Gun Owners:

[alkemyst]

Here's the freaking deal.

Gun ownership is #1 setup to allow the civilians to live without fear of being coerced into military rule. Problem is america has become passive calling those that own guns the *problem*. I hate to say this but I really feel perhaps not in my lifetime but soon that the proverbial 'sh!t is going to hit the fan'. The world is approaching the boiling point and the civilians here are approaching numbness.

Owning a gun as an individual may mean a whole different thing though that protection from tyranny...and that's OK...that is part of being free.

Yes...many people end up failing to use their firearm properly and end one of their own family's existance...well you know what? People walk out in front of cars too everyday...American wants to protect the idiots by taking away our freedoms. That is BS.

And yes, perhaps you get mugged without your weapon, or you get cornered in your home and the gun is in another room....oh well, somewhere there is another person that hears their front door kicked in and now has armed themselves and can lie in wait and end a criminal's life here. The F'd up part is there is hundreds of people that will rally and say the homeowner was WRONG to kill the guy even though he was armed as well and has a mile long rap sheet because he is just trying to feed his family.

And then you have those so freaking scared of life that they arm themselves to the teeth and end up blasting half their home away one night along with their dog....what can you do.

I do not own a gun right now as I can't honestly say I trust my wife nor people around me with one. I have had a gun pointed at me, I have been shot at in traffic, people talk about drama...it's a miracle I made it to 33. Once I own a home and can secure that I will then bring a weapon or two into that. I have already begun taking my wife to shooting ranges to accustom her to a weapon and the power behind it. I think every american should have a basic gun training course....I think it would demystify the whole thing.

 

[BadNewsBears]

And your going to take away favorite past times of millions of people. I would die for my rights before some a#swhole came and took them away. You people really don't remember how this country was started do you.NO ONE WILL TAKE MY OR ANYONE ELSES FREEDOM AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[1sikbITCH]

Why don't you go ask the Democrats why they keep letting all these dangerous people back on the streets so I have to get a gun to protect myself. They want to release all the criminals, and then take all the guns away from us law abiding citizens so those criminals will be the only ones with guns.

To hell with that. I live in East Baltimore City. My neighborhood isn't exactly Beruit circa 1982, but we have our share of home invasions, rapes, and murders. If you think you can just beat them all up when the door comes crashing down, or when they surround you on your way to your car, you're an idiot.

You'd better be packing something

 

[1sikbITCH]

Holy cow I thought this thread was only 2 pages long. I was replying to something that problebly got posted 3 months ago

Nevermind

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
Let me ask this of the gun owners here that say they own a gun for protection. Where do you keep this gun?

Being the typical irresponsible gun owner, I keep mine in a Gun Vault in my nightstand. I also have a gun safe for the long guns.

Then that's practically useless for protection. If somebody was to home invade your house, would you have time to unlock your vault and load your gun before you were surrounded? More than likely they would sneak into the house, or knock on the door and rush in while you first answered it. You said in another post guns are the great equalizer, they are, IF you can get to it in time. A granny with a gun in her purse, won't have time to use it if somebody comes up to them... a woman won't have time to grab her gun if somebody wanted to rape her, since most jump women from behind then force their way onto them.

Sorry you feel that way, it's actually worked well for me 2X. It only takes a moment or 2 & I have a spring loaded door pop open & a locked & loaded handgun... I'm thinking of getting a couple for my cars.

So I should keep a loaded gun laying around with children in my home?

Your logic sucks, you're obviously anti gun, my safety measures according to you preculde my use of a gun as a defense weapon, so nobody wins but you...

OK...

You are so wrong. I'm not anti gun at all. I'm just being realistic here. The gun is useless if it's locked up or in a bag... tell me your story of how you've used it twice. And how having a gun in your car will help you? If somebody comes to the driver side while you're at a red light and points a gun at your face and tells you to get out, how the hell are you going to get the gun? Even if it's under your seat, let alone locked up... and how locked up is it really if it only takes a moment or two to get to it?

I don't see why people think they need to lock up their guns.... I grew up in a house full of guns, and I respected them.

Guns are useful in self defense largely because your average criminal isn't expecting resistance, and they aren't planning on shooting you. So a quick draw will catch a crook totally by suprise. Besides, it's better to die fighting than to die in submission.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Do you answer your door everytime with a gun in your hand? Do you stop by a redlight with a gun in your lap all the time?

Nope, guess you win.

Hmm, you know, I read this and thought to myself that no I don't answer the door everytime with a gun in my hand and I don't stop by a redlight with a gun in my lap but I have had experiences in my life when I damn well did need to have a gun in my lap at a red light. I lived in Los Angeles during the riots in the early 90s. I had to drive down La Cienega Blvd through areas that were being looted and were under no lawful control whatsoever. I had a gun in my lap and thankfully I never had to use it. I was glad I had it though. So, fvck anyone who asks this question.

Yes, I need to own guns. I really do believe this. I've experienced first hand a complete breakdown of society. I hope I never have to experience it again but if I do I will at least have some way to defend my life and my family. This is perhaps the best reason to own guns.

 

[cain]

right.... people love guns. i love guns, i like to shoot at targets.

 

[Fingers]

my sig explains my opinion on the matter.

 

[slurmsmackenzie]

to quote krusty:
to keep the king of england out of your face.

 

[cucumber]

Target shooting is fun. Also for defense purposes. I'm not saying that I live (or gun owners, I don't have one, but that's more a money issue....) in a state of fear, but it's not a bad idea to be able to defend yourself. Of course the gun owner should take proper precautions around kids and learns to be decently proficient at using a gun. Owning a gun does bring on more responsabilities than not having one.

When it comes down to it, the vast majority of people will never need a gun, but if by chance you do, you'll be a hell of a lot better off for having one.

It's kind of like insurance. Most likely you're not going to have a serious illness, or car wreck, but if you do it's a damned good thing to have insurance.

 

[Xenon14]

Originally posted by: Hardcore

What is your point? People get killed by cars, carelessly, ought we outlaw cars too? Perhaps we shouldn't develop medicinal drugs b/c some people overdose on it. If a person wants to buy a gun, he has the right to do it. Owning a gun is not illegal, owning a car isn't illegal. Killing someone is illegal, regardless of whether or not you use a gun or a #2 pencil. If a person shoots himself by accident, what your point? Accidents happen, with chainsaws, cars, guns, planes, etc... You're using emotional appeal to argue your point. Your string of logic is this: A) Dieing is Bad. B) People Die from Guns C) Therefore guns are bad. Completely ignoring any real logic.

And what fvck kind of logic are you following? My premise is purely statistical. There will always be a certain number of accidents with a certain number of guns. Increase the number of guns, and you increase the number of accidents. Now the point i was trying to make, was that guns is something that we can live without. Can you live without cars? I suppose we can, but that'll affect almost every single part of society. But can we live without guns? MANY societies do. Some people can recreate on crack just fine and not become addicted or ruin their lives... but we know that a lot of people can't, and we balance it with the fact that they really shouldn't need to, so it gets banned and criminalized.

Now people will say that guns do become a necessity, because they need to protect themselves. The point i was making was that guns isn't as useful for protection as people think, because in the vast majority of cases, they would never get to it in time anyways. So guns isn't such a helpful means of protection at all... but it's chance of becoming a liability is still there... and the more guns that are around, the greater the chances of there being an accident, but the greater number of guns doesn't really produce as much protection as people think.

THe only person glamorizing anythign here is you. Consider the following:

Scenerio A: Guns are LEGAL. Criminals (people that break the law) and average Citizens (people that abide by the law) have guns.

Scenerio B: Guns are ILLEGAL. Criminals still have guns (they break the law). Average Citizens don't (they abide by the law).

Result: Outlawing guns only removes guns from law-abiding citizens and promotes an environmnet that is conducive to criminal activity by placing more power in the hands of the criminals.

You're assuming people in Scenario A will always have the gun on them and ready at the time of being a victim. They don't, so Scenario A is closer to Scenario B than you think, so where's the helpfulness in that? True, some people are able to protect themselves in time, but is it enough to justify it? I'm sure those who were able to will say it was, and i know if i'm a victim of a crime, i would like to think i was able to defend myself... but you have to look at the overall picture... which is there is hundreds of millions of guns out there, and yet how many of them can really be used successfully in defense? And how many of those guns get lost in the closet, forgotten, or misplaced?

The Canadian laws are FAR from perfect, but they do have certain good points. 1) you require a license, which requires passing a test (for handguns, there's actually two license and two exams you need to pass... there's two parts to the exam, a written exam, and a practical part that requires you to handle 3 different firearms) to acquire. 2) all guns must be registered to you to own it, so it becomes your responsibility. You can't sell it to a shady person, you can't pass it on to somebody else without the proper registration following it. So losing, misplacing, or forgetting about a gun can get you in trouble.

No.

I'm not assuming either or. All I'm saying is what the law ends up doing. Guns are illegal so are drugs... both are rampant in this country. You keep on bringing up "statistics", yet I do not understand how you are devoid of statistics that show that MOST CRIMINALS POSSESS GUNS ILLEGALLY.

Moreover, you are confused as to the basis of gun legality. The question is not whether or not a person that has a gun can access it quickly enough to defend themselves. That's irrelevant. The question is whether or not they can own a gun regardless of how fast they can handle it or how accurately they shoot it.

The answer is there is nothing wrong with gun ownership. WHY? B/c things become illegal when one person's right/ability to do what he wants interferes with the rights/ability of another person to do what they want. IE> You shooting me interferes w/ me wanting to live. Therefore, you can do whatever u want with your gun so long as you don't violate anyone else's right to do what they want.

Sadly, you do not understand what "rights" are. A right to freedom of speech, for instance, exists so that regardless of whether or not what you say is true or false you have the right to say it (you in no way violate anyone's rights whether or not what you speak is true or false). Similarly, gun ownership has NOTHING to do with killing someone. As I stated earlier it is just as illegal to kill someone with a #2 pencil as it is with a gun.

Secondly, I still do not understand how you justify how fast a person can access a gun vs. the legality of gun ownership. That's like saying since police can't always reach the crime scene in time or that the ambulance can't reach teh wounded in time to save them they're pointless and "statistically" should be illegal.

You're referance to Canada does not address my point at all. (Drugs are illegal, they are still sold. Same as guns. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean it doesn't happen, in fact it does... illegally!) And stop making blanket statements. Again, address my logic instead of passifying it:

There are only 2 types of scenerios either guns are legal or they are not. IN BOTH SCENERIOS, Criminials have guns!!! Why do you insist on taking guns away from law abiding citizens???

Also keep in mind this: Neccesity has NOTHING to do with legality. Laws exist for the purpose of protecting individual rights from others... so that even though your computer and car may not be necessary to you for your survival, I cannot take it from you b/c it is yours. It's called property rights. Most property, good sir, is not neccesary.

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
Let me ask this of the gun owners here that say they own a gun for protection. Where do you keep this gun?

Being the typical irresponsible gun owner, I keep mine in a Gun Vault in my nightstand. I also have a gun safe for the long guns.

Then that's practically useless for protection. If somebody was to home invade your house, would you have time to unlock your vault and load your gun before you were surrounded? More than likely they would sneak into the house, or knock on the door and rush in while you first answered it. You said in another post guns are the great equalizer, they are, IF you can get to it in time. A granny with a gun in her purse, won't have time to use it if somebody comes up to them... a woman won't have time to grab her gun if somebody wanted to rape her, since most jump women from behind then force their way onto them.

Sorry you feel that way, it's actually worked well for me 2X. It only takes a moment or 2 & I have a spring loaded door pop open & a locked & loaded handgun... I'm thinking of getting a couple for my cars.

So I should keep a loaded gun laying around with children in my home?

Your logic sucks, you're obviously anti gun, my safety measures according to you preculde my use of a gun as a defense weapon, so nobody wins but you...

OK...

What the hell are you talking about? His logic is perfectly sound and you confirmed it. You had a gun that was quick to grab and it was ready to fire. He's reffering to keeping a gun locked up in a safe and unloaded. In a bad situation speed is critical. A person can not defend themselves if the gun is locked away in the safe (not to mention trigger locks...) and unloaded.

Think about it. There are some states with laws stating a gun must have a trigger lock, be locked in a safe, and unloaded. When reacting to a serious situation is ther really time to get the keys, open the safe, open the trigger lock, then get the bullets and load the gun?

As for having a loaded gun around children... That is a serious issue and up to the parents. There's really no easy answer to this.

I'm my experience it seems that teaching the kids how the gun works and how dangerous it is is the best way to go (if you choose to have one. I'm not saying everyone should have a gun) If the kid understands how the gun works and how to use it there will be no accidental deaths from playing with guns. The mystique and coolness of guns will not exist if the kid knows all about it. Also the kid must understand how dangerous a gun is. If a kid respects guns and understands the horror they are capable of, the kid will know better than to mess with one.

As a kid I always knew exactly how to use a gun, and how dangerous they can be. Because of this the gun was never a cool new toy I found in the house. It was just another boring everyday thing I had no interest in. (lilke the stove, kitchen knives ...etc...)

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: Xenon14
Scenerio A: Guns are LEGAL. Criminals (people that break the law) and average Citizens (people that abide by the law) have guns.

Scenerio B: Guns are ILLEGAL. Criminals still have guns (they break the law). Average Citizens don't (they abide by the law).

Result: Outlawing guns only removes guns from law-abiding citizens and promotes an environmnet that is conducive to criminal activity by placing more power in the hands of the criminals.

absolutely.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
Let me ask this of the gun owners here that say they own a gun for protection. Where do you keep this gun?

Being the typical irresponsible gun owner, I keep mine in a Gun Vault in my nightstand. I also have a gun safe for the long guns.

Then that's practically useless for protection. If somebody was to home invade your house, would you have time to unlock your vault and load your gun before you were surrounded? More than likely they would sneak into the house, or knock on the door and rush in while you first answered it. You said in another post guns are the great equalizer, they are, IF you can get to it in time. A granny with a gun in her purse, won't have time to use it if somebody comes up to them... a woman won't have time to grab her gun if somebody wanted to rape her, since most jump women from behind then force their way onto them.

Sorry you feel that way, it's actually worked well for me 2X. It only takes a moment or 2 & I have a spring loaded door pop open & a locked & loaded handgun... I'm thinking of getting a couple for my cars.

So I should keep a loaded gun laying around with children in my home?

Your logic sucks, you're obviously anti gun, my safety measures according to you preculde my use of a gun as a defense weapon, so nobody wins but you...

OK...

You are so wrong. I'm not anti gun at all. I'm just being realistic here. The gun is useless if it's locked up or in a bag... tell me your story of how you've used it twice. And how having a gun in your car will help you? If somebody comes to the driver side while you're at a red light and points a gun at your face and tells you to get out, how the hell are you going to get the gun? Even if it's under your seat, let alone locked up... and how locked up is it really if it only takes a moment or two to get to it?

I don't see why people think they need to lock up their guns.... I grew up in a house full of guns, and I respected them.

Guns are useful in self defense largely because your average criminal isn't expecting resistance, and they aren't planning on shooting you. So a quick draw will catch a crook totally by suprise. Besides, it's better to die fighting than to die in submission.

Stupid Texas laws:

Does Texas have a criminal statute on making a firearm accessible to a child?
Yes. Section 46.13 of the Texas Penal Code addresses this issue. The law went into effect on September 1, 1995.

A person commits an offense under the statute if a child gains access to a readily dischargeable firearm and the person, with criminal negligence:
(1) failed to secure the firearm; or
(2) left the firearm in a place to which the person knew or should have known the child would gain access.

Under this statute a "child" is someone under the age of seventeen (§46.13(a)(1)).

Remember that under §46.01 of the Penal Code a "firearm" includes shotguns, rifles and handguns. A "readily accessible firearm" is one that is loaded with ammunition-even if the ammo is in a magazine and there is no round in the chamber (§46.13(a)(2)).

One "secures" a readily accessible firearm by taking the steps a reasonable person would take to prevent access by a child including, but not limited to, placing the firearm in a locked container or temporarily rendering the firearm inoperable through a trigger lock or other means.

There are four affirmative defenses to this section. An affirmative defense is one on which the Defendant has the burden of proof at trial. The affirmative defenses are that the child's access to the firearm:
(1) was supervised by a person older than 18 years of age and was for hunting, sporting, or other lawful purposes;
(2) consisted of lawful defense by the child of people or property;
(3) was gained by entering property in violation of this code; or
(4) occurred during a time when the actor was engaged in an agricultural enterprise.


If the child is killed when the firearm is discharged, and the Defendant is a family member, the police must wait seven days after the offense before arresting the Defendant.

46.13

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: cucumber


What the hell are you talking about? His logic is perfectly sound and you confirmed it. You had a gun that was quick to grab and it was ready to fire. He's reffering to keeping a gun locked up in a safe and unloaded. In a bad situation speed is critical. A person can not defend themselves if the gun is locked away in the safe (not to mention trigger locks...) and unloaded.

I beg to differ, he was quoting me, and referring specifically to the Gun Vault link I posted, said it wasn't fast tnough, then claimed it was not a safe manner to store guns in a later post, when he saw how quickly it could be accessed.

I went to a lot of gun shows before I bought the Gun Vault & it seems like the best compormise for my situation, we have children, yet I want quick access if I need it.

More than one person has bought a Gun Vault as a result of my links in OT

I don't pimp for a lot of stuff, but the Gun Vault is one I'll pimp for all day long

As far as the readiness thing, my dad had one of the coolest setups I ever saw, he had a cabinet built above the front door for his shotgun, it was an easy reach to grab the shotgun in the middle of the night if you had to come to the front door.

I have answered my front door with a gun in my hand, lived out in the sticks, had a knock in the middle of the night, 2 guys wanted to use my phone. Had a gun in one hand & my cordless phone in the other, offered them the cordless phone & they declined & walked away... I called the sheriff & they got picked up, never did hear what happened to them, but they sure as hell didn't have a broken down car like they claimed.

Further, my CCW permit allows me to carry in my car & I'd put a gun in my lap if we had LA type riots.

Originally posted by: 1sikbITCH
Holy cow I thought this thread was only 2 pages long. I was replying to something that problebly got posted 3 months ago

LOL, I know, this thread is only 5 days old though... Started 06/15/2004 03:23 PM

Gun threads grow quickly/get long in OT

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: 1sikbITCH
Why don't you go ask the Democrats why they keep letting all these dangerous people back on the streets so I have to get a gun to protect myself. They want to release all the criminals, and then take all the guns away from us law abiding citizens so those criminals will be the only ones with guns.

To hell with that. I live in East Baltimore City. My neighborhood isn't exactly Beruit circa 1982, but we have our share of home invasions, rapes, and murders. If you think you can just beat them all up when the door comes crashing down, or when they surround you on your way to your car, you're an idiot.

You'd better be packing something

They don't want to let criminals out. (why does this stuff always turn into demo/rep battles)...the thing is I am sure you aren't volunteering more land in your neighborhood for a new prison and I am sure you'd probably be one of the first to bitch when someone want's to raise your taxes to help pay for the construction of it on top of that. Then there is the yearly maintenance and keep of the prisoners requiring more taxes.

They are not releasing the violent ones first, they are early releasing or bypassing prison with a probation sentence/house arrest for the non-violent theft type or nuisance type offenses.

And of course if you have to live in a ghetto that sucks, but you are also going to be in the heart of where all the criminals usually are living or planning their life into crime and you could be their practice run. This is one of those examples where money can solve alot of problems.

 

[alkemyst]

all you guys talking about growing up around guns know we aren't talking airsoft right?

Also answering a door with a gun in one hand and the phone in the other to let someone use it is probably the most obvious reason they decided not to use it.

Not hearing about it later on probably means they were found not to be criminals after they got picked up...fortunately they probably got the help they needed.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Wait a minuet - didnt you people watch that spliced mockumentary hit piece by Michael Moore attacking guns? Wasnt that supposed to give you the TRUTH?! :roll:

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
all you guys talking about growing up around guns know we aren't talking airsoft right?

Also answering a door with a gun in one hand and the phone in the other to let someone use it is probably the most obvious reason they decided not to use it.

Naw, I only opened the door 1/2 way & offered them the cordless, when they declined, I bumped it open the rest of the way with my leg after they turned down the cordless phone & they saw I had a gun in the other hand, it was a POS S&W Sigma .40 that had a tendancy to fail to feed, really glad I didn't have to use it, damn thing would prob have malfunctioned & I was carrying it in my left hand.

The sheriff's dept did come out & picked the guys up off the road after they left & started walking down the highway, they weren't sure what they were up to either, but the dispatcher did say they didn't transport them to a broken down vehicle, wouldn't tell me anything else & I didn't follow up either. The guys looked like they were sleeping in the woods or something.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Isshinryu

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Yes, cars and knives kills people... but can we function in society without cars and knives? Guns we can put away, and function just fine. Look at countries like Australia and UK that pretty much banned personal gun ownership completely. They're doing just fine... and if there's a country that should be worried about a king coming back into power and taking away their rights, it would be the UK!

Please don't talk about gun violence, or any other type of violence, in the UK. You are not fit to comment. England may be fine, but Northern Ireland is a hell-hole.

And why's that? Partly because there's more guns up in Northern Ireland maybe?

Read my earlier posts. Violent crime in the UK is up nearly 100% since they banned guns. Most of the population will fall victim to more than one violent crime in their lifetime. Self defense is illegal in England, you are supposed to let the criminal do whatever they want. Hitting a criminal with a baseball bat will land YOU in jail.

Yes i've heard of that argument before, and have heard it about Canada as well. The theory goes, if people are allowed to have guns, then criminals will be less likely to commit crimes because they'll be afraid that people have guns. That could be it, or it could be because people in Canada and England are more trusting of their police, and when a crime happens, they're more likely to call the police and report the crime. I remember reading somewhere that at least 25% of all convenience store robberies in the US don't get reported... why's that they said? When they asked the store owners, they said the cops couldn't do anything anyways, more often than not they can't catch the criminal, and even if they could, they never get their money back... but there's once thing they could count on after reporting the crime, is their insurance will go up.

