An Open Letter to Lovers of the Gun

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


It was already posted. And dismissed due to "1993 having a high rate", which means it would obliviously trend downwards anyways.

I love the argument of "gun deaths", as if guns were abolished, then none of those people would be dead. Are our "gun deaths" higher than other places? Sure. I bet you our "knife deaths", or whatever else you want, are lower. People kill people, regardless of what tool they have in their hand, but at least a gun gives a victim a fighting chance against an attacker. If we outlawed guns and went back to swords, women, the weak, and the elderly would have no shot of defending themselves.

reply to post by macman


ah foiled,so it was a case of them(anti gun) not liking our facts so they dont count? this would be much more funny if it were not equally as tragic.

i mean i guess we can do that too right? so in that case the op's premise is off completely as there have obviously been more school shootings in the last century then this one(what with us only having gone 14 years into this one) but hey if they can ignore our facts and make up their own i guess we can to right?

RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by macman

 

ah foiled,so it was a case of them(anti gun) not liking our facts so they dont count? this would be much more funny if it were not equally as tragic.

i mean i guess we can do that too right? so in that case the op's premise is off completely as there have obviously been more school shootings in the last century then this one(what with us only having gone 14 years into this one) but hey if they can ignore our facts and make up their own i guess we can to right?

The OP's premise is wholly wrong, for it seeks to apply a bandaid to a bleeding artery. "Gun control" ain't gonna work. No way, no how. Try, try, try as you might...it isn't going to work. And if you try too hard, there likely would be blood.

The artery, however, still will bleed. Until you address what caused that bleed, it won't stop.

Mental health treatment is the silver bullet here. Gun control will only piss off the sane ones who have guns. The insane ones...they are your problem. Disagree? Find me one single shooter from a school shooting that didn't already have a mental health record.

Me? Never seen a shrink. Worked in a mental hospital for a few years, though. And I understand where the failures are in that system: we have turned it over to the prison industrial complex so that they could make money off the beds we used to use to treat our neighbors so that they wouldn't go on shooting sprees.

OMsk3ptic
I love the argument of "gun deaths", as if guns were abolished, then none of those people would be dead. Are our "gun deaths" higher than other places? Sure. I bet you our "knife deaths", or whatever else you want, are lower. People kill people, regardless of what tool they have in their hand, but at least a gun gives a victim a fighting chance against an attacker. If we outlawed guns and went back to swords, women, the weak, and the elderly would have no shot of defending themselves.

If More gun control were the answer to lower the murder rate in this
country, Washington DC, Chicago and Detroit would be the safest
places to live.

They are NOT!

This nationwide war for public opinion to be swayed in the direction of the progressive ideology (which now includes both parties) offers only false sanctuary and for absolute 100% proof all you have to do is look at Chicago where there is a total gun ban in effect. Or, gun free zones where killers instinctively go to kill without fear of being killed.
In order survive, a lot of people are going to have to abandon their touchy feely fairy story that guns are bad and go buy one themselves and learn it's use. Even your spokesman the butchy lady who needs a shave (Dianne Feinstein) carries a gun herself! What a stinking hypocrite she is.. Here is hoping she gets smashed in between to Mack trucks going head on at 60+ miles per hour./

Your open letter will soon read "from a lover of guns" instead of the thread title..

Just wait, that day is coming soon and you will hide behind someone protecting you with guns.
The second amendment is the most important one of all, and anyone suggesting it be revoked should be dipped in acid and rolled in flour and staked over an anthill, or seek a mental health professional (Obama is treating gun owners as mentally disturbed using the ACA to implement and enforce it) Once you give all the guns up, they may just dip you in acid, roll you in flower and stake you over an anthill.. What they do will be administering misery and suffering. Don't help them achieve this goal.

Those taking them away are doing it to strip freedom and gain control, and they aren't doing it with peaceful intentions in mind. They will KEEP THEIR GUNS and use them against the rest of us once we no longer have them. Is this your idea of a nice way to live? they will say :We will force everyone to do as we wish" This is Obama's new utopia. He is the one who is in serious need of mental treatment, but he should skip that and get someone like Dr. Kevorkian instead. Even euthanasia would be more humane for someone with Obama's mentally deluded condition than to let him continue on untreated.

Just look at the IRS to see how Obama is arming his personal army of thugs..

People should all be buying body armor in the USA, not just guns, and trust me, you will be needing body armor more than you can even realize. Do it for liberty and freedom, and your own safety.

When they come for us, they will be "cocked, locked, and ready to rock". Will we?..... Be prepared.

You want to know why I support gun rights? Its because of people like the a$$wipe that was in our garage last night. Never heard or saw him, but his footprints to and from the street are plainly visible in the snow. Granted, I would not use a firearm in that specific situation, but if the fool is brave (stupid) enough to do that here in the firearm capital of the universe, it makes me wonder what else he might do. This is a very low crime area, and I've never bothered keeping a loaded weapon in the house before, but that just changed, unfortunately.

I hate to give the gun-grabbers any ideas, but I wonder if they know that bows (as in arrows) and crossbows provide a standoff distance as firearms do.

One would think that they would want to register those items at a federal level too.

"I am sorry to hear that. School does help, at least you have some other worries and chores.

Not sure why or how, but I managed to be fine with everything that has happened to me and everyone around me. I did create aversion toward people with guns, tho. I saw first hand what monster gun can create in people, especially what I would consider 'weak people', those who like to prove them selves worth with gun, but without a gun they are nobody. "


And that is a "Might makes Right" mentallity,and the REASON I have guns,Martial arts and joined the military,in order to fight these asshats where EVER I should meet them. Not YOU. It is (to me spiritually fulfilling to counter that type,violence just makes it fun,it's almost pathological.That's why I am a soldier I'm wired to defend.
But every time I hear about someone in fear from someone like that...I want a piece.
Sure I guess we have similar traits but I promise you that individual is a SCARED person overreacting to you.

Still needs their ass kicked maybe but THEY are the reason we are having this WHOLE argument because lesser men are bullies.
I understand your fear any time I see this my blood boils.
More and more the populated areas of our country seem...less humane.

reply to post by cavtrooper7


HEADS UP!
thecommonsenseshow.com...

reply to post by FyreByrd


I have only read the OP not the entire thread.

I want to say that it's wrong to assume that someone does not love their children because they own guns, period. I only carry to protect my children from harm. I know that my lifestyle is an exception rather than the norm, but I know I'm not the only person around here living in an environment that requires that kind of protection. I don't need a gun because of people, I need a gun because of predators. If they happen to be human predator so be it. I compete with grizzly bears for our food. I encounter black bears yearly in my search of wild foods to feed my children better food than what the manufacturers have to offer. The grizzlys are after the same fish as I am to be sustained through another long winter. It's frustrating to see the anti gun crowd sink to such levels as to come out and say that you hate kids because you rely on a gun. I agree with a poster on the first page. This is terrible propaganda. Any RESPONSIBLE gun owner has their weapon locked at all times anyway when there are children around. Maybe people need to pay more attention to the kids in the first place and then they won't be stealing weapons to commit atrocities with.

woodsmom
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

I have only read the OP not the entire thread.

I want to say that it's wrong to assume that someone does not love their children because they own guns, period. I only carry to protect my children from harm. I know that my lifestyle is an exception rather than the norm, but I know I'm not the only person around here living in an environment that requires that kind of protection. I don't need a gun because of people, I need a gun because of predators. If they happen to be human predator so be it. I compete with grizzly bears for our food. I encounter black bears yearly in my search of wild foods to feed my children better food than what the manufacturers have to offer. The grizzlys are after the same fish as I am to be sustained through another long winter. It's frustrating to see the anti gun crowd sink to such levels as to come out and say that you hate kids because you rely on a gun. I agree with a poster on the first page. This is terrible propaganda. Any RESPONSIBLE gun owner has their weapon locked at all times anyway when there are children around. Maybe people need to pay more attention to the kids in the first place and then they won't be stealing weapons to commit atrocities with.

Of all the users on ATS, this is the user I had in mind when talking about remote areas and the need for protection. Sorry...a human is no match for a moose in rut. Or a scared momma bear.

In my neck o' the woods it is coyotes, mountain lions, bobcats, and hogs (which can get very large and deadly). We also have wild dogs, which tend to be pit bulls that were abandoned in the country after their fighting days were over. Yeah, really well adjusted animals there.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Aww, thanks for thinking of me.

It's true though, I don't have a fighting chance against our wildlife without a firearm.
It's not even a matter of staying out of the wild, they come into my yard where I work in my gardens and my children play. I would honestly be plain stupid to go berry picking without some protection.

I also lived in the heart of Long Beach CA as a child briefly, and I feel safer with my grizzly bears and charging moose.

It doesn't matter what gun haters and control lobbyists think. "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." SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. guns in America are here to stay.

bigfatfurrytexan


The OP's premise is wholly wrong, for it seeks to apply a bandaid to a bleeding artery.

Very weak analogy. Because there is no perfect solution, you do nothing.

I never spoke, in this thread about gun control. The article I quoted never spoke about gun control. Both spoke to the apparent insanity of keeping a gun in the home when evidence clearly shows that having a gun in the home increases the liklehood of gun violence in the home.

So many talk about protecting their families (and their is sound reason for those living in the WILD) from outsiders. But most of that violence is domestic not the result of machinations of outsiders trying to 'get' you.

reply to post by FyreByrd

So many talk about protecting their families (and their is sound reason for those living in the WILD) from outsiders. But most of that violence is domestic not the result of machinations of outsiders trying to 'get' you.

