Gun comments

Two of my favorite quotes by Edward Abbey:

“If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military. The hired servants of our rulers”

“The tank, the B-52, the fighter-bomber, the state-controlled police, and military are the weapons of dictatorship. The rifle is the weapon of democracy…an armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny.”

 

Yawn.


Still returning to the wording of the famous or infamous 2ns Amendment, "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." I wonder why people make such a fuss aout the 2nd part "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" and sweep the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" under the carpet.

 

Yeah, it it's the 'well regulated' bit that gets me. Nothing about everybody having the right to own a weapon, just those who are a part of an organised militia.

 

Actually, the "right of the people to bear arms" part is exactly that. & a militia would be raised in case of an emergency, it is not a standing militia per se, rather in would be raised say if an invasion occurred, therefore keeping arms amongst the populace would be paramount to quickly raising a militia as opposed to making them available, ( which takes time & organization & distribution which one does not have in the case of an emergency ).

& the militia concept is not swept under the carpet. Nugent & other pro gun people mention avenues of this constantly. It is one of the best crime deterents.

& hundreds of people died in Australia when guns were outlawed, store owners could no longer defend themselves & the criminals went on a spree.

Guns used defensively, ( when they aren't even fired ), deter more crime by a huge margin than crime that occurs by guns that are fired. Something like 2.5 to 3 million times per year in the US.

Anyone who thinks the 2nd amendment should be done away with which would take away a single mothers right & ability to defend her chidren is an uncompassinate boob who emptymindedly supports criminals.

 

I've heard this argument a thousand times.

Before you start tarring everyone with the same black brush and insulting people's intelligence, let me tell you that I was away from my country for one year and a half leaving behind a semi-invalid wife and two children with 14 and 10. We live in an independent house with some garden in front an back and a garage alley on the side.

On more than one occasion my wife heard obvious burglar noises like people trying to violate the door lock and in the back yard in the middle of the night and had to call the police. Fortunately this is a small town and the police are quite friendly and efficient. The fact that we also host the police academy helps too.

I would not trust my wife with a gun, really, or she might have an(other) heart attack (also she had been recently operated and recovery was not going well). Shooting herself in the foot if she shot at all would be most likely, there are people like that. I for one would have no objection in modifying some scum's life expectation.

There, I hope this sums up my own personal situation and outlook before you say something you shouldn't. I can send you photos of my house, wife and kids as proof of what I say.

This poor single mother lady you mention is definitely not covered by the 2nd amendment as she does not fulfiull requirements. She is not a "well regulated militia" and her personal security is not the "security of the State".

Before you blow up keep reading.

This piece of legislation is clearly outdated, being adequate for the Independence days, when citizens were barred from owning firearms and the owner of firepower was the colonial state. The British Army was the sole bearer of arms in the King's name, an institution far removed from the People and entirely at the disposal of the royal authority, an instrument of oppression. On the other hand what the 2nd Amendment offered at the time, in the late 18th century was an army composed of citizens, "by the People, for the People", something very diverse from the usual mercenary armies of the 18th Century. It was completely legitimate and justified.

Do the same conditions pertain nowadays? Clearly not.

So why not stop being hypocrites and simply dispense with this museum piece (constitutions are not sacred, they can have Amendements added, see?) and replace it with something much clearer and adapted to modern life, such as:

"Every law abiding citizen with no criminal record is allowed possession of firearms for his self-defence and/or sporting use."?

 

This is all wrong IMHO.

If one person says "I carry a gun because too many assholes are carying guns around", this person is just one more armed asshole.

And about guns saving lives...this is a non sense. You can't predict what will someone do with his gun. It's only after blood was spilled that you can tell whether the good guy or the bad guy died.
Guns are the best way to have an escalation in violence. Some drivers could fire at each others for a fishtail.

And I don't feel it does much good to turn a steal attempt into an homicide (I don't know about US laws, but in France you are not supposed to shoot down someone unless your life or health - not your property - is endangered).

So you can either allow everybody to carry a gun, and you get people shooting at horse stealers like back in the days in the wild west, people using guns in criminal activity, people doing a Columbine University kind of trip, and sometimes, with some luck people using guns in justifiable self defense.

Or you make guns illegal. You don't need a gun unless you want to kill someone.

 

Agreed, frankly I don't trust most people with the right to own a firearm. Sure, it may act as a deterrant to crime but as I pointed out, a firearm kept for self defense is far more likely statistically speaking to injur a family member.

Frankly I reckon you guys should look outside your boarders for a change. Even in the UK everyone has the right to bear arms unless they have a criminal record. All they have to do is provide a reason why they need a rifle or whatever.

 

Guns are tools, nothing more. So are chainsaws, both can kill, but not by themselves.
Gun safety:
Do not leave the gun out of the safe when you're not "immediately" there.
I have a concealed weapons permit, and I use it when I carry money to & from the bank. Virtually no other time.
Do not leave one in the pipe.
Everytime you pick up a gun, treat it as if it were loaded.
Check to see if a gun is loaded everytime you pick it up, even if you just set it down.
I know friends who have shot themselves, and have been shot by others. These incidents were caused by stupidity (which cannot be regulated)(unfortunately).
A co-worker got shot by his own rifle (30 30) in the leg because he handed the butt end to someone else to help pull him up an enbankment while hunting. Dumb.
My first cousin shot my second cousin in the chest with both barrels of a 12 guage while comming down a hayloft stair. Again, Dumb. He does not get another chance even if he was only 12 at the time.
Road-Rage is for RETARDS ! Just pull over and count to ten, he'll be miles away when you start again. If you're wound that tight, ( that clueless about traffic, and about how much time is actually lost (after being cut-off)), you shouldn't even drive.
There is no defense against Stupidity, and any workable legislation.
I would recomend an I-Q test for gun ownership, not rampant/paranoid/delusional/cure-all BANS !
Take the numbers for vehicle related deaths/injuries and one could use the same reasoning to ban the "tool" vehicle.

 

A country with gun control is afraid of it's own people. We have a government for the people by the people. Sure, society has changed since the Constitution was written but that is our own fault. Due to lack of government interest firearms have become something most people fear in this country. This sharply contrasts to the days when every father would teach his son how to safely use a rifle. Perhaps this is due to the rapid urbanization in the 20th century. Never the less, firearms provide excellent sporting oppurtunities for our youth. They teach responsibility, and maybe the most important of all we can feel safe in our own homes with rifles/shotguns present and the right to defend ourselves and our family from those who wish to cause harm. I wouldn't rely on the police for anything. I don't know about anyone else but I feel better sleeping at night with a 12 gauge leaning up against my book case next to my bed with three rounds of buckshot on my night stand.

 

As you're not afraid of your own people - I guess those bears in New York must be really scary !

 

A car main purpose is to move its content, a gun main purpose is to put bullets into flesh.

Of course, you can leave the car in the garage, or the gun into the box.

Weapons of mass destruction are just tools, and since they exist, their main use has been dissuasion...We all agree the average country should not be allowed to have some, because we're not sure it will use them wisely (dissuasion).

Why should the average citizen be allowed to carry a weapon, then ?

A country which forbides weapons is afraid of its citizens ? Well a citizen carrying a gun is afraid of his fellow citizens, and he might be right if the said citizens carry firearms hehe. (Well put M. Bull).

And I won't even speak of weapons which don't harm but kill, like buckshots.

Concealed weapon licence...sigh...there goes the deterence/dissuasion argument...

I like my neighbor better without a gun (especialy if I sleep with his wife )

The only point I agree with skunk is the fact it's quite possible to safely handle a gun, but under stress or pressure, under hatred or wrath, it might be another story.

I pay taxes to have the police protect me, not to do their job : fire at people or get shot at.

Be armed, drawing your gun faster, shooting faster and better than the other armed guy : if this is your conception of security, I undestand why you feel insecure

 

Hollywood has brainwashed Americans that if you have a problem, shot it. Get rid of all those pesky indians and crooks and neighbors who sleep with your wife. If a movie does not have lots of sex and violence then it may not make any money.
Dirty Harry, Matt Dillon, Robocop, Lone Ranger, Road Warrior, ect. ect.

 

Surely a government should be afraid of he people, democracy only works if the government know the people can remove them.

I would have thought that was progress? People no longer need to hunt to feed their families, no longer need to fend off the British or French, not to mention the 'pesky injuns'

Because it isn't a necessary part of everybodies day to day life?

Agreed totally, I was taught to safely use and respect firearms from a young age (starting with 'don't touch that' towards 'don't touch that unless I let you' then to 'never point at anyone' and so on until now when I am a qualified instructor).

I sleep perfectly soundly without a shotgun by my bed. Weird.

 

"If one person says "I carry a gun because too many assholes are carying guns around", this person is just one more armed asshole."

This is false. To assume anyone who has a gun is an asshole is plain dumb. Single moms who have them by & large are not assholes. Law abiding citizens who carry them are aslo by & large not assholes. Really dim minded thinking there. & yes guns save lives. The numbers are clear on it. read the book "More guns less crime" & become enlightened.


"Because it isn't a necessary part of everybodies day to day life?"


This is also false. millions of guns are in millions of households for protection 365 days of the year.


"I pay taxes to have the police protect me, not to do their job : fire at people or get shot at."

This is one of the dumbest thought pathways on the subject. You're in your house,2 am, bad guy shows up. You call police & by the time they arrive, your robbed shot & feel somehow morally superior for not having a gun. The absolute height of stupidity. Morally superior & dead.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the last paragraph (surprise, Chrome ). "Better tried by twelve than carried by six" and I know what I'm talking about. A few months ago one of my work colleague's wife (he lives in a more isolated house than mine) was broken in, robbed and raped while home alone. There!

Chrome and Miller, what are your feelings about my 2nd. Amendment Mk2, as opposed to the original convoluted wording? "Every law abiding citizen with no criminal record is allowed possession of firearms for his self-defence and/or sporting use."?

Addendum: "Dopeheads, gangstas etc. and suspicious looking fellas need not apply, even if no criminal record, which we will assume it will be a case of identity theft. Screw PC and racial profiling".

P.S. If this makes me looking like a Neanderthaler, I *am* an angry Neanderthaler.

 

Well, all I can say is...

http://www.sptddog.com/sotp/hondo.gif

 

Saw a Dom Joly programme the other night, he visited areas in the southern US where alcohol was completely banned but guns could be bought without any sort of permit.

If you had to, which would you choose,
Booze or a Piece?

(By the way, I like guns, but probably not that much )
Cheers,
Adam

 

Glad to see you using another unbiased source.

That said, I honestly don't reckon your average dumb joe on the street is intelligent enough to own a firearm.

You miss my point, there was a time when fathers taught their sons to use firearms in the same way they taught them to track animals, plant crops and so on. It was an essential part of day to day life. Now, you don't need a firearm to survive, it isn't one of the basic necessities of existance. Sorry, but if a firearm is kept for protection I imagine that still doesn't mean it is used on a regular basis to keep ones family alive.

Right, a bad guy comes into my house at 2AM, I get up, run own stairs to the cabinet my rifle is kept in by which time he has my 10 year old daughter against a wall with a gun to her head, nice.

Alternatively, it isn't kept in a secure facility, my 10 year old daughter and a mate are messing around, one of them gets shot. Nice.

Sorry but if a firearm is kept in a safe place it isn't of any use for defense. If it isn't, someone gets hurt.

I'll say it again, statistically speaking t firearm kept for 'self defense' is more likely to hurt your family than an intruder.

 

I've had a shotgun behind my door since I can remember,(as do at least half my friends & neighbors). A 20guage single shot, 3" magnum, #4 shot. (best for self defense)(wont go through a wall).
Why yes, we do have bears here. They tear down and eat up the bird feeders (usually all in one night)(around this rural gathering). Not usually this time of year though.
In spring they're all over, even in town. When they wake up they eat "skunk cabbage" to clean out their digestive tracts. We also have Bobcats galore, and for the last two years Mountain Lions. Don't let your pets out of the house overnite, or cats out at all...We have Eagles,Hawks, and coyotes. Did I mention Moose? Not that a 20 gauge will do anything but make it mad, it will scare it off. (as opposed to being morally superior, and giving it a verbal chastizement). We have Guinne Hens and Turkeys too (all protected).
City folk just don't get it, mainly because you got so much noise going on all the time, that that alone scares off all the critters you believe don't exist. Because you don't see them. I do not shoot any of these! I do not let them ravage my bird feeders, trash cans, or garden either.
When/if you carry as much money as I sometimes do, (twice a month max) perhaps only then would you change your mind.
I play softball/basketball with the local law & one Highway Patrolman. We sometimes shoot too.
Perhaps you should suggest to them that they don't carry weapons either, because of the danger to their families.
I have two daughters (youngest twenty), they knew how to shoot at age seven, and have their own guns.
Miraculously they survived, because they were trained in safety and accuracy

 

Ahhh, but I just love the Right to Bear Arms, however you pronouce that in Sierraleonese



more of the same ilk:
http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2010/gangsta%208.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2011/gangsta%202.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2012/gangsta%2013.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2013/gangsta%207.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2013/gangsta%2010.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta14/gangsta%203.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta15/gangsta%204.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta16/gangsta%205.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2020/gangsta%2012.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2021/gangsta9.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2030/gangsta%2011.JPG Holy shit, this is a gangsta style RPG shoot!

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2035/gangsta%206.JPG

http://www.fmft.net/archives/gangsta%2050/gangsta%2014.JPG

And hey, this is what I call a well regulated Militia, necessary to the security of a free State, Sudanese version.



And when roadrage reaches Britain...



But to be quite frank I have nothing against the Right to Bare arms...



[ 12. January 2007, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Za Rodinu ]