Slashdot Mirror

Experiment time: look at the two images linked, and tell me what the difference is between them:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

http://www.atigunstocks.com/me...

To put you out of your misery immediately, the first image is of a Mossberg model 500 shotgun with a standard stock. The second image is also of a Mossberg model 500 shotgun with a pistol grip.

Senator Dianne Feinstein* would have you believe that the 500 Standard is "safe". She would also have you believe that the 500 Pistol stock is an "assault rifle".

IT'S A FUCKING SHOTGUN!

They're BOTH shotguns!

They're the SAME DAMN MODEL!

*yes, this would be the same untermench who was filmed during an anti-gun rally with an AK-47, her finger on the trigger and a magazine in the receiver - in a room packed with people!

http://keepandbeararms.com/inf...

The ACLU isn't for unlimited freedom, it's for maximizing freedom.

Unless that freedom involves anything nice like a Christmas tree or something else they have a Jihad against. Sometimes the ACLU does something I like, often they don't. To depend on them them for anything would be a mistake. The have no regard for anything historical in their Athiest Jihad, not unlike how the Taliban famously blew up the historical Buddha statues in Afghanistan as described here

Here's your maximizing freedom examples:

regarding hate crimes

regarding privacy

ACLU harassing citizens

and a multitude of second ammendment ones like this

Hmm, guess you don't know anything about the Revolutionary War... There were black regiments that FOUGHT with the white regiments. Also try reading about the different gun control acts... Yup it was the NRA who was so all over it because they wanted to stop the Black Panthers from buying guns mail order (for instance). The founding fathers saw fit to allow ANYONE of any RACE to own a gun. It was the NRA (the supposed defenders of the 2nd Amendment) who wanted to take that right away. People don't realize the NRA is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

So you you can stop the race baiting....

Ref:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_Revolutionary_War

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3247

There is no actual evidence that this is true. It sounds pretty truthy, but where's the evidence?

There is plenty of evidence. What you should have said is that you have never seen it, not that it doesn't exist. A quick Google found this:

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

In reality-land there are plenty of weapons in the hands of people with no training. In reality land these well trained people with firearms live with people who aren't well trained, kids, and outright idiots.

Also, in reality land, most of those people with firearms take reasonable precautions to secure them. I don't even have children in my home, and I keep my firearms in a gun safe.

Not to mention the number of firearms stolen from well trained people now in the hands of the idiots the government would have refused to sell them to...

Did you just imply that we should take all the legal firearms away from law-abiding citizens to keep them out of the hands of "idiots"? I think you did! Tell me, on your planet are the streets completely free of all illegal drugs such as cocaine? If not, then why do you think that you can get all the guns off the streets? Disarming the law-abiding will not disarm the law-breakers.

The only people who were outraged were the people who had their houses identified as being "extra safe and secure". Funny that.

Good grief. If I posted your address along with information about valuable stuff inside your home, you'd be pretty outraged too. So why is it funny? What exactly do you think you just demonstrated?

And how is it that you can speak for all the readers of the newspaper? Some of the non-gun-permit people in the area might have been outraged.

You counter your own argument with some of those examples. We have ALL kinds of restrictions on cars. You need to pass tests, you need to renew a license to operate one, they are all registered to there owners, and you are even required to have insurance before it can leave your property. We are seeing graduated licensing introduced with additional restrictions on new drivers. And your permission to operate one can be revoked for all kinds of reasons.

And there are something like 20,000 to 30,000 laws on firearms already. There are restrictions on how you can transport them, who can buy them. Unlike cars, when you buy a firearm, the "instant check" system looks you up to make sure you aren't a felon or something.

http://keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2023

I was talking about outright banning of cars. Some people are proposing outright banning of firearms. Can you comprehend this simple idea?

If you think "gee, firearms ought to be heavily regulated" then great news! They already are! We're done!

If you think "gee, firearms ought to be banned" then I'm arguing that you are wrong.

But if all gun owners were all so well trained and conscientious America wouldn't be rubbing shoulders with 3rd world countries run by despots for its gun related violence statistics.

America is safer than those 3rd world countries. America is safer than Mexico, which has strict gun-control laws (there is only one gun store in all of Mexico that sells to civilians; it's so hard to get a legal gun that one is all they need... yet the drug gangs seem to have plenty of guns to kill people).

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/214667.php

I could show you numbers that demonstrate that areas with strict gun control have high violence. (New York City and Washington, D.C. and Chicago are all far more violent than where I live.) If I then tried to claim that gun control laws cause violence, you would say: Correlation doesn't prove causation! And you would be right.

Now, you are arguing that America has many guns

Hmm. I wonder. What weapons are legal in Mexico?
http://www.examiner.com/article/mexicans-conspire-to-obtain-stinger-missile-and-other-weapons

http://www.caat.org.uk/resources/facts-figures/weapon-costs.php

http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=1&id=30738

http://www.pcworld.com/article/260415/google_creates_interactive_visual_about_small_arms_trade.html

http://www.algemeiner.com/2012/11/13/egyptian-daily-details-sinai-arms-trade/

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=2050

You might want to reconsider your assumptions.

[goes off, finds copy of flyer]

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/images/FBI-MCSOTerroristFlyer-Back.jpg

EEEP!

The cases of people protecting their homes, stores, property or person with firearms aren't "few in number", they are just under reported by a media that is anti 2nd Amendment.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/Information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=1746

Apparently you are not informed that without a method of making a hole large enough for a man or car to fit through, rapidly i might add, to the side of the plane, it will NOT explosively depressurize. Go look it up, google is your best friend my uninformed fellow slashdotter.

Explain to me: how will banning guns remove guns from the hands of violent criminals, particularly considering that violent criminals, by definition, will not obey gun control laws? Does reality have a liberal bias on *that* issue, o great liberal avatar?

Positions on gun control correlate more strongly with urban vs. rural geography than directly with liberal or conservative views. Remember that it was conservative icon Ronald Reagan who, as governor of California, signed the Mulford Act - which was targeted at gun-toting leftist Black Panthers.

I know plenty of liberals with guns - the more progressive, the more likely to have a gun, or at least support the RKBA. I'm an armed leftist myself, and I agree with noted socialist writer George Orwell that "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or laborer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."

Since you probably fancy yourself both educated and informed, tell me why single women tend to vote Democrat while married women tend to vote Republican.

Uh, do you have to ask?

People who are socially conservative, believe in traditional gender roles and are more likely to get married young and less likely to get divorce. Therefore they spend more of their lives married. People who believe they have their own value outside of a breeding couple (just joshin' ya, married friends) are more likely to delay marriage, or not marry at all, and to leave a unhappy marriage; even those who do marry are likely to spend more of their lives single than their more conservative peers.

And again, education comes into it: women with higher education - which correlates well with more liberal views - are more likely to delay marriage, staying longer in the "single" column.

An additional factor is that single mothers also tend to rely more on the "social safety net", an issue that gives an advantage to Democrats. But I'd guess that most of the difference comes from conservatives putting more importance on mating and being more likely to believe that they need the sanction of the Church and the state to sleep together, while liberals are more willing to make their own life, or to partner up without a licence from the government.

If I remember correctly, there are things like waiting periods that have been proved to reduce crimes of passion with guns.

That's the thing though. Waiting periods had no statistical benefits - they didn't prevent any crimes. Or they may have only delayed them a bit.

