U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 02-19-2012, 02:22 PM
 
4,406 posts, read 5,455,893 times
Reputation: 2894

Advertisements

Somebody picks up a rock and throws it at someone. Then, everybody has to have a rock.
Somebody picks up a sharp stick and spears someone with it. Then, everybody has to have a sharp stick.
Somebody invents a bow and arrow and uses it across a field. Then, everybody has to have a bow and arrow.
Somebody makes a hatchet and kills his neighbor. Then, everybody has to have a hatchet.
Somebody makes a gun and kills somebody who slighted him. Then, everybody has to have a gun.
Somebody throws a grenade and kills an entire family. Then, everybody has to have a grenade.
Somebody shoots a missile and destroys a city. Then, everybody has to have a missile.
Somebody makes a bomb that renders the landscape unusable. Then, everybody has to have a bomb.

Seems to me those who are arguing for guns in national parks and everywhere else are saying that the purpose of a gun is because somebody else might have one. And where exactly does that lead us?

Humans are a stupid species. OR, they have a built-in self-destruct mechanism that insures they only last a short time. I'm hoping sanity prevails but I'm not even going to cross my fingers.

Edit: Oh, and didn't we learn this lesson from Dr. Seuss? Even Star Trek and Itchy & Scratchy offered the same lesson! Apparently nobody learns.

Last edited by mhouse2001; 02-19-2012 at 02:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2012, 02:28 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
8,480 posts, read 6,102,605 times
Reputation: 8364
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Somebody picks up a rock and throws it at someone. Then, everybody has to have a rock.
Somebody picks up a sharp stick and spears someone with it. Then, everybody has to have a sharp stick.
Somebody invents a bow and arrow and uses it across a field. Then, everybody has to have a bow and arrow.
Somebody makes a hatchet and kills his neighbor. Then, everybody has to have a hatchet.
Somebody makes a gun and kills somebody who slighted him. Then, everybody has to have a gun.
Somebody throws a grenade and kills an entire family. Then, everybody has to have a grenade.
Somebody shoots a missile and destroys a city. Then, everybody has to have a missile.
Somebody makes a bomb that renders the landscape unusable. Then, everybody has to have a bomb.

Seems to me those who are arguing for guns in national parks and everywhere else are saying that the purpose of a gun is because somebody else might have one. And where exactly does that lead us?

Humans are a stupid species. OR, they have a built-in self-destruct mechanism that insures they only last a short time. I'm hoping sanity prevails but I'm not even going to cross my fingers.
Thank you!!

Excellent outline of the problem and excellent post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,958 posts, read 7,576,344 times
Reputation: 3309
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Somebody picks up a rock and throws it at someone. Then, everybody has to have a rock.
Somebody picks up a sharp stick and spears someone with it. Then, everybody has to have a sharp stick.
Somebody invents a bow and arrow and uses it across a field. Then, everybody has to have a bow and arrow.
Somebody makes a hatchet and kills his neighbor. Then, everybody has to have a hatchet.
Somebody makes a gun and kills somebody who slighted him. Then, everybody has to have a gun.
Somebody throws a grenade and kills an entire family. Then, everybody has to have a grenade.
Somebody shoots a missile and destroys a city. Then, everybody has to have a missile.
Somebody makes a bomb that renders the landscape unusable. Then, everybody has to have a bomb.

Seems to me those who are arguing for guns in national parks and everywhere else are saying that the purpose of a gun is because somebody else might have one. And where exactly does that lead us?

Humans are a stupid species. OR, they have a built-in self-destruct mechanism that insures they only last a short time. I'm hoping sanity prevails but I'm not even going to cross my fingers.

Edit: Oh, and didn't we learn this lesson from Dr. Seuss? Even Star Trek and Itchy & Scratchy offered the same lesson! Apparently nobody learns.
I don't legally carry a gun because I want to shoot people who "slight" me, I carry a gun to protect myself from someone who might want to harm or kill me or my family members regardless of what tool they intend on using to attempt it.

I don't live in a world of Dr. Seuss or Star Trek, I live in the real world where there are crazy/evil people who do harm to and kill completely innocent people every day. I own and carry a gun to increase my chances of surviving my chance meeting with one of those people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:25 PM
 
4,101 posts, read 6,120,156 times
Reputation: 5644
Default New Legislation to Reinstate Gun Ban in National Parks

Quote:
Originally Posted by verybadgnome View Post
I have no problem with the legislation if it restores the previous status quo. I just don't see a need for guns in a national park 99.99% of the time. Yes I guess you could stave off a grizzly but that is outweighed by risk of accidental use/misuse by others. Also it helps set up poaching as a possibility for the minority of gun owners who don't care about the law. And then comes the question is how is the gun secured in a tent in a camp ground? What about arms trafficking, e.g. Big Bend National Park, that borders Mexico? What about rogue pot plantations in national parks? You'd just be helping to arm the dealers with this.
Our Constitution doesn't say anything about banning firearms in National Parks, so I'm against it. I consider it an infringement on my rights to ban firearms in a National Park. Do you have to see a need before you allow something to take place? I think not. All people that are opposed to firearms think in terms of risk of accidental use/misuse by others. Cars are allowed in parks, motorcycles are allowed in parks, felons are allowed in parks, many things that could have a risk are allowed with no thought by the people who are anti firearm. Firearms have caused very few problems in National Parks, more problems for our population are caused every day by people like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,958 posts, read 7,576,344 times
Reputation: 3309
Quote:
Originally Posted by LookinForMayberry View Post
Let me ask the stupid question: why would anyone need a gun in a national park? The animals are protected, so hunting is out. Other than to do harm to another, what possible reason would one have for carrying to a park?
While is it a stupid question, I'll still answer it.

