We need to ban all handguns in America NOW

On 24 Apr 2007 01:16:19 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:


This *sounds* real good; just like saying anyone posessing cocaine
will be immediately arrested. The problems are determining who is in
posession, and in having the wherewithall to effectthe arrests.

You try the stupid argument that because a ban on guns cannot prevent
ALL guns then it cannot prevent ANY guns.

= And it will make what difference? Other than ****ing off armed
= individuals?

So you are saying all armed individuals will be ****ed, and that is
what matters more, that it is better to allow people to have guns and
kill each other than it is to do something to secure our safety that
****es them off.. this is your argument for why guns should not be
banned? anyone with such a mentality a this should never have been
trusted to own a firearm in the first place..


If you try to take away the means of protection used by armed
individuals, in violation of the guarantees of the 2nd Amendment..yes
indeed they will be ****ed off. YOu will be violating their civil rights
in the worst possible way.
Heads up cupcake..if you wanted to :secure your safety..you would be
hiding in your basement and would not be on the roadways or out in
public, gun free zones or not.

Hence its simply your fear of weapons that is so obviously puking from
your lips. It should further be noted that you would demand that cops be
disarmed, as they shoot innocent individuals at 20x the rate that CCW
holders do.

Its gratifying to see that someone as neurotic as you are, has no
interest in owning a gun. Its likely you would suddenly run amok and
shoot up a preschool, after massacring your entire family.

Its because of deranged nut cases like you..I carry a concealed weapon
every day, all nice and legally.

“A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.”
Sigmund Freud (”General Introduction to Psychoanalysis)

So whats your next move? Banning printing presses, radios and other
informational media? After all..if you are so willing to gut the
Constituion to allay your neurotic fears..its obvious you will try to
ban the 1st Amendment as well, because someone may say something nasty
about you.

Fascinating how you totalitarian head cases seem to pop out of the
woodwork with such regularity.

Seek out a mental health professional. Perhaps he may be able to help
you before you kill, and kill again.

Remember..its for the children.


Gunner

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist

We need serious gun control in America.

Statistics: Gun Violence in Our Communities

School Safety
Less than 1% of all homicides among school-aged children (5-19 years
of age) occur in or around school grounds or on the way to and from
school. (Centers for Disease Control, 1997)

Children and Gun Violence
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in
the United States, according to the latest national data released in
2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day;
and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5
times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries.
(Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)

America and Gun Violence
American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of
any other industrialized nation. In one year, firearms killed no
children in Japan, 19 in Great Britain, 57 in Germany, 109 in France,
153 in Canada, and 5,285 in the United States. (Centers for Disease
Control)

Guns in the Wrong Hands
Faulty records enable terrorists, illegal aliens and criminals to
purchase guns. Over a two and a half-year period, at least 9,976
convicted felons and other illegal buyers in 46 states obtained guns
because of inadequate records. (Broken Records, Americans for Gun
Safety Foundation)

School Safety

* Between 1994 and 1999, there were 220 school associated violent
events resulting in 253 deaths - - 74.5% of these involved firearms.
Handguns caused almost 60% of these deaths. (Journal of American
Medical Association, December 2001)
* In 1998-99 academic year, 3,523 students were expelled for
bringing a firearm to school. This is a decrease from the 5,724
students expelled in 1996-97 for bringing a firearm to school. (U.S.
Department of Education, October 2000)
* Nearly 8% of adolescents in urban junior and senior high schools
miss at least one day of school each month because they are afraid to
attend. (National Mental Health & Education Center for Children &
Families, National Association of School Psychologists 1998)
* The National School Boards Association estimates that more than
135,000 guns are brought into U.S. schools each day. (NSBA, 1993)

Children and Gun Violence

* America is losing too many children to gun violence. Between
1979 and 2001, gunfire killed 90,000 children and teens in America.
(Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
* In one year, more children and teens died from gunfire than from
cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined.
(Children's Defense Fund)
* The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12
times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized
countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

America and Gun Violence

* Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence.
(Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
* The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12
times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized
countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
* American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a
gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times
more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other
industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control)

Guns in the Wrong Hands

* Americans for Gun Safety produced a 2003 report that reveals
that 20 of the nation's 22 national gun laws are not enforced.
According to U.S. Department of Justice data (FY 2000-2002), only 2%
of federal gun crimes were actually prosecuted. Eighty-five percent of
cases prosecuted relate to street criminals in possession of firearms.
Ignored are laws intended to punish illegal gun trafficking, firearm
theft, corrupt gun dealers, lying on a criminal background check form,
obliterating firearm serial numbers, selling guns to minors and
possessing a gun in a school zone. To access The Enforcement Gap:
Federal Gun Laws Ignored, visit http://w3.agsfoundation.com/. For a
state-by-state chart of gun crimes (FY 2000-2002), click here.
*
Studies show that 1 percent of gun stores sell the weapons
traced to 57 percent of gun crimes. According to the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), the dealer that armed the DC area
sniper is among this small group of problem gun dealers that "supply
the suppliers" who funnel guns to the nation's criminals. (Between
1997 and 2001, guns sold by this dealer were involved in 52 crimes,
including homicides, kidnappings and assaults. Still open today, it
also can't account for 238 guns or say whether they were stolen, lost
or sold, or if their buyers underwent felony-background checks.) As a
result, these few gun dealers have a vastly disproportionate impact on
public safety. The ATF can recognize such dealers based on: (1) guns
stolen from inventory; (2) missing federal sales records, needed by
police to solve crimes; (3) having 10 weapons a year traced to crimes;
(4) frequently selling multiple guns to individual buyers; and (5)
short times between gun sales and their involvement in crimes. Yet ATF
enforcement is weak due to a lack of Congressional support and
resources. For more details, click here.
* Terrorists have purchased firearms at gun shows, where
unlicensed sellers are not currently required to conduct background
checks or to ask for identification. According to the Middle East
Intelligence Report, for example, a Hezbollah member was arrested in
November 2000, after a nine-month investigation by the FBI's counter-
terrorism unit. Ali Boumelhem was later convicted on seven counts of
weapons charges and conspiracy to ship weapons and ammunition to
Lebanon. Federal agents had observed Boumelhem, a resident of Detroit
and Beirut, travel to Michigan gun shows and buy gun parts and
ammunition for shipment overseas. Boumelhem was prohibited from
legally purchasing guns as gun stores because he was a convicted
felon. Additional cases involve a Pakistani national with an expired
(1988) student visa; a Lebanese native and Hamas member with numerous
felony convictions; and a supporter of the Irish Republican Army. (USA
Today, Wednesday, November 28, 2001 Americans for Gun Safety)

* According to Americans for Gun Safety (December 2002), gun theft
is most likely in states without laws requiring safe storage of
firearms in the home and where there are large numbers of gun owners
and relatively high crime rates. Based on FBI data, nearly 1.7 million
guns have been reported stolen in the past ten years, and only 40% of
those were recovered. The missing guns, over 80% of which are taken
from homes or cars, most likely fuel the black market for criminals.
NEA, AGS and the National Rifle Association advocate for safe storage.
To access "Stolen Guns: Arming the Enemy" visit www.agsfoundation.com.

* The American Medical Association reports that between 36% and
50% of male eleventh graders believe that they could easily get a gun
if they wanted one.

* In 1998-99 academic year, 3,523 students were expelled for
bringing a firearm to school. This is a decrease from the 5,724
students expelled in 1996-97 for bringing a firearm to school. (U.S.
Department of Education, October 2000)

* According to a report by the Joshephson Institute of Ethics
(2000 Report Card: Report #1), 60% of high school and 31% of middle
school boys said they could get a gun if they wanted to (April, 2001).

On 24 Apr 2007 06:17:46 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

On Apr 24, 5:21 am, Gunner wrote:
On 24 Apr 2007 01:16:19 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

CLIPPED for Brevity.

================================================
The US Constitution's Second (2nd) Amendment - QUOTED STATES:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a
free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not
be infringed.
=================================================

While there is currently some "confusion" pertaining to this
Amendment, it is commonly understood that there is essentially two (2)
separate and equal parts to the Amendment.
1) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State;
AND
2) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.

Since there isn't anyone around (unless they are immortal) who was at
the original writing, editing, and confirming/ratification of these
various Article's and Amendment's to the Constitution - what the
Founders "meant" by this Amendment is open to a wide variety of
meanings - however it would appear that THE FOUNDERS tended to mean is
that any State must have a well organized Militia for its own Security
- Including all of the States (a National Militia/Military).

The Second portion of the Amendment - must be considered in the
framework of the "Time" in which the Amendment was originally written,
probably that the average citizen (who tended to be "on call" for
militia call-up (Minutemen)) should maintain their own weapons (Arms)
and that right to keep and bear arms (not only for Call-up but for
routine protection and food gathering/hunting purposes) SHALL NOT BE
INFRINGED.

Since it would appear the Founders determined the Amendment was for
the protection of the individual and for the community, the State, or
the Nation, it would appear that is why the Amendment was included.

Unfortunately - there are people on BOTH SIDES of the argument who
twist and turn the meaning and the essential truth of what is said -
by twisting it to reflect their own point of view or SUBVERT what the
founders originally intended. INCLUDING every Mentally Deficient,
Crazy, Psychotic, Criminal, and Weirdo in the country.

A weapon (arm) - whether it be a Rifle, Shotgun, Hand gun, or what
ever, is only a tool to be used to do the job necessary - to Protect
the individual and/or his/her family, to provide meat/food for the
nourishment of the family/community, and to protect the community
(local, county, state, country) against its enemies. In the hands of
a person who is responsible, knowledgeable, and of sound mind - who is
NOT a criminal; I really don't see any problems.

ON THE OTHER HAND, you BAN the use of weapons/firearms from honest,
hardworking, responsible citizens, then the criminals will have an
easy target on which to do whatever they wish. Also, the knowledge of
a citizenry with weapons tends to make those who wish to become
another Saddam Hussein, Adolph Hitler, Mussolini, Idi Amin Dada, etc.,
have a few second/third/fourth thoughts.

On 24 Apr 2007 07:04:31 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

Children and Gun Violence
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in
the United States, according to the latest national data released in
2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day;
and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5
times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries.
(Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)


Another disingenuous spin of the actual facts.

The vast majority of those "children" are gang members or gang related,
between the age of 15 and 25..the antigun zipper heads classifying 25yr
olds as "children"

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/datawh/stata...bd/mortabs.htm

Accidental firearms deaths below the ages of 14, are far below those of
drownings.

Unfortunately..the race of those homicide victims is overwhelmingly
black or hispanic. and the killers were same age range black or
hispanics. All of whom are prevented from legally owning a firearm in
the first place, simply by age alone, not counting previous criminal
convictions.

So if you Really wanted to stop firearms homicide..you would round up
all black or hispanic males between the ages of 14 and 25 and keep them
in cages until the age of 25.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
http://social.jrank.org/pages/1260/V...in-Murder.html
http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel02/cius2001.htm

http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/194609/page7.html


Your post is another fine example of spin and deceit foisted off on the
public to further your agenda.




Below those ages, the leading cause of homicides ARE THE PARENTS!

Ban Parents Now!!!

"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:56:50 -0500, "What Me Worry?"
wrote:

And how would this work, exactly?
I mean, what sort of "magic" would determine if someone posessed a
gun?

Ask the Brits.

From their own info, they don't have the magic:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm

This *sounds* real good; just like saying anyone posessing cocaine
will be immediately arrested. The problems are determining who is in
posession, and in having the wherewithall to effectthe arrests.

With a handgun ban in force, *anyone* in possession of a handgun would
automatically be a felon. Is that easy enough to understand?

it's easy tio understand.
What's not easy to understand is how do you convert that into
*convicted* felon?

Obviously, th US (and most countries) lack the ability to do both.

How are you going to pay for the thousands of prisons that would need
to
be built? How are you going to pay for the cost of keeping each gun
law
breaker for 30 years?

Why are you soft on gun crime?

Owning a gun is not a crime.

Handguns are illegal in Britain. Banning handguns is good for America.

Britain is not bereft of gun crime; you know that.
Banning an item does not instantly cause that item to disappear. You
know that, too.

Failing to ban handguns is a guarantee of continued handgun violence.

And, evidently, banning handguns is the same thing.

Why is it that liberasl continue to claim that gun bans work, when a
very simple Google search will show the exact opposite?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

The NFL quizzed each prospective draftee about
past drug use before Saturday's player draft
in New York. Innocent bystanders always get hurt.
After Barack Obama admitted to past use of cocaine,
he went sailing past Hillary Clinton in fund-raising.

On 24 Apr 2007 01:16:19 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

= And it will make what difference? Other than ****ing off armed
= individuals?

So you are saying all armed individuals will be ****ed, and that is
what matters more, that it is better to allow people to have guns and
kill each other than it is to do something to secure our safety that
****es them off.. this is your argument for why guns should not be
banned? anyone with such a mentality a this should never have been
trusted to own a firearm in the first place..

Well, no, that's never been the argument.
The argument is this:
There is no way to effectively ban guns. *You* can't come up with a
way to effectively ban guns, can you? If so, please do so; the DOJ
would like to know the method, as their ban on drugs has been a
miserable failure, and the same method might work there, too, as a ban
is a ban is a ban.
Rather than simply pursue a method that has never been gotten to work,
why not come up with something that will actually have a chance of
solving the problem?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

The NFL quizzed each prospective draftee about
past drug use before Saturday's player draft
in New York. Innocent bystanders always get hurt.
After Barack Obama admitted to past use of cocaine,
he went sailing past Hillary Clinton in fund-raising.

On 24 Apr 2007 06:17:46 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

On Apr 24, 5:21 am, Gunner wrote:
On 24 Apr 2007 01:16:19 -0700, Bushzilla wrote:

This *sounds* real good; just like saying anyone posessing cocaine
will be immediately arrested. The problems are determining who is in
posession, and in having the wherewithall to effectthe arrests.

You try the stupid argument that because a ban on guns cannot prevent
ALL guns then it cannot prevent ANY guns.

= And it will make what difference? Other than ****ing off armed
= individuals?

So you are saying all armed individuals will be ****ed, and that is
what matters more, that it is better to allow people to have guns and
kill each other than it is to do something to secure our safety that
****es them off.. this is your argument for why guns should not be
banned? anyone with such a mentality a this should never have been
trusted to own a firearm in the first place..

= If you try to take away the means of protection used by armed
= individuals, in violation of the guarantees of the 2nd
Amendment..yes
= indeed they will be ****ed off. YOu will be violating their civil
rights
= in the worst possible way.

Listen whiner, the Second Amendment that you are twisting to fit your
needs was not written to guarantee your "right" to personally own
guns. It clearly states it was to arm a well organized militia, and
that is all, it does not mean anything more, stop making it out to be
more than it is so you have an excuse. Again, because you are ****ing
too stupid to read and comprehend, you are placing some angry people
who have to make a sacrifice to save lives, above the security and
safety of innocent people like the students at VT and the rest of the
civilized peaceful population.

Sorry buffoon..but it was written to EXACTLY guarantee the individual
right to keep and bear arms. And the Supreme Court of the United States
has So Ruled at least 35 times. Btw buffoon..the term is "well
regulated" which according to the usage of the time the Constitution was
written..means "trained and in good working order" You also seem to be
missing that little comma that separates the verbage..and establishes
the second half as a stand alone.."the right of the People to keep and
bear arms shall not be infringed"

Btw..if you are older than 17 and in the US..you are ALREADY in the
milita.

Your ignorance of the subject is astounding for someone who pukes up
their stupidity on Usenet.

= Heads up cupcake..

cupcake? I suppose being a gun owner makes YOU a man? LOL yeah ok
you sissy, hiding behind a gun because you are too much of a pussy to
grow up and act like an adult and join the civilized world.

Snicker..here is another fine example of the neurotic Libtard somehow
equating firearms with "steel penis" and manhood. Have you no shame?
Seek out a mental health professional immediately. Perhaps after half a
lifetime of theropy..you can resume normalicy.

= if you wanted to :secure your safety..you would be
= hiding in your basement and would not be on the roadways or out in
= public, gun free zones or not.

Tell you what sissy hiding behind your gun pretending to be a real
man, you do that, I'll continue to support and work toward a civilized
culture putting people who own guns that should not, in jail where
they belong, It is time for serious gun control reform.

Thank you very much for further demonstrating the mental illness you and
your kind so pitiably demonstrate. Bravo Sir! Bravo indeed! Well
done!

= Hence its simply your fear of weapons that is so obviously puking
from
= your lips.

Awwww I touched a nerve, don't pop a vein now weirdo.

Snicker....I think "I" hit a nerve....snicker...

= It should further be noted that you would demand that cops be
= disarmed, as they shoot innocent individuals at 20x the rate that
CCW
= holders do.

No actually the worst thing we could do is disarm the police, they
should be the ones who have the guns so they can continue to protect
the population from weirdos like you.

So you want police to continue to shoot innocent people? Your slavish
appeal to authority is noted. It fits with your demonstrated neurotic
world view. You evidently need a strong father figure in your life. Did
your dad abandon you as an infant?

= Its gratifying to see that someone as neurotic as you are, has no
= interest in owning a gun. Its likely you would suddenly run amok and
= shoot up a preschool, after massacring your entire family.

My my you have some very demented fantasies, see a shrink soon, you
really should, and I think deep down inside you know you should.

Chuckle..Ive been through all the tests..and have passed with a clean
bill of mental health. It was part of several job requirements Ive had
over the years. And of course I pass the FBI, and state and local
requirements to allow me to to carry a concealed weapon daily.

Im quite sure we cannot say the same about you. Which means the system
works nicely.

= Its because of deranged nut cases like you..I carry a concealed
weapon
= every day, all nice and legally.

Let's see weirdo, I feel we should stiffen our gun laws to protect us
from people who have sick fantasies of "shooting children and their
entire family", excuse me but those are YOUR words, not mine, and you
call me deranged? yeah ok, I don't think anyone need to look much
further to see who the deranged freak is here..

I can recognize the mentally ill, and you indeed fit the description.
And yes..you would be a danger to your family and society at large. No
matter how you try to spin and deny it.

= "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional
maturity."
= Sigmund Freud ("General Introduction to Psychoanalysis)

Sure whatever Dr Weirdo, again you twist the truth to make your point
fit your sordid argument. Wishing to see guns removed from the hands
of deranged people, like you, does not constitute a fear of weapons. I
just don't want to see any more shootings like what happened at
Virgina Tech, of course you probably can't wait for another one
because it quite obviously is the only thing that gets you off..

Further demonstration of your mental health issues. Fascinating how you
can rationalize your mental state so easily.

= So whats your next move? Banning printing presses, radios and other
= informational media? After all..if you are so willing to gut the
= Constituion to allay your neurotic fears..its obvious you will try
to
= ban the 1st Amendment as well, because someone may say something
nasty
= about you.

Actually freedom of speech IS clearly protected by the Constitution,
unlike gun ownership, so no.

Again you are utterly and provably wrong. Seems you are not doing very
well here. But then..the mentally ill seldom do.

= Fascinating how you totalitarian head cases seem to pop out of the
= woodwork with such regularity.

It's called America, douchebag, that's why assholes like you are
allowed to live here, unfortunately for the rest of us.

Yes, it IS America. And Americans tolerate the mentally ill only so far.
I suspect you are nearing that point and are likely to be committed for
the safety of society before long. Btw..since we are on the
subject..have you done any military service for your country? I rather
suspect you would not have passed the pysch tests..just curious.

= Seek out a mental health professional. Perhaps he may be able to
help
= you before you kill, and kill again.

Just because my opinion differs from yours does not give you the right
to project your mental instability on me, take some of your own
advice, you know you need help, it's all over everything you responded
with, you freak..

The irony of this last paragraph..is exquiste.

= Remember..its for the children.

as long as we keep them away from people like you they will be just
fine..

Actually..if you keep them away from the sane..people like me..they will
likely grow up like you. Which would be most unfortunate. Cho is an
example of your handiwork. Pity.

:: Cheers ::


Im always cheerful. Im even more cheery when spanking ****tards like you
on Usenet.

Gunner Asch


"I don't want to abolish government.
I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can
drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.
-- Grover Norquist

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:17:53 -0500, Education_Is_Important
wrote:

While there is currently some "confusion" pertaining to this
Amendment, it is commonly understood that there is essentially two (2)
separate and equal parts to the Amendment.
1) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State;
AND
2) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed.

Since there isn't anyone around (unless they are immortal) who was at
the original writing, editing, and confirming/ratification of these
various Article's and Amendment's to the Constitution - what the
Founders "meant" by this Amendment is open to a wide variety of
meanings - however it would appear that THE FOUNDERS tended to mean is
that any State must have a well organized Militia for its own Security
- Including all of the States (a National Militia/Military).

It is a very popular myth that we have no idea of what the framers of
the Constitution meant.
In reality, we have a *LOT* of contemporary writings from the era; not
only from the framers themselves, but notes on debates and copies of
newspapers of the day with letters to the editors that cover the
debate very well.
A reading of The Federalist papers would be very instructional to the
people who think we must guess at what was being thought at the time.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

The NFL quizzed each prospective draftee about
past drug use before Saturday's player draft
in New York. Innocent bystanders always get hurt.
After Barack Obama admitted to past use of cocaine,
he went sailing past Hillary Clinton in fund-raising.

On Apr 18, 9:17 pm, "G.I. Cho" wrote:
How many more tragedies is it going to take before we wake up?

None.

We have
a serious gun problem in this country

No we don't.

and it's time to take a stand.

We already did.. in 1776.

Let the farmers and hunters keep the rifles and shotguns.

They don't need your permission.

Get rid of the pistols and the assault rifles

Not unless it says that in the constitution... and it doesn't

unless you want to go over and
fight in Iraq.

You first, socialist statist sheeple.

On Apr 19, 7:53 pm, "Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute"
wrote:
In ooglegroups.com, G.I.
Cho sprach forth the following:

"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 to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater
confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

Cho was crazy, he could of just as easily poured rat poison in a water
cooler. Guns are not the problem, just the instrument of
communication. Cho had an end, the means were many, he chose guns.