Actually, there's some anecdotal evidence that it cost lives - Women who were in the waiting period, with a restraining order out against a known threat, the police not guarding them because it hadn't been determined that the threat was high enough. Murdered by their violent husband, boyfriend, whatever.

blatantly biased reference
Waiting periods extend a potential victim's "period of vulnerability," sometimes with tragic consequences. For example, in 1991 Wisconsin resident Bonnie Elmasri, seeking to purchase a firearm for protection from a husband who had repeatedly threatened to kill her, was told she would have to wait 48 hours to obtain the weapon. Unfortunately, 48 hours was too long to wait; the abusive husband killed Bonnie and her two children the next day.[iii]

We also ought to psyche-test people for firearms ownership, get them all certified in gun etiquette, et cetera. You should be sane & clean; know how to operate, maintain and use a gun properly; and know all the relevant regulations before you can own a gun.

Hearkens back to the old literacy tests to vote; You know, the ones nobody could pass? Psyche tests can disqualify anybody - it'd be absurdly easy to turn it into a catch-22 situation.* Besides - it's already illegal for people who have been committed to own or possess firearms. That's at least a high enough standard that the average joe can't be disqualified.

As for the safety part - I'd have gun safety taught in schools again. Start with the eddie eagle type 'don't touch, tell an adult' stuff in elementary, graduate to shooting BB guns in jr high, and rimfires (maybe centerfires) in HS.

Tracking weapons after they leave factories might be interesting (a certain variety of gun has become very popular with thugs in Cleveland, but many collectors don't like it,) though likely wouldn't prove that effective.

Bingo.

*You want a gun? Wanting a gun is a syndrome, so you're crazy, so no gun

Of course this dilutes the "terrorist" label for beyond usability. I guess less than a percent of a percent of the people who fulfill these criteria have even committed violent acts of terrorism. But that's fine because the suspicion system has long ceased to be a means of catching those. It is now a multi-purpose government tool that serves for everything from law enforcement to garnering support for war.

You still haven't shown that even a single of those guns you claim were used for defensive purposes, actually performed a useful defensive function, either as a deterrent, threat, or weapon.

Admit it, you didn't even follow the links I provided, did you? The surveys asked people if they had used a gun, even if it was not fired, to protect themselves or someone else, making each reported DGU a clear case of a firearms functioning as a deterrent or weapon.

Let me make it easier for you. The NRA' Institute for Legislative Action keeps a comprehensive "armed citizen" news archive. Here is a simiar compilation at keepandbeararms.com.

Random burglars will run when they are spotted, regardless of whether you have a gun or not. Only real enemies will stay to mutilate you and your family.

Some petty crooks will run when spotted. But home invaders do not. Neither do rapists and stalkers (wouldn't life be easier if they did?).

(And besides, if someone plans to mutilate you and your family, a gun probably isn't going to stop them)

Being armed certainly increases the odds of successfully stopping such an attack.

Briefly, I realise this. I said "massive and sudden", not "explosive and catastrophic".

More here.

guns should not be allowed on airplanes, if only for the reason that they would cause a rapid depressurization unless special shattering bullets are used.

I'm sorry, but that would of yours is just nonsense. It is highly unlikely a bullet fired on an airplane would cause rapid depressurization. A few bullet-sized holes wouldn't lose air faster than the plane's pressurization control system can put more in. Hearing damage to the people nearby is a more significant concern. Here's a nice FAQ on the subject.

(I'll grant that it happens in the movies, mind you. But movie physics is not real-world physics.)

One can justify guns in such a setting because the benefits - protection against bad guys - outweigh the cost - risk from stupid guys. Just like a pocketknife, guns have a very very low probability of accidentally leaping out of somebody's pocket and being used with malevolence. If a gun is being used, there's probably a reason for it, and in most situations where there's a reason for it you're better off having the gun there than not.

One could imagine a world in which the laws of physics made gun use on modern airplanes a catastrophically bad idea, but that isn't the world we actually live in.

