User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:13:18 PM EDT
[#1]
I'd be a little confused by that one too. A pro gunner (unconfirmed at this point) would be upset at someone carrying a loaded handgun, when most of us pro gunners push for concealed carry laws.
I feel in the case of the BRC, the wishes of the hosts, and local laws should be obeyed to the letter (however stupid and backwards the laws are). The BRC should be about enjoying our sport and pasttime, and not neccessarily making some kind of statement. That guy has a right to be concerned for the safety of his children, but has to be careful not to be hypocritical in expressing it, given the forum and group and the event in question. M@ |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:20:21 PM EDT
[#2]
Then he should leave his duaghter at home, If he is afraid of having his her near "loaded weapons". It is statements like this that divide us and contribute to the erosion of our rights. I would assume by that the author of this post does not own or carry a firearm? If he does, maybe he should pull it out of his own ass, and grow up. This guy is probably one of the people who complain about people with kids at gun shows and the range, then he brings his own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:26:26 PM EDT
[#3]
As stated before, this is not about the BRC. They have made their decision and I will support it.
I guess I am trying to figure out how we can come together to help further our cause instead of hurting it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:26:53 PM EDT
[#4]
I agree when the topic of carrying at the BRC was brought up a couple of people said they didn't like the idea, WTF!! I'm still in awe that anyone here except a [:K] would say that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:34:23 PM EDT
[#5]
I think VAgunnut has a good point. On the surface it looks like we are all on the same page, but are we really ? Do we want ALL of the freedom that the second amendment was supposed to guarantee us ? Or just some of it ? Where do you/we draw the line when it comes to gun laws ? I bet it varies much more then most people think.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:36:32 PM EDT
[#6]
Stealth that is an excellant point. I think you hit the nail right on the head.
Edited to say: Stealth had something good posted, I don't know what the hell happened to it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:38:50 PM EDT
[#7]
Whoever said, NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, said it all. This is not the place for some tough-guy political statement. I plan to bring my wife, & possibly my 15 month old daughter. Are you telling me you would endanger the life of my baby so you can make some kind of STATEMENT? Accidents happen, & your preaching to the choir at this event any way. Call your congressman if you want to make a point. Otherwise, grow up. [red]Carry a loaded weapon in the vicinity of my baby, & I'll shove it up your ass sideways[/red]. rant off Well, I missed this thread, but it proves the point. If a fellow gun owner won't trust you to carry a weapon, why would an anti-gun person trust you to even [i]own[/i] a gun? I wonder if this wonderful person will freak out if full auto weapons are present? Who knows what could happen?!?!? Maybe some thug will attack him, his wife and his 15 mo/old daughter, and then he will be crying for someone with a gun to come around (police, or wishing an armed citizen had intervened). Yes, this is a SAD COMMENTARY on the state of gun owners. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:44:15 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: Stealth that is an excellant point. I think you hit the nail right on the head. Edited to say: Stealth had something good posted, I don't know what the hell happened to it. Sorry... hit the delete key while gabbing with friends. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:51:58 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Whoever said, NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, said it all. This is not the place for some tough-guy political statement. I plan to bring my wife, & possibly my 15 month old daughter. Are you telling me you would endanger the life of my baby so you can make some kind of STATEMENT? Accidents happen, & your preaching to the choir at this event any way. Call your congressman if you want to make a point. Otherwise, grow up. [red]Carry a loaded weapon in the vicinity of my baby, & I'll shove it up your ass sideways[/red]. rant off [:O] WTH? First off, how does he expect to "shove it up your ass sideways" when the guy is ARMED! Try to do that to me and I'll shoot you. Second, ND can happen to ANY gun, whether on the range or carrying it around. So HE is endangering his wife by bringing her to the BRC at all. Finally, makes me sick to think a supposed pro-gunner would say that, and the runners of the BRC would agree with him(by not allowing carrying of weapons at the BRC.) F the law. "A law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void"- Marbury vs Madison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:57:41 PM EDT
[#10]
Ahh yes, my very first locked topic. Read it [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=104938]Here[/url]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 2:58:58 PM EDT
[#11]
liberty76,
I enjoy reading your posts, but like I said the BRC is not the focus here. Not to mention the BRC is going to be on private property so the constitution has nothing to do with you carry on someone elses property that doesn't want you to. I would also appreciate it if you would edit some of your post out so this topic doesn't get locked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:01:06 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Ahh yes, my very first locked topic. After all those posts and that was your first locked topic? Man you must be doing something wrong [;)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:06:26 PM EDT
[#13]
Unfortunately, even people who count themselves as "pro-gun-Rights" are often among those who would restrict the rights of others in a mistaken belief that they are making things safer. That is how pervasive the anti-gun message is. Pro-Rights, pro-Constitutional Government folks are under attack from ALL SIDES, and we are DIVIDED.
We've allowed our children to be sent to Government Schools to be indoctorinated as non-thinking, non-questioning socialists. We've allowed moral relativism to be the standard. And we're allowing the socialists to use our individuality against us. It is likely that we will continue to see our Rights eroded away until we either submit, or decide TOGETHER that it is better to fight and die than to (continue to) live like slaves. One person can't fight (politically or physically) alone, nor can small, isolated groups. See Ruby Ridge and Waco for examples. We must fight TOGETHER, or we'll end up being crushed alone, a little bit at a time. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:12:10 PM EDT
[#14]
The poster wasn't saying that he didn't think people should carry loaded weapons around, he was just saying that he didn't want YOU people to be carrying loaded guns around.
Big difference! [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:22:59 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: The poster wasn't saying that he didn't think people should carry loaded weapons around, he was just saying that he didn't want YOU people to be carrying loaded guns around. Big difference! [:D] I missed that point, maybe you are right. I forgot the kind of people that we are dealing with around here [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:25:30 PM EDT
[#16]
As long as we continue to see things like this, we shall remain too damn polarised on the issue to hope to win.
What was it Franklin said - "If we do not all hand together, we shall surely all hang seperately." If you don't trust us - DON'T GO. I tend to trust Armed Citizens more than I trust most LE personnel with sidearms anyhow - the average Armed Citizen has more practise. I do not intend to disparage LEO's in any wise, but their recent track record re: ND incidents is not encouraging... How many Armed Citizen ND's have we been talking about here lately? How many LEO ND's? Answer my question for me... I don't think I need to explain further. FFZ |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:28:04 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: One person can't fight (politically or physically) alone, nor can small, isolated groups. See Ruby Ridge and Waco for examples. We must fight TOGETHER, or we'll end up being crushed alone, a little bit at a time. -Troy That is my point, but how do we come together to stop us from being "crushed"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 3:51:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Seriously, gun owners are people. People disagree. Get two gun-owners together and you're gonna get at least three opinions. ND's are a reality, and gun-owners who don't acknowledge that bad things can happen with guns are the most dangerous of all. If gun-owners are such universally perfect creatures, why does EVERY range have safety rules?
It is unrealistic to expect everyone to think the same way about *anything*, even here. we love to speak in ideal terms, but the reality isn't that way. Or to put it another way: People suck. [:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:12:19 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: If gun-owners are such universally perfect creatures, why does EVERY range have safety rules? Insurance purposes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:21:58 PM EDT
[#20]
If gun owners are really making these comments then I believe that we will all soon lose our rights. I don't know who you were quoting, but he sounds like a troll to me. I doubt that whoever it is, is really pro gun.
Edited to say that I voted positive though, because I will not give up hope. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:23:51 PM EDT
[#21]
Ok, to the point: Do YOU trust ALL gun owners?
Would you want your wife or kids (or anybody you care about) to go to a range or shooting area that you know is completely unregulated? In case ou were wondering, No, I don't, and no, I wouldn't... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:27:19 PM EDT
[#22]
If you're honest and admit that you don't trust all people with guns, then who do you trust? How do you tell that you can trust them? By what criteria do you judge?
Is there anybody you trust completely with guns and anybody you don't? Articulate your reasons, if you can. And why are there so many "dumb things you've seen people do at the range" or "dumb gun owners" threads? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:30:41 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Ok, to the point: Do YOU trust ALL gun owners? More to the point: Does your personal, subjective [i]lack of trust[/i] supercede the constitutional right of another? The poll numbers, as well as some of the prior comments have this correct. We are screwed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:54:20 PM EDT
[#24]
I carry a pistol quite frequently and have no problem with others doing so-but my initial reaction to the range issue was that having a "hot" range was not safe. Maybe I am just brain washed from having been taught that was how ranges were to be run since I was a child.
Perhaps I am being hypocritical, but while I support others rights to bear arms, I would not hunt with people I did not know and was not comfortable with their gunhandling skills. I have no problem with anyone who wants to meet me with their loaded pistol holstered and go out for wings, but that does not mean that I would agree to being on a hot range with loaded pistols and rifles with a large group of men whose skills and training I knew nothing about, nor would I expect them to feel the same way towards me. I think there is some kind of difference between carrying generally and a range situation. I don't think an objection to a range being run "hot" can be fairly equated with one not being a firm support of the RKBA. However I find the post quoted at the beginning very offensive. This is an issue that reasonable men can certainly disagree on and resorting to I'm right and I'll kick your ass sets my teeth on edge. I don't think this site is the best forum for the threatening of ass kickings as we are probably not the kind of folks to take kindly to such talk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 4:59:56 PM EDT
[#25]
we could win this, but it would require a lot of education. i know most gun owners are very safe and responsible. however, there are those few yahoos that do stupid things at the range or where ever that give gun owners a bad name (aside from criminals). also, all the anti-guns that think pistol grips on rifles allow spray fire from the hip. you know how much easier it is to hold a normal stock on a rifle or shotgun at your hip rather than a pistol grip! i say a demonstration is in order. "The flash suppressor allows the shooter to remain concealed when shooting at night" (http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunlaws/awb.asp) how the hell could you remain concealed when firing a gun at night?! lets line up some people and open fire in the middle of the night and see if the bradys can find them. "When San Jose police test-fired an UZI, a 30-round magazine was emptied in slightly less than two seconds on full automatic while the same magazine was emptied in just five seconds on semi-automatic" (same source) yeah right. was that controlled accurate fire or pulling the trigger as fast as you can? idk about you guys, but i plan on sending the brady campaign a letter. :)
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence 1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 Brady Campaign Phone: (202) 898-0792 Brady Campaign Fax: (202) 371-9615 Brady Center Phone: (202) 289-7319 Brady Center Fax: (202) 408-1851 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 5:01:57 PM EDT
[#26]
I wasn't really talking about safe ranges, but I was talking about carrying a gun. The response that bugged me was the one about people carrying guns. Not about Hot or Cold ranges.
I will answer your question but it can't be a simple yes or no answer. Can you absolutely trust anyone, more then likely not. You have to gain trust of those you meet and associate with. Can you trust the vast majority of gun owners when you go to a range, or at least trust that nothing bad will happen while you are at the range, well yes you would have to, or you wouldn't go to the range in the first place. I guess by your answer that you wouldn't bring your wife or kids to the range to shoot. We have all read the dumb gun owners stories and the stupid person at the range stories as well. I don't recall to many people at ranges getting shot despite all these stories. If anything most of the AD's happen at home when people think that the guns are unloaded. Once you start to assume everyone's gun is unloaded then accidents happen. If you treat every gun as it is loaded (like you are supposed to) then the chances of the ND are reduced. But in the end I was still talking about carrying your gun. Do you believe that you are safer if the people around you are unarmed or (legally) armed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 5:05:43 PM EDT
[#27]
Barbarossa I repeat BARBAROSSA
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 5:12:57 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: but that does not mean that I would agree to being on a hot range with loaded pistols and rifles with a large group of men whose skills and training I knew nothing about, nor would I expect them to feel the same way towards me. But you do agree to be on a hot range, there is just as much chance of a ND and someone getting hurt while the range has been called hot more so then when it has been called cold. You have to have some level of trust or you woudn't shoot at a public range. The way we work the shoots around here is this, When the range is cold cold, you put your rifles down and they should be unloaded but at least put on safe and pointed in a safe direction. All pistols should be holstered and no gun handling should be going on during this time period. We allow your pistols to be loaded as long as they are holstered. I don't see how there is anymore of a chance of someone having a ND this way, then lets say someone thinking the gun was unloaded and it staying in the holster. Simple rule, don't touch the guns while the range is called cold, loaded or not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 5:29:26 PM EDT
[#29]
While I agree that the guy is a hypocrite, I wouldn't be too hard on him. He is overreacting concerning the safety of his 15 month old daughter. What good father doesn't sometimes overreact to some extent?z
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 5:49:10 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Ok, to the point: Do YOU trust ALL gun owners? Would you want your wife or kids (or anybody you care about) to go to a range or shooting area that you know is completely unregulated? In case ou were wondering, No, I don't, and no, I wouldn't... Then why should *we* (society) trust you? Why should we trust you to even own a gun? Why should we trust you at the range? Why should we trust you for open carry? Why should we trust you with a CCW license? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 6:28:44 PM EDT
[#31]
So far the majority thinks we are doomed to failure in the end. Lets just hope you guys are wrong.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2002 9:36:24 PM EDT
[#32]
Too many people are satisfied with compromised (politically expedient) 2nd Amendment rights and rationalize their decision as if the ONLY choices are less gun rights or lots less gun rights.
Enjoy your guns while you can boys, they ain't gonna be legal much longer! Woo hoo! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 12:58:47 AM EDT
[#33]
Having my daughter was one reason that I started to carry!! She is so important to me thta I made a decision to carry a loaded weapon to protect her.
But the gun community has been divided for a long time. Hunters v. Sport Utility owners v. Rich Collectors V....... Only when THEIR weapons are threatened, do they fret and worry. If we don't want to end up like England, we need to support each niche of the gun community, and fight for the right to carry, weather or not we choose to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 1:24:40 AM EDT
[#34]
One thing is for damned sure, I looked at 72% of you guys saying that we are going to lose, and am pissed. How can we possibly expect to win when we have defeated ourselves?? Yes there is too much division amongst us, and yes that could very well prove to be our undoing. I for one intend to do everything in my power to see that day never comes. Think how history would read if the men who founded this nation had held this attitude. I am ashamed as you should be that so many have resigned to lose their rights. So many who claim not to want that. While I admit that I see the logic behind some of the gun legislation, and even agree with it, I do not support any of it because the powers that be will take a mile if given an inch. Fight back. But do it intelligently, rather than angrily. You will win more friends and influence more people. Those who do not wish to listen, leave behind and move on to find someone that will. Try to appeal to those of similar ideals, but not identicle, and if you fail, move on. Common sense ain't so common, so hlep the process along, point out the things people are missing.
I must admit that until very recently I was very much in the dark as to just how grim the future appears to be for law abiding gun owners, and I must say that it is not promising. However I have begun to activate myself for this cause, and will not stop. If you would accept defeat as inevitable, then lay down your arms right now, and walk away from the fight as you will only be in the way of those of us still fighting. Otherwise, lift your heads, raise your voice (when necessary), be heard, be seen, be right, be true, and so not stop until the fight is over. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 3:02:17 AM EDT
[#35]
I find it interesting that the poster didn't have a problem with the Security Agents or attending Police carrying loaded guns around his 15 mo/old.
I guess Security and the Cops are "trained" and "trustworthy", whereas we normal plebes can't be trusted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 3:43:35 AM EDT
[#36]
I will say that it is nice that some folks are as dedicated to working to further the cause of all gun owners. I don't expect every gun owner to agree on every point in life. People in the same families are lucky if they can do that. But I don't see how gun owners don't wish to support other gun owners on whatever gun issue they feel important about wether they agree or not. I know plenty of fellow hunters that don't own one "assault rifle" and they still are willing to help fight to allow the ban to sunset. To all those who are willing to try to keep the end from coming I said congrtulations, and to those that feel the end is inevitable don't give up hope.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 6:01:31 AM EDT
[#37]
Obviously, the anti-gunners propaganda is working when even gunowners are scared of guns.
I believe a hot range can be safe, but safety enforcement must be ruthless. Everyone must understand where they can and cannot handle their firearm. "Here is the handling area, muzzles that way, there is the range you may unholster you weapon in either of these two places. Anywhere else, holster your sidearm and keep your hands off it. Fail to observe these rules and you will be asked to unload, show clear and leave the property. No warning, no second chance." In short, when carrying around others, you must act like a professional and take responsiblity for your actions. I have been to IDPA events where the first stop was the unloading table, because the range was run cold. Even then, if you unholstered you pistol and were not on the range or designared safe area, you would be sent home. Many ranges are run cold due to insurance requirements, and that is likely to be a fact of life at many ranges. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 6:07:10 AM EDT
[#38]
I see noboby really answered my question about ALWAYS trusting ALL gun owners, instead wanting to discuss this in more general and abstract terms. (Here I go stirring up shit again, but I'm really curious what you guys think about these issues.)
This is a problem. I personally don't trust just anybody with a gun any more than I trust just anybody with a car, or an airplane, or a nuclear power plant. Would you all somehow allow unrestricted access and use of these things? People who use these things should be [b]trained[/b] and somehow [b]certified[/b] in their safe use. That training can come from an informal source (like a family member) or from a group or organization (like the NRA, the CPRA, etc.). The certification is the sticky part- I'd think something like a national CCW would be ideal, but I'm alot more comfortable with state equivalents. Look at how much misinformation there is right here on this site! And this is a place where the level of education about guns is pretty high... I'm not smart enough to argue this issue on "constitutional" grounds, all I can do is support gun ownership and fight to keep it as free as possible. What I do understand is the reaction non-gunowners have- they think guns are dangerous (they are!) and are afraid of them because of that. What I think gunowners don't often address are the problems associated with guns on a practical level, as that's where most of the objections from the anti's come from. They lump together the gangbangers, drive-by shooters, school shootings/Columbine, and the accidental deaths from negligent gun owners leaving their loaded weapons around for kids and neighbors to find. I hope this is a little more clear. Edited to add- I feel safer when [b]I[/b] am carrying, but get nervous around others with guns, until I have some assurance they know what they're doing. That's why I'm always in condition yellow while at the range and prefer to have a loaded gun on my hip or in my back pocket. Maybe it's a California thing- you should see the people at the range... [:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 6:42:58 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: I see noboby really answered my question about ALWAYS trusting ALL gun owners.....People who use these things should be trained and somehow certified in their safe use..... That makes gun ownership a priviledge, not a right. Do we certify people before we allow them their 1st Amendment rights? The right to free speech, the right to attend a church of their choice? I think you need to rethink your angle on this issue. You ask that people prove their trustworthyness. That is a presumption of guilt. To have a viable right, we must trust one another until given a reason NOT to trust. Innocent until proven guilty. I have been in the situation of defending a questionable gun owner at a gravel pit. My fellow shooters wanted to call the cops on him when he had done nothing wrong. I defended him. When I found out he was a danger, I was ready to shoot him and did report him to the police. Innocent until proven guilty. Trusted until proven untrustworthy. Read my story at [url=http://www.alpharubicon.com/survpage/crazedoldman.htm]Crazy Old Man[/url] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 6:52:00 AM EDT
[#40]
Paul,
Gun ownership is a right that requires some regulation in how it is exercised. We accept all sorts of regulation, including restrictions on age, types of weapons we are allowed, felon status, etc. It seems you agree, all gun owners are not to be trusted all the time. Some regulation is necessary, right? So who decides,and how? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 7:17:13 AM EDT
[#41]
One more quick thought:
If you want to know why our gun rights *may* be "doomed", I believe that it's stupid gun owners that have ruined it for the rest of us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 7:20:31 AM EDT
[#42]
DScott,
I think thaqt most of us here don't trust every gunowner unconditionally, however the point people are making is that we have absolutely no right to tell someone else they don't have a right to own firearms for protection or recreation. If I am uncomfortable with someone, I don't usually spend a lot of time associating with them. I don't seek to deprive them of their rights so that I will feel a little safer. Statistics show that the overwhelming majority of gunowners, especially CCW holders, are the most law-abiding citizens. THerefore, statistically one can reasonably assume that another gunowner will not try and intentionally hurt you. Furthermore, in the case of CCW, most states require that CCW holders go through a training class before they are issued a permit. I do feel safer around individuals who carry, for the simple reason that I know that they are trained and if I were attacked would probably help me protect myself. On the issue of our gun rights, I think one major problem is that the majority of the public is completely uneducated on our Constitution and how our government is supposed to operate. Usually if I get into an argument or begin to explain to people about gun control, I always point out first that gun control is unconstitutional and weakens our system of government. Basically, the Supreme Court's power is lessened every time they refuse to hear a case on gun control laws. Gun control laws by default amend the constitution without going through the formal process required to amend the constitution. Who's to say Congress won't start to amend other portions of the constitution? Anyway, my point is that I think a lot of our problem is that many people, including a lot of gunowners, don't understand the Constitution or its significance to our lives. If we can educate people on the constitution, maybe some of those people who have no interst in guns whatsoever will realize that the gun control battle is their fight too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 7:26:56 AM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Paul, Gun ownership is a right that requires some regulation in how it is exercised. We accept all sorts of regulation, including restrictions on age, types of weapons we are allowed, felon status, etc. It seems you agree, all gun owners are not to be trusted all the time. Some regulation is necessary, right? So who decides,and how? No, regulation isn't necesary. All regulation leads to restricts, it's just the nature of the beast. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Pretty clear to me. The only necessary regulation is regulation on the ACTIONS YOU TAKE. So, you ask "won't that cause chaos?" "we limit your 1st amendment rights, you can't yell "fire" in a theatre. Well, you DO have a right to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. You just have to deal with the consequences of your decision. 1. if there really is a fire, you are a hero 2. if there isn't a fire, you can be arrested for infringing on the rights of others. The right of the theatre to sell it's tickets, the right of the patrons to watch the movie they paid for, maybe the right for them to be safe, if anyone got hurt rushing out of the building. You have the right to shoot anyone you want. Again, you have to deal with the consequences. Justified self defense - you are fine. Murder - the state may take your life. We need to get back to personal responsibility in this country. All the laws and regulations in the world can't stop the crime and problems. Only responsibility and consequences. I've followed all the laws and regulations to get my weapons. I've taken courses, I can get certifications. None of that will stop me from doing something illegal or immoral, if I choose. Only consequences and personal responsibility can affect my choices and behavior. Felons shouldn't be walking the streets if we can't trust them to carry firearms. If they are safe to release, restore their rights. Anyone that is so mentally ill they can't be trusted with a gun should be institutionalized. They aren't safe to be walking the streets without a gun. They could use a knife, a car, whatever to harm others. Regulating guns infringes on my 2nd Amendment rights, PERIOD. It's a band-aid approach to the real problems in our society and it DOES NOT WORK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 4:26:14 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: I see noboby really answered my question about ALWAYS trusting ALL gun owners, instead wanting to discuss this in more general and abstract terms. I don't believe it is a abstract discussion when I said that you must have trust to attend a shooting range. If you didn't have trust you wouldn't be there. You may be cautious but that is not the same as distrust. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 6:58:50 PM EDT
[#45]
Frankly, I find all gun laws silly for a most basic reason - THEY DON'T ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUE.
If you wife is murdered by someone, do you care if the gun: - is preban or postban? - full auto or semi auto? - magazine fed or single shot? - bought at a gun shop, a gun show, or out of the back of a van? - black plastic or beautiful wood? - a 1000 yard 50 cal bmg or a 3 ft shooting Lorinco? - truly a gun or a knife or a plastic bag? - was bought instantly or had a 15 day waiting period? - was carried concealed or open? - was cheap or expensive? - was made from USA parts or foreign parts? [b]HELL NO! WHO CARES?[/b] These are meaningless minutia. What you care about is JUSTICE. Catching the perpetrator of the murder and bringing them to justice. What you care about is the ACTION, not the means. For those that say a certain type of weapon is easier to conceal, shoots farther, is more lethal, whatever, WHO CARES?!?? A bad guy that intends to kill will find another means. Take away the guns and they will use knives. Take away the knives and they will use scissors. And so on and so on and so on. Take it all away and they will still find a means. Don't think so? Check the murder rate in a prison sometime. FOLKS - IT'S ALL ABOUT THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY BAD PEOPLE - NOT THE TOOLS THEY USE. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 7:30:29 PM EDT
[#46]
There are two kinds of kids in my house, those who are around guns with me and those who will eventually be allowed to be around guns without me. Who else has a gun on them or with them is a non-issue to me. If I am there I will spot the idiot making a mistake. If your kid is old enough/responsible enough to shoot without you they will spot the idiot too. And sometimes, well you don't see it coming, that is life. I won't raise my kid to live every day in fear.
I do however reserve the right to shoot any idiot who makes a mistake with a gun that causes my family or friends pain. We will overcome the gun laws, because like any issue, it only takes a very vocal minority to win. It blows my mind how many people even on this site seem to have forgotten "failure is not an option". |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/4/2002 8:09:03 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: I see noboby really answered my question about ALWAYS trusting ALL gun owners, instead wanting to discuss this in more general and abstract terms. I don't believe it is a abstract discussion when I said that you must have trust to attend a shooting range. If you didn't have trust you wouldn't be there. You may be cautious but that is not the same as distrust. Basically I do have enough trust to be there, but like I said earlier, it's because I have some reasons to believe that is a safe place to shoot. Part of the reason it's safer is because there are RO's, safety rules, and ranges are places safe shooters go to shoot. If I could attend the BRC, I'd be quite comfortable knowing most there are safe and will help maintain that safety. As to the larger issue of gun rights, I think we (all gunowners) have a terrible PR problem- most people don't think about guns at all unless the terrible consequences of some idiot's gun use is thrust in their faces on the nightly news. Then they see only the negative side of guns. Frankly, only a very small number of people care at all about the 2nd amend., but they see dead people and look for simple answers. Paul is right, it's the user not the tool, but the average person doesn't go that far in their thinking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2002 3:47:22 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: We will overcome the gun laws, because like any issue, it only takes a very vocal minority to win. It blows my mind how many people even on this site seem to have forgotten "failure is not an option". Well said, and thank you. If we accept defeat as inevitable and only seek ot delay it, that is all that will be accomplished. Many things prove the self fulfilling prophesy theory, DON'T let this be one of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2002 4:05:51 PM EDT
[#49]
In response to the following quote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whoever said, NEGLIGENT DISCHARGE, said it all. This is not the place for some tough-guy political statement. I plan to bring my wife, & possibly my 15 month old daughter. Are you telling me you would endanger the life of my baby so you can make some kind of STATEMENT? Accidents happen, & your preaching to the choir at this event any way. Call your congressman if you want to make a point. Otherwise, grow up. Carry a loaded weapon in the vicinity of my baby, & I'll shove it up your ass sideways. rant off -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is exactly the problem we all face as defenders of the 2nd Amend. No wonder the anti-gun weirdos have made so many strides to unarm America when even gun owners have reservations about the right to carry. When I heard the BRC policy on carrying I decided that out of protest I won't be going. Too bad I was looking forward to this event. But I believe the 2nd Amendment is there for a reason and do not stand for its erosion by any means. I do hope the BRC is a success for those who attend but couldn't see going with people like that at the event. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2002 7:20:37 AM EDT
[#50]
Quoted: I see noboby really answered my question about ALWAYS trusting ALL gun owners That's because your question is, frankly, irrelevant, and most here know that already. The fact you believe you're asking something significant or useful with the concern over trusting [i]every[/i] gun owner casts you as a leftist, driven compulsively to pursue a world where he lives without any fear. Such a compulsion, on a mass scale, is historically more dangerous than the bogeymen that motivate it. And comparing the rest of your post to my own former political leanings - it's fairly obvious to me that there is no essential difference in how you formulate your approach to freedom than how a leftist does. First, take an abstract, emotional plea, no matter how statistically insignificant, and strike a little fear in one's neighbors about themselves. Then, promote restrictions that attenuate that fear. And care not for the systemic consequences once emotions are placated. Repeat, and [i]freedom from fear[/i] is incrementally purchased, piecemeal, with [i]rights.[/i] Non-liberals worry most about consolidations of state power over civilians, knowing the tragic, historical nature of men to abuse that power once it is sufficiently enticing. "Practical concerns about safety" run a distant second for anyone who knows history, and is aware of those enduring human appetites. That's just the way a liberty-minded citizenry operates. It may make you uncomfortable to accept that, but you don't have a choice. Don't like it? Go elsewhere. Perhaps France. Secondly, that essential paranoia - that fear of others who you don't "trust" exercising the same freedom you wish to preserve for yourself - reminds me of all my old Marxist friends, constantly proclaiming [i]their[/i] fitness for liberties, while suspecting everyone else's. I'm not surprised, frankly, that you hail from CA. There's a reason that state has gone mad. The bottom line is, if you constantly strive for emotional comfort, you do not strive to remain free. Abstract, perhaps, but true. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
