Gun Control - a discussion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-07-2012, 12:47 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
Just my two cents -- gun control is not a hot issue for me, so I'd probably never find the passion to devote a blog to the issue.

I like guns. I've owned guns in the past; however, I have not kept guns in my home since my children were about 2 years old. I know parents that taught their children from an early age how to handle and respect guns - and while that is all fine and dandy, I've never been comfortable with guns around kids - regardless of safety locks, etc.

I used to hunt, though it has been many years since I was last out freezing looking for a deer. I still enjoy target shooting, in a range. I've taught my wife and grown kids to shoot over the years as well and they enjoy it.

I used to support the NRA when I was growing up. The NRA did wonderful and great things for teaching and promoting gun safety; however, that radically changed in the 1990's in the wake of Ruby Ridge, Waco, and finally Columbine. The NRA doubled down on crazy and saw any attempt at curtailing assault rifles and accoutrements of destruction as a "slippery slope" that would eventually erode the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

I served nearly 10 years in the Army - and was a proficient marksman with the M-16. I cannot for the life of me understand why any true sportsman would need or want the M-16 civilian cousin -- the AR-15, the weapon of one James Holmes. The M-16's primary purpose is NOT to kill the enemy - it is intended to inflict severe wounding damage on the enemy. The thought behind that is for every soldier wounded, it requires two more to evacuate that soldier off the battlefield - essentially a one for three trade.

There really does need to be a conversation on gun controls -- large capacity clips, semi-automatic to automatic conversion kits, and the caliber and type of weapon being sold and/or purchased. Maybe it should require intensive background checks and licensing for certain types of weapons. But until we have a frank and open debate on the matter, with both "sides" willing to listen and possibly make compromises, this cycle will continue to perpetuate. I'm not hopeful...

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Seasbury's post
25-07-2012, 12:52 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
One of the funniest positions on gun control Smile



Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 02:08 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 12:24 PM)Red Celt Wrote:  
(25-07-2012 12:11 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Um, ya. So you are better because you go to the grocery store to buy your meat? Because that steak that was tortured on a feedlot is the moral high ground?? Take a step down from that pedestal buddy. Just last saturday I shot my dinner. It didn't make me feel manly. It made me feel proud that I was feeding my family without torturing an animal.

No moral high ground here. Just logic.

A) "I want to eat meat. Is there meat for me to get?"
B) "Why, yes... yes there is."
A) "I'll go make more meat."
B) "But we have enough... if you don't eat it, it will only be binned or sent as animal feed, so we can make more meat."
A) "I'll go make more meat."
B) "But you really don't need to deprive more animals than we already..."
A) "More meat."

And then consider the problem of gun ownership. Is the above justification for everybody to have access to a gun? Why no... no, it isn't.

That is about the worst logic I've ever heard. Do you really believe that all the wild caught meat consumed causes the equivalent amount of factory meat to be wasted? Sorry, but that is bordering on stupidity.

And if you don't want to discuss hunting in a thread, don,t bring it up. That would be equivalent to posting a thread about abortion, claiming black people are responsible for white people getting abortions, then when someone refutes that, you tell them that you don't want to talk about racism.

As for the justification part.....yes, yes hunting does justify everyone having access to guns, so long as they demonstrate they are responsible hunters. And everyone should be allowed to hunt if they are able. That doesn't mean everyone should. It means that everyone should have the choice.

Also, have a look at the miserable nightmare caused here in Canada with the gun registry. It's abolished now. Why? Because it was clearly demonstrated that the controls put in place ONLY affected those who were responsible gun owners.

I don't think you are interested in gun control, you are interested in gun abolishment.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 02:13 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 12:40 PM)Red Celt Wrote:  Run for the hills... KC has unleashed the Strawman claim!

It's not a claim if it's true.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 02:27 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 02:13 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  It's not a claim if it's true.
Then it's a claim.

