Topic: HAND GUNS Friend or Foe (Put your goves on and come out FRIENDS)

[TwoTired]

I think you missunderstand the meaning of having a right.  A right is inherant, not granted.  Privleges may be granted by an authoritative body.

I have to disagree. Human beings may behave in such a way as to lose their rights. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness may need to be defended by poppong a redcoat with your musket, but shooting an intruder in your house is much different. I would suggest that society has let us down in a much larger way if someone finds the need to break and enter, and we need to keep guns on hand for that eventuality. I don't think the forefathers imagined all of us barricaded in our houses defending ourselves from each other.

Convicted felons can lose their rights, including the right to breathe.  Rights can be and are curtailed by individual and government actions.  Nonetheless, you are born with certain rights.  The US Bill of Rights states some that are "self evident" to limit arguments about them.  I rather like the innocent until proven guilty basis of judicial law.
 
Please think again about what the founding fathers imagined.  They were very thoughtful individuals who long debated the basis for government principles.
Colonial america very much needed firearms to defend their families and homes, as there were few, if any, police available to provide defense from nefarious individuals, especially in the sparse rural areas prevalent in that day.
Help was often well out of shouting distance.  Suzi Homaker and the family unit could well defend herself, hearth, and home, against armed assailants.  Roving bands of temporarily successful miscreants were dealt with by local militia rallied for the cause, or by successive whittling of their numbers by unfortunate homesteaders.

The founding fathers also realized, that short of a standing army, such as the British employed against the citizenry, the only way to defend the country was to employ the citizenry as militia to defend it.  Current, modern, weapons were (is) essential in such an effort.

[pmpski_1]

Lastly, why is it desireable to have people injure each other with baseball bats rather than pistols?  A serious blow to the head with a bat will make a person equally dead with another struck with a well placed bullet.

I don't know this for a fact, but I imagine that it would be more psychologically difficult to kill somebody up close and personal than from a distance with a gun. Two people with a disagreement and no guns involved may fight it out with fists and not kill each other. But if one had a gun and was scared of getting beat, they could easily pull the trigger from a distance, just like the movies or a video game.

I love guns because they're fun. It's a good time and test of skill to shoot at targets. But since I'm a bit of a hot head I will not carry a gun. It would be too easy for me to get in a lot of trouble.

I don't know if I will ever own one for home protection. Would I feel safer? Yes. On the other hand, there is more of a chance of a loved one being hurt or killed, either by me or themselves.

Whether good or bad, I'm thankful that we have a choice. That is what freedom is really about.

[Buffo]

to all of you who have asi in one way or another that you dont trust yourself with a gun...

You would be very suprised at what a sobering affect it has on you. you would be amased at how fast "25 to life" comes into your brain. I have been in many fights with a gun in my waist band or under my arm. Never once did I think of pulling it. even when I was losing.

But if my family is in danger or even a stranger...good night sweet prince. I would go to theropy if i needed it...but the villan would have at least one .45 hole in them. And I would feel much worse if I did nothing.

Don

[Dennis]

I would suggest that society has let us down in a much larger way if someone finds the need to break and enter, and we need to keep guns on hand for that eventuality. I don't think the forefathers imagined all of us barricaded in our houses defending ourselves from each other.

Jaan,
I am going to guess that you have never had your house broken into, but correct me if I am wrong.

Personally, I have had this occur more than once, and it is not something that I would really care to experience again ...........

[Badboy]

I feel about the same as Buffo does,I would feel a LOT worse if I stood and did nothing to protect others against a criminal.I was not brought up to stand and no nothing like some of the reports I have seen over the years. Even if I lost my own life I would at least try. Thr way I reason this whole thing,is that if some punk wants to do a crime,it is his or hers misfortune if they meet their end. Not that I would not feel bad about what I had to do.

[Quail "Owner of the comfortable k8"]

Jaan,
I am going to guess that you have never had your house broken into, but correct me if I am wrong.

Personally, I have had this occur more than once, and it is not something that I would really care to experience again ...........

I can relate to this, The feeling of being so personaly violated.  Its was not the robbery I could replace it all easy, stuff is stuff..  It is the casualness in which it is done.  Its waking up thinking you hear something in your sleep 6 years later! 

I knew a guy that when he was young, would break into homes at night knowing the people was home because the thrill was greater.  He always laughed at me not owning a hand gun (1977).

 When you hear that "sound" and the police are 25 minutes away at best.  That 38 and hours of training make me know what I am going to do, and I set out to do it.

[750deepsouth]

Just from another country's perspective...

Unfortunately the USA is a violent society. Gun deaths .. 30-40,000 per annum ? Compare with Canada - Japan - Australia - any European
country you want to name.
Having the right to bear arms makes it very difficult to step back from the need/desire to own guns.
It's a bit like the desire for people to own larger and larger SUV's - an irrational notion that driving them makes you safer,
even though there is strong evidence to the contrary. And the M.A.D theory as it applies to nuclear weapons - Mutually Assured
Destruction.
Is it true that a fair % of handgun owners get shoot with their own weapons ?
Although there is a strong gun culture in this country as well, there is also strict liscensing and controls on ownership. Handguns are illegal
except for specially registerd target shooters.
Having said that, there are still a few shootings, and tragic accidents involving children who get a hold of parent's weapons.
I owned a rifle when I was younger and only used it for a little deershooting. Although I still hold a liscence I have not used/owned a gun for 20 years.

I'm not sure how I'd feel if I lived in the states. It might well depend where I lived. 

Andy

[Badboy]

I think that it a fable that a % of gun owners get shot with their own gun. It does happen now and then ,as for me if they want my gun ,they will have to pry it out of my cold dead fingers.Did you mean shooting themselves or the punk getting the weapon?
Years ago ,in a town close to me ,there was a young police officer killed by a man that was loony,I aways thought that he was reluctant to pull the trigger[he had had a religous upbringing] ,so he wound up dead instead of the one that should have[the loony did end up dead shortly]shot by a buisiness owner that had a 45 and was willing to protect his workers. The loony was after his estranged wife. At any rate ,autos kill many times more than guns do,and that is  a tragedy that there is no need for. People[some of them]seem to think they can drive crazy and come out on top,well they come out on the bottom [six feet under]all to often.
I have heard that the countries that are so hard on gun owners still have a high murder rate ,just a different means to get it done.
If strict  gun laws mean low crime rate,than NYC,Washington, Boston,etc. would be the safest places around,but it is just the opposite. These cities are a crime bed. The criminals don't give a hoot about any laws do they?

[Hud]

Just a few short comments. First, the courts have ruled several times that the police have NO legal obligation to protect ANYONE. Who does that leave? And the leftists are trying to take away your most effective means of protection. What does that say about how they feel about the value of your life?
Second. The right to protect yourself by ANY means is a natural, God given right, and does not come from Government, or the Constitutuion. As a matter of fact, the Constitution does not grant a single right. It only tries to protect them by limiting Government.
If you can find it, read an essay by Jefrey Snyder (sp) entitled "Are we a nation of cowards"
I would not care to use a gun on another human being, but would do so IF I had no other choice, and then only to protect my life, my families life, or another individuals life. Let them take the replaceables, and let the cops deal with that.

[TwoTired]

TwoTired, freedom is also when you get to choose to be stupid and/or irresponsible. I personally feel that too many people choose to exercise that option.

Yes, I agree.  I also feel that too many people think with their emotions, ignoring facts, historical evidence, human behavioral studies, or a scientific approach to problem solving.

I also think that you shouldn't restrict or condemn those that are smart and highly responsible, based on the actions of the stupid and irresponsible.

[78_SaltLick]

Well heres a subject thats sure to bring out the best in all of us...

Heres a story of why i got myself some protection for the house:

I use to work graveyard shift when my wife and i first moved here to oregon. One night, while my wife was at home alone (and pregnant with our first child) and i was at work, she fell asleep around midnight on the couch. She awoke with a start around 1:00am to someone banging on the door and trying the front door handle at the same time. They were shouting "Let me in! Let me in!, someones trying to kill me!" This was a mans voice. He started to throw his body weight against the door trying to break it down. About this time, our neighbor came outside, luckily he was a big biker type, and yelled at the man "What the hell is going on over there?" at which time the man immediately stopped trying to break down the door, and walked away very quickly up the street. My wife called my at work, scrared to death,  and i came home. The next morning, we noticed something missing from our front porch where the man was the night before. Our very sharp garden spade was gone. While talking this over with our neighbor, i found out he had wondered what was in the mans hand, it looked like a knife (apparently the man was holding the spade up in a stabbing position while trying to bust down the door with his shoulder).

My wife use to leave the front door unlocked at night, only because she never thought to lock it. That doesnt happen anymore. I had locked it when i left for work thank god, or she might be dead, along with my child. People are nuts, and if you think something crazy wont happen to you and your family think again. It is one thing to be on a forum and say you dont believe in guns, or baseball bats, or what have ya.....and its another when you awake with a start at 3:00am hear the sound of shattering glass coming from somewhere in your dark house. 

[Badboy]

As to the little poll,I realy can not give a good answer to that as to where I stand. I the case of a great abuse by some bastard,I might be able to shoot him and feel good about it. On the other hand,if the attacker was drunk or druged up and not in his or her right mind,then I might use force [deadly] with great sorrow. But regardless, If need be I would act and do what I had to do .

[Raul CB750K1]

Definitely USA and Europe and very different. I understand when living in a rural area that you never know what comes your way, but now imagine you are an european going to live in the States for six months (like I was). Before entering the country I had to fill up a questionary. Among other question there was wether I had been into jail, or wether I was planning to try to kill the president. May sound stupid (actually it does) but at least it's a way of screening.

I was in Nashville and saw an ad about a gun show. I thought to myself: let's learn a little of americana. 6 bucks and I was in. A shopping mall full of tables with every kind of hand gun, bows, rifles, bullets, you name it. I was going to shoot some pictures to show my friends here but I thought twice as it was not a good idea. How do you convince it's for your scrapbook? The same people there wouldn't give a damn if I shoot a picture of them in Walmart, but no way in a gun show. Why?
It was the very first time I touched a handgun, not a rifle as my dad had one for hunting. I asked out of curiosity what did I need to do in order to buy one. The guy in the table told me that I had to fill out a form so the government had that gun controlled. But there was no questionary, nothing to screen out wackos. How come?

When I took my driving license, both car and motorbike, there was a questionary about DUI and some other things. I must say that it was childish compared with the spanish test, but again, it is a way of screening.

In Spain, be it either a driving permit or a gun permit, you have to go to a doctor that will hand you a psychological test, and also will ask you some questions. It has been proved with a hidden camera that sometimes they just get your money and issue the certification even when you say you can't control your drinking habits or you get furious easily. But at least there is some screening.

So there is screening for accepting aliens and for giving driving permits but not for buying guns?

As I said in a previous post, objects are not evil in themselves. You can kill somebody with a baseball bat, with a car, with a x-acto knife, with a big wrench, with a belt, with a stone, with your bare hands... but all of them share something: neither was created or conceived as a weapon. Using a wrench to kill is giving the wrench an alternative utility. You can give a gun an alternative utility, like hammering down nails, but that's very unlikely. Guns are weapons in themselves, conceived for that main purpose and no other. You can buy one and keep it as a mean of defence, but it can turn 180º and convert itself in an object of attack. I hope you never shoot somebody thinking you are under threat and it turns out you were hairtrigger and killed an innocent. There should always be a balance between crime and punishment. You can't simply kill somebody for getting you out or your car and stealing it. Even if he is a scumbag. I wish I never have to carry on my shoulders the blame of killing somebody, whomever it may be.

[Badboy]

Don't bet on the idea that you can't kill someone for trying to steal your car. In [I believe Texes a few years ago ,a person hired by a bank to reposess a car was shot dead in the attempt. When it came to court,the shooter was off scot free. The would be reposesser was not doing it the legal way. He was trying to steal the auto occording to Texes law. In Maine if a dirt-bag tried to force me out of my car to steal it I could legally kill him . Cause it would be considered that I would have a reasonable fear for my life.
Hope I would never have to come to that.

Like you said guns are tools and they are not supposed to safe for the recipient ,and if one don't want to be in that position,don't try the crime

[Quail "Owner of the comfortable k8"]

Shooting to protect does not have to mean the first shot is to kill.

[Uncle Ernie]

Shooting to wound or stop someone only happens in the movies or by accident. I'll never forget when I lived in SF there was a guy holed up in a second floor apartment. First, in these situations I'll never understand why they just don't turn off all the utilities and wait him out. Anyway, he's shooting at the cops and a whole bunch of cops are shooting back. When it was all over, the whole side of the building was covered with bullets. Not just a dense concentration around the window- THE WHOLE SIDE OF THE BUILDING! If the alleged professionals who have access to regular training can barely manage to hit the side of a barn apartment building, how is the average Joe going to purposely "wing" a miscreant?

[Buffo]

in my opinion: if you want to act like a criminal,  I will treat you like a crminal.

Plain and simple.

[Badboy]

Buffo,I will second that!

[jaannaktin]

Colonial america very much needed firearms to defend their families and homes, as there were few, if any, police available to provide defense from nefarious individuals, especially in the sparse rural areas prevalent in that day.
Help was often well out of shouting distance.  Suzi Homaker and the family unit could well defend herself, hearth, and home, against armed assailants.  Roving bands of temporarily successful miscreants were dealt with by local militia rallied for the cause, or by successive whittling of their numbers by unfortunate homesteaders.

I am really glad that I live and work somewhere where I will never even remotely consider owning or operating a handgun. I am sad that our country still has places that people have the need to keep handguns at the ready for armed or unarmed intruders. I thought that Clint Eastwood and Steven Segal movies were the stuff of fiction, but apparently not. I guess things really haven't changed in over 200 years. The founding fathers, whatever their intent, seem to have prepared us for even this unforseen eventuality. I would gather that they had no clue that this would even be a matter of debate 200 years after the American Revolution.

I am glad that people that need handguns have the ability to buy and keep them, but I stand by the assertion that most people who have them don't need them. Also that most times a handgun is drawn and fired and someone is killed, it is an accident or a homicide, not a homeowner or dutiful citizen protecting his family and house from unlawful seizure or attack.

Peace, to borrow from another.

 

Jaan

[750FSS]

Right on Egil !  Most Americans seem to have "selective memory".  For one thing, the right to bear arms was so citizens could protect themselve from uneasonable search and siezure from the prevailing government.   
[/quo

AMAN BROTHER!!!

[TwoTired]

Definitely USA and Europe and very different.

Yes, most governments are so fearful of the people they control, they will not allow them any means of wresting that control from it.  Governments have always been the antithesis of freedom.

I was in Nashville and saw an ad about a gun show. I thought to myself: let's learn a little of americana. 6 bucks and I was in. A shopping mall full of tables with every kind of hand gun, bows, rifles, bullets, you name it. I was going to shoot some pictures to show my friends here but I thought twice as it was not a good idea. How do you convince it's for your scrapbook? The same people there wouldn't give a damn if I shoot a picture of them in Walmart, but no way in a gun show. Why?

Because unscrupulous people use such pictures and add ridiculous stories that naïve people assume as fact.  The pictures are perceived to add credibility to any story surrounding it. 

Example:  During the "assault weapons ban frenzy" perpetrated by the anti gun media.  "News Shows" aired scenes of an AK-47 in full auto fire.  Then cut to a watermellon exploding from a bullet strike.  The talking head feined horror at the awsome devatation commonly available to the common public.
However, the reality was that no full auto fire  guns were allowed in private possesion in California, including AK-47s.  The media event was staged by the police department who either had or borrowed the AK from another government agency.  Further, the standard ball amunition used in the AK merely punched tiny unspectacular holes in the mellon, to the dissapointment of the news crew.  So, the officer took out his duty 9mm sidearm loaded with hollowpoint bullets and had the news crew film the watermellon explode as he shot it.  Careful editing of the film produced a segment theat really "popped" for the viewing audience, even though it had nothing to do with proposed legislation being forwarded at the time.  This allowed the populace to evaluate the "facts "given and then think with their emotions rather than rational analysis of actual facts.

The people at gun shows don’t wish to be persecuted by anti gun zealots, either privately or publicly.
Most gun shows prominently display a "No Photography Allowed" sign near the entrances.
And, what business is it of yours to take pictures of anyone without their permission, be it at a gun show or Wal-Mart?  Your likeness and someone with basic skills in PhotoShop, can place you in situations that would be very uncomfortable to explain.

It was the very first time I touched a handgun, not a rifle as my dad had one for hunting. I asked out of curiosity what did I need to do in order to buy one. The guy in the table told me that I had to fill out a form so the government had that gun controlled. But there was no questionary, nothing to screen out wackos. How come?

Apparently you didn’t even bother to look at the form. But preferred your own assumptions rather than gathering basic facts.  The form is a 4473  created by the BATFE.  You can see a sample here:
http://www.atf.gov/forms/4473/page02.htm

In that form, you will find reference to NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) run by the FBI.
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics.htm

The seller or FFL (Federal Firearms Licensed) dealer is required to clear through NICS before allowing the buyer to take possession of the firearm.

The people behind the gun shows tables aren’t stupid.  They are pretty adept at recognizing wackos gawking at their wares.  And, can often quickly determine the tire kickers who simply waste their time from potential buyers.  They will often still politely answer your questions, but won’t offer lengthy education’s to sneering gawkers.  Particularly if you didn’t ask to handle the gun prior to pawing it, didn’t check to see if it was loaded, put your finger on the trigger and pointed it at half the souls standing in the vicinity.  Further, some people are uncannily adept at spoting a person intent on villifying guns and the people associated with them.

So there is screening for accepting aliens and for giving driving permits but not for buying guns?

False assertion. See above

As I said in a previous post, objects are not evil in themselves. You can't simply kill somebody for getting you out or your car and stealing it. Even if he is a scumbag.

Depends on the situation.  Assume a natural disaster, tornado, hurricane, earthquake, or soccer championship, etc.  These things bring out the best and the worst in people, and authorities are so overloaded that the individual is on their own for hours, even days.  Your wife or child is seriously injured, ambulance services are also overloaded, and the only timely transportation to emergency services is your car that thugs believe they should joy ride.  Are you going to tell them okay it’s only a car and hold you wife/child in your arms while they suffer or die?  What if the mere presence of a gun allows you use your own car for the emergency?

I wish I never have to carry on my shoulders the blame of killing somebody, whomever it may be.

What about allowing someone to die through your inaction?  Loved one or not.  Are you going to sleep well after that?

Still, I may understand your anti gun posture.  You live in a country where your prospects of gun ownership and training are remote.  Your country indoctrinates and constantly reinforces the concept of it’s citizens being  irresponsible and incompetent to own a firearm.  Therefore, as a comfort of conformity and resignation to being a good citizen, you comply with that indoctrination and even promote it, assuming a powerless role in crime deterrence.
It can be a very comfortable position knowing that deadly force decisions will be made by someone else who you have hired (taxation) for that distasteful job.  Some people blissfully live their entire lives in that comfort.  Some people wish they had made other preparations in the short time before authorities come to fill out the reports.

I live in a country that empowers me,  as well as weak, frail, people to stop crime as it happens with tools adequate for the task.
I haven’t been required to do that yet.  I don’t look forward to it.  I have trained and studied for the eventuality.  I think I am ready to protect me and mine should the need arise.  I am certain I will have nightmares and other mental trauma about it should it come to pass.  But, if society needs me to help keep the undesirables out of the population, I will do my part. About two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime?  I am willing to be counted among them.  And, I feel it is my duty to society to do so, if and when events so warrant.

http://www.guncite.com/gcwhoGK.html

[TwoTired]

The other thing is, if a child gets hurt in your house while playing with your gun, I don't care how much grief you have- you desreve to go to jail for life. There is just no excuse for "accidents".

Fine, then to prove you are not out to simply villify guns, you would also propose life in prison to those who allow children to drown in swimming pools, fall down stairs, drink bleach or drain cleaner, or otherwise have accidents with inanimate objects, Right?

[TwoTired]

Shooting to wound or stop someone only happens in the movies or by accident.

Well done, an opinion stated as fact.  The anti gun movement will be proud that you have adopted their tactics.

I'll never forget when I lived in SF there was a guy holed up in a second floor apartment. First, in these situations I'll never understand why they just don't turn off all the utilities and wait him out. Anyway, he's shooting at the cops and a whole bunch of cops are shooting back. When it was all over, the whole side of the building was covered with bullets. Not just a dense concentration around the window- THE WHOLE SIDE OF THE BUILDING! If the alleged professionals who have access to regular training can barely manage to hit the side of a barn apartment building, how is the average Joe going to purposely "wing" a miscreant?

Apparently, the fact that common residential walls are very poor bullet stops has eluded you.
(See, I can do it too.  However, if you really want reference pointers to bonafide test data I can provide them.)

Whoever pulls the trigger on a firearm is responsible for the entire path the bullet travels including ricochets and deflections.  A mad gunman firing wildly at cops wasn't endangering just their (apparently expendable in your eyes) lives, but the local population as well.  Perhaps they were trying to end the (continuing) threat as quickly as possible without further injury to nearby personel?
But, what do I know, it's your story.  It can have any spin you wish to place on it, since there is no way we can check if your story has any basis in fact.
 

[Raul CB750K1]

Two tired, it seems that this subject touches you as you have taken a long time to reply mine. I've seen the link you posted and honestly I couldn't find any question regarding the psychological profile of the potential buyer. They can screen out people with criminal background, but you can't simply expect that a businessman like a gun trader will be able to distinguish a wacko from a "normal" person.

You've taken a lot of discussion in your own country about the subject and have been unable to reach an agreement, so I don't expect to convince anybody, much less when it has nothing to do with me. I have just pointed out my point of view, and from my point I won't talk anymore about this subject.

What I can say you, as I have the experience of living in both continents, is that what you call "freedom" is a false feeling. You are "free" to carry guns to protect your loved ones but you can't look at a stranger's eye in your car for fear of a shooting-by. You can't simply joke with a female co-worker for fear of being accused of sexual harassment. You can't tap or kiss a neighbour's son or daughter for fear of being accused or child abuser. You can't buy anything if a credit company don't qualify you as a safe customer. You have the right to have a job but your companies are taking your jobs to Asia. And you live in a country with a government that lies to you and cheat in the polls -remember Jeb Bush and Florida?- You have a government that you don't deserve, and unfortunately they are spoiling the image of the US citizens around the world, as I only found warm welcomes wherever I went into the US. You are "free" to do what you want inside the boundaries your government set.


Now let's talk about bikes mates...


Raul

[dusterdude]

yea,as much as i love the 2nd ammendment,this is getting tired.