Owning Guns Make You a Bad Person?

I was eating dinner earlier and this came on the news on T.V.

Police: Dozens Of Guns Found In Home

Now, if you read the article it says the guns were improperly stored and such, yes I know. That article was just a transition in me talking with my parents.

When I saw it on T.V I commented saying "Wow. They're getting really strict with gun laws lately." Then my dad responded with a almost angry tone "They should be."
I thought for a short second then said "Why? It's our right to own guns."

Then on the report someone said "I thought he was such a nice guy. I didn't think he'd own guns."

Then I said "Owning guns doesn't make you a bad person."
My mom said "Sure, everyone's nice."

I responded "What's wrong with owning a gun? People own guns for self defense. Your screwed if someone breaks into a house and points a gun to your face and you have nothing to defend yourself with. People who own guns aren't immediately terrorists."

My dad then says "Yeah, but most people don't own 3 Uzis."
Then I said "So what, a gun is a gun. What difference does the type of gun or amount of guns make? People should be free to own as many guns or as many types of guns as they want."
My dad, in a desperate attempt to sound smart says "You probably don't even know what an Uzi is."
I then respond "An Uzi is a semi-automatic machine pistol. Now tell me, what's wrong with owning an Uzi?" I felt they could no longer counter my statements and left the room.

It's almost like the government is trying to make us think guns are bad to prevent us from buying them. A lot of people think if you own guns then you are a shadowy person or you're a terrorist. Notice how easy it is for them to put opinions in our head?

[edit on 16-2-2009 by CNRHKick]

As a gun owner, let me say that gun owners are bad people.

Bad for those who would violate their homes, cars, property, or threaten their safety or lives.

Bad for those who have no respect for others, nor their hard-earned properties.

Bad for those who cannot and will not fend for themselves, and must rely on others to do what they as individuals should do for themselves.

Yep. Gunowners are bad people.

But only to bad people.

Sadly yes people are becoming used to connecting gun ownership with connotations of being a bad person. I've been on the receiving end of such barbs because of my collection of firearms. Most of the time its best to just let those who think such nonsense continue to think it because you only stress yourself out trying to convince them otherwise. That being said everyone who has ever questioned my character because I own firearms got their world turned upside down when they see how anal I am about safety with said firearms; I can honestly say I have never handed a gun to anybody to look at without first having cleared the weapon myself, even if I know that its not loaded.

I agree that people should have the right to own a gun, but I still would not
want to have anything to do with a guy that owns a whole set of shotguns,
rifles and pistols. I think you have to be pretty sick in the head to want to
have such an arsenal of lethal firearms in your house, and even be proud
of it on top.

I got nothing against one shotgun, or one pistol.. but anything beyond that
makes you mentally instable and dangerous, in my eyes. I will stay far
away from you for sure.. and everyone that I know, agrees with that.

Gun freaks are a danger to society, recent history has proven that time
again and again. Especially in America, with her never ending stream of
shootouts, even in schools.

Sounds like your Dad thinks that criminals buy guns at a gunstore. You would be amazed how un-informed people are. Also it appears that people that come from an urban environment and have never owned or fired weapons are deathly scared of them and would prefer that 'magically' if a law was passed that there would somehow no longer be crime (naive).

I have seen this attitude from many of our UK posters... they fear their neighbors being armed as though we 100 million LEGAL gun owners routinely have shootouts with each other when we drink a beer.

Kennesaw Georgia is a great example of how wrong they are.

25 years murder-free
in 'Gun Town USA'
Crime rate plummeted after law
required firearms for residents

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of "Wild West" showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

Prior to enactment of the law, Kennesaw had a population of just 5,242 but a crime rate significantly higher (4,332 per 100,000) than the national average (3,899 per 100,000). The latest statistics available – for the year 2005 – show the rate at 2,027 per 100,000. Meanwhile, the population has skyrocketed to 28,189.

By comparison, the population of Morton Grove, the first city in Illinois to adopt a gun ban for anyone other than police officers, has actually dropped slightly and stands at 22,202, according to 2005 statistics. More significantly, perhaps, the city's crime rate increased by 15.7 percent immediately after the gun ban, even though the overall crime rate in Cook County rose only 3 percent. Today, by comparison, the township's crime rate stands at 2,268 per 100,000.

This was not what some predicted.

In a column titled "Gun Town USA," Art Buchwald suggested Kennesaw would soon become a place where routine disagreements between neighbors would be settled in shootouts. The Washington Post mocked Kennesaw as "the brave little city … soon to be pistol-packing capital of the world." Phil Donahue invited the mayor on his show.

Reuters, the European news service, today revisited the Kennesaw controversy following the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Police Lt. Craig Graydon said: "When the Kennesaw law was passed in 1982 there was a substantial drop in crime … and we have maintained a really low crime rate since then. We are sure it is one of the lowest (crime) towns in the metro area." Kennesaw is just north of Atlanta.

reply to post by Wehali


At the danger of giving out too much info I will provide you with a list of my firearms followed by the logic in owning all of them.

Mossberg 500A 12ga shotgun
Remington Ranger 20ga shotgun
Bolt action .22
Semi-auto .22
Remington 710 30-06
Marlin 30-30
HSA-15 M4 Carbine (.223)

Beretta 92FS 9mm
Walther P99 in .40 cal
Smith and Wesson .38 special revolver

Now that obviously is more than the suggested "1 of each" however you have to look at applications for each. The shotguns make outstanding home defense weapons but also are very well suited to clay pidegon shooting as well as actual fowl hunting. The Bolt-Action .22 is my brothers whom I am holding on to for him since he doesn't have a suitable storage location at the moment. The semi-auto .22 was my mothers and as such I inherited when she passed away, its along with the bolt action .22 are outstanding small game guns and perform amazingly for taking squirrels, rabbits and other such animals. The 30-30 is my preferred rifle for when I have to hunt in thick brush because its the shortest of my deer guns and is by far the easiest to carry when space is a premium. My 30-06 is my general purpose hunting rifle because its got more range than the other guns and enough knock-down power that if I encounter a bear (and I have before) I'm not just going to make it extremely angry. The M4 rifle was purchased for varmint hunting as its a very fast round and it has the ability for quick follow up shots, plus it doesn't break the bank to practice with it.

The .38 revolver and 9mm were also inherited from my mother, so I have absolutely no intentions of just getting rid of them because I "don't need more than 1 of each". I take both with me to the range from time to time to ensure they get used and still function properly and safely. The .40 was the first handgun I ever purchased for myself and is actually what I carry when I'm utilizing my CCW, so its got a very specific purpose just like the rest of my firearms.

By the standards you have developed I would think that I fall safely within the category of a gun freak, however apparently I've been told I'm one of the more level headed people my friends know and that I take safety very seriously. Despite owning all of those horrible guns and even going so far as to get a permit to legally carry a concealed weapon I have never once had to draw it on someone and I have never once used any of my weapons in anger (unless you count deer since they like to ruin my vehicles on back roads) nor do I find the idea even remotely possible.

Just because we have more than 1 or 2 guns does not make us insane, freaks, unstable, etc. It just means we like options in what we own, just like anyone else would when it comes to clothes, shoes, computers, guitars, vehicles or anything else where people sometimes own more than one.

reply to post by Wehali


The exact un-informed attitude I speak of... thank you for providing a PERFECT example of an urban mindset.

See, one firearm or 20, a human only has 2 hands so that argument is irrelevant, and if you hunt (which millions of Americans do) you have to have the right tool for the application.

A shotgun is good for bird hunting, a higher powered rifle for deer or elk, a .22 for squirrel or rabbit or you may prefer a variety of calibers depending on your environment. Now I am just talking hunting, now we have target shooters who may also prefer to use a number of different firearms.

How about YOU are only allowed one knife per household as you surely don't need more than one and you should be able to use it for any application from cutting bread to slicing meat.

Or, how about a screwdriver... you surely would be a nutcase if you owned more than one or two right?

And let's not even go into collecting. Just like anything else firearms are collectibles.

VP Cheney "Gunned Down" his hunting partner.

A small bog of drugs with a "cache" of weapons were discovered.

An armed assiliant.........

Yes, the media is trying to make law abiding citizens look like a bunch of lunatics who dont know that they hold a potentially leathal item.

Improperly stored? You guys on the East Coast have some odd ball laws over there. I can think of at least three guns in my house that are loaded and sitting by my bed right now. Just another way to legislate and harrass law abiding people. Which, I may add, this guy wasnt. C-4 and fully autos are highly regulated, and he should have done the proper thing and kept up with the law in this matter. But to search his home on the word of a confessed thief? I would get one hell of a lawyer to fight that one.

Want to get a breather and read about people defending themselves with firearms, since the MSM doesnt do it. Go here.

I must admit that my opinion is probably colored by the society I live in.
My country never had a history of gun worshiping, unlike America does.
Most people in my country, don't know anyone that owns a gun, and gun
deaths or injuries are extremely rare here.

Then when we compare our country to America, with its 13,000 gun deaths
every year, and its incredible amount of guns per person, we are easily
inclined to believe that owning guns is very bad. Without bothering to look
up the hard facts around the whole situation.

No one will ever manage to make me believe that owning guns provides
a person increased safety though. A criminal is much more likely to shoot
you if he sees that you are carrying or wielding a gun. The criminal is
probably much more experienced in real gun fights, so the chance that
you survive the encounter, becomes very small. Where as if you had not
have a gun with you, the criminal would just tell you to sit down and shut
up, instead of killing you.

I'm not saying this is always the case, but it certainly is in most cases.

This is nothing but common sense and logical reasoning. I'm sure that
police records will back me up in this statement as well.

[edit on (16/2/09) by Wehali]

Owning Guns Make You a Bad Person?

Well it makes you a bad person to the fascist regime.
Because you can shoot back when they try to exterminate you.

Originally posted by Wehali
I got nothing against one shotgun, or one pistol.. but anything beyond that
makes you mentally instable and dangerous, in my eyes.

How did you come to this figure? So people who collect firearms for the differences, both performance and aesthetically speaking, are mentally unstable? Then wouldn't anyone who collects anything fall under the same classification? Do you only buy one color or brand of shirts? Do you need more than one long sleeve and one short sleeve shirt?

If you have ever been in a large, well-stocked hardware store, you can see a number of specialized tools, designed for a specific job.

Take the simple hammer. My God. You have claw hammers, roofing hammers, tile hammers, cut nail hammers, sledge hammers, peen hammers, on and on, and on.

Each one is designed to do a certain thing well. You don't use a sledge hammer in watchmaking, for example.

Firearms are just tools. Tools to do a job. Tools to perform a specific task. Some are good at long-range, some at short range. Some are for close-quarters, some are for medium ranges. Some are for small, light-weight varmits, and some are better designed for two-legged varmits.

While I have a number of weapons, I don't have two of a kind. Simply as my resources are limited. Otherwise, I'd have a museum.

I've met others who have never been around guns and are fearful. They fear an innate tool. Do you likewise fear a hammer? Do you fear a handsaw?

A hammer in the hands of a homicidal maniac is just more than a tool. That same hammer in the hands of a craftsman is a tool.

The bulk of murders here is the US are gangs and punks, killing other gang members and punks, or drug deals gone bad.

These clowns kill each other over $40 worth of drugs. Every day, in every major city.

I haven't been in a shoot-out since combat. I have actually stopped violence by carrying a firearm, and thankfully, was not forced to use it. These wannabe bad-asses had a rapid change of heart.

The freedom to not require a personal weapon on a person at all times is a very recent phenomenon. Not many years ago, no one but had their weapon at hand at all times.

For those without weapons and the skill to use them, may you enjoy your life in your current stream. Me? I don't trust anything to remain the same.

In fact, the only thing I'm certain of, is that nothing, ever remains static.

And when the situation calls for self-defense, or more importantly, defending the defenseless, I just don't want to be found wanting.

Wolf321,

Mate, you can't compare shirts to guns. I've yet to see anyone destroy a
human life from a mile away, with a shirt.

[edit on (16/2/09) by Wehali]

People who own guns are not bad people. But people who preach to take away a persons right are. There I said it, if you want to take away someones rights then your a bad person.

First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition

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.

Second Amendment – Right to keep and bear arms.

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.

Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

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.

Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

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.

Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

No person shall be held to answer for any 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.

Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

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 where in 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 defense.

Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.

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.

Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment – Powers of states and people.

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.