So if some have domestic violence occur that means that all will? If some experience it all must be disarmed, left defenseless against attack from without.... since you deem it statistically less likely to occur? Are you a fan of death panels too?

As I have already told my gun-loving-internet-friends, you should get worried if President say that you can keep your current guns, there is strong evidence to suggest that this might happen earlier rather than later.

January 2014 was bad month for violence in schools, 11 reported shooting compared to 28 for whole 2013 year. Here is detail from news:

This year, in the week beginning January 20, each day was marked with a lockdown or shooting incident in a US school – including in the tragic Columbine High School in Colorado, where 12 students were killed in a 1999 shooting. On two occasions, people died. On January 25, a Saturday, a 19-year-old shotgun shooter opened fire in a shopping mall near Washington, killing two people before committing suicide. On Sunday, Jan. 26, a 16-year-old carjacker shot off a round at Pennsylvania State Police trooper conducting a check on his vehicle.

I know, guns don't kill - it is people behind guns. Or other often seen here - it is their own fault, if all kids had guns, there would be no shooting, as best answer to kid with gun (legal or illegal) is GOOD ***** (what should be here??) with gun?! (my guess from reading this thread) As you can see, I am learning directly from NRA text books.

Questions to all of you opposed to gun control - how do we protect our kids, as per statistic, every day 8 kids die due to gun violence. Please give me something better then your 'loud' calls for 2nd amendment Don't we agree that something is terribly wrong here?

The problem of school shootings is not likely to vanish anytime soon, because “schools are still part of American society and American society is violent,” said Bond, who is currently employed as a safe schools specialist with the National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Source: rt.com...

SuperFrog


Questions to all of you opposed to gun control - how do we protect our kids, as per statistic, every day 8 kids die due to gun violence. Please give me something better then your 'loud' calls for 2nd amendment Don't we agree that something is terribly wrong here?

If it is about protecting kids, maybe start with some of the biggest killers of children.

en.wikipedia.org...:Leading_causes_of_death_among_children_worldwide.svg


Because if it truly is "for the children" you will have the intellectual honesty to admit the numbers of firearms related deaths are not nearly as high as auto collision deaths.


Looks like you should have a new pet project to take on.

reply to post by SuperFrog


People die every day. Every single one of them is a tragedy to someone. You have no guarantee of safety....that is the whole idea behind the stance of a 'gun nut". We know that there is no guarantee of safety. And we expect to have some ability to try to influence our own safety. Personal responsibility, as I have mentioned before.

Because we have no guarantee of safety, bad things happen. Especially to people who are not careful. It is the same the whole world over. People die in accidents of all kinds every single day. So long as the design of a manmade object doesn't create the death of the person, then there is nothing more than either user error or accident to blame. And that is just how the world has always worked. Right down to the careless drunk monkey who stumbles and falls off the cliff. Its a dangerous life we live on this planet.

So how do you protect your children? You accept the world the way it is, and then try to teach them to survive within it. If you do not have guns in your home, then your kids will absolutely run a higher risk of injury if guns are ever present later in life.

5 years ago I had no guns in my home. My youngest (a 16 year old now) was a curious kid that would get into all manner of stupid trouble. I owned 2 rifles at the time, and kept them both at my mothers house (before she lived with us) locked away.

My youngest started to show interest in guns. I knew I had to do something about it for his own safety. So i brought my rifles home, and took him to shoot them. The 30-30 has quite a kick, and it was a good way to show him the power of a weapon such as that. The .22 was what we shot for the first year, until he understood how to handle a firearm.

2 years ago he saved up money from doing odd jobs, and bought a 9mm pistol. I commemorated the day by buying my first handgun (a .40 s&w for concealed carry). I have been around them my whole life, but never owned one.

For my own childs safety, i thought I had to intervene in his growing interest in firearm. By engaging myself in them further so that I could get trained properly to train him properly. I did the same with my oldest son when he wanted to play tennis. At the time I was 200 lbs heavier, but still had my fat ass out there sweating on the tennis courts, trying to give him the basic practice needed to learn the game.

SuperFrog


Questions to all of you opposed to gun control - how do we protect our kids, as per statistic, every day 8 kids die due to gun violence. Please give me something better then your 'loud' calls for 2nd amendment Don't we agree that something is terribly wrong here?

Additionally, it has been stated by numerous people here, numerous times, that the issue to be looked at is probably pharmaceutical related.
You have dismissed it, opining over every anti-gun anecdote you can pull from the anti-gun rights websites.


No law created, has ever stopped someone from doing something.
To believe that legislation in any way will accomplish this is pure ignorance.