Alright.....

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Alright.....

Post by allthegoodnamesweretaken on Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:36 am

So, at this point, gun control seems to be a big item in the news. I personally have to shake my head when pro firearms rallies spring up in every state capital in the continental US, and get a brief notice on the news, but when a few hundred people march on the national capital for gun control, they talk about it for 3 days.

Most people seem to have an opinion on this issue, and most people who are of similar mind to me theologically to me tend to lean a different way. So, how do you feel and what is your justification?
avatar
allthegoodnamesweretaken

Posts : 2700
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Some where in middle america

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by allthegoodnamesweretaken on Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:28 pm

Trying to limit gun violence by limiting the number of rounds in a magazine is akin to trying to limit drunk driving by limiting the amount of gallons the gas tank holds.
avatar
allthegoodnamesweretaken

Posts : 2700
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Some where in middle america

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by Gorm_Sionnach on Sun Feb 03, 2013 9:30 pm

Not being a Yank and all, and so having no vested interest in the whole thing...

Gun violence is a multifacted issue with many contributing factors, but the ease of purchase, the neutering of the regulatory bodies responsible for enforcing existing laws, and the availability of assault grade weapons certainly contributes far more to firearm related deaths.

I see the NRA and marvel at just how much power and influnce one single lobby group has over the national discourse, and that they have been able to effectively block or water down any attempts at gun control. Then when there is a popular call for more regulations, they turn to the existing regulations (which they have done there very best to stymie and weaken) and say "we already have enough".

I suppose I simply fail to see any reasonable need for a civilian to own an assault weapon. Hundreds of years of checks and balances and "good government" ought to be worth something to those who maintain the fear of jack booted government thugs.

_________________
If you approach the Gaelic gods with 'I'm not worthy', they're going to reply to you with 'Then come back when you are.

Coffee Three Shouts on a Hilltop
avatar
Gorm_Sionnach
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 838
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Toronto, ON, Canada.

http://threeshoutsonahilltop.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by allthegoodnamesweretaken on Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:08 am

Gorm, before we delve to far into this, would you care to give me what a definition for "assault weapon" is?

I do agree that it is a multifaceted issue. I firmly agree that we need enforcement of current laws.

I have to wonder about whether or not the ones that talk about "ease of purchase" have actually purchased firearms before. The last time I purchased a handgun (A single action .44 mag if that means anything to you) I spent an hour filling out paperwork.


The problem with seeing the NRA as a single lobby group is that it's not just a lobby group with the same backing as the Brady campaign for example. The newest information I could find at short notice was from 2010 at a membership of 4.3 million, and they are by no means the only group that speaks for gun owners in the US, just the most popular. By contrast the Brady Campaign claims 28,000 members.

avatar
allthegoodnamesweretaken

Posts : 2700
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Some where in middle america

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by tmarie64 on Mon Feb 04, 2013 8:42 pm

If it wasn't designed for anything BUT killing humans, you don't "need" it. Period.
I don't have a problem with guns. But, you don't hunt with assault rifles, i.e. any of the "AK" series, or any gun that will fire 30 rounds (or more) per second. Pistols are ok, I suppose, for home protection, but a shot gun is FAR more likely to actually protect the person who doesn't spend a lot of time on the range and isn't actually fully aware after being jerked from deep sleep at 2 a.m. AND you don't hear about toddlers playing with daddy's shot gun or rifle and accidentally shooting themselves or a friend or family member.
It's not a shotgun that the 2nd grader took to school today in Henrico County, VA. It wasn't a rifle that the 2 year old was playing with in VA Beach when he killed his uncle.
There are more regulations on my VAGINA and uterus than on guns. Please don't tell me things should remain as they are.

_________________
"Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened."
— Dr. Seuss
avatar
tmarie64
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1903
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Richmond, VA

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by allthegoodnamesweretaken on Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:35 am

tmarie64 wrote:If it wasn't designed for anything BUT killing humans, you don't "need" it. Period.


