Call me an Hippie, Ahole, ETC but.......

[Jackalope]

You guys can fumble around all day with what if's... As a gun owner and advocate, I see it being very hard to justify owning a AR type weapon. We all know it isn't for home defense. If anything, it's awful for home defense when you put a round through your house, into the neighbors... 10 rounds make save the arm for the time being, but the gangrene is going to get the better of it, sooner or later. What I'm worried about is the shotguns. We all know how much damage and uncorked gun with buckshot in it can cause...

The fact that our peaceful society of individuals could turn to crap at a moments notice is justification enough to own one. We only coexist peacefully in an environment of structure.. Once that structure fails and worry, panic, and desperation begins to set in we become like animals. In that time of lawlessness the socioeconomic structure collapses. People become brutal and savage.. Desperation drives individuals to to a non collective "every man for himself" set of actions. Do some reading in to Katrina. See the brutality otherwise normal people are capable of inflicting on others. It is in that time when there is no legislative government to protect you, no structure of laws, and you're alone trying to protect your family. That you'll wish you had something better than your duck gun.

 

[jagermeister]

Banning certain types of accessories, like 30-round magazines, is almost as laughable as banning assault rifles completely. As Joe said, a 12 gauge with 00 buck will do a lot more damage than a .223 AR, in relatively close quarters. It matters not in this case anyway... I believe they said the shooter didn't even use an AR, that they found it on the seat of his car. I heard he used two handguns.

The people who say "we don't need AR-style or other assault weapons because they serve no purpose" are missing the whole point of the second amendment completely. The right to bear arms is for protection, against enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC. I have the right to protect myself against my own government, god forbid it ever becomes necessary. Best believe I'd rather have 3 30-round magazines than 10 10-round magazines when Uncle Sam's boys come knocking on my door.

 

[brock ratcliff]

Make certain guns or clips illegal? Great idea!


Oh wait, it's already illegal to use them while shooting children in a school...
That law doesn't work, why would it work if the clips were also illegal?

 

[Hedgelj]

You guys can fumble around all day with what if's... As a gun owner and advocate, I see it being very hard to justify owning a AR type weapon. We all know it isn't for home defense. If anything, it's awful for home defense when you put a round through your house, into the neighbors... 10 rounds make save the arm for the time being, but the gangrene is going to get the better of it, sooner or later. What I'm worried about is the shotguns. We all know how much damage and uncorked gun with buckshot in it can cause...

You might want to recheck that.....a 55 grain ball round has LESS energy after going through a wall than a 9mm hollowpoint and is therefore less dangerous than most pistol bullets after going through a wall.

Q. Won't JSP and JHP rounds be safer indoors? Don't I have to worry about FMJ rounds going through walls and hurting my family or others?
You always have to worry about it, of course, but even FMJ 5.56 rounds will have less wound potential after penetrating a wall than even 9mm handgun rounds. Generally after passing through an interior wall or two, 5.56 bullets will have lost enough velocity that resulting wound damage would be greatly diminished. It should be noted, however, that all of the above bullets are still potentially deadly to those on the other side of a wall, so plan accordingly. Interior walls are concealment, NOT cover

http://www.razoreye.net/mirror/ammo-oracle/AR15_com_Ammo_Oracle_Mirror.htm#jspsafe

 

[at1010]

I am actually very happy I have started this thread.

Although I do think some points are WAY over the top, I do believe some of you have made very good points, and I appreciate it.

I do see your sides of the arguments, and I am a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, I think one of the best points made it that by giving up any space to the Anti's is opening the door. This is something I thought about but did not really consider a threat, after reading some posts, I can see why this could be a large threat. Again, I am not a fucking IDIOT, I just had some thoughts, and thought I would share to seek out others opinions. I knew I was not going to change any of yours, and your not going to totally change mine.

 

[Beentown]

Just about all of us has been there (on the wrong side of a logical arguement). What matters is what you do after seeing the light.

The Progressives "nudge" us into what they want by getting emotional reactions and capitolizing on it. (Hence the way the tradegy is being reported)

Why high cap magazines? Why should we have anything but shotguns? Why allow hunting when we have livestock to eat?

This keeps going...until we have no control.

