Carrying A Weapon

[JGG]

No, a gun is something violent people use and is used in violent acts. Guns do not cause violence, that's BS.
As I'm sure you'd agree, guns are not magic charms that ward off criminals, but neither are they magic devices that cause peaceful people to turn violent.

Actually, they kind of do. When a person holds a gun, they tend to become more aggressive, their adrenaline spikes, and they are far more likely to commit some kind of violent behavior while in that state.

I used to live in Alberta, where the gun culture is far closer to the United States. In my home town I know no less than 6 people who had been shot, two fatally. All the people who fired those guns were "good Christians" who would "never harm a soul." And yet they did when the got a hold of a gun. The folks there still love their guns though.

Then I moved to Windsor, on the border with Detroit. The difference a border makes on gun violence is uncanny. Windsor has almost no gun related murders compared to Detroit, which is literally visible to Windsorites. The few murders which do occur in Windsor are usually American kids crossing the border and getting into trouble.

Now I live in Toronto. I don't know anybody here who has ever been shot, or even knows someone who owns a gun. This in a city 100 times the population of where I grew up. People who own guns for anything other than hunting are ostracized.

How Americans put up, or propagate their crazy gun culture is beyond me.

 

[Blackguard_]

Actually, they kind of do. When a person holds a gun, they tend to become more aggressive, their adrenaline spikes, and they are far more likely to commit some kind of violent behavior while in that state.

Do you have a source on that? How do they show a gun is magical and it's not the person holding the gun and what they associate guns with and their attitudes towards that? e.g. handing a violent person a gun vs.

I'm very curious as to who the people studying this handed a gun. Gangsta wannabes? Soccer moms? Target shooters?

All the people who fired those guns were "good Christians" who would "never harm a soul." And yet they did when the got a hold of a gun. The folks there still love their guns though.

Bah, they say that kind of crap about violent thugs with mile long rap sheets and/or people screwed up in the head all the time.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Unless you hunt for your own food, a gun is nothing more than an assault weapon. Weapons don't need to be carried outside the home.

If you are in a situation where you need a gun or knife...it's probably to late to pull it. If someone is armed and robbing you in the street or in your home, what are the chances that you'll have time to pull it out and get the bad guy before they get you.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Do you have a source on that? How do they show a gun is magical and it's not the person holding the gun and what they associate guns with and their attitudes towards that?

Actually, it's common sense. If you feel that you need to carry a gun, and I don't, then you obviously are more scared and frightened than I am; and scientists and psycologists HAVE proved that a scared person is more likely to act irractionally than a person with a level head.

 

[Everlasting33]

If I could carry a weapon on me, I would. As a woman, I feel much more vulnerable and weak and having a gun on me would definitely make me feel a lot more safe and secure!

 

[Blackguard_]

Actually, it's common sense. If you feel that you need to carry a gun, and I don't, then you obviously are more scared and frightened than I am;

And being frightened is the only reason to carry a gun?
I suppose people who lock their houses or have alarms are irrational scaredy cats?

and scientists and psycologists HAVE proved that a scared person is more likely to act irractionally than a person with a level head.

Right, but consider that gun banners are acting out of fear of the same kind of people people who carry guns out of fear fear.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Actually, they kind of do. When a person holds a gun, they tend to become more aggressive, their adrenaline spikes, and they are far more likely to commit some kind of violent behavior while in that state.

As with any weapon that we know can cause massive damage, with a little knowhow. And you cannot blame the gun for this adrenaline spike, blah blah blah. It is still the human.

I used to live in Alberta, where the gun culture is far closer to the United States. In my home town I know no less than 6 people who had been shot, two fatally. All the people who fired those guns were "good Christians" who would "never harm a soul." And yet they did when the got a hold of a gun. The folks there still love their guns though.

And what were the reasons these "Christians" used the guns to harm? Was it self defense? And i HATE it when people assume Christians can't do a single thing wrong; what a biased assumption. Besides... they SAID they were "good Christians" but did they have a relationship with Jesus Christ? Did they accept him? Anyone can say they are a "good Christian" but that does not make them Christian in and of itself.

Then I moved to Windsor, on the border with Detroit. The difference a border makes on gun violence is uncanny. Windsor has almost no gun related murders compared to Detroit, which is literally visible to Windsorites. The few murders which do occur in Windsor are usually American kids crossing the border and getting into trouble.

Yes, but notice how you said "gun related" murders? This implies, in my mind, that there could be murders involving other weapons. Care to divulge the information? Hm?

Now I live in Toronto. I don't know anybody here who has ever been shot, or even knows someone who owns a gun. This in a city 100 times the population of where I grew up. People who own guns for anything other than hunting are ostracized.

