Republican Congressman Giving Away Gun to Lucky Follower

[silverscreenselect]

Paul Broun, the Republican Congressman who called evolution "lies straight from the pit of Hell," is trying to help raise money for his Senate campaign by giving away an AR-15 rifle to one lucky follower who registers on his campaign site (of course, Georgia lottery laws prohibit conditioning the contest on actually making a donation to Broun's campaign). Broun isn't even the first Republican to come up with this idea. One day earlier, Lee Bright, who is running against South Carolina's Lindsay Graham in a primary, published a similar notice to help "get the message of liberty out to tens of thousands of South Carolinians."

In an e-mail to supporters, Broun asks, ""How would you like to start off 2014 with a brand new AR-15 for free?" It's all part of his effort to refuse to allow "Democrats and liberal media ... to take away our guns and mandate every aspect of our lives." He also notes that Barack Obama wants to ban the AR-15, which was the gun used in the Newtown, CT, school shootings.

Unfortunately, many of Broun's most ardent supporters may be ineligible for the contest. The rules say that the winner must be 18 and pass a background check.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1591328

[BackInTex]

Unfortunately, many of Broun's most ardent supporters may be ineligible for the contest. The rules say that the winner must be 18 and pass a background check.

I'd wager a greater % of his supporters could pass a background check than supporters for Obama or even Bill.

[a1mamacat]

Paul Broun, the Republican Congressman who called evolution "lies straight from the pit of Hell," is trying to help raise money for his Senate campaign by giving away an AR-15 rifle to one lucky follower who registers on his campaign site (of course, Georgia lottery laws prohibit conditioning the contest on actually making a donation to Broun's campaign). Broun isn't even the first Republican to come up with this idea. One day earlier, Lee Bright, who is running against South Carolina's Lindsay Graham in a primary, published a similar notice to help "get the message of liberty out to tens of thousands of South Carolinians."

In an e-mail to supporters, Broun asks, ""How would you like to start off 2014 with a brand new AR-15 for free?" It's all part of his effort to refuse to allow "Democrats and liberal media ... to take away our guns and mandate every aspect of our lives." He also notes that Barack Obama wants to ban the AR-15, which was the gun used in the Newtown, CT, school shootings.

Unfortunately, many of Broun's most ardent supporters may be ineligible for the contest. The rules say that the winner must be 18 and pass a background check.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1591328

Wonder how supportive he would be of the AR-15, if his kid is in one of the schools that gets targeted by the winner! What a moron.

[BackInTex]

Wonder how supportive he would be of the AR-15, if his kid is in one of the schools that gets targeted by the winner! What a moron.

More people without AR-15s are murdered each year than people murdered by AR-15s.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

I thought it was interesting that in a recent episode of The Blacklist that when a bad guy pulled a gun in a convenience store a customer pulled a concealed pistol and shot at the bad guy. The episode would have ended there but the customer missed and hit the bad guy's child. I can't remember another example of a bystander pulling a gun on a network drama.

[silverscreenselect]

More people without AR-15s are murdered each year than people murdered by AR-15s.

The question is whether more people are murdered by AR-15s a year than there are murders prevented by law abiding citizens toting around AR-15s everywhere they go.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

More people without AR-15s are murdered each year than people murdered by AR-15s.

The question is whether more people are murdered by AR-15s a year than there are murders prevented by law abiding citizens toting around AR-15s everywhere they go.

In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

Note that is all rifles not just AR15 types

The number of people toting around AR-15 everywhere is close to zero

[Bob Juch]

More people without AR-15s are murdered each year than people murdered by AR-15s.

The question is whether more people are murdered by AR-15s a year than there are murders prevented by law abiding citizens toting around AR-15s everywhere they go.

In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.

Note that is all rifles not just AR15 types

The number of people toting around AR-15 everywhere is close to zero

Not close enough:

[lilclyde54]

If one of those 600 people a year who kill people with hammers comes at me, I hope I have an AR 15 handy. I am not much good in a hammer fight.

[elwoodblues]

When was the last time someone went into a public place and killed 20 people with a hammer? When people kill people it is with a gun two thirds of the time:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

[BackInTex]

When was the last time someone went into a public place and killed 20 people with a hammer? When people kill people it is with a gun two thirds of the time:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

So as long as people are killed 1 or 2 per event its not as bad?

So Dean Corll's murders were better than George Hennard's because Corll killed his 27 victims individually and by hand vs. George Hennared who killed his 23 all at one time by shooting them while they ate lunch? O.K. then.

