|
|
|
|
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 7:49:00 AM | >>>>>>>Really? That's funny, I have a whole safe-full that have been used for nothing but punching holes in paper, breaking clay birds and killing EVIL aluminum cans. I guess I bought them for the wrong reasons. >>>>
So you bought your gun just for target practice? Or...
>>>>>>.If you want to abdicate your responsibility of self-defense to the police, that's fine. I'd much rather rely on myself. Besides, I am a much better shot than most of the cops I know. >>>>>
You just practice with it so you’ll be a good shot so that one day if you are forced to use it to shoot someone you will not miss? Or hurt someone else? I’m glad you are being responsible about your gun ownership, however, I seriously doubt anyone who is carrying a gun on his person or in his car is doing so in case some clay birds or EVIL aluminum cans happen to cross his path.
>>>>>>>.But if there is no other reason for a gun then to shoot people and kill, and this equipment has NO other purpose, then it stands to reason that every women with her “equipment” has no choice but to be a prostitute. There is NO other reason for that “equipment” either. Same with men…we must be sure to spread our seed everywhere and anywhere. There is nothing we can do about it. We are not responsible for the “equipment” we’re born with. Well unless we had a brain or something. >>>>
Yes there is no other reason to purchase a handgun unless you are prepared to shoot someone. Your choice was in purchasing the gun. As for the rest of your post, I can barely wrap my mind around your logic. My “equipment” has many other purposes than for just being a prostitute so of course I have choices on how I want to use it. However, if women were just blow up dolls with no brains than I would have to agree with you.
>>>>>>>people need to realize one thing....its a big ugly mean world out there...there are bad guys...the good guys MUST be armed..<<<<<<
And therein lies the difference. I live in a metropolitan city in Canada and although we do have our share of crime, I do not view the world like that. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 7:50:06 AM | QUOTE: I've often wondered if that mindset didn't originate w/ the religious
persecution/complex inherited from the Puritan settlers....& subsequently re-inforced by wanting to see the conquest of the native people as something other than akin to the Colonialism from which the 13 colonies themselves were trying to escape
I often find that when someone tries to make something quite simple into something complex, it is because they know that the only way they can possibly when the debate is to cloud the issue.
The constitution makes the right to bear arms quite clear. It does not state that you may bear arms only if everyone agrees with your right. There are only three ways to take away that right. 1. Amend the constitution. 2. Find five judges who will ignore the constitution. 3. Overthrow the government and become a dictator. The only possible route you have that could happen in the near future is number two. | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 53 | |
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 8:04:16 AM | QUOTE: Yes there is no other reason to purchase a handgun unless you are prepared to shoot someone. Your choice was in purchasing the gun.
^^ I agree 100% wildcat. I have always felt the same exact way. Unless I were literally about to kill someone, and/or myself (which I of course would never be "about" to do), I see absolutely no reason to have that kind of tool , with ammunition, at hand. That was basically the mindset we were raised in growing up as well.
No one in my family ever has owned one, not even for hunting or other outdoors purposes ~ of course, they did not engage in those hobbies, so.... I guess that follows. But, the point is , in my 32 yrs of living in and around Chicago (not exactly as safe as a lot of the cities in Canada I'm sure, let's face it), and my family members' even more yrs than that, no one I know has ever had a situation such as the gun people always hypothesize (or is it fantasize?) about. No friend of mine has ever had such a situation either.
Which is what leads me to feel, personally, that such thoughts - when recurrent - may begin to border on a sort of paranoia which then feeds into that (earlier discussed) latent hostility and "settle it yourself, shoot someone" mentality that can exist here in the States. And wherever THAT originally stems from is anybody's guess, but I think MontrealGuy and Mungojoe had the best analyses on it so far. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 8:14:23 AM | ^^ I agree 100% wildcat. I have always felt the same exact way. Unless I were literally about to kill someone, and/or myself (which I of course would never be "about" to do), I see absolutely no reason to have that kind of tool , with ammunition, at hand. That was basically the mindset we were raised in growing up as well.
