Gun control for dummies

I wouldn't categorize is as "overly defensive" by any means. It is in part due to an ongoing battle with opponents who do want to eliminate all guns from private ownership. They are perfectly willing to do it a piece at a time and have made outrageous claims in some cases as well as using misleading statistics, and from what I can see doing so intentionally. The result is that those on the other side do get a bit defensive in these discussions but it is a well reasoned defensiveness.

 

The point was earlier someone posted an excerpt from UK law that indicated it was illegal to carry a weapon in public. If your hands, feet, elbows, knees, and head are weapons that makes it rather difficult to appear in public while following the law does it not?

 

Unfortunately I can't.

Well yes and no. Certainly the votes of citizens elect the politicians but not all or even most citizens are well informed and misleading statements often make a huge difference. Money and publicity count for more than they should and fact and logic less.

But it wasn't todays politicians who wrote the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Read some about them then about modern politicians and see how comparable they are. Poiticians are also often (not always I'll admit) influenced as much by getting reelected and thus money and publicity more than fact and logic as mentioned above. Thus we have things like the "assault weapons ban" which not only did they pass in the first place but they are talking about reinstituting it in spite of the fact that all the authorities pretty much agree it had no impact on crime.

I would argue that no only is it not necessary it is not desrieable. On the other hand most states which have populations in the millions have an initiative process where citizens can indeed pass laws.

That is an opinion and a very debatable one. While I think it makes sense just what form it should take is far from clear.

That's easy to say. Not so easy to do. Indeed even defining "votes wisely" is rather problematic.

 

As I explained in a post a short while ago to Historian. It's not about perceptions. Someone posted a section of what was reputed to be UK law (or some subdivision there of) which stated one couldn't carry a weapon in public. If portions of your anatomy are weapons then if you want to follow the law you either don't go out in public or detach them beforehand. As Kodiak how safe it is to go fishing in Alaska especially salmon streams when they are running unarmed. I should point out that I don't have a concealed carry permit (though I think I should get one) and the only firearm in the house is a reproduction Walker Dragoon with a very sensitive trigger that I haven't pulled out in months if not years and probably haven't shot in well over a decade. If I want to go some place in this country I go but I also avoid most of the neighborhoods in Detroit unless I have a very good reason to go there. I've also known a fair number of people who have been assaulted and some form of self defense weapon would likely have prevented it perhaps even with no injury to either party.

 

That's a rather classic straw man. First of course one must define what the real "gun problem" is or if there really is one. Rationally one would then look at how difficult it is to fix vs other problems especially ones with more impact. The fact that that isn't being done makes it clear that the real problem is that some people don't like guns.

Could not the exact same be said of the anti-gun "feaks"? The fact that you are looking at only one side of the issue is rather telling.

Of course one can. People do it all the time. The average speed on I-696 at rush hour is around 80mph even though the speed limit is 70mph. I remember reading about an Irishman who visited the US and was amazed that people stopped for red lights in the middle of the night with no traffic around. A great deal of Greeces financial problems are due to people simply not paying their taxes. Should I go on?

 

I've been to the UK on a number of occasions and found many places I wouldn't go at all, and other places I wouldn't go at certain times. One just has to look at a local paper to see that violent crime is a reality. The stats show that violent street crime in the UK is almost double that of in the US. Twenty years ago I was staying in London near Marble Arch in one of those big (Georgian?) homes converted to a small hotel - a pretty nice area. Walking from there towards Hyde Park I came across a young man beating the hell out of an elderly man just off the street between houses - just my stepping towards them broke it up and the young guy ran off. The old guy didn't want any help or for me to call the police even though he was in bad shape with an obviously broken nose. I don't know what that was all about, but the proximity to the park (where a lot of homosexuals hung out) and the fact that the young guy was kind of "pretty" gives me suspicions. Even though the old guy may have created his own problem, I was kind of surprised to come across a beat-down in the middle of the afternoon a block off of Oxford Street.

The thing is, having the option to carry a gun is much like the option to own a set of tire chains or road flares - you may not get caught in a blizzard very often, but not having those things in your car would be considered downright foolish in any rural area in the northern US or Canada. I don't really need a gun in my small town, but when traveling, yup, I'm carrying a gun even though the chances of me actually needing it are quite remote. Criminals target older people, tourists, women - anybody they think is weaker than them or may be carrying sums of money. I'm now approaching sixty (I'm 5'8) and am in no shape to tangle with a young man, so I'm going to put the odds back in my favor.

Florida actually changed the law on rental vehicles a few years back. It seems the plates or stickers (or whatever it was) identified them as rentals, and thus identified the occupants as tourists who would be highly unlikely to have a gun (this was a few years ago before states began the big reciprocity movement to recognize each others carry permits). Of course, many locals in Florida are carrying guns, so you wouldn't to rob them unless you're up for a gunfight. So, criminals learned to spot rental vehicles and target the occupants at convenience stores or gas stations. This became so prevalent they simply made rental vehicles unidentifiable and these type car-jackings and robberies disappeared.