When someone or something poses a serious threat to me I see no problem whatsoever doing harm to that person. I legally carry a gun for self defense against people who couldn't care less about gun laws or the value of my life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Reality
9,958 posts, read 7,576,344 times
Reputation: 3309
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
When I was born, Harry Truman was President. And guess what? I've lived all over the country and have never owned a gun or felt any need for one. You don't need a gun, Rick, if you make wise choices in life.
Why don't you list some of those wise choices that you feel people can make to create a safe environment where guns aren't needed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:50 PM
 
36,470 posts, read 15,977,952 times
Reputation: 8282
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Somebody picks up a rock and throws it at someone. Then, everybody has to have a rock.
Somebody picks up a sharp stick and spears someone with it. Then, everybody has to have a sharp stick.
Somebody invents a bow and arrow and uses it across a field. Then, everybody has to have a bow and arrow.
Somebody makes a hatchet and kills his neighbor. Then, everybody has to have a hatchet.
Somebody makes a gun and kills somebody who slighted him. Then, everybody has to have a gun.
Somebody throws a grenade and kills an entire family. Then, everybody has to have a grenade.
Somebody shoots a missile and destroys a city. Then, everybody has to have a missile.
Somebody makes a bomb that renders the landscape unusable. Then, everybody has to have a bomb.

Seems to me those who are arguing for guns in national parks and everywhere else are saying that the purpose of a gun is because somebody else might have one. And where exactly does that lead us?

Humans are a stupid species. OR, they have a built-in self-destruct mechanism that insures they only last a short time. I'm hoping sanity prevails but I'm not even going to cross my fingers.

Edit: Oh, and didn't we learn this lesson from Dr. Seuss? Even Star Trek and Itchy & Scratchy offered the same lesson! Apparently nobody learns.
WOW! I didn't know bears and mountain lions and wolves and snakes threw rocks.

Maybe only in Dr. Seuss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 03:53 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 3,041,295 times
Reputation: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Your most effective weapon is your brain.
Oh ****, this cougar wants to eat me. By golly, I'll outsmart it by making it answer a paradox.

You can't argue your way out of being killed. I'm pretty sure people have tried though.

Quote:
For over 60 years, I and lots of other people I know have used our brains to keep ourselves safe without having to shoot anybody.
Good thing we're not talking about shooting people necessarily?

Quote:
Granted, there are some people in very unfortunate circumstances living under threat in dangerous areas with essentially no way to escape. And, incidentally, I seriously doubt anyone posting in this thread is in that group. But I really feel for those that are - those that are innocent and law-abiding, that is - as their fears are very real and rational. But our gun-saturated culture is the biggest factor in those neighborhoods being the way they are. We need to change that and I don't see how anyone could disagree.
What does being innocent and law abiding have to do with being in a national park and having ones life threatend?

Quote:
America's gun zealotry is a rut that keeps us a primitive culture.
I think you have a hard argument to make. The simple presence of guns does not in any way instill violence of any kind. Dozens of nations have pretty liberal policies towards firearms. Canada is just as armed as the United States, and their gun-violence isn't nearly what it is here.

But, what about this "gun culture?" What culture are you referring to?

Quote:
We need new thinking and a new national commitment toward a safer, more productive, and more evolved living style.
Conscription. Forced military service like Switzerland. That'll do it.

We have an undoubtedly violent culture. But the firearms are rather unrelated. Perhaps we should rethink our "shoot first ask questions later" foreign policy.

Quote:
Or must we forever behave as the savages our ancestors were? Some of you seem to think so. That that is the rut we're doomed to remain
trapped in. I have never accepted that and never will.
We're still talking about carrying firearms in national parks, right? Firearms and their related crimes are pretty much irrelevant to the cultural problem at the center of all of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 04:37 PM
 
Location: Florida
62,647 posts, read 34,149,323 times
Reputation: 10400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite Ryder View Post
Our Constitution doesn't say anything about banning firearms in National Parks, so I'm against it. I consider it an infringement on my rights to ban firearms in a National Park.
I wonder what Reagan was thinking when the put that law into place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2012, 06:31 PM
 
Location: Tianjin, China
3,114 posts, read 2,689,711 times
Reputation: 1712
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
Somebody picks up a rock and throws it at someone. Then, everybody has to have a rock.
Somebody picks up a sharp stick and spears someone with it. Then, everybody has to have a sharp stick.
Somebody invents a bow and arrow and uses it across a field. Then, everybody has to have a bow and arrow.
Somebody makes a hatchet and kills his neighbor. Then, everybody has to have a hatchet.
Somebody makes a gun and kills somebody who slighted him. Then, everybody has to have a gun.
Somebody throws a grenade and kills an entire family. Then, everybody has to have a grenade.
Somebody shoots a missile and destroys a city. Then, everybody has to have a missile.
Somebody makes a bomb that renders the landscape unusable. Then, everybody has to have a bomb.
Or somebody picks up a gun. Then everybody still have nothing to defend themselves like South Africa.

The reason criminals have guns is not to protect themselves against civilians. It is because of other gangs and police they have guns. By banning guns, criminals will still have guns.
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:

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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:53 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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