Y'welcome.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 02:35 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 02:08 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  That is about the worst logic I've ever heard. Do you really believe that all the wild caught meat consumed causes the equivalent amount of factory meat to be wasted? Sorry, but that is bordering on stupidity.

That is about the worst thinking I've ever seen. Seeing as how we're passing compliments. I did not say that caught meat wastes factory meat. I said that caught meat is an unnecessary addition to the meat supply. But thank you for the "bordering on stupidity comment". What's life like on the other side?

(25-07-2012 02:08 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  And if you don't want to discuss hunting in a thread, don,t bring it up. That would be equivalent to posting a thread about abortion, claiming black people are responsible for white people getting abortions, then when someone refutes that, you tell them that you don't want to talk about racism.

I'm happy talking about my views on hunting. I just suggested that it shouldn't divulge us from the original point. So... you're repeating your very bad thinking.

(25-07-2012 02:08 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  As for the justification part.....yes, yes hunting does justify everyone having access to guns, so long as they demonstrate they are responsible hunters. And everyone should be allowed to hunt if they are able. That doesn't mean everyone should. It means that everyone should have the choice.

The clock is ticking for the next gun massacre. But that's OK, so long as everyone has the choice.

(25-07-2012 02:08 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  I don't think you are interested in gun control, you are interested in gun abolishment.

That's my personal opinion, yes. We're OK about individuals having personal opinions, yeah? Good. But my personal opinion isn't what's being discussed: it's the matter of gun control in a country where guns are a problem.

I mean, talk about both, for sure... if you'd sooner launch a personal attack rather than tackle an actual issue that deserves discussion.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 03:58 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 12:17 PM)Red Celt Wrote:  Do you actually deny that America has a problem? Is it too unpatriotic to admit to such a thing, or does it just irritate your nadgers when a non-American says it?

I agree that there is a problem. The gun violence in the US is an ugly issue. Remove guns from the equations and there would still be violence. But why? Is is because our youth seems to be more narcissistic and parents won't say no? Are we eating wrong? Not getting enough exercise? Is it because I didn't know what nadgers were? (I didn't, I had to look it up. Mine are not irritated because I don't have any. I'll stop rambling now.)

It just seems that complete gun abolishment is extreme and not likely. It is like saying we have a problem with illegal immigration so let's build a concrete barrier, with a moat, then throw in some alligators for extra flavor.

Seasbury is exactly right, we need to find some middle ground.

"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 04:06 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
Wow, haven't seen someone pull the "personal attack" card in a while.

He who casts the first stone and all that jazz.

Out.

So many cats, so few good recipes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stark Raving's post
25-07-2012, 04:17 PM
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
(25-07-2012 04:06 PM)Stark Raving Wrote:  Wow, haven't seen someone pull the "personal attack" card in a while.

It's exactly what you did. Don't shoot the messenger if you don't like the message. And that was an intended gun pun.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2012, 04:43 PM (This post was last modified: 26-07-2012 05:13 AM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Gun Control - a discussion
To outlaw guns or do something close to it, would be a way to drastic movement. There ought to be an adjustment of the current state of gun and ammunition laws.

For some reason there is a growing pattern of some American politicians being fine
with putting limits on 1st Amendment rights, but any discussion of limiting a thing about gun laws means you are violating 2nd Amendment rights. It is pretty ridiculous if you realize it's getting harder for some people to have the right to vote, than to get a weapon in the nation. Especially worse when one can simply buy weapons at a market or online. Having the right to get a gun shouldn't mean you have the right to get one at any point in a simple way.

The 2nd Amendment should not be just overturned.. But the biggest reason it existed shouldn't be ignored. That is a reason which no longer exists, building a regulated militia which was desired since the founders didn't want much of any standing army to exist. The world has changed a lot and with it, many other amendments have adjusted but the cold dead hands mantra perpetuates.

Self Defense and hunting equipment shouldn't be too limited. The automatic weapons and ammunition sales have no reason to be mightily assessable.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: