<abbr title="Yet Another <abbr title="Gun Wars 2">GW2</abbr> Topic">YAGT</abbr>
-
I'm going to think back to all the people I know who have died, and let's see how this looks.
Car accidents: Probably 10 - 12, most of which involved alcohol.
Suicide: 4. Two hangings, a dose of rat poison, and one drug overdose.
Cancer: 2.
Old age: 1.
Diabetes: 1.
Plane Crashes: 1. A friend's aunt was on one of the hijacked 9/11 planes.
Parkinson's Disease: 1.
Bee Stings: 1.
Influenza: 1.
Wood Splinter: 1. No, I am not joking.
Punched in the face: 1. One-hit kill in a senseless bar fight.
Guns: 0.Guns: 0
To emphasize that last statistic, let me tell you a bit of how I live my life. And to help drive this point home, I'm going to include some of the gnarly, unglamorous stories we usually don't tell to non-gun owners.
I am smack dab in the middle of gun culture. I don't even know how many I own anymore, probably around 15. I carry concealed every day, and have for nearly 4 years now. I handle guns more often than I operate road vehicles! I've been volunteer armed security for churches (gasp GUNS IN CHURCHES GASP). I'm an NRA and NFOA member and most of my inner circle and extended circle consists of enthusiastic gun owners.
I spend probably one day a week at the local outdoor range. I'm also a competition shooter, and I go to as many local matches as my schedule allows. Some of these matches have 100 participants, with a total of 400 - 500 guns, and 10K ammo expended in one morning. Given the way the gun-haters portray guns, you'd think I live in a war zone, right? People must be dropping like flies around me! Why, I don't know how a single week goes by without a gun death!
Okay, let's try to make things worse. I know people who did stupid things and shot when they shouldn't have. I know people who have shot their boats, their cars, their houses. Still no gun deaths. I know people who made handloading mistakes and had their gun literally explode in their hands. Still no deaths! Not even injuries from that!
I saw one guy have the disconnector in his pistol fail, and it started slam-firing, which is a very dangerous, uncontrolled type of full-automatic fire which cannot be stopped until it either runs out of ammo or the gun fires out-of-battery and explodes. No deaths, no injuries.
Ever seen the TV show "Hoarders"? I know one guy whose house is exactly like that, only it's gun stuff. He must have thousands of unsecured guns, gun parts, ammo, reloading equipment, containers of gunpowder, and primers just lying around. There are seriously little paths through his home you can take, and everything to either side is waist-high with gun stuff. And he has children! None of them have ever been shot, or even injured by a firearm.
I once ended up on a road-hunting crew! (If I'd known what they planned, I would not have gone along.) We ended up cruising the countryside with .44 Magnum revolvers, firing out of the window of the moving pickup truck at random animals we came across. Very stupid, very dangerous. No injuries, no deaths.
Okay, let's try to make it worse. I know quite a few who were in the military. Some of them were on the front lines in both Iraq wars, and one operated artillery in Afghanistan. I still don't know anyone who died from a gun (or anything related since I brought in military).
In fact, despite all the guns I'm around every day, and all the gun owners I'm around, some of whom are batshit crazy and have no business possessing a firearm!!, I do not know anyone who ever died from a firearm. I know exactly one guy who has ever been shot, and it was in the Vietnam War. Had nothing to do with American gun culture.
So forgive me if I don't believe you guys. I keep hearing all these doom-and-gloom stories about how bad guns are, how deadly and dangerous they are, how impossible to control they are, and how they make people just snap and start killing for no reason. Yet I don't see this in reality at all, and I'm in a better position of authority here than any of the anti-gunners because I live this lifestyle.
I keep getting told how my guns are going to kill someone, but all I can think of is my friend Jeff (no, not that Jeff) who died of a bee sting in 2nd Grade, or Ryan who died of an infected wood splinter just weeks after graduating high school and getting accepted into college.
In my gun-saturated reality dripping with CLP and spent brass, consuming ammo faster than I use toilet paper and hand soap, I know more people who have died of bee stings and influenza than guns.
