View Full Version : Your country is nuts!
Mr Punch
08-12-2009, 08:45 AM
Time for the periodical update on why the US is nuts thread... no vitriol, no slanging please, just good clean fun.
I'll start the ball rolling:With a Stormfront slogan!? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/12/barack-obama-new-hampshire-gun)
pennsylvania, where i live, is an open carry state - as long as you are permitted to own a hand gun, you can wear it out in the open... in my township you are allowed to shoot your guns provided you have a proper backstop - in my case we dug out the hillside... i target bricks with a fully choked, semi-automatic 12 gauge - preferably i use one ounce slugs. i just found 000 buckshot which contains 8 pellets at .36 inches... i am also a fan of trap and skeet shooting. what's truly nuts is the fact that england allowed their guns to be taken away from private citizens. :D
Mr Punch
08-12-2009, 05:12 PM
pennsylvania, where i live, is an open carry state - as long as you are permitted to own a hand gun, you can wear it out in the open... in my township you are allowed to shoot your guns provided you have a proper backstop - in my case we dug out the hillside... i target bricks with a fully choked, semi-automatic 12 gauge - preferably i use one ounce slugs. i just found 000 buckshot which contains 8 pellets at .36 inches... i am also a fan of trap and skeet shooting. what's truly nuts is the fact that england allowed their guns to be taken away from private citizens. :DCongratulations! I'd love to be able to do that.
And congratulations! Way to go with turning this thread into another gun law thread. UK wouldn't work as a gun carry state, simple as that.
This thread was meant for flippant news articles: feel free to posts some about UK, my home country, or Japan (no shortage of ammo there!) or this can turn into a 20-page locked down gun law ****fest. :rolleyes:
my bad ole puncher... how's are these mate??
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6562918.html
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/illinoisnews/story/A7551B882CE190D78625760D007E9769?OpenDocument
http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/08/04/Man-paints-complaint-to-city-on-house/UPI-22341249420762/
:D
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 04:42 AM
*snip* UK wouldn't work as a gun carry state, simple as that.
lol, the US doesn't work as a gun carry place either. But people don't seem to care.
The states are such a polarized place. Some Americans think they are the real americans while believing that other americans are not american at all!
The sad fact of that is that the Country is divided in so many ways internally it is a huge weight on itself.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/21/weekinreview/20070422_MARSH_GRAPHIC.html
The graphic above outlines DAILY gun deaths in the USA and the age groups and type of gun death. It amounts to approximately 30 thousand deaths a year.
That's 30 thousand people who wouldn't be dead right now if American had the guts to institute gun reform laws. Unfortunately, the stormfront poster boy and his rights to be an idiot is more important.
The graphic above outlines DAILY gun deaths in the USA and the age groups and type of gun death. It amounts to approximately 30 thousand deaths a year.
That's 30 thousand people who wouldn't be dead right now if American had the guts to institute gun reform laws.if we allowed the government to take our right to protect our lives and our families from undue oppression in whatever shape it arises, we would become slaves to a tyrannical ruling class that would still be allowed to own guns... what it boils down to is the fact that if the government, police, and military can own a gun, so can the people - an unarmed people is nothing more than sheep to be herded around whichever way the shepherd dictates... and if the shepherd decides to sell the sheep to the slaughterhouse, then there would be a heck of alot more deaths than those from a gun... i look at the idiots who kill themselves with guns as being part of natures population control. alot of us are responsible gun owners. :)
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 07:33 AM
if we allowed the government to take our right to protect our lives and our families from undue oppression in whatever shape it arises, we would become slaves to a tyrannical ruling class that would still be allowed to own guns... what it boils down to is the fact that if the government, police, and military can own a gun, so can the people - an unarmed people is nothing more than sheep to be herded around whichever way the shepherd dictates... and if the shepherd decides to sell the sheep to the slaughterhouse, then there would be a heck of alot more deaths than those from a gun... i look at the idiots who kill themselves with guns as being part of natures population control. alot of us are responsible gun owners. :)
So long as people are vehement about this is as long as the deaths will continue and the division in society will continue.