I suggest you take a look at this site Operation Self Defense that is collecting published news stories of individuals who have used a firearm to defend themselves. You may be quite surprised by the number of stories present and the fact that they are only from the last SIX months. And as stated that's the number of published stories, there are and estimated average of 100,000 to 2.5 million Defensive Gun uses in the US every year as sited by 13 different studies and lets not forget the latest study by the National Academy of Sciences. Compare that to the Brady Campaign's claim of an average of 30,000 deaths a year in the US that involved a firearm and that over 50% of those are suicides and only 3% are considered accidental leaving less than 15,000 deaths a year. Even using the lowest estimates there are almost 7 times the number of people saved from injury or death than killed by firearms every year and only 1 in seven of those defensive uses results in the defender actually firing the gun!

So, please, before making such statements as you have you should review the data and understand that beliefs are completely irrational and unfounded. Instead you should look into taking a firearms training course and learning to defend yourself so that if, God forbid, you should ever be faced with such an occurrence you are capable of defending your life and the lives of those around you instead of being a victim at the hands of those that wish to cause you harm.

the NRA is certainly not overzealous, they're sellouts. just for example, the NRA was willing to extend the "assault" weapon ban to get industry immunity...until more principled gun-rights organizations started turning up the heat on the NRA.

the NRA has gone soft, and yet the socialists still screech "right wing extremists!" for real gun-rights orgs check out
www.KeepAndBearArms.com
www.GunOwners.org

Before THE NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT of 1934, any American could own darn near anything -- sawed-off shotguns, big & small machine guns, anti-tank weapons, the works! Absent some gangland murders (more due to prohibition) there weren't many problems.

But, the government finally got the willies -- can't have them commoners with guns (gasp)!

Many of the countries with the strictest gun control have the highest rates of violent crime.
Australia and England, which have virtually banned gun ownership, have the highest rates of
robbery, sexual assault, and assault with force of the top 17 industrialized countries.

In America, a gun crime is recorded as a gun crime. In Britain, a crime is only recorded when there
is a final disposition (a conviction). All unsolved gun crimes in Britain are not reported as gun crimes, grossly undercounting the amount of gun crime there. To make matters worse, British law enforcement has been exposed for falsifying criminal reports to create falsely lower crime figures, in part to preserve tourism.

>Oh, and there's the interesting little subject of decompression to deal with...

You watch too much TV. Planes don't explosivly decompress when a bullet is shot through through the skin.

From www.keepandbeararms.com - MYTH #1 Cabin depressurization will occur if a firearm is discharged on an airplane.
3) Even if you put a common handgun bullet through the side of an airplane -- pick your caliber, any of them -- it will not depressurize a cabin measurably. And what small amount of leakage would occur could be plugged with any number of things within reach of your seat, including a small portion of the tiny pillows and baby blankets you are given by flight attendants. But don't take it from me; listen to two Licensed Aircraft Engineers, one of whom is a Lead Technician for a major airline:

"On the overall question: 'Is shooting hijackers on aircraft an appropriate thing to do considering the risk of damaging the operational integrity of the aircraft,' the answer is 'Hell Yes.' I've been a licensed aircraft mechanic for over 20 years, and I am the Lead Technician for a Major Airline. I know aircraft. It's pretty tough to down a transport category aircraft with small arms fire. Boeing's 737s, 757s and the rest are very much like bulldozers with wings on them in that regard." -- Dan Todd, Licensed Aircraft Engineer for 20 years, Lead Technician for a Major Airline

"One or even several bullets puncturing the pressure cabin wall would be hardly noticeable and the aircraft's pressurization control would easily cope with the slight loss of air. The likelihood of a single bullet causing a massive structural failure is so remote as to be insignificant." -- David M., Licensed Aircraft Engineer

Until the police and military are using these 100% of the time - I WOULD not considering using them. Why? Reliability issues.

For those thinking about serial numbers on bullets and taggants - remember if someone is really determined they can make there own:
http://www.corbins.com/howto.htm

OR - they can just steal guns and bullets from the police/military. 3 HK-11 submachine guns ..

Want to learn more? here

If folks would just get the facts first, properly researched and with attributes, there might be a lot less time wasted on all this discussion. And there would certainly be no dumb laws passed.

