Do You Carry A Gun? - Page 76 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

SamInTheSouth · #**1126** (**permalink**) 12-18-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Proof?

Leg shots are remarkably fatal. There are large vessels that can bleed a person out in a minute if ruptured,

That's how Sean Taylor died last week.

EricOKC · #**1127** (**permalink**) 12-18-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamInTheSouth

That's how Sean Taylor died last week.

That's because he was shot by a bad guy. Cops in whatever silly assed country Wallaroo mentioned are specially trained to be able to hit a person's leg, as he is moving, with only one shot, and NEVER hit a vital location.

crisis · #**1128** (**permalink**) 12-18-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

And, in this case, the behavior resulted in the attacker being shot.

Look, I'm about as far from being a religious zealot as you can get but, having actually used a weapon on people, I can certainly understand someone praying when they do so, and I don't have the slightest problem with that...

Yes as usual EricOCK ends up getting us so far from the point of the topic we are now arguing in ever diminishing circles about largely irrelevant minutiae. I bought it up only to illustrate how, with such a level of gun proliferation, weapons can find themselves into the hands of people deluded so. The frantic cries of how fantastic it was that in this case a private citizen had a gun handy are clutching at straws in a tragic situation.
In this case the gun owner shot the antagonist who then turned a gun on himself. It proves nothing to argue either that he may have killed himself at that point or that that she may have precipitated those actions.
Further to argue how wonderful having your citizens armed for such an occurrence ignores the fact that such a level of weapons proliferation and such a wide acceptance of gun ownership is in part responsible for the fact that it may be needed in the first place.
And yes chanting incantations or uttering prayers may be part of being in such a situation but she did not say she said a prayer. Her choice of words (if indeed what was reported was factual) were unfortunate and painted her as a religious nut.

EricOKC · #**1129** (**permalink**) 12-18-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by crisis

Yes as usual EricOCK ends up getting us so far from the point of the topic we are now arguing in ever diminishing circles about largely irrelevant minutiae. I bought it up only to illustrate how, with such a level of gun proliferation, weapons can find themselves into the hands of people deluded so. The frantic cries of how fantastic it was that in this case a private citizen had a gun handy are clutching at straws in a tragic situation.
In this case the gun owner shot the antagonist who then turned a gun on himself. It proves nothing to argue either that he may have killed himself at that point or that that she may have precipitated those actions.
Further to argue how wonderful having your citizens armed for such an occurrence ignores the fact that such a level of weapons proliferation and such a wide acceptance of gun ownership is in part responsible for the fact that it may be needed in the first place.
And yes chanting incantations or uttering prayers may be part of being in such a situation but she did not say she said a prayer. Her choice of words (if indeed what was reported was factual) were unfortunate and painted her as a religious nut.

Excuse me, but YOU are the one who raised the issue that she was a religious zealot. Have you forgotten your own posts now? Jeezus H. Tapdancing Christ.

Ok - thats it - into the iggy bin with you.

mpd8488 · #**1130** (**permalink**) 12-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by crisis

Yes as usual EricOCK ends up getting us so far from the point of the topic we are now arguing in ever diminishing circles about largely irrelevant minutiae. I bought it up only to illustrate how, with such a level of gun proliferation, weapons can find themselves into the hands of people deluded so. The frantic cries of how fantastic it was that in this case a private citizen had a gun handy are clutching at straws in a tragic situation.
In this case the gun owner shot the antagonist who then turned a gun on himself. It proves nothing to argue either that he may have killed himself at that point or that that she may have precipitated those actions.
Further to argue how wonderful having your citizens armed for such an occurrence ignores the fact that such a level of weapons proliferation and such a wide acceptance of gun ownership is in part responsible for the fact that it may be needed in the first place.
And yes chanting incantations or uttering prayers may be part of being in such a situation but she did not say she said a prayer. Her choice of words (if indeed what was reported was factual) were unfortunate and painted her as a religious nut.

Yes the fact that we have so many guns does mean that criminals have easier access to them, but that is part of living in a free society. I have no illusion that I will ever be safe and I don't want to be assured safety because it always comes at the expense of freedom. I, along with many of my fellow Americans would rather have our rights and put up with the drawbacks of letting all manner of idiots have the same freedoms. There is at least one gun in half of American households. There are 200 million+ guns in the hands of citizens. No ban is going to change that. Our citizens are armed and most of those who are have no intention of being disarmed. We can debate bans and restrictions as much as we want, but none of that takes into account the United States' unique political culture (and yes gun ownership is part of our political culture) and the fact that the guns are already out there.

There were times in our history when every household had a gun. What we need to look at is what changed and why do so many people turn to murder? The tools used don't matter. A person can kill somebody (even on impulse) with any numbers of implements (many of which are just as distancing as a firearm). Those are tough question that force us to look at the way in which we raise our children, the normalization of violence in our culture, endless cycles of poverty, issues of race, issues of class, and education. The reason politicians have convinced us to debate gun control is because that allows them to take the easy way out. Whatever way the debate swings in terms of legislation that is passed it gives them a free ticket out of solving the issues that are truly at the heart of the problem.

Impugn · #**1131** (**permalink**) 12-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpd8488

Mace is a bad idea. Chances are you will not aim it correctly, and even if you do manage to hit the target, you will still get some no matter what.

/AGREE

I got pepper-sprayed by a couple rent-a-cops once...younger, wilder days (charges dismissed because I didn't really do anything wrong, thank you)...whole silly story.

Anyways, they were pissed that I wouldn't let them cuff me. Barney Fife nailed me, but himself and his partner, too, at the same time. And they were supposedly trained to use it.

If I were actually out to hurt the fools, post-spray, the situation would have been much more dangerous for them than it was before they sprayed. They rendered themselves at least as "disabled" as me.

As it was, I was content to wait on the real cops and ambulance to show up and get that shit rinsed out of my eyes.

Impugn · #**1132** (**permalink**) 12-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark_Twain

Originally Posted by Steve
When I draw my weapon, I've already come to terms with the fact that there are two rounds, at a minimum, leaving that gun not long after I draw it. Period. If that wasn't the case, it would remain holstered...

Oooh, Steve, all your tough-guy macho gun talk gets me so hot. . .

Actually, that's just firearms common sense. As one with at least minimal training, I know that is just about the Golden Rule taught to everybody. If you're to the point at which it makes sense to draw a weapon, you are, by default, at the point at which it makes sense to shoot a fool. Either that, or you done screwed up by drawing in the first place.

That "pull a gun and hold it on somebody" bullshit is dangerous Hollywood nonsense.

Impugn · #**1133** (**permalink**) 12-21-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingofcool

There is a huge difference between gun control and making the owning of guns illegal.

They are shades of the same gray.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

You want to "control", "curb", "curtail", "infringe upon" gun ownership? Easy. Change the Constitution, first. Until then, there is practically no difference between "making the owning of guns illegal" and "gun control" (which could be reasonably restated as "making the owning of some types of guns illegal for some people").

Hopefully, the SCOTUS will fix the "creative" interpretations of the clearly written Second Amendment that has amounted to the un-Constitutional laws we have now - forgeddabout the crazy new control laws they want.

Impugn · #**1134** (**permalink**) 12-21-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

Well, I'm off to bed. Just finished watching "Boston Legal".

I really, really wish that all conservatives were like Denny Crane!!

The day that real Conservatives actually start resembling the Hollywood portrayal of Conservatives, this country has had it.

Impugn · #**1135** (**permalink**) 12-21-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Generally speaking, that'll only get the bad guy caught. It won't deter an nattack at all.

If I'm in a rough area, and feel threatened, I'll dial 911, and keep my thumb on the "Send" button. If the need arises, I can hit "Send" and drop the phone, leaving my hands free to to draw and aim my sidearm...

Now that would be a funny 911 call to be replayed on Fox News.

Hot News Babe: And here we have the audio of the 911 emergency call...

911 Operator: 911 Emergency Assistance. How may I help you?

Steve: ...

911 Operator: 911 Emerg...

Steve: *BLAM* *BLAM*

911 Operator: 911 Emergency Assistan...

Steve: Hey, oh, hi. Oh, I'm good, thanks. Picking up my casings...give me a sec. Anyways...send a meatwagon to...

Impugn · #**1136** (**permalink**) 12-21-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma2

I'm becoming concerned that this discussion is leading to a certain animosity and heatedness towards some of my posts.

Some are aware that I am arguing my case from a different societal attitude than that of those living in the US and excuse me. Others feel that I'm criticising the US, and in a way that is probably correct to some extent. If I hadn't travelled there I would not have had so much to say. But I did, alone, and came to no harm! However, although I have teased and taunted, it is all academic to me. Australian citizens don't feel the need to go armed and I doubt this will change any time in the next 50 or so years. Also, as I can't see myself emigrating to the US (well, I doubt you would have me!) it doesn't effect me in my every day life.

I suppose it is all to do with my distaste of an armed populace. In other words, it's a personal thing. Therefore, I bow out of this discussion and wish you all well.

When you came to the U.S., did you tie your shoes before you left? Did you put your seatbelt on when you drove to the airport? Did the car have an airbag? Did you have to go through security screening to get to your plane? Were the pilots of your plane subject to random drug tests? Were you shown the emergency exists, the dixie cup oxygen masks, your seatbelts, and your floating seat cushions? Did you chew your meal carefully? When you arrived you wear UV sunscreen and UV sunglasses?

Had none of those measures been taken, it is likely that you would have arrived just as healthy and skin-cancer free, anyway. Is that unto itself a valid argument against any of those measures? (And the countless additional ones...got tired of typing...)?

Of course not.

Using the fact that you, personally, were not subject to violence in the United States as some sort of proof-positive against the "gun culture" of the United States is, well, kinda silly.

Actually, it would be far less silly to use your violence-free experience within our "gun happy" country as a testimonial in favor of an armed citizenry. Who knows? Some ruffian might have seen some big Aussie dude and surmised you might be packing heat and moved onto another target - another time - another place. You just don't know...

moon · #**1137** (**permalink**) 12-21-2007

Quote:

Do You Regularly Carry A Firearm?

Don't be silly. Firearms are impractical in Cyberia.

Impugn · #**1138** (**permalink**) 12-27-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Don't be silly. Firearms are impractical in Cyberia.

I thought the BFG9000 was the official firearm of Cyberia.

Wallaroo · #**1139** (**permalink**) 12-27-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Don't be silly. Firearms are impractical in Cyberia.

What is Cyberia?

EricOKC · #**1140** (**permalink**) 12-27-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallaroo

What is Cyberia?

Cyberia:
1) The mythical fantasyland utopia in which moon's mind lives.
2) An AC Comics superheroine
3) An Internet service provider in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
4) A 1995 album by Cubanate
5) 1994 book by Douglas Rushkoff
6) 1994 video game
7) The name of the first Internet cafe, located in London.
8) The penal colony to which Dave Lister was sentenced in the Red Dwarf book Last Human.
9) A remix-album for the Serial Experiments Lain soundtrack.
10) An Uplifting Trance Composer.

View Poll Results: Do You Regularly Carry A Firearm?
Yes	47	29.94%
No	110	70.06%
Voters: 157. You may not vote on this poll