Is it really necessary to be walking around with a firearm? Really?
Is it really necessary to be walking around with a firearm? Really?is it really necessary to be walking around with the knowledge and ability to maim or kill people with your bare hands??
solo1
08-13-2009, 07:59 AM
With regards to gun carry laws. We have a right to bear arms and I dont think it has anything to do with personal protection its a side note. The right is the doomsday clause it is our way of making sure the government is under control they know that there are millions of gun owners and it prevents the gov from coming in and doing things they arent supposed to. Dont forget that any time another country is occupied the first thing they do is disarm the public then they string up the lawyers.
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 08:47 AM
is it really necessary to be walking around with the knowledge and ability to maim or kill people with your bare hands??
no.
but here's the rub.
the skills to do things with one's own mind and body take a lot of time and effort to develop. You are never guaranteed that everything you have trained will be enough to save you or someone else. You don't even have a guarantee that you are able to do what your training says you may be able to do. That is an unknown.
On the other hand, in the US, any shlub can go get a gun, legal or not, and walk out and kill someone without ever having to think about anything, without ever having put the time and effort into thinking about what it is. Without putting any effort into anything at all.
It's a huge difference.
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 09:20 AM
With regards to gun carry laws. We have a right to bear arms and I dont think it has anything to do with personal protection its a side note. The right is the doomsday clause it is our way of making sure the government is under control they know that there are millions of gun owners and it prevents the gov from coming in and doing things they arent supposed to. Dont forget that any time another country is occupied the first thing they do is disarm the public then they string up the lawyers.
I'm sorry, but this view point is antiquated and very provincial.
Yes, that may have applied when King George the 4th was a threat, but you live in a democracy that is free. You can vote a government out.
It's not like you're living somewhere where there is a threat of a coup d'etat or bands of roving armed black mask government death squads.
I find it funny that people always complain about outmoded laws etc etc but that the constitution of 200 years ago is still golden? Times change. You don't need johnny anybody wandering the streets representing a threat with his gun because it's his right to be threat?
no.i didn't think so...
but here's the rub.LOL... here's that classic dragon/tiger - yin/yang power interplay of opposing(conflicting) forces...
the skills to do things with one's own mind and body take a lot of time and effort to develop. so it is only natural that an opposing factor likewise manifest itself alongside it's counterpart opposite concept.
You are never guaranteed that everything you have trained will be enough to save you or someone else.and on the flipside, everything happens for a reason...
You don't even have a guarantee that you are able to do what your training says you may be able to do.and yet we train with the intention that it will.
That is an unknown.only because we fail to observe the known...
On the other hand, in the US, any shlub can go get a gun, legal or not, and walk out and kill someone without ever having to think about anything, without ever having put the time and effort into thinking about what it is. Without putting any effort into anything at all.again this would reflect the natural principle of opposite dynamics... there must be an opposite to every concievable thing in this universe and it must be manifested just the same...
It's a huge difference.LOL... actually they are quite the opposite. :D
With regards to gun carry laws. We have a right to bear arms and I dont think it has anything to do with personal protection its a side note. The right is the doomsday clause it is our way of making sure the government is under control they know that there are millions of gun owners and it prevents the gov from coming in and doing things they arent supposed to. Dont forget that any time another country is occupied the first thing they do is disarm the public then they string up the lawyers.so... on a subtle note, it would seem that countries that are being taken over(occupied), tout gun control measures that are enacted soley for the purpose of protecting the public, where in reality they are enacted to ensure a docile herd? now reflecting on the UK and now in america(along with a host of other countries), would you be willing to believe that these two lands are being occupied? and if they are infact being occupied, who are their occupiers? and would it be reasonable to say that if we are infact being occupied, that we have a right to protect ourselves from the occupation?
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 11:08 AM
hold on a sec...
you think the US and the UK are "occupied" nations?
wtf?
per capita there are as many firearms in households in Canada as there are in the USA yet the amount of gun deaths in Canada is almost not worth mentioning.
Th UK also has gun ownership for many of it's citizens, although, I would say they have stricter laws concerning handguns and carrying of same.
Canada has open carry with all long guns afaik as i remember walking to an appraisers with a 30/30 over my shoulder in plain view some years back and not a problem at all with it.
So, what's up with America, if you are all for personal rights with guns, why are there so many examples of irresponsible use?
hold on a sec...well i have let go now...
you think the US and the UK are "occupied" nations?boy... you catch on quick.
wtf? wtf is right!!
per capita there are as many firearms in households in Canada as there are in the USA yet the amount of gun deaths in Canada is almost not worth mentioning.this is because the american society and culture revolves around violence and bloodshed... just look at the average television shows that people watch on a daily basis, aswell as the movies that are generated by hollywood... these statistics are a direct result of mass brainwashing via media manipulation.
Th UK also has gun ownership for many of it's citizens, although, I would say they have stricter laws concerning handguns and carrying of same.i believe that you need a license for every firearm in the country, which means that everyone must be "pre-approved" by a governmental agency of sorts.
Canada has open carry with all long guns afaik as i remember walking to an appraisers with a 30/30 over my shoulder in plain view some years back and not a problem at all with it.this again is because the canadain culture is much more peaceful than the american culture...
So, what's up with America, if you are all for personal rights with guns, why are there so many examples of irresponsible use?i have just answered that question above. :p
BoulderDawg
08-13-2009, 11:35 AM
if we allowed the government to take our right to protect our lives and our families from undue oppression in whatever shape it arises, we would become slaves to a tyrannical ruling class that would still be allowed to own guns... what it boils down to is the fact that if the government, police, and military can own a gun, so can the people - an unarmed people is nothing more than sheep to be herded around whichever way the shepherd dictates... and if the shepherd decides to sell the sheep to the slaughterhouse, then there would be a heck of alot more deaths than those from a gun... i look at the idiots who kill themselves with guns as being part of natures population control. alot of us are responsible gun owners. :)
That's just silly. When the Constitution was written a well armed citizen group could defend itself against a group of soldiers. Nowadays if it can down to it (remember Waco) the government is always going to outgun any private group. Also, if you don't believe me, take a few shots at the police or at the military and see what happens.
That's just silly. When the Constitution was written a well armed citizen group could defend itself against a group of soldiers. Nowadays if it can down to it (remember Waco) the government is always going to outgun any private group. Also, if you don't believe me, take a few shots at the police or at the military and see what happens.why is that silly? you have stated my exact point i was attempting to convey here... albeit in a different string of words. :)
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 11:42 AM
That's just silly. When the Constitution was written a well armed citizen group could defend itself against a group of soldiers. Nowadays if it can down to it (remember Waco) the government is always going to outgun any private group. Also, if you don't believe me, take a few shots at the police or at the military and see what happens.
waco? really?
also, why would you want to shoot at a cop or at a miltary service person?
is there lead piping in your home or do you consume it in bar or flake form? :D
talk about irrational.
seriously.
have you guys actually read your Constitution? Bill of rights? Or is it just a prop for a lame argument that falls apart in the face of the actual document quite often.
remember, when that thing was written, slavery was ok, killing indians was ok, genocide was ok, women had no rights, and so on and so forth. Try to think contextually about it for a moment. Just a moment. It is your country after all.
also, why would you want to shoot at a cop or at a miltary service person?exactly... there should be no need to.
The Preamble to The Bill of Rights
Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Note: The following text is a transcription of the first ten amendments to the Constitution in their original form. These amendments were ratified December 15, 1791, and form what is known as the "Bill of Rights."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment II
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
somehow these rights have been smeared by numerous individuals, the media, and outright propaganda, which is to do nothing more than to eradicate the knowledge and understanding of just what it means to be a FREE nation of people who desire nothing more than to work, raise their family, and enjoy relative peace and happiness - as history has shown, those who feel their rights are being violated, will eventually find the courage to speak up and stand up... of course, true and honest individuals have no need for a bill of rights, but what the heck, they sure as heck look good on the paper they were written on. :)
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 12:35 PM
would you not agree that police forces are "well regulated militias"?
