Town Square

Lieber to host public forum on gun control

Original post made on Jan 25, 2013

A community forum on gun control is slated to take place at 1:30 p.m. on Sunday, Jan. 27, at Mountain View City Hall. The public discussion is being organized by former state Assemblywoman Sally Lieber.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, January 25, 2013, 1:32 PM


Posted by vfree, a resident of Waverly Park
on Jan 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm

Sounds like a facist indoctrination, meant to build fear among the dumb masses of Mountain View. Better get a bigger venue.

Posted by bfree, a resident of Waverly Park
on Jan 25, 2013 at 2:48 pm

"says her goal is to demystify the current conversation"

Somehow I doubt that; when people realize they are being fed propaganda they start thinking for themselves. There has been very little honesty on either side of this issue.

Posted by Old Ben, a resident of Shoreline West
on Jan 25, 2013 at 2:51 pm

In nearly all of these spree killings and school shootings over the last twenty years, the perpetrator has turned out to be on or withdrawing from SSRI antidepressants. I'll post a list if you want, but it is very long.

Guns aren't the problem. Drugs are: prescription drugs.

Ban SSRIs.

Posted by Mars Biggles, a resident of Monta Loma
on Jan 25, 2013 at 2:57 pm

AB 50 banned .50 caliber target rifles. There was no qualification of "assault" in the legislation. The ban passed the senate despite testimony that no crime has ever been committed with such a rifle, and no agency considered it a threat in terrorist hands. An entire sport (long-distance metal plate shooting) was virtually wiped out in California, and one of the premier manufacturers of rifles moved to Nevada. The rifles weigh 20lbs., cost $5000 and $5 a round to shoot. I feel saver knowing the gangs of Mountain View won't be packing that kind of heat. Good Job solving a non-problem Lieber.

Posted by Steve, a resident of Sylvan Park
on Jan 25, 2013 at 3:01 pm

Just when you thought it was safe again.... SHE'S BACK!

Posted by the_punnisher, a resident of Whisman Station
on Jan 25, 2013 at 3:02 pm

More " baaas " from the sheeple. Your sheeple are like when two wolves and a lamb are discussing what's for dinner..Our sheeple have the 2nd Amendment RIGHT to open carry and is also part of the dialog...

Guess which sheeple will last the longest....

That Aurora Theater owners are now being SUED for posting a notice that disarmed it's citizens and did not provide security to protect them. I'll bet M$M ISN'T covering these stories..

Aurora is a version of East Palo Alto in the Denver Metro Area.

The word RESPONSIBILITY is not paired with the word RIGHT these days. That is the missing element in the solution, not more laws and infringement on our Constitution. The advice on how to properly handle and store all weapons ( which are just TOOLS ) is out in the public eye. You can be a proper SHEEPDOG with education.

You don't like to see guns in public? how about YOU move to China, North Korea and anywhere your soon to be masters are the only people who wear guns....and often use them on their sheeple...

Posted by bfree, a resident of Waverly Park
on Jan 25, 2013 at 3:28 pm

Funniest thing about that 50 cal ban was Barret's response when the LA police dept sent one in for servicing (Web Link). Call me cynical, but I don't think more laws are the answer to this problem.

Posted by Christopher Parkinson, a resident of Willowgate
on Jan 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm

Its quite simple. The 2nd amendment is for a local militias with muskets and bayonets to keep England out. Well I think the 2nd amendment is archaic because I cannot remember the last time England represented a threat. They are an ally. I am all for our constitution, but this amendment needs to be merely historical and take it off the books.

Australia outlawed guns and the violent crimes plummeted. Take the guns away and crooks have no gun to use. I do not fear the government repressing us, I fear my neighbors gun in the hands of a criminal because he forgot to lock it up.

Posted by steve, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 25, 2013 at 4:14 pm

The issue for Californians firearms owners is not the absurd Feinstein gun control bill, but rather the even more absurd bills being proposed in our state assembly. Some of these amount to gun confiscation, and with the one party system we now have in power (I am no fan of either party), they are almost all sure to pass.

