Hesitatingly, GUNS again

Subject: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 20 May 99 - 05:28 PM

I hesitate to write this knowing what I want to say and who to say it to and how it will come across and I'm mad as hell, but after today in Atlanta, for the sweet love of God, how many is it going to take? You got an alternative, how about go out and get active about supporting it. How many, dammit, answer the question. Better yet, take the usual NRA coward's way out and say nothing when the heat's on. If you were in front of me right now, by God, you'd answer my question.

Can't help it, Chet W.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 May 99 - 06:04 PM

The fault is I fear in much of Western society, particularly that of the USA, not in the fact that guns are available.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 20 May 99 - 06:49 PM

I'm afraid nothing will change Chet, but I think I know what you're feeling. It's another sad day.
rick

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 20 May 99 - 06:59 PM

I know that the absurd easy availability of guns is not the only problem, but only a fool would say that it's not one of them. Let's work on the rest of the problems too, now that the Senate has finally found the guts to say something that makes sense about guns.

Passionately, Chet W.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Fadac
Date: 20 May 99 - 07:04 PM

Ok, here is another .02 worth. How come libril parents won't disipline their children. Never correct or heaven forbid spank them. (cosnider a slap up along side the head, a brain alignment.) So I blame the parents. If the kid is a problem at the age of two, they are not going to get better at 18. Unless the parent does something about it, then, when the kid is 14 or so, it is way too late. So the parents are too lazy to raise the kids right. So they get older and raise hell, the whole population has to pay for the parents folly.

Being a parent isn't easy. Five minuits of fun rolling in the hay, can give you an 18 year comitment.

So here is the other penny. Don't expect me to change my life or life style because you won't train your children. I truly feel that if your over 18 (old enough to be in the Army.) you should be responsable enough to take your punishment for screwing up. If your under 18. Then your parents should be held accountable. That's why there are special laws for minors, they are not supposed to know what's what. That's the parents job, to teach. Anything else is just wimping out on the job.

Remember the TV add, telling people to take the keys out of their cars, "Don't let a good kid go wrong." If he is a good kid, what to heck is he doing checking out my car for keys?

So don't blame TV, Drugs, the hole in the Ozone layer, whales, Honda cars, or Rap music, for a failure of a parent to parent. If you can't handle the toughest job on the planet, then for God's sake, don't reproduce.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 20 May 99 - 07:15 PM

Ok, What are YOU doing to improve parenting in your community, or is it all someone else's responsibility? Would you join an organization to improve parenting, the way many cowards who won't speak their own piece join the NRA?

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 20 May 99 - 09:03 PM

If it's not time to get angry now and organize against this madness, then that time will never come. Consider that a shoestring organization of heroic attorneys at the Southern Poverty Law Center succeeded in bringing the Ku Klux Klan to its knees financially. We could do the same with the "cold dead fingers" crowd.

Sincerely, I who feel at least as strong as you do about holding criminals accountable, and much more informed about it, being a teacher in juvenile prison, Chet W.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: katlaughing
Date: 20 May 99 - 09:11 PM

I agree with you, Chet. Thanks for this thread. You might like the one I just started about POSITIVE things-alternative to STRESS threads.

kat

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Tucker
Date: 20 May 99 - 09:28 PM

What can I say people? you no longer hold folks accountable for their actions, instead, inanimate objects, like guns, stones, bricks, irons, wheelbarrows! Get off it for Christ sake! Domestic violence doesn't happen because there is a gun somewhere, it happens because there is a people problem and all the singing of Blowing in the Wind isn't going to help it. Don't want a gun, fine, don't have one. See someone violating laws, report them! Oh and by the way, if you are in Portsmouth Ohio mention that I reported a felony, the address of the felon,submitted evidence and still nothing has happened! I am sure this is the frustration that is happening everywhere in America, Millions of laws, no one enforcing them

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 20 May 99 - 09:51 PM

Again, you respond to only a part of what I said because you can't deal with the whole thing. I dearly want criminals to be held accountable, and no mistake, and I don't want to take your guns or blame them. But I sure as hell wish those kids in Colorado or the one in Atlanta today had had wheelbarrows instead of what they did have, what was it?, oh yeah, guns. As far as enforcing the law, there are ways to get involved with supporting your local law enforcement (they don't get nearly enought support, only blame, like teachers) and vote to remove judges that won't send criminals to jail. People who are informed and sincere and prepared in mind can do a lot more than all the gun-gripping (till their fingers are cold and dead) one-thoughted people protecting their cabins with firepower. By the way, I have a close friend with whom I used to have this same argument (his grandfather had come here because of some IRA activities in Ireland, and guns are a big part of his identity) until I realized that it wasn't really an argument or a discussion because he wouldn't think with his whole mind. Now we don't talk about it, and we're still friends.

Have guts, address all the issues, don't ignore the ones you can't support intelligently before God and the world, is my advice.

Chet W.

By the way, how many dead children will it take, and how close do they have to be to your house.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Don Meixner
Date: 20 May 99 - 11:51 PM

I fear we will have this debate unendingly. Line will be drawn over this single issue and folks who would otherwise be friends will not speak to each other because of the stand taken. We can't speak about guns and gun ownership with out one side feeling that the other is trvializing what is viewed by them to be a horrible device.

I am not in the NRA. But I shoot and I was trained to handle guns with care. Some people view all guns as weapons while I view some guns as weapons. If the universal weapon view is held then all knives are weapons and all bats are weapons. A Yo Yo is a weapon in its original form as are the discus and javelin. Are they still?

I know that many people view my right to own a shotgun and the odd pistol as an idea whose time has been and gone. They are fine with their opinions. My thought is this, I've never used my guns foolishly or dangerously. My kids know all about them, how to be safe with them and they ignore them. I'm sorry some damaged children whose lives were set on this path years ago have come to this pass. But I will not let anyone criminalise my legal and rightful use of private property because of the crimnal actions by a very few people in the general population.

Enforce the laws we have. Accept the standard provision in the law that allows for the rightful use of rifles, shotguns and pistols by collectors, sportspersons, and any member of the popularion who wishes to own a gun.

Don Meixner

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Nan
Date: 20 May 99 - 11:55 PM

Guns don't kill.........People WITH guns kill!

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 May 99 - 12:16 AM

Again, guns are made for one reason only, tested for only one thing, ultimatley, their killing power.

I am liberal as all get out. If you read my editorial in the other thread you will know I was raised targeting practising. My kids were taught about guns. I disciplined my kids, yes even with a swat on the butt. They all three grew up to responsible adults, with no guns, no run-ins with the law and everywhere they go I am complimented on their demeanor, courtesy, abilities,and talents.

Please quit generalising!

Fingerpointing and using labels, esp. in an irrational manner will do nothing but deepen the polarisation that is already tearing our country apart!

As Chet W. says, how many children does it take? How many before everyone joins in with reasonable actions on stopping the violence? How much longer will people be driven by paranoia, instead of compassion?

kat

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Don Meixner
Date: 21 May 99 - 12:22 AM

Thats correct people with guns kill other people and animals.

So do people with : Cars, knives, AIDS, poisons, alcohol, baseball bats, hockey sticks, black belts and no belts, viscious dogs, bad cooking skills, illegal drugs, explosives, screw drivers, matches......

The one constant in all these tools of death is not the tool, its the people. Left to their own devices, the desire to kill or cause harm will always rely on the tool at hand and many of these mentioned are more eficient than a hand gun.

Don.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: AndyG
Date: 21 May 99 - 04:54 AM

This was going to go to the other guns thread but I couldn't post it yesterday.
As a citizen of the UK I've never had a right to bear arms. If I wanted a weapon I needed (until recently) society's permission. Now I can't even have that, and it doesn't bother me. The again I don't suspect most of the population of carrying concealed firearms.

To be fair I don't believe the USA is capable of withdrawing weapons from the populace given the present enormous distribution. But some serious and universal, carry, possession and purchase laws, (including weapon type restrictions) would surely be a move in the right direction.

For those in the "guns don't kill, people do!" lobby I suggest the following thought experiment.
Buy two pigs and put them in the back-yard.
Take a knife (broken bottle, crowbar, melee weapon of choice) and kill a pig with it.
Buy an AK47
Shoot the other pig.
Which killing was easier ?
What effect might restricting access to firearms have on premeditated violent crime ?

AndyG

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Banjer
Date: 21 May 99 - 05:05 AM

All I've read is well and good. I can see logic and reason on both sides. BUT, as with anything else that gets outlawed or banned, we the law abiding citizens will comply, and then only the outlaws will have that which was banned!

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Bob Schwarer
Date: 21 May 99 - 09:37 AM

Kat:

Not all guns are made for killing, tho they can. You would play hell trying a masacre with a bench rest rifle. Made strictly for punching holes in paper, real close together. Sure, you could kill some one if you tried hard enough, just like you could run down someone with a car not made for killing.

Most of my rifles are single shot. The benchrest guns require me to make my own ammunition. On top of that they weighs 15 pounds. Not something I carry under my jacket.

Bob S.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: hank
Date: 21 May 99 - 09:41 AM

Those who would trade freedom for safety niether deserve nor will get either.

Guns are made to kill. And not just people. We have in the country a severare problem with overpopulation of animoles. Guns are the only usefull way to control that. If you don't control the problem you will soon starve to death all (Not just the excess) of our wildlife. We need guns because the DNR cannot mantain wildlife iwthout them. And don't say we need more preditors, it sounds good until there is a bear eating your garbage, or a wolf snapping at your heals. Both are currently afraid of people in general, but campgrounds in some areas are in danger because bears have come to see people as in the way of food, and then they kill to get at the food you carry. Wolves will be next.

I have never heard of a gun sitting on a shelf killing someone. I have heard of people mishandling a gun and killing someone (this is rare, but it happens), I've heard of people intentially killing anouther with a gun. There are also many people who handle a gun safely. Hunting is the safest sport we have today despite the fact that there is almost always someone in range of a hunters gun, and there is no supervision of hunters. The reason is that hunters know and respect the deadlyness of their weapon, and (generally) kill only what they intend to kill.

Guns are not the common link in kids killing other kids. They are a common link in kids shooting kids, but that is not logical as you have defined guns when shooting, and of course they are a common link then. Bombs have destroied schools in the past, bombs made from standard household chemicals. Quit defining your goal and then restricting your scope to where your goal is achived and your logic will improve.

I have yet to see a convincing arguement that people are not the common link in all these school shootings/bombings, or other killings outside of school.

And finially, isolated incidents do not a crisis make. Yes of course I would be sad and angry if someone shot my sister. But I would not use that as an excuse to apply mislogic. Guns are not a big problem in our socity, they look like an easy fix, but it is not.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Uilleand
Date: 21 May 99 - 09:53 AM

So many people, so many different points of view. But there are some common themes here. I see several issues raised and rationals brought forth in favor of guns. Maybe to separate them out would help to look at the different angles. Note also that not all of us who are for gun control are against guns or the ownership there of. One issue brought up is the one of national defense. And although I personally feel that that is the least persuasive argument for personal gun ownership, I think it needs to be addressed as I feel it's the one for which the 2nd amendment was intended. This country hasn't seen ground war on its own soil in over 100 years. The technology for war and large scale invasion is so sophisticated by now that the thought of defending your own home even with a granade launcher seems ludicrous, aside from the fact that we have one of the finest military defense systems in the world. Another 'war' argument brought up is the one of defense against our own elected government. This may work well for the fanatic 'Freemen' in Montana or the Branch Davidians, but I wonder how many average Americans use that argument and truly believe it, knowing full well the priviledges we enjoy as being one of the most democratic countries in the world. Guns for sport is another issue. The one I am most likely to support. But someone who owns and uses guns just for sport (hunting, target practice)really shouldn't have any difficulty with strict gun control. There are gun clubs and hunting clubs overseas that have very tight controls on how and where a gun is kept, licensing requirements and background checks. It works very well. The most contentious issue I see here in the threads is the one about personal protection. And that is also where most of the accidents happen. To say that the kids were just 'bad' or had parents that didn't do their jobs is abdicating the responsibility to our own communities. It is a way of sticking your head in the sand and saying that because people are inherently good or bad, I don't have to do anything but defend my rights. The fact is that even the most attentive parents cannot prevent children from exploring. And best intentions go awry many times. People get angry and sometimes people get violent. By having much stricter gun controls we can prevent those situation from being serious or even fatal. It is about giving ourselves time to think and exercise that which separates us from animals:choice. Regarding personal protection against attackers and intruders: there are other options. I am afraid that by making guns as the method of choice for self defense we are teaching our children a terrible lesson. Self defense can be passive: alertness, alarm systems, and many times plain common sense.

Sorry for the length of this dissertation.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Fadac
Date: 21 May 99 - 10:43 AM

My two cents worth.

I hate to break anyones bubble, but not all guns are built to kill people. Some are built to kill the very deadly empty tin can. Others are built to shoot down in a powdery crash, the once famous clay pidgen.

We really don't need more laws, just enforce the ones we have now. Passing another law, only to have it ignored later, is just a big waste of time and effort.

For example; It is considered ileagle to drive an automobile while under the influance of alachol. However there are something like 50K deaths a year attribuited to drunk driving. OK so lets make booze ileagle. They tried that in the 1920s. The main result of that was the Mafia.

Of course in America, you can have someone run you off the road, killing you and your family, and killing themselves and thier family, to beat you to an exit because they are late for the "anti war" rally, because they are aginst killing. Or perhaps they are late for an hair appointment.

BTW, somebody asked what I do for parenting. Well I'm a parent of two. (both grown up now, both engineers.) And I still work with youth in the Civil Air Patrol. (Funny thing about CAP, they specilize in saving lives, yet sometimes I'm REQUIRED to have a gun in the airplane. It is part of my survival kit. Yes it is there to kill, so are my fish hooks, gill net, and snair. For some reason I feel that people are more important than bunny rabbits. Expecily when you are 250 miles from downtown nowhere. ) (Oh, btw it is a .22 over .410 double barrel single shot. There are other guns out there besides AK-47.)

At least it is Friday. Have a good weekend...

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 21 May 99 - 11:16 AM

The postings from Hank and Fadac have rendered me speechless.(cheers heard in background) I am emigrating to another galaxie. (louder cheers!)

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: tomtom
Date: 21 May 99 - 11:29 AM

Hank,

Hunting is the safest sport we have today? I would vote for ping pong, although it's been getting more and more dangerous nowadays--what with the plastic balls getting harder and the technical advancements with the paddle.

I know, I know, you can kill someone with a ping pong paddle, too.

tomtom

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Uilleand
Date: 21 May 99 - 01:15 PM

I hear all about the casualties when laws are ignored. What about the statistics of lives saved, because of these laws? How many people think twice about getting into a car after having indulged in an alcohol beverage? How many fines and jail sentences for DUIs and DWIs have prevented accidents? How many arguments did not result in injury or fatality because there is gun control? Those are the statistics that really matter. And would anyone truly be surprised to find out that they outnumber by far the instances where someone successfully fended off an attacker with a gun. The tragedy is that these statistics are much harder to obtain or most likely we wouldn't be having these kinds of arguments in the first place.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Don Meixner
Date: 21 May 99 - 01:26 PM

Bob: Bench rifle. I have a .32 Cal Schutzen black powder that I never ever fire. I use my 45-70 trap door instead.

Hank: Hunting is not a safe sport unless you hunt alone. There are so many untrained Nimrods out there that I have quit hunting. One fellow recently was pulled from the woods with an arrow in the back of his head. Hell of a shot. BUT shooting can be very safe and fun. I draw a definate distinction and still believe strongly and completely in the constitution.

Rick: Stay on the planet, we need the loyal and rational opposition.

Andy: Why do people always pick up an AK 47 to kill their pigs. A Mac 10 is just as poorly made and in accurate. I'd use a Shilleleigh, be cause they never misfire.

Don

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: LEJ
Date: 21 May 99 - 02:09 PM

Andy G mentioned the pig-killing analogy, deciding that guns would be the easier method of killing. I think he leaves out the dirty little secret about guns that even casual gun owners are aware of;guns are FUN.Why use a knife or a blunt object when they are so inefficient and dirty. Guns are clean and powerful; from 200 feet you can inflict sudden instantaneous death. You can't tell me that this isn't part of the thrill of big-game hunting. You can drop an animal who is far stronger and much more likely to kill you in a face to face confrontation, and you can drop him from a distance such that the animal has no idea what hit him. It's like a bolt from God.

This is the insidious danger of firearms, the strong attraction to them as equalizers. Could Harris and Kleybold, the Columbine killers, have inflicted much damage with knives or baseball bats? I doubt it. They were wimps compared to many of their victims. Only with guns could they have the pleasure of watching many who were clearly their physical and mental superiors cower before them. Only with firearms could these two losers feel potent enough to take on themselves the power of gods.

LEJ

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 May 99 - 02:11 PM

This is sickening. Why not have a pig-killing discusion privately?

You missed my point again. None of the other things you've cited were made expressly for killing, as guns are.

Rick, glad you could join me; now, does that make US the aliens, or what!???

katlaughing, disgustedly

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Sapper_RE
Date: 21 May 99 - 02:44 PM

As an ex-squaddie who enjoyed weapon training and an occasional day on the ranges, I looked at target shooting over this side of the big pond as a supurbly disciplined sport. Until, that is, I moved to Derbyshire, adjascent to the now defunct Derbyshire Shooting Centre. Listening to some dickhead blasting off 8 to 10 rounds in less than 5 seconds with something over 9mm caliber made me realise that, so far as civvy street is concerned, I was wrong. Neither did hearing what sounded suspiciously like an SMG on a couple of occasions. Here we have had Hungerford and Dunblane. Neither of which would have happened had the then law been enforced. The latter has led to a knee jerk reaction that has destroyed the enjoyment of a lot of law abiding people. However, there were enough potential psychos in the British shooting fraternity to make the current law the lesser of two evils. You, our American cousins, may be forced to catch up with us one day, despite the differences in circumstances. Bob.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: DennisM
Date: 21 May 99 - 03:15 PM

let your mind be your guide. this thread could run forever. guns, dynamite, razors, rocks, it takes a person with a brain to use or misuse what he has available. crazy's do crazy things - period.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: LEJ
Date: 21 May 99 - 03:36 PM

Kat... you apparently are missing the point. I don't think that pig-killing is the subject, the subject is the attraction of humans to using guns. Andy made an analogy, Don and I commented on it.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: SeanM
Date: 21 May 99 - 04:26 PM

Could I ask, for the future of the 'cat, that this subject be declared an 'agree to disagree' subject? In my short time on the 'cat, I've never seen a topic create such vitriol amongst people who are otherwise friendly. Let's call a truce before we do some serious damage, please? Two full threads worth of disagreement with excursions in to several others should be a strong enough hint that this is a polarizing issue, and perhaps we should reconsider continuing this same polarization...

Sean

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 May 99 - 04:47 PM

The analogous pigs and I agree with you SeanM. Thank you!

kat

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Bert
Date: 21 May 99 - 05:58 PM

I' m not taking sides on this thread but I just found this joke...

A female newscaster is interviewing the leader of a youth club:
Interviewer: "So, Mr. Jones, what are you going to do with these children on this adventure holiday?"
Mr. Jones: "We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting."
Interviewer: "Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible, isn't it?"
Mr. Jones: "I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the range."
Interviewer: "Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?"
Mr. Jones: "I don't see how, we will be teaching them proper range discipline before they even touch a firearm."
Interviewer: "But you're equipping them to become violent killers."
Mr. Jones: "Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute but you're not one, are you?"

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Fadac
Date: 21 May 99 - 06:11 PM

Bert, Legend has it, that she cut the interview just before the last line. Then broadcast the interview with a bunch of on street interviews of the sort, "Should youth clubs be teaching kids to shoot guns, that kill people?" Then when called on it, she screemed "Freedom of the press!" How convient. I agree, this thread has gone on too long. I don't think anyone changed anyone elses opinion, however a lot of steam has been let off. (pffffft)

Remember: Accordions don't play Lady of Spain, Accordionsist do.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Chet W.
Date: 21 May 99 - 06:23 PM

I agree with ending this, as far as I'm concerned, but not for the sake of civil discourse. Those who make the loudest arguments against gun control, always ignoring that we are not saying "gun banning", are not really coming up with adult ideas, so this is not really a discussion or an argument among equals. It's a bunch of adults, angry at this point in time, trying to communicate with programmed robots. If this is vitriol, then so be it. I must say that quoting Thomas Jefferson, about being willing to give up freedom for security, is entirely out of place here. One last thing, if you can find a French movie from a few years ago called "Hate", you may see what a big difference there is between an open gun culture (like ours in the US) and a controlled one (obviously, France). When violence comes, as it does everywhere sooner or later, a lot less people end up dead when guns are not growing on trees.

I'm done, Chet W.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Don Meixner
Date: 21 May 99 - 06:31 PM

Ms. Laughing,

Because you have asked I will quit being a party to this thread. We will never agree or change our minds be left to our own devices we will rail against each other until we out cute each other. I said early on this was a no win discussion.

But people will know that I am a gun owner even if I say nothing. They will smell the Hoppes # 9 faintly on my hands when we meet. Or they notice I am a little deaf in my left ear or I'll forget and wear my yellow glasses. I can hide it from some by putting a 4 foot level and a fly rod in the gun rack in the backwindow of my truck but others will know. Yes, others will know.

Or maybe not.

Your Pal til hell won't have it.

Don

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: L:EJ
Date: 21 May 99 - 08:15 PM

Just so you know, this discussion has influenced a change of heart for some of us. I got personal e-mails from Tucker, Don M, and fadac confiding that I had won them over, and voicing their whole-hearted support for handgun control. I have asked them to send their firearms to Katlaughing for safekeeping, although I would like to borrow the grenade launcher for an experiment in whole hog sausage production this weekend.

I for one enjoyed the argument. Thanks to all on all sides who participated...LEJ

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Bob Schwarer
Date: 21 May 99 - 08:24 PM

Last post. Don: Bench gun is a 6PPC tight neck. Love to shoot the old Trapdoor. Pull the trigger & wait forever to hear the bullet hit. Got a .32-40 for Schutzen work. A Stevens replica.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 May 99 - 09:30 PM

I shall turn them all into pisspots and plowshares!

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 22 May 99 - 12:27 AM

You can decide what this means, if it means anything: judging by this discussion, people who favor gun control spell much better than those who oppose it. --seed

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Bob Schwarer
Date: 22 May 99 - 07:55 PM

10 Beat your plowshares into swords and your pruning hooks into spears. Let the weakling say, `I am strong!`

Joel 3:10

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 22 May 99 - 08:03 PM

Hi Kratz, interesting point - and am I glad YOU made it. Might check out sentence structure while you're at it.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 23 May 99 - 01:35 AM

Rick, I noticed some syntactical/grammatical/other mechanical shortcomings as well, but figured I could make the point with spelling...it's easier to grasp. --seed

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Alex
Date: 23 May 99 - 02:22 AM

I was hoping that this would just go away, and I decided to stay out of it - but it just seems to keep going. If it continues further I intend to start a new thread on the lines of the Monty Python skit "Spot The Loony" (On Mudcat). I've already picked my choices!

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: hank
Date: 24 May 99 - 09:28 AM

Well, I'm staying away form these threads after this, so my last words:
don, while it is true that people die hunting, and there are idiots hunting, statisticly it is about the safest activity you can find.

I've noticed that in both the school shootings that people are concerned about, the kids would have gotten the guns in the same way. In alanta they were locked in a safe, but the kid got them anyway. An adult purchased them, and had them well stored, but that doesn't stop criminals.

For those who think they are cute picking on my (admitiadly) bad spelling: Would you tell a person in a wheelchair to get up an walk? Everyone has their difficulties, I don't claim to be perfect, please see byond them to me. (No need to respond to this, as I said, I'm staying away from this thread)

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 24 May 99 - 09:38 AM

--seed: I'm sooooo glad you pointed that out, I'd noticed it some time ago, but thought it inappropriate to comment, as I'm only British. Ta.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 24 May 99 - 09:41 AM

Oh, and nobody answered my question.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Cara
Date: 24 May 99 - 10:13 AM

Lucky I was out of town and miss this thread. Because those horrible NRA slogans were bandied about here again, let me say this again here: If only outlaws have guns, it sure will make it easier for the police to spot them.

I think this discussion has been remarkably civil, all things considered. It's one I've never been able to have with my family because of the high emotion involved (and their unfortunate placement on the wrong side of this debate) so having it here, in a "safe" environment, has been great.

Chet, I like your thoughts on doing something. It's an excellent point; if you don't like the way things are, do something about it. I try to live my life that way, and these mmost recent shootings have prompted me to consider taking a break from tutoring and doing some volunteer work for gun control. Gotta put my money where my mouth is, as they say.

Good on us, for (largely) reasonable debate (except for all of you who are wrong, wrong, wrong of course).

kat, if you melt down some of that steel and fashion it into a peace sign and send it to me I'll wear it around my neck forever, fashion be damned.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again L:EJ NOT SO!
From: Fadac
Date: 24 May 99 - 10:29 AM

L:EJ, Please don't put words into my mouth. I have not sent anyone here any personel email. Everything I have said, I have said in the open. My mind cerntley hasn't been changed here, execpt that people like to find one thing in a statement and blow that up to fit what ever argument that is running at the time.

So, don't put words or feet into my mouth. I can do that very well by my self, Thank you.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: The_one_and_only_Dai
Date: 24 May 99 - 10:36 AM

Still nobody's answered my question.

Subject: RE: Hesitatingly, GUNS again
From: Fadac
Date: 24 May 99 - 11:26 AM

One and only Dai. The right to keep and bear arms, etc.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Yes this was written when we were at war with the UK. As was Fredom of the Press, etc. Also at that time, a gentelman just didn't go out on the streets, without being armed. (usualy a sword, but still armed) Even on the streets of London, men went armed. Lets compaire with "An Englishmans home is his castle." Does that mean that your grandmother can toss out a Royal from her flat, and you can't? But they remove houses to make hiways, don't they?

Anyway, I am not able to go back in time and ask our forfathers what they ment. So I have to assume that they have told me what they mean by what the left behind. Freedome of the press. (ok some press go out of bounds here, perhaps they should be regulated too. ) A well regulated malitia, is not Aunt Qunnie with an AK-47, unless of course she is a malitial member. There is also a law here called "pasio comototias" Or something like that. This law came in effect when Pancho Via was running around killing Americans in the Southwest. This gave the citizens there the right to protect themselvs.

Think back to the dark days of WWII. The UK was wating for the Germans to come washing up on the beach. So the questions is, what is the differance between the "home guard" and a malitia?

Anyway, this is my attempt to answer your question. If all the other parts of our constuition make good sense, and folks have problems with just one. I wonder at their motives.

When I was in the Army, I swore to protect the Consituiton of the United States. Not just the parts I liked, all of it. So for me, it stands compleat, or it falls as one document. The old boys did a good job on it. Mucking with it only leads to other problems. Prohibition comes to mind. Look at all the problems that caused.

Anyway, squeeze on. |\/\/\/|