For me, I support our Constitutional rights and that includes the 2nd Ammendment.

Should everyone have a gun? No way!!
Should no one be allowed to have a gun? No way also.

 

You cannot put a price on life... I agree, but there are plenty of idiots out there who die simply due to their stupidity and there's not a damned thing you can do to save them. If you don't believe me, check out the Darwin Awards. It's called natural selection, and sometimes you just have to let nature run it's course.

Communism? We already have that. Just look at NYC and Kalifornistan. No handguns allowed in NYC without a FEDERAL DEALERS LICENSE. That's a blatant 2nd ammendment violation against law-abiding citizens.

Technology to detect handguns? LOL... sure, that'll happen. Technology is NOT the answer. Strict ENFORCEMENT of the gun laws that are on the books IS the answer. No new laws. No new gadgets. Plain and simple - if you ILLEGALLY possess a gun, then you go to jail.

 

I have been a hunter since I was little. I am definately pro-gun. I had to agree partially with Micheal Moore in Bowling for Columbine ,in the sence that too many Americans are living in fear, mostly because of the media, so these "gun uneducated" people go out and buy a gun, having no clue about how to treat or use one.

 

How's this for sad irony?

ONLY LEO can possess a handgun in the District Of Columbia.

 

?? I dont see a pro-gun point here. I believe I stated that any death that can be prevented should be given the highest priority - guns, cigs, ect. should all be on the same level and as a result not compared.


The laughing smilie after Comunism was a sign that my comment was a joke. Although Im sure there would be less gun related muders if our society was pure comunism. NYC may take on a part of it...but not all of it. I think the comunist economy is more of AN answer to the problem - but it's definitely not our answer - so I wont go into the why of that.

How can you enforce something you cannot see? Yeah...if you posess an illegal gun, you should go to jail...but who in the world is going to just turn themselves in?? And do you have any idea how many guns arent on the books and those that are are incorrect? I can walk 5 blocks from my apartment, purchase a gun on the street that is in Joe Blow's name. It's in the books...but not correctly. Technology will help this situation immensely...

 

Thanks bob. I finished building it on new years eve before the ban

 

Ahh....

 

poboy:

whoa, hold on there! soooo wrong. I dont know if you really meant this as a joke, but look at recent history in the 20th century. totalitarianism, whether communism, nazism, facism, dictatorships, etc in all parts of the world resulted in consfication of guns. consfication allowed govts to brutally murder their populace at will.

take for example, nazi germany where adolf hitler enaced and passed legislation to disarm jewish germans from owning firearms (http://vikingphoenix.com/politics/nwl_1573_1938.htm). and as we know from history, they were 6 million less by 1945.

other countries (easily found on the internet):

Soviet Union; gun control law enacted in 1929 (Article 182, Penal Code) = est 20M deaths (i think this number is too high but even halved is a huge number)

China; gun control law enacted in 1935 and 1957 (Articles 186-7, Penal Code
Article 9, Security Law, 10/22) = est death toll 27M

Responsible private gun ownership keeps govt in check. Responsible private gun ownership keeps hoodlums, thieves, murderers, etc in check. Irresponsible gun ownership just results in needless death. Thus, my conclusion is that the only way to curb gun violence is to enforce:

- the over 50,000 existing laws pertaining to mandatory jail time
- hold accountable all judges all over the nation who decrease time in jail for the use of gun-related crimes

As for those tragedies you speak of John, yes, it is a tragedy. But such is human life and things happen. As callous as this statement might seem to you, there are plenty of tragedies to go around in all intentional and unintentional forms.

Lastly if you choose, pick up any issue of "American Rifleman" magazine (an NRA publication) and in the front pages, there's stories of how regular, everyday Americans use firearms to prevent criminal activity. Stuff that will never make the local TV or newspaper.

Bob

 

Amen to that! I'll say it again! RKBA!

 

I get American Hunter, and those stories are in there too. I believe the column is called the Armed Citizen.

http://www.nrapublications.org/armed...izen/index.asp

 

VERY good posting, Not only stated well, but backed up with factual information.

 

WOW. Great post BOB...

 

Good post Bob. A little closer to home:

Fourteen studies show that guns are used in self defensive purposes an estimated 800,000 to 2.5 million times per year in the US. Now, if only 5% of those 800,000 incidents resulted in a saved life, that's 40,000 people who are alive today. Compare that to your 10,000 murders per year. Also, I question whether those 10,000 are true murders or are deaths. My point here is, how many of those 10,000 were killed while breaking the law? Also, how many were gang bangers, drug dealers, rapists, scum of the earth, etc whom darwin should have eliminated long ago?

Oh, and here's where I got my numbers: http://www.guncite.com/

 

I'm neither for nor against, since I have mixed opinions.

Observation 1:
I've travelled in switzerland where every citizen has an automatic weapon in their closet, and they have one of the lowest crime rates in the world. Counterpoint, they have mandatory military service, which leads to them knowing what they are doing with them.

Observation 2:
I look around me and realize I really don't want most of those people having guns. Most people we encounter in the wilds of civilization don't measure up to a stable/responsible/intelligent person. I look at all the impolite people I encounter on the road, and I just don't like the idea that those weasels are inconsiderate, tempermental, and *armed*. I just don't trust my peers that much. With the degradation of personal responsibility and all the social issues that follow that, I just worry, ya know?

Observation 3:
The idea that enforcing the laws that exist to punish those who misuse guns as a deterrent feels very insufficient. At the risk of introducing another political question, I'd provide the following "logical" deduction.
a) I've oft heard it said in gun totin' circles that one should never draw a weapon unless one was prepared to use it.
b) Someone using a gun to commit a crime is therefore assumed to be willing to use it
c) Without much of a stretch, one could construe then that the use of a gun in a crime could be characterized as attempted murder, or at least a casual disregard for the rights of the "victimized" party to live.
d) Since they have a lack of respect for, and a willingness to end, other peoples life in order to commit a crime, their life should be forfeit. Use a gun to commit a crime, be executed.

So am I pro gun or anti? Beats the hell out of me!

I guess I'm with Breezey... I trust myself, but I sure as hell don't trust everyone around me!

 

You're thinking like a law abiding citizen, not like a criminal. If I were a criminal, I'd just walk outside and steal a car.

This is a fallacy, perhaps calluous, but a fallacy. There is a price on human life, people die everyday because somebody didn't want to spend money on safety. Why isn't everybody here driving the absolute safest car on the market? Because it costs too much to buy a new car every time a new, safer car comes out, or they don't want the image or sporty compromise of a Volvo or huge excursion etc. For that matter if life is priceless then nobody should drive at all since 20,000 people die every year in automobile related accidents. That's the price of convenience.

Why do some people get hazard pay if life is priceless? Nobody should work in a hazardous situation, somebody needs to devise a safer way to do it. But that takes time and time is money. Better to pay somebody more than wait 5 years for a safer solution.

There is a price on life and it's amazingly (sadly) cheap.

 

If observation 2 were correct then all the states that have allowed concealed carry permits would have an increase of crime and gun related incidents, not a decrease as has happened in most (all?) states that implemented it.

 

I own a shotgun, and a 44caliber winchester rifle.

 

I'm for guns. I have a SA XD-40, Remington 30-06, Knight .50 cal muzzleloader, and a North American Arms Mini .22.

 

Firmly against. I know you all trust yourselves with having so many guns-- and to a degree I guess I do, too-- but I hope to God you keep them locked up and away from children. A single mistake is all it takes for a tragedy to occur. Statistically speaking, with a pool of weapons this seemingly large, at least one of of these guns stands a chance, however slender, of hurting or killing someone. Let's hope the odds are in your favor and that you have 100% control of who has access to your firearms.

If it means anything, I am a former gun owner, a turn of the century Winchester rifle that I was given when I was 14. Nothing bad happened. I just eventually decided it was not for me. I also think there is something wrong with our national psyche. Something has happened. The person who knows the what and the why has yet to step forward.

 

You're talking statistics... I'm talking personal comfort! While I freely acknowledge that the long term effect of having to consider whether the other guy is armed might be a sufficient deterrent to the freeway temper tantrums, I don't personally indulge in those temper tantrums, nor I am likely to start packin' just to respond to others. Not because I'm opposed to guns, but I'm kinda opposed to being in a situation where an unnecessary escalation takes place. Two sides to that, of course.

Honestly, I think that anything that increases courtesy and consideration is by definition a civilizing influence. Just think it's a sad statement that carrying a gun could be thusly characterized (as your statistics indicate).

I'm more personally invested in my third point than the first or second. But I have maybe a wee tad less respect for life than most!