Life sentence for self-defense?

[Ripsnort]

Sorry guys, this is my fault, I was hoping we could have a civil debate on gun control laws in the U.S. but this is turning into a bash thread.    I guess we're not the adults  we  thought we were...

[F4UDOA]

Sorry Ripsnort,

I am very zealious when it comes to certain things and sometimes I need to take a step back and take a breath. This is why I do not own a gun. You can imagine what this conversation would turn into if we were all in a room.

Anyway this is my last post in this thread as I am not really enjoying this convesation much right now anyway. I will just finish by quoting some of what Toad has just posted.

 

Reno noted that authors of the report acknowledged they didn't study the Brady Act's indirect impact on what is known as the secondary gun market -- gun sales by unlicensed dealers. That, experts say, is the source of a significant number of weapons used in crimes.

Toad,

What was I saying about gun dealers being responsable for gun crimes? And the gun companies that sell to these potatos?
I guess it depends on what your idea of a criminal is because you start identifying who should have gun.

F4UDOA

 

[Ripsnort]

   

Originally posted by Yeager:
Snipped-
The short answer is that it IS messed up.  The long answer is that it has NOTHING to do with guns or who owns em.

Kevin "Yeager" Hall

On that note, I end my last post with the fact that 3 of us growing up, with 21 firearms, some loaded, leaning in the corner of the closet, never once harmed any of us.  We knew better(Parents spending time with kids, talking to them, explaining to them, what a concept!).  When we were old enough, we were taught on to use them properly and attended gun training classes.We were taught to never go into that closet unless someone broke into the house while we were at home.  We respected those guns as much as we feared them.

As a Columbine victim asked Pres.Clinton on a national TV program.."Mr.President, with all due respect, but when was the last time a gun jumped up off a desk and shot someone by itself??"  The moderator moved onto the next question, since  the 10 seconds of silence was deafening.



[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 08-04-2000).]

[Toad]

FOURTH TIME, F4.......

So, come on, cut to the point...if we register, ballistic fingerprint, background check, ad nauseum...

Are you going to stop? Will you agree to and vouchsafe our rights to own and use guns in a traditional sporting manner?

Well? Or are you going to cut and run from the board now?


Next, please read what you posted...

"secondary gun market -- gun sales by unlicensed dealers"

An unlicensed dealer is breaking the law? We both agree? OK, good..then these would be criminals right? What have I said about criminals?

Now, the gun companies that sell to these potatos? (If you can find one. The Feds have really cracked down here thank goodness, but do you have an example?) They are also breaking the law? We both agree? OK, good..then these would be criminals right? What have I said about criminals?

I think I've been totally consistent on differentiating between criminals and people who obey the law.

Rip, you did not do ANYTHING wrong in starting this thread in the 0-Club. That's what it's for and I'm a firm believer that _talking_ about this stuff is a GOOD thing. Anyway, I have thoroughly enjoyed it...especially the part where I'm identified as one who, if I may paraphrase "can justify anything and is willing to kill to do it."

I enjoy stuff like that from people who live 1500 miles from me and have never met me. Shows their unbiased, balanced view of the situation.  

Besides, I think F4 is doing more for the cause of law-abiding gun owners than anyone I've seen in the last 6 months!!  

[CavemanJ]

 

Originally posted by indian:
Show me in the Contitution where it says anything about seperation of Church and state. Then look at the money we spend all over the world it says IN GOD WE TRUST. As a veteran of the U.S Army and a long time gun owner (sence 11 years old) They can have my guns when they pry them from my cold dead fingers. And about that town in Georgia I believe they have a Zero crime rate there alos antoher town I believe its in airizona there is (or was) a law that all adults would carry a gun (residents only) also zero crime rate.(its in one of those NRA magezines.

I live for two years on an Airforce base the training you guys get in weapons was not only a joke but totaly useless.

Nuff said.

Yup, check Kinnesaw's crime rate.  I was talking to someone in the arena last night on RW (forgive me for forgetting, it was a combat zone   ) who said they work in Kinnesaw and that law still stands.
I seem to recall that GA was one of the first states to allow concealed carry license holders to be exempt from the Brady law (tougher check to get the CC permit than a standard Brady check IMO).

[Spinout]

F4UDOA, toad is pro-gun so you call him violent, bigoted and a murderer. Then you say he supports censorship and anti-abortion snipers. And "your people" are getting shot by "his people"!!??

Scary stuff man.

