Gun Talk Re: have you heard about...?

[JPhishman]

Sorry, been off the grid for the past week. I just read this whole thread and had to voice my opinion. Surely everyone here loves their families and would do anything to protect them, but that conflicts with some of the moral statements I see here. Just wondering where the solution lies for those folks...

[Hicks]

I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.

We were just pointing out that it's kinda nuts that:

A. Automatic weapons designed to take out large numbers of people quickly are legal .

B.  Some people feel it's necessary to have a gun on them at all times.

[phil]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

maybe administer an IQ test along with the background check?

Maybe add in a psych eval too. And maybe have a loaner gun for a few weeks with rubber bullets only, you know just to see how they do with them at home, kind of like adopting a pet.

Definitely. Simunition is fun as hell to mess around with anyway.

[phil]

I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.

A number of people in this thread have expressed their belief that taking a human life for any reason is wrong and thus choose to not own firearms.

[runawayjimbo]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

[JPhishman]

I like the comparison of owning a gun to an insurance policy. Now I wouldn't ever get a carry permit and take a gun to a movie theater or grocery store, but I have a handgun, and it stays in the safe in my bedroom. I like knowing that should a horrendous societal collapse occur, and the odds of a home invasion happening are substantially increased, I have the means to protect my family.

And if you tell me that I'd be wrong for taking out some desperate or deranged asshole that tried to forcibly enter my home and harm my family, be it for their own personal gain, or simply survival, I ask you, what would you suggest I do?

To those of you who say it is wrong to defend oneself with deadly force if necessary; should the unthinkable happen in your own home and your family is in danger, what action would you then take to protect them? Can you honestly say that juxtaposed against the life of your spouse or child that you would be concerned with the well being of the would-be attacker?

I certainly would not.

While I agree with regulating assault weapons and perhaps even concealed carry rights, it is surprising to me how many here seem to frown upon even the most basic concept of defending you and yours in a dire situation if that self-defense potentially ends the life of the attacker. All due respect for the opinions of you all, really, but when the shit goes down, your moral idealism is impractical at best and tragic at worst, IMO.

Uh pretty sure nobody said anything of the sort.

We were just pointing out that it's kinda nuts that:

A. Automatic weapons designed to take out large numbers of people quickly are legal .

B.  Some people feel it's necessary to have a gun on them at all times.

Fwiw I agree on both of those points.

However,

RJ and PG both stated that it is wrong to make the decision to end one's life and arrogant to feel you have the right to do so IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. While I respect their decision to practice pacifism, I want to know what their alternative to self defense is.


ETA: normally I wouldn't take the time to even participate in this discussion, but I am currently in the jury assembly room of multnomah county court and have a bit a idle time on my hands.

[Hicks]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

The difference is those are all things that people do to themselves and not others.

[gah]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

All your question have to do with what one chooses to do to themselves. Last I checked the statistic for someone dying of Heart disease due to someone injecting them with double cheeseburgers was zero. Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

[gah]

Also, bigtime lollerz at hippies not being violent. As a general statement likely true, but I'm fairly certain there's more violence, or the potential for violence, in a phish lot than a movie theater. (just had to state that after reading back over some of this thread.

LOL!
:hereitisyousentimentalbastard

[McGrupp]

Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.

[phil]

Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.

Take the drink with you dude!




Wait, you're still not drinking right?

[mbw]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

[McGrupp]

Smoking is banned in public places, do you think we should reverse that?

Yes, because putting down my drink at the bar and walking outside is fucking inconvenient.

Take the drink with you dude!




Wait, you're still not drinking right?

13 days without a drop!

It's kinda... not that much fun.

[gah]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.

[McGrupp]

http://wap.myfoxdfw.com/w/main/story/68234137/

But he wasn't being RESPONSIBLE! Responsible gun owners don't do this!





But if the gun wasn't present, it wouldn't have fired. Facts hurt.

Since I think APD is trying to argue with me in abstentia here  :wink:, I guess I'll check back in.

Putting any other objects in the same pocket as a firearm is asking for trouble, and is not something you're supposed to do. And why wasn't the trigger covered? I submit to you that it wasn't the mere presence of the gun in his pocket that caused it to fire; it was his own stupidity and, yes, irresponsibility. This guy was dumb and irresponsible and I imagine he will be charged in connection with wounding those bystanders, as he should be.

Remember when Plaxico Burress shot himself in the leg? Dude had a Glock 23 (not exactly a lightweight pistol) tucked in the waistband of his sweatpants. C'mon man! As long as there are guns (even the most idealistic concede they aren't going anywhere), stupid people will do stupid things with them. I wish that weren't the case but it is.

Neither of which we can control. If only there were something we could control, maybe their access to them? No, no, that's much to rational....ah well.

Heart disease kills 60x more people than guns, why aren't we talking about banning McDonald's or (perish the thought, McGrupp) Wendy's? Cigarettes directly kill hundreds of thousands of people a year; should we ban them? How many lives has alcohol ruined? Well we can't control people being stupid with their consumption so let's just get rid of that too. What if we begin to find out earbuds are leading to an increase in deafness; would you be alright with giving up your iPod?

It's easy to force others to give up a right if you don't agree with it; it's a lot different when they want to take away something you enjoy. And it's almost impossible to get your rights back once you give them up.

should people be allowed to own rocket launchers?  grenades?  tanks? nuclear weapons?

Yes. Yes. NO. Yes.

Only said No to the Tanks because they'd mess with our streets, cause pot holes, require us to widen lanes, etc. The gov't already takes too much of my money for that bullshit. Streets, huh! BULLSHIT! No one needs that nonsense. Last I checked we did just fine with dirt roads.

Streets! Ain't nobody got time for that!