Guns

[-Demosthenes-]

Bears. I've actually seen a thing on tv about what to do when you incounter a bear. They said the best way would be pepper spay, it was very effective. I believe Tyler was refering to bears that come near or into his home. A bear in the house could be very dangerous. It seems that a bear peppered be pepper spay would be even more dangerous than normal in a confined area like a house. It seems it would run around try to run and slash at things blindly. So in defense of his house his guns might be a little more plausible idea than if he were just a gun toting hiker.

PS:

Hey Demosthenes. I don't understand why you gave me negative rep for reply #356 but with the comment "right on!".

 

That doesn't really tell me anything dude

I meant it to be a positive one, sry. It's not like I give or take away any points anyway

PSS:

Quote:

Originally Posted by -Demosthenes-

He has a good point. There are alot of reasons to own guns, and alot of very valid and good reasons. If a law was made it would have to be carefully made so that it doesn't conflict with those reasons. If the logic is that if no one has any guns then no one will need them to protect against them(not that that is the logic that your using, just an example), then they have to consider the use of guns to protect from wild animals out in the country, and change the law to incude those peoples rights.

 

I don't know if you noticed, but for the past few hundred posts this thread has been about people demanding reasons why the average member of the public needs a gun, and they have not yet got a satisfactory answer.

 

So if you're going to solicit reputation points (which I'm pretty sure is just going to make people less likely to oblige anyway), try and do it with posts that don't say "hey let's ignore the body of the thread and just repeat the earlier problematic premise".

__________________

I will try

[Sayonara]

It seems that a bear peppered be pepper spay would be even more dangerous than normal in a confined area like a house. It seems it would run around try to run and slash at things blindly. So in defense of his house his guns might be a little more plausible idea than if he were just a gun toting hiker.

Yes, I agree.

 

However I think improving the defensive structure of the house - while possibly more expensive than a gun - would be a bit more humane.

 

I will try

Hurrah!

[atinymonkey]

You know, a badger once got into my mothers house. Made a bit of a mess and left again.

 

True story. Used the catflap.

[-Demosthenes-]

What we need to find is something so anoying that no man or beast can stand it, and then use it as a non-lethal weapon!

But anyway, I think if I lived out in the country (not that there aren't cougars around, I saw one, I promise!) that I would live to possibly have a fire arm as a list line of defence. You know if all else fails, like keeping a trump card under my bed. I don't know if it's selfish, but if it were me or the bear, I really hope it was me who won.

[atinymonkey]

I probably would too, if I lived in the county where bears/tigers/ninja monkeys prowled. But the differentiation you have to make is what is the right rule, not how many exceptions to the rule can you force. Either you think everyone has the right to arms or you think that not everyone does.

 

 

By and large, rampaging bears do not beset Washington and yet they still carry arms (not the bears, the people). The constitutional amendment was to protect from rampaging Englishmen, pointing out that in certain obscure situations a gun may be useful does not make it right. It’s like Chief Wiggum using a magnum to change the TV channel in the Simpson’s.

[-Demosthenes-]

In defence of the chief, that was Homer that used his gun to change the channel, which got him kicked out of the gun club (unless your talking about a similar episode that I have not seen).

I've heard that people shouldn't have automatic wepons. Why not? I know someone who has a 50 cal in their house. I don't exactly know why...but it's freakin' awesome. I don't feel any less safe in their house, and it's not like their goin' to carry the thing into a bank and rob it.

What's wrong with that?

[YT2095]

and just HOW do you expect a bear to enter your house?

[Sayonara]

and just HOW do you expect a bear to enter your house?

Quite. Admittedly we are a bit removed from the situation and don't have houses beset on all sides by ravenous forest-dwellers, but it seems to me that it's a problem with the house, not the bears.

 

OK, keep a gun as a last resort (given a choice in the matter, I'd rather see a bear dead than a human), but don't make it the only layer between you and them.

[YT2095]

yup! sounds about good to me too!

 

I`de just like to know how big his CAT FLAP is, actualy forget that... HOW BIG is the CAT!? )

[atinymonkey]

and just HOW do you expect a bear to enter your house?

 

With a cheery wink and a quick smile.

 

Boom boom.

 

 

Lorks alordy, I gone done some crazy brain tinking. I goes push the stick in one listing hole, and ideas gone done did tumble out the other. My I recon I gone done some high fooluting fancy panned logic right there. I kin almost taste the warder letting me high tail it out of this here institution, just so long as I stop burning folk.

 

You've got flies in your eyes, that's what's wrong with you.

[-Demosthenes-]

I never wrote that? I really never did, where is that post??

[Phi for All]

I own a handgun and a couple of rifles. I don't think they would be my first line of home defense, though. My five-year-old is too inquisitive to have them accessible. I say yes to guns, no to assault rifles and the like. Remember, in the US the Constitution grants the right to bear arms... to form an effective militia.

 

I'm a believer in the Broken-Window defense. Most violent crime happens in areas that are run-down, graffitti-covered and dirty. If a place looks like no one cares, people are more apt to commit crimes there. So if someone breaks a window, fix it. If someone tags your fence with spray paint, clean it off. Always show that you care & crime will move on to areas that don't.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Lorks alordy, I gone done some crazy brain tinking. I goes push the stick in one listing hole, and ideas gone done did tumble out the other. My I recon I gone done some high fooluting fancy panned logic right there. I kin almost taste the warder letting me high tail it out of this here institution, just so long as I stop burning folk.

 

I never wrote that? I really never did, where is that post??

Can't you tell he's sarcastic?

I think he's right.

And Phi for All is right.

[mooeypoo]

A gun is a gun whether it has two barrels or one tiny bullet.

It kills, and it is MEANT to kill.

 

Most people don't know how to use them.

 

I hope most won't forever, by the way. I truely do. But point remains they are meant to KILL just like a car is meant to carry people from place to place and a hat is meant to protect against the sun.

 

You can use a hat as a frisbie, yes, but that doesn't mean it's SUPPOSED to be a frisbie.

 

Luckily, a freesbie-hat is not as dangerous as an M16.

Or a handgun.

 

 

~moo

[-Demosthenes-]

Who cares what it's supposed to do. Why is that even relevent? Things meant to do other things can still kill people.

What is it that you want? Less people to die? You want guns to be against the law to own a gun so that only the law breakers would have guns? People who commit crimes with guns got them illeagally.

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

The primary reseaon to possess firemarms is to prevent tyranny from one's own government, not as protection from some shadowy foreign invader.

 

Stop quoting the law, we have swords. - Roman General Sulla

 

For the first time in history does a nation have complete gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient. The world will follow our lead in the future. - Adolph Hitler, 15 April 1935, in address to the Reichstag

 

 

Much more information on the importance of the 2nd amendment can be found here:

 

http://www.jpfo.org/

[Lance]

The primary reseaon to possess firemarms is to prevent tyranny from one's own government' date=' not as protection from some shadowy foreign invader.

[/quote']

 

Why don’t you give us an example of how you would use a handgun to prevent tyranny from one's own government?

 

Although I don't think that’s exactly what the amendmant says...

 

"Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership"

That’s an awfully interesting site but I don’t know about it giving information on the importance of gun ownership.

 

For the first time in history does a nation have complete gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient. The world will follow our lead in the future. - Adolph Hitler, 15 April 1935, in address to the Reichstag

 

Question: Is the following an authentic Hitler quotation?

 

"This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer' date=' our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future."

--Adolph Hitler, 1935

 

Answer: No, it's a hoax. At least nobody has been able to verify it. [/quote']

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

I took that quote from this letter (pdf link) to a Governor from a Sheriff. You will find it on the second page, after which I did a search and found several hundred references to the same quote. I however neglected to verify with the good people that run http://www.weknoweverywordadolfeveruttered.com for which I am very sorry.

 

http://www.devvy.com/pdf/SHERIFF.PDF

 

As for the link to the jpfo, the reason should be quite obvious.

[mooeypoo]

Let me get this straight.

 

The primary reseaon to possess firemarms is to prevent tyranny from one's own government, not as protection from some shadowy foreign invader.

 

Okay, so if you come to my house and surprise me for my birthday, and I blow your head off and dye my room wall gray with your brains, I was defending my second ammedment right and prevented tyrany from my own government.

 

Excuse me, but owning a gun means you are ready to KILL.

 

Not "ready to check if it is working".

 

KILL.

 

RIGHT THIS INSTANCE, maybe.

 

 

If you have any problems with your law inforcement groups, DEAL WITH THEM.

But don't take law into your own hands -- SPECIALLY if you don't know how to use a gun (and unless you're TRAINED you don't).

 

What if one day you'll make a mistake? the terrifying rapist who crawled into your daughter's room and made her scream her head off -- turns out the actually be the neighbours kid, knocking on her window to say goodnight, or scaring her as a childish prank.

 

Would you shoot him too? If you thought he was a thief or a rapist you would.

 

Well.. I guess I am CERTAIN now that I am going to check EXTRA EXTRA well who my neighbours are.

 

And Demonsthene:

 

Who cares what it's supposed to do.

Is that a joke?

 

If guns are MEANT TO KILL, don't go around telling me they don't.

 

If anyone is having a gun at their house (and I had guns for three years) they're taking a CHANCE - not "protecting their home". If anything happens, call POLICE don't go around playing with a loaded gun.

 

"Bowling for Columbine" people. You seriously need to see that movie.

 

~moo

[mooeypoo]

oh, yes, excuse me but I just thought of something:

 

For the first time in history does a nation have complete gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient. The world will follow our lead in the future. - Adolph Hitler, 15 April 1935, in address to the Reichstag

 

Other than the fact this quote just NOT WORKING (dude, look at the news!! more than 11,000 killed a year in the US from guns!! where is that safer?!?!?), I also was quote baffled to see you pick THIS SPECIFIC ONE to prove your point.

 

DUDE

 

it was said by hitler.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't WANT to be in a country Hitler saw in his vision.

 

SPECIALLY if I quote a site called "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership".

 

 

that hitler quote really destroyed your entire argument, I gotta say.

 

~moo

[Sayonara]

Who cares what it's supposed to do. Why is that even relevent? Things meant to do other things can still kill people.

Because when you go out and buy a gun you know perfectly well you are paying for a device which is specifically designed to kill quickly and effectively.

Even a crackdown on illegal firearms and more stringent registration preocedures wouldn't necessarily stop a lot of gun crime, but as we discussed a few pages ago it would make investigation of those crimes a bit easier.

 

For the first time in history does a nation have complete gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient. The world will follow our lead in the future. - Adolph Hitler, 15 April 1935, in address to the Reichstag

Now someone can just invoke Godwin's Law and end the discussion. Nice one.

[Phi for All]

This is such a tricky issue. I own guns because I'm allowed to, and because taking away any of my rights makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up (btw, I had it braided in cornrows when the Patriot Act was rammed through). Beyond the reasons sited in this thread, I think the worst thing about owning a gun for protection is that it's the first thing you think of whenever you perceive a threat. The chances are so small that the threat will be best met by lethal force. Having my gun at full ready on the off-chance that a true crazy has targeted me is ludicrous. You may say I'd be thankful I had it ready for the 1 chance in 100,000 I'd need it, but odds like that give me no comfort.

 

Younger people have better reflexes than I do (there, I admitted it, with another birthday looming). They must, otherwise why would they think they're safe driving 1 car-length away from the car in front of them at 70 mph? Statistics tell me the person breaking into my house with lethal intent will be at least twenty years younger than I am. Why should I go for my gun thinking I could shoot them before they shoot me?

 

Tell me how I can accurately identify a true lethal threat so I won't be putting large holes in everything.

[YT2095]

Because when you go out and buy a gun you know perfectly well you are paying for a device which is specifically designed to kill quickly and effectively.

is that so? that thought NEVER ONCE crossed my mind with any of my purchases? so your statement although true in SOME instances, is not the totality of it

 

a gun is Not intended to kill anything, it`s intended to eject a projectile (usualy metalic) at sufficient velocity to reach an intended point. nothing more nothing less. the INTENTION to do harm comes from the gun holder! )

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

Other than the fact this quote just NOT WORKING (dude, look at the news!! more than 11,000 killed a year in the US from guns!! where is that safer?!?!?), I also was quote baffled to see you pick THIS SPECIFIC ONE to prove your point.

 

11,000 people killed per year by other Armed citizens, WWII and beyond saw the extermination of MILLIONS of UNARMED citizens by GOVERNMENT FORCES. In 6 years, several million Jews & others of Germany were not killed by invading armies, they were slaughtered by their own gov't that had legalized the murder of 'undesirables.'

 

Even at 11,000 killings per year it would take almost 100 years of that to equal a tiny fraction of the defenseless people who have been massacred simply because they could be.

 

Most citizens will use firearms responsibly, as most military personel will as well, yet there is always the danger that once something has been 'outlawed' i.e. being Jewish, homosexual, intellectual etc. there are some people that will use that as excuse to commit atrocities.

 

Gun ownership by the general population is to prevent this very thing from happening, for would you let some government thug kill (remember it is 'legal' for him to do so as he is just following orders) your neighbor, your mother or your son if you could stop them?

 

Also keep in mind that some of those wonderful soldiers torturing Iraqis to death today will be America's policemen tomorrow.

 

So endth the lesson.

[Phi for All]

Gun ownership by the general population is to prevent this very thing from happening, for would you let some government thug kill (remember it is 'legal' for him to do so as he is just following orders) your neighbor, your mother or your son if you could stop them?

Since it is legal for "them" to shoot my mother if they concoct a reason, but illegal for me to shoot "them" before they can, won't I find my house surrounded by SWAT teams or targeted by military smart weapons if I try? Then I lose my mother, my son, my neighbor AND myself.

 

The 2nd Ammendment states that, due to the necessity of maintaining a well-regulated militia, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If you think having guns in your house makes you safe from your own government, think again. Maybe you should try to form a well-regulated militia in your neighborhood. Get some training in firearms, look for the signs of neglect that criminals are drawn to, spruce things up a bit, work with local law enforcement and neighborhood watches and maybe you will be taking some positive measures towards keeping yourself safe. Otherwise you're just another armed crazy in a compound.