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.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
I don't get the fear Americans live in when it comes to guns, and "the need to protect".
I am a snowbird Canadian, who lives half the year in Florida, the other half in the middle of the prairie a couple of hundred miles north of Montana. I feel as safe in Florida as I do up north, yet my neighbors in the gated community I am in feel they have to have handguns for 'protection'. WTH? I leave my doors unlocked most of the time in both places. I don't feel any more fear in Florida than I do in Canada. I just avoid the bad areas in both places. Period. Problem solved.
In case anyone thinks I am a hoplophobe, I am not. I own a number of rifles, shotguns and am licensed to own restricted firearms. I target shoot and hunt, and am darn good at both, and probably better than most. However, I strongly support WHO owns guns, that they go through safety training, and that guns are stored properly. Once you are licenced to own, I don't care WHAT you own.
I don't understand why the NRA and its supporters feel that any sensible gun law is an attack on your 2nd Amendment rights. Background checks? That just makes sense. How the heck does that infringe on your rights? Don't you WANT criminals restricted from owning guns?
America has to get over this fear syndrome. That is what is driving a lot of firearm ownership, and it is just silly. I'm sure there are some who will disagree and give anecdotal evidence of outlier instances.
I don't understand why the NRA and its supporters feel that any sensible gun law is an attack on your 2nd Amendment rights. Background checks? That just makes sense. How the heck does that infringe on your rights? Don't you WANT criminals restricted from owning guns?
America has to get over this fear syndrome. That is what is driving a lot of firearm ownership, and it is just silly. I'm sure there are some who will disagree and give anecdotal evidence of outlier instances.
Americans are highly xenophobic and hierarchical. The fear and loathing that the free and unfettered movement of black and brown people in the population elicits causes a significant minority of white Americans (and an insignificant minority of black and brown Americans) to arm themselves for self and home defense purposes. Guns are American made for the most part, and they require precision manufacture. This means high prices and this requires aggressive marketing to sustain. Fear is a great motivator for Americans. The NRA on behalf of gun manufacturers keeps Americans in a high state of agitation and they use every excuse to drum up business. The only victims of an American gun ban would be gun makers and sellers. The only victims of an American cigarette ban would be tobacco growers and cigarette makers. What do alcohol, tobacco and firearms makers have in common besides a governmental administrative aegis? M-o-n-e-y. Lots of it. And the desire to keep making more. Americans are allowed to be preyed upon by the purveyors of alcohol, gaming devices, tobacco, guns and automobiles despite the incredible collateral damage resulting from their almost completely unregulated proliferation.
Americans are highly xenophobic and hierarchical. The fear and loathing that the free and unfettered movement of black and brown people in the population elicits causes a significant minority of white Americans (and an insignificant minority of black and brown Americans) to arm themselves for self and home defense purposes. Guns are American made for the most part, and they require precision manufacture. This means high prices and this requires aggressive marketing to sustain. Fear is a great motivator for Americans. The NRA on behalf of gun manufacturers keeps Americans in a high state of agitation and they use every excuse to drum up business. The only victims of an American gun ban would be gun makers and sellers. The only victims of an American cigarette ban would be tobacco growers and cigarette makers. What do alcohol, tobacco and firearms makers have in common besides a governmental administrative aegis? M-o-n-e-y. Lots of it. And the desire to keep making more. Americans are allowed to be preyed upon by the purveyors of alcohol, gaming devices, tobacco, guns and automobiles despite the incredible collateral damage resulting from their almost completely unregulated proliferation.
Washington DC, with practically a complete gun ban for common citizens, has murder rate higher than in many African countries. Along with Chicago, another shining example of "sensible gun control", it had seen a huge increase in the number of murders in 2015, dragging the stats for the rest of the country upwards.
Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, with very high levels of lawful gun ownership, have murder rates on par with most Western European countries despite not having their draconian gun control laws.
Washington DC, with practically a complete gun ban for common citizens, has murder rate higher than in many African countries. Along with Chicago, another shining example of "sensible gun control", it had seen a huge increase in the number of murders in 2015, dragging the stats for the rest of the country upwards.
Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, with very high levels of lawful gun ownership, have murder rates on par with most Western European countries despite not having their draconian gun control laws.
None of this is true. Is this the NRA talking point/propaganda of the day?
NYC has the strictest gun rules of any major city in the U.S., and has the lowest gun-related homicide rate in the U.S.
Chicago has very loose gun rules, and is right next to Indiana, which has the loosest gun rules of any Midwestern state. Not surprisingly, Chicago has a vastly higher homicide rate than NYC.
And even in NYC, almost 100% of guns used in crimes were legally purchased in Southern states and illegally brought into NYC. So the relatively few murders that do exist would be greatly reduced if we had sensible national gun regulations.
And, no, DC isn't going to have the same murder rate as Vermont, regardless. That's a completely absurd argument. Vermont is a rural white state of hippies; DC has hard-core violent ghettos. Obviously Vermont is going to have fewer gun-related homicides than DC regardless of gun rules.
no one is talking about banning guns, just sensible gun regulations.
I agree I mean we can't have hand grenades, do we really need military type rapid fire weapons like the ar15 or whatever it is. I'm not anti gun but we do need some sensible guidelines on what is allowed.
I am a snowbird Canadian, who lives half the year in Florida, the other half in the middle of the prairie a couple of hundred miles north of Montana. I feel as safe in Florida as I do up north, yet my neighbors in the gated community I am in feel they have to have handguns for 'protection'. WTH? I leave my doors unlocked most of the time in both places. I don't feel any more fear in Florida than I do in Canada. I just avoid the bad areas in both places. Period. Problem solved.
Do you ever go outside of your "gated community" in Florida?
I can't believe that you can honestly compare the sense of security you have on the prairies with what you feel in Florida- outside of your gated community, that is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
Once you are licenced to own, I don't care WHAT you own.
But they shouldn't be carrying them, right? Or they should have them for only the reasons that you deem correct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
I don't understand why the NRA and its supporters feel that any sensible gun law is an attack on your 2nd Amendment rights. Background checks? That just makes sense. How the heck does that infringe on your rights? Don't you WANT criminals restricted from owning guns?
Yup, I absolutely want guns out of the hands of convicted felons.
What I do not want to see is the idea of "no fly/no buy" being touted as a "sensible gun regulation". I don't want to see politicians pandering to the emotions of the American people at the expense of due process. As if some portions of our Constitution are more important than others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
America has to get over this fear syndrome. That is what is driving a lot of firearm ownership, and it is just silly. I'm sure there are some who will disagree and give anecdotal evidence of outlier instances.
Really, thanks for letting us know what we "have to do".
And even in NYC, almost 100% of guns used in crimes were legally purchased in Southern states and illegally brought into NYC. So the relatively few murders that do exist would be greatly reduced if we had sensible national gun regulations.
What kinds of guns were used in these crimes?
I heard the other day that most gun crimes happen with your standard handgun. How would "sensible national gun regulations" prevent these types of shootings?
I don't get the fear Americans live in when it comes to guns, and "the need to protect".
I am a snowbird Canadian, who lives half the year in Florida, the other half in the middle of the prairie a couple of hundred miles north of Montana. I feel as safe in Florida as I do up north, yet my neighbors in the gated community I am in feel they have to have handguns for 'protection'. WTH? I leave my doors unlocked most of the time in both places. I don't feel any more fear in Florida than I do in Canada. I just avoid the bad areas in both places. Period. Problem solved.
In case anyone thinks I am a hoplophobe, I am not. I own a number of rifles, shotguns and am licensed to own restricted firearms. I target shoot and hunt, and am darn good at both, and probably better than most. However, I strongly support WHO owns guns, that they go through safety training, and that guns are stored properly. Once you are licenced to own, I don't care WHAT you own.
I don't understand why the NRA and its supporters feel that any sensible gun law is an attack on your 2nd Amendment rights. Background checks? That just makes sense. How the heck does that infringe on your rights? Don't you WANT criminals restricted from owning guns?
America has to get over this fear syndrome. That is what is driving a lot of firearm ownership, and it is just silly. I'm sure there are some who will disagree and give anecdotal evidence of outlier instances.
You would probably be shocked that many American's own weapons for the same reason you own weapons - hunting and target shooting. The "fear syndrome" is overstated. Guns serve many purposes -- self defense is only one of the purposes.
Background checks are already in place in the US. Gun owners have learned to live with it. Some don't like it, but it's not going away. We all want criminals restricted from owning guns, but not at the sacrifice of preventing law abiding civilians from owning guns. The background system is broken, this latest shooter should have been flagged. We have to ask ourselves why he was not - no additional legislation, this likewise broken "no fly list", will fix that. That is not "sensible gun legislation", it's adding a broken system to a broken system. So in my opinion fix existing gun laws first. Anyways these gun massacres stand out because of the media attention, but when looking at the data most gun violence is committed by criminals with illegally obtained handguns (not long guns), in certain locations and demographic groups. They are all equally terrible, but once we address the root cause, and not a political agenda, we will take a step in solving the problem.
Really what most of the rest of the world does not get, simply does not understand, is the focus in the US on individual rights. The great experement that is the Constitution of the United States - The abhorrence to letting the government tell us what we the people need to do, the document that does not tell the government what to do, but what NOT to do. It could be any issue, not just gun control - it's in our blood, it's the principle that defines this country. Once you understand that, you understand the underlying resistance to gun control in the US.
"Furthermore, firearm owners are also required to obtain a gun license for any shotgun, rifle, or handgun. The purchase of firearms within the city limits are strictly restrictive to the sale and purchase of only shotguns and rifles. The sell or purchase of handguns is prohibited by D.C. gun laws."
I don't know of any other place in the US, where a gun license is required for a shotgun or hunting rifle. Although it's possible that NYC is just as bad.
As to the crime rates, the FBI Crime Database is your friend. I am tired of providing FBI stats to people who are too lazy to look them up themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
NYC has the strictest gun rules of any major city in the U.S., and has the lowest gun-related homicide rate in the U.S.
Chicago has very loose gun rules, and is right next to Indiana, which has the loosest gun rules of any Midwestern state. Not surprisingly, Chicago has a vastly higher homicide rate than NYC.
Chicago doesn't have "very loose" gun rules. It's extremely hard to obtain a concealed gun permit there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
And even in NYC, almost 100% of guns used in crimes were legally purchased in Southern states and illegally brought into NYC. So the relatively few murders that do exist would be greatly reduced if we had sensible national gun regulations.
And, no, DC isn't going to have the same murder rate as Vermont, regardless. That's a completely absurd argument. Vermont is a rural white state of hippies; DC has hard-core violent ghettos. Obviously Vermont is going to have fewer gun-related homicides than DC regardless of gun rules.
So here we go... the real reason behind murders is not the guns but who is using them.
Take the guns away, and they will stab and club each other to death.
Your last sentence is the best argument against gun control - it clearly specifies the root cause of violence, and it ain't the guns.
Last edited by Ummagumma; 06-17-2016 at 03:27 PM..
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by mishigas73
Do you ever go outside of your "gated community" in Florida?
All the time. I just avoid the bad areas. Just like I do in Canada. It is common sense and situational awareness.
Quote:
I can't believe that you can honestly compare the sense of security you have on the prairies with what you feel in Florida- outside of your gated community, that is.
Why not? I don't have the same fear that many of my neighbors seem to have. I believe it to be irrational, but it is the environment that they have lived in and that has been promoted by groups like the NRA. I've been in rural South Carolina and Mississippi and feel totally comfortable with the people there, but I've had the same discussion with them of why the fear. Most can't give real reasons, nor can they talk about anybody they know who actually was in the position to have to use a gun for protection. They do talk about others far away, but that is our 24 hour news cycle for you.
Quote:
But they shouldn't be carrying them, right? Or they should have them for only the reasons that you deem correct?
It doesn't bother me personally one way or the other if someone is legally carrying, I just don't get the fear factor. It is ingrained, and coming from a culture where that unreasonable fear factor doesn't exist, I have trouble comprehending why. If you're in ghetto Detroit, yeah, I can see your fear being reasonable, but not in most places that most of us would frequent.
Quote:
Yup, I absolutely want guns out of the hands of convicted felons.
So therefore you would support that the Orlando shooter not be restricted, as he was not convicted of anything, right? Regardless of any FBI investigations.
Quote:
What I do not want to see is the idea of "no fly/no buy" being touted as a "sensible gun regulation". I don't want to see politicians pandering to the emotions of the American people at the expense of due process. As if some portions of our Constitution are more important than others.
I see you answered my question about the Orlando shooter. In other words, there is NOTHING that you would accept other than a conviction of his right to buy, own and carry a firearm? It doesn't matter that he was investigated for possible terrorist connections or sympathies, no conviction, as an American, he continues to have the right the 2nd Amendment outlines, right? No exceptions, right?
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.
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.