Alas, they don't. But find it here: Gunfacts 3.2

You can rationalize all you want, but statistics show you are wrong. 5 gallon buckets do indeed kill more kids than guns. Same for all the rest of that stuff. Until you and whomever pays attention to facts, you run no risk of being right.

Furthermore, you also ignore the fact that guns in hands other than the criminal *save* lives.

Perhaps you should read some good information on the subject rather than speculating. Leave that for the stock market and those who have lots of cash to lose.

Try this instead: Gunfacts v3.2

Smart gun technology is available today, and is completely practical. If you don't believe me, here's a simulator for the technology...

Hmm lets see:

Man threatened in own home with gun

HELP POLICE CAPTURE GUNMAN

Tower block gun terror

England has worst crime rate in world

These are all UK stories. Would you like me to going I have over fifty of them just for the past month(you can find them here by searching for UK), or have I ruined you little puppies and snowflakes view of the world enough for one day?

This page describes the issue pretty well. I'll borrow from it:

[The Supreme Court] held the National Guard is an integral component of the US Army Reserve system (it has been since 1916). It further supported its ruling by specifying the difference between the "special militia" (in this case the Minnesota Guard) instead of the "general militia" (citizens with privately procured and owned arms) as expressed in the 2nd Amendment. Also in 1990 the Court in another case affirmed the definition of "the people" expressed in the Bill of Rights as meaning individual persons, not a group.

More Guns, Less Crime : Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (Studies in Law and Economics) by John R. Lott, Jr.

Unintended Consequences (A classic)

http://ron.dotson.net/guns.htm (Shameless plug for my own Gun page)

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/downloads/GunFacts_ v3.2.pdf

or any of:

http://home.attbi.com/~guys/guns.html
http://ww w.keepandbeararms.com/images/gunfacts.pdf
http://www.handguncontrol.net
http://www.2asist ers.org/gunfacts/
http://www.Gunnery.Net/gunfacts .html
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gun_fact s.pdf
http://www.concealcarry.org
http://www.gw. total-web.net/~rbrandes/
http://www.imagineonline .net/ncci/gunfacts.pdf
http://www.guns-world.net
http://www.secondfreedom.net
http://www.2ndamdlv r.org
http://geekswithguns.com/articles/GunFacts. pdf
http://rkba.org/indiv.html
http://www.TexasH andgunner.com

A dog will protect your property when you are not at home. A gun will sit there and do nothing.

A criminal that has an illegal gun will shot the dog.

A dog know friend from foe, and will not attack a friend. A gun will kill whoever it is shot at.

A friend of mine had a rather mean dog. He would have attacked me, and most other visitors to the house, even though they were most certainly invited. Perhaps the person with the gun shouldn't be shooting thier friends. I know i wouldn't shoot mine.

Criminals will commit crimes just to steal a gun. Very few criminals will break into a home to steal a dog.

Very few criminals will break in to steal your gun. Most likely they'll want money, jewelery, electronics, etc. What you don't seem to know is that criminals usually commit more then one crime. Guess thats why they are called criminals.

A dog provides friendship, exercise, and hours of amusement. A gun is used to kill. Period.

Dogs are also like needy girlfriends; they need constant attention. They also have to be let out every few hours or will shit on your carpet, will eat out of the trash (after knocking it over) and can bring fleas and other bugs into the house. Guns are alot less maintence.

You are afraid of criminals, then go to the nearest pound and adopt a suitable breed of dog.

I suggest you move. Most places i've lived are pretty safe and i know the areas to stay out of.

If instead you insist on owning a gun out of fear, you are a menace to your neighbors and everyone else within firing range.

Bull. You act like the only people that own guns are crazy hicks that randomly fire them. You have offered no proof, and its absurd for you to suggest that someone that owns a gun is automatically a menace.

I have a few stories to refute your claims.

http://www.jcs-group.com/what/politic/virgin.html
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBVie wItem.asp?ID=486

No, i don't have any of these bookmarked. I did a quick google search. You can do the same to find other similar stories.

Law enforcement organizations are asking that all cops be exempt from laws against carrying concealed weapons. This would apply while they're off-duty, outside their own jurisdictions.

How is gun control racist? No AC replies please.

How is gun control racist? No AC replies please.

The biggest violation that you missed was perpetrated by FDR during WWII. This was the closest America has come to a "final solution" so recently (terrifying).

Previously it was the American Indian (from our modern standpoint it is fortunate for America that the American Indian lacked access [GUN CONTROL in action] to a sufficient quantity of guns and ammunition to preserve their way of life ... visit some reservations to get a clearer picture ... the ones who faught are all dead now so we can't ask why they faught)

Because the second amendment, and those championing "gun rights", have never protected their rights and they never will. NOT EXACTLY ==> Guns Save Lives [News] Stories (eleven-pages of hyperlinks ... there would be more for 2001/2000 but there seems to be growing censorship of publishing these stories - memory hole???)

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals." (Please check this out as I only copy 'n pasted from a non-CA gov't website ... maybe it is misquoted ... whether misquoted or not you can still "Dial 911 and [wait to] die" ;-);-);-)

Of Holocausts and Gun Control (Washington University Law Quarterly)

GAMBLING WITH YOUR LIFE Is 911 an acceptable option?

Statistics the Gun Haters Don't Talk About

The Racist Roots of Gun Control

Taking Aim at Gun Control

"Dial 911 and Die (Radio Commercial)"

GUN CONTROL: A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT

The First Million Mom March

Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field

Gun Control Advocates Purvey Deadly Myths

Research related to "Gun Control

"Genocide Delayed"

Jews and "Gun Control": Fear of Freedom or Freedom from Fear?

The Racist Origins of US Gun Control: Laws Designed To Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, And African-Americans

Post your mailing address so I can send you a yard signs and window stickers that say "The people in this home are unarmed. We depend on 911" and "Protected by 911"

I would post more links to DATA but the hour is late and we are beginning to go off topic from the First Amendment issue. Although I raised the other twenty-six Amendments as a "tangential editorial comment"

The biggest violation that you missed was perpetrated by FDR during WWII. This was the closest America has come to a "final solution" so recently (terrifying).

Previously it was the American Indian (from our modern standpoint it is fortunate for America that the American Indian lacked access [GUN CONTROL in action] to a sufficient quantity of guns and ammunition to preserve their way of life ... visit some reservations to get a clearer picture ... the ones who faught are all dead now so we can't ask why they faught)

Because the second amendment, and those championing "gun rights", have never protected their rights and they never will. NOT EXACTLY ==> Guns Save Lives [News] Stories (eleven-pages of hyperlinks ... there would be more for 2001/2000 but there seems to be growing censorship of publishing these stories - memory hole???)

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals." (Please check this out as I only copy 'n pasted from a non-CA gov't website ... maybe it is misquoted ... whether misquoted or not you can still "Dial 911 and [wait to] die" ;-);-);-)

Of Holocausts and Gun Control (Washington University Law Quarterly)

GAMBLING WITH YOUR LIFE Is 911 an acceptable option?

Statistics the Gun Haters Don't Talk About

The Racist Roots of Gun Control

Taking Aim at Gun Control

"Dial 911 and Die (Radio Commercial)"

GUN CONTROL: A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT

The First Million Mom March

Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field

Gun Control Advocates Purvey Deadly Myths

Research related to "Gun Control

"Genocide Delayed"

Jews and "Gun Control": Fear of Freedom or Freedom from Fear?

The Racist Origins of US Gun Control: Laws Designed To Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, And African-Americans

Post your mailing address so I can send you a yard signs and window stickers that say "The people in this home are unarmed. We depend on 911" and "Protected by 911"

I would post more links to DATA but the hour is late and we are beginning to go off topic from the First Amendment issue. Although I raised the other twenty-six Amendments as a "tangential editorial comment"

The biggest violation that you missed was perpetrated by FDR during WWII. This was the closest America has come to a "final solution" so recently (terrifying).

Previously it was the American Indian (from our modern standpoint it is fortunate for America that the American Indian lacked access [GUN CONTROL in action] to a sufficient quantity of guns and ammunition to preserve their way of life ... visit some reservations to get a clearer picture ... the ones who faught are all dead now so we can't ask why they faught)

Because the second amendment, and those championing "gun rights", have never protected their rights and they never will. NOT EXACTLY ==> Guns Save Lives [News] Stories (eleven-pages of hyperlinks ... there would be more for 2001/2000 but there seems to be growing censorship of publishing these stories - memory hole???)

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals." (Please check this out as I only copy 'n pasted from a non-CA gov't website ... maybe it is misquoted ... whether misquoted or not you can still "Dial 911 and [wait to] die" ;-);-);-)

Of Holocausts and Gun Control (Washington University Law Quarterly)

GAMBLING WITH YOUR LIFE Is 911 an acceptable option?

Statistics the Gun Haters Don't Talk About

The Racist Roots of Gun Control

Taking Aim at Gun Control

"Dial 911 and Die (Radio Commercial)"

GUN CONTROL: A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT

The First Million Mom March

Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field

Gun Control Advocates Purvey Deadly Myths

Research related to "Gun Control

"Genocide Delayed"

Jews and "Gun Control": Fear of Freedom or Freedom from Fear?

The Racist Origins of US Gun Control: Laws Designed To Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, And African-Americans

Post your mailing address so I can send you a yard signs and window stickers that say "The people in this home are unarmed. We depend on 911" and "Protected by 911"

I would post more links to DATA but the hour is late and we are beginning to go off topic from the First Amendment issue. Although I raised the other twenty-six Amendments as a "tangential editorial comment"

The biggest violation that you missed was perpetrated by FDR during WWII. This was the closest America has come to a "final solution" so recently (terrifying).

Previously it was the American Indian (from our modern standpoint it is fortunate for America that the American Indian lacked access [GUN CONTROL in action] to a sufficient quantity of guns and ammunition to preserve their way of life ... visit some reservations to get a clearer picture ... the ones who faught are all dead now so we can't ask why they faught)

Because the second amendment, and those championing "gun rights", have never protected their rights and they never will. NOT EXACTLY ==> Guns Save Lives [News] Stories (eleven-pages of hyperlinks ... there would be more for 2001/2000 but there seems to be growing censorship of publishing these stories - memory hole???)

California's Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals." (Please check this out as I only copy 'n pasted from a non-CA gov't website ... maybe it is misquoted ... whether misquoted or not you can still "Dial 911 and [wait to] die" ;-);-);-)

Of Holocausts and Gun Control (Washington University Law Quarterly)

GAMBLING WITH YOUR LIFE Is 911 an acceptable option?

Statistics the Gun Haters Don't Talk About

The Racist Roots of Gun Control

Taking Aim at Gun Control

"Dial 911 and Die (Radio Commercial)"

GUN CONTROL: A REALISTIC ASSESSMENT

The First Million Mom March

Guns and Violence: A Summary of the Field

Gun Control Advocates Purvey Deadly Myths

Research related to "Gun Control

"Genocide Delayed"

Jews and "Gun Control": Fear of Freedom or Freedom from Fear?

The Racist Origins of US Gun Control: Laws Designed To Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, And African-Americans

Post your mailing address so I can send you a yard signs and window stickers that say "The people in this home are unarmed. We depend on 911" and "Protected by 911"

I would post more links to DATA but the hour is late and we are beginning to go off topic from the First Amendment issue. Although I raised the other twenty-six Amendments as a "tangential editorial comment"