If guns were even 10% as bad as the gun-grabbers and media make them out to be, I and almost everyone I know would be dead. Instead, aside from one guy who got shot in Vietnam, the worst gun-related injury I know of is getting sunburned at a 6-hour-long 3-gun match.
-
If we banned everything that has caused senseless, tragic, preventable deaths, there would literally be nothing left in the world. And even if we tried, guns are pretty far down the list after alcohol, cars, and obesity.
I'd say that cars, despite killing far too many people, are actually quite useful. We in Australia have cars and I'd say it would take a lot of getting used to if they were banned. I'd also say that guns, despite killing far too many people, are something that you can reasonably do without. We in Australia don't have guns (more or less) and it's not something that people need or miss.
@Lorne_Kates said:
America, you've got a gun problem. The first step is admit you have a problem.
As a non-American this seems to be obviously true. I can't think of another country that is so in love with the idea of gun ownership as the USA.
I grew up in Britain where people don't generally have a gun. Our homes are not being invaded, our cars are not being jacked and our schools and malls are not being shot up. This is without the obvious statement that the bad guys, who disregard the law about getting a gun, still probably can get a gun.
I now live in Australia where people don't generally have a gun. Our homes are not being invaded, our cars are not being jacked and our schools and malls are not being shot up. This is without the obvious statement that the bad guys, who disregard the law about getting a gun, still probably can get a gun.
The thing with those two places (Britain and Australia) is that we don't have a widespread desire to own guns. Until America thinks differently then nothing will change. It seems that Americans want guns more than they care about people getting shot.
-
the worst gun-related injury I know of is getting sunburned at a 6-hour-long 3-gun match.
Thank you for your anecdote. It'll be of great comfort to the parents of the children who died.
Some actual numbers:
Gun deaths per year in the US, per 10,000: 10.64 (3.55 homicides), that's about 11k people.
Bee stings: 54 per year
Plane crash varies year to year, but less than 1000 per year. (9/11 throws that average off a bit)
Cancer, US, all ages, all genders: ~500,000 last year.
Car deaths, 2013, per 10,000: 10.34.
So guns kill as many people as car deaths. Meaning according to you, the stats for car deaths are wrong because you've personally experienced more incidents of them. Also, why the fuck are we wasting all this money on cancer. If cancer was as bad as the bleeding heart liberals made it out to be you should know about 50 times as many people who have died by car, or by guns. Meaning you should know 500-600 people who have died of cancer, for your 10-12 car deaths.
Your personal anecdotes don't add up to actual data.
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Gun deaths per year in the US, per 10,000: 10.64 (3.55 homicides), that's about 11k people.
Most of which are concentrated around the gang-ridden inner cities. It's not a gun problem, it's a culture problem. Those people live on drugs and guns and "street cred" where you gotta shoot people to make it as a rapper.
Crime and Punishment
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/thoughtCo_pin_img_default-58a21e1638e9b32984d5b865.png)
Delve deeper into the study of crime. Read criminal profiles, guides to the criminal justice system, statistics, and more.
Stupid line break here because Discourse WHY IS THIS BOLD
Gun violence is most common in poor urban areas and frequently associated with gang violence, often involving male juveniles or young adult males.[13][14] Although mass shootings have been covered extensively in the media, mass shootings account for a small fraction of gun-related deaths[9] and the frequency of these events had steadily declined between 1994 and 2007.
This one's back a couple decades, but LA County had 800 gang-related homicides in 1992. Nearly 10% of all national homicides happened due to gang activity within a geographically tiny area!
County's Yearly Gang Death Toll Reaches 800
In a macabre year-end ritual that grows increasingly ominous, the tally of gang-related homicides in Los Angeles County broke another record in 1992, reaching 800 for the first time, according to a preliminary count by law enforcement officials.
If you remove the gang wars, which almost exclusively occur with illegal, stolen, black-market weapons that were not subjected to background checks, waiting periods, permits, or mandatory training, gun deaths are hardly even worthy of mention.
-
If FrostCat says it's false, it's almost certainly true.
I don't say it's false, whoever assembled that list does, you ignoramus. Oh, wait, their funding records are available via their tax records!
Blakey opens his mouth and spews ignorance, what a shock!
