I've found the state I want to live in:

[1776]

The nut case in Mass. that shot his co-workers, why haven't the ppl for gun control been all over the TV demanding new laws to limit guns.  Heck, they were all over TV in the Denver Highschool shooting thingie,why not the Mass. thingie?  Haven't heard a thing about this guy since his hearing for bail!!

What's different about Mass. then Co.?  This guy had bomb stuff and everything!!

[Tac]

Paintball gun in full CO2 power loaded with marbles... and a TAZER. Please, come into my house uninvited *grin*.

You got some kind of valid point there wobble, but the thing is, if someone is in your home already you are in serious toejam no matter what. Putting resistance with a firearm only increases the danger to the occupants. Most households would have to a) get the gun, b) load it with ammo (hmm.. 1 or 2 minutes go by) and c) get the bad guy without shooting the other occupants of the house by mistake or get them killed in any shootout that may occur. In any case, you are just putting yourself and your family in MUCH more danger.

A gun in the house will only give you a false sense of security, thats all. A dog is much, much better (plus you get it to bring you the paper..something the darn wife and kids wont do   )

[TheWobble]

"Paintball gun in full CO2 power loaded with marbles... and a TAZER. Please, come into my house uninvited *grin*."

Tac, there is no better way to ensure that you will be killed than that. I woulden even bother with a 22 (unless I had some CCI Stingers in it)

Also

1. If you have a gun in your house it should only be locked up during the day when you are away, at night when it may be needed it it should be loaded and easy for YOU to get to, if you have kids, then by all means lock it up during the day and unload.

2. "Putting resistance with a firearm only increases the danger to the occupants"
Well the only person I see it dangering is the amazinhunk trying to get ya, im not a criminal but if I was breaking in to a house and I heard someone say "IVE GOT A GUN!" I would probably leave, even if I had a gun thats still only a 50/50 chance of walking out of there, and I dont know many people crazy or not who would go with them odds.  However if i did not have a gun what is my choice??..nothing, I just have to hope and pray that this phycho is only gonna steel all my toejam and maby only beat the toejam outta me...thats yer best option, the others get worse and of course there is death...

2.telling yourself that the police or someone else will take care of you if someone is gonna try to break in is "a false sense of security" not being prepared and ready to defend your home and family.

3. Guns dont give a false sense of security, they give you a real chance of having a real waco coming into your house and still living through it.

"get the bad guy without shooting the other occupants of the house by mistake"

There is a bullet designed ESPECALLY to prevent this, it called the   Bule Tip Safty Slug, it is specally designed so that whenever it hits anything remotly solid it practically vaporizes, you cannot oven shoot through a thin sheetrock wall with one, however on soft tissue it acts as a normal round,  

BTW. I have a tazer and the only use i give it is to fire my giant potato gun  
 

BUT the main point is the fact that no matter what opinions anyone has, and even if guns were banned in the US (which they will never be)  there is no way in hell that the gov could enforce it, I have several guns, two of which are VERY expensive Heckler and Koch weapons, (SL8 and UBS 40) and the goverment will NEVER take them. I dont care if they were to come to my door, they would never get anything, not even my old musket that wont even shoot.  Thas the one thing the media is good for in America, right now it seems against guns, but if someone were to get killed or even roughed up for not turning over guns and fighting the cope he/she would INSTANTLY be raised to god like statud by the media as this poor guy who just want to protect his family.

[Ripsnort]

Tac said in quotes:  

A redneck is the kind of person that finds joy in owning things that will give him/her power over others. Aka, guns, big trucks (when they live in the middle of a city and work in an office), etc.

Funny, all my friends (all NRA registered)who are gun owners are the last people on earth who would want 'power' over anyone!  They use their guns for pleasure and sport.  Big trucks?  I drive to the city in a big truck, but guess what, I use that truck for everything from hauling dirt to pulling a trailer, to picking up large objects that won't fit on a Geo-metro...and my truck gets better gas milege than half the CARS being driven on the road! (21 mpg)

   

Problem is Rip, that those wacko's were once law-abiding citizens. Look at the shooting at those high schools, they had easy access to weapons, they got ticked off and went hormone ballistic (as most teenagers that are bullied get). That is the real problem.

Don't you think this is a problem that begins with the parents?  First, there are little tell-tale signs of your child going alittle haywire (look at the kids websites that killed in columbine)..second, a prudent gun owner has his guns either disassembled or locked up where a kid cannot have access to them (this day and age, when I grew up, we had 20 guns leaning against the wall in the closet, but my father spent many hours with me discussing firearms and their proper usage)  It starts with the family...after all, the gun didn't jump up off the table and kill those kids, a human being did.

   

... rednecks pulling a gun to show they have power over you (happened to me once),

Sounds like what you encountered was a criminal in my book, sure, he may have a so-called 'redneck background', but again, where do YOU define the difference between a redneck and a criminal?  You can have both, but the majority of my friends could be labeled a 'redneck' by you, however the last thing you'd ever see them doing is pointing a  gun at another human being.


   

Dont need gun control. Need a total gun ban. If you like guns and want to protect what you stated above using a weapon, go to the military or become a police officer.

Interesting, Stalin, Hitler, even Hussain feel this way too.

   

If not get a bow and arrow, learn martial arts, use your wits. If a criminal comes to threaten your home with a gun you sure as hell are at a disadvantage to begin with.

I know martial arts, but I practice it not for self-defense, but for the ART of th excercise itself.  Same applies for a gun, I use guns for pleasure and sport, to use one in self defense is a by-product of the societal level of an individual that *may* threaten my life, or a family members life.

If it ain't a gun doing the killing, it would be poisonous gas in a subway, or a meat clever, or car to run another human down with...in other words, its the social upbringing of an individual, not the means by which they commit a crime.

And I quote:

 

"Is your life worth protecting? If so, whose responsibility is it to protect it? If you believe that it is the police's, not
only are you wrong -- since the courts universally rule that they have no legal obligation to do so -- but you face some difficult moral quandaries. How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself? Because that is his job and we pay him to do it? Because your life is of incalculable value, but his is only worth the $30,000 salary we pay him? If you believe it reprehensible    to possess the means and will to use lethal force to repel a criminal assault, how can you call upon another to do so for you?

Do you believe that you are forbidden to protect yourself because the police are better qualified to protect you, because they know what they are doing but you're a rank amateur? Put aside that this is equivalent to believing that only concert pianists may play the piano and only professional athletes may play sports. What exactly are these special qualities possessed only by the police and beyond the rest of us mere mortals?

One who values his life and takes seriously his responsibilities to his family and community will possess and cultivate the means of fighting back, and will retaliate when threatened with death or grievous injury to himself or a loved one. He will never be content to rely solely on others for his safety, or to think he has done all that is    possible by being aware of his surroundings and taking measures of avoidance. Let's not mince words: He will be armed, will be trained in the use of his weapon, and will defend himself when faced with lethal violence.

Fortunately, there is a weapon for preserving life and liberty that can be wielded effectively by almost anyone --the handgun. Small and light enough to be carried habitually, lethal, but unlike the knife or sword, not demanding great skill or strength, it truly is the "great equalizer." Requiring only hand-eye coordination and a modicum of    ability to remain cool under pressure, it can be used effectively by the old and the weak against the young and the strong, by the one against the many.

The handgun is the only weapon that would give a lone female jogger a chance of prevailing against a gang of thugs intent on rape, a teacher a chance of protecting children at recess from a madman intent on massacring them,a family of tourists waiting at a mid-town subway station the means to protect themselves from a gang of teens    armed with razors and knives.

But since we live in a society that by and large outlaws the carrying of arms, we are brought into the fray of the Great American Gun War. Gun control is one of the most prominent battlegrounds in our current culture wars. Yet it is unique in the half-heartedness with which our conservative leaders and pundits -- our "conservative elite" --do battle, and have conceded the moral high ground to liberal gun control proponents. It is not a topic often written
about, or written about with any great fervor, by William F. Buckley or Patrick Buchanan. As drug czar, William Bennett advised President Bush to ban "assault weapons." George Will is on record as recommending the repeal of the Second Amendment, and Jack Kemp is on record as favoring a ban on the possession of semiautomatic "assault weapons." The battle for gun rights is one fought predominantly by the common man. The beliefs of both our liberal and conservative elites are in fact abetting the criminal rampage through our society.
[/b]

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Toad]

Same sh*t, different day.

One side wants you to give up your personal responsibility and accountability to the all-knowing, all-perfect state.

The collective "state" is deemed the only entity wise enough and rational enough to conduct itself in a responsible and accountable manner and it will tell you what your proper actions are in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.

The other side feels an individual should be allowed to do what he likes in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as long as it doesn't interfere with another person's pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. In other words, it's the "your freedom to swing your fist around at the end of your arm ends just short of my nose" concept.

Coupled with this is the "innocent until proven guilty" concept that is so integral to our form of government.

Yeah, I have a gun. Until I misuse it, what business is it of yours? None, brother, absolutely none.

Everyone of you anti-gunners that drives a car has the *potential* to get drunk and drive. This is blatant misuse of a car. What business is it of mine until you do that? None, brother, absolutely none.

Yet the likelyhood of me being injured by a drunk driver is statistically much higher than me being injured by a person mis-using a firearm.

The never ending argument continues.

[TheWobble]

Plus TOad,

When is the last time some idiot killed someone by running them over and the car company was blamed?

[leonid]

I just hope it doesn't get to the point where most states eventually allow concealed weapons w/o permits.  There is nothing civilized about a bunch of people walking in public, packing.  If you feel the need to keep a firearm on your person while in public (or at home), then something's either seriously wrong with your brain, or the society you live in.  That was the whole point to civilization, creating a society that raised the level of safety and security among its members.

Keep that in mind when you talk about bearing arms.  If you honestly feel the need to have a firearm, then the society you live in is not very secure, is it?  Which raises more important questions, like why isn't our society secure anymore?  What does that say about our current level of social development in the USA?  Is the United States now less civilized than countries like the UK, or Canada, or Germany, just to name a few?

[TheWobble]

Leonid, the the most un-secure socity there could be is one where the criminals know that the populace has no means to defend it self. I have a conceled handgun permit and I carry almost all the tiem, not really my person so much but always in my car, it has for sure saved my life once so far, and 1 time is plenty enough to justify carrying one everywhere IMO.


"Is the United States now less civilized than countries like the UK, or Canada, or Germany, just to name a few"

I think it takes a pretty civilized country to trust its citizens enough to trust them with guns, unlike the ones who fear that their populace cant handle the right to protect themselves.

But i do concur that allowing EVERYONE to carry without a permit and testing and school for it and such would be a major mistake.  Criminals should never EVER be able to own ANY kinda of gun, or a knife with over a 3 inch blade.  As for the normal law abiding populace they havent done anything wrong so dont screw with them.



[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 01-13-2001).]

[leonid]

I think you're missing my point, Wobble.  The fact that many Americans demand ownership of firearms for reasons of security, indicates either paranoia, or a real social breakdown in this country.  It's one thing to own firearms like rifles/shotguns for purposes of hunting, target-shooting, but quite another when there's a demand for handguns and assault rifles for reasons of security.  The rise in ownership of such firearms is an indication of some flaw or degradation in our social system.

It doesn't bother me that so many people own firearms in the USA so much as why they own them, and I believe the overriding reason is security and safety.  An industrialzed nation with the amount of wealth we possess should not possess a citizenry that feels so insecure as to be compelled to protect itself by their own means.

And you have only to look at other countries of similar stature to see that the level of internal insecurity among US citizens is unusual.

[TheWobble]

Well leonid I think Your on to something and to tell ya the truith your right to a degree..i know many folks who say they want a gun for personal protection for their family and such as sort of an excuse to buy the child within a really cool toy  

I think the reason many people such as myself are so adamnet about keeping our guns for personal protection and such is the deep rooted fear that one day we will lose them, and as the saying goes "you will never really know the value of a possesion until you part with it"  that holds true with almost anything.  But with guns there is a further relm of protection to contend with, If guns were for fun and sport only taking them away would seem less evil, however the fact that the gun you own may one day save your life as well as your families greatly complicates things, the goverment wont and NEVER SHOULD consider taking away firearms simply because they would be sending criminals a written invitation that says "hey nobody can hurt You now"

But the bottom of the bottom lines is the simple fact that the criminal element will ALWAYS have firearms no matter what the gov does to outlaw them, so by taking them away, the goverment is doing 2 thing simutainously.

1. Rewarding the already armed criminal element with easyer prey.

2. Punishing the law abiding citizens by telling them it is no longer their right to protect their own lives.

In no twisted mind can that seem logical and just, yet gun rights activists try to twist it to look like all the hand gun killings are done by john Q public who bought his pistol at a gun store and who would have never kill that poor nun had he not had a gun.

gun rights folks like to dredge up colenbine (sp) as their major anti-gun weapon...well look at colenbine (sp)  those kids had bombs ya know, so lets say that the gov had outlawed ALL guns and that these kids would not have been able to get ANY firearm of any kind, well then they would have just made more bombs and more powerful bombs and probably killed just  as many or more people.. so there.
Another one they like to use is the so called "accidental household shooting" where the kid finds the gun and kills his friend on accident, well folks accidents happen, people die for stupid reasons every day by the thousands, every day hundreds ond hundreds of people are killed by cars accidentally...so why are we not all riding bicycles? cars are obviously dangerous and citizens should not have them because CARS KILL PEOPLE.

Guns in America are here to stay, no matter what the goverment says or anyone else, even if a law was passed that said "give up all personal firearms to the gov" it would never happen. why?

A. the media would immediatly defend the people who own guns and proclaim them just good people who want to protect themselves from criminals.

B. The media would turn the Goverment into Satan and would make the entire nation hate these horrid wretchid overbearing monsters who are stealing peoples right to protect themselves.

C. the gov knows that A and B will for sure happen if they try to take away peoples guns so they will NEVER attempt it.

[Jimdandy]

 

Originally posted by leonid:
It's one thing to own firearms like rifles/shotguns for purposes of hunting, target-shooting, but quite another when there's a demand for handguns and assault rifles for reasons of security.  The rise in ownership of such firearms is an indication of some flaw or degradation in our social system.

I agree that it is a very strange paradox that people in the US feel the need to have a gun. I'm not saying that nothing will ever happen to me that will cause me to need to use my guns in self defense. I am saying that in all of the years I've owned guns (I got my first BB gun at 8 and my first .22 the next year) I've never felt the need to defend myself with one. I will say I feel I have the right to own them. I think it all comes back to a deep need in this country to "feel" like we can take control if things get outta hand. The ability to rise up against the government if it abuses power or to defend your family because you know the police can't be there 24hrs a day. It's the delicate balance of freedom vs police state that keeps this country free. We have an over all well balance system of checks and balances. There is the feeling of insecurity that come with knowing you have great latitude in this country to live as you please. That's what it's all about here. There are risks involved with being able to control your destiny. It's a great responsibility to make the big decisions. But that's what America is all about. The ability to live your life your way with out being able to step all over your neighbor. That also means being able to have control over your personal protection.
I would also like to say that I'm not sure which I'd rather be shot with. The .223cal or 9mm assault rifle that we're allowed to have or the .300 Winchester Magnum "deer rife" we may only be able to have. I put quotes around the deer rife because the dang thing will work just as well on a person.



[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 01-13-2001).]

[Dowding]

 

Please not another gun-control thread, im sick of reading opinons from brits and wherever who dont even live here pissing all over our right to bear arms. I dont mind people from the USA saying it stupid, because they actually live here and think that way from some valid experences that they have had, not some idgit screaming its wrong because some nanny and his professor at the finishing school said that guns are bad and that the barbaric americans have them because they are dumb violent people, this coming from people with hot tea, crazy cows, and bad teeth.

I'm just glad I'm an ocean away from your zenophobic, right-wing, gun-toting racist attitudes, Wobble.

But of course, according to your view-point, anybody who doesn't happen to be American shouldn't really be posting here.

Keep your tools shiny Wobble, those gooks are coming to get ya!

"...its real nice when an american gets kicked out of an american made game on an american service by squeaky gooks."

TheWobble, 11-28-2000




[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 01-13-2001).]

[TheWobble]

I no longer respond to Dowdings crap, all venting will be done on my web page so that You all dont have to suffer him cut and pasting everything I type over and over again.


[This message has been edited by TheWobble (edited 01-14-2001).]

[Frosty1]

Sure guys, let's get an army of idiots in Vermont to all own guns. I'm sure that will help the problem with crime in this country drastically. What a bunch of hugahunks.

------------------
===>Frosty
====>Exposure2k.com
=====>Frosty@exposure2k.com

[Hatman]

My .02 worth.

I carry a concealed weapon 100% of the time outside my home.  I have a permit for it, I'm trained with it and completely confident in its use.  At home, its locked up in a lifejacket with a quick release right next to my bed.  There's a self-defense flashlight right next to it.  I've taught my children about guns to preclude any problems there.

That said, my beliefs are obvious.  What is not so obvious is that I wish I didn't need to carry a weapon.  I am not paranoid but I do live in a high-crime area of a high-crime city and I have a responsiblity, nay, a duty to protect myself and my family.  The police are not there to protect me, that is my job.  You can take my money, take my car, take my house but try, just try to take my child and you will find out what a 40 cal 180 grain hydra shok feels like, just before fade to black.

The fact is that we live in a society where going armed makes sense.  We live in a country where our rights to bear arms are guaranteed at the lowest level.  We live in times where some moron will kill you over your tennis shoes.  Just remember, Hitler was a proponent of gun control too.  You brits, etc ought to be able to relate to that.

I don't like that I have to carry a weapon.  BUT being prepared is far better than being a victim.  Hopefully, I will NEVER have to use my weapon.  Most of my training has involved how to avoid using the weapon so if I paid attention I should be able to spot and avoid trouble.

Having armed citizens makes the predators think twice about attacking.  The uncertainty of the matter is often enough to prevent the crime.

My Glock won't help me against the Government, thats what the vote is for.  But it will stop the madman.  Pray that when the madman comes into your office that there is someone like me there too.  I'll shoot to save your life too.

hatman, out