Guns, Guns Guns

The Wild west had stricter gun control laws than we have today.

In 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”

Gun Control Is as Old as the Old Wild West

Contrary to the popular imagination, bearing arms on the frontier was a heavily regulated business

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona is not yet a state. The O.K. Corral is quiet, and it's had an unremarkable existence for the two years it's been standing—although it's about to become famous.

Marshall Virgil Earp, having deputized his brothers Wyatt and Morgan and his pal Doc Holliday, is having a gun control problem. Long-running tensions between the lawmen and a faction of cowboys – represented this morning by Billy Claiborne, the Clanton brothers, and the McLaury brothers – will come to a head over Tombstone's gun law.

The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office.

The “Old West” conjures up all sorts of imagery– such as Tombstone, Deadwood, Dodge City, or Abilene, to name a few. One other thing these cities had in common: strict gun control laws.

Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress. “Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.”

Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

The practice was started in Southern states, which were among the first to enact laws against concealed carry of guns and knives, in the early 1800s. -- The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, points to an 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”
Dodge City in 1878 (Wikimedia Commons)

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona
The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office. (Residents of many famed cattle towns, such as Dodge City, Abilene, and Deadwood, had similar restrictions.)
image: https://public-media.si-cdn.com/filer/7 ... lanton.jpg

"Tombstone had much more restrictive laws on carrying guns in public in the 1880s than it has today,”

Dodge City, Kansas, formed a municipal government in 1878. According to Stephen Aron, a professor of history at UCLA, the first law passed was one prohibiting the carry of guns in town, cultivating a reputation of peace and stability was necessary, even in boisterous towns, if it were to become anything more transient than a one-industry boom town.
Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress.

“Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.” Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

Louisiana, too, upheld an early ban on concealed carry firearms. When a Kentucky court reversed its ban, the state constitution was amended to specify the Kentucky general assembly was within its rights to, in the future, regulate or prohibit concealed carry.

Still, Winkler says, it was an affirmation that regulation was compatible with the Second Amendment. The federal government of the 1800s largely stayed out of gun-law court battles.
“People were allowed to own guns, and everyone did own guns [in the West], for the most part, but when you came into town, you had to either check your guns if you were a visitor or keep your guns at home if you were a resident.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180968013/
Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?
A check? That’s right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you’d check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not. Towns barred anyone but law enforcement from carrying guns in public.
The most common cause of arrest was illegally carrying a firearm. Sheriffs and marshals took gun control seriously.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-win ... 56035.html

Today---Illinois town bans assault weapons, will fine those who keep them
The town of Deerfield, Ill., has moved to ban assault weapons, including the AR-15 used in the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, claiming the measure will make the town more safe from mass shootings.

The ordinance was passed unanimously; "the normative value that assault weapons should have no role or purpose in civil society."

It also takes a swing at a popular reading of the Second Amendment, stating the weapons are "not reasonably necessary to protect an individual's right of self-defense" or to preserve a well-regulated militia.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 488987002/
Chicago suburb bans assault weapons in response to Parkland shooting

Chicago suburb this week took the aggressive step of banning assault weapons within its borders, in what local officials said was a direct response to the mass shooting at a Parkland, Fla., high school earlier this year.

Officials in Deerfield, Ill., unanimously approved the ordinance, which prohibits the possession, manufacture or sale of a range of firearms, as well as large-capacity magazines. Residents of the 19,000-person village have until June 13 to remove the guns from village limits or face up to $1,000 per day in fines.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... db16134355

Seattle will require gun owners to lock up their firearms, after the City Council voted unanimously Monday to pass legislation proposed by Mayor Jenny Durkan.

Starting 180 days after Durkan signs the legislation, it will be a civil infraction to store a gun without the firearm being secured in a locked container.

The legislation will apply only to guns kept somewhere, rather than those carried by or under the control of their owners.
Also under the legislation, it will be a civil infraction when an owner knows or should know that a minor, “at-risk person” or unauthorized user is likely to access a gun and such a person actually does access the weapon.

legislation allows fines up to $500 when a gun isn’t locked up, up to $1,000 when a prohibited person accesses a firearm and up to $10,000 when a prohibited person uses the weapon to hurt someone or commit a crime.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... attle-law/

chuckpeterson wrote:The Wild west had stricter gun control laws than we have today.