-
I keep hearing all these doom-and-gloom stories about how bad guns are, how deadly and dangerous they are, how impossible to control they are, and how they make people just snap and start killing for no reason.
That's because liberals are idiots that are all about the feels. When they say shit like "I feel like there's invisible rays coming from the gun that would make me want to pick it up and go on a shooting spree[1]" I believe them. People like that shouldn't be around guns.
More balanced, law abiding people, it's a different story.
[1] I know people who say shit like this. They're right--they should not be around guns. I wish they'd stop projecting their mental defects on me.
-
I guess those evil SJWs got to me and sucked out my brain and now I'm a zombie.
-
Most of which are concentrated around the gang-ridden inner cities. It's not a gun problem, it's a culture problem. Those people live on drugs and guns and "street cred" where you gotta shoot people to make it as a rapper.
You're misreading your own link. The report says that, in the 5 urban cities with a high gang population they gathered data from, the vast majority of gun deaths in those areas were gang related.
It is not saying "the vast majority of gun deaths in the entire country are concentrated in these 5 cities and their gangs".
Then you link to about.com, and then quote a 22 year old study.
Sorry, but nope. Don't try to shift it into a race flamewar. I won't deny that gangs are a huge problem. But that's a whole other argument.
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Don't try to shift it into a race flamewar.
Who's doing that? You. It's not just one race that's involved in gangs.
-
"Those people live on drugs and guns and "street cred" where you gotta shoot people to make it as a rapper. "
The racist undertones are there, when you've heard this shit enough times.
Emphasis****strong text mine.
-
66 shots over a few hours, and I thought my barrel was going to melt.
Really? How many shots at a time in rapid succession?
I never noticed that issue, but we never shot the big cals very much at a sitting, because raisins. (sore shoulders, etc) I find that with an AR, you can go through a 20-round magazine with a shot every 5-10 seconds and not notice any major overheating issues. But it is 20 shots, then a break. And I have never shot one with a pencil barrel either, so that would make a difference also.
As for your other point, I have never known anyone who died from a firearm either and I grew up where guns were a way of life. We shot groundhogs for pest control and fun and even a bit of competition. I first shot a gun before age 10. I got my first 22 and 20 gauge at around age 10 and I still have both of them. I took a long hiatus on shooting, but I am getting back in to it again. If you include 22LR, I have no doubts that I have put 10's of thousands of rounds through guns.
The thing is I, and probably you, had a father who told us just how dangerous guns can be. He also told me to always treat a gun as though it were loaded. Always check the chamber, and even after that you assume that it is loaded. Always. No matter what. And they are not toys.
They were not kept a mystery. I was allowed to shoot in my dad's supervision. I cleaned the guns after a day at the farm or the range. Even today, I know that the guns I have stored downstairs are empty, but I always treat them as though they are loaded. When handling them they are always pointed in a safe direction. From years of being taught to respect them, when I pick up a gun my index finger naturally falls outside of the trigger guard when I pick one up.
You cannot just own a firearm and not teach others in your house to respect them. Kids can be shitheads, but if you really drill it in to them that this is something that can seriously hurt or kill someone, they will get it. And you still keep them out of reach of children.
-
The thing is I, and probably you, had a father who told us just how dangerous guns can be. He also told me to always treat a gun as though it were loaded. Always check the chamber, and even after that you assume that it is loaded. Always. No matter what. And they are not toys.
It's almost as if the people in charge of the guns were controlling****strong text your access to them, controlling your attitude towards them, and taking steps to control their impact on society at large.
It's almost as if... and this may be a wild concept for people to understand... the words "control" and "ban" mean two entirely different things. I know, right?
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
It's almost as if... and this may be a wild concept for people to understand... the words "control" and "ban" mean two entirely different things. I know, right?
I was a child. I am not a child anymore. Once I was no longer a child, he stopped controlling my access to them, stopped controlling my attitude toward them and stopped controlling my impact on society.
Yet, I still have not shot anyone. Still have not murdered anyone. (Canadians are not really human)
The only controls I have seen proposed are ones that will only control a law-abiding person's access to them, and won't do a damned thing about crime. That seems like a shitty trade-off to me.
