Hardcore Sledder banner

121 - 125 of 125 Posts

487 Posts
the C&R license is simply the first step towards obtaining an automatic weapon and the 200 dollar, non refundable tax stamp application is not even a drop in the bucket of the cost of actually purchasing one.
and while i dont know how your state laws work in this regard, i can assure you that this state will not give out the license to anyone other than law enforcement.
As I quite clearly stated in my post that here in Minnesota any legally eligible resident can own a C&R automatic weapon by paying the $200 tax stamp with the application through the ATF. You don't even need a C&R license to own one. The C&R license just makes it easier to transport the weapon. Usually about a six week waiting period. When it is approved you pay the owner and the weapon is legally transferred to you. Several of my WW2 Historical reenactment friends here in Minnesota owned full auto weapons. This was in the 90's and those weapons were far cheaper. Now the cost is very high to own one. What was $1,700 then can be $15,000 now or more. Again what is the issue if no crime has ever been committed in Minnesota with one of these legally owned firearms?

1,325 Posts
Discussion Starter #122
HMMMMMMM, after all this time, still no answer to my question. Guess even the haters can't hate a citizen owning his own handgun legally and saving their child.

The Meat Man
15,697 Posts
Soooo, a few carry. A few don't like firearms. A few have them. My question had nothing to do with if you liked them or not, but like a typical troll you have to start crap.Since you did answer this. So to you i ask one more question. If i were a teacher and had a handgun in my locked briefcase and i have a CCP would you want me fired? Now if a shooter came in and your child was in my class and i shot and killed the shooter, would you still want me fired for saving your childs life and every child in my classroom?
My question is who hates firearms? I just don't need one. :rolleyes:

I have been thinking of getting this party favor.


1,866 Posts
And for the record, guns kill more people than cars.

Guns kill more people than Auto/Truck accidents?? I think not:

There are almost 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.0000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:

• 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws. (Men more so than women)
• 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
• 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
• 3% are accidental discharge deaths

So technically, "gun violence" is not almost 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
• 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago in 2015 (701 in 2016)
• 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore in 2015
. 302 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit in 2016
• 135 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. in 2016 (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals and thinking that criminal wills obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.

But what about other deaths each year?
• 60,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
• 36,000 people die in some years from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
• 40,200 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

Now it gets good:
• 250,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital! (John's Hopkins)

• 611,000 people die per year from heart disease. (CDC) It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement had focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.....Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns?

Hey Caddylover, how did that crow taste? Did you really think nobody would call you out on your lies? You Canadians need to learn to stay out of our business. We don't care what you think.
121 - 125 of 125 Posts