Every possible reason for gun ownership addressed and countered

Originally posted by AwakeinNM


Abraham Lincoln:

“Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.”

Abraham Lincoln died in 1865, in case you haven't noticed, we don't live in those times anymore, when exactly do u plan to come into 21st century like the majority of the world?

www.bbc.co.uk...

I think your James Madison quote is used inappropriately he isn't talking about international relations (whether or not one nation is subordinate to another) he's writing about the internal relationship between local, state and Federal governments and how a complicated bureaucratic system helps to prevent one guy from killing the governments head honcho (whatever that may be) and declaring himself the new leader. He's saying that simply giving everyone the ability to be armed isn't a guarantee of freedom but that combined with citizenry active in local government it could be.

"Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools."
www.nationalreview.com...#
www.tysknews.com...
...
The Colorado theater shooter chose the only theater showing The Dark Knight that doesn't allow guns. There were several theaters in his area showing the movie that same night, a couple were closer to his home than the Cinemark he chose. Why? Because that is the only theater that did not allow guns.
"So why did the killer pick the Cinemark theater? You might think that it was the one closest to the killer’s apartment. Or, that it was the one with the largest audience.
Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned."

community.babycenter.com...

Fact Check: Do concealed weapons lower crime rates?
www.wral.com...
YES.

Example: The recent Oregon mall shooting was stopped quickly, before it became a "mass" shooting, by a citizen with a concealed carry permit.

As promised:
4) No rational person would argue this point. We must act in some way to prevent this from becoming a cultural signature. The sheer number of guns can be a problem when people are not responsible with them. Knowing where they are IS necessary, but banning them would drive them into the black market. Big problem then. I am sure that the architects of the Fast and Furious gun scandal learned that the hard way.
5) While I do not personally subscribe to this feeling, I can understand why some feel this way. Feeling secure, projecting confidence and practicing situational awareness are the best defense. If having a gun helps one to achieve this, I personally have no issue with this as long as the bearer is stable. We all have our "binky" after all.
6) Concur. Silly argument really. That logic would have had us banning rocks and sticks and and and ..... I think you get the point.
7) Here is another point I contend with. There is NOTHING cold and impersonal about killing unless one is a sociopath in which case NOTHING you do will deter him. Been on both sides of this coin and it is incredibly personal either way. Also, I do not think offerring US .gov statistics will convince anyone. The US government has been known to fib. Most people, including some relatives living in that area, say DC is a war zone out on the streets. I will take my sister's word over the .gov's word.
8) In retrospect, I should probably lump 7, 8 and 9 together as they do have validity when considering the "human" factor and our need for security, even if the security as percieved is an illusion. Essentially, they are truisms which apply whether guns are around or not. It is inconcievable that we consider gun bans to be a panacea for the human condition any more than banning other "weapons" which are mere tools with other uses.
10) Don't know a bloody thing about UK stats. However, most .gov stats are suspect every where in the world.
Call me paranoid, but I have been lied to by government entirely too many times to trust them unconditionally.
11) Can't speak to this. Never been there. With relatives living around Atlanta, I do believe that area to be highly dangerous according to them. The fact that Kennesaw is in close proximity with such a low crime rate is quite remarkable but hardly a poster child for gun ownership.
12) Concur with you.
13) Unsure about the validity of this one. Back to .gov stats again.
14) Simply irrelevant either way.
15) Don't own one presently. Haven't for 31yrs since I left law enforcement. But, I have NO intention of permitting anyone to take away my right to choose.
As stated previously, subjectivity must be guarded against, or at least recognized in a debate. You are highly intelligent and motivated, but you must realize that the American way and your way are vastly different. And the reasons for said difference IS an essential element in deciding such a volatile and divisive issue.
Warm Regards
Oh, yea, almost forgot (giving the Vulcan hand sign), live long and prosper.

The bill of rights are limits on government.

We ARE NOT granted these rights THEY ARE our rights as sovereign people. By our very existence these rights belong to us. Free people came together to form government. FREE PEOPLE!

"... shall not be infringed"

I own a gun because it is my right as a person, a human being, to own a gun for self preservation and defense.

YOU might be a SUBJECT to the SOVEREIGN that sits on a throne but WE are not.

So if you let your government take away your right then that's your problem ...

but "we the people" here in America aren't gonna let that happen any time soon ...

so get over it!

Originally posted by Tikitiboo

Originally posted by AwakeinNM


Abraham Lincoln:

“Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.”

Abraham Lincoln died in 1865, in case you haven't noticed, we don't live in those times anymore, when exactly do u plan to come into 21st century like the majority of the world?

www.bbc.co.uk...

I'm sorry can you please point out to me where the expiration date is? Last time I checked there wasn't one. In the United States we have guns and are allowed to according to our governing documents, if you don't like it either move, or don't come here, problem solved. There are lots of countries that feel the same way as you and their societies are already setup to accommodate people who share your line of thinking. But as others have said until the governments worldwide decide to stop killing and using firearms then I will hold onto mine as well, just in case.

You know it's really getting aggrivating that yet again, another person from ANOTHER country is telling Americans how to live their lives.

Europe obviously doesnt value personal freedoms AT ALL. It's pretty damn sad. and The brits worst of all need to shut it, They are used to be slaves of the Monarch, and their empire has commited some of the worst attrocities man kind has ever seen. They are used to being controlled, be it the crown or the prime minister who bends to the crown, its all the same. You my freind need to find your freedom.

YOU have infringed on our individual rights in the 18th century and OUR ancestors responded by slaughtering your ancestors to earn us these rights.

As weak as you are, you are in no position to take my rights away again.

Be gone with you Red Coat.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

It's the same rebuttal we've all been making. I am glad he articulated it in a more respectful way ao you were mor accepting in an argument that destroyed your original point.

I hope you have learned some history lessons here, expanded your mind, and realize we all have reasons to have guns. You have been beaten by your government to not feel the want for a gun to protect yourself but imagine if you did have that desire? The feeling that your government is depriving you of owning and enjoying something people in another country are free to enjoy.

Guns are neat, and fun. Sure they get into the wrong hands, but so do forks.learning to assemble, smith, and care for a gun is a good thing. Especially when you are holding something smooth annd high quality.

Im not sure what rebuttal your referring too.
Im replying to quite a few people and some good arguments ahve been put forward, can you quote the one your referring to please.
I havent learned anything new that would suggest guns are good and despite what you and others think I dont have an agenda and I am open to having my mind changed, are you?

My government hasnt beaten me down on anything, even when guns were available here people didnt want them, its not a fear we have in Oz that bad men are going to come get us with guns.

I find it interesting that you use the word "enjoy" in reference to gun ownership.
By the sound of it you just enjoy having a gun, once again its like the adult version of a teddy bear for most of you
Your fork argument is just laughable.

Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

do you support the legalisation of drugs?

Yes I do to some degree.
Heroin and coke being exceptions, but green, pills and tabs in my opinion are personal choices.

I draw the line at smack and coke do to the fact that people will do anything to get a fix and it results in crime so people can support their habits.

To everyone who posted on this thread Im not cheery picking who I respond to and am dealing with them in order, for those of you who posted that I wasnt getting back to you fast enough you sound like little kids throwing temper tantrums.

Have some patience

Governments in the past century have killed hundreds of millions of people. They are the most dangerous entities in existence. We don't live in a perfect world - if we did there would be no need of government or guns. Our guns are the last check on unrestrained governmental power, tyranny. In all despotic regimes of the past gun confiscation was the first step in total domination.

You say that Americans with their shotguns, rifles and handguns are no match for the military - I agree. But how much worse off would we be without them should our government turn completely to despotism. At least there would be some resistance, something to give the would-be dictator pause.

Just think how vulnerable an unarmed nation would be. What motives would a government have in disarming its people? Would a government that distrusted its own people and so worked to disarm them be trustworthy itself?

I don't think so ...

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

What about the jews in germany or in the polish ghettos? Did they not have the right to self defense? What about the millions of Russians and Chinese who died after Communist takeovers to their country from within? Is it a coincidence that the first thing dictatorial and potentially genocidal regimes do is confiscate the firearms? Is it not true that these same governments have used the concept of "false flag" attacks to secure popular support for their actions. Remember the "ends justifies the means" when it comes to executing false flag attacks on your own people.

I dont support big gov and fully believe we are no longer in control of our "democracies" but I just dont see the possibility of the army being turned on the people as a reality.

So are you saying the Australian, British and japanese governments (just to name a few) have disarmed their population in a lead up to slaughtering us?

So are you saying that you find it likely that the US governement is planning on rounding you all up and killing you?

As for your argument about the Jews, Poles, Russians and Chinese they were different times it was impossible back then to organise a peaceful resistance, that is no longer true, it seems like you see warning signs that bad things are going to happen in your future, why not do something now?

Surely you realise somewhere in your gun loving mind that you dont stand a chance should it actually come to war against your government?

Dont quote the war of independence as its bunk, the weapons they fought with back then gave men with the will and courage a chance of victory, this is no longer the case

reply to post by Credenceskynyrd

Oh right, you don't "FEEL" they are worth talking about, even though you KNOW and I KNOW, the damage that alcohol abuse does vastly outweighs the damage that legal gun ownership does? Look at the murders, rapes, assaults and abuse carried out as a result of the abuse of alcohol- look at the lives blighted, kids taken into care, raped, murdered etc MASSIVELY more victims than through legal gun ownership- yet you "feel" it is not worth talking about, as it does not fit your narrow narrative

I didnt address them because anyone using common sense and logic can see that this argument is an embarrassment to your side.

Alcohol, Cars, Forks pieces of wood are not weapons designed to kill, guns are!!!!

Yes tragedies and accidents happen but when they occur with these items its due to negligence or misuse. When guns kill someone they are doing exactly what they were intended for

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
So are you saying the Australian, British and japanese governments (just to name a few) have disarmed their population in a lead up to slaughtering us?

So are you saying that you find it likely that the US governement is planning on rounding you all up and killing you?

Maybe not, but it would certainly make it easier in the future would it not?

Surely you realise somewhere in your gun loving mind that you dont stand a chance should it actually come to war against your government?

I would rather die fighting for my freedom ... even if there was no chance. Would you? Or are you too cowardly to fight your own enslavement? My guess is your answer would depend on how bad the conditions of your enslavement were ...

Some things are worth dying for ...

I say we keep our guns and make them work for it ...

People bent on killing people will always find a way. The solution is not to make everyone vulnerable to exploitation by those with guns, whether they are just a common thug or despotic governments.

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

Alcohol, Cars, Forks

pieces of wood are not weapons designed to kill, guns are!!!!

Yes tragedies and accidents happen but when they occur with these items its due to negligence or misuse. When guns kill someone they are doing exactly what they were intended for

So then what's your goal?

It cant be to safety or to save lives otherwise your attentions would be focused where the greatest difference can be made.

Is it just to go after a thing?

Intent has nothing to do with body count. Is this "war on guns" really just a "war on design"?

reply to post by jaynkeel

Well of course I would take it very personally, I live here!!!!! You don't. I don't go around trying to change other countries laws and believe me there are a bunch out there that are questionable to say the least. In your own opening comments you stated that you insist on people being civil etc, or else they would be passed up the chain of command and recommended banning etc, yet you yourself are throwing comments out such as I quoted so please you go back and re read your op. Generally people in this country that legally own guns respect them, handle them with care, store them responsibly and by your insinuation that they can't be trusted with a pair of plastic scissors, yes hits a nerve with many of us. It's comments like that that don't give your thread much support and shows where your line of thought is (juvenile) in my opinion. Nothing personal just the way I see it. But I will agree on one thing though, the reference to the redneck's and full on gun nuts sadly is just another side of the coin like with any other person who collects things, some people do go way overboard and are ignorant in every sense of the word....... But in our country you have to take the good with the bad else things fall out of balance and one side starts controlling the whole thing.

You came across as intelligent and despite a few personal jabs Ill be civil.
As stated in my comment you quoted it was a general comment not directed at anyone in particular and not directed at all gun owners, if it wasnt directed at you and you choose to get offended you need to ask why you are so sensitive.
Its funny you chide me for this but then mention that there are those you believe take gun ownership to far, I think we were talking about the same people I just chose to express my opinion using tongue in cheek humour

I havent made the thread for support or stars and flags, I made it to put my thoughts out there and maybe dispell a few misconceptions that gun advocates have

reply to post by usmc0311

If a person is a sociopath then maybe this is true. But for your average person killing with a firearm is extremely personal. And there is nothing easy about it. Wether it is from 10 yards or 1000, killing a human being with a firearm is a personal thing.

People are more reluctant to stab someone than they are to shoot them, being in the army and shooting someone you dont know is different than walking in on your wife with another man and seeing red.

Having a gun handy is not a great idea if something like that comes up

And on a personal note ...

We used to live out in the country. We had someone coming around our home, peeking in on my girlfriend when she was home alone. I called the cops early one morning when this person came around. Twenty minutes later the police arrived and this person was long gone. The sheriff's deputy asked if I had a gun. At the time I did not. He said "Get one!"

A lot can happen in twenty minutes. Why should I not be allowed to have the means to defend myself or my family?

You know, I know there is no guarantee that I would successfully defend myself and family against some creepy intruder but does that mean I shouldn't try? At least the gun increases my odds significantly.

I see it the same with a country as a whole. Defending itself against those who would seek to enslave the country. They may ultimately not be successful but at least it improves the odds that they will be.

Should a person or people who is being assaulted just give up?

The lone wacko on a killing spree does a lot of damage to the lives of a lot of people.

The wacko that seizes control of a nation does a lot of damage to millions of lives.

reply to post by grownshow

It doesn't seem snarky but it does sound like an attempt by someone loosing an argument to attack the debater instead of participating in the debate itself.

I dont feel like Im losing anything, a point was presented and I was curious if it was the reason you owned a gun or if it was just the easiest point to attack

I have no intention of going with a political group and bullhorning whatever message they happen to have. I do however support the rights of people to be verbally annoying because it also inadvertently helps protect my freedom of speech. I once went to wasington d.c., and some random guy was passing out papers and protesting some sort of circumcision conspiracy. If we as a society are tolerent of that free speech, then i have less reason to suspect my freedom of speech on internet forums will be limited.

Its unfortunate that so many of the people on your side of this argument dont share you views on this, do you agree that quite a few of them come across as illogical and even a bit rabid?

Since you seem to either be unaware or willing to acknowledge major historical events, i seriously doubt you will understand my reasons for owning a gun. You would either refuse to believe it or ignore it entirely. If you want to know, i suggest trying to free range livestock in a rural area with high population of natural predators.

I am quite aware of many historical events but I just dont see how any of them are relevant to gun ownership in a modern society like America.
As stated earlier in this thread I approve of guns for hunting for food and killing pests, rabbits etc not deer or bears

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


"Hello darlin', nice to see ya, it's been a loooong time, youre just as lovely as you used to be" other than the fact that you claim to be a "history student", but have learned absolutely nothing from history. The saying, 'the meek shall inherit the earth' applies directly to you, because you are scared and to be honest thats perfectly ok. My problem is when you take your meekness and try to push it on other people. Sure, we both have opinions. Yours is based on timidness and mine is based on historical fact and everyday life. You hand over the keys to your life while I cling to them, because once you give them up they are gone forever. This isn't a game. So meekness... yea... you're more than welcome to inherit the earth, but only after I'm done standing up for what I believe in and what I think is right.

FYI. thats George MFn Jones right there.

As for the OP.. More opinion, which I think I have more than explained to you, that doesn't matter in the face of people who are willing to take a stand for something they believe in.

MOTF!

Originally posted by Jerk_Idiot
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

I do not know which point you would apply my argument to, 8 or 9 I guess. We have a couple of major differences in our viewpoints. You believe in hiring mercenary's, police, to do your killing for you. I do not. You believe those who are attacking, the criminals, should be allowed to live. I again do not.

If MORE guns were out there in responsible hands there would be less criminals with guns because the criminal population would be shrunk drastically by criminals being killed. From your points it greatly appears you have no faith in your fellow citizens, only in your paid mercenarys. If you check back to the beginnings of the police force their job was not to kill for you, that was the citizen's job, The job of the police was to go after any criminals the citizen did not manage to kill because the police had the time to do so. The citizen did not.

In the 60's when the peace and love culture started I wondered then just what would happen when there was no one to defend those who had chosen it. That is what is happening now. I have far less faith in the hired mercenary's then I do in my fellow citizens who are NOT PAID to attack me or mine. A citizen has far more respect for life then a police officer does if for no other reason then if a citizen kills indiscriminately he will go to jail Not true for the police mercenary's. All they have to say is "I was afraid for my life." and they have carte blanch to kill whoever they wish with immunity.

You may want to read that through again, effectively you seem to be saying you want a gun because you believe criminals should be killed... seriously? You are saying you believe you have a right to murder and you think that is somehow ok? You don't even put that in a context of defence for your life.

Weird, and yet I guess that was the point of the (well written I must say) OP.