The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 5881 - 5900 of total 5972 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
xtrmecat

Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
Dec 31, 2014 - 05:29am PT
Healyje, your comparison for vehicles and guns is apples and watermelon.
Gun " rights " is constitutional matter.
Driving " privilege " is granted at the state level.

I do understand the inability to understand these issues by many. When I don't understand something, no matter what my personal beliefs are, I read and do research until I have a more complete understanding of an issue. This allows me to make a more informed decision on any issue and sometimes I even find I used to be very wrong and ignorant. The fear is sometimes lessened by a newfound understanding, but not always. Seeking more understanding cannot hurt.

To all others, another year has gone by and not one negative issue has resulted from my being armed all day, every day. Some of those days even around other people firing hundreds if not thousands of rounds. Most of these others are untrained and unlicensed, therefore unregulated. Statistics, should prove this the norm, if they could figure a way to measure such non issues.
Burly Bob

Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Dec 31, 2014 - 05:35am PT
Gun " rights " is constitutional matter.
Driving " privilege " is granted at the state level.

I do understand the inability to understand these issues by many.

I don't think you understand at all. Healyje is a smart man, he knows the constitution and supreme court decisions regarding firearms. I get that too.

I agree with him - it boggles the mind that firearms aren't regulated like driving privileges.

But as firepower of civilian arms continues to increase, sadly for the victims, such regulation is inevitable, the people will demand it.

Police deaths by firearms went up by 57% in 2014 according to a news blurb I saw on the telly last night...

Oh but right, we need constitutional guns to protect us from the police....

Respect to you, but I do not agree with your position.
DMT
frank wyman

Mountain climber
montana
Dec 31, 2014 - 06:36am PT
A couple of days ago some creepy looking dude came up to my house wanting to shovel the snow off the walk and driveway, since there was only a inch or two I said no thank you(I wait until there is a foot or two)Yesterday while I was at work the same guy came back to the front door, my wife(home alone)Did nothing and stayed in the kitchen.A minute later the guy is opening my storm door and trying to gain entry in MY BACKYARD!! She ran into the bedroom and grabed"THE JUDGE" where we have it hidden.She pointed it at him and started screaming to get the"HELL OUT OF HERE" One look at the 410 barrel pointed at him he took off while my wife called 911. The police arrived and then quickly drove off. A little while later they returned and said they caught up to him a few blocks away. He is now in the Lewis&Clark county jail on tresspasing charges. My wife did exactly what I told her to do,No one was hurt and "THE JUDGE" is a great deterent. She is still kind of jumpy(hearing noises in the night)But she is one hero in my book...Frank...
zBrown

Ice climber
Bruj˛ de la Playa
Dec 31, 2014 - 08:09am PT
The toddler reached into Veronica J. Rutledgeĺs purse and her concealed gun fired, Kootenai County sheriffĺs spokesman Stu Miller said. The woman, who had a concealed weapons permit, was shopping Tuesday with her son and three other children in Hayden, a politically conservative town of about 9,000 people about 40 miles northeast of Spokane, Washington.

Apparently folks living in small, conservative towns feel the need to arm up with concealed weapons. Is the place full of right-wing gangbangers?

BTW Bob

I do understand the inability to understand these issues by many.

Cash in the gun and buy yourself a mirror. A sample of size one is worthless.


Even this (possibly illegal?) 410 is not concealable in a normal sized purse.

xtrmecat

Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
Dec 31, 2014 - 09:23am PT
I agree with him - it boggles the mind that firearms aren't regulated like driving privileges.

The key terms that may be eluding you are priveledge, and rights. Rights are not granted, priveledge is. Regulate a right, maybe remove or suspend, but regulate?

Police deaths by firearms went up by 57% in 2014 according to a news blurb I saw on the telly last night...

Really, your unbiased opinion is based on a supposedly accurate telly program, with absolutely no agenda except to tell only the whole and complete truth. Perhaps I give you more credit than I should have. Really?