Do you actually want to take on the responsibility with being involved in said well regulated militia or shall it just be everyone wandering around with guns enforcing the laws?
would you not agree that police forces are "well regulated militias"?no i would not... they are an unregulated band of thugs, that usually do not have to answer for anything that they do unless there is a public outcry, which even then, they are handed a slap on the wrist in comparison to what a private citizen would recieve.
Do you actually want to take on the responsibility with being involved in said well regulated militia or shall it just be everyone wandering around with guns enforcing the laws?well regulated by whose regulations and according to whose rules? the entire purpose of militias is to protect the interests of the state and the people from the abuse of power arising from whatever said government is in place... this is why the first thing done by an oppressive regime is to disarm the public and enact draconian gun laws in attempts to thwart any armed resistance to an oppressive government. take for example this latest develpoment in encroaching on the individual rights of the states... http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/governors-oppose-dod-emergency-powers-2009-08-10.html
While I am not all that thrilled with total nut jobs being able to own and carry guns (or even as it is here in Texas, carry a handgun concealed), I will offer up one example of where is is NOT provincial
Most recently, there were the conditions that arose in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. At that time, there was a collapse of law enforcement as well as civil services and safety. Having a gun in one's home at that time was one more piece to the puzzle of survival.
Since Katrina, there have been 2 close calls here in Houston - Hurricane Rita (a dud - but we rode it out and made sure that we knew our neighbors and were in possession of enough guns to deal with the emergency situation should it arise.
Last year, there was Hurricane Ike. We personally chose to leave the area and spent almost 2 weeks in the Dallas area. There were areas that had curfews, no electricity for several weeks, phones were out, cell phone and land lines - so the ability to even call the police for help was often not there.
So, there ARE reasons to have a gun or two at home if you live in an area that is susceptible to a major natural disaster.
While I am not all that thrilled with total nut jobs being able to own and carry guns (or even as it is here in Texas, carry a handgun concealed), I will offer up one example of where is is NOT provincial
Most recently, there were the conditions that arose in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. At that time, there was a collapse of law enforcement as well as civil services and safety. Having a gun in one's home at that time was one more piece to the puzzle of survival.
Since Katrina, there have been 2 close calls here in Houston - Hurricane Rita (a dud - but we rode it out and made sure that we knew our neighbors and were in possession of enough guns to deal with the emergency situation should it arise.
Last year, there was Hurricane Ike. We personally chose to leave the area and spent almost 2 weeks in the Dallas area. There were areas that had curfews, no electricity for several weeks, phones were out, cell phone and land lines - so the ability to even call the police for help was often not there.
So, there ARE reasons to have a gun or two at home if you live in an area that is susceptible to a major natural disaster.lets also take into account washingtons stunning response to the chaos of katrina, where one is reminded that there isn't always gonna be someone around to help protect you when you may need it the most.
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 01:30 PM
no i would not... they are an unregulated band of thugs, that usually do not have to answer for anything that they do unless there is a public outcry, which even then, they are handed a slap on the wrist in comparison to what a private citizen would recieve.
well regulated by whose regulations and according to whose rules? the entire purpose of militias is to protect the interests of the state and the people from the abuse of power arising from whatever said government is in place... this is why the first thing done by an oppressive regime is to disarm the public and enact draconian gun laws in attempts to thwart any armed resistance to an oppressive government. take for example this latest develpoment in encroaching on the individual rights of the states... http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/governors-oppose-dod-emergency-powers-2009-08-10.html
well, if that's what you believe so be it.
YOur view is remarkably biased though.
Have you been beaten up by a cop or something? :p
you seem to be uncannily unfamiliar with the democratic process uki.
you seem to be uncannily unfamiliar with the democratic process uki.democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the population takes away the rights of the other 49%. :)
Lucas
08-13-2009, 01:56 PM
lol. thats a pretty funny statement. did you get that from somewhere or is that a uki original?
lol. thats a pretty funny statement. did you get that from somewhere or is that a uki original?thomas jefferson...
and here's some more nuts for the bowl... http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/13/arizona.immigrant.advocate/index.html
Lucas
08-13-2009, 04:26 PM
ah now that you mention it, it does seem familiar.
wasnt he that fellow that suggested every so many years the citizens should revolt and completely reform the government?
David Jamieson
08-13-2009, 07:13 PM
American democracy only becomes a dictatorship of the majority when one of the two parties doesn't hold a majority in the senate or congress.
The problem is the 2 party system. There needs to be a better split in congress and in the senate between a lot of different interests.
And that is entirely up the the American voter to see to it that that happens.
Ultimately it is "we the people" who keep electing the same 2 parties or worse, are just apathetic about it and don't vote for anyone.
The most powerful part of anything is the roots. It's on that level where real change takes place.
*steps off soapbox*
So, what's up with America, if you are all for personal rights with guns, why are there so many examples of irresponsible use?
Because the media knows guns = ratings, and all examples of poor handling, illegal firearm procurement [which is somehow the same as legal procurement in many stories] and the like generate moola.
As far as roving death bands, well, yes, we have those.
I was at a stop light. "Good" part of town. Around 2 o'clock in the afternoon. Just passed a cop car two blocks back. Some car painted up like a Trix cereal box [even had the rabbit on the hood smoking] pulls up behind me, all four doors pop open, four men exit the vehicle, two with long weapons [didn't get a good look at those]. I open my center consol, pull out my little revolver that can shoot buck shot, hold it in my lap.
One of the men makes it to my car, grabs my door handle, sees the gun. Backs up, makes a signal to the other guys, they run back to the car, speed off.
For those who would say I waited for things to get violent, that **** took maybe three seconds, from car door open to at my door.
In this part of the country, crime is getting worse, except in areas with easier legal access to firearms.
It's well and good to say "if no one had guns, there wouldn't be gun violence, would there?" And that's true.
And if there wasn't violence, we could all be living in the age of aquairus.
Condescending arguments and appeals to we, the braindead masses who utilize firearms, have training in them, and accept there ownership as a right of the country in which we live, are pointless. As is all holier-than-thou, we-know-the-truth interaction.
I make this vow though: I will lay down my guns, and never use another, soon as someone solves the whole "violence" thing. Weapons are here. Now. They cannot, by any legislation, be removed from the world. It's probably safer to live in the reality of the world accepting this and working to minimize our exposure to violent situations, and yet making sure we can close the gap when the sneak up on us.
And if there wasn't violence, we could all be living in the age of aquairus.
we're in luck!!! we are entering aquarius now!!!
I make this vow though: I will lay down my guns, and never use another, soon as someone solves the whole "violence" thing. Weapons are here. Now. They cannot, by any legislation, be removed from the world. It's probably safer to live in the reality of the world accepting this and working to minimize our exposure to violent situations, and yet making sure we can close the gap when the sneak up on us.this is where the periodic cleansing of the planet comes in(one of those cycles of nature)... a few earthquakes here, a comet or two over there, oh, and watchout for the tsunami's. :)
The problem is the 2 party system. The most powerful part of anything is the roots. It's on that level where real change takes place.amen brother... amen.
*steps off soapbox*so how did you like it up there?? not too bad eh? :p
jdhowland
08-15-2009, 11:14 AM
I live in a gun-friendly society. I never hunt. Don't own a rifle. Not a gun nut. I'm required to use firearms as part of my job, an act of state-mandated coercion. I train with firearms regularly and have a proper fear of them. I see them as tools, not symbols of freedom or rugged individualism.
Many people own and carry guns for a sense of power and self-importance. It's that attitude that scares me more than the idea of proliferation of firearms. So four kids were shot and two of them died while trying to rob a store in Harlem. Sad situation for everyone involved. Those kids bought into the unfortunate idea that having guns gives you power over others. And we still glamorize the idea of men with guns doing important things. It's not a crime to make movies and video games for young people that encourage this attitude. But it hurts us all.
As a CO, I've had several convicted murderers tell me their stories. Every one who wanted to talk carried a ghost with him and regretted having a gun at a particular time. The ones who don't like to talk about it may have no regrets at all except for being in prison.