You can pass all the laws you want to limit the number of rounds in magazines, or the types of firearms available. The fact remains that a determined individual will find a way to either obtain them or they will find alternative and potentially far more destructive ways to achieve their nefarious goals - for example Timothy Mcveigh

The irony is that this whole focus on supposed "Assault Weapons" (a ridiculous definition in and of itself), is that in terms of overall gun violence, let alone violence, these weapons are involved in a minuscule number of incidents. As I have written before, per FBI statistics, more people were killed in California by hands, feet, and fists than by all kinds of rifle by a large margin.

Guns like anything else can be used for good or evil. For example, they are used hundreds of thousands of time per year for self-defense in the United States. They can also be used to commit crimes; however, criminals by definition are not too concerned with magazine or firearm type limitations

Let's not also forget, that as tragic as they are, almost 60% of gun deaths are suicides.

Now this is not to say that we should not have any gun control measures in place. There is in fact a lot we can do. For example: comprehensive background checks including mental health, mandatory training, certification and frequent recertification for concealed carry permits, strict enforcement of gun crimes such as straw man purchases etc are probably more effective than regulating the capacity of a magazine or types of firearm that are available.

Posted by steve, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 25, 2013 at 4:36 pm

@Christopher Parkinson

The 2nd Amendment was not about keeping England out. It is part of the Bill of Rights which guarantees a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the individual.

The founding fathers' position on firearms in society were quite clear. Here are some quotes:

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764. That was 230 years ago. -Thomas Jefferson

"The constitutions of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property and freedom of the press." Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.-Thomas Jefferson

The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. – Samuel Adams

Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. – James Madison

Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? - Patrick Henry

We should not forget that the spark which ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate the firearms of the colonists. - Patrick Henry

In regards to your example of Australia. The number of incidents of unlawfully discharged firearms more than doubled from 1995 to 2001 but by 2011 was 24% lower than it had been in 1995 indicating that the 1996 gun laws instigated by John Howard had no immediate impact on serious gun crime, and bring into question that they had any direct effect on gun crime at all.

We could also look at Mexico which has not only some of the strictest gun laws, but also has absurdly strict knife laws. No one can argue that these laws are working. An argument is made that many of the guns in the cartel hands are from the United States. This is actually inaccurate. Many of the firearms are true military assault rifles funneled in from Guatemala - this includes grenades and other heavier weapons.

The fact of the matter is that the United States is not Australia, it's not Mexico, it's not Japan, and it's not Europe. It has its own unique culture, and firearms are an integral part of that culture. Personally, I think that an armed populace is a tremendous check on government power. History is replete with usurped democracies.

Posted by Greg David, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 25, 2013 at 5:45 pm

Well spoken Steve!

I wish I had the time to write more on the subject, but I'm too busy selling guns to law abiding citizens...

Posted by Ted, a resident of Rex Manor
on Jan 25, 2013 at 5:57 pm

Why can't she just go away quietly? Is it because she just wants to make a living telling everyone how she thinks we ought to live and behave and what to value and not?

Posted by eric, a resident of another community
on Jan 25, 2013 at 10:00 pm

Welcome to Mtn View, gun nut trolls! Enjoy the message board.

If you spew this sort of vitriol over a discussion-- a forum-- where someone might oppose your views, what does that say about the value of your opinion?

Posted by Old Ben, a resident of Shoreline West
on Jan 26, 2013 at 4:31 am

Isn't this Sally Lieber the same person who tried to make spanking your child a crime?

Posted by bfree, a resident of Waverly Park
on Jan 26, 2013 at 4:33 am

speak for yourself Eric - you sound more like a troll than anyone else posting here.

Posted by Otto Maddox, a resident of Monta Loma
on Jan 26, 2013 at 7:57 am

I own guns to defend myself and others. It's really that simple.

I have that right. It's a CIVIL RIGHT too. Don't forget that.

And the arguments going all the way back to the founders need to stop. The United States Supreme Court has brought the discussion into modern times finally. In 2008 and 2010 they told us there is no militia connection and we are all responsible for our own protection.

It's not the job of anyone else to protect us. That's one point I've neve hard gun-control advocates acknowledge.

While no right is absolute we are still talking about an enumerated right. Ultimately the Constitution will have to be amended to make guns illegal in this country.

Good luck with that one.