Hayden, a politically conservative town of about 9,000 people about 40 miles northeast of Spokane, Washington.
What? how is this pertinent to the story? To put something into context? Huh. oh well, run with it.


Apparently folks living in small, conservative towns feel the need to arm up with concealed weapons. Is the place full of right-wing gangbangers?

Your labels, although I don't know why you feel a need to label communities such as mine, are a sure indication of how true a mirror may be needed. To directly answer your question, yes, we do have a seedy sort of folks that lurk around here with the intention of doing harm. Just like frank wyman wrote of an incident in his own home, my wife had a similar incident within the last 30 days.

My less savory neighbors,"tweekers" if you will, sent one of their buddies to our front door for who knows what real reason. He claimed that he was told to come inside. My wifes refusal had to go from cordial to demanding, and if she would have to have shown him what was under the dish towel she was holding, well I am sure the Grand Jury would have also agreed with her that it was the right thing to do. He stopped trying to push his way in, temporarily.

We talk nightly on the phone when I am away, so she called early to seek advice on perhaps a better choice of firepower, should this person return later. While asking me this very question, the visiter did return, via the backyard, and tried to force a glass sliding door off the track to gain entry. He was looking through the reflective coating on the window when he realized there was a muzzle pointing at him. Even in his state of really wanting to get in, he decided that a wiser action was warranted.

When he was apprehended a few minutes later, he had a story that directly conflicted my wifes, and his plausable reason for forcing his way into our home was seen as a good enough reason to return him to society. I really hope he does no harm to anyone else, but the message was clear, wrong house. Ps, we sleep quite well, even if the neighborhood can scare some.

It really was a good thing he didn't wait for later in the night, as I am sure one of the hundred or so rounds that would have rained down on him from the upstairs would have made quite a mess of him. Yes, black rifles are more than just sporting guns.Large capacity magazine are sometimes the right tool for the job too.

Zbrown, I do look in the mirror, thanks for your concern. I do not know why you would want me to cash in my gun though. Mystery at best. More than most. I have no idea what point your picture of a shortened shotgun of limited field of fire is supposed to make. I personally have been fired upon by much bigger shotguns, yes plural, and really do not fear them as a serious weapon. They can kill, no doubt, but only when conditions favor them, lots of conditions. I think maybe you should do more research and gain a little understanding before jumping on any bandwagon. Your labels and judgements seem equally lame, but hey, thats just my opinion. We all know what an opinion is, right?

I am so glad I live in this free country to live where I wish, do as I wish, within limits of course, it has afforded me a great and wonderful life so far. What I cannot understand is most of the posters on this thread live where their rights are restricted as tightly as the law will allow, and the fear of crazies with guns is rampant. Seems us "small town conservatives with a need to arm up with concealed weapons" live with a greater sense of ease on this planet. Maybe you should try it on the other side, peace and serenity are great. Living without fear is very underrated.

Burly Bob

edited twice for some pretty funny spelling errors.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Dec 31, 2014 - 09:33am PT
Cops that let a tweaker who attempts forcible entry walk is why people feel the need to arm themselves.
Your wife should have waited until he entered and then shot him in the groin.
zBrown

Ice climber
Bruj˛ de la Playa
Dec 31, 2014 - 10:56am PT
After you get a mirror, whether you need to trade your gun for it or not, take a look and you'll see the one who has very little understanding.

Your experience over one year adds nothing to a discussion about whether concealed weapons are necessary in the conservative (not my label, the news report) town in order to safely make a trip to the Walmart.

Some of those days even around other people firing hundreds if not thousands of rounds. Most of these others are untrained and unlicensed, therefore unregulated. Statistics, should prove this the norm, if they could figure a way to measure such non issues.
.


If you live in such an area, that's your problem. Why don't you move?

A 410 is not necessarily a good deterent. Even a small one won't fit in a purse, right.

Just to be clear, if someone was attempting to break into my house I would point a weapon at him/her too. Better be careful about firing it though. Every state is not like Florida and normal citizens are often not afforded the same rights and privileges as cops in many of them.



Ricky

climber
Sometimes LA
Dec 31, 2014 - 11:08am PT

Statistics show THE JUDGE is far more likely to hurt someone you know than someone you don't know.
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Dec 31, 2014 - 11:34am PT
A 410 with a barrel shorter than 18" needs to be rifled and stockless to be legal.

The Judge is not a bad home defense piece if loaded with 250 gr .45 Colt hollow points or Winchester PDX1 Defender rounds which even in a 2.5" chamber puts out 3 plated "defense discs" as well as a dozen plated BBs. But the action on the Taurus is poor compared to my S&W Governor, which holds an extra round, is concealable, and even takes moon clips allowing much faster reloads.


We have 2 examples here of a firearm deterring crime without being fired in the personal experience out of our relatively small pool of posters, but still the anti-gunners will continue to whine about guns in the home (probably throw out the "forty-something times more likely to blah blah blah" not knowing that the Seattle Study was rigged with flawed methodology.)
xtrmecat

Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
Dec 31, 2014 - 12:20pm PT
Cops that let a tweaker who attempts forcible entry walk is why people feel the need to arm themselves.
Your wife should have waited until he entered and then shot him in the groin.

Reilly, although the theory might be justice and society would be served and better off, it always is a last resort. No one wins a gunfight, there are only survivors. Take that to the bank.

The police here are of a different thinking than the rest of the country as a whole. pretty laid back, some might even call them lazy. If not caught red handed, they always fall back on the "what do you want us to arrest him for?". They are correct, it isn't worth their time, and from my perspective, if hauled away would then have an axe to grind first thing in the morning when he gets out. This way is win/win. His mommy gets to see him again, and I rather doubt he will feel a need to return to this address. Oh, and by the way, my wifes training is under no circunstances let him enter, and center mass, no fancy shooting or creative anything. Just business at hand.


Statistics show THE JUDGE is far more likely to hurt someone you know than someone you don't know.
Ricky, care to cite? I find this odd at best.

Bob
zBrown

Ice climber
Bruj˛ de la Playa
Dec 31, 2014 - 12:48pm PT
"We have 2 examples here of a firearm [possibly] deterring crime without being fired ..."

Now for some examples of firearms not deterring a crime and/or in fact precipitating one?
Two dead NYC cops.
Twenty-six dead at Sandy Hook
Two dead cops Las Vegas

If you want to keep "impressionistic" score that comes out to 30 to 2.
Where do I place my bet?

BTW, friendly advice, even in your own home, do not point a weapon at a process server.

Have you checked out the Altadena webcam lately?

Credit: zBrown




Flip Flop

Trad climber
Truckee, CA
Dec 31, 2014 - 01:38pm PT
Kids with guns shooting their stupid ass parents. Positive Outcome. Give that kid a lolly pop.
Too soon?

Hey gun tards, you're stupid.

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 31, 2014 - 01:54pm PT

Flip Flop

Trad climber
Truckee, CA
Dec 31, 2014 - 02:05pm PT
Is that Mrs. Wallmart there?


Btw Guntards, you should look up the definition of debate. At best you polemicize. Bunch a mouth breathers.

Bob , mr aware. Define well regulated. Here's you " if I haven't died then it isn't dangerous" that sounds incredibly inane. When you go on these intellectual forays into issues, do you find yourself continuously reinforcing pre-held beliefs? Not that I care. I'm just here to kick dumbasses.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 31, 2014 - 04:02pm PT
But as firepower of civilian arms continues to increase, sadly for the victims, such regulation is inevitable, the people will demand it.

It might indeed happen, but it certainly is not inevitable. If anything, for awhile the trend has been going the other way. From a Pew Research poll comparing 2012 to 2014....

"Do you think that gun ownership in this country does more to protect people from becoming victims of crime, or does more to put people's safety at risk?"

Year: 2014 | 2012
Protect people: 57% | 48%
Put safety at risk: 38% | 37%
Unsure/Refused: 5% | 16%

The "unsure" are becoming more sure, and they are not siding with the "inevitable" direction you suggest. This is made even more clear in the following question....

"Do you support or oppose stricter gun control laws in the United States?"

Year: 2014 | 2013 | 2008
Support: 50% | 54% | 54%
Oppose: 47% | 41% | 40%
Unsure: 3% | 5% | 5%

This year saw a significant change in support of stricter gun control regulations, after a lengthy stasis of opinion. Support dropped, while, more tellingly, opposition significantly increased. The "unsure" stayed within the margin of error the same during the four-year period, so the transition came from people who had once supported stricter regulation and now oppose it.

There are many more polls like this one, and all show the same trend. It is not going the way the gun control folks would hope, and it does not denote anything approaching the "inevitability" of stricter laws.

I'll note in this context that the liberals who were touting on all sorts of threads on the taco that it was "inevitable" that the country was going to go more and more to the democrats are now strangely silent after the trouncing the republicans just handed the democrats. I am neither and think that both parties are an abomination. My point is only that the prognostications of how the country is going to go are INEVITABLY wrong.

America is a gun country, it's the only one that has guns written into its constitution, and that basic perspective is a hurdle that liberals take more lightly than they should as they prognosticate how America is going to sweepingly come to their side.

Americans may be "stupid," as Gruber states, but they are starting to tumble to the fact that mass shootings (three or more victims) inevitably take place in gun-free zones. So the sensationalization of "gun violence" by the media is beginning to have the opposite effect on public opinion than the liberals would hope.
Flip Flop

Trad climber
Truckee, CA
Dec 31, 2014 - 04:09pm PT
If you define gunFree zones as countries with real gun regulation then your talking point sounds like a bit of fox propaganda talking point designed to lull believers to do nothing.

But that's probably not you, because you're a smart person who thinks for themselves. Hell, you've been talking about gun free zones since way back.

Or, ...... You don't really get this stuff, do you?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 31, 2014 - 04:29pm PT
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 31, 2014 - 04:54pm PT
If you define gunFree zones as countries with real gun regulation....

Or, ...... You don't really get this stuff, do you?

This is not confusing. The phrase is well-defined and is never employed to talk about "countries."

Malls, theaters, schools, etc. Mass shootings always take place where citizen-owned guns are prohibited. Do you get that?
zBrown

Ice climber
Bruj˛ de la Playa
Dec 31, 2014 - 05:08pm PT
Should be turned on it's head to GunAllowed zones. This would be a reasonably small portion of the geography of the United States.

The Constitution did not address the issue of just where "the right to keep and bear arms" could be exercised as I recall, but I haven't read it lately.

Perhaps some of the scholars here can enlighten us all.






madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Dec 31, 2014 - 06:23pm PT
The Constitution did not address the issue of just where "the right to keep and bear arms" could be exercised as I recall, but I haven't read it lately.

Two things are of note to me.

1) The phrase, "... the right to..." presupposes an existing right. The 2nd amendment does not itself grant that right; the right is presumed by the amendment, and the purpose of the amendment is to clarify a limitation on the feds. To whit....

2) "Shall not be infringed" is what the feds are constrained by. So, in answer to your question of "where," the answer is "everywhere" are the feds constrained from "infringing" on the right that is presumed by the 2nd amendment.

People get hung up on what a "militia" is, and so forth. But not only is that clarified by many founders' documents, but the question is a genuine red herring. Regardless of whatever happens to the 2nd amendment or how it ultimately gets interpreted by this or that court, the right itself does not depend upon the 2nd amendment. So, even if the 2nd went away entirely, the enumerated powers clause and the 10th would also have to go away to truly and legally empower the feds to do much in the way of gun control.

Of course, the interstate commerce clause perpetually gets interpreted to mean basically anything, thereby granting the feds the exact sort of sweeping powers that the founders clearly never intended it to have. So, really, all bets are off as we head perpetually deeper into a benevolent tyranny.
Messages 5881 - 5900 of total 5972 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
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