I hope u just said those things in the heat of the moment. Apparantly you might even shoot at someone if u had a gun in such a heated argument.

Do you really mean what you say here or is it just alot hot-headed emotional bull?

[CavemanJ]

 

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Sorry Ripsnort,

I am very zealious when it comes to certain things and sometimes I need to take a step back and take a breath. This is why I do not own a gun. You can imagine what this conversation would turn into if we were all in a room.

I'm also very zealous and passionate when it comes to things I believe in very strongly.  It downright pisses me off the attitude that some anti-gunners have, and it seems you lean towards that attitude F4U.  The ban'em all-take'em-melt'em all down attitude.  Not quite there, but you're close.  You still seem to support having the government infringe on my rights.

Find some victims of accidental shootings and ask them if proper education about storage and handling would have prevented thier accident.  If they can take an emotionless look at the incident 95% will tell you yes.  Matter of fact, I'll step up and be the first to tell you that proper education on handling would've prevented an accident.  I've got an entry and exit scar from a 9mm Parabellum on me right calf.  Careless handling on the part of one of my best friends.  Yes, we're still friends, and yes, I beat the toejam out of him 2 days later.  Been almost 5yr and to this day he hasn't repeated any of his carelessness (he was one of the tougher ones to teach).
This wound has given me a damn good example to use in this kind of debate.  As soon as I got home from the hospital one of my friends says "so you gonna sell all your guns now?"  My response was to pick up me 1911A1, make sure the mag was seated, rack the slide, snick on the safety and set it beside me on the nightstand.

I've said that not law abiding person needs a gun.  Some people just aren't cut out to be responsible gun owners.  People like I do my best to talk out of buying a gun, no matter how badly they want one.  One could say I take an anti-gunner's position with these people, and I guess I do.  I know the ins and outs of gun ownership, and it's a mantle I wear with pride.  Like I said, 17yr of handling guns and only had 1 of my weapons involved in 1 accident.  I've been the victim of an accident, and I'm still 100% pro gun.  Like that person asked slick Willy:  "When's the last time a gun jumped up off a desk and shot someone by itself?"

As for this secondary gun market... I guess private sales are to outlawed?  What if Toad wanted to buy a gun from me?  We're both law abiding and responsible gun owners.  Are we to be made to pay for the irresponsible actions of some people?

Anyone got any stats on how many guns are in circulation compared to how many gun deaths/yr (not counting suicide, you're not stopping someone who's serious about committing it,they'll use pills, jump, razor blade, whatever)?  Just wondering what the ratio is.

Yeager yes, this country has problems, and yes, contrary to politically correct views guns have absolutely nothing to do with the problem.  They're tools being used, and by thier nature are high visibility items, so they catch the blame.  Everything after that statement though, IMO, serves no purpose save trying to turn this into a full blown flame war.  BTW, when ya gonna pay the US back for all the help in rebuilding after the War?  Bash us if ya want, but head for Hang's ugly american thread, it has no place in here.

Rip it's amazing what proper teaching and upbringing can do ain't it?  
My brother and I hated each other times, and the fights we've gotten into are more than enough proof of that.  But never once did we think of grabbing one of the guns, we just jumped up and went the other one again.

Bottom line:  You can have my guns when ya pry'em from me cold, dead fingers.  In the mean time, I'll be doing all I can to educate fellow gun owners (who need it) on proper storage and handling to do my part (more than?) to cut down on accidental shootings.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Guess it's gettin time to saddle up and skin out

[CavemanJ]

BTW, in all my debates with anti-gunners I've never lost my cool.  But some of them have become so enraged from either my staying cool, my points of logic, or both, that they have physically attacked me.  Quick side step and footsweep to send'em into the nearest wall usually takes the fight out of them, and if not friends that are present jump in and hold'em back.  One even continued to try to get to me after he saw I was wearing my piece and told me he'd kill me.  I just smiled and kept my cool.

And people say I shouldna own a gun

[Toad]

Originally posted by CavemanJ:
As for this secondary gun market... I guess private sales are to outlawed?  

Cave, I suspect you already know that "dealers" are already clearly defined in the Federal gun laws. Licensed dealers are pretty easy to define. Secondary market dealers are a different situation. However, if you read the regs, they are reasonably <although not totally> clear.

I was giving F4 the benefit of the doubt, assuming he knows the difference. This may or may not be the case.   (Image removed from quote.)

As I am sure you know, a single gun transaction between two private owners does not require any sort of dealer's license nor is it in any way, shape or form against the Federal law.

I'm sure this causes the "antis" a great amount of heartburn as well.

However, until they address our primary issue, that they provide iron-clad guarantees that our right to keep and use firearms in a traditional sporting manner is not going to be infringed....we will never be able to come to reasonable compromises on any of their issues.

I believe the ball is in their court. Compromise is possible IF they are willing to give up the "confiscation" they seem so bent on eventually enforcing.

I've asked F4 four different times to make that statement. Because he's probably an honorable fellow, he can't bring himself to do it, apparently.

I have NEVER met an "anti" that could.  (Image removed from quote.)

[Yeager]

F4UDOA,

You seriously scare the livin hell out of me!

Still,  in the arena Im ok with you  

====
Cave,

Do not forget, for every Ugly American, there are a dozen Ugly Frenchmen  

In my world, owning a firearm is equivalent to owning a coffeemaker.  In the wrong hands both are lethal, but in my hands both are useful and I will not stand to be denied the lawful use of either!

Yeager

------------------
 

[This message has been edited by Yeager (edited 08-04-2000).]

[spora]

 

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Sorry guys, this is my fault, I was hoping we could have a civil debate on gun control laws in the U.S. but this is turning into a bash thread.    I guess we're not the adults  we  thought we were...

(I have not yet read the whole thread, so I don't know about the bashing)

If this thread was about US gun laws, then it started a bit strangely - with an example from UK.  The quoted part (in the first message of this thread) though certainly seemed like being re-written in USA?

From what I read from the news, it seems that USA has a kind of free shooting gallery for house owners/property owners etc.  For example, a lost exchange student with inadequate knowledge of english language gets shot while asking directions...just because he 'trespassed'.

As an European I can understand why the person mentioned in the example got a life sentence (if he ever got it - could be an urban legend).  Shooting someone with a shotgun from a close range is deadly.  You know it is deadly.  When you fire at a person, even if he is a burglar, you know what you are doing.  Probability of serious injury or death is high.

So basically, property in USA is more valuable than lives - in the sense that you are allowed to defend your property with deadly force.

On the other hand, guns are so abundant in USA that most assailants are probably carrying one.  Maybe that kind of makes it OK for every amateur to carry a gun for "self defense"?

I know I should not touched this subject...but still.   I've tried it once before on Usenet a few years ago - got abusive E-mail for about 6 months from various pro-shooting-everything-that-moves-or-looks-like-a-target -groups.

I hope this AH group is more reasonable.

And yes: I do not own any firearms and do not plan to.  I do know how to operate,fire,field strip,maintain etc. various civilian and military weapons from 1930s era rifles and pistols to modern assault rifles and infantry weapons.  I do not need to have any, though.

[spora]

Let me describe the gun laws and situation in Finland.  It is certainly somewhat different from USA.  Some details are probably incorrect, but the general picture should be OK.

- you need a license for a firearm.  You get the license from the police
- to get a license, you need to have proof of membership of a shooting club/hunting club and have recommendation from a club official (not necessarily needed for .22 weapons)
- you need to have a trigger lock and/or a locked weapons cabinet.  Guns need to be placed in the cabinet / be locked at all times (or be dismantled)
- it is more difficult to get licenses for 'short' weapons (easily concealed) that rifles & shotguns.
- automatic&semi automatic weapons licenses require long term commitment to voluntary reserve organisations etc.

Of course there are some exceptions.  Of course the standards vary around the country.  Of course the criminals and some ordinary people have illegal guns.

AFAIK Finland has the largest number of private firearms in the EU.

[StSanta]

I've noticed that gun owners who have had friends who made a mistake with guns beat the crap out of their friends. ;D

So much for non violent normal people  

Me, I know my friends ain't infallible. A uy packed my chute, did it wrong and I had a bag lock (bag the chute is in wouldn't open, so you're streaming with a small bag over yer head, full speed towards ground). Fortunately, after three or four seconds it opened, by which time my hands where firmly on the cutaway and reserve chute handles.

He apologized profusely, but I didn't think too much about it - it was a mistake, not on purpose. And he was an ex Royal Marine and much bigger than me  .