Tina, you really do not wish to make this argument about need. Most of the things that each and every one of us use in daily life are not things that we have because we need them. Most of the things we have are not about need, but instead want. We want specific things, and we enjoy the us of them. If you wish to start using "need" as a reason for having things, start first by looking around at stuff that you own or want and asking yourself if someone uninterested in it would consider it a necessity or not.


But, you don't hunt with assault rifles, i.e. any of the "AK" series, or any gun that will fire 30 rounds (or more) per second.

What is an assault rifle? It is a serious question Tina. There is a definition for assault rifle, it may surprise you. Especially when contrasted with what the media and politicians are promoting.



Pistols are ok, I suppose, for home protection, but a shot gun is FAR more likely to actually protect the person who doesn't spend a lot of time on the range and isn't actually fully aware after being jerked from deep sleep at 2 a.m.

Ya know, I'll be honest. I used to think of myself as a light sleeper that would wake up is something happened. After the birth of my son, I figured out that my son can cry at what is an ear piercing level during the day, my wife can get out of bed, go change him, which causes him to cry more and louder, feed him, and come back to bed, and I won't stir. If I am in a deep sleep, nothings going to wake me. It doesn't matter what I've got.

There are benefits and disadvantages for personal protection for all classes of firearms. There are even people that make cases for rifles as home defense weapons. Right now it is a matter of personal choice.




There are more regulations on my VAGINA and uterus than on guns. Please don't tell me things should remain as they are.

Now this is something I would actually like to compare. I'll go and gather regulations on firearms, and you go and get all the regulations on your vagina and uterus, and well post them and see. Wink
avatar
allthegoodnamesweretaken

Posts : 2700
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Some where in middle america

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by Gorm_Sionnach on Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:50 pm

I am aware that there is a difference, legally anyway, between an "assault weapon" and an "assault rifle", though different definitions of what does and does not constitute either is debated and disputed. A perfect exampe would be the talk page on wikipedia, for the "assault weapon" page; there are two editors who each source numerous examples of what does/does not make something as "assault weapon".

For the most part, the difference between an "assault weapon" and a non-assault weapon would be rate of fire/size of clip and some secondary element, which some call "cosmetic" (i.e. a pistol hand grip).

Again, as someone who is coming from a very different culture (when it comes to firearms). As such I do not see the need for more than a pistol/handgun/shotgun/rifle, for self defence, hunting, sport shooting, range shooting, etc.

Yes, the NRA is far from the only lobby group promoting firearm ownership, but the entire thing is so wrapped up with the arms industry, who stand to lose a great deal of money if any sort of further regulations banning "assault weapons" is legislated.

The NRA has been the most sucesful NGO to influence legislation and establish weak or loophole ridden laws.

_________________
If you approach the Gaelic gods with 'I'm not worthy', they're going to reply to you with 'Then come back when you are.

Coffee Three Shouts on a Hilltop
avatar
Gorm_Sionnach
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 838
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Toronto, ON, Canada.

http://threeshoutsonahilltop.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by tmarie64 on Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:45 pm

I thought "Any of the AK series" made it pretty clear what "assault rifle" is.... But since "AK series" apparently wasn't clear enough, here is Merriam Webster's definition ... : any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use...
And...
assault weapon
noun
: any of various automatic or semiautomatic firearms; especially : assault rifle

Please don't be obtuse by trying to say you don't know what we mean. We all know you're not ignorant.
Do you have to have a PRESCRIPTION to buy ANY gun?
Can you remove something that is inside your gun that you don't want there?


_________________
"Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened."
— Dr. Seuss
avatar
tmarie64
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1903
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Richmond, VA

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:07 am

First of all, assault weapon is a term coined by the media, and it means nothing. It means sweet frike all.

