Programmed to be anti-gun


PDA






Gouranga
March 11, 2010, 07:08 PM
I had this rather interesting discussion the other day with a friend of mine. I live in NC now but was raised in Western NY. Around there the only people who had handguns were pretty much cops and criminals. I had been so ingrained with the mindset there on handguns I can honestly say for years i thought of them (almost instinctively) as something bad and dangerous. That they went off accidentally all the time, that people who had them were dangerous ,(the usual anti mentality) but at the same time, I owned a few nice long guns.

I find it partially amusing at this point in my life but REALLY annoying that I was programmed in such a manner. My father (who still lives in NY) is actually very nervous that I have a CCW and own any handgun much less even consider carrying it outside. he and I were both avid hunters in NY, spent a lot of time carrying shotguns in the woods. He is also an Army vet, and has spent a LOT of time around much more powerful weapons than my handgun (had an M16 slung over his shoulder quite a bit).

It got me to thinking, anyone else find themselves programmed in such a manner when they were young? is this a NY type of thing or are there other parts in the country this type of thing is prevalent?

If you enjoyed reading about "Programmed to be anti-gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
armoredman
March 11, 2010, 07:19 PM
Not out here, but AZ has been open carry since we became a state. It's a habit that can be broken - look at yourself! You did it, and so have others.

lopezni
March 11, 2010, 07:26 PM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary. I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one. I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun. Most people think you just pick one up and start shooting the bullets will go where your hand is pointing. Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in. You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.

Gouranga
March 11, 2010, 07:27 PM
yeah....it is something I think of when I talk to Anti's today. I mean it was a real fear. An irrational fear but real. As I sit here with a concealed weapon on my waist, I almost laugh but also, really, wonder, if that is not the "plan" with these bans. We are taught was is right/wrong --> legal/illegal and citizens having handguns are illegal there. The only place you see them is in the movies and folks are shooting each other left and right with them. As a kid, it does subtly program you.

I think of bans like Chicago, an entire generation has been taught citizens cannot safely carry handguns and those with them are to be feared. It is a scary thought.

Gouranga
March 11, 2010, 07:38 PM
lopezni, the problem with that is a handgun is good all around protection. It is good in the home, can be concealed. Concealed carry is good for a number of reasons. First it helps the general public to not freak out. If I go carrying a shotgun over my shoulder in Walmart I would cause a stampede. yet i walk in there with a handgun in a IWB holster without causing a stir (legal here BTW). It also gives me the element of surprise.

the problem is too many bad things happen in safe places. We had 2 burglaries low crime neighborhoods. Both early morning. Both guys broke through the roof, waited and rounded up customers and employees at gun point. We have had a number of home invasions. It is not a dangerous area and I never go looking for trouble but stuff happens and the cops are not everywhere at all times.

BHP FAN
March 11, 2010, 07:40 PM
Um...wow.Lopezni, you should come and shoot at my club sometime. Sure, we don't need handguns,but they sure are fun to shoot, collect and own.

Cosmoline
March 11, 2010, 07:41 PM
you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.

Handguns aren't the first choice for protection, but they can be very easily toted and concealed. This makes them the ideal *everywhere* firearm. As far as trouble only happening in "bad" areas, this is a load of nonsense. Trouble can come anywhere, anytime. You can either try to be prepared for it or trust to luck.

However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone.

Shortly after I moved here, a fellow at the range just gave me a Makarov, gratis! True story. I love this state.

Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.

Do you mean the chambering? Most shooters probably don't know the actual caliber unless they handload. Ask someone with a .38 Special what caliber bullet they're firing and they're likely to tell you it's a .38 caliber, when of course it's a .357" or .358"

winknplink
March 11, 2010, 07:42 PM
...otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.

This is bad programming.

Partly b/c it is opinion and conjecture being spewed as fact, but mainly b/c it is entirely incorrect.

Wow. Talk about a stereotypical blanket statement...you nailed it, sir.

230therapy
March 11, 2010, 07:52 PM
Anti-gun philosophy is a failure to think.

LRS_Ranger
March 11, 2010, 07:52 PM
lopezni: Be glad that you haven't ever been in a situation in which you might need a handgun, because not having one, you could wind up not being able to defend yourself or ones that you love. Also, have you ever had a house fire, flood, earthquake or tornado? You probably have insurance for each of those instances; just because you have not had an incident yet doesn't mean that you shouldn't have that insurance. Firearms of a portable personal defensive nature (handguns) are the same.

Kurt S.
March 11, 2010, 07:57 PM
Gouranga, funny thing. I worked with a fellow for a while from the Boston area who said nearly the same thing about him growing up where only police and bad people had guns. Nice guy, family man, smart, maybe wound a little tight at times but I attributed that to yankee upbringing as well.

He wasn't really an anti- he wasn't completely sure about concealed carry but thought having guns as a hunter or even a large number as a collector was fine. He didn't care much for so-called "assault weapons", this was probably his worst anti characteristic. He even wanted me to teach him and his kids a little about shooting. Sorry I never got the chance.

JoeSlomo
March 11, 2010, 08:01 PM
I had been so ingrained with the mindset there on handguns I can honestly say for years i thought of them (almost instinctively) as something bad and dangerous.

Sadly, there are many within our society that are being conditioned just as you were.

Places that restrict firearms result in only two classes of citizens WITH firearms, LEO's, and criminals. Citizens will ONLY hear about how firearms are used to target people, either by criminals while conducting criminal acts, or by police targeting criminals. Combined with TV and hollywood, citizens come to associate firearms with ONE thing...shooting humans.

For those of us fortunate enough to have grown up with firearms, the opposite is true for the most part. Early associations with firearms most often revolve around using them to harvest game while hunting, or for shooting targets, and while we KNOW they can be used for defense, the very last thing we would associate a firearm with is the taking of human life and crime.

Most citizens don't realize that MILLIONS and MILLIONS of rounds are fired each year, and that the percentage of rounds aimed at human targets is minuscule when compared with the amount used for target, sport, and hunting. I would imagine it is less than 1/3 of 1%.

Education is the key to eliminating ignorance about firearms. When people are given the facts about an issue, they will generally come to a logical and rational conclusion, which in our case, means that firearms are NOT the evil things they are depicted as being. They are just another tool, subject to the will of a human, like any other tool.

Gunfighter123
March 11, 2010, 08:05 PM
It is being taught at EVERY public school in America:fire:

Kids can not go to school wearing a Ruger , Colt ,S&W shirt without being pulled out of class and haveing the parents bring them a more "appropriate" shirt

No more playing Cowboys and Indians , G.I. Joe , Cops & Robbers etc. etc. -- and just look how good America is because of it:cuss:

Gouranga
March 11, 2010, 08:12 PM
One good thing about it. I have become very skeptical of "propaganda" from both sides because of it. I am betting at recognizing folks who are trying to manipulate me as well. So I guess long run it is good training.

Action_Can_Do
March 11, 2010, 08:28 PM
Gouranga
There have been a lot of misconceptions that have been tossed around as fact in history. There was a time when it was believed that wolves were the most dangerous animal in the world. What disappoints me are the people who really should know better. Cops who spew antigun lies and exaggerations, and hunters who think that AR rifles and handguns are more dangerous than the shotguns and rifles they use.

Larry Ashcraft
March 11, 2010, 08:33 PM
However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone.
Please name one state that passes handguns out to anyone.

shotgunjoel
March 11, 2010, 08:35 PM
Yes, it's called a public school education. And left leaning parents.

the iron horse
March 11, 2010, 08:40 PM
I have posted the link on this book before.

It is, I think, a really important book on the subject of guns and society.

http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Monsters-Children-Make-Believe-Violence/dp/0465036953

Reading is fun :)

mcdonl
March 11, 2010, 08:50 PM
Please name one state that passes handguns out to anyone.

And I will rent there long enough to get my free gun!!

robmkivseries70
March 11, 2010, 09:25 PM
Quote lopezni,"However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone."

Uh... Where is it that handguns are legally available to anyone? I think you'll need to reconsider your thoughts regarding your sales process if you don't really see the implications of the 4473 and the phone call of acceptability.
Best,
Rob

Hatterasguy
March 11, 2010, 09:34 PM
It depends where you live to. I live in a nicer area of CT, thats not really rural. Finding places to shoot is hard, very hard.

A lot of people are not anti gun per say, they just don't grow up around them or see a use.

I know at my school which is a big state school, its very conservative and very pro 2nd ammendment. Other than some PETA people all the active groups are conservative. I have a Sig sticker on my truck and have had a number of people comment on it, mostly Sig's rock.:D

armoredman
March 11, 2010, 09:43 PM
Well, AZ DOES have optional firearms education for schools, with mandatory range time to pass, per law. I have had handguns given to me while living here, won one of them off this website. Odd how our murder rate appears to be lower than NYC...

buy guns
March 11, 2010, 10:01 PM
It got me to thinking, anyone else find themselves programmed in such a manner when they were young? is this a NY type of thing or are there other parts in the country this type of thing is prevalent?


Yeah this has happened to plenty of people in plenty of areas. It's basic conditioning just like Pavlov's dogs.

danprkr
March 11, 2010, 10:01 PM
You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.

I take extreme offense at that. While I keep, and have used a shotgun for self defense at home. I have had to draw my concealed handgun three times - every time at work! In one of those instances all of the responding cops said I would have been justified in shooting. I did not. I was happy that night, and have been happy every time I've thought about it in the nearly 15 years since that I did not pull that trigger. Trust me, if I was "one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it," you accuse me of being we'd have had one dead criminal. As it is I stopped a burglary in progress, and no one was hurt.

