209 posts
Your last post reminded me of Stratman.
Tripper — Feb 12, 2010I wasn't really raised around actual guns, but my dad (a decorated Army officer in Vietnam) made sure we respected their power, and instilled in us a great understanding of safety. My brothers and I all had BB/Pellet guns at one time or another, and none of us were ever shot, even though we'd shoot them all the time.
I think that the arguments for gun ownership are pretty stupid, as are the arguments against.
It all comes down to something very simple: how armed do you allow the people to be? Can they own handguns? Bazookas? Tanks?
Back when our Constitution was written, the way I understand it, the idea was that people would be armed so that we wouldn't need a standing army - we'd have well-regulated militias, which is the whole reason that people should never be denied the right to keep and bear arms.
Well, we now have police forces and a standing army. We don't need for the citizenry to be armed. It's not a necessity anymore.
Do I have a problem with people owning guns, fundamentally? Absolutely not, especially if there are requirements for registration, use, and training (like driving a car).
But I do have a problem with historical revisionists that think that they'd be "protected from tyranny" by owning an assault rifle. Um, yeah, try that one in this century. It's worked great for most of the anti-government movements in this country. Waco? Ruby Ridge?
Face reality: That time is over, and unless you support the average citizen owning the firepower only allowed to be owned by the armed services, you are just at a different level of supporting the "nanny police state", and your indignation about the topic is mere self-flagellation and conservative chest-puffery.
You really think the framers anticipated how devastating weaponry would become and how little power a rifle actually gives the holder?
I think there's a place we can meet in the middle, and I think we're mostly there. I don't think gun nuts need to worry about anyone taking their guns, and I don't think anti-gun people need to worry so much about getting shot because some people own guns.
It's a very unimportant issue, in my view (which is not to be confused with reality).
Tripper
im happy with the current gun laws for the most part. i'd like a few things changed, but who wouldn't. i agree gun control should be on the back burner.
This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
Hookbender — Feb 13, 2010This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
seriously? was it the guns fault? the woman had a problem and she lost it. had guns been banned you would have read about a stabbing instead of a shooting. if you don't believe me look to Britain. guns are seriously more restricted so knife violence has skyrocketed. now they are debuting an "anti-stab" knife designed to cut down on stabbings that are becoming more prevalent.
laying the blame on a tool is foolish. what if a crime spree using hammers unfolded? would you want to ban hammers for the greater safety?
THE PEOPLE ARE WHAT IS FUCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!! NOT THE TOOLS THEY (AB)USE
Hookbender — Feb 13, 2010This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
Benjamin Franklin
you want to give up your freedoms in order to feel safe? i don't need someone regulating my life to "protect" me any more than i'm already forced to endure.
chase — Feb 13, 2010[quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#52 date=1266028849]This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
seriously? was it the guns fault? the woman had a problem and she lost it. had guns been banned you would have read about a stabbing instead of a shooting. if you don't believe me look to Britain. guns are seriously more restricted so knife violence has skyrocketed. now they are debuting an "anti-stab" knife designed to cut down on stabbings that are becoming more prevalent.
laying the blame on a tool is foolish. what if a crime spree using hammers unfolded? would you want to ban hammers for the greater safety?
THE PEOPLE ARE WHAT IS FUCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!! NOT THE TOOLS THEY (AB)USE
You think maybe only one of these people would have been killed instead of 3 if she had a knife? And maybe the other wouldn't have been so seriously injured?
People who defend gun ownership always come up with that lame argument. People are gonna kill people so why not make it easy for them? Right? I'm not blaming the gun, weapon of choice, I'm interested in making it harder for someone to murder another human being. It takes much larger balls to stab someone to death than to simply pull a triger. Banning or reducing guns in the U.S. won't prevent murders, they will make it much harder to do, imo.
Your fixing to join the army. If you went to war, which I hope you don't have to do, they don't send you into battle with a swiss knife and a candy bar. Wonder why?
Actually, I think they DO send you into battle with a Swiss Army knife and a candy bar Hook. ;)
chase — Feb 13, 2010[quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#52 date=1266028849]This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety
Benjamin Franklin
you want to give up your freedoms in order to feel safe? i don't need someone regulating my life to "protect" me any more than i'm already forced to endure.
I don't feel owning a gun is a freedom. I could care less about owning a gun. I would much rather pay higher taxes and get a more efficient police force and enough jails to get the bad guys off the streets. That would be my first objective. The very reason some people feel they need a gun is the number of violent criminals on the street the police can't do anything about. That needs to be fixed. We have gangs known for violent crime running the street and we let them. That needs repair. Doesn't help for you and I to own guns.
Why do you feel like you need one so bad? You sound scared to death at the thought of not having guns. Whats up with that? I've been shot and use to carry a gun everywhere I went until I saw I didn't need one. Using my brain is more defense than carrying a gun.
CraigBert — Feb 13, 2010Actually, I think they DO send you into battle with a Swiss Army knife and a candy bar Hook. ;)
Maybe, but you couldn't find it in battle because your so loaded down with granades and ammo for your guns, plural.
Hookbender — Feb 13, 2010[quote author=chase link=1265411987/50#53 date=1266032799][quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#52 date=1266028849]This is why average citizens shouldn't have weapons. A gun is a gun until it's used, then it's a weapon.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/02/3-dead-in-shooting-at-huntsville-ala-campus/1
"WAFF, citing authorities, confirms that a female faculty member pulled out a gun and began shooting after learning she was denied tenure. She has not yet been identified."
seriously? was it the guns fault? the woman had a problem and she lost it. had guns been banned you would have read about a stabbing instead of a shooting. if you don't believe me look to Britain. guns are seriously more restricted so knife violence has skyrocketed. now they are debuting an "anti-stab" knife designed to cut down on stabbings that are becoming more prevalent.
laying the blame on a tool is foolish. what if a crime spree using hammers unfolded? would you want to ban hammers for the greater safety?
THE PEOPLE ARE WHAT IS FUCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!! NOT THE TOOLS THEY (AB)USE
You think maybe only one of these people would have been killed instead of 3 if she had a knife? And maybe the other wouldn't have been so seriously injured?
People who defend gun ownership always come up with that lame argument. People are gonna kill people so why not make it easy for them? Right? I'm not blaming the gun, weapon of choice, I'm interested in making it harder for someone to murder another human being. It takes much larger balls to stab someone to death than to simply pull a triger. Banning or reducing guns in the U.S. won't prevent murders, they will make it much harder to do, imo.
Your fixing to join the army. If you went to war, which I hope you don't have to do, they don't send you into battle with a swiss knife and a candy bar. Wonder why?
i'll go, no doubts about that. they send me with a rifle because it's the most efficient tool for the job i'm sent to do. having the power to defend myself is important and will thankfully remain a constitutional right for as far as i can see.
since we both disagree, we can vote according to our beliefs. fortunately there are more people who agree with me right now than you. when/if the tide changes i will reevaluate.
So I guess your religious since the majoriety are religious. I assume your not gay cause most people are straight.
Going by your own statement, you side with the majoriety, I'm not sure will ever agree on anything.
I mean, do you really think these people would have been murdered if this person didn't have access to a gun?
I would give up all my guns and rights to guns forever to save one life, much less 3.
Here is a sign of horrible law enforcement. Apparently the bitch that murdered the 3 teachers in Huntsville has shot and killed her own brother 20 years earlier and is still, or was still, on the streets. Incredible.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_ala_university_shooting_brother
seriously? was it the guns fault? the woman had a problem and she lost it. had guns been banned you would have read about a stabbing instead of a shooting. if you don't believe me look to Britain. guns are seriously more restricted so knife violence has skyrocketed. now they are debuting an "anti-stab" knife designed to cut down on stabbings that are becoming more prevalent.
laying the blame on a tool is foolish. what if a crime spree using hammers unfolded? would you want to ban hammers for the greater safety?
THE PEOPLE ARE WHAT IS FUCKED UP!!!!!!!!!!! NOT THE TOOLS THEY (AB)USE
What a load of bollocks you have been suckling on the NRA tit.
The homicide rate in Britain is around 1/5 to 1/6 of the US
where over 70% are carried out with guns
Sure knives are going to be used my those who want to murder
because guns are so hard to get.
It has "sky rocketed" amongst gangs mostly teenagers in the last few years. The murder rate is like Manhattan or Hollywood in some of our ghettos
But the uk doesn't get mass killings where someone goes postal, the last one of those was
Dumblane when gun control was tightened further to cover "sports clubs".
The Guns are needed as self defence argument is ludicrous. Especially talking about fighting the government.
Even as personal defence you are unlikely to be ready in a real situation.
The statistics on guns being used as a successful defence show it is very rare - even for police.
The only honest argument for guns is that the increased levels of lethal violence is a price worth paying
People who need them as tools will always have access to them.
The truth is 99% of guns are not required as tools.
I'm suprised Chase didn't use the right to hunt game bullcrap. After checking, only 11% of gun owners hunt. I guess that's not important to him since he obviously doesn't hunt, because the majoriety of Americans don't hunt. ;D
According to WIKI, murder with guns are 2 to 4 times higher in the U.S. than countries that are economically and politically similar to the U.S.
Hookbender — Feb 14, 2010I'm suprised Chase didn't use the right to hunt game bullcrap. After checking, only 11% of gun owners hunt. I guess that's not important to him since he obviously doesn't hunt, because the majoriety of Americans don't hunt. ;D
i do, didn't figure it worth mentioning. deer, turkey, waterfowl.
Hookbender — Feb 14, 2010
I would give up all my guns and rights to guns forever to save one life, much less 3.
and there is where we are different.
chase — Feb 14, 2010[quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#60 date=1266115879]
I would give up all my guns and rights to guns forever to save one life, much less 3.
and there is where we are different.
Reminds me of one of those philosophy questions. Sure, you'll probably save three, but you'll lose a LOT more lives in the long run, especially now with so many punks that don't value life. So is that worth it still?
CraigBert — Feb 14, 2010[quote author=chase link=1265411987/50#66 date=1266173644][quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#60 date=1266115879]
I would give up all my guns and rights to guns forever to save one life, much less 3.
and there is where we are different.
Reminds me of one of those philosophy questions. Sure, you'll probably save three, but you'll lose a LOT more lives in the long run, especially now with so many punks that don't value life. So is that worth it still?
yeah it is one of those philosophy questions -
your assertion that it would lead to more deaths in the long run is just that - an assertion.
What can you back it up with?
If guns in the hands of citizens is the only thing holding back serious crime levels then it should be easy to show some evidence to that effect.
Not the NRA bullshit that Chase parrots.
hard evidence that compels a conclusion.
Crime levels in the UK are directly comparable to the US -
we have very similar cultural attitude to violence.
The UK in many ways is actually culturally more violent than the US.
Boxing is a clue to that - world belt holding champs from the UK are far more likely white than in the US.
The US hasn't had a top white boxer holding a belt in decades.
On whites - racially restricted boxing - the UK would beat the US in the majority of belts with 1/6 the population.
There is a more general level of violence in the UK in bar fight/punch up yob culture right across the racial mix.
Which isn't great - but if we threw US levels of gun ownership into the UK overnight it would be mayhem here.
It would go from 1/6 to 6 x the level of US homicide.
I prefer the former and taking my chances with punks using fists and knives.
Hope you have your gun handy when the punk has a gun.
If we were just starting out then maybe it would be an assertion, but since there is NO CHANCE that guns will be removed from citizens I always wonder why the topic resurfaces all the time. Nice, if simple, sentiment, but not going to happen - EVER.
I don't have the time to find the stats right now (maybe later), but they will show that the vast majority of the shooting deaths occur within a very narrow sector of all citizens and mostly those that will never be disarmed even if it becomes law. I think you'll find that most crimes are done by those that are very nervous which is why most are easily scared off (even by stupid things like large dog bones and bowls left outside). However, when they go into these situations knowing that they will be the only ones armed, it gives them far more confidence.
Just for full disclosure, no, I don't own any guns (had a .22 target pistol for a while, but that's been sold) so I have to rely on common sense, a lame alarm system and several years of martial arts. That said, I'd have no problem getting something like a Mosberg shotgun (with some modifications) for home defense if I thought it necessary.
If we were just starting out then maybe it would be an assertion, but since there is NO CHANCE that guns will be removed from citizens I always wonder why the topic resurfaces all the time. Nice, if simple, sentiment, but not going to happen - EVER.
Why regulate something we can never stop?
Rape. Why regulate rape if people will keep doing it?
Murder? Clearly, it still happens. Let's just make it a fucking free-for-all.
Hell, people will always drive drunk. Clearly, it's been illegal, with stiff penalties, for a very long time. But people still do it. A lot. We'll never stop it. Why even try?
The list of things that we will never stop people from doing, even if they are illegal, is long.
The argument that we should therefore not try is asinine.
Maybe you need to look at your list again Charger. In all of those things, as well as using a gun criminally, there are consequences.
For your argument to even be valid the following would have to be proposed:
To prevent rape, everyone will need to be "fixed" so that sex isn't possible.
To prevent murder, everyone will have to surrender all objects that can be used to kill someone.
To prevent drunk drivers, all alcohol will be confiscated and cars will be no longer be allowed (heck, they even tried to do part of this and its failure only proves my point).
The bottom line is that you need to confiscate items that is a basic right of all Americans to have and, even if you get most to cooperate, many won't - especially those that are the main cause of the problem in the first place. Removing all guns from all Americans (as well as all foreign vistors and illegals) is simply NOT possible. Children need to be taught that life has value - trying to remove weapons in lieu of this is not only a complete waste of time, but expensive and counter-productive.
Rape is different than sex. How in the hell are you gonna fix people so that they can't have sex? ;D
Your reaching way out there Craig.
Your arguing the point that because something happens we shouldn't try to prevent it. That's absolutely insane. If guns were banned there would still be murders. Maybe less.
I said earlier I'd rather use my brain for defense. Stay away from bad parts of town, fixed.
And, maybe with much less guns on the streets the cops will have time to clean up the bad parts of town.
Not reaching at all, but since you obviously don't see that you're fixing the wrong part of the problem, I'll let you keep to your fantasies. ::)
fingers — Feb 14, 2010[quote author=CraigBert link=1265411987/50#67 date=1266183608][quote author=chase link=1265411987/50#66 date=1266173644][quote author=Hookbender link=1265411987/50#60 date=1266115879]
I would give up all my guns and rights to guns forever to save one life, much less 3.
and there is where we are different.
Reminds me of one of those philosophy questions. Sure, you'll probably save three, but you'll lose a LOT more lives in the long run, especially now with so many punks that don't value life. So is that worth it still?
yeah it is one of those philosophy questions -
your assertion that it would lead to more deaths in the long run is just that - an assertion.
What can you back it up with?
If guns in the hands of citizens is the only thing holding back serious crime levels then it should be easy to show some evidence to that effect.
Not the NRA bullshit that Chase parrots.
hard evidence that compels a conclusion.
Crime levels in the UK are directly comparable to the US -
we have very similar cultural attitude to violence.
The UK in many ways is actually culturally more violent than the US.
Boxing is a clue to that - world belt holding champs from the UK are far more likely white than in the US.
The US hasn't had a top white boxer holding a belt in decades.
On whites - racially restricted boxing - the UK would beat the US in the majority of belts with 1/6 the population.
There is a more general level of violence in the UK in bar fight/punch up yob culture right across the racial mix.
Which isn't great - but if we threw US levels of gun ownership into the UK overnight it would be mayhem here.
It would go from 1/6 to 6 x the level of US homicide.
I prefer the former and taking my chances with punks using fists and knives.
Hope you have your gun handy when the punk has a gun.
i do have it handy. my concealed carry license lets me carry a .45 H&K with me literally everywhere. lets flip your scenario on its head and re-examine it. show me some examples of instituted gun bans that have effectively reduced violent crime.
every gun control scheme goes wrong when it departs from reality early on. the very basis for gun control is based on the idea that if you take away the gun you will take away the violence. its simply not the case. if a crackhead wants your wallet for his next fix but cant get his hands on a .38 special he is still going to rob you. he might not use a gun, but it will be a kitchen knife or a ball bat.
to take it further i will consider the impossible. consider all guns were removed from the world and destroyed, what now? the prevalence of knife crime will skyrocket. are you going to ban those next?
There aren't any examples of countries instituting gun controls recently they were put in place several decades before.
All you can do is compare violent crime crates in countries with and without Gun Controls.
In the UK the knife is the most popular tool of choice, in the US it is the Gun.
The US has ~ 6x as many homicides
How do you explain that ?
Without resorting to claiming supposed differences in the violent nature of respective countries citizens,
CraigBert — Feb 15, 2010Not reaching at all, but since you obviously don't see that you're fixing the wrong part of the problem, I'll let you keep to your fantasies. ::)
Your the one in fantasy land. So everyone is suppose to simply teach our children that life has value and let the chips fall where they may? If they kill they kill, but ignore the fact that a gun is the most commonly used tool of the trade? Wow, that should fix shit.
Do you have a clue how much more advanced we are today than we were when the comstitution was written? Today, we don't need the right to own guns. We know that doesn't fix shit. Why don't you park a tank in your garage? That make you feel better? Why are you people so scared to death about not owning guns? Fuck Craig, you don't even exercise your right, and your still bitching about it. Tou should be in jail for not taking advantage of gun ownership.
Now, since you don't have a clue as to what I think may be the problems that need addressing, maybe you should re-read the entire thread before opening your big pie hole.
And if I'm addressing the wrong problems, why don't you first, list the problems that should be addressed with evidence that they are in fact problems, then list the solutions and give evidence that they will work. Prove your case amigo.
And don't tell me I'm wrong and in some fantasy land and in the same breath spit out a load of fucking shit about stats that you don't have time to look up. Try looking up the facts first, then state your opinion based on facts, not the other way around. Your not in the position to tell anyone their wrong. You don't know what your talking about by your own admission.
fingers — Feb 15, 2010There aren't any examples of countries instituting gun controls recently they were put in place several decades before.
All you can do is compare violent crime crates in countries with and without Gun Controls.
In the UK the knife is the most popular tool of choice, in the US it is the Gun.
The US has ~ 6x as many homicides
How do you explain that ?
Without resorting to claiming supposed differences in the violent nature of respective countries citizens,
couldn't be becuase we have 305,000,000 people versus your 61,000,000 people could it?
chase — Feb 15, 2010[quote author=fingers link=1265411987/75#75 date=1266236370]There aren't any examples of countries instituting gun controls recently they were put in place several decades before.
All you can do is compare violent crime crates in countries with and without Gun Controls.
In the UK the knife is the most popular tool of choice, in the US it is the Gun.
The US has ~ 6x as many homicides
How do you explain that ?
Without resorting to claiming supposed differences in the violent nature of respective countries citizens,
couldn't be becuase we have 305,000,000 people versus your 61,000,000 people could it?
I'm sure he's saying "per capita" and not total.
I don't think we need to ban all guns. But I think there is a wacko side to this that believes people should be able to own automatic weapons or guns that can be easily hidden on a person... to me those people are just as nuts as those who believe that no one should have a gun.
Here's where I come down on it.
Say someone REALLY, REALLY wants to kill someone. If they do it with a gun, there is a chance--sure, maybe a small chance--that a bullet will stray and kill someone else. Don't tell me that's irrelevant, because to the people whose children are killed as collateral damage, it is not irrelevant, or minor. It is a dead person who was alive earlier. If that same murder occurs with a knife, there's not a whole lot of chance of a stray blade, unless it's a really crowded area.
A simple look at how easy it is to kill 35 people with a few guns proves this out.
Now I'm not saying get rid of all guns. You are correct, that cannot happen. But I'm saying there can be reasonable limits. We can limit the types of weapons people can own... we can limit the clip capacities... AND we can limit the people who are allowed to get them. People who are mentally unstable, like the Va Tech dude, should not be getting guns. A federal database should be able to cross-reference buying patterns... for fuck's sake, if you buy a ton of fertilizer in three states over the course of a few months, Homeland Security will be all over you. If you buy 200 guns in that same timeframe, will anyone even notice? Is there even a way to track that?
There is reason, in then there are far left and far right arguments. I know that there is something in the middle that most reasonable people can agree on. We just aren't allowed to use reason... anytime we start to reason too strongly, the NRA sends out a flyer telling us how x politician wants you to be killed in your home with nothing but a swiss army knife and a neon sign required over your door that says "kill me and rape my wife, please." It's not sane to have this argument if the only point of the argument is that there can never be any limits...
Nah - it is comparing rate per capita
The US have something like 30- 36 x as many homicides in actual numbers as the UK
I pretty much agree with Charger, although if the possibility exist, I'd like all guns off the streets, period. Their would be much less killing with guns, accidental shootings, etc.
It's funny to me to hear someone call a gun a tool. Shit, a tool is used to perform a task. We have no room in society for that kind of tool today. What task can be performed with a gun, or weapon?
The interesting part of the argument for me is the emotion and pure want of guns or gun rights even by people who don't own any. I can't grasp that. What is this need for guns and where is it coming from? Why are people so scared to death of not owning guns even if they don't actually own any? Holy shit. How fucking stupid sounding.
Charger.....there is a way for government officials to tract gun purchases, but I think it varies by state. In Miss., I bought several handguns. I purchased the gun, filled out several forms for background checks etc. and have a 7 or 14 day waiting period before I took possession of the gun. The model and S# of the gun were put on the forms. I would hope a crazy purchase like you describe would set off alarms, but who knows. In Alabama, you have to have a license to carry a gun in your vehicle. I doubt that does much good. Not sure on purchases in Al.
well, yet another argument we will never agree upon. in my opinion taking things away from citizens isn't a job for the government, whether it has a potential for abuse or not.
Governemnt takes from you all the time. ::)
The only thing goverment would be taking from Chase is the freedom to hunt. And since your in the maniority, I think your opinion is poop, and you lose the argument because your the minoriety.
The one time your out on a limb and your own people smash you. (the majoriety) ;D ;D
I still don't get why your so worried about guns, I mean, your about to be able to play with them all you want. ;D
(just kidding here :))
Guns, abused? So, killing another human being with a gun is gun abuse????? So, it's a desease without a fix now? :-?
Could you define what gun abuse is? I'm lost.
exactly, the government regulates so much of our life already why give them more? what do i do with guns? hunt, target shoot, self defense are the main things. me being the minority first off isn't true and second doesn't matter as much as you think. you realize America isn't a democracy right? at least it wasn't intended to be.
by the way, no "e" in minority or majority
Hookbender — Feb 12, 2010Your last post reminded me of Stratman.
Close, but not enough shitty grammar or calling me a traitor. ;)
Tripper
chase — Feb 16, 2010exactly, the government regulates so much of our life already why give them more? what do i do with guns? hunt, target shoot, self defense are the main things. me being the minority first off isn't true and second doesn't matter as much as you think. you realize America isn't a democracy right? at least it wasn't intended to be.
by the way, no "e" in minority or majority
That's cute. Start a sentence with a capitol letter.
11% of gun owners hunt. How many times have you used your weapon for self defense or even felt the need to have a weapon? Have you ever used a gun for self defense? If you didn't have guns, would your life change at all, besides the fact you wouldn't ba able to hunt? Why is this such a big deal to you? Having guns?