Posted by Diane, a resident of North Whisman
on Jan 26, 2013 at 8:09 am

The problem is people like Lieber will make as many parts and features as possible of a gun illegal to the point that every legal owner and law-abiding citizen will be treated as a criminal for having purchased a gun in the past, present or future. The only people with guns will be those that don't pay any heed to the law, i.e., criminals, who will prey on the rest of us.

Posted by Political Insider, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 26, 2013 at 7:20 pm

No big surprises here for Ms. Lieber. Its always about her and pandering to special interest groups.

Nice comments from Steve. Most of this gun control stuff is irrational because people think they have to do something that they have little control over. Banning is just an over-reaction. There will always be a small group of people that will mis-use things in a criminal manner, but we dont ban them.

Posted by Richard , a resident of Shoreline West
on Jan 27, 2013 at 12:33 am

Steve really hit the nail on the head and when you have a tragedy like the Sand Hook people immediately want to have a ban put into place and the government really has no other choice but to respond in some way or another. In a way I can understand how some of these people might think because people are always afraid of things that they don't know about. I am not a gun owner but since I was a young kid I was always been exposed to guns and was on the rifle team in high school in Los Angeles and still love to go target shooting.
The problem is guns aren't the problem, it's people and no matter what kind of restrictions you implement there are always going to be people out there that are unstable and snap and there is no ban that's going to cure that problem. So you restrict the number of rounds you can have in a clip so God forbid it happens again but the next person will just take more magazines.
I lost my son in Afghanistan in 2011 and let me tell you I cried the day the Sandy Hook shooting took place because I could feel those parents pain but at least my son was killed in combat and that can be justified but not what happened there. We do have a lot of people in this country that collect and own guns, and there are varying reasons why but if the truth be told it's because a lot of them are scared. Some may say the lines are a little blurred between being prepared and being scared but regardless of the reason most are law abiding citizens that are within their right to own their guns. As far as any back round checks are concerned, I could be wrong but I doubt that most people that have committed these random mass shootings were listed as being mentally ill or have anything that would've popped up on anyone's radar. There really is no way to stop someone from going into a school or theater and start killing people if that's what they are bent on doing but what we can do is to have at least have armed security to at least try to fight fire with fire.

Posted by Chris Parkinson, a resident of Willowgate
on Jan 28, 2013 at 3:34 pm

For all of you who own guns, and feel the right to such a violent society, good luck to you. If your gun is ever used in a crime, I will remember your words. As Bill Maher puts it very well, Gun Owners are people with no sex (Paraphrased, you can use your own imagination) parts, they are people who as they get older, their guns get bigger.

We need to divest ourselves of the military industrial machine. Clinton did it and look at our economy and national debt. Bush and the like minded military industrial complex pushed up this war cry, and for what, nothing in the end but one stupid Saudi dead and a few in prison. We could have done better. In the end the Bush machine pushed the government credit card through the roof and in the process created a society of fear mongers Glen Beck and the like.

I could care less actually, but with the escalation of sick people having access to guns (they might just steal yours)that shoot as our best in the military do, we are literately the only nation in the world with this issue. Mexico is a plague of drama minds and dramatic violence. They need to fix their own problems. I might also point out the majority of violence is from American Made AK47's weapons not Kalashnikov rifles as one would assume. The Israeli made UZI but there I am wrong, we are just like Israel, the difference the Israelis' walk around with these automatic weapons. The violence in the middle east is deafening.

The good news is the gun owners are a minority, the police can feel comforted in that. I have one brother who used his gun once a week as a cop, and a brother in-law is retired sheriff in LA County and never discharged his gun in one of the most violent counties in the west (yes I am well protected by friendly relatives). Dan Gates on the other hand was like my brother. And don't tell me about guns, I had my fill with them in my misspent youth.

I mined sapphires with a friend Kevin some 30 years ago, and a group of young and old white men who looked all the same and from Deliverance (yes caring rifles and hand guns) one day came to visit Kevin and I. We were on BLM land but because we were successful in pulling ore out of the ground, these Deliverance cousins were going to get rid of us. Kevin and I and his wonder pit-bull terrier Zeke were in a pit we had dug to mine and had our 44 mag's aiming at them. I yelled out for calm heads to prevail. Among the group was a cousin who was a deputy Sheriff. He calmed everyone down because I told him and everyone there, it was a good day to die, and we were in a pit with many loaded guns and bullets and they weren't. In the end cool head did prevail, not a shot was heard. They were pissed off we had trespassed on their air. They had patented all the stream beds and we crossed one by hoping over the stupid 1 foot trickle. We said fine, we'll pack our bags and leave. We had pulled out hundreds of sapphires and a couple of nice rubies I still have. I made a nice ring for my wife out of one of the sapphires. Remember that the next time you buy her something nice.

I'll never forget those days being face to face with death, yes those guns saved our lives, but when was the last time any of you went sapphire mining. I would also bring a gun with my in the Klondike. Nothing getting a grizzly bear on your scent. But we do not live in the Klondike. As far as fear of crime. I am a graduate with my masters ready to teach. In Mt. View we have the Khan Academy. In there is the pedagogy method of teaching that has proven to work. You want to get rid of crime give people brains and give them hope. We did it in the Clinton years, murder almost dropped off the radar. Since 9/11 crime, torture, and now horrid gun violence has been our mindset. Get over it, grow up, and go through life with no fear. 9/11 is over, the need for Clinton progressive strategies is here. In the end what are you really afraid of that you must own a gun? I think its the irrational fear of death.

Posted by Sparty, a resident of Cuesta Park
on Jan 28, 2013 at 4:00 pm

has sally been on vacation on another planet?

hundreds of shootings and murders of people in Oakland, San Jose, Richmond, San Francisco, etc. over the last few years.

And she is blind to them all. Guess she only is moved to act when Caucasians die.

Posted by John M., a resident of Cuernavaca
on Jan 28, 2013 at 4:48 pm

The second amendment does not give the right to own guns, it is the right to bear arms.
That means that we can all own guns- as well as an M47 Patton tank like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Posted by the_punnisher, a resident of Whisman Station
on Jan 28, 2013 at 4:56 pm

Still a lot of sheeple bleating. The issue about sex/guns is a Freudian misconception that the truly ignorant people still use that shows stupidity along with ignorance. Just ignore and don't feed the trolls.

For the guy bragging about the "pacifist way " his TRESPASSING cause a confrontation, YOUR behavior instigated the confrontation in the first place! You are technically guilty of an admitted theft of property and you blow off your "little problem. "

Since we are playing " show and tell ", I'll tell you about several incidents on our acreage in Northern WI. Every year, our POSTED property is visited by plenty of CHICAGO out of towners during hunting season. Like our ENTITLEMENT PRESIDENT, these wannabe deer killers ( many don't want the meat, just a trophy head )figure since they pay an out of state license fee, THEY CAN HUNT WHEREVER THEY WANT IN WISCONSIN!!!

Unfortunately, when someone tries to get them off their POSTED NO TRESPASSING land, several times they just wave their guns and say " make us ".

After a deputy takes another hour out of his patrol time in our county to give them the bum's rush, they usually load themselves back into their Illinois plated trucks and try the same thing in another county.

I see this no different than a armed gang of thieves trying doors in a neighborhood to hit the jackpot out in Mtn.View.


If you don't believe this, do your own search. It is not hard to find out about the sickening details...

That is the primary reason I call the unarmed sheeple. When the Big One hits, a lot of sheeple will get slaughtered by the criminal element AKA the wolves debating with the sheep over what's for dinner.

While you are doing the SCOTUS research, take a look at the Colorado Springs crime stats.S C.S. is only a bit down I-25 from Castle Rock... You quickly find out why the burglars/locked door thieves would rather choose Denver to try their luck.

Go ahead, ask your local PD about the SCOTUS ruling.

Posted by steve, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:31 pm

@Chris Parkinson

Firstly, given that you are by your own claims a graduate degree holder, one would think that you would know better than to engage in vulgar ad hominem attacks.

Secondly, while we can certainly debate the influence of the military industrial complex in US politics, it is hardly the point here.

Finally, while firearm usage in Mexico is not directly related to the 2nd Amendment, supposed firearms trafficking from the US to Mexico is a canard often used by gun control advocates as a basis for attacking the 2nd Amendment - Notwithstanding the fact that our own government has been merrily engaged in arming the cartels with their misguided gun walking operations spanning two administrations.

You state that: "The majority of violence is from American Made AK47's weapons not Kalashnikov rifles as one would assume". This is factually incorrect.

The problem is that the statistics used to claim that the majority of the firearms in cartel hands are from the US are based on only part of the truth.

Each year, the Mexican government submits firearms to the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) for tracing. In 2008 they submitted 7,200 firearms to the ATF. Of the 4,000 that the ATF could trace, 3,480 or 87% were from the US. That is where the large numbers we often hear comes from.

However that number hardly tells the whole story.

According to the GAO about 30,000 firearms were seized by Mexican authorities from criminals in 2008. So the 3,480 traced by the ATF actually represents 12 percent of the total, and less than 48 percent of the 7,200 submitted to the ATF for tracing. So essentially about 90% of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.

The remaining 22,800 firearms seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were not traced for a variety of reasons. For example, Mexican authorities simply don't bother to submit some classes of weapons for tracing. Such weapons include firearms identified as coming from their own forces, or weapons traced back to themselves as being sold through the Mexican Defense Department. They also do not ask the ATF to trace military ordnance from third countries like the South Korean fragmentation grenades commonly used in cartel attacks.

Posted by Chris, a resident of Willowgate
on Jan 29, 2013 at 2:24 pm

@ Steve, Ad hominem huh, that came from Bill Maher attack him. I gave him credit you are like the one that shoots the messenger. Its still funny though, in fact a real riot to listen to him rail against gun owners. In fact, I recorded it and thinking of you will enjoy an hour listening to it and laugh. Laughter it works.

I have other fish to fry, good luck to the minority gun owners here, as my lawyer friends say, forget it, we hold the reigns of the majority rational thinking people and I will never win an irrational argument. I agree.

Oh and are we erasing history with Fast and Furious where AK47's were found in drug cartel thugs from Mexico? Like Bill Maher says: The Bubble.

I have to give credit to my friend Sally, she knows how to get a crowd going.

Posted by Steve, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 29, 2013 at 4:54 pm

@Chris I can't argue with your logic

Posted by Old Ben, a resident of Shoreline West
on Jan 29, 2013 at 11:07 pm

Sally Lieber should get a job.

As far as the guns go: MOLON LABE.

Posted by resident, a resident of Cuernavaca
on Jan 30, 2013 at 12:36 pm

All I can say is"wow". Stunned. Someone proposes a discussion on gun control and ways to reduce gun violence and the immediate response is to shut it down with insults and extreme comments about fascism and propaganda? Why not show up at the meeting and debate your point ? Are you so afraid of a meeting like this taking place at all? Why does everyone hear 'ban' when someone proposes 'controlled regulation"? Do you deny that there is a gun violence problem at all in our country? That gun violence is something that can be mocked and explained away in an obscure internet message board? I don't get it. I hate what is happening in Oakland, EPA and even here in Mountain View. Sandy Hook was horrific but beyond what happened there, it raised awareness of the widespread problem gun violence in every community. I don't know the magic solution between preserving 2d amendment right and reducing gun tragedies. However, I do think its high time this issue was addressed in discussions at the local and national level. My only hope is that people will listen and respect all sides (there are more than 2!) of this issue so that progress can be made. Right now, the status quo is not working.

Posted by Steve, a resident of Sylvan Park
on Jan 30, 2013 at 2:39 pm

Debate at a function hosted by Sally? Better odds of debating racial equality at a Klan function.

Posted by Chris, a resident of Willowgate
on Jan 30, 2013 at 2:43 pm

@ resident, its called voter apathy. Its a disease where the status quo let it all hang out yet do not voice anything. I am a self admitted loudmouth and my mouth gets me less that what I should be expecting. But I don't care because its my fundamental right to be myopic if I want to :)

Posted by juniperk, a resident of Gemello
on Jan 30, 2013 at 2:55 pm

I don't own a gun and I don't like violence either. But I am all for 2nd amendment. Leiber , jackie spier, Difi,Barabara boxer won't have to worry about violence because they always have protection and they live in super rich neighborhoods like Hillsborough, Marin,etc.,, and they always travel by Chausffeur driven limos at our hard earned money. These politicians are so pathetic and liars and they pretend to care about regular folks but they don't really. They support war on iraq and Afghanistan and support drone attacks on other nations but they think it should be illegal for common folks to defend themselves with guns. I am surpiried why DiFi's husband hasn't invested in gun companies because she would have supported people carrying all kinds of weapons including rocket launchers, bazookas,etc..In a anutshell, Leiber is a moron and they people who voted are him are rotten and senseless fools.

