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.
I really hate it when conservatives serve up this tripe.
We "use these children's death" for political points because we recognize that this nation has an absurdly high rate of gun homicide and we care about it when people like these kids are murdered.
Conservatives, on the other hand, don't care because they don't wish to do anything other than further gun proliferation and eliminate all gun regulation. Doesn't matter to them how many times higher our murder rates are than other first-world nations.
When you feign offense at "using these deaths, etc. etc", it's just code for "we don't want to talk about the problem because we don't care."
This was in Springs, Texas where the good guy Ron Haskell decided to be the bad guy with a gun. He shot and killed six relatives before being chased down and surrendering to the police. I guess Open Carry Texas has a point...the more guns the less murder.
Not sure how pertinent this is, but it gave me pause.
We are not anti gun at all, since we have hunters, military and police officers in the family, and do not believe in messing with the Constitution, ever.
DH and I went to the movies last week. Apparently, an older man sitting near a family with pre teen and younger children had expressed annoyance that the children were disturbing him. I don't know if the man made a polite request, or if he used racial slurs. Anyway, the man with the children marched to the front of the theater and started yelling at the older man about "disrespecting his children". Both parties left the theater.
What if one of them had been armed? What is one of them decided to pull a gun on the other. This could have easily resulted in tragedy.
Not sure how pertinent this is, but it gave me pause.
We are not anti gun at all, since we have hunters, military and police officers in the family, and do not believe in messing with the Constitution, ever.
DH and I went to the movies last week. Apparently, an older man sitting near a family with pre teen and younger children had expressed annoyance that the children were disturbing him. I don't know if the man made a polite request, or if he used racial slurs. Anyway, the man with the children marched to the front of the theater and started yelling at the older man about "disrespecting his children". Both parties left the theater.
What if one of them had been armed? What is one of them decided to pull a gun on the other. This could have easily resulted in tragedy.
Certainly it could have. There are daily conflicts like this all over the country. What if fists started to fly? what if the old man whacked his cane against the heads of the kids?
there are so many "what ifs"...most certainly, this has crossed my mind as well, especially when I was "anti-gun" in my younger days.
I don't know if we'll ever truly have a good compromise that satisfies everyone on both sides of the issue.
But, as for now, it IS in our Constitution, and I WILL continue to carry my gun for my own protection.
Believe me, it does scare me a bit carrying this gun with me...there's so much responsibility involved. I do NOT take that lightly, either!
I keep it on an empty chamber just in case of mis-fire, falling and having it discharge, etc. Also, doing so, gives me pause to use it only in cases of extreme measures and for self-defense.
I hope that allays your fears a bit....but then again, I'm a responsible gun owner.
I'm sorry, Gein, but you do not have a logical or cogent case here.
First of all, regarding your dog analogy (which, I'm sorry to say, is absolutely ridiculous). Being a dog owner (and trainer of my own service dog...a German Shepherd) and having studied the breeds extensively prior to buying my GS pup, you are stating incorrect information, for the most part. Read the following article - it refers to research that was done that correlated an increase in dog attacks as being relative to the popularity of the breed at that time, rather than the breed of dog itself.
Also, interestingly enough, a Pomeranian...I repeat, a POMERANIAN was involved in a fatal attack! This breed of dog is about the same size as a typical Maltese.
"The most extensive study to catalog breeds of dogs involved in attacks was done by the American Veterinary Task Force on Canine Aggression and Humane-Canine Interactions, published in June 2001. Some analysts have stated that this study indicated that dogs that were consistently high on the list correlated to the breeds of larger dogs which were more popular at that time."
In fact, my little 2-pound Chihuahua puppy was more aggressive than my 95-pound German Shepherd! When they first were introduced, the little Chi pup growled at my Shep, and proceeded to drag my Shep's bone she was chewing on right out from under her nose!