How Americans put up, or propagate their crazy gun culture is beyond me.

Oh, so it's AMERICANS who are crazy? That's basically what you are saying with this last sentence. Besides, without guns, our country would technically be British. Guns are a necessary means to an end in war, but also they are used for self defense in a country that is slowly going down the toilet. I'd think we would WANT to propagate our "crazy" gun culture because if we did not have them, criminals would walk all over us with guns they got off the black market.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Oh, and JGG, in this kind of thread... you cannot really use circumstantial evidence/ hearsay to support your claims. Give us some hard evidence, like a study, but also state who conducted that study and how.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No one has a real beef with those who dislike guns. You have your reasons. But it is important to remember that those actively seeking to impose even marginally restrictive gun controls have a long-term agenda of eliminating all guns now held by private citizens. This means guns used for hunting, target shooting, collecting, or self-defense. They simply want to disarm America. (I have yet to learn why.)

Sadly, many of you who just don't like guns often buy into their false arguments and thus unwittingly support them.

More than any other nation private gun ownership is woven into the fabric of American life. The right to bear these arms was not given by anyone. The second amendment is a reassurance of this self-evident right, and also an assurance that infingement of that right would not be tolerated.

A good lesson could be learned in advance by this story:

A farmer removed all the stones from his fields, even the small ones. The next season his crops failed. Wondering what to do he asked his neigbor. His neighbor advised, "Put the stones back in."

The lesson is clear. Just as the farmer didn't really understand what good the stones did for his particular crops, so many don't understand how our guns rights strengthen us.

owg

 

[suzybeezy]

I think that you should have the right to carry a gun, but some rights shouldn't necessarily be exercised.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And being frightened is the only reason to carry a gun?
I suppose people who lock their houses or have alarms are irrational scaredy cats?

You can't shoot someone with a locked door. Although, if you think about it, locking a door doesn't solve anything...if someone wants to get in, they'll break a window if the door is locked.

There's no weapon or locking device on the planet that will prevent someone from turning to crime. Everyone on the planet can carry a gun and lock their doors...guess what, there will still be murders and robberies.

Right, but consider that gun banners are acting out of fear of the same kind of people people who carry guns out of fear fear.

So we don't let either kind of person carry them...problem solved!

If you aren't a hunter or a police officer, you don't need a firearm. Killing someone who's breaking into your house doesn't solve anything. They've still disrupted your happy home life, and with the way today's court systems work, you'll still probably face charges for involuntary manslaughter and discharging a firearm.

So who wins?

 

[Blackguard_]

You can't shoot someone with a locked door. quote]

Ok bad example. How about seat belts? By your logic, the person using them is obviously frightened and in fear of a collision, and so people wearing seatbelts are prone to irrational action, which with a vehicle can kill someone.

Although, if you think about it, locking a door doesn't solve anything...if someone wants to get in, they'll break a window if the door is locked.

Hmm. This kind of logic sounds familar....

"Although, if you think about it, gun banning doesn't solve anything...if someone wants to kill, they'll break a skull if the gun is unavailable."

There's no weapon or locking device on the planet that will prevent someone from turning to crime. Everyone on the planet can carry a gun and lock their doors...guess what, there will still be murders and robberies.

Yep.

So we don't let either kind of person carry them...problem solved!

Touche.

If you aren't a hunter or a police officer, you don't need a firearm.

Yeah, and only EMTs should be allowed to own first aid kits, and only firemen should be allowed to have fire extinguishers.

What sort of argument is "you don;t strictly need something how I interpret "need", so you should not legally be allowed to have that"?

Why do hunters 'need' guns anyway? They don't 'need' to hunt, and there is bowhunting.

Seriously, most people who make the "need" argument only include Security type people (including military) as needing guns. I am honestly suprised you included hunters.

And why do cops need guns? It;s not as if there were no patrolmen before the gun was invented.
And why are they exampt from your "fear" argument against carrying?

Killing someone who's breaking into your house doesn't solve anything. They've still disrupted your happy home life

I suppose I'm not supposed to call the police either then?

Or, it's A-OK if Johnny Law kills the guy, but not if Cecil Civilian does?

Besides, you say "disrupted" as if it's a past event and the homedweller is shooting the burglar in the back as he flees outside the house, but the guy is in the process of disrupting your home life, and so there is a problem to be solved.

, and with the way today's court systems work, you'll still probably face charges for involuntary manslaughter and discharging a firearm.

Attitudes and laws towards self and property defense are not uniform throughoout the Union.

So who wins?