In 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”

Gun Control Is as Old as the Old Wild West

Contrary to the popular imagination, bearing arms on the frontier was a heavily regulated business

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona is not yet a state. The O.K. Corral is quiet, and it's had an unremarkable existence for the two years it's been standing—although it's about to become famous.

Marshall Virgil Earp, having deputized his brothers Wyatt and Morgan and his pal Doc Holliday, is having a gun control problem. Long-running tensions between the lawmen and a faction of cowboys – represented this morning by Billy Claiborne, the Clanton brothers, and the McLaury brothers – will come to a head over Tombstone's gun law.

The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office.

The “Old West” conjures up all sorts of imagery– such as Tombstone, Deadwood, Dodge City, or Abilene, to name a few. One other thing these cities had in common: strict gun control laws.

Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress. “Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.”

Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

The practice was started in Southern states, which were among the first to enact laws against concealed carry of guns and knives, in the early 1800s. -- The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, points to an 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”
Dodge City in 1878 (Wikimedia Commons)

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona
The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office. (Residents of many famed cattle towns, such as Dodge City, Abilene, and Deadwood, had similar restrictions.)
image: https://public-media.si-cdn.com/filer/7 ... lanton.jpg

"Tombstone had much more restrictive laws on carrying guns in public in the 1880s than it has today,”

Dodge City, Kansas, formed a municipal government in 1878. According to Stephen Aron, a professor of history at UCLA, the first law passed was one prohibiting the carry of guns in town, cultivating a reputation of peace and stability was necessary, even in boisterous towns, if it were to become anything more transient than a one-industry boom town.
Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress.

“Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.” Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

Louisiana, too, upheld an early ban on concealed carry firearms. When a Kentucky court reversed its ban, the state constitution was amended to specify the Kentucky general assembly was within its rights to, in the future, regulate or prohibit concealed carry.

Still, Winkler says, it was an affirmation that regulation was compatible with the Second Amendment. The federal government of the 1800s largely stayed out of gun-law court battles.
“People were allowed to own guns, and everyone did own guns [in the West], for the most part, but when you came into town, you had to either check your guns if you were a visitor or keep your guns at home if you were a resident.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180968013/
Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?
A check? That’s right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you’d check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not. Towns barred anyone but law enforcement from carrying guns in public.
The most common cause of arrest was illegally carrying a firearm. Sheriffs and marshals took gun control seriously.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-win ... 56035.html

Today---Illinois town bans assault weapons, will fine those who keep them
The town of Deerfield, Ill., has moved to ban assault weapons, including the AR-15 used in the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, claiming the measure will make the town more safe from mass shootings.

The ordinance was passed unanimously; "the normative value that assault weapons should have no role or purpose in civil society."

It also takes a swing at a popular reading of the Second Amendment, stating the weapons are "not reasonably necessary to protect an individual's right of self-defense" or to preserve a well-regulated militia.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 488987002/
Chicago suburb bans assault weapons in response to Parkland shooting

Chicago suburb this week took the aggressive step of banning assault weapons within its borders, in what local officials said was a direct response to the mass shooting at a Parkland, Fla., high school earlier this year.

Officials in Deerfield, Ill., unanimously approved the ordinance, which prohibits the possession, manufacture or sale of a range of firearms, as well as large-capacity magazines. Residents of the 19,000-person village have until June 13 to remove the guns from village limits or face up to $1,000 per day in fines.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... db16134355

Seattle will require gun owners to lock up their firearms, after the City Council voted unanimously Monday to pass legislation proposed by Mayor Jenny Durkan.

Starting 180 days after Durkan signs the legislation, it will be a civil infraction to store a gun without the firearm being secured in a locked container.

The legislation will apply only to guns kept somewhere, rather than those carried by or under the control of their owners.
Also under the legislation, it will be a civil infraction when an owner knows or should know that a minor, “at-risk person” or unauthorized user is likely to access a gun and such a person actually does access the weapon.

legislation allows fines up to $500 when a gun isn’t locked up, up to $1,000 when a prohibited person accesses a firearm and up to $10,000 when a prohibited person uses the weapon to hurt someone or commit a crime.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... attle-law/

Why are you trolling this forum?

You show no interest in Weber's writings.

chuckpeterson wrote:The Wild west had stricter gun control laws than we have today.