If you or anyone you know advocate the removal of any of these rights then you/they are the "bad" people

[edit on 16-2-2009 by XTexan]

We have a right to own guns, and in fact most of the people that I know (family, friends) have at least 1 gun in the household. I am a proud gun owner, as you can't always rely on the police/authorities to protect your homestead and belongings. Also, hunting is a useful and possibly life-saving skill, say if SHTF...or you're out in the wilderness for more than a few days without proper provisions. You are going to NEED to eat, and what easier way to take game? I feel much safer owning a couple of guns, especially considering where I live. It is the absolute best deterrant against thieves and other possible criminals, and when owned in conjunction with a guard dog or two, your home is THAT much safer.

2007 — 41,059

Thats the number of automobile deaths in the United States for that year.

2007 -- 565,650

Cancer caused deaths in the United States.

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

Heart disease: 652,091

Cancer: 559,312

Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 143,579

Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 130,933

Accidents (unintentional injuries): 117,809

Diabetes: 75,119

Alzheimer's disease: 71,599

Influenza/Pneumonia: 63,001

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 43,901

Septicemia: 34,136

source

Lets not play this statistics game, because the numbers in fact arent in favor of the anti-gun group. Death by firearms isint even on that list, and I would rather see money dumped into saving some of those lives before i see legislation enacted that would be wasting everyones time and directly violating the Constitution.

Originally posted by Wehali
A criminal is much more likely to shoot
you if he sees that you are carrying or wielding a gun. The criminal is
probably much more experienced in real gun fights, so the chance that
you survive the encounter, becomes very small. Where as if you had not
have a gun with you, the criminal would just tell you to sit down and shut
up, instead of killing you.

I'm not saying this is always the case, but it certainly is in most cases.


[edit on (16/2/09) by Wehali]

Actually, this is rarely the case. Most gun deaths you read about in the US come from either gang related shootings, ie bad guys shooting bad guys, or suicides. Sadly, sometimes the suicides involve a lunatic wiping out his entire family, or the V tech shooter who legally never should have had a firearm to begin with.

Where I live, guns are very common. Its not unusual to see people in the grocery store or at the mall packing. Thats just the open carry people, 10x that number carry concealed. Very very few gun deaths here. The criminals know we are armed and leave us the hell alone. If they dont, they are going to the morgue.

As for experience. I beg to differ. Most people I know are very good shooters. Spend time at the range, take classes on proper usage and safety. How many criminals do you think spend a weekend at a gun range?

Sit down and shut up? Hardly the case. Look at the rape numbers in Florida after concealed carry was passed. They plumeted. If someone breaks into my house, how do I know that they will just rob me and leave? If I had a family its my job to protect them, I sure dont want to be told to sit there and watch my wife and kids get raped and killed.

It may seem odd to you because guns arent part of your culture, but to myself and many Americans, guns mean freedom. Freedom from oppression, freedom from crime, free to not be a victim. Come over here some time. Spend time with good law abiding citizens who happen to be armed. They will be just like you, good, decent people who just want what is best for their families, honest days pay for an honest days work. We're not looking to shoot up streets or buses, just making certain we can take care of ourselves.

Originally posted by Wehali
Mate, you can't compare shirts to guns.

As silly as it seems, you can. One protects you from the elements and/or embarrassment, the other protects you from criminals. Sure, neither one guarantees the prevention of these things, but a person should have the right to not be naked or helpless.

FACT: Criminals will always be able to acquire guns.

So, why should law abiding citizens be prevented from their own self protection? I may change my mind on this when the government starts issuing each individual their own security detail.

Originally posted by Wolf321
FACT: Criminals will always be able to acquire guns.

I'm not sure if that's a real fact, but it is most likely certain.
If citizens don't own firearms then crime will go up, because people will be more and more prone to getting robbed or shot by criminals, just because they can't legally own a gun.

Originally posted by Wehali
My country never had a history of gun worshiping, unlike America does.

Worshiping?

That's exactly the kind of language someone might use to portray a law abiding gun owner as unstable.

Of the hundreds, or possibly thousands of gun owners I've met in my life, I can honestly say that I've never once seen a single one pray to, or worship a firearm.

Luckily, your opinion or interpretation of others will never infringe on my 2nd Amendment rights.