This is utterly ridiculous! I was raised by a cop. I've been hunting all my life. I definitely have that kind of tool, with ammunition, at hand, at all times. Why? Well, come break into my house in the middle of the night, or try to harm my daughter, or anyone else I care about for that matter, and you'll find out real quick! 
I have a good friend who is a police dispatcher. She's in training to become a cop. Not long ago, her house was broken into for the THIRD time, but this time, she walked in on the guy in her carport. He beat her so badly she had to be hospitalized.
She's trained with a Glock 40, so that's what I bought her as a gift. Personally, I'm really hoping that creep comes back a 4th time.
BTW - we have a town here in Georgia where the head of every household is REQUIRED to own a gun, unless they state that they are some kind of concientious objector. I don't think I'll be breaking into any houses in Kennesaw anytime soon!
Mark
 | |
|
NERO1
|
Joined: 3/8/2008
Msg: 55 | |
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 8:32:19 AM | | Msg 58, it's just a fundamental difference in cultural backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds quite likely, as well as, realistically, length of time one's people have even been IN the United States , and the location of where they 'settled' , etc. It just reflects that we have a fundamentally different way of viewing the world and the people around us and the direction in which we would like to see the country go. I will continue to be an activist for my view(s) as you will for yours. It is , in all reality, a greatly divided country -- one as large as this could feasibly be (in fact IS, in many ways) many different "countries", so to speak, all within the geographical boundaries of this one large continent. Different ways of thinking, & viewing the world; different ways of speaking a language based on a common source language; different regional cultures and values and demographic makeups ; different norms and mores, etc. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 8:45:35 AM | | I normally don't speak about folks this way. However, having read message 60, leads me to believe that this fellow is simply trying to make you feel that he is intelligent, or he is simply trying to make you angry. I can't tell which. I have trouble believing that he truly believes this stuff. lol. When I was young our home was invaded. Three men came in unannounce holding a gun and telling everyone to shut up and sit still. My father having heard the commotion, came down stairs with a rifle, pointed at the head of one of the men and stated that the intruders will leave or the one will die. the intruders left. The police apprehended them soon thereafter. Had there been no gun in the house, then only God knows what may have followed. My sister was sixteen. If you want to risk this happening to you,(I know the odds are small, but odds don't mean anything when your the chosen) then feel free to not own a gun. I am done with this debate. I will not debate ignorance or inexperience. It is a waste of time. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 8:58:12 AM | You're full of nonsense. A permit for concealed carry is only bad for rapists, robbers, muggers, and other low lifes.
All people deserve to feel secure about their persons when they are out and about. They shouldn't be hasseled by anyone even including men who just want to hit upon some woman they have targeted.
Women should learn to say, "Make my day dude," as they pull their Dessert Eagle 44 Magnum special from their purses, the world's most powerful handgun. BTW, it only takes a little bit of training to feel confident and emotionally calm dealing with scumbags.
The Eagle | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:02:01 AM | >>>>>>>>>This is utterly ridiculous! I was raised by a cop. I've been hunting all my life. I definitely have that kind of tool, with ammunition, at hand, at all times. Why? Well, come break into my house in the middle of the night, or try to harm my daughter, or anyone else I care about for that matter, and you'll find out real quick!<<<<<<<<
So you own a gun because you are prepared to shoot someone. Regardless of the reason why, noble or not, the fact remains that a gun is a weapon. And a handgun carried on your person or in your car is a weapon designed to shoot, main and kill people. For all the posters on this thread who keep bringing up all the analogies that using cars, bats and knives as weapons is the same thing, its not. Actually, even the driver in the original post grabbed his gun and shot at the other driver, the weapon at hand, rather than try to use his car as a weapon and try to hit the other driver's car.
The fact is that it is so much easier to haul off and shoot someone (from a safe, desensitized distance) and ask questions later than it is to get in your car and mow them down, or grab a bat or a knife and try to attack. I'd bet most people would try to run away or hide if they felt like they were in some kind of danger before they would engage in hand to hand combat. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:10:53 AM | >>>>>>>>>>All people deserve to feel secure about their persons when they are out and about. They shouldn't be hasseled by anyone even including men who just want to hit upon some woman they have targeted.
Women should learn to say, "Make my day dude," as they pull their Dessert Eagle 44 Magnum special from their purses, the world's most powerful handgun. BTW, it only takes a little bit of training to feel confident and emotionally calm dealing with scumbags. <<<<<<<<<<<
OMG... are you serious? So we should now start pulling out guns if someone is hitting on us? Deal with a minor annoyance by calmly pulling out a gun? You are joking, right? That is utterly ridiculous not to mention extremely dangerous. And then people wonder why some of us have a problem with the general public owning and carrying guns. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:13:36 AM | | You seem like an educated person Nero... Would it make you feel better if they were run down by a car? Or stabbed to death and decapitated on a bus? Or pushed out a window, or choked or drowned or poisoned or burned alive in a house. Should I go on? Guns are just an easier way of throwing a rock, I own a few and mine don't get pointed at anything I don't want to kill. I was raised right and taught how to use them properly. That is the problem, simply make it a non arguable death penalty to use a firearm in a crime, no trial just an immediate death penalty. And people will stop this foolishness. But alas Liberals just can't see the logic. You have a mad dog you put it down... Or the state will do it for you. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:13:51 AM |
By your goofy logic, if there are drunk drivers who mow down pedistrians or kill someone crashing their cars; therefore all our cars have to be taken away because some fool ran amuck with a car.
Cars were not designed with the specific and primary purpose of killing people instantly at a distance. Cars are inherently dangerous devices nontheless, and you have to be trained and pass a test that demonstrates you are capable of operating one safely before you can legally drive one. You can't just go out and do it.
So what are the appropriate safeguards and standards for a device that _is_ designed to kill people instantly at a distance? You're the adult here, so you tell me.
That type of reasoning is perposterous and offensive to adults. You pull this kinda crap on children only!!
Indeed!
If someone uses a steak knife and fork to stab a neighbor, I got to eat with my fingers?
No, but knives and forks aren't specifically designed to kill other people at a distance. The knives are dangerous, and as you claim to be an adult, I assume you know enough to store them so that people won't readily cut themselves when they reach for one.
Having a device that is designed to kill people instantly at a distance in a place that provides ready access to someone who is liable to become thoroughly enraged, is like randomly scattering sharp knives throughout your silverware drawer. Somebody's bound to get needlessly hurt in an arrangement like that. How do you store _your_ knives?
You are an idiot. The bradycampaign is moronic, and as brain dead as the clown it was named after.
Mr. Brady was no clown, and he was perfectly fine until some crazed idiot who got access to a gun shot him in the head. That was about the most cretinous remark I have ever seen, and if you, sir, are half the adult that you claim to be you will apologize for it.
If you do not do so, how can you expect anyone to trust you with a steak knife, let alone a gun? | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 9:16:48 AM | On average, it takes about 10 minutes for the police to arrive..if they show up at all.
I've learned I can not depend upon any one but myself for protection.
I live in the country and there are many people who just cruise around looking to rob or steal...home invasions.....meth heads and drug addicts who now visit the dealer down the road.
When I lived in Asia, I carried an ice pick for protection....
I live alone and even if I didn't I'd have weapons.
I would not shoot anyone over a TV or vehicle...unless I were in the vehicle.
If I feel my life is at stake......when I pull it out, someone is going to be shot.
I took the gun classes and I do practice....I enjoy shooting at paper targets, milk jugs, cans.
I go to the target range........$5.00 and hour. I enjoy it.
I plan on purchasing a shotgun so I don't have to be so accurate.
And to go to the turkey shoots.
I'm not giving my weapons up.......
ceeceekitty | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 10:30:07 AM | Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Knives kill more people than guns do (FBI, 2004). Why aren't your steak knives registered?
Trusting and relying on someone else to protect you (i.e. police force) is your voluntarily giving up your right to be responsible for your own freedom and protection. While you may wish to do this, others choose not to (THIS is what's encoded in "American DNA": the right to self-preservation).
The statement that a self-armed populace is an unruly one is not supported by facts. When Australia outlawed handguns over 20 years ago, it's a recorded fact that violent crime went up over 400%. When the UK outlawed handguns, they also conveniently changed their crime recording stats to cover the fact that violent crime skyrocketed (they made crimes like rape, armed larceny, and other such crimes "minor" and categorized differently). When the DC ban of '72 was enacted, violent crime went through the roof because the only people who had guns had them illegally and the general populace couldn't defend itself, being forced to rely on an overworked and sometimes-corrupt police force.
Stick to facts Don't be persuaded by one person's opinion, read up for yourself. The FBI has violent death statistics every year or two, read up on it! I was amazed to learn that in 2004, there were 5 times as many drunk-driving deaths in the nation as there were gun deaths (both murder and accidental-shootings). Dying by the knife (an ancient technology, to be sure) was 300% the number of gun deaths.
Guns don't kill people; ignorance, apathy, and misdirected anger do, and these things are unlegislatable.... (or ARE they...?) | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 10:51:29 AM | Violence isn't always the answer.
However, there are certain questions where it is the only answer.
Criminals and terrorists will not give up their guns and so therefore, neither will I.
In an ideal world we'd live in peace and love and sunshine, but until that day unless someone has the ways and means to prevent violence (i.e. with violence directed at that perpetrator) then it won't change, it doesn't matter how many laws (20,000 and counting) you pass, it still won't matter.
Murder, rape, and robbery are already against the law, and laws don't discourage them from happening at all.
Besides, there are almost 40 of our 50 states where it is "shall issue" in terms of permits, or in the case of the ultra-violent Vermont and Alaska, no permit is needed at all. Some states have no permits for carrying openly and you just need a permit to carry concealed, and other states consider the vehicle an extension of your home so you need no permit to carry in a car.
Laws against automatic weapons did a great job preventing the North Hollywood bank robbery shootout, I might add, but that'd be seen as silly by people who think laws prevent any sort of crime.
I was told years ago that locks and fences "kept honest people honest", but what a stupid statement. If they were honest in the first place they wouldn't be thinking "gosh if there wasn't a lock I'd take everything not nailed down".
One more tidbit.....I'd still rather go hunting with****Cheney than driving with Ted Kennedy, who is one of the most hypocritical people in terms of gun control, as most elitists typically are.
Did you know that in D.C., one of the few organizations with a gun license is the very group being quoted by the original poster? With that license they're allowed to possess firearms.......kind of a double standard. Kinda like Diane Feinstein having a permit to carry while at the same time trying to make sure San Francisco people couldn't even own a pistol at all.
And how about Chicago, where you can't own a handgun legally since the 1980's and crime is so bad they're talking about deploying the National Guard and giving cops M4's and M16's to go on patrol? I mean, in Europe cops typically openly carry assault rifles (and I mean actual, selective fire type rifles, not the ones that the Brady people get into a tizzy over) and submachine guns, yet most places there you can't own more than a double barrel shotgun, and even those require an extensive wait and a reason, which self defense doesn't qualify. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 10:57:01 AM | Guns don't kill people; ignorance, apathy, and misdirected anger do, and these things are unlegislatable.... (or ARE they...?)
Give someone with misdirected anger ready access to a gun, and bang! You could be dead.
As with all other inherently dangerous devices, guns should be stored with proper safeguards. And, no one who isn't adequately trained should have access to them.
Since we hold guns to be a constitutional right, we have an obligation to train each and every citizen in their proper use and safe storage, and also in the safe way to defuse emotionally charged situations in which guns are present.
If we simply make guns accessible to random idiots who refuse to recognize their responsibilities when dealing with such inherently dangerous devices, we can't very well complain when frightened people clamor for them to be banned.
We either deal with guns like responsible adults, or we don't. We can ban them, thus infantilizing ourselves, or we can let them run amok, in which case no one is really safe. --unless you think that having a gun will somehow protect you from a bullet whizzing toward your head.
Or, here's a novel idea for you: We can do what the Founders intended. We can make sure that our militia--our armed citizenry--is well regulated by making sure that all of our citizens are adequatel trained in the proper use and safe storage of firearms. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 11:09:23 AM | Our Militia Acts require every able bodied male (and being the 21st century, we can include women) from ages 18-44 to own a rifle and keep ammunition, and also know how to use them.
Being the 21st century, that means every household should have an M16, ammunition, and each person should be required to qualify with them at least once a year.
We'd be kinda like Switzerland, though they've got the SIG 550 series (which we can't have due to import restrictions, while police can) which are far superior to Eugene Stoner's type of rifle.
(Being an enthusiast I only speculate and quote what I've heard from anyone with SIG rifle experience......)
They didn't have "safe storage", much less gun safes, back when our country was founded. Arms were above fireplaces, left by back doors, in drawers, and generally anyplace where they might be convenient. Such as in a belt or pocket, also. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 11:37:34 AM | I already think EVERYONE is a potential threat to me and would rather take all the legal measures available to me for my defense and those who I care for.
You're on your own.
That's a very "American" viewpoint, that you won't find many people here having.
Most Americans cannot even imagine a city , Canada's second largest Montreal , that in roughly 35,000 man years ( 7,000 officers/five years) of policing - fired one hundred shots.
As to the ability of the police to protect people, let me submit this, for your consideration:
Source: The Geographic Reference Report 2007 (3/2007)
Crime Rates - Selected North American Cities
(per 100,000 population)
Cities Homicides Robberies
Baltimore, MD 43.5 638.5
Detroit, MI 42.1 596.2
Washington, DC 35.8 552.3
Atlanta, GA 25.8 724.6
Philadelphia, PA 22.2 657.4
Dallas, TX 20.1 607.5
Miami, FL 17.9 614.5
Chicago, IL 15.5 552.0
Minneapolis, MN 14.1 597.5
San Francisco, CA 11.6 399.9
Boston, MA 10.5 418.6
Vancouver, BC 3.0 149.0
Hamilton, ON 2.0 39.0
Toronto, ON 2.0 108.5
Montreal, QC 1.5 147.5
Ottawa, ON 1.5 88.0
Sudbury, ON 1.0 53.0
Guelph, ON 1.0 60.0
http://www.2ontario.com/welcome/ooql_602.asp
Again , in reference to Munjo's point about the fear of crime, check out those numbers (even in their highest areas) and how very small a chance anyone has of experiencing those things in their lifetime.
Now Canada has a lot of firearms owners:
Gun Ownership and Crime
A national survey commissioned by the Canadian Firearms Centre in 2000 found an estimated 2.3 million firearm owners.
http://www.canadianembassy.org/government/guncontrol-en.asp
And yet these guns, and the many illegal firearms we have here too, are not being used in anywhere near the same numbers to rob, kill, or to injure fellow Canadians.
Homicide and robbery rates are far lower here, even if the NRA says that this is impossible. 
We have street gangs (Crips and Bloods , etc) , illegal drugs, and poverty . We watch the same violent TV shows and movies you do, and we play the same violent video games.
So what's different , and why do we have a society that's far safer ?
Remember, there's no death penalty here for murder, less police officers per capita , and less prison cells too.
And yet ?
The 2004 GSS asked respondents how safe they felt from crime while walking alone in their areas after dark. Possible responses included very safe, reasonably safe, somewhat unsafe, or very unsafe. For the purposes of this study responses were divided into two categories such that experiencing fear of crime was represented by feeling somewhat or very unsafe, and not experiencing fear of crime was represented by feeling very or reasonably safe.
Among the population of urban Canadians aged 15 years and older considered in this study, 18% (representing about 3 million Canadians) indicated that they experienced fear of crime while walking alone in their areas after dark, while the majority (82%) indicated that they did not experience fear of crime in these conditions.
http://www.statcan.ca/english/research/85-561-MIE/2008013/def-en.htm
More than eighty percent of Canadians did not fear walking in their neighborhoods on the street , alone, and after dark.
If you look at Americans, and how the see crime, I'm pretty sure you'd see nowhere near that level of comfort - armed or not.
With about half of Americans currently saying crime is up in their local areas, and about 7 in 10 saying it is up nationally, Americans have a decidedly negative outlook about crime.
The recent increase in negative public perceptions of crime contrasts with actual government crime statistics, which show that rates of violent crime as well as property crime have generally leveled off at extremely low numbers.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/102262/
Perceptions-Crime-Problem-Remain-Curiously-Negative.aspx
And this echoes back to what Munjo was referring to, about the perception of crime being a critical part of all this. Generally, in North America, crime rates have gone down (overall) since their high point in the Seventies. That's due to many things, especially the decline in the youth demographic.
In 1997, the U.S. murder rate was the lowest in 30 years
The primary focus of each Crime in the United States report is the estimated number of crimes reported to law enforcement agencies. While only a portion of all crimes that occur are reported to law enforcement, those that are provide an assessment of the workloads of the criminal and juvenile justice systems.
The FBI estimates that in 1997, 7,726,000 larceny-thefts, 2,461,000 burglaries, 1,354,000 motor vehicle thefts, 1,022,000 aggravated assaults, 498,000 robberies, 96,000 forcible rapes, and 18,200 murders were reported to law enforcement agencies. One would have to go back to 1971 to find a lower annual number of murder victims in the United States and to 1967 to find a lower murder rate (i.e., murders per 100,000 persons in the population).
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/jjbulletin/9812_2/murder.html
That wonderful world that we older people can recall was actually far more dangerous than it is today, statistically.
And yet, if you look at public PERCEPTION of crime, it far exceeds it's real threat level.
The strange thing is that you can see this same pattern repeating itself in North America and Europe, crossing those barriers of cultural filters almost equally. In almost all cases, crime has decreased (especially violent crime) , but public perception/fear has increased.
That's quite possibly due to an increased media coverage which magnifies the problems in the eyes of it's viewers due to the constant flurry of stories and images.
This leads to more scared people, and more armed people. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 1:19:08 PM | ,to reduce crime and it's victims to the fear of the boogeyman is extremely ignorant and indifferent towards the millions of victims and ther families
That is nothing more than a strawman argument and a blatant appeal to emotionalism that is completely divorced from the reality of the point. Carrying a gun has NOTHING to do with sympathy or empathy for victims or their families. It is, however, a typical tactic used to try and remove reality from the debate.
But, nice try.
The reality of it is that only 1/2 of 1 percent (that's 0.5%) of ALL Americans will face a violent crime which endangers their personal safety or life at any given year.
By the same analogy I used with the home invasions that would mean you would need to live two lifetimes in order to need your gun.
That is a very far cry from the "wolves at the door" mentality that is being portrayed by the "I NEED my gun" attitude.
The fact that someone has spent time in another country is of no value to this debate. We are talking about the American Constitution. What another country thinks does not hold one iota of importance.
Hmm... I guess you missed that part about how I am an American, as in "Born in the USA". So I guess my view does have some validity by that standard, huh?
I already think EVERYONE is a potential threat to me
Yes, that was my point and, interestingly, I didn't need you to say that to know it. Funny, huh?
There is a common theme among many Americans that leads them to see anyone who falls outside a given circle as "a threat" that requires being armed against whether that belief is warranted by the facts or not. It's an attitude that can be seen at the national level (where the threat is to "America, our ideals and our values") to the personal level (where anyone outside your immediate family and friends 'who are like family' is automatically a threat).
Many Americans see themselves as 'besieged and beset' at every turn, where everyone who is not them wants to take what they have, where every motive is nefarious and dangerous to them. It is, at times, almost a mass paranoia that rarely bears any real resemblence to any real threat.
The original point of the poster was that seemingly normal and adjusted people were now gun toting,shoot-em-up renegades.
Yes, and we're pointing out WHY that is a very likely and probable outcome to "a gun in every pocket" (especially in densely packed metro areas) | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 2:11:36 PM | How about putting it like this,
"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away."