Assault Rifle is a technical term for any rifled carbine or long arm that will fire multiple rounds for a single trigger pull. The M4 series (M16 for US, C7 for Canada) are 5.56mm Assault rifles, capable of automatic fire. The Colt AR-15 looks pretty much like the M4, the only differences being the third position of the fire selector switch and the differences in the sear of the bolt. The AR-15 fires a single round per trigger pull, it is not an assault rifle.

The AK series, like the AR series can be either military full automatic assault rifles, or simple civilian repeating rifles. Unless it fires fully automatic it is no more an assault rifle than my Lee Enfield .303. I can maintain an aimed rate of fire with my bolt action that is equivalent to a repeating rifle, but neither one can approach the rate of fire of a fully automatic weapon.

The AR-15 looks like a military M-16 or C7. I can get a squirt gun that looks the same, that doesn't make them an assault rifle either. They market the rifle with its similar style and accessories because most soldiers are familiar with its workings, and for that reason it makes an excellent platform for their personal weapon, for training their children on. To learn to shoot on a weapon similar to what you would use later in the military is just good sense. It is a decent target rifle at short to mid range, and ammunition is decidedly cheaper than the heavier calibers us old farts learned on (5.56mm is sooo much cheaper than 7.62mm)

_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by Gorm_Sionnach on Mon Feb 11, 2013 12:26 am

Actually, under the 1994 Assault Weapon law, the attribute which makes a firearm an "assault weapon" specified semi-automatic (with cosmetic attributes) to differentiate from fully automatic firearms (with similar cosmetics) which were already covered under a seperate law. The term does have (or did have as the law is currently expired) a legal definition, and so to dismiss it (simply) as an invention of the media is incorrect.

In regards to it not being a technical term, where as assault rifle being a technical designation, that is correct.

_________________
If you approach the Gaelic gods with 'I'm not worthy', they're going to reply to you with 'Then come back when you are.

Coffee Three Shouts on a Hilltop
avatar
Gorm_Sionnach
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 838
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Toronto, ON, Canada.

http://threeshoutsonahilltop.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Mon Feb 11, 2013 11:06 am

By that definition, every non-muzzle loading weapon is an assault weapon. Like I said, it is a media invented term, that means nothing. Every single pistol ever invented, and the cap and ball black powder revolving rifles and pistols developed in the civil war era would qualify as an assault weapon by that definition.

A law based on cosmetics; it looks baaad; make it illegal, it scaaaares me. Horse pucky. Either a weapon is capable of automatic fire, making it a military grade weapon, or it is not, making it a civilian weapon. Other than rate of fire, the only dividing line between civilian and military ordinance is weapon payload; with tracer rounds, and anti-material rounds not being suitable for civilian use.

Cosmetically my Lee Enfield looks like any other deer hunting rifle. This particular arm has been to war on multiple continents, and killed more men than most will meet in a lifetime. It is not an assault weapon under this law because it doesn't look scary. Given multiple magazines I can and frequently do put hundreds of rounds downrange without pause. The act of changing magazines while shooting, or on a jungle shoot, while moving through the range, is seamless and requires no pause in fire.

A law that states due to cosmetic features one weapon is banned as an assault weapon, and another of the same caliber, range, cyclic rate is permitted makes about as much sense as saying a F350 iwith canopy is a personal vehicle requiring a normal licence while one with an open box is a commercial vehicle requiring a commercial licence. No difference save one has a removable fiberglass top covering the box. Lawmakers would be laughed out of the capitol were they to propose such a bill, but with guns its OK because guns kill people (far fewer people than cars do) and therefore panic and histrionics are OK.

_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by allthegoodnamesweretaken on Fri Mar 08, 2013 11:20 pm

Thanks John for picking this up. My comp got a virus, and I have been waiting for the IT guy at work to get to it. It must seem like I fell of the face of the planet here.

I'm working on coming back
avatar
allthegoodnamesweretaken

Posts : 2700
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Some where in middle america

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by DeavonReye on Sat Mar 09, 2013 10:49 am

John has given a very good overview of this topic.

