BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh

Subject: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 05:58 PM

With a different perspective.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 06:23 PM

Wow. That video was hard to watch, gnu. I knew it was going to go off and the suspense was hard to bear.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Mrrzy
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 06:50 PM

Right, just what we need, guns in bars. All they need now is children... in the bars... with the guns... and it will all make sense to somebody.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 06:50 PM

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 06:52 PM

Sorru - thar was me being trigger happy and pushing the wrong button.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 07:04 PM

gnus in bars... now, THAT would be bad.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: flattop
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 07:13 PM

The video would be funnier if it was shorter. It's still funny considering Jonathan Haidt theory that our conscious thoughts are like a rider on an elephant of unconscious emotions. When the elephant decides where he is going, the rider's wishes don't matter.

So, you're a waiter in a gun filled Tennessee restaurant when the cook puts too much salt in the peanut soup. What's next?


Jonathan Haidt & The Happiness Hypothesis

Leadership by and for rider/elephants

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 07:37 PM

I don't know about you but it makes me feel real safe, knowing that some permit holders are disenfranchised. Of course, it might be a little late for me when one of the 218,000 permit holders is about to lose his permit.

"Of the roughly 218,000 handgun permit holders in Tennessee, 278 had their permits revoked last year, records show. Since 2005, state records shows nearly 1,200 people have lost their permits."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/05/tennessee-lawmakers-allow_n_211710.html

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 07:53 PM

Well, bad gun day here in my little holler...

Not too sure who has been doing the shooting but it's been goin' on for almost 5 hours now and literally thousands of rounds have been fired...

I Finally called the Sheriff's Dept about a half an hour ago and waiting for them to get back to me but it's now completely dark and the shooting hasn't stopped...

I guess I should consider myself lucky because the bullets aren't comin' my way but I called the guy two farms down and he says it's been like living in war zone...

The problem with gun ownership is that is seems that most of the folks that own them are the stupid people... Not all, mind you, but a disporportionate number...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: olddude
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 07:58 PM

sadly Bobert, you are pretty much right

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 08:19 PM

I disagree. Few are stupid. But, when the stupid ones fire for over 5 hours, well, they make a lot of noise. Seems they like the noise like a baby likes a rattle.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 08:56 PM

How in the hell can they find and/or afford so damned many bullets? Even .22s are selling for US $3.00 for 50, and that's if you can find 'em in the stores.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 09:07 PM

Danged if I know, Rap... Lotta that stuff has been the heavy duty stuff... Like 30 cal or better... Very loud...

I can't think that "my shooter" would have had the stamina to shoot for 5 hours straight... He's really not all that healthy... I think that maybe someone rented out their land to a shoot club... That many rounds had to have been alot of shooters tho I didn't hear shot goin' off similtanously...

And, for the record, I'm stickin' with the premise that way too many stupid people own guns...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 09:48 PM

Well, yeah, I agree with that. I told an old codger here that he'd be better off with a 3 D-cell flashlight than with the .38 he had since all he wanted it for was in case someone broke in. Besides, wives don't get near as upset with flashlight by the bed as they do with, say, a .45. Folks who belong in the house don't die as often, either.

Course, I still like my small sword. Elegance and grace in stickin' the guy who broke in, that's my style. None of those nasty holes in walls, floor, ceiling and furniture to patch up.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: olddude
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 10:02 PM

They probably reload their own, if the swag their own bullets and reload their shell casings it can be pretty cheap to shoot all day long

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: katlaughing
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 10:18 PM

Gimmee a can of spray paint any day for repelling anyone stupid enough to break in. That and my dog.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 12 Sep 09 - 11:40 PM

I'm not breaking into anybody's house, planning to stick anybody up, shooting anyone, setting myself on fire, getting a tattoo, having my nipples pierced, or doing much of anything other than live my plain vanilla, simple, dull life. Please don't make me change my plans. I get annoyed when I have to change my plans and I might say something that would hurt your feelings.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 03:23 AM

It's all very simple. If you think children are a disposable commodity, then have your guns by all means.... It would only take 9 months to make another... (irony - if you can't spot it), but decide what is more important to you: the right to kills someone if you want, but face the music later, or the right not to be killed.....

In the end it is your choice......

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 09:44 AM

Do people have to pass any test in the States before they can get a gun licence, the way they would to get a driving licence?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Riginslinger
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:04 AM

I think if they're blind, they can't get one.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:17 AM

Har! Har! Jacky and Dunlap are at it again! I think Jacky was quite right to be a bit concerned about Dunlap waving them guns around. Dunlap is an idiot. Chongo would have cold-cocked him in about 1 second, disarmed him, and that would have been the end of it. If there is anything Chongo can't stand, it's an idiot waving a gun around in his general vicinity.

The situation in Canada is, you have to take a very thorough firearms training course and pass it. This requires a fair bit of study and thought. The normal course is for long guns. If you want ot use handguns, then there's a considerably more stringent course to pass. Then you get your permit. Then you can buy a gun (plus ammo) and it gets registered upon purchase.

Criminals, however, don't take the course. And they don't usually buy their guns in a legal fashion either, needless to say.

The incidence of gun-related crimes has remained fairly low, but has increased noticeably in large urban areas like Toronto. Most gun-related crimes are connected with youth gangs and the drug trade...and the gang members are usually shooting at other gang members, but sometimes they hit innocent bystanders too.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:34 AM

Do people have to pass any test in the States before they can get a gun licence, the way they would to get a driving licence?

Depends on the State, McGrath. Some yes, some will issue 'em to anyone who can belly up to the counter.

That's the idiocy of letting the States handle this; should be a NATIONAL law so requirements are uniform everywhere in the US.

and no, I'm not a ban-all-guns loonie; I own 'em & I hunt & target shoot.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 03:03 PM

There is a pretty comprehensive test here (in New Mexico) to get a license for concealed carry, but none to either purchase a handgun or to carry one openly - a la Wyatt Earp. NM recognizes concealed carry licenses from 20 other states, without regard to the relative stringency of their laws. I agree with GregF about the need for a national law, or at least some uniformity between jurisdictions.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 04:33 PM

In Indiana, when I first got a concealed carry permit, all you needed was to fill out some forms, be fingerprinted and have them checked, and have it all run through the National Crime Computer and the State Police.

In Kentucky, I had to take an 8 hour course on the legal responsibilities of concealed carry, the basics of using a firearm, and demonstrate that you could hit a life-sized target 21 feet away 11 time out of 20 shots (I did somewhat better than that). Prior to being allowed to even take the course you had to be cleared by the National Crime Computer, the State Police, and be fingerprinted and have them checked.

Here in Idaho, I had to be cleared by the local Sheriff's office AND cleared by the State Police AND the old fingerprint check done. If I had not been able to demonstrate by my Kentucky permit that I had been educated in concealed carry I would have had to repeat all the Kentucky stuff. Unlike other the other state, Idaho doesn't even tell you when your permit comes in, much less mail it to you. Actually, what comes in in paperwork you take to the people who issue driver's licenses and they take your picture and put it on a driver's license type card -- they also take the paperwork and send it to the Sheriff's office and the State Police.

Now, if I want to purchase a weapon I go to the gun store (or Walmart or where ever they sell guns) and select the one I want. I have to fill in a bunch of Federal forms asking such things as "Are you a convicted felon?" and "Do you use illegal drugs?" and "Is there a restraining order of any sort filed against you?" and "Are you buying this gun for someone else?" Then my ID (can be a driver's license) is checked against the FBI's instant background check (via telephone, and no, you can't overhear). If all is okay, I pay the man and walk out with my new gun. If a check later shows that I lied on the federal form (and you sign it as an oath), I would be arrested, probably convicted, and almost certainly have my rights to possess or own firearms revoked. If it can be shown that the guy who sold it to me knew I was lying his Federal Firearms License can be revoked -- which would put him out of business and could land him in jail. In both cases, mine and his, the fines would also be substantial.

In all states (as far as I know) you can't get a hunting license (if you were born after a certain date) unless you successfully complete a hunting safety course. This not only teaches weapons safety (bows are included, for instance), but also basic survival, how to field dress your kill, and other things that make for fewer dead people in the woods (and it has -- the number of people killed in hunting "accidents" has decreased dramatically year after year since these programs started back in the 1970s -- look it up for yourself). I honestly wouldn't want to be hunting with anyone who couldn't pass such a course.

Yes, a uniform code for the purchase and ownership of firearms would be nice. So would flying pigs. Maybe, someday I'll see both.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Greg F.
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 05:50 PM

... Maybe, someday I'll see both.

Not of the NRA Wackoes have anything to say about it, you won't.
Well, maybe the pigs.....

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 06:05 PM

Once we attain sanity (down the road a bit, yet), there may be pork in the tree tops.

I own a couple of handguns and a .22 cal. rifle. Well trained in their uses and responsibilities by a one-time guitar student of mine who had been a Marine, and was a member of the Seattle Police Athletic Association, although he wasn't a policeman. He was thoroughly trained in combat shooting, but mainly he was into competitive target shooting.

At one time, I had a concealed weapons permit (issued by the Seattle Police Department). Photo, fingerprints, and as I recall, I had to wait for a week before I received it. It had to be renewed every year. Loren and I had the permits primarily because it was the easiest way to carry our ordinance to and from the range. Otherwise, this state (or city) required that when firearms are transported in an automobile, they must be locked in a secure box of some sort, which, in turn, is locked in the trunk (boot). Not doing much shooting these days and not particularly feeling the need to go armed, I let the concealed weapons permit lapse years ago.

As far as home security is concerned, I let my snake take care of that. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 06:18 PM

What puzzles me is that an organisation representing people who use guns isn't in the forefront of a demand for stuff like "a uniform code for the purchase and ownership of firearms". Obviously there are some gun-nuts around who wouldn't want that, but I'd assume that most gun-owners are on th ewhole reasonably same.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 06:26 PM

Last Thursday or Friday I got a new rifle and I'm looking forward to shooting it. Let me tell you something about it.

Single shot: you have to load a new bullet, by hand, each time you want to shoot.

Bolt action like the Lee-Enfields and Mausers of the WWI and WWII.

It weighs over ten (10) pounds (about 4.65 kg). Most of this weight is in the barrel, which is very heavy. The barrel is also "floating" to dampen harmonics when the rifle is fired.

The sights are a micrometer rear aperture and both it and the front sight are Anschutz-compatible, with 10 inserts for the front sight included. They are factory zeroed for 50 yards (45.72 meters).

It's 5.6 x 15mmR, and a very nice piece of work indeed. I expect to be asked about it by a bunch of people when I take it to the range.

I got it new in the box, but it was originally made for the US Army.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 06:30 PM

You know, McGrath, I've long thought the same thing. Illinois won't even let you buy ammunition unless you have a state-issued Firearms Owners Identification Card, which is about the minimum I'd expect -- just basically a background check. And you don't even need to own guns to have one.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: artbrooks
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 07:01 PM

Unfortunately, the NRA has co-opted the "gun-owners-representative" position in the US and, IMHO, they are generally the antithesis of the idea that most gun-owners are on the whole reasonably sane.   Once upon a time, they stood for safe and responsible gun ownership. However, they have long since moved passed that to focus on the idea that nobody should have the right to control or restrict anyone's right to carry or shoot just about anything.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 07:51 PM

Guns have two enemies. Rust and politicians.

In Maine to get a permit to carry concealed you must pass a background check, and demonstrate your ability to handle a hand gun. My law enforcement background is proof enough of that, but the check still takes about a month. There are 10,000 permits in Maine and I have never heard of one being taken away.

To buy a long gun from a dealer you simply need to pass an FBI check which takes about 10 minutes.

The big loop hole is gun shows and private sales. No one has figured out how to stop nuts from buying guns that way.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 07:53 PM

So if most gun-owners are sane, and if the NRA doesn't represent sane gun-owners, why don't they either take over the existing NRA and restore it to sanity, or set up a sane NRA (SNRA) to replace it as the "gun-owners-representative"?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 08:37 PM

sane? The NRA has so brainwashed most members that 'sanity' applies only to responsible behavior with guns. Most members will not do really stupid stuff....but regarding the laws, most members have been convinced that ANY new law is the beginning of the attempt to take away their guns, not to simply create reasonable oversight.
   The really dangerous folks do a lot of buying at gun shows in the more ....ummm... 'lenient' states, and the NRA has millions to spend to resist any attempt to restrict those gun shows.
The laws make it possible for 'sane', and relatively honest folks to buy all the guns they wish, but it also provides the loopholes for all those other, not-so-sane types.

NOTHING other than a very serious grassroots movement which targets (no pun intended) members of Congress will ever cause any change, and the gun lobby has so many ties to other groups that it is not a likely prospect.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 09:38 PM

If anyone was wondering, 5.6 x 15mmR = .22 long rifle.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:31 PM

There are other groups in US than the NRA. I'm a member of the NMLRA -- the National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association, for instance, and hardly anybody commits a crime with a flintlock these days. I might join USA Shooting, the governing body for the US Olympic shooting sports and bypass the NRA completely.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Little Hawk
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:39 PM

You should see if you can also get a guest membership in the PPP.

That's the "Pistol Packin' Primates"...apes and monkeys packin' heat.

Talk to Chongo.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:40 PM

Last night I noticed a new sign on a bar down the street: NO FIREARMS OF ANY TYPE ALLOWED ON THESE PREMISES

Wonder what brought that on? I haven't heard of an 'incident'.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 10:42 PM

We discussed banning concealed weapons from the Library, but couldn't figure out how to find out if someone had a concealed weapon. BUT you can't smoke within 20 feet of the doors.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 13 Sep 09 - 11:22 PM

"but couldn't figure out how to find out if someone had a concealed weapon"

Geez. Child's play. You just station a coupla chimps or gorillas at the entrance. They can smell whether someone is packin' a gun, because we can smell the powder burn in the barrel, the gun oil, etc. If they smell a gun on someone, then they grab the bozo, shake him down good, and confiscate the gun. He gets it back when he leaves the libary.

As for yer no smokin' rule, I think that's way outta line.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: bubblyrat
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 04:49 AM

You people in the US don't know how lucky you are !! Here in the UK,we have some of the most repressive gun-laws in the entire world,and nobody,I mean nobody,is allowed,under ANY circumstances,to own a hand-gun of any sort.As far as I know,this includes BP weapons like the Remington "Old Army", or Colt replicas.Criminals,of course,are exempt from these tiresome regulations,and may own & use as many handguns as they wish (which they frequently do).
            If you are lucky enough to gain a permit to own & use a rifle (mostly .22, but some in ,for example,.308 Win for deer-hunting),then you can expect regular visits from the Police,to make sure that your weapon is stored in a Police- approved steel safe,with the ammunition and bolt ( any sort of auto or pump is a big,big no-no,especially in full-bore !) in a separate secure safe,and with strict limits on how many rounds you can hold,too.
                Even an air-rifle is strictly limited to a muzzle velocity of 12 foot pounds, anything more powerful being classed as a "Firearm" (it could only happen in Britain !).
                   Shotguns,of course,are also subject to restrictions,and whilst it is still possible to own (although the Police don't like it at all) a pump or semi-auto,the magazine capacity can only be 3 shells,so you only ever gain just one extra shot over a double -barrel ! Waste of time....a pair of Holland & Holland 12g and a "loader" would be much better !(those were the days!).
             But of course,armed criminals are not subject to any restrictions at all,and,if one of them is shot or injured whilst,say,robbing a bank,or a house,then he can expect to get compensation,damages,FREE (that really pisses me off)medical and mental after-care and lots of hand-wringing "where did the state/his parents/the education system go wrong/fail him ?" crap.
                Like I said, you Americans don't know how lucky you are !!