Hookbender — Feb 16, 2010[quote author=chase link=1265411987/75#83 date=1266294914]exactly, the government regulates so much of our life already why give them more? what do i do with guns? hunt, target shoot, self defense are the main things. me being the minority first off isn't true and second doesn't matter as much as you think. you realize America isn't a democracy right? at least it wasn't intended to be.
by the way, no "e" in minority or majority
That's cute. Start a sentence with a capitol letter.
11% of gun owners hunt. How many times have you used your weapon for self defense or even felt the need to have a weapon? Have you ever used a gun for self defense? If you didn't have guns, would your life change at all, besides the fact you wouldn't ba able to hunt? Why is this such a big deal to you? Having guns?
that is terrible logic. i guess i shouldn't lock my front door since nobody has ever attempted to break in. i won't wear my seat belt either since i've never been in a crash to need it.
and yes my life would change. i get out and shoot at least once a week. it's a hobby of mine. i do failure drills, speed drills, etc. with my concealed carry weapon. i also reload my own ammunition and get out to the range to take the rifle out a few hundred yards.
a more interesting question is why are you so preoccupied with what i do in my personal time and with my own money. does my owning multiple firearms bother you? in all seriousness i would like to take you for a trip to the range with me. i have converted more than one gun hating liberal that way.
to answer a question you have alluded to but not outright asked, the reason i carry a gun daily is this; there are 2 ways a person could get me to do something. the first is to use reason/logic to convince me. the second way is to use force or the threat of it to compel me. carrying a weapon simply eliminates one of those options. i train as often as possible to maintain proficiency and confidence. god willing i will never need to draw my weapon, but if i am forced to than i will hopefully be ready.
have you ever been mugged, beaten up, robbed, etc? i have been. i have simply taken responsibility for my safety and that of my wife instead of hoping a police officer is close enough to help.
chase — Feb 16, 2010 in all seriousness i would like to take you for a trip to the range with me. i have converted more than one gun hating liberal that way.
Probably far safer than going hunting with Dick Chaney! ;)
As far as I recall Hook has been shot and carries a gun
Maybe the difference between you is he has been shot at
Chase
I don't care what you do period, really. I just don't understand the mentality behind the need for guns when you actually don't need one. How are you gonna convert me to liking guns? I do like guns, I have been to several ranges, and until recently I carried a gun everywhere I went. Until....I saw that I had no need for it. (.40)
No one knows how they would react in a bad situation. Pulling a gun could cost you your life, versus not having one and losing just your wallet. You can't practice shooting another human being. And if you pull your gun and fail to use it, your likely to be shot yourself.
What if one of my kids gets in my car and finds my gun under the seat? What if one of my kids stumbles upon my gun in my home? I also don't want the responsibility of gun ownership.
And yes Chase, I've been shot in the shoulder, actually. Attempted car theft and in the wrong part of town.
I thought I explained that already.
chase — Feb 16, 2010well, yet another argument we will never agree upon. in my opinion taking things away from citizens isn't a job for the government, whether it has a potential for abuse or not.
With no limits?
Look, I understand letting people destroy their own lives. Hell, you want to use heroin all day? Be my guest. Just don't drive somewhere high as fuck.
The problem I have is that guns are not about your own personal choices. They are something that can, and often do, affect other people. If you could guarantee me that no one innocent would be shot with those guns, I'd agree with you 100%. But you can't. It's one thing for you to have "freedom." It's another thing for that freedom to impinge on others.
Hey, if someone jumps you for your wallet, do you really think a good reaction is to kill that person? I mean, seriously. I never have more than $100 in my wallet, a few credit cards. Everything in there can be replaced. Is that what a human life is worth?
If someone stole my wallet right now, I'd probably be shot just out of spite after they find that it's empty and I don't have any credit cards any more! ;D :-? :'(
does that person have a weapon threatening my life? too many people have been killed while cooperating with robbers/muggers/etc. i will prefer to take my chances with defending myself instead of waiting to see if i will get shot or stabbbed so I can't identify the person. if you would like i can post multiple examples of this happening nationally.
as far as guaranteeing safety, that's impossible with anything. driving a car is considered a right even though using a car wrongly does often affect others. even with 50,000 people a year dying on the roads, cars are still considered an acceptable risk and used often by the majority of people. guns are no different. there is roughly 1 firearm per person in the US right now. there are over one hundred million US citizens who own at least one gun. that is not likely to change, if ever. even president Obama who is widely acknowledged to be the most liberal president ever elected has no intentions of passing any new gun control regardless of how he truly feels. he is smart enough to remember what happened in 1994 when the original "assault weapons" ban was passed.
Hookbender — Feb 16, 2010Chase
I don't care what you do period, really. I just don't understand the mentality behind the need for guns when you actually don't need one. How are you gonna convert me to liking guns? I do like guns, I have been to several ranges, and until recently I carried a gun everywhere I went. Until....I saw that I had no need for it. (.40)
No one knows how they would react in a bad situation. Pulling a gun could cost you your life, versus not having one and losing just your wallet. You can't practice shooting another human being. And if you pull your gun and fail to use it, your likely to be shot yourself.
What if one of my kids gets in my car and finds my gun under the seat? What if one of my kids stumbles upon my gun in my home? I also don't want the responsibility of gun ownership.
i'm curious, was it simply liability that stopped you from carrying? at one point you must have felt like I feel now. as for pulling the gun and not using it? that won't happen, the only way that weapon is going to be presented is if I intend to use it. there is no legal basis for drawing a weapon to deter. if i am within my rights to draw it, i am within my rights to use it to stop the force, or threat of force.
there is a lot of legal precedent that holds people accountable for brandishing a firearm. even firing a "warning shot" is frowned upon legally. in all the instruction i have taken it has been made clear that if you draw your weapon you need to use it.
CraigBert — Feb 16, 2010If someone stole my wallet right now, I'd probably be shot just out of spite after they find that it's empty and I don't have any credit cards any more! ;D :-? :'(
;D ;D ;D ;D
chase — Feb 16, 2010does that person have a weapon threatening my life? too many people have been killed while cooperating with robbers/muggers/etc. i will prefer to take my chances with defending myself instead of waiting to see if i will get shot or stabbbed so I can't identify the person. if you would like i can post multiple examples of this happening nationally.
as far as guaranteeing safety, that's impossible with anything. driving a car is considered a right even though using a car wrongly does often affect others. even with 50,000 people a year dying on the roads, cars are still considered an acceptable risk and used often by the majority of people. guns are no different. there is roughly 1 firearm per person in the US right now. there are over one hundred million US citizens who own at least one gun. that is not likely to change, if ever. even president Obama who is widely acknowledged to be the most liberal president ever elected has no intentions of passing any new gun control regardless of how he truly feels. he is smart enough to remember what happened in 1994 when the original "assault weapons" ban was passed.
No, driving a car is considered a privilage which can be taken away if necessary. Completely different than gun ownership. No one has a right to drive a car, they are given the privilage to drive a car. So, you have the shoot first ask questions later attitude? If that's the case, you made a case for your right to be taken from you.
What stopped me from carrying was the fact that first, I learned I don't need to, and second the responsibility, and third the possibility of my kids finding the gun and a horrible accident happening. Yes, third should have been my first concern.
Chase, you have no idea how you would react in a situation. You may pull the gun and freeze up, you may even forget the fact you have one. Yeah, we sure would want to think we could be Rambo in a time like that, but more likely than not, ain't gonna happen the way you plan it.
You mentioned instruction.....if you've had proper training with guns, I credit you for that. Most people don't.
i've taken professional instruction dealing with concealed carry issues. working on things like the draw, target recognition, malfunction clearing drills, etc. no doubt their is a huge responsibility. i would like to see more people do the same
as to not knowing what i would do, that is where the training kicks in. hopefully it will be muscle memory and reflex