Will the NRA say he could have used a knife?
By NewHampster on March 12, 2009 at 8:40 AM in Gun Control
(Bumped up by Administrator)
CNN, in the url, calls it a “Shooting Spree”. You know, like a fun time shopping before the wedding. http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/11/alabama.shooting.spree/index.html
Personally, I think these insane incidents involving guns are completely avoidable.
I also know that we have a mixed crowd here and I’m pissing off some friends. Too bad because I want you to for once, just to humor old Hampster I’d like you to ask yourself this question.
Would he have been able to go from house to house killing all those people with a Knife?
Or maybe if he used a machete or a high powered hunting bow. How about that ancient weapon sometimes called the partizane? I know. If he had no access to guns he would have used his fancy bullwhip he picked up in Mexico.
By the time McLendon ended his rampage, he had fatally shot his mother and set fire to her house, and killed his grandparents, his aunt and uncle, the wife and child of a sheriff’s deputy, and three other people, according to King and the coroners of the two counties where the shootings occurred.
“He was shooting at just ordinary people going about their business” said Alabama state Sen. Harri Anne Smith.
Yeah, I know the lie "People kill, not guns". Bullshit! Guns are enablers. Guns are the modern machine which enables a crazy person to step over the edge and commit mass murder. We would not have had Columbine, Virginia Tech or any number of mass killings, if it was not so easy to get a gun in this country. You can say I want to take away your guns and you wouldn't kill anyone. Then I say there is no other reason to have a gun which has only one purpose, killing. That argument sits no better with me than the asshat who refuses to give up his gas gussler, or recycle at his home. I work for one of those and the obstinance is quite funny. "I don't believe in recycling" I can afford the gas" etc.
I think it is time for this country to put the ball in the gun owner's court. If you want to keep hunting or even target shooting, then find a way to develop single shot weapons for those purposes. We must do away with automatic or repeating weapons in the hands of anyone but professionals.
Wait. I think I hear someone saying, "If you take away the guns only the crooks will have guns". More bullshit from the industry. If we stop manufacturing them then nobody will have them.
I was about to be funny and say Please don't shoot me. Then I remembered something else. How liberal talk show hosts and gay mayors tend to get shot. Because people with guns use them while the rest of us shut up and hide.
Cross posted from my home at Partizane.com because somethings are too important to keep to oneself.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
We already have a good idea of what will happen if we restrict guns from citizens. I cite Mexico. It is illegal for private citizens in Mexico to own guns in over a .22 caliber. As we know, Mexico isn’t exactly the safest place to be. If we never made another gun in this country… and we might not some day due to product liability… guns are cheap in Russia for example. Mexican smugglers can just make do with AK47 guns. Truthfully, the smugglers there probably don’t have or need the best in equipment to begin with. It’s not like the citizenry has anything to defend themselves with. As a side note, look at the class structure in Mexico. I am going to push this a bit further and say there are things you can do to unarmed peasants that you would not consider if the citizens were armed and capable of forming a militia. The founding fathers were fairly wise. As time goes forward, they are looking wiser all the time, at least to me they are.
American guns are exported to Mexico illegally and the people who buy them are drug cartels. We just had this “discussion” at the dinner table. Eric Harris and Dylan Kleibol purchased their AK 47s through a third party at a gun show which didn’t require a background check or three day waiting period. The law here was changed after Columbine and the NRA has put a lot of money into campaigns to remove the restrictions again. Even after Virginia Tech, many states do not require mental illness reports to be filed to keep sick people from buying an automatic or semi-automatic weapon. The problem isn’t the 2nd Amendment, it is the NRA whose members want NO restrictions. Even people who would never own a gun for any purpose, don’t generally begrudge hunters or even handguns, but it is contrary to the safety of everyone to have no restrictions.
No one needs an assault rifle in their home. Period.
IF you’re NOT living inner city –
IF you DON’T have to hunt for food or LIKE hunting rabbits for food you sure as hell DO NOT NEED a hand gun or AK47 or M16 or any other nasty thing. I agree.
But you’ll call your friends who own one the minute violent crime starts to creep into your neighborhood.
My wife didn’t like guns much, either, until I bought her a stainless steel S&W .357 with rosewood grips. Damn it, she’s a better shot than me.
personal ownership and use of guns continues to be the scapegoat of persons who have no other solutions to the crimes committed involving the use of guns. This the the epitome of ignorance….always has been and always will be. Those persons advocating the prohibition of firearms as a solution need to return to school and take a course in psychology. Prohibition of guns had NEVER been an inhibition in this type of behavior. Any disturbed person who chooses to utilize a firearm to inflict harm in a random manner or a directed manner is going to be able to do so whether a firearm law is on the books or not.
Tom, my degree(s) are in mathematics/statistics, but I did manage to take Psychology 101 for a humanities credit. Of course abnormal psych might have been beneficial in understanding why someone would take a gun and kill ten people or why others are so paralyzed by fear they think guns should be sold at the supermarket without background checks or waiting periods. Perhaps instead of calling me ignorant, you might be able to explain what you learned in college which supports your argument guns should be readily available to someone with a history of mental illness or a record of violent behavior? Something to offer comfort to the man in AL. whose wife and two year old child were killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or the mother in AR whose ten year old son is facing a lifetime in prison because there was a loaded gun in his father’s home which he used to kill his father and another man? Why do police face criminals in shootouts with AK47s and body armor they bought on the Internet? Why is it that police departments all over the country oppose concealed gun laws? THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE SECOND AMENDMENT! IT’S THE NRA WHICH WANTS NO RESTRICTIONS OR REGULATION ON GUN OWNERSHIP! Why is that so difficult to understand? Guns are lethal. They kill more than 55,000 in our country every year. They facilitate suicide, deadly accidents across the population including young children, they are available to the mentally ill and to known violent felons. My opinions may be ignorant to you, but your are insane to me.
You *still* insist on blaming the weapon. The simple truth is that without someone manipulating it, a gun is inert, much like a hammer.
Oops. Hammers are next on the list.
No, Ferd, I don’t blame the weapon anymore than I would blame a car when a drunken driver causes an accident. If one applies for a drivers license, one is required to present identification, (in some states) proof of citizenship. one’s previous driving record is checked for violations and a driving test is required (written and driving). The state does everything it can to insure only those meeting the requirements are permitted to drive and I think we can all agree to give a person the license to drive when the applicant has a history of DUIs would be irresponsible. There are probably homicides committed with a hammer, but it is a statistically insignificant number and that includes suicide by hammer, accidental deaths by hammer and spree killing by hammer. There is a problem evident here from the comments on nq. No compromise is possible in the minds of those who consider it a constitutional right to own an automatic weapon. Notice, please, the terms automatic and semi-automatic because even though I loath guns of any kind, I’m a reasonable person and if there is no proof of previous violent history and a person is willing to wait a few days, I recognize that person’s right to own a handgun and hunting rifles. We have developed into a culture which glorifies violence in every form and yet when a man goes on a killing rampage in AL, we don’t discuss the victims and the effect on their families and how tragedy can be avoided in the future. Instead, we engage in a vociferous and angry debate over the right to own any kind of gun we choose and it never fails. The pro-gun group immediately assume there will be an assault on their constitutional rights and the pro-control people accuse the anti-control of being responsible. We have this discussion and nothing changes until the next tragic rampage and we begin the same conversation again. This is the way it is with every social issue and we are left with a divided nation because no one is willing to compromise. There is name calling, derision and mockery of those who disagree with our version of the correct point of view. We invoke the constitution, but ignore direct assaults on that document and allow ourselves to be distracted by issues politicians have set aside to keep us divided.
Interesting post, elise. Mathematically speaking you substituted Tom’s post in the equation for one that seems a figment of your imagination. Mathematicians like to do that to solve problems, no? You solved for your substitute quite well. But I don’t think that TS =/(does not equal) the person you take him to be. I would use absolute value of TS and then try to solve the equation again.
Lark, which part of Tom’s post did I substitute for which figment of imagination? This part?
“personal ownership and use of guns continues to be the scapegoat of persons who have no other solutions to the crimes committed involving the use of guns.”
There is no ultimate solution to gun violence any more than there is an ultimate solution for drunk driving or drug addition. If you want to argue it is the constitutional right of citizens to regulate their own behavior even if it can cause damage or death to others, you will open the door to any type of behavior being protected by the constitution and we know the result would be chaos.
‘Of course abnormal psych might have been beneficial in understanding why someone would take a gun and kill ten people or why others are so paralyzed by fear they think guns should be sold at the supermarket without background checks or waiting periods.”
The NRA believes it is a violation of second amendment rights if Wallmart and K-Mart are not allowed to sell guns and weapons. Gun ownership is not the issue as I have repeated several times in response to the attacks against me. Or perhaps this is the statement you are defending?
“This the the epitome of ignorance….always has been and always will be.”
It would be difficult not to be cognizant (or to be ignorant) of the consequences of gun violence in our country. The consequences of having no restrictions is something some have trouble comprehending and this is exactly what the NRA endorses.
New Hampster, you are completely full of utter crap on this issue.
Kind of like ‘airplanes’, huh?
I would like to return some of your profanity to you, but I won’t. Let me just note that when I call people a ‘dip’, I’m usually thinking something along the lines of ‘moronic, drooling, braindead asshat’. So, you dip, he didn’t have an ‘automatic’ weapon.
WTH? Great argument. You win. Why didn’t I see it before! Getting shot is obviously worse than being blown up by someone like Ted K.
And of course you’ve thrown in the moronic ‘guns just for sport or hunting’ idiocy. People use guns millions of times a year to protect themselves or others:
Americans use a gun in self defense once every 13 seconds, on average:
New Hampster, to get back to why you are such a dip, note the above statistic on the instances of more than ONE attacker. 1.25 million cases of multiple attackers where the would-be victim used a gun to protect him or herself. Of course, I could carry a few cocked and ready cross-bows over my shoulder everywhere I go.
And how many people who don’t even have guns have benefited by the criminal’s fear that a homeowner or individual may have a concealed weapon? We KNOW this is significant, because when Florida passed their concealed-carry law, armed-robbers started targeting rental cars due to the fact that it was likely that a rental car would be driven by someone who was visiting Florida and therefore unable to legally carry a concealed weapon, i.e. a multi-shot hand-gun! Consequently, rental car agencies removed the tell-tale stickers from their cars that would indicate it was a rental.
So, yeah, you’ll feel like you’ve saved people by banning guns, but you’ll have merely enabled a state-enforced monopoly: only criminals will have guns.
Not that they’ll need them: any two men can pretty much do what they want with a solitary woman, and even most solitary men.
I completely agree, New Hampster. Automatic weapons aren’t used for hunting animals – only humans.
But then I’m Canadian.
