Fire arms: For or Against?



 Sociology > Depression > Fire arms: For or Against?

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 2 of 2

1

 

2

 
Topic: Sociology > Depression
User: "Spartacus"
Date: 15 Jun 2007 07:17:48 PM
Object: Fire arms: For or Against?
I think it's really weird as a Canuk sitting back giggling over this
debate. Yet muy American side is troubled that there's so much fuss
over that Virginia massicre thingy and I think it was just something
fuled by the war like most things now; everyone so self righteous and
all about it... But I remember as a child, out in Saskatchewan
shooting goffers with 22 longs at 25 cents a tail! And hey! It often
made the difference whether I ate that day or not!
You could take every last gun out of The U.S. and then read reports
how students are slitting each others throats next week! You see, it
just wouldn't matter! There are lots of ways to kill yourself or
others that gun control has nothing to do with! There are also 50 ways
to leave your lover! Even if you screen for wackos, an under ground
movement will just see that as an opportunity to capitalize on it...
So, in my mind, it seems a silly argument. Weapons aren't "just"
weapons. They can also be tools. I just don't think officials are4
seeing the entire picture that's all... What's your take on this?
.

User: "Gayle"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 16 Jun 2007 04:59:47 PM
On Jun 16, 4:33 am, mighty mouse
<mousieNOSPAM9...@hotmail.com> wrote:

(BTW, if you go to that link, also check out the ghost tour photos under
visitor info / things to do. The last photo on the page was taken by
me, about 6 months before that massacre.)

Wow, Kylie, interesting photos. So, what
did you think of the Ghost Tour overall?
Gayle
.
User: "mighty mouse"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 16 Jun 2007 09:18:29 PM
Gayle wrote:

On Jun 16, 4:33 am, mighty mouse <mousieNOSPAM9...@hotmail.com> wrote:

(BTW, if you go to that link, also check out the ghost tour photos under
visitor info / things to do. The last photo on the page was taken by
me, about 6 months before that massacre.)


Wow, Kylie, interesting photos. So, what did you think of the Ghost Tour
overall?

Gayle

I thought it was interesting, but I really didn't believe in ghosts much.
I took the photo because about half of the group thought they could see
something "ghostly" near that fence. I thought they were full of it,
but I took a photo in that direction anyway. Imagine my surprise when a
glowing blob appeared in that photo, exactly where people said they saw
something!
.


User: "mighty mouse"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 16 Jun 2007 09:15:34 PM
Spartacus wrote:

On Jun 16, 4:33 am, mighty mouse <mousieNOSPAM9...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Spartacus wrote:


seeing the entire picture that's all... What's your take on this?

I'm totally against guns. They should be used only under controlled
conditions for hunting, farming, sports shooting and law
enforcement/military uses. Anything else is completely unnecessary.
The whole US "right" to have a gun is just *****, IMHO. No-one has
the right to put their own, their families, and the whole populations
lives at risk by owning a gun if they don't need it for one of the above
mentioned purposes (I don't care if I get flamed for that!)


Why would you be flamed? I asked for an honest opinion and you gave
it. I do appreciate you expressing what that is! I'm of the school
that people may agree to disagree, as long as it's not habit forming.
I look at it that you must know more about it than I do with first
hand experience and all! But answer me this: If these people that
can't be trusted with weapons should brake into your home and threaten
the lives of you and your family, would you be thinking the same way
as now?

If guns are heavily restricted, then there's no need to carry one for
protection, because there's less to need protection from.


How do you qualify this? People find other ways! Necessity is the
mother of invention; more-over, even illusions can look necessary:
"Oh! There's no more guns... I think I'll take to throwing people out
windows then..." I'd rather be shot thanks! Not that I'm offering an
option. I wish that people weren't generally just plain evil scum, but
they are! One man could slit a hundred thousand throats in one night
if he were quiet and fast enough. Don't give them any ideas! Sometimes
the solution can be worse than the problem...

