OK gun lobby and Property rights folks...let's hear how great this was

Donkey® · 12-03-2006, 10:31 AM

Police: Boy, 14, fatally shot after egging SUV - CNN.com

Originally Posted by article

Police: Boy, 14, fatally shot after egging SUV
POSTED: 9:07 a.m. EST, December 3, 2006

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) -- A 14-year-old boy who was throwing eggs at cars along with two other teenagers was shot and killed by someone who had been in a sport utility vehicle that was hit, police said.

Danny Crawford was killed by a gunshot wound to his upper body, Franklin County Coroner Brad Lewis said. He died in an alley on the city's west side early Saturday, authorities said.

The teens were throwing eggs at cars when an SUV that was struck chased them, Detective Tim Huston said. The vehicle stopped and several gunshots were fired, he said.

Police were looking for the shooter, who fled in the SUV, Sgt. Dana Norman said. The SUV believed to be involved was found a short time later near where Crawford died.

The other teens were not hurt, police said.

So, is this the type of behavior you advocate? He was protecting his property. This is a PRIME EXAMPLE as to why guns and people need to be regulated. I don't give two shits what the Constitution says, behavior like this is unacceptable. What's funny, for every story we hear about people valiantly defending their homes from home invaders, there are at LEAST 5,000 like this one. People are ignorant animals...and the Constitution doesn't take that into account. We're governed by the same animal instincts every other animal on the earth has. The writers of the Constitution gave the human race too much credit.

Adding to this scenario, what would your opinion be if the kids, in fear for their lives, shot the guy who killed their friend? Would they be justified?

hsmith · 12-03-2006, 12:18 PM

you are using this as an example of gun rights?

no, this is pretty sad all around. this has nothing to do with property rights or gun rights.

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 02:02 PM

Anti-gun laws would have done nothing to prevent this.

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Anti-gun laws would have done nothing to prevent this.

If he would have had a machine gun in his trunk, it would have killed all the kids quite easily

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

If he would have had a machine gun in his trunk, it would have killed all the kids quite easily

Anti-gun laws wouldn't prevent him from buying a machine gun.

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Anti-gun laws wouldn't prevent him from buying a machine gun.

A federally licensed firearms dealer may not sell a machine gun or destructive device, a short-barreled shotgun or rifle except as approved by the Secretary of ATF. 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(4).

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

A federally licensed firearms dealer may not sell a machine gun or destructive device, a short-barreled shotgun or rifle except as approved by the Secretary of ATF. 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(4).

You're assuming a person willing to shoot a 14 yr old kid would obtain his guns legally?

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

You're assuming a person willing to shoot a 14 yr old kid would obtain his guns legally?

Break down the percentage to me of criminals who use guns one can legally purchase with any sort of special federal license (just following local state laws) and the percentage of criminals who use guns banned by regular sales (Fully automatic machine guns, RPGs, etc)

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Break down the percentage to me of criminals who use guns one can legally purchase with any sort of special federal license (just following local state laws) and the percentage of criminals who use guns banned by regular sales (Fully automatic machine guns, RPGs, etc)

Quite irrelevant.

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Quite irrelevant.

It goes against the general rule, you are subtly stating that "gun control laws only disarm upright citizens" when in fact gun control laws have kept machine guns out of the hands of very wealthy criminal organizations for decades

In the 1930s, automatic guns were used in Chicago and other cities for massacres by criminals (See St. Valentines Day)

Now that there are gun control laws, that doesn't happen

The problem with gun violence has to do with legal owners and dealers mishandling their guns and having them sold to criminals in one way or another, there is no big "underground market" of people shipping machine guns and RPGs into the US

The way you guys talk about "illegal guns" you'd think there was some huge 9mm gun factory in mexico that illegally ships them to NYC...instead of the reality that legal gun owners are irresponsible and let their guns fall into the hands of criminals

Dave · 12-03-2006, 04:11 PM

What if he would have ran the kid over? Would you be crying and throwing a fit to have vehicles banned?

What about whoever sold the eggs to the kids anyway, I mean what kind of store clerk doesnt know that the eggs are going to be thrown at passing vehicles. Better yet, what would have happened if the egg throwing resulted in someone dying, then we could ban eggs right?

hsmith · 12-03-2006, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Break down the percentage to me of criminals who use guns one can legally purchase with any sort of special federal license (just following local state laws) and the percentage of criminals who use guns banned by regular sales (Fully automatic machine guns, RPGs, etc)

all those laws are really working

motivez · 12-03-2006, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

all those laws are really working

If current laws are not working, why would less laws make the situation better than adapting the laws to the current situation?

I'm pretty middle of the road when it comes to gun control. Law abiding citizens should be able to buy guns for defense or hunting or whatever they want. That's their right and I have no problem with it. But I also have no problem with common sense regulations, background checks, waiting periods, yadda yadda.. I'm also hesitant to say people need uber machine guns and military grade weaponry.

Question though, where do the guns that people obtain illegally come from? Were they originally bought legally and then resold illegally, or is there a dumpster somewhere that the gun companies don't secure that people can dive into and have their pick of the litter?

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

If current laws are not working, why would less laws make the situation better than adapting the laws to the current situation?

Less government is better.

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 05:48 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Less government is better.

So less government agencies that conduct domestic spying?

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

So less government agencies that conduct domestic spying?

On American citizens, yes; on non-citizens, spy away.

Certainly a bit off topic, don't you think?

RMNIXON · 12-03-2006, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Quite irrelevant.

If we could only merge this with a thread about how the war on drugs is a failure because you can get them so easily illegally! The point would be that someone intent on commiting a major crime with a gun is not worried about the legal possesion of said weapon!

I am nor expert, but don't you need a permit to carry a gun in a car? Because the car operates on public roads and property. This is not the same as ones private property, as a home or a business would be!

Thorgrim · 12-03-2006, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

On American citizens, yes; on non-citizens, spy away.

Certainly a bit off topic, don't you think?

I don't remember you coming out against domestic wiretapping of american citizens?

I certainly don't remember you coming out for a smaller military and less government in general

It's germane if the main tenet of your argument is that less government=better...which in the past you seemingly rejected

ballz2wallz · 12-03-2006, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

I am nor expert, but don't you need a permit to carry a gun in a car?

In most states, yes.

I doubt they had one.

Diamond Cross · 12-03-2006, 05:58 PM

Motivez, the majority of them come from stolen firearms. The second largest source comes from firearm shows.

Here is an excellent cite on firearm resources:

GunCite: gun control and Second Amendment issues