Doesn't ANYONE here have an issue with unmonitored gun ownership?

reply to post by KarlG


"And if there REEEEALLY isn't anyone else who even REMOTELY agree with me on this stand then I am soo gonna close this thread down, purpose lost."

Don't run off because nobody agrees with you. That would make this place very boring indeed. Anyway, you haven't heard from everybody yet. Some people don't check in here every day (or every few seconds in some cases. )

KarlG,

I see your point so let me extend my point of view.

I have cases of ammo and also reload my own ammo. I sport shoot as a hobby, the only hobby I have, and often shoot up to 500 rounds per shoot. That seems like a lot but have several sport shooters together we use several cases at a time. Different guns using various calibers. often 100 rounds per gun.

Restriction of firearms would limit the classes I can shoot and restriction of the amount of ammo would turn a whole day at the range to about 30 min.

Beyond that I also use my sidearms for work. I carry a duty weapon, back up and shotgun. I am in a high security position that requires me to carry such weapons to do my job, so training is also a must. To train for accuracy, and split second decision response also requires many hours of range time and thousands of rounds being fired.

In my professional position to have an armed citizen to come to my aid in a time of distress may save my life. I hope it never comes to that. All too often sworn law enforcement is actually a second responder, taking account of what took place, not preventing the crime.

When off duty I carry concealed, you wouldn't ever know or expect it were you to see me. I'm the guy in line at the store, at the bank or having dinner with my armed wife who you would also never expect to have a gun. I carry not because I'm paranoid but because I'm prepared for the worst possible scenario, plan to survive and very aware of my surroundings. I don't ever want to have to use my gun but if I have to defend my life, or the life of 20 other people being slaughtered in church, the mall, or on the street I have a fighting chance.

My hex-wife (pun intended) was a student of serial murderers. Those guys almost never used guns to kill their victims. Less than 1% from the data she had collected.

LOL hex-wife. How bad WAS she??!?!

And yeah, serial murderers would not use guns. Serial rapists neither. Not when they have a continual need to kill to fulfill.

But at least we won't have massacrists (if this word exists). The numbers of mass murderers who shoot 10-40 people at one go in enclosed spaces would GREATLY decrease (I'm certain of this), because they used to be law-abiding citizens who got pushed off the edge.

Again, I'm NOT banning guns. You are free to own guns and bullets, but restrictive in the quantity of firearms, and amount of ammo.

That way, felons have guns, and so do you. No issue there on defense. Though you'd better have your firearm on you when you get faced off in the street.

Hex-wife. LOL.

reply to post by HeavilyArmed


Wow, okay. Didn't see that one coming.

Good for you if it's for the worst possible scenario. Bad things can happen VERY QUICKLY and DON'T I KNOW IT.

But read some of my posts above, about how to resolve the issue of shooting as a sport. Ranges exist, so I guess we should all make use of them. Though it will result in disgruntled people, I really do believe in the long run things WILL help.

At the same time, I really understand your point of view.

Very logical, reasonable, and well-explained. I can see now where you're coming from, though I still stand by my... um, stand.

Also... seriously, NOT ONE person agrees with me?

I'm not a felon.

I have thought of mass murder.

Would I do it? Of course not, because I don't want to be on death row(costing taxpayers dollars), and I don't want to be in prison(the "legends" are enough to keep me away).

The fact is the urge is still there, how long until a person like me "cracks" amd says 'to hell with the consequences?'

Just hypothesis, but can you say it isn't based in reality?

...as I have said before, I love playing "devil's advocate" when I have had a few drinks...

reply to post by Gawdzilla


Lol. OK, so I AM checking here once every few seconds.

It's just cos I have this service where I subscribe to alerts if there are replies... and there are many replies. BUT continue posting, it's very interesting to discourse with all ya!

Originally posted by dragonking76
The fact is the urge is still there, how long until a person like me "cracks" amd says 'to hell with the consequences?'

Hopefully you crack up in New Hampshire where you'll be put down rather quickly.

My advice would be to "crack" in a gun-free zone or heavilly anti-gun state like MA, CT or NY. That way you'll get to rampage freely for an hour or so before the cops bother to do anything about it.

I have a big issue with unmonitored gun ownership, especially after working with a severely bipolar woman for 10 years with a concealed weapons permit who regularly made threats against us. Fat chance getting the cops to intervene!
The only problem is that there are far more unlicensed guns floating
around the underground that licensed guns, and enough people who know how to make them or import them than regulation would control.

i think the laws are fine just the way they are. No need to change anything.
There are laws to prevent felons and nut jobs from getting guns, why restrict the owndership of guns or ammo for the common folk. Very few of the freaks that go out and shoot something up actualy purchased their weapons legaly.
Limit the ammo to a box or so? that would be a joke, before hunting season we put at least a box through the guns to make sure they are sighted in and firing like they should, during hunting season i buy at least 2 boxes of ammo for each gun used. Just in case, never had a time where i needed more than a few bullets. But you never know.
I am totaly aginst any new laws or restrictions on weapons. Instead of coming up with new laws, why not enforce whats on the books.
Would be a much better option.

reply to post by KarlG


You are wanting to monitor the law abiders while the criminals will be getting their guns and ammo anywhere they please.