[silverscreenselect]

So as long as people are killed 1 or 2 per event its not as bad?

Hammers have other uses besides killing people, like hammering in nails so that heavy shelves won't clunk people in the head.

AR-15s have no other uses other than allowing people to shoot up a whole bunch of targets like school children or allowing guys to reaffirm their masculinity by toting one around and fantasizing about using it to defend themselves.

[BackInTex]

So as long as people are killed 1 or 2 per event its not as bad?

Hammers have other uses besides killing people, like hammering in nails so that heavy shelves won't clunk people in the head.

AR-15s have no other uses other than allowing people to shoot up a whole bunch of targets like school children or allowing guys to reaffirm their masculinity by toting one around and fantasizing about using it to defend themselves.

There are valid uses. You probably don't care to think about them because it would shed light on your own lack of desire or drive to protect yourself or your family. It seems you'd rather rely solely on the government to protect you, or as you've stated in your past, just give up and hand it all over to someone else, glad to 'live' another day oppressed by those who seek to do you and your family harm. You seem to be satisfied with a 'safety in numbers' mentality. Lots of other people to pick as targets and as long as you're not picked too many times, as long as you get to keep breathing, that's all that seems to matter for you.

Of the over 3 million AR-15s in the US, only a small few have been used for crimes and only 1 used in the manner you put on your white flag and wave around as an example.

[silverscreenselect]

Lots of other people to pick as targets and as long as you're not picked too many times, as long as you get to keep breathing, that's all that seems to matter for you.

My life and the life of my loved ones means more to me than the money I was carrying that night or engaging in juvenile macho fantasies about what being a real man is, which is apparently something that you enjoy doing. Owning an AR-15 or whatever other weapons you may have in your personal armory doesn't make you a man, and it doesn't make your loved ones safe. If someone does choose to break into your house intent on doing you wrong, they are unlikely to announce themselves to give you a chance to load up and defend yourself. You're better off spending the money on better locks or a loud dog.

If you really think that the few hundred dollars you spent on whatever gun or guns you have in your personal arsenal is what it takes to be a real man, then your sense of values is as shallow as your political thinking. However, you can take comfort in one thing. If the day comes when your own little arsenal has to be put to actual use, the odds are it won't be you that winds up getting killed or injured, but rather one of the family members you supposedly love and want to protect. Plus, as the study shows, having a gun is also handy if you ever feel you have the need to prove you're a man by taking it out on one of those family members you supposedly love and want to protect.

Risks and Benefits of a Gun in the Home

And in case you get tired actually trying to read something scientific instead of the comic book nonsense the NRA puts out there, I'll skip through all the facts and statistics and go to the conclusion:

There are real and imaginary situations when it might be beneficial to have a gun in the home. For example, in the Australian film Mad Max, where survivors of the apocalypse seem to have been predominantly psychopathic male bikers, having a loaded gun would seem to be very helpful for survival, and public health experts would probably advise people in that world to obtain guns.

However, for most contemporary Americans, the scientific studies suggest that the health risk of a gun in the home is greater than the benefit. There are no credible studies that indicate otherwise. The evidence is overwhelming that a gun in the home is a risk factor for completed suicide and that gun accidents are most likely to occur in homes with guns. There is compelling evidence that a gun in the home is a risk factor for intimidation and for killing women in their homes, and it appears that a gun in the home may more likely be used to threaten intimates than to protect against intruders.

On the potential benefit side, there is no good evidence of a deterrent effect of firearms or that a gun in the home reduces the likelihood or severity of
injury during an altercation or break-in. That said, for the large majority of households, having a gun in the home will not provide either health benefits or
costs this year. However, for those households where having a gun or not will matter this year, the evidence indicates that the costs will widely outweigh the benefits.

The benefit–cost ratio is especially adverse for women and children in the household. Indeed, after weighing the scientific evidence, the American Academy
of Pediatrics (AAP) decided that guns do not belong in households with children: "The AAP recommends that pediatricians incorporate questions about guns into their patient history taking and urge parents who possess guns to remove them, especially handguns, from the home.

If that's not enough, here's a couple more:

Many private surveys have asked questions directly about self-defense gun use. Some general conclusions from these surveys are the following:

(a) more people report a selfdefense gun use against an animal (eg, snakes, dogs) than against a human; (b) police report more total self-defense gun uses than all civilians combined; (c) there are far more illegal gun uses against people than selfreported self-defense uses by them; (d) most reported self-defense gun uses do not occur at home, and relatively few protect children; (e) most of the self-reported selfdefense uses are either ambiguous or socially undesirable.

