Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit
I know many gun owners and they are all good people. But who is to say they might encounter in life situations they may not be able to deal with? I'd rather they not be a gun owners in those cases.
I support the right to own guns for self-defense. I support the right to own guns for hunting. I support the right to own guns for nation defense (including domestically). But I don't understand the fascination for guns in our culture, especially movies, TV, and video games. To me, shooting for entertainment makes me uneasy.
As for automatic and semi-automatic rifles, I would prefer they were kept in some kind of armory. The armory and the guns therein would be privately owned. But in order for gun owners to access their guns, they would have to go through a process that provides some assurance they will not be able to use the gun for criminal purposes, for example the gun could only be fired in a designated area and with other competent gun-onwers in the vacinity. This would hopefully eliminate the lone wolf, but would still allow gun ownership for target practicing and national defense reasons.
|
Sort of reminds me of my intel days when you just assumed there was always someone looking over your shoulder and carried on with life. It also reminds me of those I knew then, not in intel, who were shocked that such an apparatus existed in the US, people looking over your shoulder. Such as the girl in my belly dance troupe who was an immigrant from Czechoslovakia; she thought she left that kind of world back in the Warsaw Pact.
Sort of reminds me of the days of the Beltway Sniper when I asked my mentors that if such was happening in Texas, would it be wise to put my .308 in the hands of a lawyer for the duration? That if the law came to my door, because they know of my credentials, wanting to examine my rifle, what should my response be?
In that conversation, my arms dealer mentor mentioned, "Well, you better believe that the Sheriff knows you have that .308."
Of course, it isn't only the Sheriff but those employees at my gun range as well. They know I have it and further, they know how I shoot it. I only shoot silhouettes, iron sights, combat sling, and center of mass and logging all my shots.
So, A and B.
A: This is the USA; do we really want everyone looking over our shoulder like the USSR?
B: They may be watching you now.
OH! And there is C.
C: At the turn of the century, all I had in my personal collection (not the family collection) was my H&K USP .45 pistol. I was practicing rather regularly and went in one Friday morning. Not being a hunter, I am not up on the deer season schedule. The place was loaded with hunters zeroing in their rifles for the next day.......and I must have caught many odd eyes being there practicing with my pistol.
How do we define other "competent gun owners" when we may be shooting for different reasons?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
.......paddock on the other hand planned everything, and had been planning everything for months.........
|
The wild thing is that this has been life. Planning scenarios where someone attacks to see how SWAT teams will react with the technology we provide them with. Planning terrorist attacks so a level of social invisibility is achieved. Creating security drills. Handling tasks like "This building is now a Federal Courthouse; secure it.". Having gone through simulations of response to attacks and learning to being aware of all those little details.
So what makes any of my ilk different from him? We are on the side of good and we are committed to being so. We have the same tools and the same knowledge as the bad guy, but we are on the side of good.
Of course, there is always that possibility that someone of us might change our minds someday about how we act but that is like what I was told in another job. Part of the interviewing was the determination of trust.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72
I appreciate your thoughtful response...but did any of this forums many gun "enthusiasts" ever really stop to think for a second...and I'm begging some of you to do this before throwing out the "liberal gun hater" response..really just try for once to look inward and examine your own psyches:
Maybe there really IS something sick about obsessing over guns to the extent too many people in this country do? Maybe that sickness that attracts people to the instrument of death sometimes escalates to a desire to actually use all of this armament for its intended purpose? I mean, guys on this forum regularly lament how they are basically begging for someone to try to break into their house so they can shoot them. This guy was amassing enough firepower to run his own militia.....for what purpose? Far beyond anything logical....it's either a fetish, or desire to actually kill a lot of people. Isn't that mental illness on its own?
|
For me, it is an element of professionalism.
I am reminded of the thought that popped into my head after I cleaned my first Uzi. "Congratulations! You now know your way around one of the most popular fire arms in the world.". It was knowledge for the just in case. Just like practicing on a wheel gun. I don't own any (I might in the future, there are two reasons right now) but I practice to know my way around them in case I ever have to use one.
Then, there is the region of being prepared. I would like to own two Llama pistols, for example. It is not that I think they are such great guns (they are sufficient) but rather just to have a 2nd one in inventory should the first one "break". The established infrastructure for this or that gun does not then go to waste.
That's the desire but obviously, that is an expensive project. Something not to be done all at once but rather as opportunity presents.
Next, I never want to shoot someone especially as a civilian. I was told that if I have to, "Expect to need a psychologist, to be infront of the grand jury, and to be sued." To make light of the matter, the resulting paperwork would be terrible.
But....better the paperwork than to be dead especially if the route to death is a long and painful one.
I will tell you something. Decades ago, I went through a self evaluation exercise of a sort. Consider the situation where you have a child killer infront of you, it is just you and him, there are no witnesses around, and you can kill him right then. Do you?
I decided that I would not.
I will certainly not care about the possibility of killing someone (ER or the morgue) if I have to defend if I am attacked, I've been part of a SAM crew to take out aircraft, but when options exist even if the person in question does not deserve them, taking them out won't be the automatic choice.
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.