In 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”

Gun Control Is as Old as the Old Wild West

Contrary to the popular imagination, bearing arms on the frontier was a heavily regulated business

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona is not yet a state. The O.K. Corral is quiet, and it's had an unremarkable existence for the two years it's been standing—although it's about to become famous.

Marshall Virgil Earp, having deputized his brothers Wyatt and Morgan and his pal Doc Holliday, is having a gun control problem. Long-running tensions between the lawmen and a faction of cowboys – represented this morning by Billy Claiborne, the Clanton brothers, and the McLaury brothers – will come to a head over Tombstone's gun law.

The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office.

The “Old West” conjures up all sorts of imagery– such as Tombstone, Deadwood, Dodge City, or Abilene, to name a few. One other thing these cities had in common: strict gun control laws.

Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress. “Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.”

Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

The practice was started in Southern states, which were among the first to enact laws against concealed carry of guns and knives, in the early 1800s. -- The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, points to an 1840 Alabama court that, in upholding its state ban, ruled it was a state's right to regulate where and how a citizen could carry, and that the state constitution's allowance of personal firearms “is not to bear arms upon all occasions and in all places.”
Dodge City in 1878 (Wikimedia Commons)

It's October 26, 1881, in Tombstone, and Arizona
The laws of Tombstone at the time required visitors, upon entering town to disarm, either at a hotel or a lawman's office. (Residents of many famed cattle towns, such as Dodge City, Abilene, and Deadwood, had similar restrictions.)
image: https://public-media.si-cdn.com/filer/7 ... lanton.jpg

"Tombstone had much more restrictive laws on carrying guns in public in the 1880s than it has today,”

Dodge City, Kansas, formed a municipal government in 1878. According to Stephen Aron, a professor of history at UCLA, the first law passed was one prohibiting the carry of guns in town, cultivating a reputation of peace and stability was necessary, even in boisterous towns, if it were to become anything more transient than a one-industry boom town.
Laws regulating ownership and carry of firearms, apart from the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, were passed at a local level rather than by Congress.

“Gun control laws were adopted pretty quickly in these places,” says Winkler. “Most were adopted by municipal governments exercising self-control and self-determination.” Carrying any kind of weapon, guns or knives, was not allowed other than outside town borders and inside the home. When visitors left their weapons with a law officer upon entering town, they'd receive a token, like a coat check, which they'd exchange for their guns when leaving town.

Louisiana, too, upheld an early ban on concealed carry firearms. When a Kentucky court reversed its ban, the state constitution was amended to specify the Kentucky general assembly was within its rights to, in the future, regulate or prohibit concealed carry.

Still, Winkler says, it was an affirmation that regulation was compatible with the Second Amendment. The federal government of the 1800s largely stayed out of gun-law court battles.
“People were allowed to own guns, and everyone did own guns [in the West], for the most part, but when you came into town, you had to either check your guns if you were a visitor or keep your guns at home if you were a resident.”
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180968013/
Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?
A check? That’s right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you’d check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not. Towns barred anyone but law enforcement from carrying guns in public.
The most common cause of arrest was illegally carrying a firearm. Sheriffs and marshals took gun control seriously.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-win ... 56035.html

Today---Illinois town bans assault weapons, will fine those who keep them
The town of Deerfield, Ill., has moved to ban assault weapons, including the AR-15 used in the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, claiming the measure will make the town more safe from mass shootings.

The ordinance was passed unanimously; "the normative value that assault weapons should have no role or purpose in civil society."

It also takes a swing at a popular reading of the Second Amendment, stating the weapons are "not reasonably necessary to protect an individual's right of self-defense" or to preserve a well-regulated militia.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 488987002/
Chicago suburb bans assault weapons in response to Parkland shooting

Chicago suburb this week took the aggressive step of banning assault weapons within its borders, in what local officials said was a direct response to the mass shooting at a Parkland, Fla., high school earlier this year.

Officials in Deerfield, Ill., unanimously approved the ordinance, which prohibits the possession, manufacture or sale of a range of firearms, as well as large-capacity magazines. Residents of the 19,000-person village have until June 13 to remove the guns from village limits or face up to $1,000 per day in fines.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... db16134355

Seattle will require gun owners to lock up their firearms, after the City Council voted unanimously Monday to pass legislation proposed by Mayor Jenny Durkan.

Starting 180 days after Durkan signs the legislation, it will be a civil infraction to store a gun without the firearm being secured in a locked container.