Yes, perhaps you'll find other articles refuting this, so be it. I'd submit to you that certain breeds have been in-bred more, as well as mistreated by their owners...or purposefully raised to be aggressive. So, with pit bulls being very popular now amongst certain types of people for a variety of reasons,(protection, dog-fighting, etc.) you just may find that, indeed, they are responsible lately for more attacks. It's not usually inherent in the breed, however. It's the fault of the dog OWNER.
The article further supports this by saying:
"The American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA) states in an article on their website entitled "Are Certain Breeds of Dogs More Aggressive Than Others?" that the above-cited study did not prove that certain breeds of dogs are more dangerous than others, but simply proved what veterinarians have long believed for years: that nearly any dog can be aggressive, or non-aggressive, based on his early training, socialization and environment."
So, your post below is illogical and incorrect:
--Bad analogy, bad argument. In fact, exactly WHAT IS your argument? Do you want ALL guns banned? Why? How would you propose to do this? What about our rights as U.S. Citizens?
- Agreed.... see my sources and reasoning above. Finally, some sense.
--I take this one quite personally. You might want to TRY to really consider what you say before your post...especially the sarcastic one. Yes, I AM afraid...but not of my shadow. I'm afraid regarding the "open season" on women. All you have to do is turn on the news every day, and there's a mother, a sister, a daughter missing and presumed dead.
Yes, I AM afraid to go out without my concealed Smith and Wesson. I'll be happy to tell you why.
(And, this is the part that always gets me about certain people of a certain political sway)...Not ALL people can be lumped in the same category, nor is this an "all or none" phenomenon.
People are NOT the same...meaning, not ALL people are able to run, defend themselves, or fight. I fit into the category of all 3. Have you heard of muscular dystrophy? Well, I'm a woman who has it. I still walk with a cane, but look quite "normal". In fact, TOO "normal".
I'm actually quite good-looking (won many pageants), blonde, (and yes, brains, btw...I'm a physician/surgeon).
I cannot count how many times I've been followed, propositioned, touched inappropriately, and YES had to TRY to fight off a potential rapist. In fact, this unwanted attention and aggression has happened to me on almost a daily basis.
That's when I decided enough is enough (I used to be anti-gun, BTW. Also used to be a democrat, in my younger, more uneducated days....). So, I did my necessary training, and purchased a gun.
I DO feel safer with it, now that I'm weaker and more infirmed. And believe me, I will NOT hesitate to use it (after fair warning, of course, if the situation allows it). As I'm a crack shot, I'll try to wound, first. Maybe the kneecaps, maybe the balls. It depends on the type of attack.
So, I'm STILL afraid when I go out, but not as much, as I have my protection on my hip.
I'd like YOU to convince ME just exactly WHY you are trying to prohibit those of us who qualify, from obtaining as many guns as we want to get? So far, you haven't provided much of a cogent debate or any evidence at all.
Thanks for listening - Dandiday
PS - Why the disgusting name? Is it to hide your incompetent attempts at a rational discussion?
Well let me try this again. First, I don't care if you carry a gun. I don't care if you buy a thousand guns. I don't care if you buy a nuclear weapon. Just don't try and tell me that a knife, or a dirt clod or your fists are the lethal equivalent of a gun. If they were, then why would you need one.
Now back to the dog analogy. You entirely missed my point on the dog analogy. First, I have six dogs. I have a Pit Bull, a rat terrier, a bull terrier, a jack russell terrier, a pembroke welsh corgi, and a belgian shepard.
I take extra precautions with the Pit because if she were to attack she could do some serious damage. I also take precautions with my little dogs but I realize that somebody could just kick the hell out of them if they caused any problems. This really isn't hard to understand. Again, weapons work the same way. A person who picks up a dirt clod has less potential for harming others than someone who picks up a fully loaded automatic weapon. Once again, you trying to say that a pomeranian is as dangerous as a Pit is no different than saying a butter knife is no more dangerous than an AK 47. It just isn't so.
In another post on this thread you talked about how this crazy guy "could have killed his family with an axe blah, blah, blah." Well sure he could of, and I admitted that. However, the fact remains the YOU carry a gun. Why don't you tote around an axe for your safety? You carry a gun because it is the most efficient weapon ever invented for people's personal safety. I get that. So why do you gun packers try and deny it?
As far as the harassment. Hopefully these evil men will back off and leave you in peace. You should come here to Oklahoma where we have open carry and I bet those guys will leave you alone.
As for your dystrophy, I wish you the best with your condition. Sounds like you have either Becker's or Steinert's MD. As for your other MD or DO as the case may be. Congrats on your hard work and I hope you continue to be able to work.
.......................And it sounds like your shadow is mighty shapely.
And as for my screen name? I have always had interest in serial killers after working in mental health. And I have a sick and twisted sense of humor.
Your kind of new around here. You'll get used to me.
Last edited by eddie gein; 07-14-2014 at 09:41 AM..
I DO feel safer with it, now that I'm weaker and more infirmed. And believe me, I will NOT hesitate to use it (after fair warning, of course, if the situation allows it). As I'm a crack shot, I'll try to wound, first. Maybe the kneecaps, maybe the balls. It depends on the type of attack. ......
Great post except for this. It goes against EVERYTHING I have been taught and read about.
When will some of you gun enthusiasts learn that the actual name of a gun doesn't mean diddly squat to a person concerned about a person walking up with any type firearm?
CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
yes i can understand that, which is why i dont point out that someone is wrong about identifying a particular weapon. and i do applaud you for using the proper term enthusiast, rather than nut, or other derogatory term when describing gun enthusiasts.
Well let me try this again. First, I don't care if you carry a gun. I don't care if you buy a thousand guns. I don't care if you buy a nuclear weapon. Just don't try and tell me that a knife, or a dirt clod or your fists are the lethal equivalent of a gun. If they were, then why would you need one.
Now back to the dog analogy. You entirely missed my point on the dog analogy. First, I have six dogs. I have a Pit Bull, a rat terrier, a bull terrier, a jack russell terrier, a pembroke welsh corgi, and a belgian shepard.
I take extra precautions with the Pit because if she were to attack she could do some serious damage. I also take precautions with my little dogs but I realize that somebody could just kick the hell out of them if they caused any problems. This really isn't hard to understand. Again, weapons work the same way. A person who picks up a dirt clod has less potential for harming others than someone who picks up a fully loaded automatic weapon. Once again, you trying to say that a pomeranian is as dangerous as a Pit is no different than saying a butter knife is no more dangerous than an AK 47. It just isn't so.
In another post on this thread you talked about how this crazy guy "could have killed his family with an axe blah, blah, blah." Well sure he could of, and I admitted that. However, the fact remains the YOU carry a gun. Why don't you tote around an axe for your safety? You carry a gun because it is the most efficient weapon ever invented for people's personal safety. I get that. So why do you gun packers try and deny it?
As far as the harassment. Hopefully these evil men will back off and leave you in peace. You should come here to Oklahoma where we have open carry and I bet those guys will leave you alone.
As for your dystrophy, I wish you the best with your condition. Sounds like you have either Becker's or Steinert's MD. As for your other MD or DO as the case may be. Congrats on your hard work and I hope you continue to be able to work.
.......................And it sounds like your shadow is mighty shapely.
And as for my screen name? I have always had interest in serial killers after working in mental health. And I have a sick and twisted sense of humor.
Your kind of new around here. You'll get used to me.
Hahaha! actually enjoyed your post this time. I, too, have a fascination about serial killers...wondering exactly what is it that's gone wrong in their mind...Nature vs. nurture? Both? Seemingly so...
Gein was heinous...get the chills just thinking about him. Unfortunately, now that picture is in my mind every time I'll see your post (ugh!)
Back to the gun issue - so, your only beef with guns is that they have the propensity to cause more widespread damage, if in the wrong hands? I'm still trying to understand what your point is.
Your other posts suggest that the levels of homicides increase with gun ownership, and that just isn't the case. That's the point I was attempting to make.
It's a societal issue rather than the type or size of ANY weapon! Of course a dirt clod isn't lethal as a gun, knife, or ax- no one said it was. The level of the weapon depends on the level of the attack, now, doesn't it? It also has to do with the attack in reference to "personal space". If I was being attacked, throwing dirt might momentarily irritate the attacker, but certainly wouldn't stop him/her.
I carry a gun because I'm now too weak to wield an axe or a knife of a sufficient size. Honestly thought about converting my cane into some sort of defensive device, ala James Bond (knife out the bottom?) prior to buying a gun. haha...I have an active imagination. My S & W is the perfect size for me to handle, and affords me the "distance" from my attacker that a knife or axe wouldn't provide. An AK 47 or other such machinery doesn't interest me....couldn't lift the darn thing, anyway.
Having said that, I DO worry about these weapons in the WRONG hands...the gangs, the cartels, and any other maniac out there.
If there's a maniac/crazy person running towards me to attack, I, as I assume most people, would prefer not to physically engage, as this person might overpower me. The gun affords me space, distance, and thus, that protection from physical over-powering, unlike a knife or axe (unless one can accurately throw these weapons!)
As I said, since I have muscular dystrophy, I have absolutely no means of fighting or running. (You were close...I have Limb-Girdle. It has a similar progression of weakness as the Duchene type, but the disability is drawn out over decades instead of just 10 to 20 years). Permanent confinement to a wheelchair is about 5-8 years down the road for me, in observing family members with the same cursed disease.
In that case, I'll tuck the ol' Smithy on the inside arm of the chair, easily accessible. So, a gun for me is the perfect answer. Gein, if you have another alternative or suggestion, I'm certainly willing to listen.
I couldn't help but chuckle...another shadow reference...eh? Well, let's just say not only am I NOT frightened by it from that standpoint, and I'm still told it looks mighty fine. Especially from certain vantage points.
Ah, those stereotypes....I'm an M.D. btw.
I wish I HAD pursued the psychiatric residency instead of surgery. There's sooo much to learn about the workings of our brain. I guess that's why I watch all of those "true life" criminal shows...am trying to learn just what pathology is going on, and understand the damaged mind. Too often, I've observed people engage in arguments or conflicts with people that seem to be "off" a bit. So, learning about these pathologies has helped me steer clear of these individuals and the potential danger they pose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J
Great post except for this. It goes against EVERYTHING I have been taught and read about.
Robert, you are absolutely correct. In my gun training classes, I was taught to go for the "kill". However, I really don't know if I could kill someone else, and live with the repercussions.
I'm sure it depends on the situation at hand. If I'm attacked, especially with someone wielding a weapon, I will assume they mean to kill me at some point.
So, then, yes. I would follow my teacher's instructions and go for the kill shot. Thank you for the reminder, and the youtube post.
yes i can understand that, which is why i dont point out that someone is wrong about identifying a particular weapon. and i do applaud you for using the proper term enthusiast, rather than nut, or other derogatory term when describing gun enthusiasts.
Thanks for the reply. I was meaning did CHUCKSEE understand.
"Sharing a photo on her Facebook page of President Obama’s recent visit to Texas, the founder of the Moms With Guns website commented on the photo, stating: 'Where is an assasin (sic) when you need one?' ... Added below, she asserts, 'We Will NO LONGER Tolerate Your Tyrannical Abuse!'"
Perkin’s website Moms With Guns (“Because an armed society is a safe society“) states as their mission: “By Remaining Armed Moms of America We will NOT be Victims!!! Our Mission is to Normalize the Open Carrying Of FireArms(sic) in the State of Texas and Inspire Other States to Normalize the same. We are Law Abiding Citizens of this Great Republic of the United States of America from ALL walks of life.”
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.
things to consider
Dirt vs. guns???