In England they just had a big shooting people are not allowed to have guns….Go ahead and tell the people along our southern boarder they shouldnt own guns…..Take away our guns and this country will be lost within two years….Our founding fathers gave us the rights to freedom of religion and the right to bear arms….Try taking either one away and there will be blood in the street…..
There are shooting incidents in other countries but not so darned many as here! Check the stats.
No country has as many guns as we do….How many people die from drunk drivers every year compared to death from guns!!!!!!!!!!!
Good point. About half of all traffic fatalities are from drunk driving. That dwarfs firearm fatalities. We should ban alcohol.
Of course we tried that before. I hear it didn’t work.
I did. Did you before you made that statement?
There are plenty of countries that have more gun-murders per capita than the US, Mexico being one, even though the US averages 90 guns per every 100 citizens, more than any other nation.
Finland comes in third on gun ownership at over 50 guns per 100, but they don’t even rank on the murders per capita stats I found.
“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that… it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:45
“One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.” –Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. ME 9:341
“Those who hammer their guns into plows, will plow for those who do not.”
— Unknown
It is unfortunate that so many people were affected by this tragedy but I do not want to live a country where an already powerful government never fears the power of its citizenry. Firearms frequently curtail despotism and when one considers the amount or firearms in our country we actually have very few events of this magnitude. I am far more worried about the government than guns.
Aaron, Thomas Jefferson could never have envisioned the kind of weapons available now sometimes with no background check. The idea of an armed rebellion against the government of the US is a silly notion unless it is carried out by the military which would leave us with a military dictatorship.
“It is unfortunate that so many people were affected by this tragedy but I do not want to live a country where an already powerful government never fears the power of its citizenry.”
Innocent people are being killed, not the government. If you think you can fight the government with a handgun or even an automatic, I wouldn’t place a bet on you being anything but dead after that confrontation. The ballot box is the only way to change anything.
Interesting choice of terms… “change”. But as to Thomas Jefferson not foreseeing automatic weapons… it doesn’t matter. It’s not about the guns it’s about the right to defend yourself against tyranny from all enemies… foreign or domestic. The second amendment did not “give us” that right nor do any amendments “give us” anything… they recognize that we are born with those rights inherently. There is a difference.
The Iraqis and Afganis are doing a pretty good job of showing the world that determined patriots (that’s what they think they are) with small arms, can defy the most capable military machine in the history of humanity. The vast majority of societies in history were top-down despotisms that terrorized their own populace to maintain control. Our guns are primarily to defend our freedom from our own wanna-be tyrants.
Elise, what happens when the ballot box is controlled by corrupt, greedy politicians? What then?
P.S. It’s good to “see” you again. I wish I were looking at you from the same side of the fence. You’re one of the bloggers I admire.
Guns will never disappear in America, banning them would only create something like prohibition. People can make their own guns, they even manage to make guns in prisons.
If I thought banning guns would prevent senseless violence, I’d support it. Unfortunately if you look at history and also human behavior around the world, human beings are more then capable of committing atrocities without firearms. Bombs, suicide bombers, hijacking airplanes, blowing up trains, locking people in churches and setting them on fire.
Let’s see, 800,000 people were hacked to death in Rwanda back in the spring of 1994. Hey, remember that? How the f. does stopping the manufacturing of guns keep people from murdering each other?????
Or look at feudal Japan… they made ownership of swords illegal. Only the Samurai could own them. The people found ways to make weapons out of shakuhachi flutes as an example. Most people who want to ban guns… well they mean well. I take it the author here is one of those that have good intentions. But, this movement is also backed by those with less than honorable intentions.
I would like to see a link to that info, AngryWhite.
Link to what?
The 800,000 hacked to death because every picture I have seen of Rwanda, the killers have carried guns.
Try “We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda” or “The Machette Season”.
AWP, I read the book reviews about The Machete Season and some history of Rwanda. The militia was 30,000 men who were armed with AK47s grenades and machetes. If it is your argument machetes are as easy to use as guns, we don’t need to worry about buying a gun, do we? How many people were killed in the US in 2008 from machetes and how many from guns? There were 33,000 gun related deaths and I can’t find any statistics for machetes. A UN study showed the US accounts for 45% of all gun homicides in the world. The US is number one leading such countries as Brazil and Mexico.
It is not my argument that weapons are interchangable. My original point is you can stop manufacturing guns, but that will NOT keep people from murdering each other. Can anyone in the U.S. walk around with a machette without getting arrested? Come on. But if you look up “knife crime statistics,” for here and abroad, you’ll see violence on the upswing.
How many guns are in the U.S.? Per capital is 90 firearms per 100 citizens, is that correct? Did we decimate our population of 300 million because of it? In Rwanda, where the population stands at 10 million, neighbors killed each other; most used what they had available-clubs and machettes. With 800K dead, I would say that is the definition of decimation. However, we have not eliminated ourselves despite an arsenal available to private citizens.
By the way, how many of those 33,000 gun-related deaths were suicides? The AP reported the figure as 55%, is that all pro-gun propaganda bullshit too? If someone wants to off themselves, they will find a way so banishing guns doesn’t stop that either. I am all for gun regulation. I do not want criminals and drug addicts getting hold of weapons to shoot at random. But regulation does not equal banning.
AWP, Rwanda was a war and genocide. People were systematically killed by ruthless leaders and it was a horrible thing, but I don’t understand how that can be used as an argument for a lack of responsibility in our country for the thousands of deaths every year. Yes, more than half the deaths last year were suicides and how does that diminish the horror? A severely depressed person can, in some states, go to the neighborhood gun store, buy a gun without a waiting period, take it home and kill him/herself the same day, sometimes killing other family members first. As I said in another comment, I don’t like guns and won’t have one in my home, but I am willing to compromise. If you want a gun for hunting or a handgun, that is your constitutional right. My problem with the NRA is clear. They do not want to allow any regulation and they believe there is nothing wrong with a private citizen owning automatic guns. Automatic and semi-automatic weapons are most often used in spree killings and shoot-outs with law enforcement. I have not heard of a single police department say they want an armed public. In a moment of road rage, a person with a gun can take someone’s life. In a moment of severe depression a person can take their own life. When life becomes more difficult through economic crisis, these incidents will increase just as they did during the Depression. Soon there will be soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with PTSD and they kill themselves with increasing frequency. If someone wants to kill themselves, they will probably find a way, but there are others who will change their minds if the means isn’t available so easily. Regulation doesn’t equal banning, but try telling that to the gun lobbies.
Wow! New Hampster, you set off an avalanche of pro-gun comments.
I once had someone pointing a gun at me. It turned out to be a fake. If I’d had a gun I could have killed him. He was drugged up on Prozac.
Just for another what if scenario….when my best friend’s mom was stabbed to death, back in 1984, (we were nine)….the dad wished he had arrived home just a few minutes sooner. Cause he would have shot that prick rapist with a handgun he was allowed to carry.
I would have cheered
AngryWhitePerson, is shooting the only way your friend’s dad could have prevented the rape/murder?
Save your bullshit. PLEASE. When you come home to find an assailant attacking your wife (stabbing her multiple times in the stomach and neck,) what would you do, take the time to talk? Figure out why the rapist was such a bad person????? The dad was allowed to carry a concealed handgun and was trained to use it. Instinct would have taken over. However, just to clarify, he did not get there in time and instead, came home to find his wife dying.
My friend’s dad had to retire early and take care of two young girls. Your question, it really just disgusts me.
And your over-correction to the perfectly valid question Elise asked disgusts me. SO fucking what.
Elise asks a perfectly legit question about preventing a rape, and you charge ahead with your bullshit. Then insert strawman after strawman pro-gun crap.
Elise’s question is important to ask even if you believe in gun ownership or the use of a gun to kill a rapist. What it suggests is that there are ways to PREVENT these actions and they don’t involve guns. What your response says is that you are utterly incapable of living in this world without fear and that you will resort to animal level thinking that makes you completely reliant upon a gun instead of a thinking human being who can fathom the areas of prevention that would have saved her the agony and shame of a rape.
But no..you go ahead an blather away with your pro-gun rantings and show everyone how mighty and tough you are. From here you are no brave soul. When asked about prevention you make the insane comment drawing a picture of pulling up a Freudian couch for the rapist as if that is what Elise said in such a short and direct question.
So before you go off on another of your sanctimonious tirades that end in you’re being superior to Elise and filled with all your hysteria you might want to realize there are many ways to prevent these types of attacks before they happen and these methods are taught around the nation every day in martial arts schools and self defense courses.
But you go ahead and cling to the gun as the only option viable to prevent rape and murder if you wish and join the unthinking crowd of trogs who simply dumb down America.
Disgust you? To bad.
F. off moron. When your loved one is getting killed, stop to think about options and see where that gets you.
Go ahead and tell all the rape victims in the world that they should have learned how to prevent them. Screw you.
Thank you for understanding my meaning 007. Sometimes I am clumsy and assume my thoughts are easier to follow than they are.
self-defense is the most basic of rights, TT, and that includes the use of guns if necessary. doesn’t mean that guns are always the best way to handle every situation, but gun ownership is a right, nonetheless.
trying to ban guns just adds to the image of leftists as anti-personal responsibility; blaming crime on guns instead of criminals is pretty weak and disgraceful, IMO. i live in western SD, and i’m sure that people out here have as many guns as anybody, and yet the murder/crime rate is very low. it’s called a culture of personal accountability and lots of cops. just the way i like it.
Effete and decadent.
yea you can say “what IF” all friggen day long to ANY STUPID ARGUment
AngryWhitePerson, your first comment was a little vague to me. If your friend’s father had not been too late and had come upon the rapist/murderer in the act, would he have been able to stop it since the attacker was armed with a knife instead of a gun? Someone tried to break into my parents home several years ago and my father wanted to buy a gun. My sister and I persuaded him to go to the local police station for their advice. The officer told my father to install spotlights in the front and back and to add dead bolts to the doors and block the windows with pieces of wood. He said it is more dangerous to own a gun. Some people, in their minds, believe their reactions will be quick enough to use the gun before being shot themselves and that may not be the reality. There are many children killing themselves or someone else every year. In any case, I am sorry about your friends mother and whenever someone dies a senseless death, people always say “what if “.
We lived in Section 8 apartments, with rampant crime any given week. My friend’s dad happened to be weapons trained AS PART OF HIS JOB, not because he was some “chickenshit” coward hiding in shadows trying to be macho. If he had the CHANCE to save his wife, he would have shot that prick without hesitation.
Did they ever apprehend and convict this person?
No, not when I was a child. It’s very possible that this scumbag got caught doing something else later on. But we wouldn’t have known about it. The “incident” never made the news or the local paper.
For that justice denied, I am truly sorry.
I suppose you wouyld have sung him to sleep with a lullabye?
OMG, like, what if Iraq had nuclear weapons!
What does that have to do with gun ownership?
Hate to say it, but the Iraq war probably never would have happened, and Saddam would be in Iraq today and we wouldn’t be. Kaptain Koolaid wouldn’t be President either. What if indeed.
For sure, Doc; The what ifs from the beginning of this decade would fill a good-sized tome. It is a damn shame we didn’t ask all along the way before we found ourselves here.
Golly, smarter people than me will have to come up with a solution to this problem.
But one thing that always made me wonder. In any other manufacturing business marketing folks make a decision on the size of the production run for a product.
Too few and you can’t recoup the design, tooling, and production costs. Too much and you end up with unsold inventory. Guns seem to be the exception to this rule.
Its funny how they never talk about the “shooting sprees” in the ghettos.
As a Mother that has experienced having a son shot and paralized by gang violence. They don’t count it or really investigate it. My son was shot 12 years ago and not one person has been brought to justice.
I am very sorry to hear about your son.
no one knows better than you and your son what the cost of crime is, so you’re certainly going to have some valid ideas on how to deal with it. here is some of my experience: i was robbed at gunpoint while delivering pizzas in a “bad part” of Tampa FL; thankfully i wasn’t hurt, but if you know Tampa, you know that i very well could have become one of its many murder/assault victims.
i happened to find a cop almost immediately after the incident happened and told him the whole story (the perps were probably still running down the street at that time and could have been caught). the cop basically just blew me off; they called me a couple days later, but of course no one was ever caught.
contrast this with a robbery attempt at a pizza place i work at here in Rapid City, SD: a guy tried to hold us up one night with a box-cutter; a delivery driver saw the incident from outside the building and called 911; within seconds there were multiple cops on the scene; they caught the guy running down the street, and i guarantee he is doing at least 10 years in jail right now. btw, the crime rate in SD is very low overall. i know that there is (was) over 10 times the violent crime rate in FL vs. SD.
moral of the story: when criminals know they stand a very good chance of being caught and doing serious jail time, the crime rate goes down, and that includes gun crime. i think however that the willingness to fund sufficient cops and prisons comes from a community which takes a very strong stand against crime, and so the crime rate will probably be lower to begin with.
I have never owned a gun or wanted a gun in my house until this year. Now, my husband and I are tossing around the idea of purchasing one (and we are seniors.) The fact that Obama is now in the White House and is making so many socialistic changes and seems to be hell bent on destroying the economy is probably a large part of feeling that way.
Also his plans for a civilian army – (what the heck is that for?) I don’t know if we will be able to resist our fundamental belief not to own a firearm, but I am comforted by the fact that there are so many good Americans and patriots out there that do have them.
For the crazies out there that have a gun, well they would have them anyway, even if they were banned. My feeling is that gun ownership evens the playing field. I believe the second amendment was for citizens to be able to rise up against tyranny. I never thought it might happen in the US until now.
So, I have changed my stance on gun ownership and apparently many other Americans have too. Obama was voted gun salesman of the year last year. People are stocking up on ammunition and fire arms.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/16/firearms-associations-claim-obama-drove-surge-gun-sales/
I’m with you OhioMary! I may purchase a gun. I realize the real answer lies in actually punishing criminals that is the way to make us safe! These guys use guns, get out and do it again! I know many responsible gun owners and they would never hurt anyone unless someone was threatening their family. I think that we will need to protect our homes and families from the chaos with all the homeless, unemployed, starving people. Desperate times and desperate people do desperate things. I would rather be safe than sorry. Plus, I want to protect the constitution and we do have the right to bear arms. I never worried that we would lose all of our freedoms until faced with the Obama. I’m not going to sit back and watch our freedoms pried away one at a time no matter what that freedom is. Once freedom is gone, it is gone!
OhioMary, banning guns is not the topic. It is regulation and restrictions to provide background checks and waiting periods, refusing to sell guns to felons or the mentally ill.
exactly. And it should be noted that this isn’t only about regulating, but we should also look at whether the gun lobby is in fact promoting a gun culture that over-stimulates macho gun loving braggadocio that becomes totally reliant upon their weapons for courage and pride.
I had an incident many years back where a friend ran his damn mouth thinking he had his gun in his car and he wouldn’t have done so if he had known he didn’t have it. Now I love this brother dearly but he was showing off with his mouth while thinking he could just defend himself and in the end got his ass whipped by 3 guys who he’d been provoking. And while I can’t make him the poster boy for all gun owners, that sort of cowardice is so damn common, its promoted in movies, TV, and highly reflective in the culture of violence that many refer to here as “gang life” or “drug cartels”. This shit didn’t just come out of the ether, its been coddled, fed, promoted and there is an industry that thrives upon these cowardly portrayals.
A true warrior who has faced their tests wants no conflict for he/she realizes that warfare is perpetual and immoral. It is the cause of any honorable warrior to work towards putting down weapons in the end and to seek all paths to peace.
And to the pathological types who want to rant on about ‘tell that to the criminals’….I have. I have been threatened with guns, knifes, being outnumbered and have been well trained in how to deal with them, and sit here today to speak about it because of the wisdom of my teachers who saved my life by trying to reduce my instinct to fight at the drop of a dime.
Our culture is filled with overly macho bullshit that needs to be called into check. It is this macho crap that is the real sign of both weakness and cowardice.
And for the religious folks out there who overly rely upon their guns as a confidence I ask them about the value of their faith when it is only backed up by Smith or Wesson.
I live in a neighborhood where you can sit on the front porch and hear gun shots at least once an hour. And every one of those shots is fired by a chickenshit coward who dare not stand his ground without his gun.
The reality is that there are violent things in this world we’ll have to deal with, but to hell with the notion that I or others have to arm themselves to the teeth less they be taken over by a dictatorship or by the criminal gangs.
The number one thing missing in both these problems is unity of the citizens to want something different. We are packing heat in almost every home yet it doesn’t stop George Bush from turning this country into a dictatorship and hasn’t prevented Obama from passing his budget requests. So own your guns and believe in the power of this ownership, but sit on your fat ass and do nothing as a citizen and you get what you deserve for this sloth.
Elise, thanks for the thoughtful comments you’ve been making.
the violence-loving culture that you mentioned is really the root of the problem, and it has nothing to do with guns, IMO. the culture is the problem, which i think you alluded to. it is hard to know how to combat this, because culture spreads, just like communicable diseases; it becomes self-replicating. if the bad culture reproduces at a faster rate than the good culture, we’re screwed.
Thank you, truthtelling007!
Your comments say it all and so well.
Right down to the fact that civic responsibility doesn’t end at gun ownership.
Thank you both Elise and truthtelling007. Anyone who wants to own a gun should be happy if there were registration and background checks.
When I was younger I worked in Canada with a bunch of guys that liked hunting on weekends. Their gun purchases had to be approved by the Police Dept. This made them more proud of being responsible hunters.
No, it was about banning all but single-shot “toy” guns.
Sorry, didn’t get back to post until today – I have mixed feelings about background checks. On one hand I think it is a good thing for the police to know who has guns and that people should have a permit to carry concealed – on the other hand, I worry that if we would become a socialist state where the government knew we had guns, then they would know where to come to get them. In Nazi Germany I read that they had gun registration, and when they came to take them away from the citizens, if you had lost it, or no longer had it to hand over they just shot you.
In the above case it sounds as if the shooter (McClendon) would have passed the background check. He had no criminal record – he had even applied to be a police officer.
I don’t like the idea of assault weapons in the hands of criminals, but if you totally outlaw them, then what do the non-criminals defend themselves with? Can you stop someone shooting at you with an assault weapon with a one shot as the writer says we should have?
Ohio Mary: I think you’ve expressed the very uncertainty that has led to the huge uptick in recent gun sales–uncertainty of the American populace. We don’t know where any of this is going to go, and the “rather be safe or sorry” meme is playing itself out across the country.
My local gun store is mobbed everytime I walk in. Ammunition is flying off the shelves at WalMart and Gander Mountain.
I personally have no problem with background checks. I’ve been checked. I have nothing to hide. I have no problems with restrictions on assault weapons. Unless I’m ready to gather an army I don’t understand why they’re on the market.
But as a law-abiding citizen I have a right to defend myself and my property. And I will do that if push comes to shove. The fact that there are criminals and crazies on the streets doesn’t mean that I or any other responsible gun owner should give up our firearms. It’s because of the criminals and crazies that I own guns. It’s a priviledge granted to me and my family under the Constitution of the United States.
And if some people don’t like it? Too bad.
The shooter had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. And, gun sales have gone up more than 40% recently. And, there are new calls for assault weapons bans, but some dems say no way. Interesting update on the story from Samson Alabama…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690314709013801.html
Well, you can urge control of our gun manufacturers, but what about all the gun manufacturers in other countries? To me trying to control our gun manufacturers, and as a result also the importing of guns, would just lead to more smuggling into this country. And since we’ve done such a bang up job with controlling the drugs smuggled into this country, are you sure you would want to put guns in that same category?
Babs, I have a cousin who’s friend had been under psychiatric care for several years and under suicide watch twice. One day he walked out of his apartment to a nearby gun shop, bought a gun, walked back to his apartment and blew his brains out onto the table. Now he may have found another way if the gun shop hadn’t been so convenient, but it wouldn’t have been easy if it had been necessary to find someone selling them illegally. In 2005, 10,000 homicides were committed with firearms and according to the New England Journal of Medicine, an average of 46 people/day kill themselves with guns. Add accidental shooting, shooting by children where guns are available and it adds up to a plague of violence. Why would anyone object to regulating the sell of a lethal weapon?
’cause it makes it easier to take them all away! Duh!!!
In the “nanny state” when somebody poops their pants… from then on everybody wears the same diaper. It’s just simpler that way for the ones at the top who are “responsible” for us. Since none of us would be “responsible” for ourselves. Every freedom we keep is a guard against the “nanny state”.
YEs! they should make guns illegal so people won’t have them anymore. While they are at it, they should make drugs illegal, speeding illegal, and throw in theft there too.
Touchet for atty. general!
Firearms and hunting are of no interest to me. However, living in a rural area without neighbors nearby, I would much rather have a firearm handy to deal with an intruder than a long-handled shovel or a lamp. I truly feel that if violence is in someone’s heart, it will find a means of expression whether or not guns are taken away from the rest of us. Imagine how much damage you could inflict with a car.
Rural areas should have no background check problems since everyone knows each other and I would think the cops would prefer knowing which houses have guns. I have no problem with this.
It’s the cities that are the problem.
When walking alone in the woods, I would be much more concerned about crossing paths with a two-legged animal than a four-legged one. If I lived in the city, I’d still want to own a gun.
New Hampster, while I see no use for a 50 cal and other automatic firearms, I do believe that a person has a constitutional right to bear arms. SCOTUS said as much in a decision in 1999-2000 and most recently in the DC case.
They are instruments of death and I would not use them hunting by choice, as I like to hunt without announcing my position.
Yet if comes to eating or self defense in the upcoming anarchy….well…
Man made the gun, gun kills man.
NewHampster: Good point made. But, all we have to do is look back and review the weapons the terrorists used to crash planes into buildings. Box cutters, a knife about 4 inches long…
What it comes down to, if someone is going to kill another, they will do it. Whatever the means.
In 2001, more than three times the number of people killed by terrorist, died from guns.
Thousands of people die in car accidents, let’s ban cars. How about prescription drug overdoses? Ban ‘em! The response will be “they are useful”! So are guns.
And while we’re at it, let’s hit them with banning all cellphone use in cars. I’ve been closer to being killed by idiot drivers with cellphones hard-wired to their skull than I have by someone with a firearm and this includes gum-beaters and jaw-jackers with hands-free models. If this issue is *really* about safety, banning them should present no problem to those who want my guns.
The comment shredder is at it again.
“Wait. I think I hear someone saying, “If you take away the guns only the crooks will have guns”. More bullshit from the industry. If we stop manufacturing them then nobody will have them.”
If you truly believe that, you are incredibly, painfully, naive.
Do you believe it’s ok to sell guns over the Internet, Kevin. Or at gun shows which require no background check or waiting period? Do you realize in many states certain types of over the counter cough syrups require identification and the purchase is limited because it can be used to make meth? Annual stats for death by methamphetamine is minute when compared to death by guns. Pain killers are regulated by law. Oxycontin is available on the street, but no one argues it should be sold like aspirin without a prescription.
Wow elise, sorry but you can’t get there from here. Do you often read that much in to peoples statements?
EVERY law abiding citizen of the united states should have the right to own and carry a firearm that is reasonable for self protection, period, full stop.
That means a criminal background check to be sure they are not felons or mentally incompetent to own said firearm.
But the thought that if we just quit making them then no one would have them is simple minded and utterly ridiculous.
If we stop manufacturing drugs, no one will have them? You KNOW this isn’t true. Just because legitmate sources stop the manufacture of firearms doesn’t mean all of sudden NO ONE will have them.
Complete and utter fallacious statement. You sir are the epitome of retarted.
I mean really you can’t believe that can you?
Australia banned guns and the crime and murder rate went UP. Break-in murders are much higher in the UK than the USA because the thief is assured the homeowner will have no weapons of self-defense. Evidence after Katrina showed the surest way to anarchy is a defenseless civilian population. In Darfur, unarmed citizens are hacked to death with machetes, a method which has killed more ethnic and Christian Africans than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
A non-law-abiding citizen will get their weapon of choice no matter the law and will be a menace; a law-abiding citizen, since they are law-abiding, will then not be armed on par with aggressors, but even armed with any type of weapon they will never be a menace.
Except to those who would impose tyranny.
But then he said a lot of things, like this for example:
We need to guard our freedoms, even those freedoms we don’t particularly care for. The freedom to protest the second amendment is a right we have because of guns. Ironic.
“The freedom to protest the second amendment is a right we have because of guns”
I disagree with this premise. The freedom to disagree with any of the amendments comes from a realization of such freedoms. We have guns available all over the nation and yet so many people have no use of them because they are dumbed down with American Idol and the latest Viagra craze.
The coupling of one freedom to the right to own guns is a false conflation. You have the right to protest the second amendment by the power of voice that is much more powerful than a gun. This is why they were enumerated as ‘inalienable rights’.
I’m not for being such a pacifist that people are easily controlled, but strongly believe that most of the problems we have stem from ignorance and silence, not because not enough own guns.
And you have every right to do so, that very right I would defend even though I don’t fully agree. But show me just one instance where a nation won independence through either the power of voice or the printed word.
I was referring to our war of independence, and subsequent wars fought to preserve freedom… note the qualifier at the end.
The rate of the mentally unstable is increasing (and will probably soar higher as the economy dips lower). Many are angry enough about being screwed by rich people that they may also become part of thsi problem. With such easy access to guns here (gun shows) I expect mamy more such stories as we move into increasingly uncertain times.
With a usurper and Marxist in the White House , you gun control people should stop your old propaganda, it’s not going to happen…
Do you realize how many millions of people you would have to kill to disarm America?.
Gun and ammo sales right now are off the charts….
Get real…………
and do you realize that you can cripple all those millions of Americans by putting a new series like American Idol on Fox?
The greater control of propaganda is more effective than warring on the citizens. By convincing enough of them to simply buy their way to happiness, and convincing them that there is a common enemy, you can control them for much longer and at much deeper levels.
Your whole comment is nothing but bullshit propaganda that is simply the flipside of the perceived propaganda you throw at the author of this post.
Where was your outrage over the last 8 years when your government was turned into a dictatorship under George W Bush and his law staff at the Office of Legal Council which advocated the take total control, dismiss the powers of Congress, and assume a Unitary Executive? It was second seat to your hatred of Muslims, and your blind loyalty against an “enemy” that you were pointed to and said, “charge!”
Gun sales are off the charts now because of the bullshit rantings of many who keep trying to convince themselves and others that there is a new power to take away your weapons which is drummed up nightly by loons like Lou Dobbs and across the net by cowards who think they’ll be any safer by reliance upon weapons.
Good luck in your newly highly secure nation of scared shitless chickenshits who would rather buy guns and ammo than getting involved as citizens and challenging their representatives and Senators to do a good job in Congress.
Obama is just another puppet in the power structure of American politics, and you’ve bought into your role perfectly.
I want a missile silo in my back yard.
You know because I have the right to bare arms.
Seriously though! With Rights come responsibility. The founding fathers gave us these rights because they didn’t want government to be able to consfiscate weapons and allow only the state to have them. Yet with the right comes the responsibility of private citizens, and makers and sellers of these weapons to ensure that THEY act responsibly when selling, creating, and buying these weapons. maybe instead of forming the NRA just to fight against these new government regulations, they could have regulated themselves. Imagine what would happen if gun companies had stopped selling assult type weapons to private citizens. And suing those who did. Look at the way HOllywood get’s royally pissed when someone burns their movies. Imagine what would happen if gun manufactures showed that much righteous indignation with their products. The idea that founding fathers had was that adults can think for themselves and that the goverment doesn’t have lord over and spoon feed them. But if you want to feed yourself you have show some intiative. Whipe your own mouth so mommy won’t have to. Until these people realize that if they don’t want to be told what to do they must act responsible, slowly but surely their rights will be taken away. And they are hard to get back.
From the mortage crisis to the morons we place in office. All of the problems we have are our fault. I’m not kidding when i say i’m furious not with obama but with the juvinile people who put them in office. Instead of acting like adults we act more like adolescent, full of rebellion low on independence and then we wonder why things don’t work out for us. Start acting like adults. Just like i will never get a missle silo in my back yard, mentally unhindge people, and irresponsible citizens shouldn’t get assult weapons. You don’t want mommy goverment telling you what to do. Grow up move out, and start doing things to regulate yourselves. The constitution promises LIFE, LIBERTY
note darlings life goes before freedom. My life trumps your right to own a gun.
it’s true that america is a nation of infants and fools, and we have only ourselves to blame for our present situation; however, you last sentence doesn’t make sense. you having your life and someone else owning a gun are not mutually exclusives propositions.
Thank you – my thoughts exactly!
There may be money in the stimulus bill for that. Think of all the jobs it would create!
Actually I’ve already got one, although they hauled away the Nike missile it contained over 30 years ago. I’ve been hoping to pick up a replacement on eBay.
Couldn’t you just use the silo as a giant composting pit? The thought of all that fertilizer growing thousands of flowers makes me feel all smooshy inside.
Whew!!! After seeing the topic i thought,oh no I dont want to have to never come here again.But reading the post makes me feel better.Good responses people.I have gun’s and have gotton more amao since the unsurper.But I can agree hunters dont need ak47’s etc for hunting.
I for one am glad New Hampster doesn’t own a gun. I wouldn’t like a gun held to my head forcing me to give up my gas guzzler and to compell me to religiously recycle. Yes, I know that’s an absurd notion, but hey, too much unopposed power in the wrong hands leads to such wonderful events as the Holocaust.
The incidence of gun-related deaths relates directly to the incidence of gun ownership:
http://www.gun-control-network.org/GF01.htm
Presumably this relationship will continue, since the incidence of bat-shit craziness is also increasing with each passing year.
correlation does not equal causation; logic 101. i would like to see the relationship of gun ownership to gun crime broken down *within* the united states, not just across different countries. i think that if you did that, you wouldn’t even have the correlation. culture is a bigger part of murder rates than gun ownership is, IMO.
And the incidence of gun violence also increases during non-daylight hours, Zippy. Oh, I know! Let’s ban darkness. Your post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies will be your undoing, Zippy. Try a course in logic and then a course in silence.
kgirl1028
The constitution promises LIFE, LIBERTY
note darlings life goes before freedom. My life trumps your right to own a gun.
___________________________________________
” Give me liberty or give me death ”
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”.
Benjamin Franklin
_______________________________
That we have an elected President and Congress is a conspiracy theory………
Sure opened up a contentious can of worms there NH. I usually agree with you but not this time.
I hate guns. I don’t have a gun. I don’t want a gun in my house.
The thing I do favor is the Constitution. The 2nd. Ammendment give the “people” the right to bear arms” Period.
I don’t like guns. But I like people that want to take away constitutional rights even less.
Wrong.
“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.”
Those who are members of the militia (national guard) have every right to bear arms.
“Those who are members of the militia (national guard) have every right to bear arms.”
Sorry, NewHampster, That view has never been the legal view. The latest USCC decision (in DC) stands directly in opposition to that view, and so does this historical meaning of militia. Just because you say something is so doesn’t make it so.
In the day, regular citizens were the militia. But hold onto that thought, it is the very “decision” we will get from our commander in chief and constitutional “arbiter”. Wait and see. Let me again quote my favorite authority on the subject:
Socialism and control is a slippery slope.
ah, what joy to log on the morning after and see such active, civil discussion around a topic dear to my heart.
Thank you all for being the mature NoQuarter readers you are.
Snoopy – Bingo
And yes, I know we’ll never take away the guns. I also know that there is no argument to stop us from having stronger registration and waiting requirements. And if anyone can give me one single, logical, not from the NRA handbook reason for the sale of assault weapons, then I’ll go buy one.