Yes, people will still try to hurt and kill other people with whatever
weapons are available, but surely the risk is less if the weapons they
have are less dangerous and have to be used at close range.


I don't think so... People are inventive when it comes to killing one
another. There's only been world peace a total of 92 years in all of
human history! And the greedier the rich get, the more resorceful the
poor has to be! It's not that they 'want' to 'be' criminals. They're
born into the environment; a concreat jungle! There, even a piece of
glass is a weapon at close range or as a projectile.

Australia is the site of the world's worst lone gunman shooting rampage,
where 35 people died one horrible afternoon in 1996. I never want to
see that happen again.


That is sad! But then people die in car accidents every day. How many
people die from smoking in one afternoon? Much more extensive agony!
What if while you worry about gunmen, you slip on a banana peel and
break your neck? It seems to me that if you say people can't be
trusted, all the more reason we need some form of persuasive
protection... Or anybody could do just about whatever they want. I
long for the good old days when you died in bed with your boots on I
guess... Anyway, you make a strong case! I don't even like borders or
slaughtering chickens and such. I'm a decent hue bum bean! Soon, it
might not matter due to fall out...

http://www.portarthur.org.au/pashow.php?ACTION=Public&menu_code=400.300

(BTW, if you go to that link, also check out the ghost tour photos under
visitor info / things to do. The last photo on the page was taken by
me, about 6 months before that massacre.)- Hide quoted text -


Yes thank you! Is it for my boo boo? BTW, I admire indignance! I wish
it were a better world...

- Show quoted text -



Hey Spartacus,
I'm not doing great right now, so I won't write out a lengthy reply, I
just don't have the concentration.
I have a deep fear of guns and violence, but I'm not sure why.
Even if someone was breaking into my house, I wouldn't want to have a
gun near me. Firstly, it wouldn't be loaded, and I wouldn't have time
and enough control of myself to find it, load it and use it. I'm more
likely to just freeze up.
Secondly, I would be afraid that the burglar would get the gun off me
and use it against me, and thirdly I would be afraid that someone else
(a child, whoever) would find the gun and use it. I'd rather try to
talk my way out of the situation, if at all possible (which isn't likely).
So in my eyes, there are very few situations which would justify joe
average owning a gun. Self defense isn't one of them.
.
User: "Michael A. Ball"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 09:38:46 AM
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:15:34 +1000, mighty mouse
<mousieNOSPAM9947@hotmail.com> wrote:

...
I have a deep fear of guns and violence, but I'm not sure why.
Even if someone was breaking into my house, I wouldn't want to have a
gun near me. Firstly, it wouldn't be loaded, and I wouldn't have time
and enough control of myself to find it, load it and use it. I'm more
likely to just freeze up.
Secondly, I would be afraid that the burglar would get the gun off me
and use it against me, and thirdly I would be afraid that someone else
(a child, whoever) would find the gun and use it. I'd rather try to
talk my way out of the situation, if at all possible (which isn't likely).

So in my eyes, there are very few situations which would justify joe
average owning a gun. Self defense isn't one of them.

I'm very glad you know your limitations. I admire that. However, we can
change our limitations. Simply by thinking about our options, available
alternatives, and tactical responses, we can change ourselves into to
better defended, more secure individuals. Wit a balanced combination of
shooting-range time, study of bad guys, and tactical responses, one can
live relatively safely.
Until you can absolutely commit to defending your, even by killing a
human, you should not consider a gun for defense, because you're correct
about it being used on you--or maybe just taken, after you die.
I admit that violence scares me, I'm also too tired and weak to put up
much of a fight. That is why I love having some fair skills with guns.
I'm not eager to kill anyone [except woods arsonists and dog abusers],
but I love being ready and able!
As a "Joe average" myself, I consider self defense the primary reason
to own a gun(s); relaxation is reason number two. Target practice is
very relaxing--especially on days when I shoot well. :-)
I know all of this probably sounds like Greek to you, but I'm only
trying to say that becoming a responsible shooter might open up some
fabulous doors for you.
I hope you have a great day!
________________________
Whatever it takes.
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 09:41:01 AM
"Michael A. Ball" <Guardian@wireco.net> wrote in message
news:78ga73l2h1c8rutj0gs0lo5g2bcoer7q9n@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:15:34 +1000, mighty mouse
<mousieNOSPAM9947@hotmail.com> wrote:

...
I have a deep fear of guns and violence, but I'm not sure why.
Even if someone was breaking into my house, I wouldn't want to have a
gun near me. Firstly, it wouldn't be loaded, and I wouldn't have

time

and enough control of myself to find it, load it and use it. I'm

more

likely to just freeze up.
Secondly, I would be afraid that the burglar would get the gun off me
and use it against me, and thirdly I would be afraid that someone

else

(a child, whoever) would find the gun and use it. I'd rather try to
talk my way out of the situation, if at all possible (which isn't

likely).


So in my eyes, there are very few situations which would justify joe
average owning a gun. Self defense isn't one of them.


I'm very glad you know your limitations. I admire that. However, we

can

change our limitations. Simply by thinking about our options,

available

alternatives, and tactical responses, we can change ourselves into to
better defended, more secure individuals. Wit a balanced combination

of

shooting-range time, study of bad guys, and tactical responses, one

can

live relatively safely.

Until you can absolutely commit to defending your, even by killing a
human, you should not consider a gun for defense, because you're

correct

about it being used on you--or maybe just taken, after you die.

I admit that violence scares me, I'm also too tired and weak to put up
much of a fight. That is why I love having some fair skills with guns.
I'm not eager to kill anyone [except woods arsonists and dog abusers],
but I love being ready and able!

As a "Joe average" myself, I consider self defense the primary reason
to own a gun(s); relaxation is reason number two. Target practice is
very relaxing--especially on days when I shoot well. :-)

I know all of this probably sounds like Greek to you, but I'm only
trying to say that becoming a responsible shooter might open up some
fabulous doors for you.

I hope you have a great day!



________________________
Whatever it takes.

what are you self defending from
.
User: "Michael A. Ball"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 10:04:43 AM
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 07:41:01 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

...
what are you self defending from

For me, specifically, and here? The threats I'm most likely to face
include home invaders/robbers, burglars, and malevolent, disgruntled
people.
________________________
Whatever it takes.
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 10:11:15 AM
"Michael A. Ball" <Guardian@wireco.net> wrote in message
news:ajia73pa94g2a6t3uhlt6jl1ctaqa40msa@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 07:41:01 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

...
what are you self defending from


For me, specifically, and here? The threats I'm most likely to face
include home invaders/robbers, burglars, and malevolent, disgruntled
people.


________________________
Whatever it takes.

how many times has this happened to you so far
.
User: "Michael A. Ball"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 10:55:04 AM
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 08:11:15 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

what are you self defending from


For me, specifically, and here? The threats I'm most likely to face
include home invaders/robbers, burglars, and malevolent, disgruntled
people.

how many times has this happened to you so far

Zero.
__________________________
When I count my blessings, I count my dog twice.
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 10:57:11 AM
"Michael A. Ball" <Guardian@wireco.net> wrote in message
news:gvla735i6oabugc93c72ai2i1aukg2utnd@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 08:11:15 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

what are you self defending from


For me, specifically, and here? The threats I'm most likely to face
include home invaders/robbers, burglars, and malevolent,

disgruntled

people.


how many times has this happened to you so far


Zero.



__________________________
When I count my blessings, I count my dog twice.

then why do you need a gun ,
to protect yourself from something that never happens
.
User: "Michael A. Ball"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 02:06:39 PM
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 08:57:11 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

how many times has this happened to you so far


Zero.

then why do you need a gun ,
to protect yourself from something that never happens

It is something that has never happened to me; but it happens, even in
this little town, every few days.
I intend to do all I can to make certain my answer to your previous
question remains, "Zero."
And for the record, even if there were no crime on this planet, I'd
still keep my tiny collection of five guns, because each is magnificent
in its own way.
________________________
Whatever it takes.
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 02:45:26 PM
"Michael A. Ball" <Guardian@wireco.net> wrote in message
news:v21b73d6omas5rdv0ekm9k8pvr0636naak@4ax.com...

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 08:57:11 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

how many times has this happened to you so far


Zero.


then why do you need a gun ,
to protect yourself from something that never happens


It is something that has never happened to me; but it happens, even in
this little town, every few days.

I intend to do all I can to make certain my answer to your previous
question remains, "Zero."

And for the record, even if there were no crime on this planet, I'd
still keep my tiny collection of five guns, because each is

magnificent

in its own way.



________________________
Whatever it takes.

well you go right on protecting yourself ,
from things that never happen then
.
User: "Contrarian"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 18 Jun 2007 04:08:06 PM
% <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

I intend to do all I can to make certain my answer to your previous
question remains, "Zero."
And for the record, even if there were no crime on this planet, I'd
still keep my tiny collection of five guns, because each is

magnificent in its own way.
well you go right on protecting yourself ,
from things that never happen then

That's how it works. Notice how all the massacres happen
in "gun-free" zones?
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 18 Jun 2007 04:14:46 PM
"Contrarian" <adrba65@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:WuCdi.56$YH3.27@newsread1.mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net...

% <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

I intend to do all I can to make certain my answer to your previous
question remains, "Zero."



And for the record, even if there were no crime on this planet, I'd
still keep my tiny collection of five guns, because each is

magnificent in its own way.


well you go right on protecting yourself ,
from things that never happen then


That's how it works. Notice how all the massacres happen
in "gun-free" zones?

all i know is that if i invaded a home ,
and got confronted by the owner ,
and i had a gun and he didn't i'd leave ,
but if he had a gun i'd shoot him before he shot me ,
so lets do the math , my way , no one gets shot ,
the other way someone or both are getting shot
.
User: "Michael A. Ball"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 18 Jun 2007 07:45:40 PM
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:14:46 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

...
all i know is that if i invaded a home ,
and got confronted by the owner ,
and i had a gun and he didn't i'd leave ,
but if he had a gun i'd shoot him before he shot me ,
so lets do the math , my way , no one gets shot ,
the other way someone or both are getting shot

How gallant of you! Unfortunately, most intruders are not such
gentlemen.
Your way? LOL At least its funny!
Out of curiosity, what makes you think you'd shoot the home owner,
before he shot you? I think you'd be disappointed at my house.
________________________
A day without recoil is like a day without sunshine!
.
User: "%"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 18 Jun 2007 08:03:52 PM
"Michael A. Ball" <Guardian@wireco.net> wrote in message
news:619e73t43mcc14vt530jshbskhproqe3bf@4ax.com...

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:14:46 -0700, "%" <persent@gmail.com> wrote:

...
all i know is that if i invaded a home ,
and got confronted by the owner ,
and i had a gun and he didn't i'd leave ,
but if he had a gun i'd shoot him before he shot me ,
so lets do the math , my way , no one gets shot ,
the other way someone or both are getting shot


How gallant of you! Unfortunately, most intruders are not such
gentlemen.

Your way? LOL At least its funny!

Out of curiosity, what makes you think you'd shoot the home owner,
before he shot you? I think you'd be disappointed at my house.



________________________
A day without recoil is like a day without sunshine!

no one kills more than americans ,
and its usually ... each other
.





User: "Spartacus"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 17 Jun 2007 06:20:49 PM
On Jun 17, 3:06 pm, Michael A. Ball <Guard...@wireco.net> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 08:57:11 -0700, "%" <pers...@gmail.com> wrote:

how many times has this happened to you so far


Zero.

then why do you need a gun ,
to protect yourself from something that never happens


It is something that has never happened to me; but it happens, even in
this little town, every few days.

Sure it does! I never thought I'd be robbed either but I was; they
even took the dishes and all the dangling wires, light bulbs etc. I
kid you not! Fortunately, I was away at the time! I thought showing
that you can get along with guns was something uniquly American.
There's much bigger fish to fry right now! This small frie stuff
should all be on the back burner right now. And the war is going to
spur on all kinds of radical types, so these events are slightly
biased I'd say. The war, global warming, immigration, medical
coverage, education, research all effect us more on a general basis. I
don't own a gun... But I'll tell you truly; I keep a heavy, blunt
object close by just the same! What if Russia should take that as a
que to march it's army through Alaska, down to the American border,
and start making faces at you and calling you dirty guys and stuff? Or
China, now in massive build up! And now is the time to disarm
yourselves? Why? Are you giving up?


I intend to do all I can to make certain my answer to your previous
question remains, "Zero."

Everyone says: "Oooo! Guns are bad! Guns are bad! But I've never seen
one fire itself! Meanwhile, were all getting ready to drop our nukes;
this is insane... But we invented guns to hunt for food and for
protection in the first place. And it's impracticle then to punish
everyone for those few irresponsable ones that can be regulated or
screened for fruit cake tendencies. Any thing can be a weapon; a paper
weight, a pin, a pot of boiling water etc. Removing the weapons might
look statistically better for a short time. But like I said, people
are resourceful and would only find another way to rape the public of
more tax dollars. Besides, you're gonna get the odd nut case no matter
what you deal with in life. If we resort to treating each other like
children, we must live by a childs rules!
It's so terrible humans kill for sport? Black widows kill for sex! And
they're girls! It's mainly for hunting season though. The poor animal
routine doesn't work cuz that's why we invented game preserves. Now if
these weapons aren't locked up and the ammo locked some place else,
then it would be irresponsible with children in the house. Whether you
could get yourself loaded and ready before someone got to you is
another story! They should take away our man toys for these scattered
instances? Then let's ban wimmin drivers, cell phones, alcohol,
gambling, gluttony and poker night! Plus it would create another
Underground, build new Mob controlled operations... It would open up a
whole can of worms! To take one side or the other, it's best to
consider the whole picture. Has anyone blown their foot off with one
of your guns?


And for the record, even if there were no crime on this planet, I'd
still keep my tiny collection of five guns, because each is magnificent
in its own way.

How often do you use them? Or are they 'all' soully for display? I
think it's pretty conclusive such a bill would never pass right now
anyway? I think we should take a vote and see who's making more sense
here? With what you've spent on the war over the last 15 years, I
seriously question if you have any ammo left to load the up anyway! Or
enough cash for a bag of navy beans and a straw! hehehe...


________________________
Whatever it takes.

.
User: "Contrarian"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 18 Jun 2007 04:05:22 PM
Spartacus <jinxfx13@hotmail.com> wrote:

Everyone says: "Oooo! Guns are bad! Guns are bad! But I've never seen
one fire itself!
Any thing can be a weapon; a paper
weight, a pin, a pot of boiling water etc. Removing the weapons might
look statistically better for a short time.

John Lott's Website: April 2007
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/2007_04_01_johnrlott_archive.html
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/labels/Crime.html

.








User: "BoredToTears"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 19 Jun 2007 12:11:51 PM
On 17 Jun, 15:38, Michael A. Ball <Guard...@wireco.net> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:15:34 +1000, mighty mouse

<mousieNOSPAM9...@hotmail.com> wrote:

...
I have a deep fear of guns and violence, but I'm not sure why.
Even if someone was breaking into my house, I wouldn't want to have a
gun near me. Firstly, it wouldn't be loaded, and I wouldn't have time
and enough control of myself to find it, load it and use it. I'm more
likely to just freeze up.
Secondly, I would be afraid that the burglar would get the gun off me
and use it against me, and thirdly I would be afraid that someone else
(a child, whoever) would find the gun and use it. I'd rather try to
talk my way out of the situation, if at all possible (which isn't likely).


So in my eyes, there are very few situations which would justify joe
average owning a gun. Self defense isn't one of them.


I'm very glad you know your limitations. I admire that. However, we can
change our limitations. Simply by thinking about our options, available
alternatives, and tactical responses, we can change ourselves into to
better defended, more secure individuals. Wit a balanced combination of
shooting-range time, study of bad guys, and tactical responses, one can
live relatively safely.

Until you can absolutely commit to defending your, even by killing a
human, you should not consider a gun for defense, because you're correct
about it being used on you--or maybe just taken, after you die.

I admit that violence scares me, I'm also too tired and weak to put up
much of a fight. That is why I love having some fair skills with guns.
I'm not eager to kill anyone [except woods arsonists and dog abusers],
but I love being ready and able!

As a "Joe average" myself, I consider self defense the primary reason
to own a gun(s); relaxation is reason number two. Target practice is
very relaxing--especially on days when I shoot well. :-)

I know all of this probably sounds like Greek to you, but I'm only
trying to say that becoming a responsible shooter might open up some
fabulous doors for you.

You can't do that here cos it's virtually impossible for anyone to own
a handgun legally, never mind practice with it.
Thankfully.
You can get a prison sentence for possession of live ammunition.
.



User: "Janithor"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 15 Jun 2007 10:24:13 PM
x-no-archive: yes
Spartacus wrote:

I think it's really weird as a Canuk sitting back giggling over this
debate. Yet muy American side is troubled that there's so much fuss
over that Virginia massicre thingy and I think it was just something
fuled by the war like most things now; everyone so self righteous and
all about it... But I remember as a child, out in Saskatchewan
shooting goffers with 22 longs at 25 cents a tail! And hey! It often
made the difference whether I ate that day or not!

You could take every last gun out of The U.S. and then read reports
how students are slitting each others throats next week! You see, it
just wouldn't matter! There are lots of ways to kill yourself or
others that gun control has nothing to do with! There are also 50 ways
to leave your lover! Even if you screen for wackos, an under ground
movement will just see that as an opportunity to capitalize on it...
So, in my mind, it seems a silly argument. Weapons aren't "just"
weapons. They can also be tools. I just don't think officials are4
seeing the entire picture that's all... What's your take on this?

All I want is a ma deuce, and I'll be happy.
.
User: "Jane"

Title: Re: Fire arms: For or Against? 16 Jun 2007 07:58:59 AM
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:467357DD.6060900@comcast.net...

x-no-archive: yes

Spartacus wrote:

I think it's really weird as a Canuk sitting back giggling over this
debate. Yet muy American side is troubled that there's so much fuss
over that Virginia massicre thingy and I think it was just something
fuled by the war like most things now; everyone so self righteous and
all about it... But I remember as a child, out in Saskatchewan
shooting goffers with 22 longs at 25 cents a tail! And hey! It often
made the difference whether I ate that day or not!

You could take every last gun out of The U.S. and then read reports
how students are slitting each others throats next week! You see, it
just wouldn't matter! There are lots of ways to kill yourself or
others that gun control has nothing to do with! There are also 50 ways
to leave your lover! Even if you screen for wackos, an under ground
movement will just see that as an opportunity to capitalize on it...
So, in my mind, it seems a silly argument. Weapons aren't "just"
weapons. They can also be tools. I just don't think officials are4
seeing the entire picture that's all... What's your take on this?



All I want is a ma deuce, and I'll be happy.

Hunting only
.



  Page 2 of 2

1

 

2

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.2109     pg.1169     pg.647     pg.357     pg.196     pg.107     pg.58     pg.31     pg.16     pg.8     pg.4     pg.2

OLDER