Most killings are killings of passion - someone loses their temper and the result is a tragedy. Whether you consider the puropse of guns to be purely recreational such as target shooting, or them as tools of death, meant to kill primarily doesn't matter. In terms of power, a gun is much stronger than a knife. A weak 90lb woman has an equalizer against a karate kung fu master. It allows you to carry through an intent to harm while minimizing the risk to yourself. If the other guy has a gun, it is a matter of who has it p first, and skill of course, but I talk about the statistical mean normal kind of gun owner.

Many things can be used to bring death or harm to another human being. A handgun is just an extremely convenient and effective such tool. More effective than knives, cigarrettes, rocks or cars.

To me, most handguns are made for defense, i.e "peace through superior firepower". Detterants. But, they deter by their ability to kill, not by their cool looks. One could argue that the detterant effect is proportional to the lethality of the gun (which has many factors to it, I know).

For target shooting, you do not need a high capacity modern handgun like the Glock 17. More fun, maybe, but if it is target shooting, guns dedicated to this are more precise due to ergonomic fit and whatnot. And such guns could be stored in gun clubs instead of the home..

I guess what I am getting at is that I do not buy the"target shooting" argument. The fun argument I do. I am not sure I buy the "guns are not made for killing" argument either, not with modern handguns. They deter because they are effective killing/maiming tools.

This of course has nothing to do with the second amendment and I am not recommending anything about whether handguns in the US should be banned or not.

If, as Ripsort wishes, we are to have a rational discussion about it, we gotta look at purpose and how well the purpose is met, and with what side effects it has. Many of you are much more well read than me on the subject, so I'll just finally leave some of my thoughts.

Purpose of handguns in the USA:
a) defense against an opressive government

Have no argument against this one, other than I think it is unlikely that the American government will attack the American people, or that the American people would allow it to happen *by peaceful means*. Americans aren't dumb at all. They're just opportunist dweebs.  

b) personal defense/defense of property/loved ones

This to me seems like the strongest and most viable argument for allowing guns. Here we must see how likely it is you will need to defend yourself with the gun, and what side effects owning a gun has. Crimes of passion would fall into this category. I do not have the numbers, so will leave it at this.

c) second amendment/rights
In almost all other western country, guns are considered a public health issue, and gun ownership is a priviledge, not a right. Not so in the USA. The intent of the second amendment can be discussed; did the forefathers intend that every American civilians should have the right to bear arms, or did they wish for it to be limited to militas, which any American can be a part of? Furthermore, could they foresee the rapid development the American society has been through, ethically, morally and technogically? Is the second amendment in a certain sense obsolete and in need of (grin) an amendment?

d) target shooting/recreational shooting

I've briefly ventured into the area above and have little to add, other than the "fun vs harm" equaion seems to be the proper one to use. An analogy that might be flawed would be me riding a very loud HD - fun for me, but harmful to the environment and other people's hearing, not to mention annoying.

We've got the right to free speech, but not the right to unnecessarily yell "FIRE!" in an overfilled cinema. Are there such considerations to be made about gun ownership?

Just a few thoughts to spark off a serious debate.

Cave, please do't beat the crap outta me if you disagree  . And remind me not to make stupid dangerous mistakes when near you.

<S!>

------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"

[Rock]

 

Daff, (whos from UK and probably more familiar with this case) said one (maybe both?) assailants were shot in the back.

This is where he messed up. Hard to claim to be defending yourself if the "attacker" has his back to you.

Don't shoot someone in the back, it's murder.

[Toad]

I'll participate in this one; reasonable would be a nice change.    

...but not for a while.

I'm all worn out from that last totally bizarre debate that just went on. I swear, every time I read one of his later posts the foam was dripping down the INSIDE of my monitor glass.    

In the mean time, here are a few web sites that deal with the 2nd Amendment. I'm sure you can find more with a search engine. These may help our European Opportunist Friends   and undecided US citizens understand a bit more of just what this argument is all about.


Highly Recommended:
 http://www.2ndlawlib.org/
 http://www.guncite.com/


Good:
 http://www.saf.org/Constitutions.html

Interesting: http://apachego.com/rights/

If we're going to discuss it, we all might as well be familiar with the basis for the discussion.

If you are truly interested, the first two sites can keep you reading for hours. There are some very interesting direct quotes from our "founding fathers" that leave no doubt as to the intent of the 2nd Amendment...no matter how much the Politically Correct would like you to believe otherwise.

Knowledge is a good thing...enjoy!

Oh, btw..here's something from the Swiss Embassy on their laws.
 http://www.swissemb.org/legal/html/gun_ownership.html

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 08-04-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 08-04-2000).]