The point of that Florida story is that even though most people are not carrying guns, the knowledge that some people are makes street crime a difficult proposition. The fact that 10% of the population are carrying guns makes the other 90% safer than it would be otherwise. Outside my small town, you can count me among that 10%.

 

I myself do not own a working firearm, though I do have several non-firing replica's and some edged weapons, yet personally I do not feel unprotected or unsafe in my own home. I keep a rather large pocketknife in my truck, but have never needed it in any other capacity than as a tool for cutting something to length.

Like urqh, I feel safe in my own country pretty much anywhere I go. Yes there are some places where I will not go at night, but then I do not have to. I am vigilant in any situation where I could be a victim like a large crowd or a unruly group, and if the reason for being there is not compelling, I'll leave the situation.

In short, I practice common sense.

While I myself do not own a gun, I generally have no problem with those who do.

I won't tell you, you are paranoid for feeling the need to own a gun, but then please do not call me a fool for feeling I do not share that need.

 

Sometimes it ain't that easy.

 

That is why I will not impose my opinions and beliefs on others.

 

Sometimes that ain't easy either.

 

Of course. The only real issue is that unexpected occurrence - the wife or daughter calls some night because the car broke down while passing through a seedy area... It's nice to have the option of carrying a gun, just to keep you on the right side of the law.

I spoke earlier of carrying in Las Vegas, yet even there I'm not carrying unless we're doing one of those wander-down-the-strip evenings when you're jumping from casino to casino. There's a lot of street crime in those various over and underpasses along the strip and the further you get towards downtown, the worse it is. It's as easy to pack a small gun as it is to pack a cell phone...

I spoke of the gun I keep in my car. I bought an old Star "Super" for $200 in 9mm Largo for the purpose since in this damp climate I didn't want to worry about rust on an expensive pistol. The Largo factory loading is kind of anemic, but in this model of pistol (a 1911 clone) you can load it up to .38 Super velocities - close to .357 mag in power. That's a pretty good all-around tool for bears or people, so I've got three mags; two loaded with 115 grain hollowpoints and a third with 147 grain solids that will crack the brain pan of a bear. It's practical.

I just think guns in general are practical tools. You don't need a jack for your car every day, but when you do need one you need it pretty badly.

The only time I can recall that I ever "needed" a concealed weapon was walking down the street in Anchorage from a restaurant to our hotel. My wife is an attractive woman some years younger than I, and a group of four or five youngish street people drinking in a vacant lot approached us making threatening noises; "blondie this" and "blondie that" - I had a gun in an IWB (inside the waist - hidden) holster and just by unzipping my windbreaker I telegraphed to them that I was carrying. They immediately shut up and retreated back into the vacant lot without another word. I didn't have to draw or even speak. Even my wife was unaware of what had just happened and asked me about it when we got out of earshot - they had frightened her and then just evaporated. I had to explain to her that I had let them know we weren't an easy target.

 

The anti-gunners haven't convinced the pro-gunners that guns are not needed yet.

 

It was me, I think. The British definition of "offensive weapon" doesn't include body parts, so the answer would be no-
"'Offensive weapon' means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person, or intended by the person having it worth him for such use by him (or some other person)."
http://www.nwhsa.org.uk/offensive_weapon.htm

 

But what constitutes a violent crime in Britain is frequently changed to reflect whatever new targets the Police are required to hit, so the comparison is meaningless. The statistics are usually collated from major cities, so have little in common with the rest of the country.
I'm with Urgh; going anywhere at any time is the mindset around here, and always has been.

 

Agreed, each side has presented their opinion, and I can recall no one changing their position. Further if memory serves this is the 3rd such thread in the last few months.

 

I LIVE in the UK and travel up and down it on a regular basis..There are no unsafe places its citizens can not go to, with the exception still of certain areas of Ulster. I too have worked and visited the USA many times and have watched my itinerary with care. There is no comparison no matter what you say on here.

 

Too true, as I have constantly said, no opinions will be changed. But the idea of bringing other nations into the argument if America has a problem with guns is a none starter and totally irelevant. This thread should be taken as an example of how not to conduct a debate. It should be closed until the next occurance. There will be one. That is one thing that unfortunately will happen. I will once again add to the next one offering my sympathies to my American cousins...It would be illuminating judging by how many think and have brought Australia and UK into the argument to see Americans do the same on the horrendous gun massacres in our two countries too please..But then you would have to tell us when they are happening on the same scale of deaths etc. That is the proof of the pudding.

 

Yeah, it's run its course. The foxes who've lost their brush will not be convinced that having one is a good thing.