Vsicks Pathy Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 The lack of movement by anyone in the US to curve the tragedy that is your "right to bare arms" has delivered yet another massacre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Nothing to do with the right to bear arms. Sorry. That right has to do with military and self defense. Criminals are able to get guns whether they are legal or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 6, 2007 Author Share Posted December 6, 2007 Seems to be a catch 22 in play here. You can lawfully get a gun and be a good citizen.... you know, to BARE arms in self defense and the like..... I am just wondering.. At what point does it be come criminal to have the gun, assuming it is a legal weapon and registered to the owner that so desperately wants to exercise his born right to use it? Is it criminal to have a thought, a bad thought that is? Or is it just criminal, and suddenly the guns can be got from any old where, after the shootings occur? Is this the point at which we say, this has nothing to do with the right to BARE arms?? Given that the vast majority of killings are with legally acquired and owned guns, ie by law abiding citizens, I'll bet you $10.00 that Robert Hawkins' weapon was legal. Your not hoping to have the cake and eat it too are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 I don't think it's the "right" that matters. There are many legal guns in Canada as well. We simply don't have the same gun violence, per capita, as the US. There seems to be, among some people, an attitude of "shoot first, ask questions later" that is the real issue. That may stem from fear, or from some other feeling of inadequacy that leads people to feel the NEED to carry, and use a gun. Whether I'm allowed to or not, I'll never carry a weapon. That's my personal choice. I don't see the need, nor do I want the feeling of being a "tough guy" because I'm packing. To be honest, I see most people who use a weapon, or threaten with one, nothing more than a scared child, with no ability to defend themselves otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfisch1191 Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Ever see the movie Red Dawn. if @!*% like that ever happens i dont want to be running around with a Boomerang! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted December 6, 2007 Share Posted December 6, 2007 Seems to be a catch 22 in play here. You can lawfully get a gun and be a good citizen.... you know, to BARE arms in self defense and the like..... I am just wondering.. At what point does it be come criminal to have the gun, assuming it is a legal weapon and registered to the owner that so desperately wants to exercise his born right to use it? Is it criminal to have a thought, a bad thought that is? Or is it just criminal, and suddenly the guns can be got from any old where, after the shootings occur? Is this the point at which we say, this has nothing to do with the right to BARE arms?? Given that the vast majority of killings are with legally acquired and owned guns, ie by law abiding citizens, I'll bet you $10.00 that Robert Hawkins' weapon was legal. Your not hoping to have the cake and eat it too are you? hehehe.. what do you expect at 3am, an English major? it is not a crime to have guns. It is not a crime to have thoughts of blowing away a school full of innocent children. It IS a crime to make those thoughts known and/or to act upon them. 10 minutes from my house, there was a planned school shooting interrupted and stopped. While all the guns that the kid had were legally owned, they were not legally owned by him. His dad has a lot to answer for. as for the rest of the posts in this thread.... play nicely children! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 I don't think it's the "right" that matters. There are many legal guns in Canada as well. We simply don't have the same gun violence, per capita, as the US. There seems to be, among some people, an attitude of "shoot first, ask questions later" that is the real issue. That may stem from fear, or from some other feeling of inadequacy that leads people to feel the NEED to carry, and use a gun. Whether I'm allowed to or not, I'll never carry a weapon. That's my personal choice. I don't see the need, nor do I want the feeling of being a "tough guy" because I'm packing. To be honest, I see most people who use a weapon, or threaten with one, nothing more than a scared child, with no ability to defend themselves otherwise. A little bit of research (it has been done here before) with regard to gun ownership and the amount of guns in the US will show that gun ownership in the US is way out there... Truly off the scale compared with most countries. One could surmise that the more guns in a society the more chance there is for gun related crime. As for the second part of your post, I couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Ever see the movie Red Dawn. if @!*% like that ever happens i dont want to be running around with a Boomerang! A movie? What about WMD for something really scary? Oops, sorry, my bad... That was make believe too wasn't it? But if a movie can scare someone so bad then by all means, arm yourself with every weapon you can think of. See you on the 6 o'clock news one day........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 (edited) A little bit of research (it has been done here before) with regard to gun ownership and the amount of guns in the US will show that gun ownership in the US is way out there... Truly off the scale compared with most countries. One could surmise that the more guns in a society the more chance there is for gun related crime. I agree with that (about the US gun ownership numbers), HOWEVER, my point was that gun ownership isn't the issue, and DOES NOT directly correlate with gun crime in all cases.. For instance... http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/documents/s=401/bcw1187145477862/ Edited December 7, 2007 by Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daftpup Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 I agree with that (about the US gun ownership numbers), HOWEVER, my point was that gun ownership isn't the issue, and DOES NOT directly correlate with gun crime in all cases.. For instance... http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/documents/s=401/bcw1187145477862/ Holy @!*% Simon buddy, gettin right in his kitchen with that one, atta boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 (sitting off to the side waiting to hear that the source Simon provided was slanted/biased) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeV Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 So once @sspipes start running people over with trucks are we going to lose our trucks? or @sspipes start drunk driving & killing many many more than guns; prohibition? It didn't work when they tried... I keep my guns either way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimGreg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 In my opinion not enough people in the US use their guns. To many laws to protect the criminals and criminalize the victims that stop the good people from shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unccpathfinder Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Once again...as in previous gun threads...there are sources in mexico (handguns illegal) where you can get a handgun with serials removed no questions asked exchange on site with cash money in hand...so that right there shows that if all of the firearms in the US were removed...the only ones to be removed would be registered arms and would leave only the illegal guns around and gets you nowhere fast...so its just a part of life...everyone with a decent temper along with other stipulations should be able to obtain a C&C wherever whenever all across the US and when someone thinks about doing something stupid like this they may not do it b/c after the 1st shot or so someone will drop their ass My theory: If your pissed off at the world and want to kill yourself...do it but leave everyone else out of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 (sitting off to the side waiting to hear that the source Simon provided was slanted/biased) You can read more of Don Kates rantings here and make up your own mind. What a nutter! lol. And Carol Hehmeyer doesn't seem that much better. They do both have quite a following with the NRA though. I wonder why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 I agree with that (about the US gun ownership numbers), HOWEVER, my point was that gun ownership isn't the issue, and DOES NOT directly correlate with gun crime in all cases.. For instance... http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/documents/s=401/bcw1187145477862/ No need to shout.... Anyway it was good that you put their opinions forward, but that's just what that was, a couple of people with an opinion. Now how about some facts? Like the death rate that is falling (rapidly too I might add) in SA (is gun control starting to kick in??) or that Australia hasn't had a mass murder since the buy back. There are factual statistics from the other fire arms threads that you may want to look at, or you can go directly to the source. SA will be a good topic for debate.. The crime rates are going up (petty crime with firearms) in some areas, while the murder rates are plummeting? Is that suggesting that less guns available to the populous is depriving murders of the preferred tool? I have not looked into it but it sure sounds interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 So once @sspipes start running people over with trucks are we going to lose our trucks?or @sspipes start drunk driving & killing many many more than guns; prohibition? It didn't work when they tried... I keep my guns either way Are you OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrimGreg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Crossbows are actually a good weapon for a silent hard to trace lethal projectile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfisch1191 Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 A movie? What about WMD for something really scary? Oops, sorry, my bad... That was make believe too wasn't it? But if a movie can scare someone so bad then by all means, arm yourself with every weapon you can think of. See you on the 6 o'clock news one day........... Easy on that movie it brings very good points to the table and it is a REALLY GOOD MOVIE! I also realize we are not going to be invaded by any means without nuclear war or plenty of warning. I also read a short reading on wikipedia about Australia’s gun policies, and I am trying to get this correct before blasting my opinion. You are allowed to have guns if you go threw the correct procedure and for certain purposes ,hunting, target practice ect. You are just saying we have fewer rules on getting guns and in general the American public has more firearms than Australia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 (edited) No need to shout.... Anyway it was good that you put their opinions forward, but that's just what that was, a couple of people with an opinion. Now how about some facts? Like the death rate that is falling (rapidly too I might add) in SA (is gun control starting to kick in??) or that Australia hasn't had a mass murder since the buy back. There are factual statistics from the other fire arms threads that you may want to look at, or you can go directly to the source. SA will be a good topic for debate.. The crime rates are going up (petty crime with firearms) in some areas, while the murder rates are plummeting? Is that suggesting that less guns available to the populous is depriving murders of the preferred tool? I have not looked into it but it sure sounds interesting. First off, I wasn't shouting. My apologies for the mix up. I used capitalization to accentuate important words. SA= South Africa, or South America? I'm thinking South Africa, as they were mentioned in the article I posted. Anywho..... what "facts" are you looking for? I'm in NO way saying that gun control is a bad thing. I'm simply saying that I don't believe gun control, or the lack thereof, is the root of the problem. The argument you make that the death rate is falling in SA, and that Australia hasn't had a mass murder since the buy back are your arguments, not mine. This particular segment of the article I posted rings particularly true.... "For example, though Norway has far and away the highest firearm ownership per capita in Western Europe, it nevertheless has the lowest murder rate. Other nations with high firearms ownership and comparably low murder rates include Denmark, Greece, Switzerland, Germany and Austria. Holland has a 50 percent higher murder rate despite having the lowest rate of firearm ownership in Europe" It's not about the guns. It's about the people holding them. That's all there is to it. For instance, my father owns a number of guns. (Rifles, shotguns etc) I have NEVER....EVER heard him speak of them, let alone have I seen them, except for when I asked to. He does not make any comments about shooting people, or does he ever threaten anyone with a gun. As far as anyone outside myself, and my mother is concerned, he doesn't own a gun. That is the mentality in Norway, Denmark, Greece etc. That is why the murder rate is low. Conversely, many folks, including many here, will talk of their guns, will make comments about how they would, or would not use them. Many folks carry handguns with them for protection. Those are the guns that will be used. The ones owned by the people who carry them along with them, and in general, make firearms an everyday part of their life. It has nothing to do with HOW MANY people have guns, it has to do with WHO has guns. Edited December 7, 2007 by Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclops Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 I'll throw in there that the low levels of violence are in countries that have excellent social services and educational systems......basically the population feels secure.......in Canada there have been shooting rampages etc. ......but nothing like our neighbors to the south Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclops Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 oh right..........something about........ guns don't kill people.........people kill people........maybe the trigger has to be pulled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 You can read more of Don Kates rantings here and make up your own mind. What a nutter! lol. And Carol Hehmeyer doesn't seem that much better. They do both have quite a following with the NRA though. I wonder why. Thanks Steve. I knew you wouldn't let me down. heheheh I'll be sure to check the link later today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vsicks Pathy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Thanks Steve. I knew you wouldn't let me down. hehehehI'll be sure to check the link later today. So you read that article then k9 and came to the same conclusion as I did? Fruit loop or what? That's some pretty demeaning language used there from someone claiming to be an authority on the subject, wouldn't you agree? Seems all that education stands for nothing when you have a narrow mind set or tunnel vision. I mean to say, if he were meant to be writing an objective piece, then why was he so partisan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9sar Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 I'll have to admit, I did have a chuckle. Of course, there are plenty of sources that are further out there. It's tough to weed through the opinions and creatively collected facts (only select those that support your argument) in the media. I try to stay away from the civilian news agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now