Also in Canada and England, the minority and immigration community are more likely to trust the police than those minority communities in the US. They hear about the racism in the police, they hear about the Rodney King's and stuff. So if something happens within the community, they're less likely to report to the police or cooperate with the police. Do you think if a Latino in a Latino community gets attacked, he's going to run to the police? Hell no, they'll take care of it themselves, because the communities don't trust the authorities.

You have to understand the mentality of a criminal. Criminals DO NOT think they're going to get caught, that they're going to fail... if they do, they wouldn't commit the crime. It's a psychological condition called 'magical thinking', 'narcissistic immunity', or the 'superman' syndrome. They just don't believe they'll fail or get caught... which is part of the reason why more heavy sentences does absolutely nothing to deter crime, because the criminal never thinks they're going to get caught!

None of what you said in any way applies to the fact that when guns were banned, violent crime went up. You didn't even address the issue.

Furthermore, you don't even have a solid argument, you're just sort of talking, trying not to tie yourself to a point.

The fact is, you're better off having a gun than not. Even if you choose not to draw it or use it, it's better to have the OPTION of defending yourself.

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: cucumber


What the hell are you talking about? His logic is perfectly sound and you confirmed it. You had a gun that was quick to grab and it was ready to fire. He's reffering to keeping a gun locked up in a safe and unloaded. In a bad situation speed is critical. A person can not defend themselves if the gun is locked away in the safe (not to mention trigger locks...) and unloaded.

I beg to differ, he was quoting me, and referring specifically to the Gun Vault link I posted, said it wasn't fast tnough, then claimed it was not a safe manner to store guns in a later post, when he saw how quickly it could be accessed.



Oh hell!

I missed that. You make perfect sense and I retract my defense of the other guy.

As a kid I lived near a prison and there were constant breakouts. There would be choppers flying around with the searchlights searching our neighborhood every couple of weeks. Having a gun handy was not a bad idea. Many of my neighbors (luckily never us...) had convicts break into their homes as refuge from the cops.

 

[Softballslug]

Originally posted by: cucumber

Originally posted by: Xenon14
Scenerio A: Guns are LEGAL. Criminals (people that break the law) and average Citizens (people that abide by the law) have guns.

Scenerio B: Guns are ILLEGAL. Criminals still have guns (they break the law). Average Citizens don't (they abide by the law).

Result: Outlawing guns only removes guns from law-abiding citizens and promotes an environmnet that is conducive to criminal activity by placing more power in the hands of the criminals.

absolutely.

When guns are OUTLAWED only the OUTLAWS will have them............

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

[cucumber]

Originally posted by: Softballslug

Originally posted by: cucumber

Originally posted by: Xenon14
Scenerio A: Guns are LEGAL. Criminals (people that break the law) and average Citizens (people that abide by the law) have guns.

Scenerio B: Guns are ILLEGAL. Criminals still have guns (they break the law). Average Citizens don't (they abide by the law).

Result: Outlawing guns only removes guns from law-abiding citizens and promotes an environmnet that is conducive to criminal activity by placing more power in the hands of the criminals.

absolutely.

When guns are OUTLAWED only the OUTLAWS will have them............

Why is that so hard to understand?

I'm not sure if you're reffering to me or people in general, but just in case, I completely agree. I wasn't being sarcastic.

 

[DeeKnow]

Originally posted by: edro13

I think your opinion would change if you read a few of the stories in the NRA magazine. Every month, they have a section with ~5-10 stories about home/self defense.

NRA? LOL ... that would be an unbiased party on this debate, i spose...

I recently saw Heston on "columbine' ... i think he disgraced himself rather sadly on that film... NRA should be declared an illegal organization

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: DeeKnow

Originally posted by: edro13

I think your opinion would change if you read a few of the stories in the NRA magazine. Every month, they have a section with ~5-10 stories about home/self defense.

NRA? LOL ... that would be an unbiased party on this debate, i spose...

I recently saw Heston on "columbine' ... i think he disgraced himself rather sadly on that film... NRA should be declared an illegal organization

Well then, we better shut down the NAACPand ACLU while we are at it.:roll:

I think it is pretty clear that Heston was not all "there" in that interview. Nice of Moore to take advantage of someone with a diminished capacity.