It's very simple to understand. You want to place restrictions and monitoring - against the US Constitution - on people that you have no right to do so against AND it's the wrong group of people to be so restrictive with anyways.

reply to post by KarlG


Look I agree everyone should not own or carry a gun, I know several people I wouldn't trust with a gun some my own family. I'm also an advocate of licensing, background checks and training, training, training.

I also believe in responsible gun ownership, lock them up when not home, preferably in a safe (or in my case several) bolted to a concrete floor so they can not be stolen and used by the criminal element or god forbid a child gets a hold of one.

The main reason for disagreement with you is simply this, once the limitation of firearms and ammo becomes general law then that only leads to the next step, ban them all and that is simply not acceptable!

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Hopefully you crack up in New Hampshire where you'll be put down rather quickly.

My advice would be to "crack" in a gun-free zone or heavilly anti-gun state like MA, CT or NY. That way you'll get to rampage freely for an hour or so before the cops bother to do anything about it.

Ouch! Please, don't be so insensitive! Sometimes after a particularly heated argument I just wish I COULD JUST KILL Someone too. But it's just those momentary moments of anger. Other people have longer moments. Other people consider it as something "to try".

please, discourse with consideration! I'm sure dragonking wouldn't like to be "put down"!

reply to post by KarlG


You obviously didnt 'get' the exchange. Go back and read both his post and mine. If you still don't 'get' it I'm afraid I cant help you.

Originally posted by HeavilyArmed

The main reason for disagreement with you is simply this, once the limitation of firearms and ammo becomes general law then that only leads to the next step, ban them all and that is simply not acceptable!

Agreed. Banning of guns completely = NO WAY NO HOW.

I'll do anything in my power (which isnt much, lol) to stop complete bannng of guns. At the same time, I'll do anything in my power (again, not much, sigh) to ensure safety for all especially in light of cases of large massacres.

I have a differing view from you here in that I believe firearms and ammo can be limited WITHOUT resulting in a ban of firearms. I know, I sound way too idealistic and naive for a conspiracy theory board but... that's just me.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


OK, so don't help me.

That's how I perceived your message. Insulting with a hint of "hope" that he might crack in a place where he might rampage for an hour.

Take the criticism, goodness knows I have.

And there are a couple of people here who would agree with me. So I guess this thread should be left up and running for a couple more days till it runs out of steam. I would love to know more about what you think anyways.

reply to post by KarlG


Seriously? Did you read his message?

Wow. I'm at a loss.

Here's dragonking's post:

Originally posted by dragonking76
I'm not a felon.

I have thought of mass murder.

Would I do it? Of course not, because I don't want to be on death row(costing taxpayers dollars), and I don't want to be in prison(the "legends" are enough to keep me away).

The fact is the urge is still there, how long until a person like me "cracks" amd says 'to hell with the consequences?'

Just hypothesis, but can you say it isn't based in reality?

...as I have said before, I love playing "devil's advocate" when I have had a few drinks...

Okay?

Here's mine:

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Hopefully you crack up in New Hampshire where you'll be put down rather quickly.

My advice would be to "crack" in a gun-free zone or heavilly anti-gun state like MA, CT or NY. That way you'll get to rampage freely for an hour or so before the cops bother to do anything about it.

So he poses a hypothetical situation of "normal guy lawfully owning arms and just snaps" as a pro-restriction stand. Follow? So I counter with a "armed populace putting a stop to mass murder" with a little "when seconds count police are minutes away" peppered in there for good measure.

Do you really not get it or are you pulling my leg?

Somebody gets this, right? Or am I just insane and when I speak all people hear is "crazy guy shouting at clouds?"

EDIT to fix my taags.

[edit on 9-4-2009 by thisguyrighthere]

reply to post by KarlG


What kind of weapons would you register? I was an assault boat coxswain in the Navy for a while, and I hung out with S.E.A.L.s who taught me a lot of interesting things you can do with whatever is handy. One guy beat the poo-poo out of me with a rolled up newspaper just to prove a point.

BTW, I own a Napolean, should that be registered?

reply to post by ohioriver


Apparently martial law would be a good decision to diminish gangs, yeah?

Wait. Who's the gang again? The retards shooting each other and a few innocent people on the street, or the NWO that raped and killed innocent people in Iraq and made the yearly death toll here look like child's play.

reply to post by Revolution-2012


Iraq?!?!

Wait, can we not go into international issues?

I'm not talking about US military intervention to stop the rampant violence against Iraq citizens. I could... but it's not my forte, and really, it doesn't apply to the situation here.

reply to post by KarlG


Someone said they're afraid of gang bangers.

I told them, I guess the military stepping in on our own soil could stop that.

But wait, that'd be martial law.

And oh, if we have to jump through 9 loops and go through 5 mazes to get a gun and ammunition, we wouldn't be able to fend martial law.

It's a delicate teeter toter, and I think good idea would be to keep it exactly where it's at.