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 04:51 AM

The same whackos are brainwashing the people into thinking that national health care is socialized medicine. What the hell do they think Medicare is?
Oh, yes, that word, think. That's the key.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:37 AM

Let's see: medicare, the VA, medicaid, employer-paid insurance...nah, there's no socialized medicine in the US of A.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 08:41 AM

"Like I said, you Americans don't know how lucky you are !!"

          I can see why you feel that way, bubblyrat. I've recently been told of a huge black market of American guns going to Australia. I understand they passed some restrictive gun laws a few years back.

         This has completely destroyed the used gun market in America. It used to be, if you weren't feeling very flush, you could purchase a used gun for less money, but now they're only a few dollars less, and in some cases cost more than new guns, when big chain outlets run specials.

         Hopefully America won't restrict her gun laws further. It might have to supply the entire world the way things are going.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 08:44 AM

Would you see if you can find your source for that Australia thing? I'd really like to know about it. Seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Stringsinger
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 08:52 AM

The gun laws have no real teeth in them. Anyone can get one and use it for a crime.
If I am ever on a jury panel and someone has used a gun in commission of a crime, I find them automatically guilty. No extenuating circumstances.

Here in the US we have developed a "gun culture" which associates the possession of a firearm with that of some kind of warped masculinity.

Seeing these guns at town hall meetings makes it clear that their purpose is for intimidation.

Gun laws should have teeth in them.

I think a responsible gun owner would be quiet about ownership and not brag about it
like so many of these complaining NRA whack jobs.

The Second Amendment has been hi-jacked by a warped interpretation.
It needs to be re-thought and perhaps changed to suit a new environment of a civilized society.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 09:03 AM

I think that possession of a weapon -- any weapon -- during the commission of a crime should be require an additional five to ten years in prison even if the weapon was not used or even displayed. If someone dies during the commission of the crime, even if the weapon was not used or displayed (let's say the person dies of a heart attack), it should be considered premeditated murder (possession of the weapon during the commission of the crime demonstrates intent to use it, bringing it along shows premeditation).

But I admit to being a radical about crime and punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: olddude
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 09:36 AM

If you took away every gun away from every sportsman, every law abiding citizen, nothing would change. Nothing. Do you really think the gangs and the drug dealers will turn in their AK-47's or handguns.   The problem is the violent society that we live in. Unless there is a change back to the family values we had in the 50's we will continue to see the violence. It is a sad world we live in folks.

Bobert, are you sure that the sound is firearms. My back yard sounds like a war zone. The grape farmers have their air cannons setup to scare the birds and deer away from their crop for harvest. It sounds like shotguns going off. I guess the corn farmers are doing the same. The air cannons are on a timer here. It starts at 9 and goes on until dark. They drive me nuts cause it makes my dogs go off every time they hear the boom.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 12:16 PM

Lets not get the idea that ALL gun owners are some kind of macho. One has nothing to do with the other.
Now, HUMMERS, that is macho!

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 12:26 PM

"Would you see if you can find your source for that Australia thing? I'd really like to know about it. Seriously."

             Rapaire - The rumor in Oregon is that the reason used gun prices are so high is because they are being exported to Australia. But I did a quick internet search and could find nothing to support it, so it very well might just be that, a rumor.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: pdq
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 12:33 PM

"Like I said, you Americans don't know how lucky you are !!" ~   bubblyrat

Actually, many of us do recognize how free we are in the United States.

Lucky? Luck has little to do with it. Freedom takes constant work.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 12:33 PM

Colorado Springs sees guns as an easy way to build up the city coffers; they have taken steps to sell off guns which were confiscated from criminals, turned in by citizens, and lost and found. They promise none of them will have been used in the perpetration of a felony crime, i.e. killed somebody. Those ones have to be kept as evidence. They used to melt down the others and sell them as scrap metal, but now they think they can make about 10,000 dollars off of selling them. It will be a closed-door, invitation only to dealers sale. The first one is this Thursday. They are following the lead of the county which has already done this, apparently.

Government selling weapons for resale on our streets. My comment is XXX-rated.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 12:46 PM

"Like I said, you Americans don't know how lucky you are !! "

Fortunately, people who think that way are a tiny minority here.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 01:04 PM

Just to stir things up a mite: Monarchies have never liked an armed citizenry; no tyranny does.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 02:24 PM

You have to be VERY careful what conclusions you draw from that.

"If the govt. comes out against 'armed citizenry', they are therefore a tyranny or heading that way"???? ....careful....

"If citizen are armed, this will prevent tyranny."...be very careful....


etc....

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 03:00 PM

'Tain't my sayings, just stuff I've heard.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 03:03 PM

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks." --Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785. ME 5:85, Papers 8:407

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:45

"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. ME 9:341

"I learn with great concern that [one] portion of our frontier so interesting, so important, and so exposed, should be so entirely unprovided with common fire-arms. I did not suppose any part of the United States so destitute of what is considered as among the first necessaries of a farm-house." --Thomas Jefferson to Jacob J. Brown, 1808. ME 11:432

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution (with his note added), 1776. Papers 1:353

"None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important." --Thomas Jefferson to -----, 1803. ME 10:365

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 03:03 PM

*grin*...yeah....I've 'heard' that and more. Aphorisms Abound!

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 03:44 PM

Yep...those sure make a lot of sense.......in 1773-1803. Jefferson would choke on them if he could see what has transpired since.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 03:44 PM

I like the part about ball games being too violent and don't build character.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 04:22 PM

I just watched the video I linked to in the first post again... I still think it's funny.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: MarkS
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 05:47 PM

"They probably reload their own, if the swag their own bullets and reload their shell casings it can be pretty cheap to shoot all day long"


Even that can get costly, after buying the bullet heads, the primers, and the powder. And the time it takes can be outrageous too.
Only folks I know (I used to be one) who do their own reloading are those who shoot in competition and want the grammage of the bullet head and grainage of the powder to be "just right" for their firearm.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: olddude
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 06:09 PM

Not really Mark, I used to get the lead from tire weights and add some tin to make my own wad cutters for target shooting, primers and power were pretty cheap, but you may be right I have not done that in years so everything probably is much more expensive. I use to get a bucket of tire weight lead for practically nothing at the junk yard when I would target shoot quite a bit

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 06:37 PM

Plenty of armed civilians in Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: artbrooks
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 06:39 PM

Yep - whipped the Raj, didn't they?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 06:41 PM

They are still doing it to this very day.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Nick
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 06:43 PM

"Like I said, you Americans don't know how lucky you are !! "

The last two sets of stats for gun-related deaths comparing US and UK (per 100000 people) were about 28x and 33x more which is significant unless, of course, you are a half wit. It's usual to then have it pointed out at that many of these are suicides (that's comforting) or that South Africa and Jamaica are worse.

With luck like that I can understand why you might feel the need to rush out and buy a gun.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:02 PM

"The NRA has so brainwashed most members... most members have been convinced"

It's a bit disturbing that it's evidently so easy to "brainwash" and "convince" so many people who clearly pride themselves on being free citizens of a country dedicated to the principle of independence and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: pdq
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:08 PM

You can't compare "death by gun" rate of the UK, which has no real right to bear arms, with that of the United States.

Try "murder rate" instead:

Honduras                                                  58

Mexico                                                     10

United States:                                             5.8

United Kingdom                                       2.03

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:44 PM

Well... it's obvious, innit?

The UK has such social systems as health care and a proper education system and a far more civilized society than any of the countries you cite, PDQ.

If you want to lower ``gun crime``, take away the crime.

InnitÉ

My keyboard has gone screwey... hope that posts okay...É

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:49 PM

Reboot and let's see... ?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 07:49 PM

That worked... DAMN VISTA!

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 08:58 PM

"...so easy to "brainwash" and "convince" so many people who clearly pride themselves on being free citizens of a country dedicated to the principle of independence and so forth."

It isn't 'easy', they are just very good at it. I'd bet they have tame staff psychologists designing wording and making semi-logical 'connections' with other hot-button issues....just like ad agencies work out what colors are likely to sell condoms. They appeal to 'machismo', 'patriotism', and various other interests, and in the long run, they don't have to convince even a majority. They just have to sway enough politicians with the IDEA that they have convinced a lot of voters. These people think that owning guns makes them 'independent' and good citizens. They seldom see the statistics about problems with guns, and when those statistics ARE made public, the NRA uses them to say, "See? You need guns to protect yourself against all those.....ummmmm....gun owners." ...yes, they phrase it a bit differently.

   We have only 250 years or so of history to define us, and the 1st 150 were real cases of struggle & frontier mentality. How long has it been since the UK has had internal struggles where individuals needed to deal with armed turmoil? The Border Wars with Scotland? The Vikings? I'm not being totally facetious .... you need to ask yourselves why, as guns were being 'upgraded' in the 1800s, no one seemed to think they were needed by individuals in the UK. Over here, we still had to defend ourselves AGAINST the UK/England as late as 1812.

I could type for hours, but you would need to be here and 'feel' the undercurrents of history & attitude that made the gun culture so strong....and now there are so many guns hidden away that laws to restrict them would be laughed at by many.


etc...etc....

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Sep 09 - 09:17 PM

HM Revenue and Customs told Parliament in 2005 that the following seizures of guns had been made:

Financial year        No.rifles & handguns seized   Number of shotguns seized
1999–2000            512                                    129
2000–01                    211                                      44
2001–02                    415                              219
2002–03                    228                                      36
2003–04                    285                                       8

This being the case, the question must be asked: How many were successfully smuggled into the UK? What percentage do these figures represent?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: GUEST,Kendall
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 05:10 AM

Let's take a look at the facts. Put instinct and fear aside for a minute and ask this question:

How can taking guns away from law abiding citizens make us safer? To expect a bad guy to register or turn in his weapon is silly!

Fact. A few years ago Florida had a crime wave with muggings and robberies. Then, they passed their "Right to carry" law and the crime rate took a nose dive. Now, the bad guys cant know if a potential victim is armed or not.
Ok, if someone can refute this logic, tell me about it.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 05:35 AM

I'm not an American and find some of the attitudes expressed against universal health provision and gun control equally alien and often totally illogical

A number of possibly apocryphal stories abound

"In one little place in Texas, they required every house in the county to have a gun and you know what happened? All the robbers moved to the next county."

One of the most convincing and sincere arguments I have heard from across the pond comes from Joan Chittister -
[A Benedictine Sister of Erie, a best-selling author and well-known international lecturer on topics of justice, peace, human rights, women's issues, and contemporary spirituality in the Church and in society.
She presently serves as the co-chair of the Global Peace Initiative of Women, a partner organization of the United Nations, facilitating a worldwide network of women peace builders, especially in the Middle East.]

to extract from her discussion on the issue....

'The argument runs…."If we take guns away from the good citizens, only the criminals will have them."

By limiting the firepower of other people but keeping -- enlarging -- our own, we will contain whatever violence others might inflict on us, we argue.
Or to put it another way, by legitimating public violence to contain personal violence, we will become peaceful, we say. As if giving guns to "good citizens" will in any way limit the brutality, the scope, or the impact of professional criminals

But if it's true that the best way to control violence is to arm us all, then what are we waiting for? By all means, as the good man said to me, let's arm everybody -- and as soon as possible

"Maybe they have a point," I said to myself about the idea of universal arms. After all, it only makes sense. Some one of those students, had they all been armed on the Virginia Tech campus, would surely have stopped the shooter in his tracks -- and early."

But then I heard the other side of my soul speaking. Right, I thought. Thirty-two people probably would not have died then.
Not at that moment. In that place.
But how many of them would have survived the rest of the gunfire in their lives: The shots coming from all the testosterone-fueled males on all the Friday and Saturday nights of their lives?
Or all the road rage that would soon be punctuated by gunfire?
Or all the domestic arguments that happened one time too many to be tolerated any longer?
Or all the alienation that shadows this big, impersonal, anonymous, lonely society we live in that drives the isolated to choose the pain of death over the pain of living?

Taking guns away from the certifiably disturbed will surely not lessen the violence spawned by all the balanced but frightened, frustrated, drinking, arguing, angry people around us whose nerves are frayed and whose guns are handy.

"Guns don't kill people," they tell us. "People do." Exactly. According to the Brady Campaign Web site (www.bradycampaign.org): "In 2004, guns were used to murder 5 people in New Zealand, 37 in Sweden, 56 in Australia, 73 in England and Wales, 184 in Canada and 11,344 in the United States."
Strict gun laws exist in all of those other countries. In the end then, that translates into a very different reality. In New Zealand, death from handguns is 1 for every 800,000 people. In the United States, it's 1 death for every 27,000 people.

Until we're willing to tell the police that every distraught person on the streets of our cities will hereafter be armed so we won't be needing police anymore, we don't really believe that universal firearms make us safer than we are now.
Until we're willing to go to bed at night knowing that all our children are sitting in all the clubs, bars and house parties of the country where everyone there is armed, learning to drink and to shoot at the same time, there's something specious about our rejection of gun control.'

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Riginslinger
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 08:26 AM

Part of the problem is the American two party system. If one party is for something, the other party naturally has to be against it. It's that way with gun control. The NRA is afraid to allow any kind of concession on gun ownership, so the other side wants to abandon all kinds of guns. Somewhere in the middle there is probably a reasonable position.
          I have a couple of rifles, and I can't even bring myself to shoot animals. I did one time and I'll never do it again--I suppose I would if I were starving. But my guns are only fired 2 or 3 times a year, and only at paper targets.
          There are factions in the community who want these guns to go away along with the automatic handguns and assualt rifles. It forces me to back the NRA.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 08:47 AM

A sword, in its scabbard, keeps another so.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 08:53 AM

Look at it this way.
Russia has a lot of what we want. Oil. Why dont we invade Russia? Because we would get our asses kicked! They have as much firepower as we do. It's called the Balance of terror.

How were we able to invade Iraq? because Saddam didn'
t have those WMDs. If he had, he would have creamed us.

It's the same thing on a smaller scale here. You might blow your horn at a car full of Nuns who go to sleep at a stop light, but you aint gonna do it to a gang of Hells Angels.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 09:42 AM

I have no information about the possession of swords, whether in scabbards or not, but last year there was a great deal of attention given in the UK to the increasing possession of knives by young people.

Many reports concluded that, because knife culture feeds itself, fear pushes more children into carrying knives for what they see as 'protection'
One 16year old explained that he carried a knife from the age of eight because of bullies.
He ended up using it. "It was fun," he remembers. "The boy was taking the mick, I stabbed him and got an adrenalin rush.

Roger Morgan, the Children's Rights Director stated "Young people tell me they believe there is an increasing number of other young people carrying weapons in order to defend themselves.
As a result, many themselves say they have carried a weapon or have considered doing so themselves out of a fear of violence on the streets or at school,"

Its the same thing on a bigger scale

The argument is that no country with just conventional arms is likely to try the patience of a nuclear power barring "proportional deterrence" in which a relatively less-capable nuclear power such as Iran can deter a much stronger nuclear power (the United States, Russia, Pakistan, India, Israel) if it is viewed as able and willing to destroy "value targets" in the attacking nation even while it is being obliterated.

So why shouldn't Iran or any other country want to acquire nuclear weapons in this 'Balance of Terror' where everyone carries a sword even if in its scabbard?

Iran has reason to be concerned about its security
Regime change in Tehran has been a recurrent theme in U.S. policy,
Iran was accorded a place in the U.S. "axis of evil" and is now even more vulnerable than only a few years ago to nearby U.S. military power.

However legitimate these U.S. policies and actions may be considered, along with the animosity toward Iran of some key regional countries, they do provide an objective basis for Iranian security concerns - that stand likely led Saddam to conclude (accurately) that the United States would mount only a mild protest to his use of chemical weapons against Iran.

'How were we able to invade Iraq? because Saddam didn'
t have those WMDs. If he had, he would have creamed us.'

Iranian policymakers certainly must believe that a nuclear weapon would provide them with enhanced deterrence against a U.S. attack.

It's all a matter of scale........

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 11:18 AM

"...the bad guys cant know if a potential victim is armed or not.
Ok, if someone can refute this logic, tell me about it."

Spoken like someone who knows how to use weapons.....how many folks are like that?

Sorry, Kendall, but it seems to me that the bad guys will know that most folks will NOT be armed....and they surely will be able to make good guesses about who will & who won't. (There are many people who cannot be trusted with a gun, even if they are honest.)
   Not only that, the element of surprise in a street holdup can make it stupid for a victim to reach for a weapon...even if they have one.
What it WILL lead to is more accidental shootings as nervous folks react too quickly to perceived threats and more shooting BY bad guys as others fail to 'quite' react quickly enough to real threats.

   I cannot even comprehend the amount of training and weapons it would take to get any significant % of the sane, adult populace competent to 'carry' and defend themselves properly.....and don't you imagine that IF such training were offered, many wannabe bad guys would sign up....for hints?

Almost all suggestions I see for general arming of the public are from folks who already KNOW how, and just don't quite 'get' how hard it is to instill that expertise & attitude in others.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 02:34 PM

Bill... up in the frozen white, ALL are required to take the test. Different teasts for different types of ownership or aquisition. And submit to a background check, and get signatures from spouses and... and... and... it takes well over a month.

And, if you wish to hunt in New Brunswick, and you were born after 1981.01.01, you have to take the hunting course and pass that test.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 07:50 PM

gnu... instead of drugs, can we import some "reason" from Canada?

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 07:56 PM

Bill, your point is well taken and well thought out. However, the facts speak for themselves. The Florida right to carry law has had a serious effect on crime/

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Sep 09 - 09:38 PM

I find it difficult to come to terms with a report from Farmington Hills MI based on the argument that the advantage of everyone having acess to guns reduces crime claims as a positive that

"Guns in the house are not necessarily a great hazard, either. National data at the time of the debate showed just 44 gun-related deaths at home of children under 10"

In one web site arguing the right to bear arms prevents crime the author complains
"In nearly every state it is illegal to shoot a burglar even in your own home unless you are threatened with harm"
UNLESS?

Meanwhile, research into the effect of concealed carry laws on the incidence of crime has yielded mixed results.

In his book, More Guns, Less Crime, University of Maryland scholar John Lott's analysis of crime report data claims a statistically significant effect of concealed carry laws on crime, with more permissive concealed carry laws correlated with a decrease in overall crime.

Lott's conclusions remain controversial

Yale Law Professors John J. Donohue III and Ian Ayres, for example, have claimed that Lott's conclusions were largely the result of a limited data set and that re-running Lott's tests with more complete data yielded none of the results Lott claimed ("Shooting Down the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis". Stanford Law Review.)

The National Research Council, the working arm of the National Academy of Sciences, similarly claims to have found "no credible evidence" supporting Lott's thesis.(Jon Weiner. "Shooting holes in a lawsuit")

University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt argues that available data indicate that neither stricter gun control laws nor more liberal concealed carry laws have had any significant effect on the decline in crime in the 1990s.

While it has been argued that in Florida the concealed carrying of arms resulted in a decrease in crime the Stanford Law Review study conversely suggests that in most states with shall-issue laws, there were increases in crime of all types.

Whatever the actual basis for the 'God Given Right' to bear arms and the correlation between this right and shooting fatalities is I'm really quite relieved that I live in a country with has one of the lowest levels of gun ownership and one of the lowest rates of intentional gun deaths.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 04:28 PM

I was going to reply to Kendall with my own notion about not being TOO sure about the details of causality when statistics show a drop in certain types of crime, but Emma's post kinda makes my point. There is dispute among supposed experts about what is involved....after all, we haven't done a survey of 'criminals' as to their change in habits.
When there is a change in statistics in a long-time trend, we have to be very careful what we attribute it to.

(many years ago, someone noted an amazing correlation in the consumption of alcohol and the rise in salaries of college professors...)

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 05:02 PM

LOL Bill! I always suspected academics :)

Seriously, Bill makes a good point - that not all things are directly or obviously 'cause and effect'

Miami International Airport was the focal point of crimes against tourists, including "smash and grab," "driveway," and "highway" robberies, in which criminals preyed on people leaving the airport in easily identifiable rental cars.

Other rental-car drivers became victims after getting lost once they left the airport.

To address the problem, the Metro-Dade Police Department† (1) increased visible uniform patrols, (2) adopted a problem-oriented approach to improve the area and generate support from local businesses and other government agencies, and (3) implemented a tourist safety program, to provide safety information

In addition, the Florida legislature passed a law requiring that regular license plates be issued to replace the easily identifiable ones on rental vehicles, the county required that maps and directions be provided with every rented vehicle, and identifying stickers were removed from rental vehicles.

Over 500 directional signs were installed, many in the airport area, and a tourism safety video was shown on many inbound international flights.
Officers were trained to contact lost or confused motorists, and give them an escort if necessary.
They were also equipped with cell phones, maps, brochures, and other information in a variety of languages, to distribute as necessary.
The police devoted four to five times the normal level of resources to the airport area, using several special responses (for example, using decoy parked police cars, conducting undercover operations targeting "hot spots," and deploying motorcycle patrols during peak times).
They also established a tourist hotline, started a newsletter, and set up a 24-hour information counter in the airport.


In the two years following the initiative, crimes against visitors dropped in the area:
robberies decreased by 50 percent, and auto thefts by 79 percent. (Metro-Dade Police Department)

Information from Center for Problem Oriented Policing

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 05:13 PM

Well, figures don't lie, but liars figure.

It's all grey. Guns allowed, crime down (US). Guns disallowed, crime up (Canada). And I am sure other studies can indicate the opposite. (BTW, I don't have ANY figures for Canada... just some dead friends who were victims of home invasions.)

Correlations? I do not know and nobody "knows".

Fact is, if a person owns a gun and is trained properly and keeps it safe and doesn't use it with criminal intent, no problem. I really don't understand what is wrong with that.

What I do understand is that the laws in my Canada do not PUNISH people SEVERELY for the illegal of firearms during robbery and extortion and the like. Case in point... steal my gun (burglary and subsequent illegal possession of a firearm... which the POLICE are suppose to PREVENT) and then commit a crime with it and I can get a longer sentence than the crook? WTF???!!!

Now... will some of you anti-gun nuts TRY to understand what the pro-gun nuts are saying? Some of the criminal laws as written and as proposed are absolutely fucking insane.

The "one bad apple" arguement is not acceptable. What's next?... fill out a form to see if there is any insanity in your genetic history which may allow the state to sterilize you? That might have saved a buddy of mine from being decapitated with a sword a few years back. And his wife from being cut to pieces. No guns were present.

Oh, yeah, I still think the first post on this thread was to link to a comical video. The thread hasn't been quite as comical.

Have fun with it. I doubt if I'll be back to listen to the same old shit.

gnightgnu

PS... 44 kids under 10 died from gun accidents? How many die from poverty, substance abuse, and so on.... and THAT is a crime.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Sorcha
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 05:16 PM

Look, in Wyoming, I COULD 'carry', but I CHOOSE not to. It's called avoiding confrontation that could escalate. I don't NEED to carry concealed....if you are after CRIME, why hide the piece? Jesus.

Besides, in MOST places, you can only shoot someone IF they are IN YOUR HOME or YOU can prove intent to bodily harm.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: gnu
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 05:24 PM

Just came back to see if my post got through as I got a 503 when I submitted. And I saw Sorcha's post. I agree.

But, I'll just add that here in The Great White, you are not allowed to use a gun for self defense in your own home against a crook. You will end up in jail.

Like I said... the laws are insane.

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Sep 09 - 10:25 PM

There are indeed some insane laws..... the serious question is, who designed and promulgated those laws?

Most laws that seem stupid to we, ahem, sane folks, are designed by and for some special interest group...and in many cases, it is either money or religion pushing dumb regulation down our throats. (Sometimes the stated explanation is a couple steps removed from those two items, but the ultimate defense of them boils down that way.)

(Yes, I can defend that attitude...for hours...but not typing and not this late at night)

Subject: RE: BS: US Gun laws... yes... again... sigh
From: kendall
Date: 17 Sep 09 - 01:22 PM

In Maine you may shoot to kill if you are sure and can convince a jury that you were in fear of your life.

As for me, I would gladly give up my gun IF everyone else did the same thing. Now we know that's not going to happen. We must deal with things as they are, not as we wish they were.