Guns, for em or against em?

egg on my face then... carry on ^_^

There is more truth to that than we might want to admit!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/03/nyregion/03disease.html

Dosen't Chip sell thick skins? His skins are awesome!

I asked him eons ago to create them but have yet to see the announcement. God knows when he does he'll make a mint.

We'll have to pool our $L to buy them for the people on the forums, especially Land and the Economy.

"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government. -- George Washington"

The founding fathers believed a armed populace was one of the checks and balances of our
goverment. I think they are right. As long as the hired help in DC knows there are about 200 million guns in this country. They will hopefully not do anything stupid.

A gun is a tool. You can feed yourself with it. Defend your home with it and yes commit a crime with it. To me the people who scream "Let's outlaw the guns" are treating the sympton and not the disease. The disease is we are a violent species. We have been killing each other since we fell out of the trees. Outlaw guns and people will stab each other. Outlaw knifes and they will bash each other with rocks and so on down the line. The other part of the disease is we don't teach people to be responsable. Joe Suburbia hears there has a been a break in down the street. Joe thinks "I need a gun". Joe dosn't know a muzzle from a grip. Brings home his new treasure and sticks the thing loaded under his pillow. Little Johnny finds it and shoots his best friend and kills him (true story in the paper a few years back) Now do we raise hell about the dummy who purchased the gun. No, we raise hell because it was a gun. If Joe had known to put a trigger lock on it and put it in a secure location. Nothing would of happened. Guns are just like anything else. Unless you think before you act something stupid is going to happen.

Instead of out lawing guns. let's out law stupidty. Make it mandatory that before you buy a gun you have to take a gun saftey class.

To throw another cliche in here. Ted Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with my gun

Rox

A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. -- Sigmund Freud,

I should have my new kevlar coated forum skin ready soon

An excellent example - I completely agree.

As a leftist I absolutely agree with this statement and it's the sole reason why I support the ownership of guns (although I do not allow them or facsimiles of them in my home).

However, I would like to point out that the typical NRA member is less concerned about watching over the republic than they are about having their gun porn. Gun porn is owning a gun for self-serving reasons such as wanting power, using it for a hobby, and even as an instrument of crime. There exists a compromise between the need to protect our republic and the individual's need to sate their lust for gun porn. That compromise is education (classes on use and safety), regulation (strong restrictions and accountability), and segregation (elimination of guns where their presence is a threat).

~Ulrika~

There is reason to believe that banning drugs dramatically increases criminal gun use; ask Al Capone. Creating an artifical criminal class out of those who participate in consensual "crimes" does also tend to increase disregard for laws. That people can't grasp these concepts after nearly a century of evidence continues to amaze me.

the other 1% died from having bullets hammered into their bodies like nails.

i wish there was another poll choice: "guns are ok and the regulations are fine. we just need to enforce them better."

$5000 bullets wouldn't reduce gun crim cause the criminals would still get them illegally and law abiding people wouldn't be able to afford them.

i don't think the poll means that the majority in sl are pro guns. all the anti-gun people saw the word "guns" in the title of the thread and are staying away in case it goes off. kiddin!

i have a gun and i'm thinking of getting another. it's fun going out to the back woods firing range and seeing all the good ol' boy redneck guys suddenly like "hello young lady of the ethnic persuasion who i am suddenly very respectful and courteous towards." muhahaha!

lol I'm apparently the only other. I don't like guns, I don't want a gun, I don't want someone with a gun around me. I also know that telling someone else what to do is a slippery slope. Can't do it and expect to keep your own freedom. so, I'm against guns, but I'm going to do absolutely nothing about it except to avoid places where they're likely to be and protect myself using an necessary means should I be confronted with one.

This is utterly ridiculous and borders libel. How the hell can you state this without backing it up with facts ! This constant projection of how you view the world exists onto other folks is entirely unneedful and tiresome Ulrika.

I'm not an american, so I can't really speak my opinion about wether it's constitutional to remove the second amendment, lest I get a good flaming from the patriots in the crowd.

As for owning guns though, I think of it this way:

you buy hedgeclippers to clip your grass.

you buy a gun to kill something.

Wether it is in defense or aggression; if you put a bullet through someone, you've killed them. Any justification is a rationalization of the situation.

If you can justify it or can't, to any degree, is simply an indicator of how much you value life.

Sure, if I had a family I would do my damndest to protect them were they to fall into danger. Would I kill the agressors?

Quite simply -- no.

And just as an aside -- the reasons for the constitution are pretty unusable these days. I dare you to take up arms against your government if you think they're stepping out of line.