So many things I hear from the pro-gun people are just as bad as we heard/hear from the O’bots. You have been brainwashed by the gun industry. Two seniors up above think they can protect themselves with a gun in the house? Against the 20 something young bucks who broke in while you were having tea.
We control cars, booze, the age we can screw and drivers. Why don’t we at least attempt to control guns?
You controlled prayer in public schools, didn’t you? Well now you have the results you wanted to have. Now you want to control guns. When the out of controls are in control then who’s going to control them, you? I’m sure you’ll speak to them nicely and they will do according to their good and fair conscience that they would have developed.
Why not prohibit any speech about morality? Or why not declare religion obsolete? Wouldn’t that bring us closer together?
Be real. Guns are not speech, religion, prayer.
But since you brought it up, I was one of those early 1960’s Jewish kids who was forced to say the lords prayer every morning and sing Christmas carols. Maybe I’d be a more religious Jew if I hadn’t had a daily dose of Christian indoctrination.
By your argument we should probably not have driver’s licenses or car registrations either. Heck, let’s let my 92 year old dad keep driving as long as he feels it’s his right to drive.
How did you know? I am also against the State professional regulation boards.
Christmas carols should have been prohibited long long time ago. I agree. They should have been substituted by debauchery and orgy.
OMG. People are using guns to kill because they weren’t forced to pray in school? Not that religion ever lets evidence get in the way, but the vast majority of non-praying students never use guns to hurt people. But if you like correlations, look on conservative blogs – you’ll find a high correlation between religion and gun-love. I don’t believe that prayer has anything to do with a discussion about shooting crises.
The second amendment was put in place by the Framers to ensure that if (read “when”) the government grew tyrannical, the citizenry could rise against it. That idea alone is enough for me to own an assault rifle.
The firearm is pivotal to our freedoms. Had the Brits disarmed the Colonials of weapons like the military had, the revolution would not have happened, or have been longer, and most likely unsuccessful.
Incidents like these are tragic. So are car accidents which claim *many* more lives each year than firearms. I, however, when faced with weighing the options that I can think of, find that I can find no acceptable substitute.
“Two seniors up above think they can protect themselves with a gun in the house?” Yep, I do, and I’m not even a member of the NRA, nor do I go to gun shows, or receive literature from the gun industry–no interest whatsoever. All I can tell you is that if someone breaks into my house, even if I lose, I promise you I will be taking a piece of their a$$ with me. Nobody’s breaking up my tea party without a fight.
“We control cars, booze, the age we can screw and drivers.” Yes, and since this is so effective, I feel like I live in a damned Utopia!
I used to be a handgun owner and for a good reason – to potentially defend myself. There was a time when I would have to conduct business in an area that was crime infested. I chose to have a handgun ready and be vigilant as well as cautious. I never had to use it but did choose to “flash” it on more than one occasion to ward off what i saw as potential threats. Since that time I chose to sell the guna nd don’t have one now.
If I lived in a rural area I feel I would need a gun or rifle to protect against at least possible unwanted animals.
There are reasons for guns.
Guns are enablers.
Gun are inanimate objects and cannot be enablers. People are enablers in the use of guns. The same way cars are not enablers of drunks drivers – it’s the abuse by the driver.
Guns are the modern machine which enables a crazy person to step over the edge and commit mass murder.
I have no doubt that if the Columbine murderers did not have access to guns they would have used explosives.
Depending on where we live we already have pretty strict gun control. But no matter how many laws you enact it will never be enough to be an absolute cure and could end up hurting the people those laws were not intended for.
Nicely done, termo. I concur.
NH, since you already prohibited prayer in school and you are getting all your unwanted frozen embryos, fetuses and babies aborted, why stop there?
Why not prohibit church attendance? Most people get offended by church attending people and unleash at them by trying to kill them. Since religion is so offensive and raises such hate, lets prohibit religious speech, no?
Why not prohibit a multiple party system since politics is so offensive and so many people unleash against those of different party persuasion? Lets have one a one party system.
No guns
No religion
No political party differences.
Hurray!
lark,
I disagree strongly with New Hampster on this issue but you’re out of line with your first sentence.
Please make your argument in a civil manner. It wouldn’t hurt to start with an apology.
You make a good point. That introduction was out of line and uncalled for. An unnecessary irritant.
NewHampster, I apologize for making that assumption against you. Sorry. Your position about prayer in school, abortion and stem cell research is unknown to me.
You got it all wrong. Let people have as many guns as they want, but simply ban the production, sale and possession of bullets. Whatever. As long as there are mass methods of killing, the human race will continue to use it one way or the other.
You can press your own bullets, my friend makes all his own bullets. Years ago when these little groups started that were not going to pay income tax, these people(large groups across the U.S.) began stockpiling guns and ammunition for the time the government would come after them, that movement was in the latter part of the 70’s and 80’s. The bullet press still works. People will still have bullets.
I am not against people having guns, but the regulations and laws already on the books should be used. Like most of the laws against illegal immigration, they are there, they just aren’t enforced.
Ban automobiles. Ban airplanes. Ban trucks. Ban trains. Ban electricity. Ban natural gas. Ban horse and buggies. Ban just about anything you can think of because just about anything you can think of can kill, has killed, or will kill when in/or under the control of mortal human beings.
BAN PEOPLE
truthorconsequences: LMAO.
You know when I read that story about the Alabama shooting, my reaction was: Oh, great, now they’re going to ban being “quiet”.
People who want to ban things for the sake of safety have lost sight of the fact that there are no guarantees, no matter how carefully they might plan their lives. All they see is a forest of danger, forgetting that it’s a single tree falling that will kill them.
Then there are those who want guns because they think all the trees are out to get them…
Sounds like another psychosis to me. So we’ve established that morons like bots should not have guns and neither should the insane.
So now, you’re the one who is controlling who gets guns and who doesn’t?
How ’bout this version…
People who want to have things for the sake of safety have lost sight of the fact that there are no guarantees, no matter how carefully they might plan their lives. All they see is a forest of danger, forgetting that it’s a single tree falling (after shooting a target stapled to it) that will kill them.
Pardon the gallows humor…
Ferd, I’m a gun owner too, but what would be nice is something in the order of (what I’ve heard) Japan has: make the person submit an application well in advance of the point of purchase, make them pass a psychological test, and make the registration expensive (to cover costs)…and then make them wait a year to get the weapon.
Would that solve all the problems? No. But it would solve many like someone going and getting a gun to “solve” marital disputes or getting them out the hands of Mexicans sending them down to their drug cartel (this happens around DFW all the time..not a psychosis, a fact). So, if you are responsible and stable, you get your hunk of metal, but if not, tough.
My somewhat snarky point was that I know a lot of people who “need” to have a gun because they think the whole world is out to get them. So some fear for their security because guns are out there, and some fear for their safety unless they have a gun. Fear is the common factor here.
Her’es my snark in name only, then:
And I also know of a lot of people who *need* to beat their gums silly on a cell-phone while they’re driving. Where is the outrage at the carnage caused by this crap? Oh, everyone has to be in constant contact so they can bleat until the sheep come home. Never mind I’ve been rear-ended by these sorts. Besides, it’s cool to yap and drive poorly at the same time.
I’m sorry, ces, but I find most of my fellow citizens short at least a lugnut on their wheel assemblies.
There are plenty of laws *already* on the books against half-wits, obamabots, and criminals who might want to purchase a gun.
So if guns are to be banned due to the havoc and death they can create, then so should the following items:
cars
cellphones
free speech
politicians
lawyers
doctors
bureaucrats
bosses
teenagers
nails that bend on the first hammer strike
screws that strip before you use them
bent fencing materials
anyone who works at Wal-Mart
potholes
hot coffee in styrofoam cups
the space shuttle
standing armies of any kind
Three Stooge’s Short Subjects
Marx Brother’s Movies
All Rap music
Most country music
Anything by Black Sabbath
Anything by Frank Zappa
artichokes
the element lead
the element mercury
any element beyond U-238
the USC Trojans
And there are many more
Don’t forget hockey players:)
I live in Texas, Ferd, so I know what you’re talking about! Ha! Even before the cellphones became surgically connected from hand to hole in head, I was rather fearful of my life on the road here!!!
And I even dare to ride…gasp!!..a bicycle on “their” roads. So when you mention potholes, the lack of shoulders, lane marker reflector “bumps”…yeah, I hear ya.
But I just wonder what do we do with the morons who initiate the legal poop storm by doing things that cause other people so much harm in the first place? I mean, it’s some idiot lady who puts her COFFEE in her crotch and pops the clutch or the guy who lets his wife ride on the handlebars who then slams into a curb (killing said wife)…these are the idiots who are to blame with the mundane stuff.
Seriously though, I think guns fall into another category because their PURPOSE is to inflict harm on whatever. I think the Fore Explorer is right up there…poor design that led to many deaths, but it’s a car, not a weapon BY DESIGN.
Honestly, this issue is something I struggle with, because I can see some of both sides. That’s why I would like layers of “insulation” before any joe schmo gets a Sat Night Special at a local gun show held in a school’s gymnasium on Friday night.
In the end, I have NO delusions about me being some hero if I’m in a bank hold up situation or home invasion. Being prepared is one thing…almost WANTING to someday be in that situation to justify having a gun is WAY beyond my personal makeup. (Not saying that’s what you are, just in general…)
So yeah, if you toss in the UM Wolverines or heck, make it simple…WATER!…I’m with ya.
Anything by Frank Zappa
Oh no you don’t Ferd…
I would be in the dumps without Pajama People and the yellow snow!
Ces, you have as much a right “not” to own a gun as I am to own one. It’s a choice. But belittling gun owners or pretending we’re all a bunch of psychos takes the discussion no where.
You may not like the idea of gun ownership. Fine. But that does not prohibit me or others to have a legal right to own and [with proper certification] carry. These are privledges granted under law and the US Constitution.
I don’t take these rights for granted. And neither should anyone else. But please, let’s not reduce the discussion to dumb personal attacks.
Sorry for the typo:
“as I have to own one.”
Um, I wasn’t pointing that at Ferd, personally at all, Peggy Sue. The word “those” was non-specific.
Ferd, if you took that personally, I’m sorry. It wasn’t intended that way.
I didn’t say ALL gun owners.
I didn’t say MOST gun owners.
I said there are THOSE who feel that way.
As in, some gun owners. And I could point to some friends/acquaintances of mine as proof.
Moreover, the point stands, there are SOME who are so afraid they feel the NEED to have a gun.
Besides, Peggy Sue, point of fact is I AM A GUN OWNER, so I don’t think I’d want to go around calling myself a pyscho.
I stand corrected, Ces. And no, I don’t think you would call yourself a psycho :0).
This has been a spirited discussion. Which is a good thing in my mind because it’s an important issue for many of us.
I agree, my thanks to you, as well.
