BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: TIA
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 03:21 PM

From the CNN story in Guest's opening post...

"After the tape was shown, Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, presented Heston with the "quintessential cowboy" rifle "that helped win the American West."

By shooting what...?

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 03:07 PM

There was one suicide here in Juneau a few years back that had an element of humor in it. A man left a note then went out and threw himself into the ocean (in our 'front yard', so to speak). Well, our water is COLD. He scrambled out, went home and changed into dry clothes. Then hanged himself.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 02:13 PM

"...people determined on suicide will accomplish it...

But there are degrees of determination. And people whose degree of determination to kill themselves isn't that strong are particularly vulnerable to ways of doing so that are available on impulse.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST,pdc
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:32 PM

Guns or not, people determined on suicide will accomplish it eventually. One of the most hideous aspects of the net is that there are websites on how to commit suicide. I've often thought that this type of site should be brought to the attention of parents as well as the porn sites.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: The O'Meara
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:30 PM

A couple years ago, the TV show "60 Minutes" did a segment about Charleton Heston. I watched it with some trepidation, since Mike Wallace and CBS have a decidedly anti-gun bias. As it turned out, however, the whole issue of guns was secondary, and Mr. Wallace came to the conclusion that Charleton Heston was truly dedicated to preserving the freedoms we Americans are guaranteed in our constitutional bill of rights. (Remember, Charleton Heston also marched with Dr. Martin Luther King in support of civil rights for all Americans.) He just started with the 2nd amendment.

O'Meara

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:19 PM

Suicide can have a lot to do with easy availability of the means.

When they changed the type of gas avaiable on the mains in Britain, to use North Seaas instead of Coal Gas, one side effect was that it wasn't poisonous any more. Rather to the surprise of everyone the suicide rate from all causes plummeted - between 1963 and 1975 ity went down by 40 per cent.

Sure there are always other ways of killing yourself - buy for a lot of people the fact that they couldn't end it all by sticking their head in the gas oven was enough to stop them taking their life.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: harvey andrews
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 12:39 PM

I read somewhere recently...correct me if I'm wrong..that since the shooting of John Lennon more Americans have died from shootings than were killed in the whole of America's participation in World War 2.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 12:07 PM

Ebbie - For sure, there are tens of thousands of communities in the USA that do not meet the extremed example I was giving...and I know that. I've lived in small town USA. Most of the time things seem pretty safe and peaceful in American small towns and smaller cities.

I think the aggressive conduct of the USA government itself may be the most important point of all. The USA has an estraordinarily aggessive government, and that affects the attitudes and expectations of American citizens. It can't help but do so.

pdc - Good point.

Kat - It's true that crimes are more easily committed when guns are available. However, legislation that tries to make guns less available frequently ends up hurting the wrong people, and merely complicating the lives of a lot of entirely peaceful gun owners who are not threatening anyone and don't intend to.

I think it would make more sense to establish greater social justice all around...thus reducing people's level of fear. But that would involve transforming the basis of the whole society, transforming the health care system, transforming the media, and so on, and that is what the $ySStem is not prepared to do. It will not address its own institutionalized negativity and inequality, because it's run by those who profit most from keeping things just the way they already are.

Sounds kind of like France before the Revolution...

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 08:15 AM

Neighmond, I am sorry about your brother. Thank you for sharing that with us. With all due respect, though, a lack of gun may make a huge difference in such impulse suicides as I wrote of. I truly believe if that child had not had access to his father's gun that afternoon he would not be dead. It was very much an emotional, spur-of-the-moment desperate act, as many crimes of violence are, esp. when carried out by children.

Thanks, again,

kat

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 06:26 AM

Katlaughing,

I am a peace-loving man, but up close and personal or far away, if somebody posed a lethal threat to my family or myself I would kill them with my bare hands, if it came to that.

If someone is going to take their own life, the lack of a gun won't stop them for a moment. My brother commited a very thought-out and deliberate suicide (without a fire arm)and lingered in a hospital bed for 36 hours before a merciful death came.

FWIW

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST,pdc
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:56 AM

Response to Little Hawk:

I agree with virtually every word you say, and you show some keen insights into the survivor mentality. Canada has always had a survivor mentality as well (see Margaret Atwood's analysis of Canadian literature, entitled "Survival"), but Canadians have always had to survive climate, a common enemy that brought them together.

One issue you could have explored further re "Bowling for Columbine":
you ask:

"...there are a hell of a lot of guns in Canada too...and very little gun-related violence. So what's the story on that?"

Part of the story on that, which should have been made crystal clear by Moore, dammit, is the TYPE of guns that Canadians own. Most gun-owning Canadians have rifles for hunting. There are some (registered) handguns, mostly for shooting clubs, sports type stuff, etc. But -- and this is a huge but -- assault weapons, automatic machine pistols, all the heavy attack weapons that are permitted in the US, are illegal in Canada. (I don't even know the names of most of them, but you can figure out what I mean.) What are those guns for? Shooting deer? Target practice? I think not. They really serve only one purpose.

I think this is a pertinent distinction which should be emphasized.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:54 AM

Little Hawk, you say: There is terrible poverty in the USA in many places, alongside tremendous wealth. The gap between rich and poor is growing wider all the time, and there's very little social safety net. A succession of neoconservative American governments have mostly made the situation steadily worse, specially since the Reagan era. The inner cities have been more or less abandoned. That is not trimming of over fat government, it's abdication of government!

What you have is an increasingly desperate underclass, a beleagured and frightened middle class fleeing to featureless suburbs and gated communities, and an upper class that keeps getting richer and more isolated from the troubles of the lower and middle classes...allied with a media that feeds people paranoia on a daily basis...just to make a profit!

That's a recipe for social decay, oligarchy, and the destruction of democracy...all so the rich can get richer. That's what's happening.

What you say may be true in the HUGE cities- I don't know. I don't live there. (Neither do you, actually.) All I know is that if things where I live were as bad as you say - or where I have ever lived (I have lived in Oregon, Virginia, Michigan and Alaska, and visited many other states) I'd be quaking in my slippers behind locked and barred doors and windows.

You remind me of a childless person giving advice to a parent.   Note that I don't think you shouldn't form and give opinions- but if you were rearing a kid, you might find yourself at a loss on occasion. The same way that you might find living in the US for the most part rich, fulfilling and without fear.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: DougR
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:43 AM

Guest appears to believe that Chuck Heston's Alzheimer's was brought on due to some nefarious happening. It happens, Guest, just like bodily functions do. It cannot be brought on because of ones defense of owning firearms.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:38 AM

*sigh*...my dad, granddad, and great-granddad grew up with guns as a part of their daily lives. The code they lived by, never drawing them in anger, never pointing them unless they meant to kill, understanding the responsibility and consequences of owning and using a gun, is not a general code among many who own guns in this day and age. There are too many who own guns with no thought as to their lethal power.

Also, I believe America is much more violent, today, with the proliferation of gun ownership, than it ever was in their day. People just didn't resolve things with firepower as much back then. Of course, the exception was in self-defense as in the case of my great-grandfather.

There has to be some solution. I'd vote for Clinton's, too, if it was practical, i.e. if it excluded me and mine!**bg**

One more thought: it becomes much more difficult and more up close and personal to kill someone/thing with weapons other than guns. Anything which takes more thought and preparation can be a good thing if it gets a person cooled down enough to really think about what they are doing.

Also, I can't help but think all of the children I know of who have killed themselves or others with their adult family members' guns, may have had a lot harder time doing so with a long bow, knife, etc. At least with those, they could only take out one person at a time. Yep, that 14 year old in WY who was afraid to tell his parents he'd made less than "A"s on his report card would have had a hell of a time locking himself in the bathroom with a long bow, after school, and blowing his brains out as he did with his dad's hunting rifle.

As to self-defense, if it's up close, use a can of spray paint to the eyes.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 01:06 AM

Just saw "Bowling For Columbine" today in Barrie, Ontario, Canada. It's a pretty heavy movie. It makes some very good points, and at the same time engages in some rather manipulative tactics to do it. Michael Moore put together a very powerful film, but he compromised himself a bit here and there, in order to score points...

For instance: I know any number of Canadians who lock their houses, although I don't doubt that Americans are more inclined to do so. His Canadian interviews were pretty selective. Moore gave the impression that virtually no Canadian locks his house. Simply not true. It is true that Canada has a far lower per capita crime rate than the USA, however, as he pointed out also.

Moore deliberately maneuvered Charlton Heston into a very unpleasant position in a rather sneaky manner, and he was an invited guest in Heston's home at the time. I actually felt a little sorry for Heston, although I've always tended to sharply disagree with his politics...about guns and in general.

At the same time, I could understand Moore's legitimate concerns, and what he was trying to achieve. He just did it in a rather sneaky manner, I thought, under the circumstances.

The burning question Moore was trying to get answered was: Why is there such a high incidence of gun-related violence (per capita) in the USA? Why is it worse in the USA than in other developed countries.

He was implying that it is because guns are too easily available (perhaps)...and the media is sensationalist (absolutely true!), causing people to be extra paranoid in the USA (absolutely true), and there is a strong tradition of using guns in the USA (also true).

So, all of those things may be taken into account as factors...but...there are a hell of a lot of guns in Canada too...and very little gun-related violence. So what's the story on that?

I think the key is this: The USA is a society where every key decision made comes down to MONEY. If you've got enough of it, you're okay. If you don't...you're in deep trouble. It's a "survival" based society. People in survival mode are very easily turned to violence when they doubt their capacity to survive a situation.

Now why does Canada have a national health insurance plan to pay for people's medical treatment? Because it's profitable???? NO. Because it's advantageous in social and human terms...and that outweighs the significance of dollar profit.

There is terrible poverty in the USA in many places, alongside tremendous wealth. The gap between rich and poor is growing wider all the time, and there's very little social safety net. A succession of neoconservative American governments have mostly made the situation steadily worse, specially since the Reagan era. The inner cities have been more or less abandoned. That is not trimming of over fat government, it's abdication of government!

What you have is an increasingly desperate underclass, a beleagured and frightened middle class fleeing to featureless suburbs and gated communities, and an upper class that keeps getting richer and more isolated from the troubles of the lower and middle classes...allied with a media that feeds people paranoia on a daily basis...just to make a profit!

That's a recipe for social decay, oligarchy, and the destruction of democracy...all so the rich can get richer. That's what's happening.

Ally it with a culture that celebrates a long tradition of bearing arms and using guns...and you've got a recipe for disaster.

A society that respects nothing at all except the buying power of the dollar finally respects nothing at all, period.

You don't base a sane social policy on making profits for a few players at the top, you base a sane social policy on making a better life for everybody.

That isn't being done in the USA.

Moore focused on that too. He should have focused on it more, rather than taking cheap shots at guys in gun clubs, many of whom are not the nut cases whom liberals (and I've been accused of being a "liberal" enough times) imagine when they imagine gun owners.

The people on both sides of this issue could benefit from recognizing the humanity and intelligence of the people on the other side and not merely dismissing them as stereotypical dimwits.

There is one other factor too...a national government that customarily resolves its own problems by violence should hardly be surprised when its citizenry themselves start doing the same on the home turf. Set a lousy, irresponsible example at the top, and it will be followed.

And right there lies the most crucial difference between the USA and CAnada...or most other modern developed nations in the present era. It is not considered acceptable in Canada to settle issues through violence. It has long been standard behaviour for the USA to do that on the broad stage of the World...just as if the USA was Wild Bill Hickock stalking the streets of Tombstone.

Moore touched on those matters too, but I think he took some cheap shots at what he presented as the stereotypical "gun owner". That's easy to do, but it doesn't prove much.

People love having someone to look down on, and it's as easy for liberals to fall into that moral superiority trap as it is for conservatives.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 11:34 PM

SINSULL,

In respect to Heston I would probably agree that he should do something practical with his guns-donate them to a museum, give them to friends and family, whatever. I think that in not too long a time he will be unable to make many rational desisions, and may do something he would never even dream of doing now, and it's best to not put danger in front of him.

Thanks for pointing that out-

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: The Walrus
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 08:56 PM

I've missed most of this thread, so, if it's been said already, I apologise:

"...After Dunblane (16 five year old kids and their Teacher killed in a gym) we had to do something..."

I found it amusing that the majority of 'anti-gunners' I've seen and/or met drive cars or are driven.

More children are killed in London in a month than were killed in the whole year of Dunblane. Perhaps "Saint Ann" bryson (or whatever her name was) would have been better trying to ban cars.

If the loony with the gun had chosen to get tanked up and drive his car into the school gates when the kids were coming out, whould there have been such a outcry against cars? I think not. Responsible gun owners were an easy target (especially for the tabloids).

Remember, making gun ownership illegal only affected LEGAL gun owners
(and before anyone else says it, yes, I know Hamilton had a licence, but at least one of the weapons he used wasn't on it).

Embittered ex-pistol shooter

Walrus

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: gnu
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 07:42 PM

Yes, SINs, but if he was Canadian, and the paperwork was not exactly correct, all his guns would be forfeited to the govermnment, not his heirs. In Canada, officers have arrived at the house after the funeral and demanded the weapons be surrendered by the spouse on the basis that the proper paperwork was not in order. May veee see your paaaapers ?.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 05:23 PM

Neighmond - I was simply filling in a piece of information left out in the initial post for those who had not seen "Bowling For Columbine". I agree with your comment re: responsible gun owners. I even think that Heston was a responsible gun owner but with his current affliction ought to be disarmed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 05:12 PM

Yes Guest, you did, & if you look at where you put it, it looks like a cheap shot, doesn't it? "You know nothing, enough said".

As to metaphor, I know exactly what it means, & you haven't used one yet. You've tried to draw various parallels between the modern & medieval worlds that don't exist. Parallels are not metaphors (not necessarily, anyway, & in this case, not at all). And you've waffled. Oh, and you're still embarassingly anonymous & trollish. You're not doing very well so far, Guest...

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 05:03 PM

*Sigh* Raedwulf I did put Enough Said in my last post. I have no desire to debate in depth on this subject, because you only have a limited understanding of the word metaphor.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:55 PM

Guest:

1) Try acquiring a moniker, *FAILED*

2) I suggest you desist from the sneering & snide personal remarks. *FAILED*

I alluded nothing about a monopoly on historical knowledge. I merely pointed out that you were, & are, talking crap. I know enough to know that you know not half so much as you would like others to believe. I know enough to know that that you know only enough to support the views you want to hold, & you stopped right there... I notice you haven't defended or repeated the 'personal sidearm' or 'assault rifle' so far. Care to justify those remarks? I'll be blunt, I don't think you can. If I did, I wouldn't have been pulling you up in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:49 PM

Charlton Heston had been diagnosed with early signs of Alzeimers disease when Moore interviewed him. A classic sympton of Dementia is loss of short term memory; not to mention the stress of knowing he was losing his ability to debate and work for the NRA. He was not replaced by the NRA because of his interview, but because of his illness, which he has met with grace and dignity; something Mr Moore completely lacks.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:41 PM

McG - there's a difference between longbow & warbow. The warbow requires regular practice if only because of the great strength required to draw it. A modern Olympic recurve usually draws about 35-40lb, max. The average warbow draws @135lb! Now you know why regular practice was required...

A hunting bow would be much lighter. The actual technique of archery is not *that* difficult to acquire. The difficulty is in keeping that technique steady when you are drawing weights at (or close to) your physical limits. I'm a reasonable shot. With a 45lb ash self- longbow, you'd be taking your life in your hands to stand in front of me at any distance up to 60y. That's more than hunting distance in most cases. As to 45lb draw, it's not as light as it might sound, but anyone used to regular physical effort (as most medieval people certainly would be) would have no problem drawing it.

135lb is another matter. That's why regular practice was required - to build & maintain the necessary muscle mass to cope with the demands required. A crossbow can be spanned with mechanical leverage, a longbow can't. This is why the French could buy companies of mercenary c/bowmen. It's the reason why they couldn't 'buy' longbowmen (it takes years of training & practice to be able to pull a warbow). It's also the reason why Guest is talking rubbish when he claims that a c/bow is 'an assault rifle'...

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:33 PM

I am sorry, I ought to have said Japan, not China. My fault.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:32 PM

Just because Heston makes a bonehead of himself doesn't mean the rest of responsible gun-owners are that way. I have my own theory about fire-arm related violence, which you may read elsewhere in this thread.

FWIW, I don't apologize for my views, either. I think the murders at Columbine were unspeakable tragedy, but responsible gun-owners had nothing to do with it. Those two boys broke 20 existing gun laws if they broke one. Likewise, the parents of the child shooter of Kayla Rolland clearly weren't responsible. No law in the world can change that.

Germany and China may have lower gun-related violence than us, but if someone is out to so ill it can be done with a stick, blade, rope or any number of everyday items. People will simply finnd other way to kill. That's a sad hard fact.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: SINSULL
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:20 PM

A short synopsis of Heston's appearance in Bowling for Columbine:

As startled and grateful as he is at this moment, there's no question that Moore has an agenda. He's never pretended to be objective, but instead sees his filmmaking and tv work as a kind of pop-cultural agitprop. He pursues his subjects -- GM's Roger Smith, Nike's Phil Knight, and here, NRA president and voluble spokesperson Charlton Heston -- with a relentlessness that is sometimes funny, sometimes grating, and always disquieting for someone (usually the subject). Here, Moore finally talks his way into Heston's L.A. gates, whereupon he asks him pointedly about his NRA speechmaking (in the wake of Columbine and again, during a rally in Flint just after the shooting of 6-year-old citizen Kayla Rolland by another first-grader). Heston insists he didn't know about Kayla's murder, and refuses to apologize.

Moore pushes on, pressing Heston to come up with possible reasons for the States' inordinate rates of gun violence, Heston hems and haws, suggests "historical" proclivities (until Moore points out that Germany and Japan have violent histories and remarkably low gun violence stats), then finally blurts that it must be bound up in American "mixed ethnicity." Moore doesn't wait, but repeats the phrase back to Heston, who blanches when he hears his own words come back at him. He cuts off the interview and shambles off, his back retreating from the camera as Moore asks him to look at little Kayla's photo.

Certainly, Heston, virulent and nonsensical, is an easy target, and hardly worth the amount of time that Bowling for Columbine spends on him. But his slip speaks to the slippery workings, unconscious or hyperconscious, of U.S. culture, politics, and morality, an inexorable campaign of fear and consumption.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:07 PM

that should be 6'9"

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 04:06 PM

ClintonHammond:

I have an undivided 40 acres...when can you come over?

A good bowman feathering in to some dinnner on the hoof could show some of my hunting friends a thing or two about accuracy, I'll say that. I hunt with a gun because I am very poor shakes at best with a bow.

FWIW, my neighbor's grandfather was 6'9' tall, 295 punds on the hoof, and walked in leather-soled moccosans without a sound. He could sneak up and off a dear in less time than it took the rest of us to load and fire.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:50 PM

Of course a longbow is a very effective and lethal waapon, a lot more so than guns were for a long time. But it is, from all I've heard, a pretty difficult weapon to master, and requires a lot of work to keep the skill in usable condition - which is why Edward and other monarchs were so keen on ensuring a supply of people with that skill, and making them keep in practice.

(And if I'm wrong about that, Raedwulf, and learning to use the longbow is really a doddle after all, correct me.)

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:46 PM

Raedwulf. I would not say that I know more about any subject of history as I do not know you personally. I applaud your use of the Longbow its a wonderfull sport and recreation. I started using the Longbow in 1968 and have been a re-enactor myself. My knowledge of weaponry is not restricted to firearms alone. Unlike you I alluded nothing personal about having a monopoly on historical knowledge. Enough said.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:45 PM

"I'm inclined to agree with Clinton though - get rid of all the people..."

Thanks for your support....

Chaz...

I'm pro-hunting... I guess... even though seems like an anachronism these days... although it does provide one access to much better meat than a grocery store...

That aside, I'm still anti-firearm... ya wanna hunt?? take yer chances with a bow like a REAL sportsman...

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:42 PM

Practically speaking, I see no indication that any prohibition laws work. If people want something they'll get it. In the time of the Volstead Act, you could buy drinkin' alcohol in pretty much any town in the US. I read Henry Miller when his books were illegal. You can get guns in the UK & in New York City. You can get illicit drugs even in jail. Before Roe vs Wade there were abortions.

People will even make their own drugs, porn, zip guns -- does anyone remember those? -- if all else fails. Homemade drugs and abortions are particularly bad.

And the people you are trying to keep these things from are the ones most likely to seek them out.

Clint

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:37 PM

Raedwulf,

Thank you for the complimment.

Perhaps a good place to start would be the enforcement of the laws already in effect. To do so would practically negate the need for further legeslation.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:35 PM

Neighmond - I confess I bridled a bit at the tone of your inital post (I'm not particularly pro- or anti- gun, I should mention). Latterly... *sigh* I can only wish that all gun owners were as responsible as you seem to be. The trouble is, we all know that they're not & that 'education' simply doesn't get through to them. Then again, neither, seemingly, do stricter laws. What the solution is I don't know. I'm inclined to agree with Clinton though - get rid of all the people... ;)

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:32 PM

Peter T:

"Considering that the Party that spends taxpayers money on foreign fields, is daily encroaching on individual rights, and is letting the elderly and children and anyone else without decent socialist health care rot is also the prime supporter of guns R' us, is there not something a tad twilight zone about all this ridiculous "vassal to no man" rhetoric?"

No.

This is America, where one does not have to allign themselves with any particular party. The two mainstream parties are both corrupted beyond redemption. Both have lost sight of the Founding Fathers' vision. I assume the party you refer to is the Republican pparty; Bush and company are no friend to the Constitution, in case one hasn't taken notice of recent events.

As such I am no follower of theirs. I follow the letter of the Constitution, and all else can go to thunder.

It is high time for reform, and God knows it will be welcomed with open arms when it commes.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:30 PM

Guest:

1) Try acquiring a moniker, even if you don't sign up to the board. It makes for a much more coherent argument, because you can be properly identified. You also get far more respect from everyone else for the simple fact that you look much less like a troll!

2) I suggest you desist from the sneering & snide personal remarks. It adds nothing to your arguments & impresses no-one. Quite the reverse.

3) There is nothing 'weak' about my intellect, thank you. I am both a re-enactor & an archer. I shoot longbow exclusively, up to 4-5 times a week. At the moment I'm mixing posting on Mudcat with fletching more arrows. Are you so very sure that you know more about the historical context than me?

4) Your analogies are fallacious! By your remarks, you display considerable ignorance of social, military & historical context. Like all too many people, you seem to have investigated a given topic only far enough to confirm the prejudices you had before you started! A longbow is no more a 'personal sidearm' than any standard issue infantry rifle. A crossbow is not "the assault rifle of its day". Such comments display your lack of knowledge. Frankly, I wouldn't even subscribe to the implied "personal sidearms need more training than assault rifles".

I won't suggest you stick to music. I will suggest you stick to talking of modern weaponry (with which you presumably are pretty familiar?), & leave out the erroneous historical parallels!

Oh, and no, personal sidearms aren't the original discussion, but it was YOU that used the phrase first... ;)

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:24 PM

ClintonHammond:

"Talk about bullshit... Guns are NOT sport... they are for KILLING... Plain and simple... Killing humans is what they were invented for... "

It may interest you to know that my firearms have not taken part in any human exterminations, nor will they. Here is what my firearms have done:

At my hand, my firearms have provided many a fine meal to many people.

At my hand, my firearms have provided more than one fine coat and hat (from the same deer we ate, nothing went to waste.)

At my hand, my firearms have provided protection from a drunken and dangerous man, who was detained untill the authorities could remand him to the appropriate facility.

I have spent many a plesant afternoon in fellowship while at hunt (legal and in-season, of course), and engaged in shooting competitions. Many a freind was made at such events, and glad I am to know them.

Other people may view firearms as a means to killing other people, but I, sir, do not.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Peter T.
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:18 PM

Considering that the Party that spends taxpayers money on foreign fields, is daily encroaching on individual rights, and is letting the elderly and children and anyone else without decent socialist health care rot is also the prime supporter of guns R' us, is there not something a tad twilight zone about all this ridiculous "vassal to no man" rhetoric?

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:12 PM

Metchosin

Don't appologise to me, respectful debate builds nations.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:09 PM

Truth hurts eh Guest 03:20...

"shooting sports"

Talk about bullshit... Guns are NOT sport... they are for KILLING... Plain and simple... Killing humans is what they were invented for...

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:02 PM

Michael Moore is an asshole, and his film bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Metchosin
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 03:02 PM

Sorry Neighmond ......sounds a bit too much like The Ballad of Hollis Brown to me.....to depressing to contemplate for long.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:58 PM

Actually, personal firearms aren't the topic. Charlton Heston being driven out of his NRA leadership position by his appearance in Michael Moore's film 'Bowling for Columbine', is the topic. Not to be nitpicking, or anything. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:55 PM

Raedwulf, personal firearms being the topic, I chose to use the example of Edwards law, to show people were encouraged to train with weapons 750 years ago. As to knowledge of history, I would point out that only dictators want to control personal weapons. England did not have a standing army, and relied on its people to own and maintain proficiency with the deadly accurate Longbow. You may roll your eyes all you want sir, but if the analogy is lost to you it shows weakness of intellect on your part not mine.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Neighmond
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:47 PM

Metchosin

"Gee Neighmond, so sorry to hear that times are so tough for you at this moment, despite two jobs. Perhaps if you hocked your gun and computer you could buy some food and medicine with the money to help keep your family through this tough time."

I will hock nothing. The rifle and shotgun can provide food for body, and the computer provides a means of study, wherein I may gain knowledge, which, as we alll know, is food for the brain.

Without either all is lost.

Chaz.

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:45 PM

McGrath, you're not as right as you might like to think you are! And I'm a pretty good shot with a longbow... ;)

And as for Guest, in case you hadn't noticed, the world has changed a bit in the last 750-odd years. Ed III's edict (thank you for that - it was being discussed in another thread & I couldn't remember the date!) had absolutely bugger all to do with crime or personal protection. I really can't be bothered to argue in detail, because gun threads are always polarized 'twixt gun nuts & gun haters so it makes 'discussion a bit pointless, but your quote of a 14thC Law is asinine & irrelevant. Your understanding of 14thC life is equally limited & puerile ("The Longbow being the equivalent of a personal firearm in 1369" - {rollseyes} no, not at all!).

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:41 PM

Obviously your knowledge of Longbows is as weak as your knowledge of firearms McGrath. The Longbow was still more efficient on the battlefield than early firearms, and the Crossbow became the assault rifle of its day (requiring less training to use than the Longbow) both capable of penetrating armour plate (bullet proof vests) Interestingly enough, the Crossbow is considered a firearm in Canada.

The NRA became involved in all aspects of firearm ownership because of the political social engineering attempts, to destroy all shooting sports by people like you. Your statement about the use of handguns without training is however the main focus of why the NRA does its best to provide safety training. Their main function at one time was to encourage enforcement of responsible gun laws, and promote safe training in firearm use. They shifted to political involvement in all aspects of the shooting sports, because of uninformed political activity to ban all use of personal firearms. On that note why dont you stick to music?

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:26 PM

I take it quite a few of you engaging in this discussion haven't seen Charlton Heston in the Michael Moore film 'Bowling for Columbine'?

Subject: RE: BS: 'From my cold, dead hands' farewell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:19 PM

Now the National Longbow Association would be a much better idea. You have to work pretty hard at it before you've much cahnce of doing any real damage with a longbow. Unlike a handgun, where anyone can shoot members of their family who are trying to sneak in the house late at night, without any training at all.

Incidentally - if it's the National Rifle Association, why doesn't it stick to rifles?