These surveys belie the notion that most reported self-defense gun uses are legal or socially beneficial. For example, criminology students read all the stories of self-defense gun use in a national firearm survey and rated only 25% as being socially desirable. Criminal court judges from across the United States read the 35 descriptions of the reported self-defense firearm uses from 2 national surveys and found that, even if description of the event was accurate, in most of the cases, the self-defense gun use was probably illegal. Many were arguments that escalated into gun use. ...

What the data do indicate is that much of the self-defense gun use reported on private surveys is inappropriate and socially undesirable. The possibility of
using a gun in a socially useful manner—for example, against a criminal during the commission of a crime—will occur, for the average person, 0 times, or perhaps once in a lifetime. At other times, the use of a gun against another human is socially undesirable. Regular citizens with guns, who are sometimes tired, angry, drunk, or afraid, and who are not trained in dispute resolution, have lots of opportunities for inappropriate gun use. People engage in innumerable annoying and somewhat hostile interactions with each other in the course of a lifetime.

Various studies have examined who typically gets shot by a gun in the home. A study in King County, Washington (which includes Seattle) examined gun
deaths occurring at home from 1978 to 1983 (N = 398). There were 9 total selfprotection homicides (only 2 of intruders). For every self-defense homicide involving a firearm kept in the home, there were 1.3 accidental deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides, and 37 firearm suicides.

A more complete study examined all gunshot injuries (nonfatal as well as fatal) in the home occurring in Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and
Galveston, Texas (1992-1994) in which the gun involved was known to be kept in the home. Home guns were 4 times more likely to be involved in an accident, 7 times more likely to be used in a criminal assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used in an attempted or completed suicide than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

A study of all gunshot injuries in Galveston, Texas, over a 3-year period found only 2 that were related to residential burglary or robbery. In one, the homeowner was shot and killed by a burglar; in the other, the homeowner shot the burglar. During the same interval, guns in the home were involved in the death and injury of more than 100 residents, family members, friends, or acquaintances.

[Bob Juch]

Here's a disturbing fact: In the U.S. almost one child per hour is injured by a gun badly enough to be hospitalized, around 7300 per year.

[silverscreenselect]

Here's a disturbing fact: In the U.S. almost one child per hour is injured by a gun badly enough to be hospitalized, around 7300 per year.

According to BiT, they must have a lack of desire or drive to protect themselves or their family.

[BackInTex]

Here's a disturbing fact: In the U.S. almost one child per hour is injured by a gun badly enough to be hospitalized, around 7300 per year.

According to BiT, they must have a lack of desire or drive to protect themselves or their family.

These stats are a little dated but just to put 7,300 per year in perspective....about 1/3 the number of shopping cart vicitms. But I don't see SSS or BJ crying for a ban or registration of shopping carts. Perhaps we should require licenses to use shopping carts.

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Research--Statis ... d-younger/

•An annual average of 21,600 children 5 years old and younger were treated in US hospital emergency rooms for shopping cart injuries during the years 1985-1996


•There has been a significant increase in the estimated number of these injuries between 1985 and 1996.


•In 1996 there were 22,200 injuries versus 16,900 in 1985.

[Bob Juch]

Here's a disturbing fact: In the U.S. almost one child per hour is injured by a gun badly enough to be hospitalized, around 7300 per year.

According to BiT, they must have a lack of desire or drive to protect themselves or their family.

These stats are a little dated but just to put 7,300 per year in perspective....about 1/3 the number of shopping cart vicitms. But I don't see SSS or BJ crying for a ban or registration of shopping carts. Perhaps we should require licenses to use shopping carts.

http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Research--Statis ... d-younger/

•An annual average of 21,600 children 5 years old and younger were treated in US hospital emergency rooms for shopping cart injuries during the years 1985-1996


•There has been a significant increase in the estimated number of these injuries between 1985 and 1996.


•In 1996 there were 22,200 injuries versus 16,900 in 1985.

I'm not seeking a ban on any non-automatic guns. I'm in favor of mandatory background checks and training before you let someone buy one.

I doubt many shopping cart injuries are nearly as life-threatening as gun injuries.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

I'm not seeking a ban on any non-automatic guns. I'm in favor of mandatory background checks and training before you let someone buy one.

I doubt many shopping cart injuries are nearly as life-threatening as gun injuries.

Are there any automatic guns available for sale to the general public?

You really don't know anything about the seriousness of shopping cart injuries or gun injuries.

[SportsFan68]

I'm not seeking a ban on any non-automatic guns. I'm in favor of mandatory background checks and training before you let someone buy one.

I doubt many shopping cart injuries are nearly as life-threatening as gun injuries.

Are there any automatic guns available for sale to the general public?

You really don't know anything about the seriousness of shopping cart injuries or gun injuries.

I do. MatiasCousin has been injured by a shopping cart and a pistol. The grocery cart resulted in a screaming fit and minor bruise; the pistol injury resulted in a trip to the ER and a lifelong scar.

[Bob Juch]

Are there any automatic guns available for sale to the general public?

Uh, no. That's because they're banned. I'm in favor of that.

You really don't know anything about the seriousness of shopping cart injuries or gun injuries.

Yes I do. I have a brain.

[silverscreenselect]

You really don't know anything about the seriousness of shopping cart injuries or gun injuries.

Yes I do. I have a brain.

More stats from the study I posted, which BiT and TMITSS are too busy setting up straw men to rebut than to actually read:

--Children aged 5 to 14 years in the United States have 11 times the likelihood of being killed accidentally with a gun compared with similarly aged children in other developed countries.

--When 34 injury prevention experts were asked to prioritize home injury hazards for young children, based on frequency, severity, and preventability of the injury, the experts rated access to firearms in the home as the most significant hazard.

--From 2003 to 2007, 33 Americans per day were murdered with guns. This includes almost 1 child (aged 0-14 years), 5 teenagers (aged 15-19 years), and more than 7 young adults (aged 20-24 years) per day. More than two thirds of all homicides in the United States during this period were firearm homicides. The US rate of firearm homicide for children aged 5 to 14 years is 13 times higher than the firearms homicide rate of other developed nations, and our firearms homicide rate for 15- to 24-year-olds is 43 times higher.

--For every fatality from an accidental shooting, there are more than 10 people injured seriously enough in gun accidents to be treated in hospital emergency departments.10 In other words, almost 20 people a day are shot unintentionally but do not die. This number does not include any of the more than 45 people per day who are treated in emergency rooms for BB/pellet gun wounds (2003-2007) or the many others injured by firearms in other ways (eg, powder burns, struck with a firearm, injured by the recoil of a firearm), many unintentionally. One study of nonfatal accidental shootings found that the majority were selfinflicted, most involved handguns, and more than one third of the injuries required hospitalization. Injuries often occurred during fairly routine gun handling—cleaning a gun, loading and unloading, target shooting, and so on.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

How could I not post this. I am not making this up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2ro9xJVp5

EXCLUSIVE: Obama's high school pot dealer who he thanked for the 'good times' was beaten to death with a hammer by his gay lover [the pot dealers's gay lover] after fights over flatulence and drugs

Too good to check

[Spock]

>>>--From 2003 to 2007, 33 Americans per day were murdered with guns. This includes almost 1 child (aged 0-14 years), 5 teenagers (aged 15-19 years), and more than 7 young adults (aged 20-24 years) per day.<<<

The vast majority of the "Teenagers" and "Young Adults" murder victims are not innocent victims. Simply put-they are Gang-Bangers or on the edges of the gangs. If "X" young adult is killed this week-he may have been involved in beating "Y" teenager last week.

[silverscreenselect]

>>>--From 2003 to 2007, 33 Americans per day were murdered with guns. This includes almost 1 child (aged 0-14 years), 5 teenagers (aged 15-19 years), and more than 7 young adults (aged 20-24 years) per day.<<<

The vast majority of the "Teenagers" and "Young Adults" murder victims are not innocent victims. Simply put-they are Gang-Bangers or on the edges of the gangs. If "X" young adult is killed this week-he may have been involved in beating "Y" teenager last week.

Or they were the people who just happened to be nearby and couldn't duck fast enough when the gang bangers start shooting at each other.

A lot of shootings occur as a result of escalation of alterations (some of them drug or alcohol fueled) that would have ended in cursing or fisticuffs otherwise. That doesn't make the victims any less dead. My neighbor Ray got in an argument with another man about his car stereo. He'd be alive today if the other guy didn't have access to a gun. And if Ray had a gun, there might have been two or more dead people instead of one. Guns turn manageable confrontations ugly.