Posted by kman, a resident of Monta Loma
on Jan 30, 2013 at 3:06 pm

If someone plows into a bunch of people with there car on purpose, does that mean we should ban all cars?

Posted by steve, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Jan 30, 2013 at 3:54 pm

@resident Look at the FBI statistics: Murders in the U.S. have been decreasing steadily since 2006, going from 15,087 to 12,996. Firearms murders also followed this trend, decreasing by 14 percent.

At the same time that we were seeing the decline in homicides, gun sales were surging. Specifically in 2009, FBI background checks for guns increased by 30% over 2008, while firearms sales increased by almost 40%. The number of applications for concealed carry permits jumped across the country as well.

While I'm not suggesting a causality between increased firearms sales and declining homicides- though a case could be made for; I am saying that there is no denying that if more guns equals more violence, then we should be seeing the number of homicides increase with increased firearms sales, not decrease as they are.

The issue I have with many gun control advocates is that their argument is emotional vs factual. For example, while Sandy Hook was a horrible tragedy going after so called "assault weapons" is utterly pointless. Simply put they account for around 0.6% of firearms violence in the country. Furthermore, there is simply a lot of misinformation around this class of weapon, for example, that they can fire 100s of rounds a minute, or that they can easily be modified to be fully automatic, or that they are military grade etc. It's all nonsense and designed to illicit an emotional response

As an interesting aside, the Sandy Hook shooter (I refuse to use his name), didn't even use an assault rifle, he used four handguns. See the following video from NBC news - hardly a bastion of 2nd amendment rights: Web Link

Ironically the gun most commonly used in the commission of crimes is the Smith & Wesson 38 revolver (Source BATF)

Posted by ladym, a resident of Rex Manor
on Jan 31, 2013 at 4:35 pm

Am not good in voicing out my opinions but just want to share this website about this topic:
Web Link
Interesting statistics when gun control is in effect.

Posted by NRAKills, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Feb 1, 2013 at 2:42 pm

Myth: "More good guys with guns can stop rampaging bad guys."
Fact-check: Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0
• Chances that a shooting at an ER involves guns taken from guards: 1 in 5

Myth: "Keeping a gun at home makes you safer."
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.
• 43% of homes with guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.
• In one experiment, one third of 8-to-12-year-old boys who found a handgun pulled the trigger.

Myth: "Carrying a gun for self-defense makes you safer."
Fact-check: In 2011, nearly 10 times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.
• In one survey, nearly 1% of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at their claims found that more than 50% involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.

Myth: "Guns make women safer."
Fact-check: In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers.
• A woman's chances of being killed by her abuser increase more than 7 times if he has access to a gun.
• One study found that women in states with higher gun ownership rates were 4.9 times more likely to be murdered by a gun that women in states with lower gun ownership rates.

Posted by Old Ben, a resident of Shoreline West
on Feb 1, 2013 at 2:54 pm

NRAKills, your list is completely bogus.

Tell Nick Meli up in Clackamas about the "zero mass shootings stopped by armed civilians." That's just for starters. You didn't click on that web link up above, so kindly provided by "ladym", did you? You should, before you post a bunch of lies about guns.

Posted by NRAKills, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Feb 1, 2013 at 7:51 pm

Old Ben is correct. As of December of 2012, there has been exactly ONE time where a potential mass shooting was stopped by an armed citizen.

So, please correct the above to read:

"Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 1"

Thanks again to Old Ben for the clarification.

Posted by ladym, a resident of Rex Manor
on Feb 5, 2013 at 1:50 pm

Mass Killings Stopped by Armed Citizens

Web Link