The legislation will apply only to guns kept somewhere, rather than those carried by or under the control of their owners.
Also under the legislation, it will be a civil infraction when an owner knows or should know that a minor, “at-risk person” or unauthorized user is likely to access a gun and such a person actually does access the weapon.

legislation allows fines up to $500 when a gun isn’t locked up, up to $1,000 when a prohibited person accesses a firearm and up to $10,000 when a prohibited person uses the weapon to hurt someone or commit a crime.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... attle-law/

The Earps set themselves up as law enforcement to protect their gambling and prostitution businesses. Armed customers could be a threat to their corruption.

Most of the 1800s vintage gun laws were intended to disarm either native Americans or freed African Americans. The infamous Dredd Scott decision held that Blacks should not be recognized as citizens because doing so would empower them to bear arms just like the slave masters.

It's not the type of weapon that is the issue, it's where and when you have them.
I want---
[1] background checks (prevents criminals from buying)
[2] seven (7) day waiting period before the gun store can give you the weapon. (giving the person time to cool off if the purchase is based on anger)
[3] provide a valid home address
[4] illegal to carry a firearm in public places

Any objections-?

chuckpeterson wrote:[1] background checks (prevents criminals from buying)

...no, it simply makes it slightly harder for criminals to get guns.
The problem isn't the supply, it's the demand. For some time, the use of guns in robberies was met with mandatory extended jail terms in the UK, causing criminals to default to knives and other non-projectile weapons as they didn't want to die of old age in a cell. When this was revoked, the number of guns in use by criminals rose dramatically.
Make is so that the use of guns in a crime (even if not fired) carries a (well publicized and non-appeal-able) harsh penalty and the demand will drop.

[2] seven (7) day waiting period before the gun store can give you the weapon. (giving the person time to cool off if the purchase is based on anger)

Agreed. Time to think things over is usually a good thing.

[3] provide a valid home address

...and I can hear the outcries now from those whose culture means that they are constantly travelling between places. In the UK, we have two notable groups of said people, the Gypsies (who have their own code of honor and keep their word) and the Irish Travelers (who have an unfortunately deserved reputation for committing crimes and leaving campsites piled high with debris that includes human waste). I'm sure America has some of its own traveler-equivalents and once you take renters/seasonal workers into account... yeah...

[4] illegal to carry a firearm in public places

Again, problematic. If you have a cop wanting to get arrest bonuses, what's to stop him lurking outside a Gunsmith's and arresting anyone walking from their car with a pistol that needs a replacement spring?
Add the word loaded to that point and things will be a lot less contentious, especially if in order to prove it, one is required to point said gun at their own foot.
You may also wish to let law enforcement personnel skip that final point (at least, when they're on duty...)

chuckpeterson wrote:Seattle will require gun owners to lock up their firearms, after the City Council voted unanimously Monday to pass legislation proposed by Mayor Jenny Durkan.

Starting 180 days after Durkan signs the legislation, it will be a civil infraction to store a gun without the firearm being secured in a locked container.

And the violent criminals breaking into your house are just going to wait while you unlock your gun safe. There are even stupider proposals to require you to have two safes, one for your guns and one for your ammunition.

If you need a gun for self-defense, you need it NOW, not in five minutes. Or even two minutes.

chuckpeterson wrote:[1] background checks (prevents criminals from buying)

Ineffective. Yes, they can prevent convicted criminals from buying guns legally, but most criminals hand Pedro The Pusher a few hundred bucks and get a gun on the spot.

Rather than trying to keep the guns away from the criminals, why not keep the criminals away from the guns? Keep them in jail where they belong!

chuckpeterson wrote:[2] seven (7) day waiting period before the gun store can give you the weapon. (giving the person time to cool off if the purchase is based on anger)

A woman’s abusive ex-husband broke into her apartment, beat and raped her. The next day, she reluctantly bought a gun, but was not allowed to actually have the gun until after the 15 day waiting period. The ex-husband made bail, broke into her apartment again and beat her almost to death. Do you think she had enough time to ‘cool off’?

Crimes involving guns are already illegal. Instead of passing more laws that will only hurt the innocent, why not enforce the existing laws, and impose the full penalties? And stop letting violent criminals out on parole because they didn’t commit any crimes in jail.
———————————
You can't have the government take away the freedom of only the people you don't like.

Imaginos1892 wrote:A woman’s abusive ex-husband broke into her apartment, beat and raped her. The next day, she reluctantly bought a gun, but was not allowed to actually have the gun until after the 15 day waiting period. The ex-husband made bail, broke into her apartment again and beat her almost to death. Do you think she had enough time to ‘cool off’?
———————————
You can't have the government take away the freedom of only the people you don't like.

Anecdotal. If I would draw any conclusions from it, it's that it's a consequence of a broken society that fails to protect its citizens.

Joat42 wrote:Anecdotal.

I'm sure that's a lot of comfort to the people these 'anecdotes' happen to. Or the next woman who's caught in that situation.

Why not just get serious about prosecuting criminals who shoot at people?

In the community where I live, a seventy something year old man became so irate at his landlord's attempt to evict him for installing a very large scale, unlicensed and unregulated marijunna grow that was illegal under State as well as Federal law that he fired two rounds from a 12 gauge shotgun at his landlord's children. The observations by the victims was that singular projectiles impacted about 10 feet from them after being fired from a range of 100 yards. The implication was that he was shooting shotgun slugs, about six to ten times the mass of a bullet from an AR-15 with about ten times the wounding capacity. The money quote from the recorded police interview is the psychopathic pot plantationist's bitch wife lamenting, "we're old. We don't have time to shoot at children." My heart bleeds for them.

An idiot Judge subsequently refused the landlord's petition to evict based on the reasoning that the previous efforts to evict for the 300+ plant capacity marijunna grow had been harassment. Perhaps the judge was distracted by the concurrent proceedings by the bar association against his wife who had committed perjury by denying under oath that she had indulged in a year long affair with one of her subordinates while she was a US Attorney? Perhaps Amanda Marshall gave her husband a dose of syphyllus that penicillin can not cure which is rotting his brain?

Less than a week after the Judge refused the eviction, one of the marijunna bootlegger's drinking buddies shot a young man outside of the local pizza parlor. Richard Mershon was also old, but he had plenty of time to shoot at children. Ditto for Frederick Hopkins, but he shot police officers.

At the criminal trial for reckless endangerment and menancing rather than attempted murder, the psychopathic pot plantationist's lawyer put the guy's grandson on the witness stand as a "firearms expert." He was allegedly an authority on guns because he was in the USMC before being discharged because of a brain injury then worked in a gun shop before being fired after some 100 AR-15s were stolen. This "gun expert" testified in support of the Elmer Fudd defense. "Grandpa couldn't have been firing slugs. He has a full choke barrel on his shotgun. Firing slugs would cause the barrel to explode, just like what happens to Elmer Fudd when Buggs Bunny sticks a carrot in the muzzle of his shotgun." Everyone is invited to peruse the Wikipedia article on shotgun slugs aswell as the article from the FBI publication CRIME LAB DIGEST which is the primary reference. A jury swallowed this bull shit hook, line and sinker.

Imaginos1892 wrote:

Joat42 wrote:Anecdotal.

I'm sure that's a lot of comfort to the people these 'anecdotes' happen to. Or the next woman who's caught in that situation.

Or gets shot by her husband...

You are using the typical "but think about the children" argument but have replaced children with women.

Just some facts for you:

• The U.S. General Accounting Office estimated that 31 percent of accidental deaths caused by firearms might be prevented with the addition of two devices: a child-proof safety lock and a loading indicator.
• Approximately one of three handguns guns is kept loaded and unlocked and most children know where their parents keep their guns.
• More than 75 percent of first and second graders know where their parents keep their firearms and 36 percent admitted handling the weapons, contradicting their parents’ reports.
• Among children, the majority (89%) of unintentional shooting deaths occur in the home. Most of these deaths occur when children are playing with a loaded gun in their parent’s absence.
• Those people that die from accidental shooting were more than three times as likely to have had a firearm in their home as those in the control group.
• Domestic violence is more likely to turn deadly with a gun in the home. An abusive partner’s access to a firearm increases the risk of homicide eight-fold for women in physically abusive relationships.
• Women who owned a gun died by firearm homicide at twice the rates of women who didn't.
• More than 80 percent of guns used by youth in suicide attempts were kept in the home of the victim, a relative, or a friend.

Now, do you have statistics on how many women who purchased a gun successfully protected themselves from an abusive spouse by using the aforementioned gun and does it outweigh any other factors?