)
New England Journal of Medicine
Guns in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill someone you know than to kill in self-defense.
The risk of homicide in the home is three times greater in households with guns. The risk of suicide is five times greater.
APA/AAP
Nearly 40 percent of accidental handgun shootings of children under sixteen occurred in the homes of friends or relatives.
A 20/20 report on gun safety programs targeting children, i.e., “Eddie Eagle”, highlighted a study demonstrating that these programs simply don’t work.
That is true. But why doesn’t the NEJM says that while most advertising asks people to talk to their doctor about something, talking to doctors is a fallacy. The problem isn’t guns but talking. People essentially hate other people specially when other people talk. The act of talking is the most dangerous one. Once you talk you make more enemies than friends. Each time you talk the probabilities that those hearing you will hate you increases exponentially. That’s why the doggy thread is so popular, because contrary to what is understood, dogs and cats, pets in general do not talk. So they end up being loved. But humans talk and that causes great hate among those around.
So why dosent’t the NEJM says that people use guns against their love ones or against those they know just because those are the ones they hear.
The fact is that NQ threads are mostly written and shared by people who’s main objective is to control others.
Why are guns used? To control others. To control others when they speak. To make people shut up for good. Lets face it once of the most satisfying thing is to shut people up.
And why does this happens? First they shut prayer in school. Then they want to shut up their conscience. They want to shut up other people’s conscience. People want to shut up God.
They stopped (a) forcing public prayer and (b) forcing non-Christians to say Christian prayers. No one stops a religious child from saying a prayer privately, whether before lunch or any other time. I repeat – people are free to pray at school. What they’re not free to do is public prayer. This way, everyone’s rights are respected. If you want to pray, you can, if you don’t, you’re not forced.
You act like the right to pray was taken away, which it wasn’t. But that’s seemingly to obscure that what you are advocating is forced public prayer in schools.
The thing is that when children and teens are given exposure to public prayer in which prayer serves the purpose of enlightening the conscience and bringing about humility in the heart, then issues include character as a meaningful part of life. When issues are amoralized by lack of consciousness and meaninglessness is at the forefront of education, then the results of such amoral education is similar to secret prayer – secret egotistical wrongdoing.
Public prayer seeks to unmask the ego and to expose personal wrongdoing. Something that is lacking in the financial sectors and in the corporate sector.
Public prayer in school is also a way to move children and teens towards seeking the advice and umbrella of religion and church in their lives. Without it, people tend to move toward self-sufficiency and amorality.
Anyway, I know that prayer in school is gone forever. But so is a society that can govern itself morally.
Lark, and you came to this conclusion how?
My neighbor, two doors down went on vacation. He asked the kid across the street to feed the cats while they were away. The kids had a party in house. The shotgun was locked away and the shells where locked away in different parts of the house. They broke into the both places and the shootgun was loaded and “accidentally” went off and killed one of these kids.
A teenage was dead and the life of another was ruined. Both gun and ammo were “locked”.
My point is that it was not the gun that killed, it was the actions of a kid. So one may say if the gun was not present it would not have happened. Maybe that is true but to me the real problem is a lack of personal responsibility that permeates our society.
BO said, ““If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,”… and so it is that violence begats violence.
So if BO said he will bring a gun…how does that work for “gun control”?
I am left speechless. But the fact remains that one of the most salient aspects of our present is the desire to exert control over our environment. The kids wanted to be in control while being a guest in that house over and above being in control of feeding the cats. Obama wants to control others through threats of overpowering others by using a gun over a knife. No one wants to give up control.
These children probably never obeyed their teachers except maybe under the threat of expulsion from school. Obama simply does not like to obey the rules of engagement. We better keep an eye on him because I don’t think he will be obeying the Constitution all that much. He, like those children may load the shut gun and pull the trigger.
I think it’s probably worse than that. It would be one thing to plainly disrespect it. It is another to espouse belief in the document on one hand and on the other hand feel you have the moral authority to arbiter over it.
I agree that control over ones surroundings is a primal human force.
Respectfully, I am at a loss to understand how it is that you say this NQ forum seeks to “control”?
While I may read what is posted here, it is up to me what I do with that information. Personal responsibility requires critical thinking skills. Those kids were not “bad kids” just lacking these skills.
Lao Tzu
Okay I admit I exaggerated with that statement. I retract that statement in full for now. May St. Ignatius forgive me for using ‘control’ out of context.
I still get your meaning and thank you for the exchange.
What “homes” were the data collected from? Ages? And was there any part of this “study” that attempted to determine what, if any, training had or had not been taken. I thought not. This sounds like a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.
Maybe if gun owners wouldn’t mind registering their weapons (like I have in the past) we’d have better statistics???
(I’m not picking on you Ferd, really. You’ve just been lucky enough to make points I felt to reply to. So no ado here….just sayin’.)
My weapons are registered. I don’t mind that. What I do mind is someone who wouldn’t know the business end of a gun from their own tattooed forehead or arse telling me how I should handle emergencies and how I should store, maintain, or otherwise keep my weapons.
But all this will not help the statistics, which can be twisted into anything on an agenda. If the agenda is complete gun control, they’ll find the statistics to back it up.
And people, preferring safety to freedom (and will get neither, in the bargain) eat the crap up. But while bleating about safety, they’ll jam that damn cellphone to their ear and drive like a schizophrenic Mario Andretti, taking their half of the road out of the middle and endangering everyone around them.
I agree, Ferd, I agree.
Statistically, your toaster is probably more of a risk than the gun.
See, I appreciate your level-headedness about it. If Texas made us register, I would. I’m not afraid of those “trees” if you know what I mean.
You can lie about anything with statistics, that’s for sure.
This is a very thoughtful discussion, and I respect all viewpoints.
I am a gun owner, and have been for many years. I use all necessary caution and have a very healthy respect for fire-arms.
As to mass shootings, I remember the restaurant shooting in Texas some years ago, where a well trained women had left her gun at home, and several people, including her father were killed.
We were motorcyclists for many years, traveling remote areas, and totally exposed if stranded. We wanted to be able to defend ourselves if necessary.
The majority of illegally obtained fire-arms come through the criminal system, but there are also gun shop owners who willing sell weapons to illegitmate customers.
Law enforcement is not going to be able to stop violent acts no matter how heroic their efforts…I pray it never happens, but I would rather be safe than sorry…or dead!
The problem is, if guns were against the law, this nutball would still have the gun and I wouldn’t. No thanks.
Uppity my friend, there are many who might consider a cat loving, animation crazed blogger to be a nutball. Not I mind you, just saying.
That was uncalled for and you know it.
And therein lies the rub.
If all were equal and everyone were playing on a level field, there might be some reasonable argument for limiting gun rights. But everything is not equal and the playing field certainly is not level.
Look people, NewHampster, our beloved leader said right here in this thread that he is for shutting up Christian indoctrination. That is the way I understood him. So for a lot of people if Christians don’t shut up why not mull them down? Guns are mostly used to shut up people so they stop talking. NewHampster is the first one that would like to shut up a few himself, no?
A lot of the killers that binge on killing sprees usually do it against targets like churches, restaurants and places where people are there talking freely their minds, specially their consciences. Actually we don’t even like it when our elected officials vote their consciences. We prefer they would vote what the pols indicate.
Wars and guns are all about shutting people up because we hate when other talk.
I am not your beloved leader and I and my post do not speak for the owners of NoQuarter.
You on the other hand are looking to be shut up, but not by me. NRA employee trolls like you who like to twist arguments around a pretzel until people get so confused they give up, you should just be ignored. In fact is ignore derived from ignoramus?
I know.
NewHampster, your perspective on the NRA is seriously skewed. Now, calm down, take a deep breath. I’m not an NRA member, I do own guns, I do have a carry license and my personal handgun is registered. For all of that, I had to undergo both state and federal “bureau of investigation” background checks, complete handgun training on safety and legal liability, as well as marksmanship.
Are we good so far?
The NRA promotes gun safety every day by providing training for hunters and gun owners.
Isn’t that a good thing?
The NRA [like its counterparty the ACLU] is actively engaged in protecting the Constitutional rights of gun-owners, while promoting safety, training, and proper use of guns for protection and hunting.
So, give the devil his due on that at least.
One more thing, NH:
My training was provided by the police. A former police chief provided my classroom training at a local community college course; a currently serving police officer provided my marksmanship and safety training.
I lived in Texas during this Luby’s restaurant event. It ultimately led to the Texas “carry law”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hennard
Fact of the matter is if you make guns illegal, only illegals will own guns, and tragedies like this still happen. See the situation in Germany.
Quick search of school shootings is pretty interesting (there are more but these are the major highlights)
March 11, 2009
10 dead at a school in Winnenden, Germany
September 23, 2008
Seinajoki University of Applied Sciences, Kauhajoki, Finland. Student Matti Juhani Saari, 22, killed 10 people before shooting himself in the head.
November 7, 2007
Jokela High School, Tuusula, Finland. Pekka-Eric Auvinen, 18, killed seven fellow students and the school’s principal before shooting himself in the head.
April 16, 2007: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia. Student gunman Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people in the United States’ worst-ever campus shooting incident
April 26, 2002: Johann Gutenberg Gymnasium, Erfurt, Germany. Expelled student Robert Steinhauser, 19, shot and killed 13 teachers, two fellow pupils and a police officer before committing suicide.
April 20, 1999: Columbine High School, Colorado. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 12 fellow students and a teacher.
March 13, 1996: Dunblane School, Scotland. Unemployed former scoutmaster Thomas Hamilton, 43, opened fire on a school gymnasium full of five and six year olds before turning the gun on himself.
December 6, 1989: Ecole Polytechnique, Montreal, Canada. Marc Lepine, 25, killed 14 people and injured a further 14, with a semi-automatic rifle and a hunting knife before taking his own life.
the mindlessness and complete lack of logical thought, and abrogation of personal responsibility of the ‘eliminate the guns- eliminate the problem!’ mentality roars right through here.
Drugs are illegal! Yeah! you never hear about them anymore do you?….Just a few more laws, on top of the 20,000+ that haven’t done anything more than produce unarmed victims.
Someone who is that deranged isn’t going to let laws stop them. One armed veteran or off duty cop could have ended that. Why is this sooooo hard for a liberal mindset to see?
“When seconds count, the police are minutes away!”
As a former sworn officer, and veteran, i can tell you 94% of all crimes go unsolved. YOU AND YOU ALONE, ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU AND YOUR SAFETY. Every attempt at abrogation of responsibility by foisting it off on government will fail. Ask the Jews of Nazi Germany how gun control worked out for them, oh you can’t find any!!??
A prohibition against weapons, besides leading to the breakup of the United States, (I for one will NEVER give mine up, just look at the sovereignty bills that are moving forward), would produce another black market. What, the smugglers, who pay no attention to our border now, will ship drugs, humans, anthrax, botulism, but draw the line on weapons? Your ignorance on this is appalling.
Yes, I lived in Texas, my kids were born there and I have family there. If Texas secedes, I am so there. My kids can be “anchor babies”.
Agreed, Alpinejager. And this statement should ring in everyone’s head with half a dose of common sense:
YOU AND YOU ALONE, ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU AND YOUR SAFETY.
And if you’re waiting for the guys in the white hats to save your ass? Good luck with that!
The only ones sporting white hats lately are the same ones that ride unicorns. I certainly won’t be waiting on them.
You and me both, Ferd. Look, I wish the world was pie-in-the-sky fair and peaceful and violence was something we read about only in the history books.
But I know that’s not the truth. In fact, I know it like I know my name. And I say that sadly. My decision to own guns was not out of some philosophical tilt or pro-American, defend my Constitutional rights slogan, but by being run over by a very personal, very harsh and raw reality.
So, I won’t be waiting for the unicorns either.
Peggy Sue:
I understand. I have owned guns all my life and before last June was a card-carrying member of the Democratic Party for 32 years. Like my free speech, which the anal-retentive control freaks cannot have unless they can pry it off my cold, dead lips, they won’t be getting my guns anytime soon. This is in part because I believe in protecting myself but I also believe in exercising my Constitutional rights, while I still have them.
I am sick and tired of honest, law-abiding citizens being punished for the actions of a few psychotics or malcontents.
“Will the NRA say he could have used a knife?”
This is an example of what I would call a BS distraction, very commonly found in our patriarchal society and often claimed by duped liberals: Get rid of the guns and there will be no killing.
______________________
See? The guns are blamed, but not the BOYS and MEN who commit the crimes. Happens all the time.
Article says:
“We would not have had Columbine, Virginia Tech or any number of mass killings,…”
Oh yeah? WHO did those killings? Girls? No.
The weapon gets blamed, but not the person, and certainly NOT the gender.
Gender is NEVER EVER seriously the topic, because the distraction of a policy like gun control becomes the topic INSTEAD.
Deflections.
Gun control arguments bolster male politicians and keep them in power because pro and con gun control voters argue over weapons as the sole cause of violence, and not the gender of the people who commit the crime. Debating positions on gun control reinvigorates their corresponding political affiliation and serves to empower candidates during election time.
It’s like everyone is blind to what is right in front of them. Some kind of societal facade of false reality. A Man’s Lie.
I think you have a very valid point.
A Man’s Lie is when men say that they permit women to share power. Most men that kill including killing sprees do so in order to shut up women. Women and men that are womanlike. Men that use prudence to try to achieve their goals. So men can’t tolerate women to control them and when some of these men feel trapped by controlling women they loose it. And as women take on more and more power in society, more and more men get increasingly not only less capable of managing their lives but more towards violence as a means to resolve the woman vs. man conflict.
Lets face it, woman are the one that are expected to shut up. And mostly they do. That’s why so many conflict do deescalate because women retreat.
What is needed are women like Sarah Palin, that take CONTROL OF THEIR OWN LIVES. Not of the men that surround them but of themselves. Men like McCain, who tried and succeeded to set limits on Palin are the problem.
What we need is a woman like Palin to become president of the country. Lets see how many members of the Senate will recourse to threats against her for bossing them around. Not if Palin shows them that she is in control of herself and she expect men to be in control of themselves.
I would be all for that. But, screw the current party system… she needs to be a part of a new third party. This party would not cause division, but would instead unite the broad center of America which is currently unrepresented for all practical purposes. Unless we get a third party, I will never again be a participant of the election system as it currently stands. There is no point, as there is no real choice.
Since I live in the gun-toting South, I’m surprised the guy managed to shoot as many people as he did. One wrong step on his part and someone would have blown him away. No, he wouldn’t have killed that many with knife, but it also less likely that a citizen or cop armed with a blade or club could have stopped him.
I’m soooo confused…I so don’t understand the logic of dumping the problem of gun violence in the same bag as drug use or school prayer or doctor/patient relationships… or the implication that talking, not guns, is the problem….
Clearly the use of drugs can lead to a whole bunch of personal or family problems; at the same time (IMHO, which is evidence-based), prohibition of drug use creates more social problems and burdens than it solves. Doctor/patient conversations and the resulting decisions are personal and private choices. Pray all that you want, in whatever way works for you; respect the right of others to do the same, or not. And, personally, I’d rather engage in a spirited and respectful conversation – or even a heated verbal conflict – than pull out a gun.
The NRA is a special interest group with the goal of supporting the gun industry. Clearly the issue of gun violence is complex with potentially deadly public health consequences, and thus deserves more than simplistic parroting of NRA talking points and either/or solutions.
For the record, my spouse is a gun-owner and instructor. At the same time, we support common-sense restrictions including longer waiting periods, comprehensive background checks, and bans on automatic weapons.
As another point of fact (National Cime Victimization Survey)over a five-year period there were 341,000 reported incidents of firearm theft from private gun owners – these are occurances only, the survey doesn’t tally how many guns were stolen in each incident; the actual number is even higher. Private and legal gun ownership is a significant causal factor in the availability of illegal firearms.
Health is the ability to tolerate. Not everyone is as healthy as you are. There are a lot of sick people. Tolerance is something that is built and constructed throughout life. Usually instilled be the mother and reinforced or broken by the father. But if a mother instills intolerance then you have an unhealthy individual. Guns is a manifestation of intolerance.
Health is also the ability to grow. Not everyone grows past their childhood. Many men, as Judge Judy says, grow out of childhood after 50. She has quite a lot of contempt for adult males that exhibit childlike behavior throughout their lives.
Thank you. I know an NRA member who agrees with you on the registration background checks and automatics, but he would never voice his opinion publicly. He might be afraid he’d get shot.
The NRA is a special interest group with the goal of supporting the gun industry
Er….no. That is inaccurate.
The NRA is a special interest group with the goal of protecting constitutional 2nd amendment rights.
Sorry, Kat. But I don’t get the gender argument. I am a woman. I am a gun owner and I make no apologies for that. I have no problems with background checks. I’ve been run through the computer. As I said earlier, I have nothing to hide.
But I’ll be honest, I simply feel more secure knowing that I have a gun[s] to defend myself if or when the occasion arises. I had a personal experience that taught me that lesson long ago. And I think we have to face facts: the national anxiety about the economy, the government, the world-at-large over the last 5 months has resulted in phenomenal gun sales.
People of both genders, all ages and from all walks of life feel uncertain right now. Some are buying guns and loading up on food. And what I’m hearing again and again from folks is “better safe than sorry.” The same thing Ohio Mary expressed.
Myself? I’d rather hope for the best but be prepared for the worst. But to each his [or her] own.
My argument isn’t against or for guns. (I support the second amendment, personally.)
My argument is that there is a Male Gender Crisis. Looks at who commits the crimes.
My argument isn’t against or for guns. (I support the second amendment, personally.)
My argument is that there is a Male Gender Crisis. Look at who commits the crimes.
Okay. Well that–the gender factor in violent crime–is a legitimate subject for discussion, I think. But Hampster’s article is about “guns are enablers” and/or “get rid of the guns, get rid of the violence.”
Neither of which is true, as far as I’m concerned. And no, I haven’t bought into the NRA propaganda. I was plugged into real life at an early age. And lost a sister to that very reality.
We are what we live [or die for].
Weapons have changed over time from the stone age clubs, spears, flint, sharp stones, to swords, to Crossbows, to Flintlocks, to Glocks.
50 years from now it might even be the famous Star Trek Phaser.
The kill weapon of choice is the kill weapon of the day.
“People Kill, not weapons.”
Between 25 and 50 years from now, the policies of this administration with respect to mortgaging the nations future will be driving countless of people to violence against each other and against the state. What we are doing today has consequences. People will find their lives and their future intolerable. But we would have solved our immediate problem and would have returned to living out of our home equity credit lines.
I’ve come to believe that the debate over guns is almost like looking for a lazy solution. One of those quick fixes America has gotten so fond of. We don’t really want to do what’s necessary, we just want to pop a pill and make all the symptoms go away.
If our goal is to try and prevent tragedies like violent shootings often involving young men, we have a whole list of things we need to address. Our culture that glorifies and romances violence for starters. The lack of mental health treatment and evaluation. The way we fail to identify these potential time bombs before it’s too late. Why women and girls are so often targeted. The list is huge. Instead we’d just like to ban guns, call it good, and forget all about the need to address underlying issues.
I have seen figures scattered about here of 10,000 or 20,000 or 33,000 people killed by guns in the USA each year. Okay lets break this down. These statistics usually involve: 1) Police shooting Perps (legally) 2) Citizens shooting perps (legally)which interestingly is usually 3 to 5 times the number of police taking out perps 3) AH’s robbing business’s and killing people in the commision (illeagally) 4) Murder/Suicides (illegally)5) Crazies running amok and shooting people (illegally) 6) Accidents.
Now probably percentage wise on 1) thru 6) above
1) 10%
2) 30-50%
3) 50-60%
4) 5%
5) 2.5%
6) 2.5%
Now these figures are mine but I think good guesstimates from following the news (as biased anti gun as it is) all these years.
Now we dont want to cut down on 1) when a good cop kills a bad guy..this is GOOOOOOD! We dont want to cut down on 2) either since whether you know it or not civilians legally kill bad guys way more than cops every year..just ask a cop. Now number 3), 4)
5) and 6) we can do something about, however not by taking my guns ..you see I might need it someday for Number 2). For every innocent person killed anywhere in the world my heart goes out to their families. For those killed in 1) and 2) above
GOOD SHOOTIN’ keep it up. I also agree with Ben Franklin who argued..That people who sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither..even if that gun by my bed every night is the one taken away from me by a burglar and used to shoot me instead, it will still be worth all the other nights when i did not have to go to bed in dread should an intruder
intrude upon my home. Since the prisons are filled with 80 to 95% people who have or would if they cared enough to vote would have voted democrat I am real real real suspicious when they want my guns anyways. Since democrats are the ones usually most likely to be shooting you anyways it just seems natural to me that other democrats would be trying to make it easier for their buddies by taking guns away and so just on that principle i would oppose it.
Anyways this is all my opinion:) LOL
I expect more and more males to resort to killing sprees in very high alarming rates. Specially good males that find their futures totally destroyed by having their police records follow them for the rest of their lives no matter where they find themselves. Bad ass criminals have the luxury of getting gainfully employed at fast food restaurants, etc. so they will not be going the killing spree way. But as teens and young people see themselves totally disenfranchised by a system that won’t let loose of their past, more and more they will take to drastic measure to protest their fate.
