The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 5081 - 5100 of total 5458 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Jim Brennan

Trad climber
Canada
Mar 12, 2015 - 03:21am PT
It's all relevant Jonnyrig, to all views posted.

This thread has the sport enthusiast, the cautionary tale, Colt himself as a surrogate Jesus, I shoot to feed my family, the farmer eradicating varmints, the personal preservationist and every other avenue of experience involving why they throw lead or don't.

It's a cool thread and I personally have said a lot of input here has changed my mind about why.

The Community College Philosophy Professor should protest a little less. Madbolter, I almost thought you were reasonable until you trolled out old Sam Colt and his six shooter being what makes people equal.

If that's what you truly believe, your libertarian self should really go after the no good civil and criminal legal system as a fraudulent institution.



Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Mar 12, 2015 - 06:18am PT
jonnyrig, thanks for the interesting and thoughtful reply.

So to think, as you're getting out of this thread, that he with the firearm is making claim to a superior right to self-defense is really only half-assed logic. They're not claiming superior rights, just superior armament. Or at least equal armament. A fighting chance, so to speak.

There's a mythology at play here, in some posts, of the armed citizen fighting righteously against injustice out on the street. Zimmerman fit this myth, so there are those who defend him, despite his pre and post trial record, because to do otherwise upsets the myth. One poster can't even comprehend the possibility that the self-appointed vigilante with the gun could be in the wrong, it gets him seething mad.

But to think that none of us is capable of taking on that responsibility in a nonthreatening manner, with the requisite skill and judgement to have reasonable odds of successfully defending ourselves and our loved ones is... well, pathetic.

I disagree here that it is pathetic to think that. I used to spend time with some competition shooters, steel plate and action pistol shooters. One of their topics of discussion was what they would do if someone ever f*#ked with them on the street. It was something they looked forward to happening.

These guys were experts, mind you. Bianchi Cup shooters, one was California action pistol champ.

One day some kid shoplifted a part out of a store. A chase ensued, the kid went all parkour and was going over a wall. One of the guys called upon the holy spirit of Sam Colt and was about to shoot the kid in the back when he fortunately realized what he was about to do. Shoplifting is wrong, but it's not a capital offense.

The power of life and death is heady stuff.
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Mar 12, 2015 - 06:19am PT
It's perfectly clear to me why people obsessed with guns are referred to as "nuts."
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2015 - 06:46am PT
Gary, how do you propose that smaller/weaker (perhaps due to age or disability) persons defend themselves against physical assault?

This and the "battered woman" argument is always a go to in these conversations but almost always made by physically abled men who own lots of guns. If guns were effective in preventing abuse, why is domestic abuse so rampant in America? Gun ownership in America is incredibly high and violent crime persists. There is a persistent desire among those for whom guns fulfill an emotional need to justify that need rationally or ideologically and it usually falls short. A physically superior person or someone simply armed with a melee weapon attacking a target within 20 feet who does not have their gun drawn is probably going to win the initial encounter, especially if their intent is truly to harm. Cops train for that all the time.

This debate would be a lot more honest if people would simply admit that the guns make them feel safe and powerful.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Mar 12, 2015 - 06:47am PT
For sure there are people truly "obsessed" with firearms. The same way there are true cases of obesessions with every imaginable thing there is.

For what it's worth in my several decades around firearms I've met only a handful who might fit that diagnosis.

The vast majority are normal people with normal lives.

Same goes for climbers or any other hobby. The tendency is for ignorant people who don't participate in a given activity to lash out and decree the other group as "nuts".

Ignorance with perhaps a dash of fear.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:31am PT
I'm sorry but when we are unable to pass any kind of laws related to gun ownership because a relatively few people have a stranglehold on the political process motivated by six degrees of separation slippery slope logic wherein virtually all laws or regulatory actions are motivated by the secret desire to "take all our guns away" the generalization is warranted.

Remember that time the Access Fund got a law passed forbidding contractors from offering granite countertops or gravel driveways because it would inevitably lead to the closure of all rock climbing in North America?

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/08/doctors-cant-ask-about-guns/375566/
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:43am PT
Ron, I appreciate your posts because you so plainly lay out your facile logic.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/211321-poll-most-gun-owners-support-universal-background-checks


Just because you own a gun does not mean that you want less strict gun laws nor does it mean you think that doctors talking about gun safety is just another attempt to begin "taking away all the guns." It's just paranoid delusion fueled by arms manufacturers, lobbyists and dealers such as yourself. People raked in the cash on AR-15's and other assault style weapons in the massive fear backlash after Obama's elections and Sandy Hook. Result? Lots more money in the hands of gun makers/dealers and now you can carry in National Parks! THEY ARE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS AT ANY MOMENT, RON!

Let's be honest here. A black kid with a toy gun is more likely to get killed in this country than a bunch of white guys with assault rifles aggressively confronting federal agents will even be charged with a crime.

*edit* Hell, you can be buck naked but if you're wielding blackness you're more likely to get killed than a white dude with a gun: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/10/police-shooting-unarmed-naked-man/24689183/
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Mar 12, 2015 - 09:56am PT
Wow, Jim is sundowning at dawn.

OK, this nut went shooting with Bill and Anastasia yesterday. Bill is clearly a better marksman than our green beretted friend. Of all the docs I've shot with he is clearly the best.

I think that this debate will go on endlessly,..... unless Hillary gets gets her old digs back.


I'm glad I was born when I was.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 12, 2015 - 10:04am PT
I truly don't get it. The only reason to protest background checks for private gun sales is to preserve the ability to sell guns to criminals?

It seems to me: if you sell a gun to a criminal, then you become criminal by that act. So to avoid becoming criminal, why wouldn't you want to validate the person with whom you are about to transact?

To preserve the ability to conclude the sale, bank the money and avoid scrutiny by the government. ie preserve the ability to sell guns to criminals and then lalalalalalalala I can't hear you innocent (deaf and blind) angel wings.

DMT
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Mar 12, 2015 - 10:41am PT
DMT, I know that you know there are also laws against cruelty to animals
yet whips are still legal and the horse you're beating is quite dead, so I
guess you're technically not a perp, yet. Swing by Sin City and I'll take
you on a drive-by where they don't care about no stinkin' background checks.
Criminals aren't stoopid enough to use guns they didn't steal or buy from
other criminals.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 12, 2015 - 10:46am PT
I didn't think I'd get a straight answer... ;)

DMT
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Mar 12, 2015 - 10:56am PT
Ron....i take it you're referring to the GOP side of tha asile. I agree, let's stop coddling them.
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Mar 12, 2015 - 10:59am PT
Hey Dingbat, it is not about preserving the right to sell to criminals. Any ethical person knows that guilt is attached to the crime making him an accomplice. There is no grey area. The light is either on or off.

Do you not grasp the orwellian implications of your plan?


donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Mar 12, 2015 - 11:03am PT
Referring more to criminal ignorance.
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Mar 12, 2015 - 11:30am PT
Ron posted
In fact not one gun owner I know has ever sold a gun to someone they didn't know very well.

The plural of anecdote is not "data."
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Mar 12, 2015 - 11:51am PT
The Community College Philosophy Professor should protest a little less. Madbolter, I almost thought you were reasonable until you trolled out old Sam Colt and his six shooter being what makes people equal.

Where did you get the idea that I'm a community college professor, JB?

Regarding me arguing that way, really... no. I'm saying that it's an implication of Gary's whining about gun-carriers apparently having "more of a right" to self-defense.

Personally, I think Zimmerman was an idiot. Apparently (according to a court) within his legal rights, but an idiot nevertheless. Even sticking with the real world as opposed to some fantasy-land that has Martin the "victim," Zimmerman was looking for a confrontation, and he just might have been the dead one out of it. That's always the risk in life-death confrontations!

Reasonable and responsible gun-carriers are not looking for a confrontation, because they know the profound limitations of the gun. And they know the profound legal ramifications for using it, even in a totally-justified self-defense situation.

The gun does not suddenly make you invulnerable. In fact, odds are that even well-trained shooters are going to, under life-and-death stress, not aim well and likely miss. Repeatedly. And if the confrontation is close-range enough that a miss is unlikely, that's far "too close for comfort."

Ultimately, any situation that actually did require the use of the gun is far, far too close for comfort. And the gun in no way guarantees that the outcome goes your way. And that's even before you hit the courtroom, if you live to see it!

So, yes, there are some gun-toting, wannabe Rambos that give a bad name to gun-carrying. But they are not in the majority.

I, too, have had a change of perspective during this thread. Initially I was opposed to ANY new gun-control laws. At this point I would support a well-written universal background check law.

I understand Ron's complaint about it being just another tax. That's a pain, no doubt! My worry concerns a "national gun registry," and if that can be explicitly (written into the text of the background-check statute itself) precluded, then I would support it.
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Mar 12, 2015 - 11:54am PT
The DOJ just go through with its investigation into the original Ferguson shooting and found ZERO evidence to convict the officer of anything, that after two other separate investigations. But the ones that LIED in court and to police a bout that incident walk free. They were probably the same ones to shoot two Ferguson police officers last night.

Yeah I've wondered why there won't be any charges against those who attempted to frame the cop. Seems to me that if you falsely accuse someone of crime, you should get the same sentence that your intended victim would have received.

I don't know if Holder is a criminal, but he seems to have horrendous judgment, which is an unfortunate quality for the nation's top law enforcement official.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Mar 12, 2015 - 11:55am PT
"The plural of anecdote is not "data."

I love that saying. Too bad that most people that it applies to have no idea what it means.


I got some nice 9mm hollow points the other day...anybody wanna see 'em?
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Mar 12, 2015 - 12:02pm PT
Still got a few Black Talons.

I hear that the cardboard boxes alone go for $40!
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 12, 2015 - 12:26pm PT
Do you not grasp the orwellian implications of your plan?

No, not really.

DMT
Messages 5081 - 5100 of total 5458 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews