Author Topic: The Armed Citizen - Oct 2003 (Read 8288 times)

Gadfly · « **Reply #30 on:** November 03, 2003, 10:23:01 PM »

My problem is that the gun owner appoints himself as jury, judge, and executor, being death the only possible verdict.

The criminal makes the appointment, the victim simply fullfills his duty.

Toad · « **Reply #31 on:** November 03, 2003, 10:56:19 PM »

Gentlemen, gentlemen....

you fail to see that the Criminal is the VICTIM in these cases. Only the CRIMINAL has the right to survive these encounters.

And MT, you're way off base. First of all, every State still has to follow Federal gun laws and there were plenty of those in '90.

Secondly, I just tossed a Federal summary of State gun laws that was given to me back around 85. I wish I hadn't tossed it because I'm pretty sure I could counter any example you wished to post. All I can say is your source must be mighty picky about what he considers a "gun law".

However, you may go here Research Library | State Gun Laws

and see what I'm talking about.

Now, does California have "gun control laws"?

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #32 on:** November 03, 2003, 11:03:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
My problem is that the gun owner appoints himself as jury, judge, and executor, being death the only possible verdict.

Did the guy with the BBgun deserve death as punishment? Did the burglar?

Much better to stay in Spain, criminal or otherwise, I'll give you that.

Daniel

So Cyrano you think the shooter in either case should have waited? Waited to see if the burglar tried to stab him or shoot him? Waited (like the one man) for the burglar fo fatally stab his wife? Waited to see if the robber would shoot first, or ask him to say if his gun was real or not? Do you value your life (and that of your family) so little that you will risk death to let a criminal live?
Sorry if someone points a gun at me, their life is forfeit.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #33 on:** November 04, 2003, 02:45:39 AM »

It's difficult for me to accept those terms the same as for you to see it from my point of view.

I live in a society where guns are an oddity. If I get robbed, chances of the criminal having a gun are close to 0, and so having a simple pepper spray gives you the chance to repel the occasional attack.

For me, having to take someone's life is not a something I have to deal with everytime I feel threatened because chances that the assaulter's intention is to kill me are very slim.

I understand your position, and living in the US is a whole different story.

I believe it's a case of mutual understanding. While it may be justified to carry guns in a gun society, it can definitely be harmful to introduce guns in a gun-free society.

Daniel

straffo · « **Reply #34 on:** November 04, 2003, 03:00:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
While it may be justified to carry guns in a gun society, it can definitely be harmful to introduce guns in a gun-free society.

you nailed it perfectly !

-tronski- · « **Reply #35 on:** November 04, 2003, 03:28:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
G
Now, does California have "gun control laws"?

Tronsky

beet1e · « **Reply #36 on:** November 04, 2003, 07:19:42 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
I believe it's a case of mutual understanding. While it may be justified to carry guns in a gun society, it can definitely be harmful to introduce guns in a gun-free society.

Daniel, Straffo - I agree with you both. After Tony Blair's government has finished ruining Britain - which won't be very long now, I shall probably relocate to either France or Spain, where I shall feel perfectly safe.

Torque · « **Reply #37 on:** November 04, 2003, 07:35:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH

I believe it's a case of mutual understanding. While it may be justified to carry guns in a gun society, it can definitely be harmful to introduce guns in a gun-free society.
Daniel

That's becoming apparent.

http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archives/030218_guns/blackmarket.html

Ricker's Affidavit is interesting enough.

cpxxx · « **Reply #38 on:** November 04, 2003, 07:53:38 AM »

Cyrano got it right. In a society with few guns you don't need a gun. In a society with lots of guns and America is not unique in this you need a gun to protect yourself.

In America as I pointed out in the other gun thread, vested interests keep their profits up by keeping up the demand for guns.

The first post is horrfying in many ways, first off the number of armed robberies and the fact that the penalty for burglary is DEATH. The NRA may be proud of the 'success' stories but I wonder if they post the incidents where the robber shoots the citizen dead as he reaches for his gun. Is it worth getting into a gun battle to prevent someone stealing a car or a few hundred dollars? Does the NRA post the incidents where the robber gets away without anybody dying.

Americans pay a high price for their 'freedom' to bear arms. The rest of the world looks on and learns from America's mistake.

Edit: Then I read Torgue's link
http://www.cbc.ca/disclosure/archiv...lackmarket.html. So much for original thought on my part.

lazs2 · « **Reply #39 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:13:14 AM »

I believe it is a little more complex than that. there is the matter of personal freedom and freedom from tyranny. the tyranny for some people may be from criminals... for instance... the people in england are told to hide in their rooms when a burglar comes calling. Hope he doesn't decide to hurt anyone. we take a different view about protecting ourselves and our loved ones... we take a different view on our property... in the U.S. most people are property owners. we gave up serfdom and peasanthood over 200 years ago and don't look forward to going back.

Gun control laws don't seem to stop the rate of homicides for any country... nor... do they increase it. The guns don't make people kill. Homicide rates are pretty constant... if your country has a low homicide rate without guns then it will have a low rate with them...and vice versa... The only difference that is decernable is that countries and states with lax gun control have lower overall crime.

no gun control law was ever passed because of out of control gun homicides. The excusses in every case were flimsy.

Beetle... it is funny that when england was passing some of it's more drtaconian gun laws that the opponents of such useless laws pointed to the french as an example of loss of personal freedom but you would go there to feel "safe"?
lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #40 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:17:56 AM »

torques link.... LOL... well, that proves that evil people will do evil things no matter what law you pass eh? they will get the guns no matter what. There is no country in the world no matter how draconian the gun control that doesn't have homicides and suicides.... there is no country in the world that doesn't have gun violence.

There is no proof that the gun dealer did anything illegal. The people who used the guns broke lots of gun laws. They chose to ignore the gun laws.

lazs

Dago · « **Reply #41 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:18:03 AM »

Quote

The first post is horrfying in many ways, first off the number of armed robberies and the fact that the penalty for burglary is DEATH. The NRA may be proud of the 'success' stories but I wonder if they post the incidents where the robber shoots the citizen dead as he reaches for his gun. Is it worth getting into a gun battle to prevent someone stealing a car or a few hundred dollars? Does the NRA post the incidents where the robber gets away without anybody dying

There is a long history and many good reasons for Americans to be armed. The right to bear arms was written as an amendment to our Constitiution and done so with good reason. A population unable to defend itself is a population that risks oppression and subjugation. You have to look no further than WW2 to see examples of what can happen to a nations people when they lack the ability to defend themselves and their nation.

It also helps if you consider the dictatorial rule many of the early settlers of the United States were fleeing, and the freedoms saught in their desire to form a new nation.

I am not blind to the problems our nation now has with guns, and with criminals armed. There are so many problems with society in general that you cannot blame the problems just on guns. One of the biggest problems is the incredible lack of family now in the black community, the overwhelming majority of children are borne to one parent households. The economy here as elsewhere has more people out of work than normal. etc etc.

I don't want to live in an armed camp, with citizens hunkering down in their homes afraid of the dark, and I don't think I do, but I also don't want to live in a nation where my country lacks the ability to defend itself from dangers outside or inside.

Quote

Americans pay a high price for their 'freedom' to bear arms. The rest of the world looks on and learns from America's mistake.

Yes we do, and we pay the price. But, an awful lot of nations look to us for guidance, for economic support, and even more look to us to protect them. And that is a fact.

dago

CyranoAH · « **Reply #42 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:26:58 AM »

Sorry but having a gun doesn't me feel more free. Living without the fear of someone shooting at me does.

It's a matter of perspective.

Daniel

straffo · « **Reply #43 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:27:12 AM »

@Laz :

I feel safe enought,I don't need a gun at home.

And my personnal freedom is ok ,thanks.

When will you learn a bit about my country before posting ?

@Dago :

Quote

You have to look no further than WW2 to see examples of what can happen to a nations people when they lack the ability to defend themselves and their nation.

You pretend the outcome would have been different ?

BS.

lazs2 · « **Reply #44 on:** November 04, 2003, 08:43:12 AM »

I have looked at the history of both spain and france and if not having guns is the reason for it then I am glad we have guns in America.
lazs