 

[Kaiser878]

I dont really have any desire to argue about any of this... So Here is my stance...


You wont take my guns...
You wont tell me what guns I can and cant keep in my house.
If I wanna have a 2000 round clip, ill have it. Its my second amendment right!

I heard a funny/uneducated quote the other day on NBC. A lady was speaking out against guns and she made the comment, "its easier to obtain a gun than it is to obtain help for a mentally ill person."

My retort to that is very simple....You can thank former Democratic president Jimmy Carter and his worthless wife Rosalynn Carter for that.. Her view was the state mental hospitals were helping very little with the mentally ill, and it was the communities job to help them, within the community. So, they made a big push to have them closed, due to a waste of money, in their eyes!

So tell me again why is it easier to get a gun than it is to get help for a mentally ill person??

 

[Hedgelj]

I am actually very happy I have started this thread.

Although I do think some points are WAY over the top, I do believe some of you have made very good points, and I appreciate it.

I do see your sides of the arguments, and I am a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, I think one of the best points made it that by giving up any space to the Anti's is opening the door. This is something I thought about but did not really consider a threat, after reading some posts, I can see why this could be a large threat. Again, I am not a fucking IDIOT, I just had some thoughts, and thought I would share to seek out others opinions. I knew I was not going to change any of yours, and your not going to totally change mine.

Some more food for thought grabbed from Defensivecarry.com

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.
At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.

With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows. One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire.

The blast knocks both thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second
man crawls to the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless.

Yours was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter. "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.
"Only ten-to-twelve years,” he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested

numerous times.

But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."
The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings.

The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero. Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your neighbor
that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this to allege
that you were lying in wait for the burglars. A few months later, you go to trial.

The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.
When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works against you.
Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term. How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.
This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead. The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control", demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle) Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearms still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying, "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands.” All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens. How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered and licensed. Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

 

[jeremy44230]

Our nation continues to blame guns, clip/magazine capacities... This ain't the problem!

Our country has a much bigger problem. How can we see a kid that walks down a hallway and leans against walls when others walk by? How can we raise kids that have NO social skills? How can both parents just leave children to raise themselves and act shocked that their beloved child could massacre others? These questions can go on and on.

Then, after it is all done, they say " I thought he would get better" how does this happen? Parents need to raise their kids with ethics and morals. Sure, there will always be bad apples but how much more could it be reduced if parents actually raised their children? Raise your kids with morals and values that the country was built on! Be a part of their life, know where they are & who they are with. Talk to the kids and LISTEN to them.

The saying that guns don't kill, people do is so simply but it is true! 3 rounds at a time or 100 rounds at a time, don't matter! How about raise your kids the right way so they won't do any of this shit!

This is easier said than done, I realize this, but where does this go from here? Weapon bans, ammo bans, clip restrictions? Anarchy?? Do we all really think that Americans are going to stop buying and owning guns, no!

 

[Hunter II]

You could kill just as many kids with a can gasoline and a match.

 

[Milo]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036.html


good article if your looking

 

[Beentown]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323723104578185271857424036.html


good article if your looking

Good find.

 

[brock ratcliff]

Good read, Eric.

 

[moundhill]

Yup, great read.

 

[badger]

Thanks for the link Milo, I'm sharing it on facebook.

 

[chrisgotell]

do we not see that the Killer, Killed his mother then stoled his dead mother's guns and then went to the school. what gun law would have stoped this he started with murder and we have laws against that. as gun owner we do not need to give up or in any new gun laws. we need to end GUN FREE ZONE

 

[Huckleberry Finn]

Why should we make laws to control people who don't follow the existing ones in the first place?

 

[hickslawns]

Why should we make laws to control people who don't follow the existing ones in the first place?

Precisely. Hit that one on the head Huck.

 

[Flatlander]

Let me weigh on on this one. I have quite a few issues with this and this is gonna be a long post so grab your coffee or beverage of choice.

1.) Lets look at the 2nd amendment.
1.a) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED - therefore any gun law that removes access is an infringement per the wording of the Bill of Rights. Now I know that the Supreme Court did rule that some laws can be constitutional but I personally disagree. I'm a big fan of the constitution and the definition shall not be infringed is pretty bluntly obvious.
1.b) A lot of anti-gunners will also use the "Assault weapon or High capacity magazines" are military weapons and what normal person needs access to those. Our forefathers had just finished fighting a war against the most powerful military in the world at that time and had won against all odds. The British regulars had primarily smoothbore muskets where the colonists had rifled barrels in their rifles. Therefore the colonists actually had better weaponry than the military they were facing. Did this help them defeat the British? I'd put money on it and especially if you have ever listend to the historical aspect of an Appleseed you'll find out exactly how much. So the forefathers knew and understood exactly what it took to create change against a dominant government and they wanted the people to have the ability to keep the government in check IF it ever became necessary again. Not to sound too radical but without the 2nd amendment keeping reign on the government, what else protects any of the other rights in the constitution or bill of rights? Think about it.
1.c) Many of us have military backgrounds. We all swore an oath to defend the constitution, and that means all of it in my book.

2.) Magazine capacity, your first point. So you see no problems with banning a 30 round magazine b/c it doesn't affect you. What about the people it does affect? Are you only going to complain if the gun laws affect you? That's not being profirearms, that's "I don't care until it personally affects me" aka apathy. If they propose legislation that limits all magazines down to your random number of 10 what does that do, who does that affect? Well Glock 19 one of the most popular 9mms on the planet, comes with a 15 round magazine, Ruger SR9, Sig 9mms, my 10/22 with the 25 round magazine, etc. Then in a couple of weeks or a year when some evil person creates havoc with 30 individual 10 round magazines then are you going to say....well maybe we should just all have revolvers as those take longer to load than a semi-auto so the person can do less damage.
Oh wait the same day as the Conn shooting an evil person in China which has some of the most strict gun laws in the world had this happen to them. 22 Children stabbed by a knife
Well I suppose we out to ban all the knives b/c no one needs access to the really sharp ones, the dull butter knives will have to work the next time I field dress my deer.

3.) Why are we as a culture so bent on blaming everything but the person? A firearm is a tool, nothing more nothing less. People are killed by many means every day and yet nothing is said about that. How many people die each month from automobile accidents? More than died in Conn, and I would bet more kids are killed every year in automobiles than in school shooting. Where are the calls for common sense car laws? This is almost a cliche but blaming the gun for the Sandy Hook shooting is like blaming a spoon for making a person fat. Why are we so against a person having to deal with the consequences of their own actions?

4.) To those who think if we give a little as gun owners than the anti's will have less to complain about. Really? I mean really? Have you ever looked at the Ohio Coalition to stop gun violence's facebook page (here)? Do you think they would stop just b/c we gave a little? No, just like we fight for a step by step reinstatement of our gun rights, they will continue to fight for a step by step elimination of them.

5.) Do gun laws actually do anything to stop crime? Well lets look at something. Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. Chicago Homicides Outnumber U.S. Troop Killings In Afghanistan and this was as of August. So a city with very strict gun laws is more dangerous than a war zone. How's that working out for the citizens of Chicago? Also, how many of the people who are outspoken for firearms laws actually have firearms protecting them and their families? An Illinois state senator tried to board a plane with a handgun


6.) Would additional laws stop school shootings? Well one of the most famous school shootings aka Columbine still occurred during the AWB. Also, the most deadly school killing in US history didn't even use firearms. The Bath School Disaster


7.) You cannot stop crazy, you can not legislate away evil. People will do whatever they have to to do what they want. Laws are not going to stop this from happening. Just look to see how well the banning of drugs has worked on the illegal drugs in our country.

What might stop this from happening? Well for one the media frenzy only makes things like this more appealing to the pyscho who wants to be famous. Also the media coverage makes it appear like they are happening more and more when in actuality that's not true. Look at This list of school shooting in the US. Not really an uptick in them, just more exposure to them makes it appear like they are happening more often.

I agree with Joe, this is one outstanding post!

You sir have cleared my head and helped me regain focus. Thank you for your post!

 

[Curran]

Small movements are exactly how they erode your rights to nothing.

Exactly

THERE IS NO WHAT IF'S TO HOMICIDAL LUNATICS PEOPLE. you try to put rational thoughts into irrational situations.

And exactly again.


Guys, this is way bigger than guns, this is about freedom.