You don't NEED a gun simplified.

[bongaroo]

The original poster cited an article about guns from an organization that is located IN WISCONSIN--USA.

I've been a gun owner since the Regan years.

How about you, Sonny?



The ankle humper isn't worth my time. 




ROX

PS: wrag:  the second link sent the my spyware into freak-out mode...there very well might be malware or spyware links on that site.

Using the bold all the time is funny too.

What does it matter what he thinks anyways?  He doesn't vote here.  He can't change your laws, we do that.  Lay off playing "who can have an opinion here" cop.  It's foolish.

[wrag]

The original poster cited an article about guns from an organization that is located IN WISCONSIN--USA.

I've been a gun owner since the Regan years.

How about you, Sonny?



The ankle humper isn't worth my time. 




ROX

PS: wrag:  the second link sent the my spyware into freak-out mode...there very well might be malware or spyware links on that site.

I've never gotten a spyware reaction from that site???  Seems odd?

[Iron_Cross]

Aww screw it.  Both sides distort things to their advantage, and vehemently refuse to see any view but their own.  Anti's, think every gun is a killing machine, that if you even look at a gun funny it will kill you and everyone you love, all on it's own.  The Pro gun nuts have visions of dropping tangos, that invade their home.  What a bunch of horse hockey it all is.  IMHO both sides need to get hit upside the head with a clue by four.

Make up your own (insert your personal deity here) damn mind.



Fun for the whole family right there.

[ROX]

Can't argue with pure american illiteracy 

Go to the ORIGINAL post.  Click on the FIRST article link.  Go to "HOME".  Scroll to the bottom of the page 

You will see that the article on guns originates from:  P.O. Box 270143 | Hartford, WI 53027

Last I looked that was in the US.

Maybe I need to spend all my free time telling New Zealand how to run it's business, and how people in New Zealand should run their lives.




ROX

[AKHog]

If you get over my 5' security fence...if you get past my 2 German Shepherd dogs...if you break into my house...I'm not going to be cowering in the closet with my cell phone crying to the cops (who might show up 5 hours after I am dead....maybe)...I'm going to take my 45 caliber with hollow points and blow your pumpkin clean off.  Period.

Look it up some time and you might figure out why I carry a gun and have legal automatic weapons. Not only is it a right to some it is a duty to exercise that right.

Yes, I forsee civil unrest in the US in the coming years that might lead some folks to use that confusion to break into homes for money or just to kill people.  When that happens, I stand by my original post.  If/when they break into my home with evil intent, the only problem I will have with killing them is having to clean up the blood later.  Outside of the inconvienence of patching up the bullet holes in my brand new house and cleaning up all the blood...I am pretty comfortable with that.

I feel compelled to post when people post illogical and irrational arguments though. Which is quite common in gun threads. There is a lot of "Can't see the forest for the tree's".

You foresee widespread civil unrest and riots? Cool, lots of angry people running around with handguns. Hope you feel comfortable with that.

Vulcan, forget about rational arguments with some of these people. They are literally arming themselves 'for when the zombies come'. They live in a fantasy and think they will have to protect themselves with automatic weapons at some point in the future. The idea they are going to protect their household with a colt 45 or automatic weapon is a classic and common reoccurring example of the fantasy. If they had any grasp of reality they would be going for the good old shotgun, which is proven to be much more effective but not nearly as fun to fantasize about. These are the types of people who accidentally kill their neighbor with their armor piercing bullets, or leave their .45 loaded in their night stand for 'protection', and their kids find it, and then we all get gun bans.

Honestly it makes people like myself, responsible knowledgeable gun owners in the United Sates (why does everyone refer to our country as a continent?), feel embarrassed to be associated with this type of extreme paranoid thoughts. Can't see the forest through the trees sums it up perfectly.

If some of you guys really feel you need to protect yourself to this extent, may I suggest a reality check. So far most of the fantasy home invader situations you have all used as examples would leave YOU in prison for murder. Good luck owning guns when you get out. In most states you really do need to be backed into your closet, have already tried to call the cops, and in immediate physical danger before you can legally protect yourself with a gun. The reason those laws are in place is because so many of you are so gun happy you'd shoot a crack head digging through your trash with your .50 cal. If you really feel threatened, I simply suggest moving. Hell I haven't even taken the key out of my ignition in my truck for 3+ years, and the front door to my house doesn't even have a lock. I live in one of the richest counties in the country and I can't remember a home invasion or a gun being used in a crime the entire time I've lived here.