That, and the police aren't obligated to aid you. It's been upheld in court that the police aren't responsible for your safety, and if something happens to you, even in front of them while they are watching, they are not liable for it. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 6:43:08 PM |
It's been upheld in court that the police aren't responsible for your safety, and if something happens to you, even in front of them while they are watching, they are not liable for it.
What case? Is it from a situation where a person hurt him/herself whilst the police were there but not intervening? | |
|
| |
| |
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 7:14:19 PM |
...otherwise law-abiding citizen (it's not as though he were a career criminal or gangster) would not have kept a gun on his person or evidently within reach in his car had he not been allowed to do so legally.
Ummmm... probably half of the people I know have a firearm within reach if not on their person most of the time.
Fists can kill too.
Large SUVs such as Hummers also kill.
Other than the stress and anger management issues, which is a growing problem in the U.S. culture of disposables, I think firearms should be carried in plain view. That way more people will be nicer to others. And maybe those in Hummers, Suburbans, Expeditions and other big personal trucks should be required to get something like a CDL-Lite license or permit with extra emphasis on sharing the road with others and random drug and alcohol tests several times per year. | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 7:21:38 PM | Wow nero , some how your name fits.... I am for carring a cocealed weapon..You think on duty cops needs to have a gun hugh. Some cops are misfits in society crazy as the rest...I was stalked by a cop protecting the people because he wanted a case and wanted me to go into a house wired because he was a **** and too damn scared to do it.. He wanted a feather in his hat and needed someones help..
I love my country but I will tell you our goverment sucks bad.. Our courts suck bad it is a money game Mafifa shit .. Money is all it is about.. Go to the court house and see how much these **stards make off people speeding and other misamener stuff when they should be handling crimes they hide and jump out to get you..The cops do not protect you my friend.. They hurt familys and destroy you...
Hell yes we need to protect our selfs .. If you believe the cops are there to protect you you are living in a make believe world...They dont care about you.... a cop to protect me... Oh God you pissed me off so bad.. the court let him do it fully aware.. I went to FBI to get it stopped It is your federal right to file a complant...againce a corrupt cop......
Are ya crazy
Hell yes I will have a gun and I will use it instead of calling a cop...
I personaly was stalked by a cop..For two dam years ....And my friend you are a very shallow msinformed man.. We all need to protect our selfs... | |
|
| Concealed Carry Laws in Cities / Suburbs = Terrible Idea
Posted: 8/15/2008 7:50:03 PM | SKAJ,
The Supreme Court has ruled that police have no Constitutional duty to protect citizens from harm. Linkydinky: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html There are other cases. Google is your friend.
I'm not a paranoid person. I don't hang out with paranoid people. I don't believe there is an inevitable violent attack in my future. But if there is, I will be prepared. If you choose to be unprepared, I wish you well.
Most of my friends own and shoot guns. Among my closest friends who shoot are a medical doctor, 2 lawyers, a real estate investor and the owner of a mechanical contracting company. Hardly the hillbilly rednecks that gun owners are often portrayed as.
I know anecdote is not the equivalent of data. But let me leave you with this true life story.
A few years ago, I had an acquaintance who had an ex that stalked and threatened her numerous times. She had 2 restraining orders issued against him. One day he showed up at her house in a drunken rage. She saw him outside and phoned the police. Right after she did this, he kicked down her front door and entered her house and told her he was going to Beat the living S$^t out of her.
Thankfully, she had her wits about her and grabbed her legally owned Glock and pointed it straight at his chest. Well, the 6'2" 250# ***hole realized he was no match for a 9mm pistol and high tailed it out of there. The police arrived 5 minutes later. Another squad car pulled him over a few miles down the road. He was charged with DUI and violating a restraining order. Total jail time: 4 hours.
So I ask all of you anti-gun folk, what could she have done differently? Hired a bodyguard on her $500/week salary? Taken out ANOTHER restraining order? Prayed to Sarah Brady for protection? | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 13
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
|
Home
login 