I live in a state that allows concealed carry without a permit. Is that crazy? Maybe a little, but we still have a frontier mentality here. My wife won't go camping with me or take the kids to our favorite local beach unless I bring a hefty pistol to ward off bears. Two weeks ago, near where I live, a man was walking his dogs and heard a twig snap. He turned in time to see a "grizzly" (we call them brown bears, here) in full charge. He tried to backpedal while drawing his pistol and fired with no thought of aiming. The bear went down and skidded past him as it died. That's an unusual outcome for that situation. He was prepared. Too bad for the bear; I like bears. It must have been starving. I'm glad that man is still alive. His pistol was a .454 Casull. A gun like that isn't made to be used against people.
Good gun control is proper training and respect. It doesn't come from lawmakers.
Enough.
jd
I live in a gun-friendly society. I never hunt. Don't own a rifle. Not a gun nut. I'm required to use firearms as part of my job, an act of state-mandated coercion. I train with firearms regularly and have a proper fear of them. I see them as tools, not symbols of freedom or rugged individualism.
Many people own and carry guns for a sense of power and self-importance. It's that attitude that scares me more than the idea of proliferation of firearms. So four kids were shot and two of them died while trying to rob a store in Harlem. Sad situation for everyone involved. Those kids bought into the unfortunate idea that having guns gives you power over others. And we still glamorize the idea of men with guns doing important things. It's not a crime to make movies and video games for young people that encourage this attitude. But it hurts us all.
As a CO, I've had several convicted murderers tell me their stories. Every one who wanted to talk carried a ghost with him and regretted having a gun at a particular time. The ones who don't like to talk about it may have no regrets at all except for being in prison.
I live in a state that allows concealed carry without a permit. Is that crazy? Maybe a little, but we still have a frontier mentality here. My wife won't go camping with me or take the kids to our favorite local beach unless I bring a hefty pistol to ward off bears. Two weeks ago, near where I live, a man was walking his dogs and heard a twig snap. He turned in time to see a "grizzly" (we call them brown bears, here) in full charge. He tried to backpedal while drawing his pistol and fired with no thought of aiming. The bear went down and skidded past him as it died. That's an unusual outcome for that situation. He was prepared. Too bad for the bear; I like bears. It must have been starving. I'm glad that man is still alive. His pistol was a .454 Casull. A gun like that isn't made to be used against people.
Good gun control is proper training and respect. It doesn't come from lawmakers.
Enough.
jd
[emphasis from Vash]
Perfect. Thanks for your obviously experienced and educated point of view!
i grew up with guns around me when i was young... i started shooting when i was like 9 years old. my grandfather always made a point of gun safety... treat the gun as if it is always loaded and never point a gun at anyone unless you or your family is in direct danger. that was it. two simple points he drilled into my head... accidents don't happen, they're caused. :)
dirtyrat
08-16-2009, 02:11 PM
i grew up with guns around me when i was young... i started shooting when i was like 9 years old. my grandfather always made a point of gun safety... treat the gun as if it is always loaded and never point a gun at anyone unless you or your family is in direct danger. that was it. two simple points he drilled into my head... accidents don't happen, they're caused. :)
That's just it, buddy. There's a lot more stupid people out there than there are intelligent and responsible people. Half of them or more actually think they are intelligent. :eek:
Time for the periodical update on why the US is nuts thread... no vitriol, no slanging please, just good clean fun.
I'll start the ball rolling:With a Stormfront slogan!? (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/12/barack-obama-new-hampshire-gun)
and here's black man with an assault rifle... does this invoke the black panthers? why gotta keep this thread balanced with the original poster. :D
(CNN) – At least two Arizona men brought assault rifles to President Obama’s speech Monday to the annual Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Phoenix.
CNN’s Ed Henry reported that one of the men was carrying an AR-15 assault rifle and shouted anti-Obama slogans. The men remained outside the convention center where the president was speaking. Henry said U.S. Secret Service and local police were "very much aware" of the situation and were paying close attention to the men.
However, Arizona is an open-carry state, meaning it's legal to carry firearms in public as long as they are visible.
here's the picture... http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
it seems to be nuts by design...
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.