Allow me to speak on the "need". Like many other things we do for fun, what one person may find appropriate may not be to another person. But it doesn't necessarily make the item 'evil'. A few examples:

There are people who enjoy cars that have a TON of horsepower, able to quickly take it up to 150mph or greater without any problem. They don't "NEED" a car that can do that, but it makes them happy. If they crash at that speed, . . . it will pretty much be over for them, . . . and whomever they unfortunately crash into.

Alcohol can be a fun way to relax and/or have fun. However, there are some bottles that will get you drunk VERY fast. They don't "NEED" to drink something that is a great percentage of alcohol in it, but they want it. Drunk driving kills far more people than "assault rifles" ever will. Realistically, "to save lives", wouldn't it be prudent for the government to ban any alcoholic product with an alcoholic content greater than 5%? Wouldn't it save a lot of lives?

Here's the thing. I have a rifle that some would consider "evil". It will probably never see anything other than a range. But it is a VERY fun rifle to own. It can be made to be quite accurate. The recoil is awesome. Ergonomics feel great. Being able to shoot more rounds before having to stop the fun to reload is a big help. Sure, my 1958 Ruger Single Six "Cowboy Action" 22lr revolver is fun, but not on the same level.

Now, every once in a while, some evil person uses one of these types of rifles and does a lot of damage with it. Tragic! Ghastly!!! But it was the person who did it, and the person who needed fixing. 99.9% of the AR-15s sold will never be used in this way! A very important thing to remember.

In this country, we do have the 2nd Amendment. That Amendment isn't about hunting. . . . or even personal protection, though those things are a part of it. It's main purpose was to defend against a tyranical government. It has happened before, and could very well happen again, . . . even in the United States. But there is another GREAT advantage of those 99.9% of non-threatening AR-15s in the hands of law abiding citizens. Before another country considers invading the U.S., . . . it can't JUST calculate the military resistence, . . . but also the resistence from those rifles "behind every blade of grass". We can't know how many potential wars were never fought on this soil because of that fact.

Now, I know there are those who have strong opinions against this type of firearm. I get it. Some horrible things have happened recently, . . . and unfortunately may again. But the blame rests in many other places, and answers should be found in many other places . . . . the firearm used is just . . . an easy target.
avatar
DeavonReye

Posts : 769
Join date : 2009-06-15
Location : SW MO

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by Gorm_Sionnach on Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:15 pm

The 2nd amendment was put into place to ensure a well armed militia could be summoned should the need arise, not having the infrastructure nor the resources for much of a standing army at the time. Again, several hundred years of good government ought to be worth something against the ever present fear of some imagined tyrannical government coming to take your stuff.

The application of the second amendment has not prevented the outlawing of many kinds of weapons for civilian use either, so putting reasonable limits in place is, well reasonable.

The overwhelming statistical evidence available clearly points to a correlation between availability of such kinds of firearms and an increase in firearm related deaths. You simply do not see the same kind of recurring level of gun related violence in places where there is stricter gun control enforcement.

I think it is telling that the NRA actually managed to lobby the Federal government to the point where the CDC was prevented from collecting data regarding firearm related deaths. You want to talk about undue influence and fear of shadowy cabals putting their self interest ahead of the public good?

Yes, there are many elements involved, but placing the blame on everything else you can, yet not actually bringing up the firearms that were involved?

_________________
If you approach the Gaelic gods with 'I'm not worthy', they're going to reply to you with 'Then come back when you are.

Coffee Three Shouts on a Hilltop
avatar
Gorm_Sionnach
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 838
Join date : 2009-04-02
Location : Toronto, ON, Canada.

http://threeshoutsonahilltop.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by gillyflower on Sat Mar 09, 2013 5:03 pm

Has anyone read this in Rolling Stone?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gun-industrys-deadly-addiction-20130228

For gunmakers, the political fight over assault rifles and high-capacity pistols is about more than just profits – it's about the militarization of the marketplace and represents a desperate bid by gunmakers to prop up a decaying business. The once-dependable market for traditional hunting guns has fallen off a cliff. To adapt, the firearms industry has embraced a business strategy that requires it to place the weapons of war favored by deranged killers like Adam Lanza and Jared Loughner into the homes and holsters of as many Americans as possible. "They're not selling your dad's hunting rifle or shotgun," says Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center, a top industry watchdog. "They're selling military-bred weaponry."

The reason is that they are losing children to video games.

This sales boom papers over a perilous trajectory for the industry. A generation ago, more than half of American households owned a gun. Today it's barely one in three. Millennials, in particular, do not share their parents' love of firearms: Less than 20 percent of Americans born after 1980 report having a gun in the home. "For the industry, the problem is 'Who is going to buy the guns?'" says Sugarmann. "To borrow the language of the tobacco industry," he says, "they need to find 'replacement shooters.'"

_________________
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. Marcus Aurelius
avatar
gillyflower
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3400
Join date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by DeavonReye on Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:50 am

I agree that the odds of "needing to defend against a tyranical government" is low, granted. But we should never fool ourselves into thinking it couldn't happen again. The 2nd Amendment does speak of a militia. But it also states "the right of the people". The same "people" in the other Amendments are the same "people" in the 2nd. An individual right.

Now, . . . I know these types of rifles seem "scary" to those who are not familiar with them, but they are no different than a hunting rifle. Just cosmetics and more rounds. And yes, some FEW [very few] evil people chose to use them for evil purposes, . . . but to punish the 99.9% of law abiding citizens for the actions of a few evil people isn't the way to prevent such things.

avatar
DeavonReye

Posts : 769
Join date : 2009-06-15
Location : SW MO

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:11 am

When the number of people killed by guns approaches the number killed by drunk or (increasingly) stoned drivers, then I will care.

Right now, its a bit like passing laws against lightning strikes or shark attacks; sure they make the news when they happen, and anyone they happen to suffer a tragedy, but take a cold look at the numbers before you decide what you want to be afraid of.

A gun or a car; which will be more likely to injure or kill you due to the poor life choices of others? People pass laws to limit the number of rounds in a magazine, cool, but irrelevent. Take a look at the details of the mass shootings and usually these meat heads are so loaded with weapons that they don\t change mags they change guns.

I tried getting our local politicians to propose the idea of putting speed governers on automobiles to prohibit going more than 20km past the highest limits in the whole damned province (not city limits, highway limits), and was shot down. Even though it is illegal to go 220 anywhere in Canada, every dealer reserves the right to sell vehicles who selling point is how far past the ability to safely operate by an idiot who thinks street racing is safe, it can go.

Ban hi cap mags, because while shooting any munber of bullets can be legal, its should be incovenient. DO NOT BAN the ability to drive a vehicle twice the maximum speed limit in the whole nation, and up to six times the posted limits, because no number of people killed by cars are ever anything but an accident. You only blew threw a crosswalk and sixteen red lights so fast you have no idea what you hit, its not like you pulled a trigger or anything. Somehow it only counts if your weapon doesn't come with a stereo.

_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by gillyflower on Sun Mar 10, 2013 11:27 am

Of course not. And if you want to keep a military grade gun in the house to shoot other humans just in case the government turns tyrannical and the tanks roll down your street one day, okay. Only if that happens, realize that you've got more problems than your military grade gun is going to solve.

I suggest that if you think that is going to happen in the next few years, or 10 or 20 you should also spend all the money you can on stockpiling food, buy isolated land where you can build a hidden bunker for your family - do make it tank proof - start connecting and practicing with militias. It isn't going to be much of a life but at least you will be alive.

Personally I think the whole military grade gun push is caused by old white Republicans who see their way of life dying, not to mention the dying profits in the gun manufacturers. The young would rather play video games than spend - what is it? $.50 a bullet? at a practice range. Military grade guns, however are sexy, and appeal to the twenty-somethings, like the article says.

In the library, we've seen a shift from middle aged men reading westerns to the older men reading Star Wars type science fiction. It is all based upon the games they played as a child. So, the NRA is aiming at them, the children and young people. Things change, hobbies change with each generation sadly.

_________________
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. Marcus Aurelius
avatar
gillyflower
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3400
Join date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:05 pm

Military grade ammunition. What a joke. Military ammunition is 9mm for short arms, 5.56mm for longarms, having replaced 7.62mm. In civie terms thats the most common ammunition in the world.

Target shooting with man killing rounds makes sense. Man killing rounds give you enough energy to shoot a decent sized round a decent distance without punishing recoil. That 5.56mm will kill a deer or coyote if you are hunting for the pot or protecting the property, just as easily as it will stop a man.

It will piss off a bear, annoy a moose, and flatten against body armour at long ranges.

Civilian rounds, the .303, .30-06, .308, 7mm magnum, 40-50 and all the heavy hunting rounds will go through bullet proof glass or police body armour like a hot knife through butter. Anything that will stop a bear will go through the door you are sheltering behind, you, the wall behind, and some poor shmuck at a random angle beyond.

Man killing rounds are not more powerful than civilian ones; they are less powerful. We reduced from hunting rounds to lighter rounds because of overkill. We can load more, and fire faster, using light rounds than we could with big heavy hunting rounds.

Dirty Harry's .44 was sexy, but unless you are me, you are not getting off a second round any time soon after the recoil from that monster. Outside of boar hunting or bear defense in the back country, I would stick with a 9mm or .45 and get off a clean double tap before my poor punished wrist could wrestle the monster back down to earth.

_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by gillyflower on Sun Mar 10, 2013 1:26 pm

How many people do you think in the new target audience are ever going to see a bear or deer in the wild?

You alas are not the target audience. You actually know guns and bullets and what they will do. Most city and suburban people just go out and buy a cool looking gun. Target practice? What's that?

I take it back. New York times article. Ownership dropping except for Republicans. That gives me hope that the people in my area are all talk and there aren't that many guns in the hood.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html?hp

_________________
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. Marcus Aurelius
avatar
gillyflower
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3400
Join date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by DeavonReye on Sun Mar 10, 2013 2:05 pm

One thing I have learned. You can't trust news sources. . . just because they posted an article. Just offering that up.

There is a HUGE push from the anti-gun agenda to teach kids that guns are dangerous and to not have anything to do with them. A kid was punished for making a "paper gun" [basically an "L" he was using to play guns". A little girl was repromanded for having a child's bubble blowing "gun". Other stories like this have emerged. They are getting kids so afraid of even the thought of guns that they'll grow up to be non-gun owners. It is an irrational fear. An absurd way to scare kids. The police were called in some of these cases!

If you want to lower violence, teach kids early to be respectful to others and safe with anything that requires a measure of safety. Make sure criminals and people with ant-social mental disorders are kept unarmed for their sake and the sake of others.

But the tool isn't the problem. It IS criminals, . . . gangs, . . . and those who are determined to harm others. If not a firearm, . . . a car through a crowd of people will be their next choice.
avatar
DeavonReye

Posts : 769
Join date : 2009-06-15
Location : SW MO

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Sun Mar 10, 2013 4:06 pm

A gun is dangerous, a hammer is dangerous, a car is dangerous, an extension cord is dangerous. Laws keeping those who cannot exercise the minimum legal level of judgement (ie competence) or who have proven dangerous judgement (criminals) should be banned from anything which the risk of their abuse makes a reasonable risk to the public.

Gun licences, like drivers licences should be granted only after screening determines competence to make the judgement calls, and proven competence in training. We don't give you a licence just because you need a car for work, you have to prove to the state you can be trusted with one in a school zone, and when things get stressful in your commute. If you can't make that standard of skill and mental ability, you can't drive. If you can't meet a similar standard with guns, you likewise should not own one.

Education is the path to safe and responsible use. Keeping kids from learning=ignorance=bad decison making. Like family planning, failing to teach your daughter about the penis will not keep her from getting pregnant. Teacher her about how its safety is operated, and to always assume its loaded, and never point it at anything you don't plan on getting nailed, will stand a good chance of preventing unplanned pregnancies. The same measures with firearms will keep people from getting killed by accident, or from believing the gun is a magic wand to cure problems.

Like planned parenthood, the idea is to assure people are staying safe, and that society is enjoying the best balance of the benefits of responsible practice vs irresponsible and reckless use. Like automobile licencing, we want to make sure that those of us who share the streets with you are benefited by your driving, not killed by it. Just like with cars, you cannot get away from risk entirely, that is a statistical inevitability of any human use of tools.


_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by gillyflower on Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:21 pm

DeavonReye wrote:One thing I have learned. You can't trust news sources. . . just because they posted an article. Just offering that up.

There is a HUGE push from the anti-gun agenda to teach kids that guns are dangerous and to not have anything to do with them. A kid was punished for making a "paper gun" [basically an "L" he was using to play guns". A little girl was repromanded for having a child's bubble blowing "gun". Other stories like this have emerged. They are getting kids so afraid of even the thought of guns that they'll grow up to be non-gun owners. It is an irrational fear. An absurd way to scare kids. The police were called in some of these cases!

If you want to lower violence, teach kids early to be respectful to others and safe with anything that requires a measure of safety. Make sure criminals and people with ant-social mental disorders are kept unarmed for their sake and the sake of others.

But the tool isn't the problem. It IS criminals, . . . gangs, . . . and those who are determined to harm others. If not a firearm, . . . a car through a crowd of people will be their next choice.

We have three children dead in the last year in this area, killed by children finding and playing with family guns, not necessarily their family gun. Sometimes it was a visiting child who found the gun, something the parents thought was well hidden. I don't have a problem with scaring children so that they won't pick a gun up, if other means don't work.

You will always have people overreact, uncertain of the rules, etc. calling the police over play guns and the like, but those incidents can be fixed unlike when a child dies. They make the news because they are ridiculous.

The news sources that reported the news were quite correct. The children died. I wish they had been wrong.

_________________
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. Marcus Aurelius
avatar
gillyflower
Admin
Admin

Posts : 3400
Join date : 2009-04-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by John T Mainer on Sun Mar 10, 2013 10:26 pm

Again, children raised with proper training in guns wouldn't have done that. Before we could lift any of the family guns, my sister and I knew
1) a gun is loaded until you have ejected the mag and checked the guide path yourself
2) a finger is never on a trigger unless you are on the range, and cleared to fire
3) a gun is never pointed at a human being you are not in the middle of killing
4)least popular of all with the social workers; touch the guns without dad being present and you will not sit until your next birthday.

_________________
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
"Let justice be done, though the heavens fall."
avatar
John T Mainer
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 1004
Join date : 2009-04-01
Location : Maple Ridge, BC Can

http://community.bc-freehold.org/news.php

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by DeavonReye on Mon Mar 11, 2013 9:38 am

gilly, . . . I firmly believe that if you have children, and are a gun owner, . . . you MUST have a locking case and either keep the key on your person at all times, or [if it is a combination lock] keep any information about how to get it open away from those who shouldn't be playing with them. The Sandy Hook tragedy wouldn't have happened if the mother had done this. I hate to speak ill of the dead, but she knew her son's issues . . . and shouldn't have had anything in that house for him to get ahold of.

It is a serious tool to own and must be repected as such. I do!
avatar
DeavonReye

Posts : 769
Join date : 2009-06-15
Location : SW MO

Back to top Go down

Re: Alright.....

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum