U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-16-2010, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,129,186 times
Reputation: 2167

Advertisements

I can, and I will.

9/11 brought us stupid legislation like the Patriot Act and equally dumber solutions like the two current budget-busting Police actions. This fear towards healthcare reform brought us a law that didn't really change anything, but gave the chicken coop to the foxes (the healthcare industry). Now we have this irrational fear of crime supposedly spilling out of trash cans & sewer holes that brought us this piece of nonsensical legislation.

A funny thought crossed my mind; Before the 1960's America didn't really have a problem with illegal immigration, and from what I read in the history books, our modern budget deficit didn't exist until the 1980's.

As far the crime's concerned...*sigh*.... I will concede and say I also consider the latter issue to be a major concern, although the solutions that are currently coming out of the statehouse will hardly go anywhere to solve them.

Like I said before, I can't wait for saner heads to come into office and smooth things over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by neil0311 View Post
Please, let's not tar all issues with the same brush. There are many real issues and many real concerns, and you mention some. Just because there may be hype related to some issues, that doesn't disqualify or reduce the validity of others.

Frankly, I'm much more concerned about terrorist attacks, illegal aliens, and runaway spending than I am about crime at Hartsfield (and I'm there constantly), which is pretty close to non-existent. It's not "fear" to raise real concerns about real problems in our country.

Last edited by AcidSnake; 05-16-2010 at 10:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2010, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Marietta, GA
7,844 posts, read 14,558,153 times
Reputation: 3484
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownhornet View Post
I wonder how many Georgia Tech students would agree with this? I swear some of you people are slow.. why do you think so many of them get robbed? Because people KNOW that they are unarmed and cant defend themselves. You can tell pretty easily on here who grew up in a bubble outside of reality.
There is a big difference between carrying a weapon to defend yourself in an unsafe or questionable part of town and carrying a weapon into a bar or the terminal at the airport (which is covered wall to wall by cameras and cops).

I have no problem with people owning firearms, but I do question the sanity and wisdom of people who want the unfettered ability to carry a gun anywhere, in a state that requires absolutely no training and very little licensing. It doesn't take much to buy a gun or to get a carry permit in GA.

Sorry, but living in fear and paranoia isn't reality for everyone. Sorry if it is for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Midtown Atlanta
747 posts, read 1,269,371 times
Reputation: 328
Quote:
Originally Posted by axemanjoe View Post
I can't think of any negatives to a citizen arming themself to stay safe.

As far as cases where someone was injured with a firearm, I can't apply the term "legal gun" to any case. A firearm doesnt care how it's used. I've seen and read about cases everywhere from kids shooting themselves or someone else, to hunters ketting shot due to careless handling (remember Cheney). It's the act or ommission by a person that causes these occurrences.

As far as bars and restaurants the same thing applies. If one is stupid enough to get sloshed while carrying a firearm, he needs a quick reality check in the form of the local drunk tank, and maybe a thumping from the sensible patrons before I get there.

If it were up to me there would be no consuming of alcoholic beverages in any public place, just in private residences. If alcohol were discovered to today it would immediatey be classifed as a schedule I substance, like cocaine, heroin, etc. But that's another topic.

I like to tell folks this; I have been conducting an experiment for the last 34 years. I have a loaded handgun in a drawer. It's my test gun. I'm testing it to see if it acidentally discharges. It hasn't as of yet.

See my point. It's the people that are doing these idiotic things that is the crux of the issue. Not people wanting to stay safe.