At least we won’t be able to expect these kinds of killing sprees from illegal aliens since it is okay for them to apply and get a job even if they have violated immigration laws to start with. Illegal aliens are not to engage in that sort of behavior. If deported they can always take a new identity.
The commonality in the overwhelming majority of the violence can be summed up in one word and it is not “gun,” but “men.” I will not give up my guns and I will protect myself. Guns are the great equalizer for women as women are on average much smaller and physically weaker. Guns are also the great equalizer for the elderly. While I have some facility in fighting hand to hand, I don’t expect this will serve nearly so well should I live to be ninety. I suggest genetic engineering. Until then, I am keeping all my guns, thx.
NonNomNom said:
“Guns are the great equalizer for women as women are on average much smaller and physically weaker.”
Right on the money, Nom.
We can argue how women and men are [or at least should be] regarded equal in the workplace, equal pay for equal work. But when it comes to self-defense, nearly every woman is at a disadvantage [unless her attacker is 90 pounds and she is a weight-lifter]. Needless to say–not the norm.
Whether it’s PC or not, a gun is indeed an equalizer. But that also means, you need to know how to use a gun, be familiar and comfortable with the firearm. I’d recommend the safety/instruction classes many gun shops offer now. And routine target practice. Because if and when you need to use a gun for protection, you don’t have time to think. And once you pick the gun up, point it and put your finger on that trigger, you have to be prepared to shoot.
It’s not an easy decision. Nor should it be.
Maybe we should just outlaw men…
No, creeper. I’m not for outlawing good men. Those I like. A lot.
It’s the bad ones I’ll defend myself against. And that’s my right, not simply as a woman. But as a human being.
Guns are for men with small dicks
Guns are for paranoid skitzos
Guns are for hunters
Guns are for men with small dicks who like to HUNT and kill things smaller than themselves to feel better about their small dick
Guns are for killing (something)
or wounding (something)
They are NOT to be used as dust collectors (except for that upper 2 percent of the wealthy)
I don’t need a gun (if we ever called it a GUN in the Army they would have made us DROP AND DO 20)
IT’S A WEAPON MY DRILL SERGEANT WOULD YELL!
IT’S A KILLING MACHINE
if you feel you NEED One you are either living in ALASKA or similar
OR you are a man with a small dick (lol half way kidding here)
or you are paranoid and feel the evil doers want you and your wife and your weapons and your house and your cheap pos 4 wheel drive that is sitting on blocks in the back yard
NOT
GUNS are STUPID (in anyone’s hands but the military, police or valid licensed
animal killershunters like chainsaw cheney and his DUCKS!jmo
I’m sure there are many exceptions (chuckle)
I just asked my wife if it was okay to show you my equipment. Then you could stop running your mouth…………
Sorry Dawnelle. I don’t have a dick. I’m not a schizoid and I’m not a hunter. I’ve also never been in the Army. So, my guns are guns, period.
And I make no apologies for owning them because I know from personal experience that I’m ultimately responsible for my own safety. I’m law-abiding and I’ve been cross-checked with every gun I’ve purchased.
So, maybe I’m one of your exceptions. But there are a lot of people just like me. Lots of women, too.
Gimme a break.
I feel sorry for the victims. If they’d had a gun, they could have shot him.
It’s not the GUNS; it’s the PEOPLE WHO USE THEM. I’m a gun owner, with a carry license. The people in heartland America are buying guns at a rate never seen before; ammunition, too. You can thank Obama and Holder for that.
There have always been crazy people who have killed people. Ted Bundy didn’t need a gun to do his psychopathic serial killing.
In Britain, when they banned personal ownership of guns, violent crime more than doubled.
You can protect yourself with a gun, or you can die at the hands of a criminal who doesn’t give a shit about the laws and will get a gun no matter what. I prefer to have a weapon; I will use it if someone threatens my life in the course of a violent crime against me in my home–or elsewhere.
In this country, we have a 2nd amendment right to own guns. I am taking that right seriously these days.
Here’s the real story about Samson Alabama.
The US Army is patrolling the streets. Not the National Guard, not the Police: The U.S. Army.
That’s a violation of Posse Comitatus. Are you worried? Hell no. You’re too busy holding up shiny objects to distract people from the real problem here: A gov’t preparing for martial law in this country.
When they decide to implement martial law, do you think anyone will have ANY RIGHTS at all? Do you think you’ll be safer? Safe like the Mayor in Maryland, whose two labrador retrievers were slaughtered in their own home by a SWAT team that set up a sting against innocent people?
Gimme a break. You’d better get a clue.
Jeebus, thx. It’s about time more people started talking about Posse Comitatus. When it first came out months ago that Northcom was going to used active military personnel against civilians I posted about this (at sp) and people called me hysterical.
I’ve read a few posts from people saying they’re considering going to Canada: it’s the same thing there: they are partnered with Northcom. Every time you turn around the list of places governments all over have and or are planning to deploy troops within our borders is expanding.
And they won’t be armed with our wimpy handguns either. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/27/lockheed_exoskeleton/
But on the upside… the urban brown shirts won’t know how to use whatever they do have.
I’m a woman and don’t own a gun but I support the right to bear arms 100% in this country. Once that right is gone, so is our country. Sorry I disagree 100% with this article. I am considering buying a gun for self protection…from our government.
New Hampster, I do appreciate your view-point and your passion.
Your statement that these trajedies could be avoided is true…up to a point.
While some of these killers may erupt spontaneously, my guess is that most of them have sent off signals for a period of time.
Their family members and even close associates either cover for them or tune out and hope for the best.
Then society pays in blood!
When someone is determined to kill, they will find a way, and the only variable will be the number of victims.
This is sadly true, Sassy. Hoping for the best without preparing for the worst can land you in the morgue. And everyone will say: oh, what a shame, what a waste, what a terrible, terrible thing.
But dead is dead.
Sorry, I’d rather have a fighting chance.
And that is the bottom line in any argument unless those on the opposing side can guarantee that criminals won’t get guns. They can’t and offer nothing as an alternative. I’m pretty good at karate but don’t stand a chance against someone with a weapon pointed directly at me unless I have one, too.
Except unicorns and rainbows, Ferd. Too be honest, I believed in them once. But they let me down. Badly.
So now? I depend on myself. To each his [or her] own.
Hey New Hamptser, thanks for a great thread.
Not that I take a position but does “a well regulated militia” include those citizens down on the southern border…what was the name of them?
At any rate, the point I wish to make is when “the government” does not enforce the laws, “the people” will act.
So I am attempting to work out if we are a “government of the people…” and the “government by the people” refuses to act as a “government for the people” even Abe himself said;
Abraham Lincoln
The meaning of “rise up” in his time is not in doubt. Remember the days when people had gun racks in the pickup cabs?
Is that still legal?
For rifles, in some states, yes.
I grew up on a ranch in rural OK. I counted cattle most mornings before school and always had a rifle behind the pickup seat of my truck in the case I saw coyotes. I drove the truck everywhere even to high school. I knew several other guys in school that did the same thing. Nobody ever took one of their guns out to look at it or show it at school however… people just knew better. But it was a different time, but not that long ago.
Docelder,
I have come to really respect OK for their respect of Heritage and traditions and their heroic defense of the constitution.
Okie’s understand that Liberty and Tyranny is the major struggle and because of their rugged individualism and respect for the flag we have a chance to take out country back.
In the land of the blind, a one eyed man will be King. In an unarmed land, the one armed man writes the rules.
LOL,
That’s good enough to share in the office tomorrow..
Have a great weekend!
Unfortunately SM, moments after I posted that it struck me that it would have been better if I had written “In the land of the blind, a one eyed man will RULE. In an unarmed land, the one armed man WRITES the rules.” Due to the internet pressure for haste, my ponderous thoughts sometimes lag and suffer.
I firmly believe a gun is only as dangerous as the person holding it…
The NRA is not the problem, the problem is stupid people. Lets ban matches, he set fire to his mothers house. Lets ban the automobile, he used it to go and get his ammo. What happened is sad, but the gun is not the problem, its the loose nut on the grip of the gun.
I guess we’re lucky we can still have this conversation, so thanks to New Hampster for bringing it up. In some places, the conversation alone is cause for investigation. I understand that safety comes first, but apparently, home invasion by the police is okay if someone even mentions the “right to carry” in some quarters. That should be cause for alarm among everyone here.
3/11/2009
Did you know that at one Connecticut college, simply advocating for extending the Right to Carry onto college campuses is enough to get students referred to the campus police?
It happened at Central Connecticut State University, after student John Wahlberg gave an assigned presentation on a “relevant issue in the media.” Mr. Wahlberg wanted to speak about school violence, and during his presentation he discussed Right-to-Carry on campus. According to the Recorder newspaper, after he “made the point that if students were permitted to conceal carry guns [sic] on campus, the violence could have been stopped earlier in many of these cases,” his professor lodged a complaint with the campus police.
Mr. Wahlberg received a “request” to come down to the campus police department, where officers proceeded to rattle off a list of firearms that he legally owns, and asked him where he kept the guns.
All because he dared mention Right-to-Carry.
If the facts in the newspaper are accurate, this is outrageous. Expressing an opinion about Right-to-Carry on campus shouldn’t lead to a police investigation. It should lead to a discussion and debate about the issue, but apparently that’s too much to ask from the academics who hyperventilate at the thought of the Bill of Rights being enforced on college campuses.
Would he have been able to kill as many people with an axe?
Would he have been able to kill as many people with explosives?
Would he have been able to kill as many people with a car?
Would he have been able to kill as many people with a bio weapon?
It doesn’t matter. The central problem is that the guy was psycho and wanted people dead.
Some counterpoints:
Since guns can’t talk, how are guns enablers? This like a person blaming the big mac for being fat! The food is just there- what did you choose to do with it? Did you eat 50 of them are throw them away. And if someone thinks the gun is talking to them, then we know for sure they are not all there.
There’s other mass murders- 9/11, oklahoma city, gas chambers, saddam hussein, etc What was the main method of execution then?
True a gun is a weapon desdigned for killing but so is the bow, the knife, heck you can can even use a fork if you’re in prison. Again, the materials are all there- what do you choose to do with them?
Stop manufacturing?? The technology is out there. Someone will manufacture it. If it’s not a law abiding industry then it will be the criminal. A drug lord made forbes list. Does anyone NOT think he could use that money to manufacture weapons?
And I’m still trying to figure out what liberals, gay people, SUVs and recycling have to do with guns? In fact it seems to me that you have a VERY NARROW view of people who own weapons and what type of people they are. Projection much? You do not have to won a weapon. You can argue afainst it. But I’m just tired of the same old weak, political and bigoted arguments..