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.
You want to have a mature discussion, then start one, don't just link to a story, what's to discuss? I hate discussions where I have to dig, and dig to find out what the hell the person wants to discuss.
But you are responsible for the harm caused by your speech, you should also be responsible for the harm caused by any gun that is registered in your name, unless it was reported stolen.
If your kid gets his hands on a gun owned by you, YOU should be held responsible for any harm caused by that gun. Keep it locked up, and out of the hands of others.
I am responsible for my own actions, not the actions of others. If I use my freedom of speech and it violates the tort laws, sue me. If I use my firearm and it harms another (not in self-defense) then charge me with a crime.
If my kids get their hands on my firearms they will know how to use them safely. I began hunting with my father by age eight. My father bought me my first 12-gauge pump shotgun (Winchester Model 1912) when I was ten years old.
Like my father before me, I do not lock up my firearms. They are loaded and ready for use in a heartbeat.
As to the original question, the answer is "No!" On the one hand you have the "gun nuts" from the far right who give the rest of us a bad name. On the other hand you have the hope-to-die liberals from the far left who seem to believe that individuals have no rights because government is the answer to everything. The reality is that most of us who are gun owners lie somewhere in the middle and are extremely responsible and safety conscious. However, we are drowned out by the inflammatory rhetoric from the extremists.
At issue, as has already been expressed, is how many of your constitutional rights are you willing to give up? All it takes is one to start the road down hill.
I am responsible for my own actions, not the actions of others. If I use my freedom of speech and it violates the tort laws, sue me. If I use my firearm and it harms another (not in self-defense) then charge me with a crime.
If my kids get their hands on my firearms they will know how to use them safely. I began hunting with my father by age eight. My father bought me my first 12-gauge pump shotgun (Winchester Model 1912) when I was ten years old.
Like my father before me, I do not lock up my firearms. They are loaded and ready for use in a heartbeat.
So were Ms.Lanzas. Not securing her guns cost her, and many others their lives.
I find the psychology behind the arguments on both sides of the issue to be fascinating. While I'm not a gun owner, I can understand why people would want to have guns for protection or sport. And I think the idea of banning most firearms, which is sometimes presented from the left side of the (American) political spectrum, is as unfeasible (not even factoring in Constitutional issues) as "putting all illegals on buses and deporting them" which one hears from the right.
But some gun owners' mindsets seem inexplicable to me and my personal experience. Do most gun owners believe it's quite likely that someone will kick in their door and that they, the gun owner, will have to have weapons at the ready to fight them off? Do you live in a constant state of fear or anxiety without a gun? When gun owners talk about keeping an arsenal at home to "defend against tyranny," does this imply that they expect or anticipate a likely scenario where they would have to barricade themselves against government agents and fight to the death?
As I said, I like to hear where people are coming from, and I'm not a judgmental type, but I don't understand this perspective. It seems that even in places where there are less restrictive gun laws, I hear more cases of accidental or family argument shootings than the more justifiable Florida Senior Citizen types. I think I share the OP's perspective that both extremes tend to fetishize firearms (They are the root of all violence and evil and must be completely banned vs. Any and all weapons should be available to nearly everyone at all times). But I could be mistaken.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,749 posts, read 23,819,647 times
Reputation: 14665
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812
You want to have a mature discussion, then start one, don't just link to a story, what's to discuss? I hate discussions where I have to dig, and dig to find out what the hell the person wants to discuss.
What's so difficult about it when most are able to view the video that is a VERY poignant example of maintaining second ammendment rights within reason, followed by the context of the example used in the next post. When you asked what it was stating you could not view the video I then provided more info with a link in text format. How does that negate maturity?
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 12-17-2012 at 11:21 AM..
I'm usually silent on specific gun restrictions since I don't know much about guns in the first place. However, I will never have a problem with a citizen buying, owning, being licenced and trained to use a handgun for protection or a rifle for hunting. Beyond that, with high powered weapons that seem more military grade and assault type guns I start to question it. I think there will be more bans on more kinds of guns and I'm not going to fight against that, but I also know this country will never put a full on gun ban into play so I'm not worried about it. The right to bare arms doesn't say the right to have any weapon every created just becasue you want to.
Actually, Glitch is pointing out, rightfully, that taking away inherent rights is a slippery slope. Today it's the 2nd amendment, but next year it could be the 1st amendment.
That "slippery slope" theory is exactly what prevents solutions being reached for many different issues, gun violence being just one of them. There is rational middle ground, and if we throw "slippery slope" up every time someone makes a suggestion, nothing will ever get better. People on both sides have to be reasonable, look objectively at all the facts, not just those that seem to support their own viewpoint, listen to and learn from each other. Legislation is always about both sides "giving an inch" and it does NOT have to mean that eventually they'll take a mile.
The discussion will move many on the side of gun rights to see we need some new regulation. The far right idiots will never move and care more about their Chinese SKS and the non threat of a government take over of our rights that they could give a rip if there were 10000 shootings like last week. These idiots like Ted Nugent have no place at the table to even talk about it.
I'm usually silent on specific gun restrictions since I don't know much about guns in the first place. However, I will never have a problem with a citizen buying, owning, being licenced and trained to use a handgun for protection or a rifle for hunting. Beyond that, with high powered weapons that seem more military grade and assault type guns I start to question it.
You probably should have remained silent, for all you did was to prove your initial sentence correct.
The power of a weapon is determined by the rounds it uses. The "high powered, military grade, assault type guns" you seem to favor banning are no nor lethal than other weapons that use the same type of round.
F=ma
For the science challenged, that means Force equals mass times acceleration, though in the case of firearms the acceleration is negative. That means if Gun-A puts a 55 grain .223 bullet downrange at 3000 fps, it will do the EXACT same damage as Gun-B, assuming it also puts a 55 grain .223 bullet downrange at 3000 fps. That one of them may "appear" to be "high powered, military grade, or assault type" does not change the physics.
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.
