Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/14 22:25:26
(permalink)
You guys are completely misunderstanding the question. I'm not talking about different scenarios (i.e. Peewee Herman with a gun vs. Tim McVeigh with a truckload of explosives). I'm talking about Joe Schmo armed vs. Joe Schmo unarmed.
Give a person a gun, and that person's destructive abilities will increase. Yes or no?
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/14 22:30:00
(permalink)
bdickens
Monkey23, you are committing the fallacy of false analogy.
The chances of something falling out of the sky and hitting you are so remote as to be statistically close to zero. The chances of being violently attacked, while still fairly small, are far north of that.
No, Monkey23 made a great point. Fear of attackers makes a person carry a gun. Fear of falling objects makes a person wear a helmet. There's no flaw in that analogy. Probability is irrelevant; the point is that fear causes reactionary behaviour. If he had said Fear of attackers makes a person carry a gun. Fear of falling objects makes the sky blue. That would be a 'false analogy'. BD, what you've done is a False Charge of Fallacy 
post edited by Spaceduck - 2009/10/14 22:52:20
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/14 22:34:00
(permalink)
|
Monkey23
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 848
- Joined: 2007/06/08 11:21:22
- Location: Montreal Canada
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/14 22:53:57
(permalink)
bdickens
The chances of being violently attacked, while still fairly small, are far north of that.
Maybe, but not enough to not make it absurd.
|
bdickens
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 847
- Joined: 2007/09/13 18:14:13
- Location: Hockley, TX
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 06:41:24
(permalink)
Monkey23
bdickens
The chances of being violently attacked, while still fairly small, are far north of that.
Maybe, but not enough to not make it absurd.
Tell that to the victim of a violent attack. There is an absolute flaw in comparing getting attacked with getting hit on the head with something falling out of the sky. Compare the numbers. How many people get hit with random objects out of the sky every millenium vs. the number of people who are attacked every day? One is a very real possibility and the other has a statistical likelihood of zero. I'm not misunderstanding anything. People commit murder with their bare hands. Again, how much more destructive can you get than murder? Do some murderers make their victims more dead somehow because one implement was used instead of another?
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 07:24:05
(permalink)
bdickens
There is an absolute flaw in comparing getting attacked with getting hit on the head with something falling out of the sky. Compare the numbers. How many people get hit with random objects out of the sky every millenium vs. the number of people who are attacked every day?
I take it you didn't bother to read the link I posted explaining False Charge of Fallacy. You're getting obsessed with irrelevant points, such as probability. But, ok, just to get past that, how about comparing A person afraid of getting attacked who carries a gun all the time A person afraid of getting in a car crash who wears a helmet all the time Now do you understand the point? At some point you have to stop being afraid.
I'm not misunderstanding anything. People commit murder with their bare hands. Again, how much more destructive can you get than murder?
Simple: you can kill more people. With your bare hands, there's only so many people you can kill, and they all have to be within armslength. With a gun, that number is tenfold or a hundredfold, and your range extends to hundreds of feet. You can kill the victim, the victim's family, the cops who try to stop you, the paramedics who try to save the cops, and finally yourself. I can't believe you fail to grasp that concept, unless you're being deliberately obtuse for the sake of arguing. Like I said, I'm just trying to help you understand the point you've been missing for the last few pages. Gun control does not seek to end violence; it seeks to diminish the power of violent people.
post edited by Spaceduck - 2009/10/15 07:27:55
|
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 31918
- Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 07:29:10
(permalink)
"The single largest mass murder in US history was comitted on September 11, 2001. Almost 3,000 people were murdered in four seperate but tightly coordinated attacks. Not one single firearm was involved. Talk about magnifying the violent potential! The worst school killing in US history was a bombing. If you want to kill a whole lot of people, explosives are the way to go. Guns are a really poor substitute." Did you read the article Mr Dickens? Mr. Kehoe's final act of violence was using a RIFLE to shoot the bomb assembly in his automobile... thus causing it's ignition. Nice, I don't even have to break out the ol Logic Handbook to send you back to locker room for that one. Got any others? :-)
|
marcos69
Max Output Level: -26 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4950
- Joined: 2004/11/05 21:44:33
- Location: Between my guitar and amp
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 10:00:27
(permalink)
Spaceduck
...Gun control does not seek to end violence; it seeks to diminish the power of violent people.
This is the point gun control advocates miss. Criminals don't give a **** about the law. They will still have guns if law abiding citizens are denied that right.
|
Monkey23
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 848
- Joined: 2007/06/08 11:21:22
- Location: Montreal Canada
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 10:05:46
(permalink)
bdickens
Monkey23
bdickens
The chances of being violently attacked, while still fairly small, are far north of that.
Maybe, but not enough to not make it absurd.
Tell that to the victim of a violent attack.
There is an absolute flaw in comparing getting attacked with getting hit on the head with something falling out of the sky. Compare the numbers. How many people get hit with random objects out of the sky every millenium vs. the number of people who are attacked every day? One is a very real possibility and the other has a statistical likelihood of zero.
Ok, so forget things falling out of the sky, how about people wearing helmets in case they fall and hit their heads? Now I don't know what your violent crime rate is in Houston but it can't be that high as to top the number of serious injuries and/or death that result from accidental head injuries. And yet, you (I'm assuming) do not walk around with a construction hat all day long, thus rendering your reasoning absurd.
|
Monkey23
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 848
- Joined: 2007/06/08 11:21:22
- Location: Montreal Canada
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 10:10:09
(permalink)
And on top of that, even if you were to walk around with a construction hard hat all day long, it would present little danger to the general public. If some deranged postal worker got hold of a hard hat, not much would happen.
Having said that I have personally come to learn from many of you here that guns pose very little threat to the public as well, I'm just saying that as far as a probablilty of something bad happening it doesn't make any sense.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 10:16:55
(permalink)
marcos69
Spaceduck
...Gun control does not seek to end violence; it seeks to diminish the power of violent people.
This is the point gun control advocates miss. Criminals don't give a **** about the law. They will still have guns if law abiding citizens are denied that right.
That's a great point. The same problem exists with drugs. But, as with drugs, it's a start. Authorities need to follow up with tough punishment for any gun related crimes (mandatory 20 years if a gun is found on you during a crime... that should separate the law abiding citizens from the whackos). One way or another, my whole point is that something has to be done to get the guns away from violent people. By your same reasoning, I don't think hardcore criminals will be too scared by a little old lady with a gun--they'll probably just kill her quicker.
|
spacey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8769
- Joined: 2004/05/03 18:53:44
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 10:55:33
(permalink)
I'm not sure what can be learned from all of this but I have my understanding-not based on anything I've read here.
I've been around guns and people with guns all my life.
I live in a country that has states that have different gun laws.
There are people that know about guns and the laws.
There are people that don't know either.
There are different types of guns used for different things.
I can honestly say I've never known anybody (civilian) that carried a gun because they were afraid.
I can honestly say I've never known anybody that carried a gun so they wouldn't be afraid.
I've never known anybody that carried a gun and wore a hard hat because they were afraid.
I have known many people that own guns for a couple of very simple reasons....
They have the legal right to own firearms.
They may have these legal rights extended so they can carry them, concealed or not.
They may obtain different types of legal permits to hunt with firearms.
They have the legal right to protect themselves.
Anybody that has an issue with any of this has an issue with our federal and state laws in the US.
Any other issues would fall under illegal use or possession/purchase of a firearm or weapon.
Pretty simple to me...so what's to be argued?
|
Monkey23
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 848
- Joined: 2007/06/08 11:21:22
- Location: Montreal Canada
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 11:16:08
(permalink)
spacey
I have known many people that own guns for a couple of very simple reasons....
They have the legal right to own firearms.
They may have these legal rights extended so they can carry them, concealed or not.
They may obtain different types of legal permits to hunt with firearms.
They have the legal right to protect themselves.
Anybody that has an issue with any of this has an issue with our federal and state laws in the US.
What does having the legal right have anything to do with it? You also have the legal right not to carry a firearm. So the thing that I don't understand is why anyone would choose to carry a firearm with them on a day to day basis. In a dark alley at night, I understand. On their way to Home Depot on a Saturday afternoon, I don't understand. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that I honestly don't understand. The only reasonable answer I can come up with is that these people are in fact afraid. Otherwise you wouldn't need one. Saying that you have the legal right to carry a firearm is a cop-out and doesn't explain why you would choose to. For the record, I am not pro or anti guns. Guns in my country are not really an issue. Nobody gets into to heated gun control debates up here, so please don't take my posts as argumentative. I am honestly trying to understand the mentality on both sides. There was another thread a couple months ago on the subject and I found it to be informative and enlightening. I also was surprised at how respectful people were to each other on both sides of the issue and am very curious. This is why I'm here.
|
spacey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8769
- Joined: 2004/05/03 18:53:44
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 11:39:13
(permalink)
Monkey23
spacey
I have known many people that own guns for a couple of very simple reasons....
They have the legal right to own firearms.
They may have these legal rights extended so they can carry them, concealed or not.
They may obtain different types of legal permits to hunt with firearms.
They have the legal right to protect themselves.
Anybody that has an issue with any of this has an issue with our federal and state laws in the US.
What does having the legal right have anything to do with it? You also have the legal right not to carry a firearm. So the thing that I don't understand is why anyone would choose to carry a firearm with them on a day to day basis. In a dark alley at night, I understand. On their way to Home Depot on a Saturday afternoon, I don't understand. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that I honestly don't understand. The only reasonable answer I can come up with is that these people are in fact afraid. Otherwise you wouldn't need one. Saying that you have the legal right to carry a firearm is a cop-out and doesn't explain why you would choose to.
For the record, I am not pro or anti guns. Guns in my country are not really an issue. Nobody gets into to heated gun control debates up here, so please don't take my posts as argumentative. I am honestly trying to understand the mentality on both sides. There was another thread a couple months ago on the subject and I found it to be informative and enlightening. I also was surprised at how respectful people were to each other on both sides of the issue and am very curious. This is why I'm here.
Legal right has everything to do with it. It gives people a choice. As you stated, some want to carry one and some don't. That's easy enough for me to understand and is no different than some people may have home security systems and some don't. It's simply a personal choice. People may have many different reasons for carrying and people may reasons for not carrying. Nobody here is capable of answering for all of the people. You either didn't read or didn't understand some of my post. There is no "cop-out". People have the legal right to carry should they choose to do so. I would assume there may be many reasons for a person's choice. If you do not understand that maybe an example would help. Let's say you and your buddies want to go to the firing range across town and target practice with your guns. No problem. If you know the laws and follow them you can carry your firearms to the range and target practice. If you're searching for a reason that people shouldn't be able to function under the firearm legalities, because that's a "cop out" I don't have anything to help you understand. But it's really of no matter anyway other than you not understanding. It won't effect people carrying firearms or the legalities.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 11:54:21
(permalink)
I can't accept the "it's the law, so live with it" angle.
Laws must evolve with the needs of society. When we keep running back to some crusty 200 year old document, it shows we haven't learned anything. The founding fathers never in their wildest dreams would've imagined a common firearm that is capable of spraying a dozen people dead in seconds, or a sniper murdering random people for kicks, or cities so consumed by fear that people shoot through closed doors before asking 'who is it'.
If, in your experience, guns have never posed a threat, that's cool. But try living in a major American city where your perception would change dreadfully. These are the people that need gun control.
We make compromises to our liberty every day for the sake of the common good. Sure, it bothers me that I can no longer take a pair of nail clippers on an airplane, but I can live with it. So would it really trouble you if gun control laws were more strict, for the sake of protecting your fellow Americans in the cities?
|
Monkey23
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 848
- Joined: 2007/06/08 11:21:22
- Location: Montreal Canada
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 12:39:32
(permalink)
spacey
Monkey23
spacey
I have known many people that own guns for a couple of very simple reasons....
They have the legal right to own firearms.
They may have these legal rights extended so they can carry them, concealed or not.
They may obtain different types of legal permits to hunt with firearms.
They have the legal right to protect themselves.
Anybody that has an issue with any of this has an issue with our federal and state laws in the US.
What does having the legal right have anything to do with it? You also have the legal right not to carry a firearm. So the thing that I don't understand is why anyone would choose to carry a firearm with them on a day to day basis. In a dark alley at night, I understand. On their way to Home Depot on a Saturday afternoon, I don't understand. I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that I honestly don't understand. The only reasonable answer I can come up with is that these people are in fact afraid. Otherwise you wouldn't need one. Saying that you have the legal right to carry a firearm is a cop-out and doesn't explain why you would choose to.
For the record, I am not pro or anti guns. Guns in my country are not really an issue. Nobody gets into to heated gun control debates up here, so please don't take my posts as argumentative. I am honestly trying to understand the mentality on both sides. There was another thread a couple months ago on the subject and I found it to be informative and enlightening. I also was surprised at how respectful people were to each other on both sides of the issue and am very curious. This is why I'm here.
Legal right has everything to do with it. It gives people a choice. As you stated, some want to carry one and some don't.
That's easy enough for me to understand and is no different than some people may have home security systems and some don't. It's simply a personal choice.
People may have many different reasons for carrying and people may reasons for not carrying.
Nobody here is capable of answering for all of the people.
You either didn't read or didn't understand some of my post. There is no "cop-out". People have the legal right to carry should they choose to do so. I would assume there may be many reasons for a person's choice. If you do not understand that maybe an example would help. Let's say you and your buddies want to go to the firing range across town and target practice with your guns. No problem. If you know the laws and follow them you can carry your firearms to the range and target practice.
If you're searching for a reason that people shouldn't be able to function under the firearm legalities, because that's a "cop out" I don't have anything to help you understand. But it's really of no matter anyway other than you not understanding. It won't effect people carrying firearms or the legalities.
This is an explanation. Just saying "because we have the legal right to" without further explaining your position is a cop-out. Not that you owed me or anyone else here anything, so I appreciate you explaining further.
|
bdickens
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 847
- Joined: 2007/09/13 18:14:13
- Location: Hockley, TX
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 12:53:32
(permalink)
Spaceduck
Gun control does not seek to end violence; it seeks to diminish the power of violent people.
Wrong. Gun control isn't about guns, it is about control.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:03:11
(permalink)
bdickens
Spaceduck
Gun control does not seek to end violence; it seeks to diminish the power of violent people.
Wrong. Gun control isn't about guns, it is about control.
So what you're saying is that these go to 11.
|
spacey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8769
- Joined: 2004/05/03 18:53:44
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:17:47
(permalink)
Spaceduck
I can't accept the "it's the law, so live with it" angle.
Laws must evolve with the needs of society. When we keep running back to some crusty 200 year old document, it shows we haven't learned anything. The founding fathers never in their wildest dreams would've imagined a common firearm that is capable of spraying a dozen people dead in seconds, or a sniper murdering random people for kicks, or cities so consumed by fear that people shoot through closed doors before asking 'who is it'.
If, in your experience, guns have never posed a threat, that's cool. But try living in a major American city where your perception would change dreadfully. These are the people that need gun control.
We make compromises to our liberty every day for the sake of the common good. Sure, it bothers me that I can no longer take a pair of nail clippers on an airplane, but I can live with it. So would it really trouble you if gun control laws were more strict, for the sake of protecting your fellow Americans in the cities?
Not being able to accept something is a personal issue. I don't know if there is anything I could offer that would help you with that. Maybe if you changed the way you look at it..."it's the law, so live with it"...to how it is..."it's the laws so people have freedom of choice". You're making assumptions that I never lived in a major city. Your telling me about how people were and what they may think from 200 years ago....?? Ok...whatever you think. You question gun controls and needing to be more strict...how strict are they now and how or what would you do to make them stricter? "for the sake of protecting my Americans in the cities?" Would I be troubled? I can't answer that because I don't know what you're talking about. I think it's safe to say that I won't be troubled anytime soon by gun control laws if ever. Really confused me to with that gun that could spraying dozens of people...what gun are you talking about? What confuses me most about all this...I feel like some may think everything's going to change after this thread. I don't think they should give driving license to people without them passing an I.Q. test and a driving test. And if they got in a car with a cell phone it would blow up and spray them and the car with a puke green paint that smelled like road kill skunk that had to wear off...........prolly ain't gonna happen. If I "can't accept it"...tuff. What's a guy to do? You don't drive and talk on cell phone at the same time do you? Better not.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:35:07
(permalink)
Spacey, I wasn't making any digs at you personally; it just appeared from your lack of exposure to gun-toting paranoiacs that you haven't spent any time in the Bronx. No need to get defensive.
|
bdickens
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 847
- Joined: 2007/09/13 18:14:13
- Location: Hockley, TX
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:39:39
(permalink)
Spaceduck
I can't accept the "it's the law, so live with it" angle.
Laws must evolve with the needs of society. When we keep running back to some crusty 200 year old document, it shows we haven't learned anything. The founding fathers never in their wildest dreams would've imagined a common firearm that is capable of spraying a dozen people dead in seconds, or a sniper murdering random people for kicks, or cities so consumed by fear that people shoot through closed doors before asking 'who is it'.
If, in your experience, guns have never posed a threat, that's cool. But try living in a major American city where your perception would change dreadfully. These are the people that need gun control.
We make compromises to our liberty every day for the sake of the common good. Sure, it bothers me that I can no longer take a pair of nail clippers on an airplane, but I can live with it. So would it really trouble you if gun control laws were more strict, for the sake of protecting your fellow Americans in the cities?
Interesting. Is the Constitution "some crusty 200 year old document" when it comes to you being able to pop off at the mouth, or if the police want to ransack your house or car?
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:47:53
(permalink)
bdickens
Is the Constitution "some crusty 200 year old document" when it comes to you being able to pop off at the mouth, or if the police want to ransack your house or car?
On freedom of speech, yes. Once again, the founding fathers didn't anticipate some of the vile, hateful, incendiary things people would be perpetrating under that banner. And about protection from police ransacking my car, presuming you're referring to the 14th amendment, that bit was added 120 years after the original Constitution, thus proving my point that our nation's laws must continually evolve over time. Subsequent refinements of "illegal search & seizure" continue, the most recent being last April. Thanks for proving my point. As Mike said earlier, back to the locker room with ya, Mr. Dickens!
|
spacey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8769
- Joined: 2004/05/03 18:53:44
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:53:41
(permalink)
I wasn't being defensive my friend. I didn't take anything personally. I thought you posted "talking" to me. I was responding best I knew how to a concern of your's. I thought the green paint would let you know there are people that have the same feelings about different issues. Spaceduck I don't carry a gun. I own pistols and rifles and shotguns. I quit hunting about 5 years ago. I killed everything I shot with one shot and everything I killed I ate. (with the help of family and friends). For some reason the last whitetail I shot gave me a horrible feeling. I didn't understand why. I didn't question it for long either. I have not fired a gun since. I keep them safely at home for protection if I need to protect my family. It would be horrible to have to take a life protecting loved ones or ones shelf. I hope my guns never fire another shot. My wife carries a pistol when we go on long trips. It is our right by law to have these choices. I don't want to see them taken away. Of course I don't like crazy people having guns but I don't have the answers...that's why we call them crazy people. If we got rid of crazy people and still had guns sounds alright to me. Sure not belittling your concerns....just responding and sharing my thoughts, with good intentions. Michael
post edited by spacey - 2009/10/15 13:55:06
|
bdickens
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 847
- Joined: 2007/09/13 18:14:13
- Location: Hockley, TX
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:54:47
(permalink)
That would be the Fourth Amendment. Added at the time the original doccument was adopted. Don't try to play Constitutional Scholar with me. Go do some reading; you might learn something. Vile, hateful and incindiary language is nothing new. It existed long before the eighteenth century.
|
Philip
Max Output Level: -34.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4062
- Joined: 2007/03/21 13:09:13
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 13:55:13
(permalink)
Are guns and nuks dangerous (necessary?) evils?
How deadly do you/I want them to be? Or do you/I want to stop/prevent the s!n, transgression, murder, etc.
Please elaborate more pol!tic&lly and/or rel!g!ously.
In sum:
A man has natural (God-given rel!g!ous) rights and constitutional (pol!tic&l) rights to protect oneself from the s!nner(s), wacko(s), divorce judges, doctors, emos (myself), deer-hunters, rednecks, punks, sports-idolaters, etc.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 14:04:42
(permalink)
bdickens
That would be the Fourth Amendment. Added at the time the original doccument was adopted. Don't try to play Constitutional Scholar with me.
P'raps someone needs to. There were 17 more amendments added after the Bill of Rights you know, the most recent in 1992. You're saying we should ignore all of these, go back to 1787, wigs and white leotards? You first.
|
Spaceduck
Max Output Level: -50.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2499
- Joined: 2004/12/29 12:51:03
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 14:12:37
(permalink)
Hey Spacey, I'm really sorry I think I confused you with the other fella who is getting somewhat defensive. Your points are well taken, and I think you alluded to it earlier: gun laws should depend on the region, since there is no blanket solution for the whole country. To a certain degree, we're seeing that in places of high risk like airports & places of public assembly. Maybe all of Manhattan should become one of those zones  The problem would definitely be solved by getting rid of the crazies, but I'm afraid that would mean me!
|
No How
Max Output Level: -23.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5180
- Joined: 2006/05/02 11:56:01
- Location: the boogie-woogie Isles
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 15:13:02
(permalink)
The issue, for me, has nothing to do with laws. I just can't fathom a million people walking around with concealed hand guns in the flow and fury of society. I can not count on ONE hand enough people who I would deem mature/balanced enough to carry a gun around in public on a regular basis. (BTW..this is not aimed at anyone on this forum as all the gun toters in this thread seem to be fine and sturdy humans...i'm just saying, up close, everyone I know is whacko...essentially) When I was sixteen my uncle would get me to drive him all over the state of Michagan so he could drink from bar to bar. He had an arsenal in his trunk. 45's, 22's Lugers/ ...he loved to have an excuse to pull one out and 'show off'. Every time he came over to our house we all took cover...."Uncle D is here...RUNNNN!!!!!!....of course i'm not kidding. These were legal. He (and i do love him) still has that arsenal in his trunk and he's 77 years old. I don't drive him around anymore as i drive other eccentric types around now....my wifey and kiddies. I put my foot down and forbid hand guns if I'm going to be their chaufeur. So far so good.... I guess I've been hanging with the crazies too long.
post edited by No How - 2009/10/15 15:45:00
s o n g s – Beauty lodged in a bad hotel has no value. Raymond Lull
|
bdickens
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 847
- Joined: 2007/09/13 18:14:13
- Location: Hockley, TX
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 15:41:17
(permalink)
What I'm saying is that if you think that some crusty 200-year-old doccument doesn't suit you any more there is a mechanism in place for changing it. It's been done 27 times already. What would number 28 hurt? Guess what? There's already millions of people carrying handguns around legally. Has one of them hurt you yet? 48 different states have a better opinion of your fellow man than you do. I find it telling that the anti rights crowd loves to use prejudicial language against people they disagree with, calling them wackos, paranoid, crazies. Here's some pop psychology for you: projection issues.
|
StudioCat57
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 209
- Joined: 2008/01/15 10:51:26
- Location: Northern Virginia
- Status: offline
Re:My Morning...and a punk...
2009/10/15 16:23:14
(permalink)
Been around guns all my life...Grew up military and most all in the family served...
In virginia, carry conceal permits are available, so I have one...Fairfax County, where I reside, we have around 10% or so carrying firearms legally... with over a million citizens...Thats a lot of guys/gals carrying guns!!!
Means in a big line at a KMart or McDonalds, 1 in 10 are probably carrying...I like those odds...
Bet that scares a lot of anti-gunners!!!! But you know what...I personally don't care if it bothers anti-gunners or not...
We don't have high crime here but step across the river to D.C. and its the wild west....
Proud to carry!!! And proud it's an american product!!! Kimber .45...
I practice presentations almost everyday and can clear from conceal from the small of the back and put 2 down range in the 10 ring of a B-1 target in under 1 second with a Pact timer...
You gotta love that!!!
P-4 3.0ghz- 3 gigs ram Sonar 6.021 Producer DM-3200 Motu 2408mk3 Lots of VST's
|