[AKHog]

Aww screw it.  Both sides distort things to their advantage, and vehemently refuse to see any view but their own.  Anti's, think every gun is a killing machine, that if you even look at a gun funny it will kill you and everyone you love, all on it's own.  The Pro gun nuts have visions of dropping tangos, that invade their home.  What a bunch of horse hockey it all is.  IMHO both sides need to get hit upside the head with a clue by four.

Make up your own (insert your personal deity here) damn mind.
(images)
Fun for the whole family right there.

Iron, didn't see your post before I made my last reply, but you pretty much summed it up perfectly. Gun arguments are essentially pointless because so many people let their emotions override rational thoughts.

[ROX]

I love the "arming themselves for when the zombies come" take.

I have been a gun owner and target shooter for 30 years.

Most people around here are very much into hunting and target shooting, and many pass that on to the next generation.

The great thing about being a firearm owner in America is that you can use if for self protection if/when the time comes, but you had better be proficient (hunting/target shooting) with it long before that time comes.

One of the guys in my squad is a 5 time national target champion.

You will find a lot of black powder guys around here as well.  Black powder deer season is VERY popular.

BTW:  If you don't see the coming civil unrest that is building in our country---then WHO is living in the fantasy world?  Evidently some people never turn on the evening news.



ROX

[AKHog]

I love the "arming themselves for when the zombies come" take.

I have been a gun owner and target shooter for 30 years.

Most people around here are very much into hunting and target shooting, and many pass that on to the next generation.

The great thing about being a firearm owner in America is that you can use if for self protection if/when the time comes, but you had better be proficient (hunting/target shooting) with it long before that time comes.

One of the guys in my squad is a 5 time national target champion.

You will find a lot of black powder guys around here as well.  Black powder deer season is VERY popular.

BTW:  If you don't see the coming civil unrest that is building in our country---then WHO is living in the fantasy world?  Evidently some people never turn on the evening news.

First of all, owning a firearm in America is not a protected right. Perhaps you are talking about the country United States of America?

"Arming yourselves for when the zombies come" isn't something I just made up, its exact terminology I see coming from some extremist. Its also a reoccurring theme or mentality I notice from many of the pro assault-rifle-for-home-defense types, even if not a direct thought it is a underlying force for the pro gun nuts. Unfortunately these types are usually the most outspoken type of pro gun people, as exemplified by this thread.

You make a valid point that I agree with, most gun owners are responsible and have a good grasp of reality. However so far most of the pro-gun views posted in this thread are NOT from those types of people.

Civil unrest is not going to lead you to protecting yourself with hand guns and assault rifles. I'm sorry but that is simply not going to happen. Do you even understand what situations an assault rifle is designed to be used in? Hint: its NOT for protecting yourself inside your house. If you think you're going to need it to drop tangos at mid to long ranges in the open public streets, the way it was designed to be used, then you are living in a fantasy.

I come from a long line of gun ownership too. My step father is a past Olympic team member and national champion for trap and target respectively. My biological dad was LEO. My mom blew away a skunk with a .357 when I was -1 month old, still in her womb. You get the picture. I love collecting and shooting all types of guns, especially high powered rifles. At no point in my history have I been taught that these types of long range high powered guns would be used against people. Even with all the gun exposure in my family we all have a good grasp of reality and understand these tools are not to be used as defense, that is what a simple pump action shotgun is for.

If you are talking about using these types of guns towards other people, you are no longer in the realm of home defense. I'm not sure exactly what you think the world is coming too, but I don't think you will ever need to use an assault rifle to insure the well being of your family. If civil unrest really lead to major rioting and crime in the streets, the national guard and military would be mobilized, temporary restrictions would be in place, and if you pulled out your assault rifle for protection you'd probably be viewed as a combatant and be shot on the spot.

[lowZX14]

First of all, owning a firearm in America is not a protected right. Perhaps you are talking about the country United States of America?

"Arming yourselves for when the zombies come" isn't something I just made up, its exact terminology I see coming from some extremist.

Well unless you have some kind of psychic powers that reveal what these extremists are going to say, I'd say you made that one up.

[ROX]

Who in their right mind would ever attempt to use an assault weapon for home defence?   

Please quote my post where ever I mentioned the term "assault rife".  (Prior to this one, of course.)

The great thing about the USA is that I can be a gun owner for the reasons I want to be a gun owner, and if others don't like the reasons I choose to be a gun owner then they are cordially invited to go pound sand. 


ROX

[AKHog]

Well unless you have some kind of psychic powers that reveal what these extremists are going to say, I'd say you made that one up.

1. I'm just tired of people using America the continent, and the United States of America the country, interchangeably. I think it shows some sort of arrogance or at least some ignorance.

2. Its not something they ARE going to say, its something many of them already say. Like I just said before, this isn't something I made up, its actual terminology I've seen used. There are people out there that literally think they will need to protect themselves using high powered rifles against some sort of organized advancing force in the open streets, killing multiple people at long range, some of them wearing armor, to secure their own safety. While I agree anything is possible, planning for something as unlikely as this is similar and is as sensible as planning for being struck by lightning or being invaded by aliens.

[AKHog]

Who in their right mind would ever attempt to use an assault weapon for home defence?   

A lot of people, actually. Its a fairly common argument for pro assault rifle types. My specific comment was a response to Challenge when he commented about the need to exercise the right to own automatic weapons (which I assume he means assault rifles).

I did not see you mention assault rifle specifically, but using a .45 for home defense is not much better, which I did see you mention. A lot of people will argue that they need hand cannons for home defense, yet it has been proven many times over that there are much better weapons for the job. For example something that will kill the intruder but not travel through 3 walls and kill your kids/neighbor, and something that does not need a high level of training to use effectively in a high stress situation.

Using home defense as the argument to owning high powered pistols or automatic rifles is not logical, yet it is the most used argument coming from the extreme gun nuts as to why they should own these guns. Hell the 2nd doesn't even mention home defense or anything like that.

[Iron_Cross]

Now that is home defense.

The great thing about the USA is that I can be a gun owner for the reasons I want to be a gun owner, and if others don't like the reasons I choose to be a gun owner then they are cordially invited to go pound sand. 


ROX

Amen, brother, amen.

The Anti's need to re-read (or read in most cases) the Declaration of Independence.  Especially the part about, life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  To me the pursuit of happiness is shooting a sub MOA group at 100 yards, or watching my daughter blast out the 10 ring, with her .22 pistol.

[lowZX14]

1. I'm just tired of people using America the continent, and the United States of America the country, interchangeably. I think it shows some sort of arrogance or at least some ignorance.

2. Its not something they ARE going to say, its something many of them already say. Like I just said before, this isn't something I made up, its actual terminology I've seen used. There are people out there that literally think they will need to protect themselves using high powered rifles against some sort of organized advancing force in the open streets, killing multiple people at long range, some of them wearing armor, to secure their own safety. While I agree anything is possible, planning for something as unlikely as this is similar and is as sensible as planning for being struck by lightning or being invaded by aliens.

Well sir, America in itself is not a continent neither since you have North America and South America which are each continents.  And usually, being as that the majority of the population on the bbs is from the United States of America, the term "America" is generally accepted to mean the United States of America because we Americans are lazy and do not feel like saying or typing all of it.   
As far as what the extremists are going to say or have already said, I was just saying that unless you have actually heard someone say it, you cannot predict what they will or will not say.

[lowZX14]

As far as the 2nd Ammendment having the words "for home defense" in it, you are correct.
The interpretation of what the 2nd Ammendment means has been debated for many years but not too long ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling on the 2nd Ammendment:

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___ (2008) is a landmark legal case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use. It was the first Supreme Court case in United States history to directly address whether the right to keep and bear arms is a right of individuals or a collective right that applies only to state-regulated militias.

They also had this to say:

"In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense

and this

The Court based its reasoning on the grounds:

that the operative clause of the Second Amendment—"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"—is controlling and refers to a pre-existing right of individuals to possess and carry personal weapons for self-defense and intrinsically for defense against tyranny, based on the bare meaning of the words, the usage of "the people" elsewhere in the Constitution, and historical materials on the clause's original public meaning;

all of this is from Wikipedia which isn't always my number one source for factual information.