(edited)

Another non-American chiming in here. I think that the second amendment is both wise and practical and you guys are lucky to have it. I think it's essential that the citizens of a nation should have the means to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. (Or, for that matter, a traitorous military, or an invading army, should the conventional army prove inadequate, much as some Iraquis are doing now. OK OK, forget I mentioned Iraq, I'll keep this on topic.)

Anyway, that said, you can't have a revolution every day but why do so many people down there keep shooting each other in the meantime? If there's some sort of national homicidal tendency that I just don't get then I suppose there's nothing to be done but it seems to me that, as has been said earlier in this thread, alot of deaths could, be prevented with proper education and storage practices ect. A car can be a deadly machine and training and a licence are required in order to own and operate one, why should a gun be any different? If you prove yourself to be a dangerous or incompentent driver, your licence can be revoked, so should it be with guns.

Here in Canada a licence is required to own a gun and each gun must be registered. In order to get a licence you must take a training course on how to operate, store and transport a gun, this makes sense to me. While I understand that if the day comes when the populace must take up arms against the big bad government it may be a bit of a drawback if they have records on who owns each and every gun, some sort of manditory education and licencing could prevent alot of carnage and sorrow.

hmmm... true 100 years ago. If the conventional military proves inadaquate, or all of it corrupt, well a gun aint gonna do much for ya .

I was so excited to come home and see what replies I'd have to my post. I crafted it as an opinion piece based on an anecdotal stereotype of an NRA member. Its goal was to contrast the selfless ideological spirit of the second amendment with the selfish personal desires of individuals. I thought naturally the conversation would evolve into a discussion between a "duty" and a "right". Do we have the right to use weapons as we please or do we have a duty to keep them to protect the republic?

I was even hoping there would be a discussion about the leftist philosophy on gun ownership versus the libertarian philosophy on gun ownership (on which the whole opinion piece was inspired). Is it true that the leftists have a desire to protect the ideals of the republic whereas individual libertarians have a desire to serve themselves (both anecdotally and by definition)?


Instead I get you telling me that you are tired of me expressing my opinion. Fighting the urge to point out the irony of you defending the Second Amendment while you are simultaneously denying me the First Amendment, I'll instead remind you that this is a public forum and the sole purpose of this forum is for us to express our opinions and discuss them.

In the future if you disagree with someone in the forums, why don't you keep your gorilla-banging-on-the-glass and feces-throwing posts out of the threads. They contribute nothing but anger and sorrow for the others trying to exchange ideas.

~Ulrika~

You were doing so well . This also would be a first amendment right.

Geez, go out and bye a sense of humor already!

The only gun I want would be an EMP gun. I could shoot it at asshats who drive down the road playing their music so the folks in the next county can hear it, and short out their car. It would also be nice for folks who cut me off in traffic, weave in traffic, speed, drive 15 muies BELOW the speed limit, or just plain piss me off when I am driving.

Now, thats kinda a silly way to think about it. For example, people who swords to pratice the ancient art of iaito(or iaido orhwatever).. This is a weapon designed to kill -- yet it is used peacefully as a hobby. I can't recall ever hearing about iaito practicioners killing people with sudden drawouts -- I'm sure it happens, but uncommonly.

For another example I own a butterfly knife. I don't think I've ever cut ANYTHING with it. I spin it, toss it, flip it and do tricks with it. Same with guns. It can be used merely for hobbies sake -- and I see nothing wrong with that.

---

On a more broad note I always found it interesting that people thing the removal of handguns would do anything -- criminals stealing weapons beside. As people have said -- a knife will replace a gun and a knife a rock. It is making the nation less violent which is the issue.

Granted I don't think the NRA helps very much.

Another thing to think about -- how many murders fail? I don't think that many... If someone really wants to kill someone they'll find a way. If I wanted to kill someone, they'd be dead, even if I had to do it with my bare hands.

The trick is making people not want other people dead. As a peaceful person, a gun has no violent intentions for me. It is simply a hobby, like anything else.

Oh come on, Jeska. "Attacking post"? I did no such thing. Edit my post if you want, you guys own the forum, but don't make my post out to be worse than it was.

***/ Hands Devlin the 44 Magnum that I use for just such asshats

(44's are good, with the right load they will put a nice hole in the engine block)

Observation of apes in captivity seem to indicate that it is mostly bonobo chimpanzees
that throw their feces. As a group, gorillas are inclined to be more fastidious than that, and generally voice disagreement with frenetic gesturing and hoots. Let's not generalize.