The acts needs to be addressed, not the items. I cannot fathom where it would be anywhere fair, prudent or justified in not allowing citizens the ability to protect themselves. I know I've said this on this board before, if you expect the government to keep you safe, you are sadly kidding yourself. I don't care what Mayor Reed says, what any police chief says, what Gov Perdue says, what any legislator or what Frank Rotundo at the GA Chiefs Ass'n says, they cannot and will not keep anyone safe when it really counts. When the criminal has a gun to your head, where will they be and where will their respective cops be. Oh yeah, just minutes away, if they even know it's happening.
Wow, you just said a lot about yourself. Oh, and by the way, I am liberal, but truth be told I don't care much for quiche. Your stereotypes say a lot about your intelligence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Midtown Atlanta
747 posts, read 1,269,371 times
Reputation: 328
I am liberal, but I don't care much for quiche. Thanks for the stereotype though.
So I guess I should keep a firetruck in my driveway in case my house starts to burn. You know, can't trust big bad gov't. Oh, wait, I'm not irrational.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 12:00 PM
 
906 posts, read 1,445,159 times
Reputation: 468
A few questions for axemanjoe (or whoever else might want to answer):

(1) If we pursue your interpretation of the Second Amendment, it sounds as if I should be allowed to take a bazooka with me (if I so choose) when I drive to the airport. If this is not your meaning, then at some point you must be acknowledging that there are, in fact, limitations in what it means to bear "arms." So what defines those terms and limits? Surely you can't argue that the founding fathers were anticipating such technological advances when they used such phrasing?

And if there are limitations there, it doesn't seem unreasonable to debate other limitations. Which leads me to . . .

(2) Not every amendment is written to be completely without checks. For the First Amendment, for example, one is not entitled to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater because the public good/safety trumps the rights of the individual in that particular case.

One could certainly argue that there are ways in which dopes or individuals who shouldn't be managing firearms in public spaces (former criminals, people with psychological problems, children), could conceivably threaten others' individual liberties with firearms mismanagement.

My point is that it's too un-nuanced to claim, quite simply, "it's MY right to do WHATEVER I want" when there is clear precedent for our society, and especially our judicial system, to make sure individual application of these rights aren't posing a reasonable threat to the public good. It seems sort of cavalier to pretend like allowing MORE arms at public locales which are typically the primary targets for sabotage by terrorists and crazies--i.e. airports--isn't a potential threat to the public good.

(3) There is a compelling argument to be made that the Second Amendment was never intended as solely an individual right in the first place. Rather, it was about militia regulation and formation:

"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."

To me, that doesn't scream "AN INDIVIDUAL HAS A RIGHT TO HAVE A GUN AT AN AIRPORT!" It says, "A state has a right to form a militia, and its members (as a people, a group) have a right to bear arms in composing that militia." I understand there are opposing interpretations. But if we're reading this literally--which conservatives are wont to do--nowhere does it state this as an individual right that applies to all contexts in the U.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 12:06 PM
 
705 posts, read 919,592 times
Reputation: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by koko339 View Post
Wow, you just said a lot about yourself. Oh, and by the way, I am liberal, but truth be told I don't care much for quiche. Your stereotypes say a lot about your intelligence.

Sorry you don't see the sarchasm in my words. I try to use stereotypes in a facetious maner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 12:10 PM
 
705 posts, read 919,592 times
Reputation: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by K-SawDude View Post
A few questions for axemanjoe (or whoever else might want to answer):

(1) If we pursue your interpretation of the Second Amendment, it sounds as if I should be allowed to take a bazooka with me (if I so choose) when I drive to the airport. If this is not your meaning, then at some point you must be acknowledging that there are, in fact, limitations in what it means to bear "arms." So what defines those terms and limits? Surely you can't argue that the founding fathers were anticipating such technological advances when they used such phrasing?

And if there are limitations there, it doesn't seem unreasonable to debate other limitations. Which leads me to . . .

(2) Not every amendment is written to be completely without checks. For the First Amendment, for example, one is not entitled to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater because the public good/safety trumps the rights of the individual in that particular case.

One could certainly argue that there are ways in which dopes or individuals who shouldn't be managing firearms in public spaces (former criminals, people with psychological problems, children), could conceivably threaten others' individual liberties with firearms mismanagement.

My point is that it's too un-nuanced to claim, quite simply, "it's MY right to do WHATEVER I want" when there is clear precedent for our society, and especially our judicial system, to make sure individual application of these rights aren't posing a reasonable threat to the public good. It seems sort of cavalier to pretend like allowing MORE arms at public locales which are typically the primary targets for sabotage by terrorists and crazies--i.e. airports--isn't a potential threat to the public good.

(3) There is a compelling argument to be made that the Second Amendment was never intended as solely an individual right in the first place. Rather, it was about militia regulation and formation:

"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."

To me, that doesn't scream "AN INDIVIDUAL HAS A RIGHT TO HAVE A GUN AT AN AIRPORT!" It says, "A state has a right to form a militia, and its members (as a people, a group) have a right to bear arms in composing that militia." I understand there are opposing interpretations. But if we're reading this literally--which conservatives are wont to do--nowhere does it state this as an individual right that applies to all contexts in the U.S.
I didn't mention some of your issues as I was staying in the context of crime and self protection. I also presumed that I would not need to cover the common sense factor either. Freedom speech certainly doesnt give some the right to yell fire in a theatre. And I don't see where carrying a bazooka or M16 while buying groceries is prudent.

While the second amendment is militia specific, the life liberty and pursuit of happiness does factor in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Tyrone, GA
126 posts, read 184,957 times
Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by koko339 View Post
I am liberal, but I don't care much for quiche. Thanks for the stereotype though.
So I guess I should keep a firetruck in my driveway in case my house starts to burn. You know, can't trust big bad gov't. Oh, wait, I'm not irrational.
going a bit overboard? we prefer to purchase fire extinguishers and smoke detectors for fire protection, and guns for personal and home protection.

as a responsible legal gun owner, i have no need to carry/conceal and would never need to carry one at the airport. but i do have relatives and friends that do carry. they have special circumstances. they work 3rd shift and they travel in less than favorable areas in town. would leaving their guns in the car be any safer then carrying in the airport? i don't know the statistics of car break ins at the airport. it's better to carry it in person than risking it being stolen in the car.

those that haven't had relatives killed in home invasions will not understand why some homeowners have loaded weapons next to their bedside. my uncle was stabbed in the chest protecting his family from a home invasion. he was an ophthalmologist and lived in a nice safe neighborhood in a very gun restricted state.

when i worked late shift, someone tried to break into my home at night while my family slept. this was also a nice safe neighborhood. fortunately, my dalmatian was quick to prevent the intruder from entering the window he had broken.

as for accidental shooting at home, the CDC has the statistics for fatal accidents at home. accidental shooting is not in the top, but falls in bathrooms are. should tile floors be outlawed? guess not. also, the FBI has statistics on how many lifes where saved from self defense shootings vs violent crimes on unarmed citizens.

i used to be anti-gun for most of my life until reality revealed itself. just hearing the word gun caused my kids to tremble. many parents also have a fear of guns and some no longer let their kids play with mine when they found out i own a few.

back to the subject about carrying in the airport. it's not about protecting one at the airport, it's about not disarming someone that can legally carry anywhere else.

another argument that was mentioned. no one really knows who has a concealed weapon. the question is, is that person a good guy or a bad guy. i just hope there are good guys carrying because bad guys ignore the gun laws.

btw, i'm a liberal...

-a|ex
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 12:41 PM
 
705 posts, read 919,592 times
Reputation: 320
Thanks for your insight alex, BTW, I'm pretty liberal myself on a lot of issues and I often clash with establshment types at work. I used the stereotype in context to try to bring some sarchasm and also levity to the topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2010, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
3,463 posts, read 4,129,186 times
Reputation: 2167
On a sidenote, I'm not a gun quack but I do own a Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun with pistol grip. But it stays at home.

Now if I was REALLY into weaponry, my choice would be the FN P90:

http://www.fnhusa.com/support/images/dynamic/mils/FNM0031sb.png (broken link)

It has that futuristic feel to me. Okay...I will stop being crazy now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by K-SawDude View Post
(1) If we pursue your interpretation of the Second Amendment, it sounds as if I should be allowed to take a bazooka with me (if I so choose) when I drive to the airport.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top