Depends where you live. If you're assuming you will get charged with that stuff, it depends on how much danger you thought yourself/others were in. i.e. "is it worth it to face the legal penalties to stop this guy?"
but then the answer to your question is "no one", but you would be less of a loser then the dead guy.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

You can't shoot someone with a locked door. quote]

Ok bad example. How about seat belts? By your logic, the person using them is obviously frightened and in fear of a collision, and so people wearing seatbelts are prone to irrational action, which with a vehicle can kill someone.

Again, you're argument doesn't work for the situation. Seat belts are something used to protect you in case of an accident. An armed robbery is something that someone does on purpose.

 

[NavyGuy7]

You can't shoot someone with a locked door. Although, if you think about it, locking a door doesn't solve anything...if someone wants to get in, they'll break a window if the door is locked.

There's no weapon or locking device on the planet that will prevent someone from turning to crime. Everyone on the planet can carry a gun and lock their doors...guess what, there will still be murders and robberies.



So we don't let either kind of person carry them...problem solved!

If you aren't a hunter or a police officer, you don't need a firearm. Killing someone who's breaking into your house doesn't solve anything. They've still disrupted your happy home life, and with the way today's court systems work, you'll still probably face charges for involuntary manslaughter and discharging a firearm.

So who wins?

Umm even if you don't let either person carry them... criminals will still find ways to smuggle guns into the US, and use them. Just look at our drug problems, for instance. Many drugs are illegal... yet people find ways to get and use them anyway.

And just because the court system is screwed up doesn't mean that you can ban firearms. That's unconstitutional, as I have said before, and I will not discuss in depth again. If you want to know, go back and see previous posts.

 

[NavyGuy7]

And what do you know, blackguard? For once we agree about something, I.E. banning guns won't solve anything. In fact, I think it will actually create more problems. Many people can be dissuaded from attacking or robbing someone if said person has a firearm themselves, and has the drop on the thug. They wouldn't even need to fire if would-be attacker/robber runs. Many criminals in today's society are cowards who use guns as a quick way to rob or accomplish something. Guns aren't the problem. People are.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Umm even if you don't let either person carry them... criminals will still find ways to smuggle guns into the US, and use them. Just look at our drug problems, for instance. Many drugs are illegal... yet people find ways to get and use them anyway.

And just because the court system is screwed up doesn't mean that you can ban firearms. That's unconstitutional, as I have said before, and I will not discuss in depth again. If you want to know, go back and see previous posts.

Yes, when that was amended to the constitution, it was done so that people could overthrough the government if necessary so they wouldn't have another situation like they had in England. It wasn't so they could walk around like cowboys and say "I dare you to steal my wallet."

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And what do you know, blackguard? For once we agree about something, I.E. banning guns won't solve anything. In fact, I think it will actually create more problems. Many people can be dissuaded from attacking or robbing someone if said person has a firearm themselves, and has the drop on the thug. They wouldn't even need to fire if would-be attacker/robber runs. Many criminals in today's society are cowards who use guns as a quick way to rob or accomplish something. Guns aren't the problem. People are.

I live in Ohio, and everyone thought that bringing in the concealed carry permits would solve a lot of the crime problems...it didn't quite work like they planned.

For one thing, they don't do a check on your psycological background, only your criminal background...which means that a bi-polar person could get a concealed carry permit...hooray!

I sure do feel safe with people carrying guns when they could have an uncontrolable mental breakdown at anytime.

 

[Darkhorse]

Well, if they do have a breakdown and start shooting people randomly, another person with a gun can bring the shooting to a quick halt...

 

[Lynden1000]

I live in Ohio, and everyone thought that bringing in the concealed carry permits would solve a lot of the crime problems...it didn't quite work like they planned.

For one thing, they don't do a check on your psycological background, only your criminal background...which means that a bi-polar person could get a concealed carry permit...hooray!

I sure do feel safe with people carrying guns when they could have an uncontrolable mental breakdown at anytime.

I understand where you're coming from. But on the other hand, if I was riding in a car that just happened to break down in east St Louis in the middle of the night, I would much MUCH rather be in a car with someone who was carrying a gun.

But I do respect that, ultimately, we all want the same thing: less gun-related violence against the innocent. We just don't agree on how to get there.

 

[DrFate]

I live in a small town and have thankfully to this point never needed to use a weapon for personal defense. Part of my reason for being armed is a point of honor. Among the Norse, carrying a weapon was the sign of a free man as slaves were not allowed to carry weapons. Its a symbol that I am a free man and willing to defend that.

I'm a walking razor. Don't you watch my size. I'm dangerous.