Gun Ownership - are you really safe?

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 07:31 PM

Yes, This land is your land gets my vote, too!

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 08:20 PM

Home invasions in our part of the state tend to be unarmed home invasions, because everyone knows that most homes in the county are protected by homeowners who have guns on hand for hunting, and who know how to use them for the protection of farm animals (against predators) and who know the law pertaining to defending home and family if necessary.

Bar fights here tend also to be unarmed fights, for the simple reason that it is well known that many people here have "carry" permits and may be prepared should a fight go to the next level.

Children here tend to learn about gun safety, well before they are old enough to get a case of teenage rebellion and tote one to school.

Most teens who hunt (for the family table), and who have earned their rifle by demonstrating their responsibbility over a number of years of careful pretnal guidance, would never think of risking the loss of their prized hunting rifle by doing something stupid with it. Parents of children tend to lock their hunting and target-shooting firearms up and sometimes keep them offsite, to protect the younger children.

Of course these are not guarantees, but they are the cultural norms here in our area.

And I can't say ALL parents are that responsible-- we do have idiots moving here from the flatlands who don't have a clue about any of this, and for all I know they leave guns out where little ones can grab them.

~Susan

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: frogprince
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:08 PM

I just, for the first time in my life, actually registered the fact that this line is in our national anthem:

"Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just"

That line is so little known that it isn't really a significant factor in modern American culture. But the fact that a song containing that line was adopted as our anthem in the first place, is just about appalling.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Rapparee
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:10 PM

Which is one reason I like "This land is your land."

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:11 PM

It's easier to sing too.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:31 PM

Kat - thanks for that link.. I always thought (along with a lot of your fellow countrymen) that the last line of the Spar strangled banner was 'play ball!'

"as in shoot anyone carrying one on sight" And what if that gun turns out (as it has before) to be a toy, a replica or a table leg?

Redemptive violence - otherwise known as payback. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Pretty soon, the whole world is blind and toothless.

LTS

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:35 PM

I was pretty much of a handgun bug at one time, largely because a friend of mine was into target shooting and got me interested as well. He was a member of the Seattle Police Athletic Association, and I (and a couple other of his friends) would go with him as his guests and spend an enjoyable afternoon putting holes in paper at 25 yards. On other occasions, we go out in the tall-and-uncut where no one lived nearby (sometimes a gravel-pit or somewhere close to a hill or embankment that would act as a back-stop) and massacre beer and soft drink cans. Re: the beer cans, once we finished up a day's shooting, we'd gather at someone's place and sit around cleaning the guns. Once they were cleaned and put away, then and only then would the beer come out, and we'd prepare a few targets for next tune.

This had darned little to do with killing people or things. It was more like golf. Shooting for score.

I still have the guns, safely locked away, but I don't go shooting anymore.   I don't keep them around for protection, and as soon as I get off my duff, I plan on selling them—to a gun dealer and repairman I know, whom I also know to be diligent and ethical about checking out a customer before selling him or her a gun.

I used to walk with a pair of crutches. On the very few occasions were I felt threatened, I'm quite sure the person making the threats was unaware of how effective a crutch in the goolies can be.

I like Rapaire's idea of the smallsword for self-defense. It may not have the range of a Glock 9 mm. pistol, but it's far more elegant and stylish.

I am of the opinion that the National Guard units of the various states constitute the "well regulated militia" the founding fathers had in mind. A totally unorganized bunch of armed civilians is certainly not a "well regulated militia."

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Peace
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:37 PM

Yeah to that, Don. Then there's Blackwater.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 09:47 PM

Well, I could fall off the couch and break my neck too. I just can't worry about what 'might' happen. That includes maniacs in my neighborhood. Shoot 'em all and let God sort em out. Tongue FIRMLY in cheek here.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Rapparee
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 10:03 PM

Elegance personified, that's me. But the smallsword is hanging on the wall, I know how to use it, and I don't have to load it, etc.

Besides, there's something psychological about having 35 inches of steel, in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, pointing at your stomach or throat that a pistol just doesn't supply. (A 12 gauge side-by-side double barrel shotgun has it, too. As they say out here, "Buckshot means buryin'." But it can leave messy holes in the walls and furniture and besides, it just ain't very elegant. And it's hard to pull that buckshot back if you've made a mistake.)

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 10:49 PM

".. And it's hard to pull that buckshot back if you've made a mistake."

...and if widespread ownership of various firearms is allowed & encouraged, we will be reading about more & more 'mistakes'. Training in how to load & pull the trigger is easy: training in good judgment and restraint is not.
   We just had a police officer in this area kill one man and wound another at the policeman's home...they were delivering furniture! and there was some sort of silly dispute. This was the 4th or 5th time this guy had been in hot water for brandishing his gun and making threats.
   Imagine regular folks, already nervous about harassment & robberies 'defending' themselves by waving a gun every time someone looks at them funny.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 10:58 PM

Hey, mistakes are too easy with guns, esp hand guns. But my Mr's biggie was with a .270 hunting rifle. Bolt open, one in the chamber (don't ask US how that happened--he has been using firearms since he was a tot and is a 'trained police officer'). Closed the gun case....BOOM! Shot my Jeep Wagoneer. Driver rear quarter panel glass and back glass, richotched off a tree across the street, and buried in the dirt.

Scared the HOLY LIVING CRAP out of both of us, but thankfully, nobody hurt and the Cop Shop wasn't alerted by a neighbor. I had the aluminun panel from the storm door and some of the Jeep glass framed, put a brass plate with the date on it. Gave it to him for Xmas. He is still (as he should be) pretty upset, sheepish, embarassed...etc.

Accidental discharge can (and probably eventually will) happen to anybody. Lady Luck plays a large part...or God. Which ever you prefer.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 11:13 PM

I've never heard anyone say of a smallsword, "Officer, I was just cleaning it, and it accidentally went off!"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Sorcha
Date: 18 Apr 07 - 11:15 PM

Nope. Hey, if it were up to me, there would be NO guns in this house, but it isn't up to me.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 11:56 AM

Bill, you really disappoint me with all this demagogic stuff. For every story like that one, I can come up with another showing a responsible use, or a life saved. Usually when you debate a subject, you stick to quantifiable stuff. I can only surmise on this one that you are so committed to what you think is the right course that your normally sterling debating skills are being shelved. There is an important distinction that those whose real goal is to get rid of all guns don't want to make. There are many legitimate uses for guns, and the guns of law abiding citizens aren't the ones used in these crimes.

- During the Clinton Administration, the Justice Department studied the issue. They were attempting to show that guns were a danger. One of the facts they uncovered is that guns were used for self defense 1.5 million times each year. This study was conducted by anti gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.

- Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.

-More guns, less crime. In the decade of the 1990s, the number of guns in this country increased by roughly 40 million—even while the murder rate decreased by almost 40% percent. Accidental gun deaths in the home decreased by almost 40 percent as well.

-Gun-free England not such a utopia after all. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997. And according to a United Nations study, British citizens are more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States. The 2000 report shows that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 02:15 PM

"For every story like that one, I can come up with another showing a responsible use, or a life saved."

I sincerely doubt that you can counter anywhere NEAR the number of tragic uses of guns with positive uses.

"Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day. "

That is....beyond my comprehension. I need a reference and an idea of what they include in those statistics.

Mick...we may disagree, but as you say, you know me...Don't you think "demagogic" is a wee bit over the top for my honest presentation of my views?

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Greg B
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 02:28 PM

"I grew up watching heroes such as Marshal Dillon go after the bad guys
and get them, but he did his best not to have to shoot them"

Yeah, but in the end, on almost every show, he had to do it. Oh,
he didn't want to. Felt kinda bad afterwards. But yup, pardner,
it just had to be done.

Wasn't it Billy the Kid who said "I ain't never killed nobody
that didn't need killin'?"

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 02:39 PM

Bill, I do know you, I value you as a friend,and I have no doubt that you are not typically a demogogue. But it seems to me that you are employing a demogogic debating tactic on this one. In this debate, it seems to me, you are relying on individual stories that suit your bias. I understand this. You know me as well. I am a progressive, and work in many liberal, progressive causes. Over the years, in my involvement with the Democratic Party at the highest levels, and in causes espoused by my progressive friends, I have felt conflicted over my use and enjoyment of firearms. Remember the Kayla Rollings shooting? That was the one where the kindergarten girl was shot by a classmate with a gun left laying around? That next weekend I was in Flint with the Second Lady. And I was challenged for my views. I said then what I say now. These are horrible tragedies. But they have little to do with the overwhelming majority of gun owners in the USA who simply have and use weapons in a legal and responsible way. Any law that takes those weapons will not reduce violent crime. In fact the statistics seem to show it will increase it.

As to the cite I gave on the number of times guns are used by law abiding citizens, here is the cite:

Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun," 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995):164.
Dr. Kleck is a professor in the school of criminology and criminal justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee. He has researched extensively and published several essays on the gun control issue. His book, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, has become a widely cited source in the gun control debate. In fact, this book earned Dr. Kleck the prestigious American Society of Criminology Michael J. Hindelang award for 1993. This award is given for the book published in the past two to three years that makes the most outstanding contribution to criminology.
Even those who don't like the conclusions Dr. Kleck reaches, cannot argue with his impeccable research and methodology. In "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," Marvin E. Wolfgang writes that, "What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. . . . I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence." Wolfgang, "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, at 188.
Wolfgang says there is no "contrary evidence." Indeed, there are more than a dozen national polls—one of which was conducted by The Los Angeles Times—that have found figures comparable to the Kleck-Gertz study. Even the Clinton Justice Department (through the National Institute of Justice) found there were as many as 1.5 million defensive users of firearms every year. See National Institute of Justice, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," Research in Brief (May 1997).


Mick

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Greg B
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 02:47 PM

After 9/11, I was lamenting the fact that the response had been to
ground, for a period of weeks, law-abiding pilots of light aircraft
(which lacked the mass and carrying capacity to do much damage) while
permitting large commercial aircraft (such has had brought down the
twin towers) to continue to fly.

The old guy with whom I was talking said "well, they gotta do
something."

This sort of sums up the 'make a law' mentality which increases
the burden on law-abiding citizens while doing absolutely nothing
to make us safer from criminals who don't give a damn for the law.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 03:01 PM

These are horrible tragedies. But they have little to do with the overwhelming majority of gun owners in the USA who simply have and use weapons in a legal and responsible way.

Yes, until their 14 year old son comes home from school and uses his dad's hunting rifle to commit suicide afraid to tell his parents he didn't get all "A"s on his report card as happened in WY.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Donuel
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 03:01 PM

" Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens with 40% ...."

Karl Rove School of Super Statistics

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 03:36 PM

ya know, kat, you are really starting to show that you don't know what you are talking about. Does the thought occur to you that someone who is so despondent and unbalanced that they are going to take their life, will do so anyhow? Did the gun make this student kill him/herself? No, it did not. Does the thought occur to you that the kid would have thrown him/herself in front of a car, jumped off a bridge, or overdosed? I think if I were you, I would be more angry at parents who drive their children to this, instead of using these victims to try and prop up your biases about weapons. As I said to Bill, I will say to you. I can match each of your horror stories with a positive story. People who are out of their depth and don't have facts to back up their positions use these tactics. You would be better off just saying you don't like guns and wish they were gone. That would be fine. But I give cites as to what I am saying. Those of you who know me, know that if I thought gun control would save the lives of these innocents, I would advocate and act to make it happen. But the evidence and experience does not show that.

Until you and others stop using these individual stories to appeal to popular prejudices (which is what demagogues do, look it up)you will be on the losing end of the argument. It is why Americans overwhelmingly support the right to own firearms.

One of the sad parts of this debate is that by the anti gun people taking such a polarizing position (unlike what Bill D has said elsewhere) it hinders the ability to make progress in certain areas that might make sense. For example: I support liberal conceal carry laws. But I feel that the training component should be much more rigorous. If one is going to carry a weapon in public places, the training ought be what police officers go through.

There is much dialogue that could happen, but not as long as the anti gun forces advocate against law abiding citizens, and the rights they have had for generations.

Mick

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Slag
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:03 PM

Just a little more grist for the mill: If you are an able bodied male in these United States, between the ages of 17 and 35, I have news for you. You ARE a member of the federal militia. In addition many states have similar clauses. What have you done to prepare to defend your state and country? It is your RESPONSIBILITY to know how to use weaponry and follow military discipline.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:16 PM

"I've never heard anyone say of a smallsword, "Officer, I was just cleaning it, and it accidentally went off!""

Only problem, it is against the law in both Maryland and DC to carry any blade over 3 inches. The police will confiscate it, and break the blade off on the nearest curb.

So, one cannot legally carry a smallsword.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Wesley S
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:24 PM

"It is your RESPONSIBILITY to know how to use weaponry and follow military discipline."

Caaaallll Meeeee Irresposible.....

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Rapparee
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:32 PM

That's too bad. They'll only take MY smallsword when they pull from its scabbard! Or would that make it a concealed weapon?

Having been in sporting good stores in Maryland, including REI, all I can say is that the Maryland cops must spend a lot of times breaking knife blades....

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:32 PM

Mick...I am reading those references.

I find on the WWW the "Gunowners" site where you probably obtained them. There's a lot to read there, and more in THEIR links...but almost everything I've looked at so far seems to relate back to the "Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime" study.

What I see is language like "... citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year." That still seems larger than I can imagine. They don't say how many of these were separate individuals and how many were one guy reporting he 'used' his gun in defense 53 times....and does 'use' include simply saying "I've got a gun, you better not try anything."?


Since I do not have that book, I am left wondering how their numbers were arrived at....that is, what kind of data was included. Police reports? Interviews? Hearsay? I say this because as YOU know from listening to Bush for 6 years, statistics can be padded and manipulated and interpreted to prove most any point....and a "gunowners" website would certainly have an interest in a particular conclusion.

I am still reading and trying to sort out what I think about the data/study/source. It would be important if it were even fairly accurate.


but also..." In this debate, it seems to me, you are relying on individual stories that suit your bias."

No, I am not 'relying'...as anyone does, I cite 'examples' I am familar with. (Did you read the one about the guy I knew personally? You said YOU had never known anyone who was careless or dangerous....I did.) I 'rely' on myriads of facts and stories and valued opinions of others for 45 years now. I did not start opposed to guns...I played at guns..I once owned a .22 pistol...briefly. I had no built-in opposition, or personal tragedies to color my opinions. I just ran what I knew, what I read and heard, what others (on BOTH sides) said, and what logic tells me, and was persuaded that as far as I could tell, the negative aspects of the USA's fairly open policy on personal ownership/possession of firearms has begun to to outweigh the positives.

This is not a frontier society any longer, and YOUR argument that "my family has always had 'em, so why should I give 'em up?", doesn't move me a lot when I see the monthly reports of robbery & assault in DC and other cities. (I do NOT see many reports of 'honest citizens defending themselves with guns'.)

But, as a matter of fact, my concern is NOT especially with making YOU give up your guns...it is rather with being MORE sure that idiots cannot GET them...and removing them from the hands of idiots who already have them! (See my post in the other thread.)

further, demagogue sayeth not. (I got wood to turn)

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 04:45 PM

No, I am not 'relying'...as anyone does, I cite 'examples' I am familar with. (Did you read the one about the guy I knew personally? You said YOU had never known anyone who was careless or dangerous....I did.) I 'rely' on myriads of facts and stories and valued opinions of others for 45 years now. I did not start opposed to guns...I played at guns..I once owned a .22 pistol...briefly. I had no built-in opposition, or personal tragedies to color my opinions. I just ran what I knew, what I read and heard, what others (on BOTH sides) said, and what logic tells me, and was persuaded that as far as I could tell, the negative aspects of the USA's fairly open policy on personal ownership/possession of firearms has begun to to outweigh the positives.

This is not a frontier society any longer, and YOUR argument that "my family has always had 'em, so why should I give 'em up?", doesn't move me a lot when I see the monthly reports of robbery & assault in DC and other cities. (I do NOT see many reports of 'honest citizens defending themselves with guns'.)

Exactly, Bill. I used to be a "dead eye" with a 9mm and still have the 22 single shot rifle I grew up with in my parents' house. I don't have any bullets in the house. I quit target-practice when I moved East.

Our gun culture has stifled my desire to yell at folks who drive by our house going 50mph in a 20mph posted zone because ya never know...one of them may have a gun and come back to blow my head off in a fit of rage. Chances are it would be when I least expect it and unless I am going to start walking around with a six-iron on my hip, I would never get a chance to defend myself against such an attack, so...I keep my mouth shut.

Attack me, belittle me, and dismiss the personal stories of tragedy all you want Mick. They are still tragedies and they happen everyday in homes with legal guns and parents who think they are being careful. The world is not as black and white as you seem to think it is...lots of gray areas. It doesn't matter what tradition is...the world is a lot different than it used to be and some things need to change. I don't know what the answers are, but there's got to be a better way than what is happening right now.

kat

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Big Mick
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 05:04 PM

I didn't belittle you, kat. You attacked my arguments by citing a tragic example as though that were the norm. This is another example of trying to take the high ground by using a story to appeal to emotion. We all have emotion, and we all ache over these tragedies. But these tragedies are not the fodder for solid law that will resolve a problem. When you attempt to sway by appealling to emotion as opposed to supporting your position with solid fact and demonstrable proof, it is you doing the attacking and attempting to belittle.

Bill, I don't believe you to be a demagogue. But I believe in this argument you are using the tactic. As to the cite I provided, I am unsure exactly which site I grabbed it from, but I did provide a fairly exact reference for which you should have no problem tracking the veracity. In fact, the sources cited were folks that were anti gun. As to the implication that I just grabbed these numbers, remember that I have been at this argument a long time.

For the rest of you, I probably agree with Kat and Bill D on many more issues than I disagree. But on this issue I find myself at loggerheads with them and others. The facts as I have been able to uncover them just don't support the contentions many of these good folks are making. I understand the horror and desire to fix the problem. But the answer doesn't lie in band aid treatment of a severed carotid.

Mick

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 05:07 PM

Mick,

remember that I have been at this argument a long time

It shows too....

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 05:10 PM

My family always had slaves. Why should I not have one?

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 05:13 PM

...and my grandfather could by tincture of cannabis, laudanum and cocaine from his apothecary. Why can't I? I think my freedom is being impinged upon...(contd p96)

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Peace
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 05:28 PM

Canada has a gun registry. All the honest people I know registered their firearms. Estimates from the RCMP state that 1 in 4 households have a firearm. They also estimate that there are 16,000,000 rifles in Canada.

"FOR THE 548 MURDERS IN 2003, STATISTICS CANADA REPORTS SHOW:

71% of murders were committed with something other than a gun.
29% of the 548 murders were committed with a firearm (6% of the guns used were registered, 26% were unregistered and the government didn't know the registration status of the other 68%). Makes a sane person ask: "What good is the gun registry?"
68% of the 161 firearms homicides were committed with handguns (that the government has been registering since 1934).
Between 1997 and 2003, the registration status was known for 46% of firearm-related homicides. Of these, 86% were not registered and 80% of the accused persons did not possess a valid FAC or Firearms Licence. Why? Because 69% of murderers were already known criminals including five that had previously been convicted for homicide. Why were these murderers back on the street? "


"FOR 22,906 ROBBERIES IN 2003, STATISTICS CANADA TABLES SHOW:

86% of robberies reported by police were committed with something other than a firearm.
95% of the injuries suffered by victims of police-reported robberies were injured with something other than a firearm.
88% of firearm robberies reported by police were committed with guns that were either already banned or handguns that should have been registered.
85% of injuries suffered by victims of police-reported robberies committed with firearms were committed with guns that were either already banned or handguns that the government has been trying to register for the last 70 years. "

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: nutty
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 06:43 PM

In the UK these are the statistics from the Home Office .....

Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in the UK is very low – less than 0.5% of all crime recorded by the police.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 07:43 PM

Well, gol danged...

Apparently I'm part of a militia 'cause I own a gun??? Didn't get membership card in the mail 'er any training and for the life of me I'm not too sure if the Ruskies were to ivade Page County, Va., where I was 'spose to be with my 12 guage or my over under 410/22...

But I reckon I'm in malitia 'cause I own a couple guns???

Wonder what malitia the folks in DC who ride tghe streets at night killing one another are in???

Yo, Mick... I loves ya brother but waht malitia are you in???

Might of fact, fir all my Mudcat friends: What malitia are you in??? Do you have regular training??? Patches on yer sleeves??? Membership cards???

Just curious...

Now this is one dumbass argument we have going here... I think it would take a brain dead person to misconstrure the Second Amendment... Heck, if the Founding Fathers wanted everyone to pack heat just for general purposes then why did they word it in the same sentence with the right to have a malitia???

And, fir cripes sake, how many of the Founding Fathers could have envisioned the menu of arms available to folks some 250 years later???

Hey, I don't have no problem with everyone in the country owning a rifle just like the Founding Fathers prolly did but handguns in the Founmding Fathers days were for an occasional duel and not something to stick in yer glove compartment incase someone pisses you off on the highway...

I mean, lets get reasonable here, folks... Yeah, I like and need havin' my guns but I, nor you, don't need no handgun...

And BillD is entirely correct... When I was growin' up in Falls Church, Va. there was a gun nut who accidently killed himself with a gun so it ***can*** happen... But that's not part of my argument... Just back-up testimony...

Bobert
(gun owner)
(former NRA member)

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 09:09 PM

Did you know that 99% of all statistics can be used to support any damn point you want to make as long as you arrange 'em and present 'em in the right way? I love statistics. But not as much as I love packin' enough deadly firepower to feel "safe".

And in my case, that is one HELL of a lotta firepower!

It ain't safe out there.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: GUEST,pattyClink
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 09:54 PM

The Founding Fathers were trying desperately to keep their little nation from turning into someone's autocracy. They wanted and started a system where the people who live there would truly hold the power, not some elite which ruled over them. They believed one way to ensure this condition would be to never let the elite decide who could have a gun and who couldn't, and thus amendment #2.

They did not foresee how civilized and numerous and mechanized we would all become, nor that we would have vast standing armies and missiles. Doubtless it would have been better had they devised other ways to keep power in the hands of the people instead of a huge armed government. It seems silly today to think the little people could rise up and slap the runaway government into line at rifle point.   

That said, I still don't want Dick Cheney or George Bush or Mr. Gonzales to gather all the guns to themselves any more than they already have. And I'm pretty sure this Cho character would have slapped together some IEDs to do his dirty work had gunpower not been available.

And speaking of Dick & George, let's reflect on the fact that Iraqis have to live with massacres practically daily.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 10:25 PM

The only way anyone is going to take my smallsword away from me is if they pry it out of my cold, dead hand!

Don Firth

P. S. They might just have to deal with the Walther P-38 in my other hand.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: IvanB
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:23 AM

As the son of a gun owner I was taught to shoot both rifles and handguns at an early age. Also, at an early age, I determined gun use was not something that appealed to me. Although I accompanied my stepdad and his friends on many hunts it was always without a gun in my hands. My true joy was when I could accompany them on fishing expeditions and sometimes even show them how it was done! Since I left home I've never owned any kind of gun nor knowingly allowed one in my house.

That said, I watch the gun rights debate with mixed emotions. Mick, you've stated that dialogue can't happen "as long as the anti gun forces advocate against law abiding citizens, and the rights they have had for generations." But, admit it, the polemic from the organized anti gun control lobby has been just as rabid and is at least as responsible for the lack of reasoned debate as is anything gun control advocates have had to say. I assume you received your original concealed carry permit in Michigan, where you were required to pass a test on proper firearms usage as well as a background check that could have ruled you out for such permit for any of numerous reasons including mental disorders. But, when Allen Cropsey (a conservative who I would place among the worst Michian legislators I've seen in my lifetime) introduced his amendment to the concealed carry law, he envisioned mandatory issuance of a permit with practically no restrictions and the gun rights advocates fought long and hard against the restrictions that were finally implemented. And, unfortunately, the restrictions for handgun ownership are far lower in most other states.

One thing that no gun law in my knowledge requires is that a gun owner maintain his/her competence with a firearm and this, more than any other reason, makes me hesitant to see citizens running about willy-nilly with guns. Although I learned to shoot and to shoot well, it's been almost 50 years since I've touched a gun and, although I'd certainly have the ability to shoot one if it was handed to me today, I certainly have no assurance I'd have the competence to hit my intended target or that I wouldn't instead shoot an innocent bystander. My stepdad carries a concealed handgun with him, and has told me on numerous occasions that he doesn't get to the practice range anywhere near often enough - and I've always considered him a relatively responsible gun owner! It's the millions who would buy guns and never make it to the range that worry me.

I have no argument with responsible gun ownership. I do have an argument with those who maintain that individuals should be able to buy any guns they want with almost no restrictions on either the purchase or ownership and, let's face it, that's where the big money gun lobbyists seem to want us to go.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:33 AM

Amen, Ivan!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:36 AM

Amen, part B, Ivan...

Bobert

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:43 AM

Bobert,

"And, fir cripes sake, how many of the Founding Fathers could have envisioned the menu of arms available to folks some 250 years later??? "

And how could they have envisioned the Internet? At the time of the Bill of Rights, it was SPEECH and PRESS- No mention at all of electronic expression. So, by your arguement, there is NO right to freedom of speech except by unamplified voice in the presence of those listening. And no right to freedom of the printed word unless it is produced by a hand-powered press.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: bubblyrat
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:43 AM

I agree that America certainly seems to have a problem with both guns, and the proliferation of gun-related violence in the entertainment industry.However, one should be careful when considering the effects of wide-ranging gun control laws, maybe even leading to total bans,in some instances, as is the ludicrous situation in Britain.Any government, anywhere, would be only too happy to have that much "control" over its citizens, removing at a stroke the possibility of armed insurrection by the populace !! ---I am sure George Bush would just LOVE that !! Sadly, no attempts at limiting or controlling the number of weapons in circulation in a civilian population will ever solve any problems, as the law-abiding citizen will dutifully obey the rules, and the criminal element of society will not. Doubtless, many a life could have been saved in Britain in the last ten years if certain shopkeepers, householders, and security -guards had been allowed to have a gun with which to defend themselves against their (fatal) assailants, but ,Alas !! --in Britain, one is not allowed to defend oneself with any kind of weapon at all.If you live in a dangerous or intimidating neighbourhood in Britain, and you are afraid that you might get mugged as you get out of your car at night, you might be tempted to keep a baseball bat behind the driver"s seat. Well, if you do, the police will most certainly prosecute you for possessing an Offensive Weapon-----They are far more concerned for the safety and welfare of your assailant than they are about YOURS !! A shortsword hanging on the wall at home, indeed !!! HA !!------Wave that at an intruder who"s just threatened you with a gun (all British criminals have one ) and is now raping your daughter, and you will get at least two years in jail, IF you attack the intruder with it !! THAT is what life is like under the dictator ,Tony Blair, and ,whilst the USA may well have gun-law problems, ----I know which country I would feel safer in ( and it isn"t THIS one !!! ) So keep your guns, guys, and be thankful that you can !!! And stay out of Britain---it"s out of control, and every day it becomes more like the Wild West than the real Wild West ever was ( with the Keystone Cops thrown in ).   Sadly, Roger ( Scared Shitless every day )....

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: bubblyrat
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:00 AM

I forgot to say !!----Take a look at dear old Switzerland---there, the Army is comprised almost entirely of civilian militamen, or at leastit was until fairly recently.All males up to age 40, or maybe even 50, had to undergo regular military training, and were legally required to keep their weapons ( Rifles, pistols and sub-machine guns and relevant ammunition ) AT HOME , as part of the "quick response " military strategy of that nation.Did they become a nation of gunslingers ?? No !! Did the citizens of Basle indulge in an orgy of drive-by machine-gunnings ?? No!! Were the Gnomes of Zurich slaughtered in their banks ?? No!! But then ,the people of Switzerland are very picky about who they let into their country, are comparatively less racially diluted, and are not forced to live like rats in a shoebox, so perhaps gun-crime is more closely linked to socio-economic conditions, rather than firearms proliferation "PER SE " ????

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Gulliver
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:12 AM

Re Switzerland--it's the same in Israel (excluding Arabs, of course). When I was working on a kibbutz there I had to undergo weapons training (only time I ever fired a machine-gun, also learned to drive a tank!).

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: GUEST,Not that guest, not the other one, either
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 09:43 AM

I am convinced! I am going to get a handgun. I will take recommendations from the gun owners who have been weighing in as to what to get. I want to do mostly target shooting (so economy is a concern). But I would like to know that whatever I get could also defend me from criminal intruders and revenooers. Also from the ocassional card-cheater. ;-) I am considering a .357 magnum revolver, a 9mm semi, and a .22 semi. Any suggestions?

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:00 AM

Bubblyrat, I get it that the Swiss are more responsible in their gun ownership than they are here in the States. The NRA contributes to this irresponsibility. Therefore, those who are irresponsible shouldn't own guns.

And it gets bigger and bigger. You purchase a handgun and the criminal can buy a semi-automatic on the streets and you have a bigger bloodbath than in the Wild West where there weren't any semi-automatics or illegal automatic weapons.

You gun owners think you're safe but criminals can get at your weapons and they do it all the time and sell them in the streets. It's just posturing to think that gun-ownership is a solution to gun crime. But it could create more gun battles.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Pilgrim
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:03 AM

Any weapon which you hold for the purposes of defence can be used against you. Some would do well to recognise this.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Peace
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:05 AM

'GUEST,Not that guest, not the other one, either'

Gte a .44 Magnum and stop fuckin' around.

Subject: RE: Gun Ownership - are you really safe?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:11 AM

Bubblyrat - don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail. It's purpose is to scare the crap out of people like you.
Doe you honestly imagine that if ordinary people had guns you would have had fewer firearms-related deaths in the UK?
And yes, you are allowed to defend yourself in Britain. Whatever the right-wing tabloids say, the law entitles you to use reasonable and proportionate force to defend yourself. You can even kill someone if necessary. What you can't do is what Tony Martin did, and that is to shoot someone in the back with an illegally held firearm.
So, if someone is raping your daughter, you may certainly use the smallsword on the wall. You may find yourself having to justify your actions in court, but that is only right, for no-one should have carte-blanche to take another person's life (or perhaps, in your gung-ho world, they should).
And before writing any more twaddle on what the police will and won't do, why don't you talk to a police officer. Get your head out of the tabloids and engage with the real world.