where most of the crimes and deaths occur), are ran by Liberals, they are generally only interested in keeping records on gun deaths committed by violent criminals. They are not all that interested in how many people are stabbed or beaten to death and they are definitely not interested in how many people legally and successfully defend themselves against violence, by any method; gun or otherwise.
You see if they started keeping those kinds of records then that would show how many innocent lives were potentially
saved by the use of a weapon in the hands of a law abiding citizen. They are afraid of that number because then they wouldn't be able to justify their calls for more gun control. Why would they want more gun control that restricts law abiding citizens from having guns, when the crooks and murderer's just break those laws, leaving citizens defenseless?
Well, they want you to need government protection, that way they can hire government employee's (cops, fire fighters, teachers, all unionized of course), that will also be dependant on a government check and benefits, then after they have wasted your tax dollars and need more, they can threaten you with taking the police off the street and let the riots, looting and burning begin. That's only half of it though; you see they need criminals to make this work, so they crowd millions of people into certain areas of these big liberal city's, make sure that all the jobs dry up or get sent overseas, then put a government roof over their head and give them just enough food stamps to keep them alive, make them angry at the world by telling them slavery from 200 hundred years ago put them there, then just set back and wait until the despair, depression, and hopelessness of their situation drives them to self medicate with illegal drugs and alcohol and turn to crime to get the money they need to buy the things they need and want.
Of course drug users, attract drug dealers, and things get violent when they compete with each other, so they need gangs and the gangs raise the kids, because daddy is in jail and mom is stoned. You keep the borders wide open so the drugs keep coming and as a added benefit you get illegal immigrants and they fill any jobs left and also become depended on government handouts. You don't let prayer or the Ten Commandments in the schools because prayer might give them hope and the Commandments might contradict what they learn in the gangs. You know, all that 'thou shalt not kill' crap. Of course they won't be in school long anyway because most will drop out, which doesn't bother the teachers, so long as they get more pay and benefits and if they don't, they'll strike with the cops and fire fighters.
Now the government has a nice little round robin, closed system, to manipulate and control, all for their own corrupt reasons and benefit. It's really a brilliant scheme because the elite in the government get all the power and money and then they blame all the problems on guns, or slavery from 200 hundred years ago, or greedy corporations, or global warming or guns (did I say guns twice?). They are really creative when it comes to finding something to blame while they keep accumulating power and control. Well, I got little off your question there but to answer it. No, no one knows how that breaks down.
P.C.