-
As a counter-point, we have had our access to tanks greatly controlled, yet twice in American history there have been people who went on rampages in tanks and caused a shitload of mayhem and death. One guy built a tank from a bulldozer, another stole one from a USNG depot. This was despite the extreme levels of control on such things...
-
That's twice in American history, not... several times a year. I'd say those controls are working fairly effectively
To further your analogy - This argument is between people arguing that only the military should have access to tanks and that allowing regular citizens access to them is dangerous and may cause extreme harm, and people arguing that everyone should have the ability to get as many tanks as they want, within reason, and the only way to stop someone who's shooting people with a tank is to go full WWII style on them and blow them to bits, using the tank that you have for your protection.
-
No, the point was that the laws will not have the effect that you wish. People who will commit crimes will not give a shit about breaking another law. I see your argument as being ludicrous, as though you think someone would honestly think, "I'm going to kill that motherfucker...but wait...I don't have a gun. Oh well, I will go mentor troubled youths instead."
Those who would murder someone, will not be stopped by gun control. The only people that it will stop from getting a gun are law-abiding citizens.
-
But it's happened twice. TWICE...
Sounds like it works to me...
-
Not really...they are just less ideal weapons to be used by the mentally ill. It was more about the point that if a mentally ill person wants to go on a rampage, they will.
-
And if the mentally ill person goes on a rampage with a sword or something, they're probably gonna kill a lot less people...
I don't hate guns at all - the issue I see with them is that they're not worth the cost. There is a much higher chance, IME, that guns available to the general public will be (accidentally or on purpose) used to cause harm, rather than good. And honestly, the concept that a "good guy" with a CCW will stop a crime is absurd. The idea breaks down when you think about the many different ways that can go south really fast.
Now, I'm not really actively trying to do anything about this, because honestly, we're too far gone as a country to stop it. Guns are everywhere, and yes, if we implemented strict controls right now, it wouldn't do anything to stop criminals, because they're pervasive everywhere - it would take a major policy change (and probably a constitutional amendment) to fix the problem. So random shootings are just a thing we're gonna have to deal with in the US. If we could get to a state like other countries, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but I honestly don't see that happening.
-
Guns cause way more good than harm. Hundreds of thousands of people enjoy hunting, target shooting, plinking, etc. That is before we even get to home defense and other "good".
Alcohol has no real use for society, and causes harm. But I have no desire to live in a Prohibition society. I have been to Utah. If it had not been for us taking a shitload of booze with us on the plane, it would have sucked. But I am a responsible drinker of alcohol. I don't want to ban it all because some people are assholes when they drink.
I don't see what you think gun bans would do, and I sleep easier having the ability to defend myself. Police are reactionary. They come after the crime has been committed. They investigate. They may arrest, if they have enough evidence. But the damage has already been done.
-
Hundreds of thousands of people enjoy hunting, target shooting, plinking, etc.
You can also enjoy those without keeping lethal firearms at home and on your person ;)
home defense and other "good"
Which can also cause harm, if used improperly.
Remember, we're talking about the general populace here. We already know people do really stupid things, and there's only so much you can do by vetting people.
If you allow lethal weapons in public, people will do stupid things with the lethal weapons. They may, alternatively, do stupid things with other options of lethal weapons, sure. But those are nowhere near as easy, nor as deadly, nor as efficient as firearms.They come after the crime has been committed.
They come when you call them. They do show up while a crime is being committed (or the stuff I hear on the police scanner is fake...) And I have a lot more trust in a guy who does this self-defense thing for a living than I do in some rando who's just defending himself.You've been trained how to use a gun. You probably will use a firearm safely. Will everyone else? I sleep easier knowing that public service personnel are keeping me safe, not by holding a weapon I (and the vast majority of people) am neither trained nor qualified to use
-
Can I go shoot at my friend's house, for the cost of ammo, and have a BBQ after, without owning firearms? I assume you were saying that I could always go to a range, but 300' ranges are hard to come by in metropolitan areas...the field gets even thinner when you want to take a Weber and drink while you clean firearms.
Police come when you call them, but they will never show up while a home invasion is going on. Not unless they are driving down your street when it happens. Police are reactionary. They come after it happens. They can't be everywhere at once. But my Mossberg 500 with 00 buckshot is 5' away from me when I sleep and is one pump from being ready to defend my family.
And yes, it is well out of reach of children... The rest of the guns are under lock and key in the basement.
-
they will never show up while a home invasion is going on
Yes they will. Happens all the time. I hear it on the scanner a foot from my monitor. Longest response time I've heard is probably 5 minutes. Average is like 1 or 2. Sounds like your police force is undermanned for your area...
Can I go shoot at my friend's house, for the cost of ammo, and have a BBQ after, without owning firearms?
No, but that's not one of the requirements you mentioned. And that's not worth the cost of having dangerous weapons in the hands of the public, in my opinion.
But my Mossberg 500 with 00 buckshot is 5' away from me when I sleep and is one pump from being ready to defend my family.
And are you ready to blow someone's head off just for breaking into your house? Are we back to the chop someone's hand off for stealing a loaf of bread kind of punishment scheme?
Are you sure you'll NEVER use that weapon in anger? Even if you're drunk as a fish and just had a terrible argument?
What about everyone else? Even if you answered yes, would you trust everyone else to never do that either? Or would the victims of that shooting just not really matter?
FFS, really? 4 minutes?
-
I can't speak for others, but I know I wouldn't. I am not an angry drunk. I am a mischievous drunk. And not a "shoot the neighbor's birdhouses" sort of mischievous either. I am the "get you thrown out of a bar, but laugh about it later" sort of mischievous drunk.
Shooting is not a lone activity usually. I have been to the range and shot by myself a few times. It is not nearly as much fun as shooting at a friend's. I am sure you have things you do for camaraderie. That is what it is for me and many others. Hell, try and find a range that will let you set up some 2-liters of generic cola and shoot them, not going to happen. And 300 yard ranges are very rare around here. Most are 50 yard or less in my city. 50 yards with a decent handgun is not that much of a challenge.
-
Shooting is not a lone activity usually. I have been to the range and shot by myself a few times. It is not nearly as much fun as shooting at a friend's. I am sure you have things you do for camaraderie. That is what it is for me and many others. Hell, try and find a range that will let you set up some 2-liters of generic cola and shoot them, not going to happen. And 300 yard ranges are very rare around here. Most are 50 yard or less in my city. 50 yards with a decent handgun is not that much of a challenge.
I don't doubt that. I think one of the major reasons this sparks so much debate is due to the culture change between the two sides. I'm a military brat and usually lived on base (I don't any more though...), so I never really could even think about keeping a gun at home or shooting in my back yard. If I wanted to shoot, I'd go up to the firing range, or hunt in the hunting area.
I think this discussion goes back to my point above though - I don't think we're ever going to get to the point that other countries are in - despite the fact that I personally believe that's a better way to run things. I don't think having ready, easy access to firearms is worth the potential cost. But, there's not much we can do about it.
I do hope that (and I've generally seen support for this) we can look at revising who is allowed a firearm, and try to keep those restrictions tight. Most people seem to agree that's acceptable, and it hopefully will at least cut down on the mass murders a bit.
-
Addendum:
Another thing to consider here is the difference between rural and urban gun control.
I think it's much more feasible, and would theoretically be better in the long run, to restrict guns in urban areas (to the point of a near-total ban) than it is to restrict them in rural areas. In rural areas, I can see the self defense argument having merit too - It could take a while for a police response to get to you. So I think this is an issue that probably needs to be dealt with at a lower level than it is right now.
-
And if the mentally ill person goes on a rampage with a sword or something, they're probably gonna kill a lot less people...
You ask all the Chinese people who've been killed in knife massacres whether that's true or not. Yoy pull out a couple of machetes, say, on a crowded train platform, its pretty easy to rack up a good boost count. Oh, but at least they don't have gun violence.
-
I watched a documentary once, that actually had nothing to do with gun control, but it was talking to prisoners about what places they chose to rob. It was almost like the scene from Pulp Fiction. They chose chain stores and not mom and pop shops, because the chain stores would not have guns. They wouldn't rob a family-owned gas station because it might be the owner behind the counter and if it were, he would be armed.
I think prohibiting firearms in urban areas is a shitty idea for that reason. Then they know that people will be unarmed. They know they can't do shit. And they know that the cops are 10+ minutes away. Criminals don't respect laws, so they will still have them.
Not to mention that I live in an urban area and could not legally keep my possessions at home.
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Every single one of those deaths would have been prevented by
properly controlling the gunsparents not being criminally negligentThere's the problem. You can't just ban anything that can potentially be dangerous when kids get their hands on it unattended.
Kids drink the drain cleaner and die, choke on a billion of small things and die, fall out the window and die. And in each of those case, the solution is to watch your fucking kids, not ban drain cleaners, windows and small things. Because children are fucking stupid, and that's why we invented the whole parenting thing.
-
Not to put oil on the water (which I guess is a bad idea in a flamewar), but does anyone have any numbers of how many "legal" guns are stolen or otherwise used in school shootings or other crimes?
I'm just asking because in Sweden (Ninth place in the world considering the number of guns per capita), that figure is zero, which makes a lot of the US gun debate difficult for me to follow.
In Sweden, before you get a gun, you need to have a gun-cabinet that is heavier than your average safe, and you need to keep vital parts of your guns locked up elsewhere, and you are only allowed to carry the gun if it is not concealed and you have a license for it and are on your way to or from a shooting range. Getting the license? For hunting rifles this involves taking courses on gun handling before being certified after a test (which involves just as much knowledge about animal tracking and hunting as it does actual gun handling). For small-arms, it means being an active member of an established and authorised shooting club and then get the club's approval before applying with the police for a license.
-
People who will commit crimes will not give a shit about breaking another law
Which we can see from the vast number of criminals who steal tanks and go on rampages.
Or the people who already break the law by speeding, so don't give a shit about burning down houses.
-
Don't come to a gun thread and complain about racism. That would be like going to a sexuality thread and complaining about all the religious stuff that gets brought up. Gun control is inherently racist, in exactly the same way that voter registration laws are.
-
Which we can see from the vast number of criminals who steal tanks and go on rampages.
Or the people who already break the law by speeding, so don't give a shit about burning down houses.
are you getting on about?
-
Gun control is inherently racist, in exactly the same way that voter registration laws are.
?
-
What's not to get? If voter registration disenfranchises black people from the vote, then gun registration disenfranchises black people from the gun. The logic is bulletproof.
-
Unfortunately, most people who believe in gun control only seem to want to do things that a) wouldn't have stopped the mass murderers but b) would take away guns from people with a demonstrated respect for the law (nationwide, concealed carry permits are far less likely to commit crimes than the general populace.
And usually, when you accuse them of wanting to confiscate guns you get accused of shoulder aliens, even though it's obvious their so-called proposals are usually redundant with existing law or outright fantasy (that is, not that they have a fantasy of confiscating guns or something, but nothing they say has any connection to reality). At least now they're being more honest about it.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
When guns aren't controlled...
Actually, I'm glad you're here, because you're the guy who wants cars confiscated from drivers. We should eliminate fires and swimming pools, too.
If it saves one life.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
But the culture goes "meh, kids will get murdered, that's ok".
Fuck you. Not my culture. Seriously, fuck you. That's bullshit. Do you really believe that?
I might as well say that you want women to be raped by stronger men because you don't want them to be able to defend themselves. Stop supporting rape culture you asshole.
-
Or the people who already break the law by speeding, so don't give a shit about burning down houses.
In one case, you go from "speeding" to "burning down the house". In the other, you go from "murder" to "owning an unregistered firearm".
Can you see a bit of... directionality issue here?
-
What's not to get? If voter registration disenfranchises black people from the vote, then gun registration disenfranchises black people from the gun. The logic is bulletproof.
Gun control was actually part of Jim Crow. For instance:
I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers and to thereby reduce the unlawful homicides that were prevalent in turpentine and saw-mill camps and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied.
That's a quote from the judge's opinion.
Your linking of modern voter registration and Jim Crow gun control control strikes me as unsubstantiated and contrary to fact.
-
In Sweden, before you get a gun, you need to have a gun-cabinet that is heavier than your average safe, and you need to keep vital parts of your guns locked up elsewhere, and you are only allowed to carry the gun if it is not concealed and you have a license for it and are on your way to or from a shooting range. Getting the license? For hunting rifles this involves taking courses on gun handling before being certified after a test (which involves just as much knowledge about animal tracking and hunting as it does actual gun handling). For small-arms, it means being an active member of an established and authorised shooting club and then get the club's approval before applying with the police for a license.
These seem (more or less) like the steps a reasonable person would/should take...
There's probably partly why I am personally unarmed... I'm not part of a gun culture group - aside from my slightly nutty father-in-law and my mild-mannered neighbor that I just learned (I think) is armed.
Being a noob is a
to getting properly trained up.
-
Gun control was actually part of Jim Crow
Actually, the racist roots of gun control predate Jim Crow, given that the latter was a response to the Civil War.
"The historical record provides compelling evidence that racism underlies gun control laws -- and not in any subtle way. Throughout much of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method for keeping blacks and Hispanics "in their place," and to quiet the racial fears of whites."
-
A lot of the left's sacred cows have racist roots. Gun control, minimum wage, Wagner Act labor unions...I'm not sure if Social Security was meant to discriminate, but it's had that effect, too (black men have historically had shorter life spans, and since it's not like a pot of money you own you can't pass it on to your heirs).
-
I'm just asking because in Sweden (Ninth place in the world considering the number of guns per capita), that figure is zero, which makes a lot of the US gun debate difficult for me to follow.
#[CITATION NEEDED]
-
I never noticed that issue, but we never shot the big cals very much at a sitting, because raisins. (sore shoulders, etc) I find that with an AR, you can go through a 20-round magazine with a shot every 5-10 seconds and not notice any major overheating issues. But it is 20 shots, then a break. And I have never shot one with a pencil barrel either, so that would make a difference also.
It was a big cal. 7mm Remington Magnum. It was an NRA High-Power match, so I brought my highest-poweredest rifle! Naturally, mine was about three times more powerful than anything else there...
The thing is I, and probably you, had a father who told us just how dangerous guns can be. He also told me to always treat a gun as though it were loaded. Always check the chamber, and even after that you assume that it is loaded. Always. No matter what. And they are not toys.
Unfortunately no. That's a story for another time and place, but my father was NOT a good guy. He was one of the reasons I got into CCW, because if he someday discovers where I live and snaps, it really wouldn't be a surprise to anyone who knew him.
He actually owned a bunch of guns, but was apparently a secret (to me anyway) felon, so they hardly ever came out. When a bunch of stuff happened, naturally he worked out some kind of deal that allowed him to get rid of his guns without being convicted of the gun crimes he was guilty of! If existing laws had been enforced, he could have been locked away for long enough that I'd never have to worry about him.
They come when you call them. They do show up while a crime is being committed (or the stuff I hear on the police scanner is fake...) And I have a lot more trust in a guy who does this self-defense thing for a living than I do in some rando who's just defending himself.
You've been trained how to use a gun. You probably will use a firearm safely. Will everyone else? I sleep easier knowing that public service personnel are keeping me safe, not by holding a weapon I (and the vast majority of people) am neither trained nor qualified to use
My competition circles are actually full of average people of all ages, colors, and sexes.Yes there are a few truly gifted people who stand out among the crowd. However, when cops show up to firearm matches, they almost always get last place. Poor time and poor accuracy. I'd rather be defended by an average CCW gun owner than the average police officer.
Police come when you call them, but they will never show up while a home invasion is going on. Not unless they are driving down your street when it happens. Police are reactionary. They come after it happens. They can't be everywhere at once. But my Mossberg 500 with 00 buckshot is 5' away from me when I sleep and is one pump from being ready to defend my family.
Last time I had to call the police, it was two hours before they showed up. As another not-@Lorne_Kates-approved anecdote, my sister was getting harassed by illegal immigrants living near her apartment complex, and the police flat-out refused to get involved. I immediately taught her how to shoot and we got her a 12-gauge and a 9mm. Having never used any firearm before, it only took her a couple hours to become proficient! (She's since married a Marine and moved away...I'm not too worried about her anymore).
And are you ready to blow someone's head off just for breaking into your house? Are we back to the chop someone's hand off for stealing a loaf of bread kind of punishment scheme?
See above. I'd much rather my little sister blow the head off a couple slimeball illegal immigrants (they weren't even Mexicans, so let's not flame about race please) who break into her apartment at 2 AM than have her get raped and murdered. If it saves even one life...
Are you sure you'll NEVER use that weapon in anger? Even if you're drunk as a fish and just had a terrible argument?
Many of us don't have anger problems. And many of us don't get drunk. Some of us don't even argue in real life! (That's what TDWTF is for)
I think it's much more feasible, and would theoretically be better in the long run, to restrict guns in urban areas (to the point of a near-total ban) than it is to restrict them in rural areas.
Chicago and DC beg to differ. Handgun ownership was 100% illegal in DC until just a few years ago. They still had a ton of gun crime. Again, an enforcement problem.
You ask all the Chinese people who've been killed in knife massacres whether that's true or not. Yoy pull out a couple of machetes, say, on a crowded train platform, its pretty easy to rack up a good boost count. Oh, but at least they don't have gun violence.
To expand on this, this happened within a couple days of the recent Oregon shooting. More people died in this knife attack than in the Oregon situation! Yet the media is nearly silent on it, as if they have an agenda and want to blame the tool rather than the criminal.
http://www.mining.com/fifty-killed-in-a-knife-attack-at-a-chinese-colliery/
-
It was an NRA High-Power match, so I brought my highest-poweredest rifle! Naturally, mine was about three times more powerful than anything else there...
That means you have the biggest penis and you win.
-
This could go in a lot of places, but I'll put it here:
http://weaponsman.com/?p=26006It's a longish post with several sections, but the last two are what I wanted to share
**Number IV:** There’s probably no greater generator of the stupid that is Smart Dip than the universities. In a short essay on some Orwellian trends in new uses for old words, Powerline’s Ammo Grrl has a word to say about a word.
VIOLENCE – Talk to any SJW for any length of time and you learn that everything is “violence.” Swearing. Shouting. Pointing. Disagreement in particular. Years after I (finally) got a degree from a Minnesota State College, I went into their Administration Building and saw little plaques on all the desks that bragged, “This is a violence-free workplace.” Well, glory be, that would distinguish it from all the other workplaces where fisticuffs and gunplay are a normal part of the day. Seriously? Was there a big problem with Assault and Battery before you hit on the obvious solution of putting up plaques?
Of course, only the most stupid and magically-thinking person, even in a room full of bureaucrats whose superior economic use would be to be tasked in support of organ harvesting, actually thinks a “violence-free workplace” sign does anything. It’s not supposed to do anything. It’s just one more case of empty virtue-signalling.Number V: We’re reminded of when the Massachusetts Army National Guard’s IT people (a more useless bunch of Massholes can only be found in the state’s welfare offices, on either side of the counter, but we digress) loaded up C 1/20th SF’s computers with context-sensitive (and we do mean sensitive) filters. Want to go to Safariland and order holsters? Barrett to get some spare mags and firing pins? You can’t do that.
This site is prohibited. Reason: weapons/violence.
So we called the oxygen thieves at the state HQ (which had just, grandly, renamed itself Joint Forces HQ because it was a nest of otherwise useless Air National Guard desk jockeys along with the Army National Guard drones), and asked them to kindly remove their hindranceware from our computers. It quickly emerged that they didn’t really know how to operate the filters, and they weren’t very interested in learning, and anyway, they told us:
It’s part of the Adjutant General’s fivety-leven point plan to end workplace violence.
We had a ready reply:
Honey, we are a special forces company. We are all about workplace violence!
But no, that didn’t make an impression. Some bureaucrat from the 90% of the Army that’s flat cold terrified of firearms was going to continue to stand in the way of the 1% that actually gets an enormous kick out of using them. So, like the fabled Internet, we routed around the damage by using private computers and a wireless/cellular internet connection.
Welcome to the combat arms! This is a violence-free workplace. Lord love a duck.
Gang Homicides — Five U.S. Cities, 2003–2008
Gun violence in the United States - Wikipedia