So, if my trying to make a living and protect myself is wrong - guilty. Until you've been there done that I really don't want to hear your... I can't say here what I want to since it wouldn't be very high road, but suffice it say the emoticons don't do it justice! :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire: :fire:

Do not paint us all with one brush. If you choose not to take responsibility for your own protection be aware of the consequences of that choice. Remember the police have no legal obligation to protect you. Only you have that responsibility. Meet that responsibility or not as you choose, just don't attempt to take that right from those of us with enough b... um, courage to shoulder the responsibility for ourselves!

Gunfighter123
March 11, 2010, 10:23 PM
Quote:
"You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. "

I take extreme offense at that.

I agree with Dan and I am also offended by that remark ---- and YOU SAY YOU SELL GUNS Lopezni ???? How do YOU know that one of the firearms you sold have not been used in a murder ???????

This is The High Road not the High and Mighty Road !!!!

JellyJar
March 11, 2010, 11:08 PM
Heck, I was raised in Alabama which is a very gun friendly state. Most people could get a permit to CCW long before Florida set off the modern era of CCW in 1987. Yet I was raised to be quite anti gun. Mostly anti handgun as it was socially acceptable for hunters to own long guns for hunting of course.

Then in 1981 I moved to Texas for 26 years and the crime there forced me to get off the fence so to speak and decide one way or the other. Fortunately for me I had learned how to think for myself so after doing a bit of research I discovered the truth and HERE I AM! A card carrying member of the NRA. In fact I am probably more pro 2A then even the NRA. Especially when it comes to handgun ownership and CCW!!!

lopezni
March 12, 2010, 12:11 AM
Please name one state that passes handguns out to anyone.

Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun. Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done. I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol.

have you ever had a house fire, flood, earthquake or tornado?

No, I live in NY, those things don't happen here.

also, I met some idiot who has no business owning any firearm say he was going to AZ to get a Glock and bring it back to NY. He said I'd like to see NY do something about that, I guess Plaxico needs a new roomate

Gunfighter123
March 12, 2010, 12:29 AM
In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done.

Just wondering -- do YOU require the same when YOU sell a firearm to someone ???

Cosmoline
March 12, 2010, 12:46 AM
Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor

You mean IIIA? Any hunting rifle will cut through it like a hot knife through butter. I assume you want strict additional checks for rifles as well then.

In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done.

You need to make up your mind, though. Either handguns are useless toys for the mall ninjas, as you first claimed, or they're uber lethal tools of death that must be regulated by at least four layers of greasy eastern bureaucracy.

those things don't happen here.

House fires and floods don't happen in NY?? You must not even bother insuring your home or business.

RP88
March 12, 2010, 12:49 AM
Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun. Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done. I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol.

the mouth-breathing racist remark can take a hike. [Moderator note: the racist remark was removed in the original and in the quote.]

...and he could have easily purchased a gun off the street if he really wanted to. In fact, I'd say the commonplace Glock would have yielded better results than the Five-seveN.

But, to get to the point: a person who has a mental breakdown and an idiot who should not have owned guns in the first place (he didn't even have an NJ permit - which is where he lived) and the rest of the 0.0001% of people who misuse guns are grounds for inconveniencing the rest of the law-abiding country?

KarenTOC
March 12, 2010, 01:12 AM
I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun.

I'm confused. What does being able to operate a bolt action rifle have to do with carrying, and knowing how to use, a handgun?

CMP
March 12, 2010, 01:13 AM
It is being taught at EVERY public school in America

Kids can not go to school wearing a Ruger , Colt ,S&W shirt without being pulled out of class and haveing the parents bring them a more "appropriate" shirt

No more playing Cowboys and Indians , G.I. Joe , Cops & Robbers etc. etc. -- and just look how good America is because of it
__________________

I was aloud to wear my Vegas gun store shirt in school that had a MP5 on the back of it, but then again I live in a very small town...there was a corn field across the road from our school. Even so many of the people I grew up with have more of a negative opinion towards guns than a positive one.

Cel
March 12, 2010, 02:29 AM
Gouranga~You wouldn't happen to live in 'Gate City' would you?

Southern Rebel
March 12, 2010, 04:04 AM
lopezni,

Based on the people you know, have seen, etc - I would say the problem seems to be that you really need to hang out with a better class of "people". There is a whole new world out there for you to see and experience.

Now, I know that sounds sarcastic, but I had to do the same when I was a young man. At that time, handgun possession was frowned upon and, therefore, most of handguns that I saw or knew about were owned by people I really didn't want to be around. After it became ok to not only own them, but also carry them, a whole new world of gun owners suddenly appeared.

Generalized statements that are based on what we can see in our own little worlds are usually only valid within that small part of the world.

JoeSlomo
March 12, 2010, 04:17 AM
Sigh.....

It is ALWAYS "Such and such loony used his firearm illegally to do x...."

Why is it that there is NEVER the same outrage that the victims of said loonies were NOT LEGALLY allowed to have a firearm to STOP the loony?


Why?

Banning ANYTHING has NEVER worked.
Alcohol? NO!
Drugs? NO!

The ONLY thing that gets banned or restricted when it comes to firearms is the DEFENSE of the honest citizen.

Banning and restrictions on firearms are nothing more than a ban and restriction of defense for honest citizens.

mnrivrat
March 12, 2010, 05:43 AM
Seems that the OP asked a good question, and two posts later lopezni gave him a difinitive answer.

Lopezni - You have a bad case of lopsided logic .

bdickens
March 12, 2010, 06:35 AM
Hey, lopenzi. tell Paul Helmke hi for me.

car15bill
March 12, 2010, 06:37 AM
lopezni, I moved from michigan to western NY, and I can't bring any of my pistols with me. I never had a carry permit in Michigan, but now I can't even POSESS my own property because of this states stupid laws. I have to pay the state close to 300 dollars to re-own my own stuff? BS!!

And the 4 people you must know to vouch(sp?) for your good standing, in the same county? more BS. I drive a truck all week, I have met about 30 people in my job and my girlfriends family. WHY am I asked to make friends in order to take back control of my own posessions?

BTW, yes almost everyone I have met in WNY is anti. I know of 2 other people who are actually into shooting and collecting guns, I know 2 other "fudds" who only own guns for hunting, and everyone else just gives me a funny look when I tell them i'm into guns. Their first words are always, "oh, your a hunter"? nope, not a hunter, not even close....

cskny
March 12, 2010, 07:15 AM
Anti-gun philosophy is a failure to think.




No. People you label as Anti-gun have a multitude of reasons that are not all the same. Some truly are afraid of guns, other's just support keeping them out of criminal hands (because 2% of gun show sales in criminal hands is 2% too high). You label them all the same.

They have alternate viewpoints on a social issue.

The inability or unwillingness to understand that alternate viewpoint is:

"a failure to think"

Davek1977
March 12, 2010, 07:16 AM
Lopezni:

Who needs the Brady bunch when ywe have people advocating the exact same sorts of things right in the industry? I could never bring myself to buy a firearm from a dealer with an attitude like yours. I might as well donate directly to Brady and Co. You're supporting them and their overall agenda, if not fianncially simply by your words

Zoogster
March 12, 2010, 07:19 AM
Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.

Then you probably don't have to worry about them firing it much.


Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in.

While far from an expert on video games the shooters tend to focus on long arms, those firearms with greater firepower and employed by armed forces both real and make believe. Not handguns.


I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone.
You want to protect your home get a shotgun,

You go on to say how you dislike handguns or easy access to them, but promote a shotgun.
You realize with a hacksaw your typical shotgun turns into a much more formidable concealable (enough for criminal use) illegal weapon than any pistol anywhere in the same price range.
What would you rather look down the barrel of in the hands of a criminal, a sawed-off short barrel shotgun, or his pistol?
12 gauge or a typical .22, .25, .380?
Anywhere handguns have been outlawed modified long guns soon fill the role.


Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people.

Many survived, and had he been using a long gun instead he probably would have been an even greater problem. Had he been using a more potent firearm fewer would have probably survived. Many of those killed took rounds to the head.
I don't really think that counts against handguns. The typical service rifle on base or similar from the store would have been far more dangerous, and just as easy for him to bring into the building he worked in on base.
The availability of the handgun in fact probably kept him from using explosives, or a more potent firearm.
Which do you prefer, suicide jihadi armed with a handgun, or a suicide bomb? Do you want to learn he is a threat when he detonates or when he starts firing his pistol?
Pass out those handguns!
Sometimes it is better when firearms are the path of least resistance and alternative methods are not pursued.



In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done.
Ah that is great. A 2nd Amendment originally intended to deter tyranny from government subject to absolute governmental discretion.
Governments in the last 100 years killed more people than all known common criminals and thugs throughout all of recorded history. Your common thug may be the immediate concern, but governments will still be the primary concern and threat to freedom long after we are gone.


What would you do in your utopia free from handguns when local thug comes in armed with the shotgun he stole from your local hunter, and you have no handy concealable handgun. You certainly are not going about your day with a slung long gun.
The truth is comfortable convenient concealment throughout a day is more important to the good guys than to the bad guy who technically only needs to cover it up from the car to the store, or to your front door (if even then.)
The bad guys may choose to carry easily concealed firearms when available, but they certainly do not need them, and do better without them than the good guys.

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 07:38 AM
lopezni, you bring up a couple people who got guns who should not have them. I would remind you that in CCW states like NC we have hundreds of thousands of CCW permit holders and still our murders are carried out by people will illegally owned firearms, aka criminals.

I could jump on google and quickly compile a list of people murdered with knives, baseball bats, tire irons, cars, yet we see no efforts to make people fear and ban them. I would also note I had to go through 2 background checks, get fingerprinted ,and go through a CCW class to get my permit. I could tell you more on legal use of firearms in my state than some cops.

There are idiots driving cars that have no business behind the wheel. I have met some who could not even read road signs, yet we have stringent laws governing them, even a road test. I would bet the use of automobiles has caused many more deaths and injuries then guns in any state. A LOT of car owners have no clue how to perform routine maintenance or how to keep their vehicles in safe working order.

As for a gun having the ability to piece body armor. I can once again jump on google and find ammo that would pierce body armor for any gun I own, including my 12 gauge shotgun. My 12 gauge is easily bought in NY. I guess what I getting at is CCW really is not a bad thing. It is a great thing. CCW permit holders are safer and more law abiding than the general population, none of the states who allow it have erupted in wild west gun fights despite fear mongering that this would happen. Handguns are generally drop safe (something that cannot be said for many shotguns), and I have heard plenty of examples of 12 gauges going off when banged or dropped (like what might happen when you are woken up in the middle of the night by an intruder).

I think you would be surprised at the "class" of people who hold CCW and carry weapons around with them. How many folks I know who wear suits to work, women, professionals. In stark contrast with the gun toting rednecks anti's try to portray. I can also say out of the hundreds of permit holders I have met not a single 1, not 1 has any desire to kill anyone with them. In fact, most of us hope and pray that our self defense weapon turns out to be the biggest waste of money we have ever had.

I would also like to point out, I have a fire extinguisher in my car, yet I am not an arsonist. I also have airbags and have resisted the desire to drive into a brick wall to see them work. A handgun is a tool, a safety device. It is there in case that 1 in a million event takes place where it is needed. I choose to not be at the mercy of a criminals with guns. Our police in this city are AWESOME. However, if I dial 911 right now and report someone in my home I will not see one for at LEAST 5-10 minutes. In that time I will be dead or wounded.

Guy B. Meredith
March 12, 2010, 07:47 AM
Well, several things here. I am from SoCal and live in the SF Bay area.

First, I came into using handguns with the mindset that they are great for recreation. The sports involving handguns are more diverse than long gun.

I first purchased a handgun when my daughter started hanging around a turd in an SF Bay area prison with drug record and we had a fear that his friends might show up on our doorstep. Actually, that was my rationale for justifying getting back into firearms sports at the time as I am too cheap to otherwise spend that money for my own enjoyment. I now keep a 12 GA Mossburg 500 for defense and want to avoid any of my revolvers ending up in an evidence locker.

I have no illusion that handguns carry some magical power of destruction. My 12 GA and 30-06 are much better bets there. However, try lugging the long gun around for personal protection. Good luck.

The issue of high capacity handguns is just friggin stupid. My 8 shot revolver reloads in about a second and in competition I may carry six or more reloads. That's a minimum of 56 rounds. The bottom loaders may have 10 round capacity and carry six or more reloads. I repeat--the issue of high cap mags is BS. Of course with long guns reloads may be more difficult, but they do the job with a lot fewer rounds.

Finally, you are correct about the video thing--or at least confusing imaginary with real life. I have seen Japanese tourists at our local range grab two semi autos, swing them in the air and shout "Rambo!".

I have been a range safety officer for three clubs and do feel the great uninitiated public is dangerous in use of firearms. I think everyone who owns a firearm should be required to go through training on safety and competency. I also think those course should be offered free of charge to prevent discriminating against those who could not afford them.

rattletrap1970
March 12, 2010, 07:53 AM
lopenzi
You know for a guy who's been on here for a while that was an amazingly "Troll Like" statement. I think at the very least your argument could have been presented as a little less incendiary. I agree there are folks that probably shouldn't own guns, however, you seldom know that till they have them. It's unfortunate, but that is the way it is. People aren't mind readers. People also talk a lot of crap, but, that doesn't necessarily make them dangerous or ineligible to own a gun.
And please, don't use Maj. Hasan's rampage as ANYTHING other than a reason that those soldiers should have been able to carry. Because I guaranty you if one or two people IN that room at the time had weapons on them that sorry POS would have gotten greased after the first couple shots.

bdickens
March 12, 2010, 07:55 AM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary. I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one. I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun. Most people think you just pick one up and start shooting the bullets will go where your hand is pointing. Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in. You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.
Thus answering the question "are there any anti's who frequent THR?"

waterhouse
March 12, 2010, 08:34 AM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary.

The nice thing about humans is that we have an incredibly complex system of communication. We write, speak, use tone and inflection, body language, etc. This allows us to learn things without actually having to experience them or see them with our own eyes. On top of this, we have an extremely efficient means of transmitting this information around the world. Through TV and the internet, we can know what is happening, literally on the other side fo the globe, in almost real time.

Were you at Fort Hood when the shooting occurred? Were you at the bar with Plaxico when he shot himself? You weren't, but you know they happened because other humans were there and communicated what they saw and heard. You now accept these occurrences as fact.

Why is it, when you have shown through your own writing that you are capable of knowing things you haven't personally seen or experienced, that the fact that you have never personally "been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary" sways your judgment?

It is clear that you know about dangerous things . . . you brought up the Fort Hood Shooting.

You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.

Those soldiers that were working at their job at a military base, do you think they were hanging around a place they shouldn't be? Or should they have been carrying their home defense shotguns with them to work?

I'm serious. You are capable of knowing things you haven't experienced. Do you deny that innocent people defend themselves with handguns every single day? I know you've never witnessed it, but you do know that it happens, right?

Were all of these people that defended themselves with handguns in dark alleys in run down neighborhoods? Do you think they woke up and thought "hey, I hope someone tries to mug me today, so I can shoot someone. That would really make my day!"?

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 08:37 AM
You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.
You mean like the Lane Bryant clothing store up the road from where my mother lives, outside of Chicago? Six women were shot execution style, five killed and TOTALLY defenseless because the legislators of the State of Illinois think it's better for five women to die than for one to defend herself with a handgun.

Or do you mean Virginia Tech?

Or maybe Amish school houses? Yeah, those little Amish girls were really up to no good. Do you think they "had it coming"?

youngda9
March 12, 2010, 08:45 AM
I'm serious. You are capable of knowing things you haven't experienced. Do you deny that innocent people defend themselves with handguns every single day? I know you've never witnessed it, but you do know that it happens, right?
Lopezni should read this website to learn that guns protect good people more then they hurt them.
http://www.thearmedcitizen.com/

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 08:45 AM
I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference.
Really? Why not?

Should he accept a Protestant minister or a Catholic priest?

I just LOVE it when anti-gunners try to play to the imaginary bigotry of the diverse community of gun owners. They usually get it rammed up their colons, and I'm sure you'll be no exception here.

As I've said, bigotry runs VERY deep in the AHSA crowd. Usually it's racial or ethnic, but religious bigotry (usually anti-Semitism) is in play too.

BURN
March 12, 2010, 08:48 AM
I had a friend that was from Boston, he did not understand why I felt it was a good idea to have a handgun on me every where possible. After a few months he started to get the idea when things happend that were reported on the news and my response was "what could have been differnet if one able bodied person there had a legal handgun" I also had to explain to him that a gun did not "Just go off" no more then your car "Just started"

LRS_Ranger
March 12, 2010, 08:49 AM
I asked: "have you ever had a house fire, flood, earthquake or tornado?"
You said: "No, I live in NY, those things don't happen here."

By this, I take it to mean that you don't carry insurance of any kind, or do you? I kind of hope that you don't, because then at least you will be consistant.
Not only is my CC pistol a source of enjoyment, as I shoot IDPA, but it is also my source of protection as I can't carry my Benelli everywhere I go. (I wish I could, but since it's not the wild west anymore I have to make do with something smaller) I carry it for the same reason that I have an alarm system on my house, and fire, flood, and automotive insurance. Just in case. I HAVE had to pull it once. I am still glad to this day that I didn't have to use it. It's simply my insurance policy. Just because there are a few retards that do the wrong thing doesn't mean that my rights should be restricted. Are you really a gun dealer? If so what's your ffl and where do you work?
Anyway, for the good of the Law-abiding citizens in the rest of free America, please keep yourself and your liberal votes in New York or ********** or some state where I can choose not to live.

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 08:52 AM
They have alternate viewpoints on a social issue.

The inability or unwillingness to understand that alternate viewpoint is:

"a failure to think"
I used to see EXACTLY the same "argument" from the followers of the late Dr. William Pierce.

Racism is an "alternate viewpoint".
Anti-Semitism is an "alternate viewpoint".
Gay bashing is an "alternate viewpoint".
Holocaust denial is an "alternate viewpoint".

... if you're the perpetrator instead of the victim.

Anti-gunners actively and knowingly seek to harm others by depriving them both of their lawfully owned property, and more importantly, the right to defend themselves from the unlawful use of deadly force.

You advocate harm in EXACTLY the way that those who advocate anti-sodomy laws do.

LRS_Ranger
March 12, 2010, 08:56 AM
Quote:
"Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. "

The body armor argument is brought up all the time. I say "who cares?" Who did he shoot that had body armor on? Did it make a difference whether his pistol had body-armor penetrating capability? Why is this such a big issue? Where are all the shot body armor wearing victims that have been shot down at the mall while shopping? To me, this is the biggest scare tactic non-issue ever.

I really hope that you are taking the time to read some of these responses, there is always more than one way to look at something. Learn from the experiences other people. None of us know everything.

Dravur
March 12, 2010, 09:04 AM
Some truly are afraid of guns, other's just support keeping them out of criminal hands (because 2% of gun show sales in criminal hands is 2% too high). You label them all the same.

Why is it, we are supposed to give credence to people like this? If someone has an irrational fear of guns, then we politely wave at them and dismiss their ideas as the talk of a crazy person... same as an irrational fear of garden rakes and circus clowns. We do not give them the power to take garden rakes away or to force clowns out of business. We ignore them.

By the same twisted logic of the 2% gun show silliness.... It has been proven that Car lots are places where criminals get their cars. Or even worse! they get them off the street from some "private transaction". Now, why in the world do we allow car people to get together to sell these high powered death machines and getaway vehicles to the common criminal without a background check! Oh, the horrors!

See.. we should lend no more credence to these morons and their sycophants than we would to any other nutter with a cause.

You are free to have whatever Alternate Viewpoint.... but I have the right to dismiss it out of hand when it does not deal in logic or have any basis in fact.

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 09:07 AM
I was thinking the same thing Deanimator. Why is an Islamic Cleric any less reliable than my baptist pastor? I have met many Muslims, and while we disagree on religious beliefs, they are no less or more moral than I. They LOVE the US, and would defend her. We have Muslims serving in the military who risk their lives day in day out for us to have the right to live.

I really do not want to play gang up on a poster here. Really, you voiced your opinion, and we all have them. Nor is it my intention to slam all NYers. I lived there for 25 years and have many fond memories of the western part of the state. My point of contention was the "training" I received. I used to think that all this hype that TV and such can influence how you think was garbage but when you look inside you see stuff like this.

I mean getting to irrational fear, I grew up afraid of handguns, the first one I bought, I was really nervous, like I was doing something wrong. I committed myself to the range 3 times a week for 3 months until I learned that gun like it was an extension of my own hand. My wife is the same way. My father when I talk to him rationally, on his fear of me with a handgun, admits it is irrational. Doubly so when you consider my sister is a cop in NY. She and her husband (who is a cop as well) have a lot of handguns and are always armed. That does not make him nervous at all(as they are cops and cops should have guns).

My father also recognizes, I have fired my weapon more than 10 times as much as my sister and brother in law combined. I have received more firearms focused training than they did.

It is amazing to me the level of programming and not only that but how DEEP it goes. When you are fearful of these weapons so deep, when anti's spew ridiculous claims (i.e. all handgun owners WANT to shoot someone), it becomes instant truth to you.

You look at the posts across this site, you see folks who do not take gun safety lightly. In my experience they represent the majority.

As to the other point I do not ever put myself in danger deliberately. The gun is NOT a ticket to go start trouble or some badge of courage. Because I literally carry the power to end a life and/or cause extreme harm to another human being I am doubly careful in avoiding situations that could turn violent, confrontational, etc. Once again, this has been the status quo from gun owners I know. I also do not have a bunker in my back yard, though I have 4 daughters so I may need one to live in for a week every month when they hit their teens.

In short, everything I was taught on guns in NY was totally incorrect. it was an example as to another danger in gun bans. I am not a criminal but the statement Lopezni shared (which is pretty brave to throw up in this community), paints me as one. That mentality is borne out of such an environment created by gun bans. I can say this as well, it was NOT easy to break out of it. If any of you talked to me 8 years ago, I would likely have the same things to say that Lopezni did about many members of this board. Sad to say it but it is true.

benEzra
March 12, 2010, 09:10 AM
Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun.
Which states DON'T? The New York background check is based on NICS, unless you live in NYC, is it not?

NJ goes waay beyond NICS into petty harassment (resulting in the lowest rate of lawful gun ownership in the nation, though it doesn't seem to affect criminal misuse), and so does Massachusetts. Most of the rest use the standard databases, even states that route the check through a state level LE organization (i.e., Florida checks go through FDLE but accesses the Federal database).

Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people.
You've been had. 5.7x28mm won't penetrate any vest rated to stop .357, and that is true whether you're talking about civilian-available OR military/LEO restricted AP. 5.7 civilian ammo is stopped by .357-rated vests, and anything restricted 5.7x28 AP will penetrate, .357 AP will.

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 09:15 AM
However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one.

I have to say, I feel the same way about voter registration cards. I think we should limit voter registration to people who can pass an IQ and reading test. I don't want every random idiot to be able to vote.....


Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people.

First of all, many firearms sold today have the capacity to penetrate body armor. Pretty much any rifle will.. The Five Seven in particular requires special ammunition however, the purchase of which is restricted. But of course you know that, you're just putting the straw man argument out there since you don't have any real point.

Second, the guy was an officer in the US Army. How easy do you think it would have been for him to find 4 people who would give him a great personal recommendation? Give me a break....

Third, what does magazine capacity have to do with anything? It's pretty easy to reload magazine fed handguns so this is another anti talking point that makes no sense.

Most of this is cut and paste from the anti playbook, well beaten down arguments that really don't hold up under any scrutiny. It's getting a bit old.

I do find it interesting that you hail the lofty NY restrictions as effective yet your state has a higher gun crime rate than mine, where we just "hand them out to anyone"...... Did you ever consider the possibility that it's not a GUN problem?

Trumac
March 12, 2010, 09:34 AM
Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun. Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done. I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol.



No, I live in NY, those things don't happen here.

also, I met some idiot who has no business owning any firearm say he was going to AZ to get a Glock and bring it back to NY. He said I'd like to see NY do something about that, I guess Plaxico needs a new roomate
I watched a house burn down just the other day...I live in NY.. I thought those things don't happen here..
Also, as an LEO, if I were to find someone in possession of a handgun and they had no NYS permit I'd be seizing it. That is what NY would do about it.

lopezni
March 12, 2010, 09:55 AM
What would you do in your utopia free from handguns

I never said I wanted to get rid of handguns, I want to change they way people obtain a CCW.

Second, the guy was an officer in the US Army. How easy do you think it would have been for him to find 4 people who would give him a great personal recommendation? Give me a break....

No, It would've had to've been 4 people living in the county, could not have been his soldiers as that is a conflict of interest.

and if you notice, people generally don't take bolt action rifles on shooting sprees or robberies, the 4rnd capacity and slow rate of fire kind of hinder that. In fact, most criminals probably wouldn't even look at a rifle or shotgun because it is not gangster enough

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 10:00 AM
No, It would've had to've been 4 people living in the county, could not have been his soldiers as that is a conflict of interest.

Again, it's well reported that the Major had many friends around town. You're just not going to get it to pass the smell test that an officer in the US Army would have trouble getting references.

If he can pass all the DoD background checks you can't possibly be suggesting that the State of NY would have uncovered something are you ?

You need to abandon that argument, it's not going to help you.

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 10:02 AM
and if you notice, people generally don't take bolt action rifles on shooting sprees or robberies,
..other than Charles Whitman, etc.

Of course the Beltway snipers would have been well served by a bolt action rifle.

the 4rnd capacity and slow rate of fire kind of hinder that. In fact, most criminals probably wouldn't even look at a rifle or shotgun because it is not gangster enough
Criminals don't use SHOTGUNS???

You're standing there now, literally dripping with FAIL, like Carrie at the prom.

CoRoMo
March 12, 2010, 10:20 AM
I want to change they way people obtain a CCW.

Fortunately for freedom and liberty, you'll never get your chance. You're on the losing side of an idealistic war. How ironic it is that this thread began with a New Yorker detailing his liberation from bad programming, and here we have a fellow New Yorker trapped in similar delusion, but with no logical escape. The OP illustrates the absurdity of the programming through his departure from it, lopezni illustrates the same absurdity through his continuation within it.

winknplink
March 12, 2010, 10:20 AM
You're standing there now, literally dripping with FAIL, like Carrie at the prom.

From his first post...not fact one presented, just smear and conjecture.

My condolences to Trumac for having to share a state with these two vocally ill-informed individuals.

And bless all you guys with more patience than I possess for trying (fruitlessly) to reason with this man.

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 10:27 AM
You're on the losing side of an idealistic war.
It's no more "idealistic" than a campaign to support racial segregation of the schools. What these AHSA types are doing is trying to limit fundamental human rights to their own magic chalk circle of those who're "better" than the rest of us. His appeal to anti-Muslim bigotry was like a fog horn warning of it.

Patriotme
March 12, 2010, 10:31 AM
I live in VA which is a mostly pro gun state. Northern VA has a very large amount of Liberals (can't we just give the top 30 miles to Maryland?) but the rest of the state is very pro gun. I suprised by my daughter telling me that some of her teachers were telling students that no one has a right to own guns. She also said that police officers would come into the Elementary School classes and also tell the kids that no one had the right to own guns. As my daughter had been shooting for years and growing up in a very political household she knew a lie when she heard it (this was several years ago). She also had many fellow students that hunted and the teacher and cop both found themselves quickly shouted down by students. Neither were happy with the dissent. During the 2008 Election a teacher gave my daughter's class a survey to let the kids know how they stand politicaly. One of the questions stated, "Do you believe that everyone has the right to own a gun?" My daughter wanted to the question changed to reflect that no one wants crazies, criminals or drug addicts armed. The teacher would no change the question and said if you are pro gun then you want everyone armed.
There is a great deal of indoctrination in our schools. The funny thing is most teachers know absolutely nothing about guns, the law or the politics around guns. They are just good little sheeple spouting the party line.
My wife is one of the few pro gun teachers in her school. She is a definate minority in her political views.

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 10:43 AM
Wow. Patriotme, I would be talking to the principal IMMEDIATELY. First of all, they have no business pushing political agendas on kids. Second of all, they are teachers. They are supposed to be teaching things like Math, Science, History (like US History). I would like to see how the teacher rectifies her statement with the Bill of Rights.

I would also be talking to that officers Chief and the Mayor. The officer has a right to his/her opinion, however when they step into a classroom and make a statement like that they are representing the department, the city, and in part the board of ed (as they are sanctioned visitors of that school).

They have no right whatsoever to push political agendas in there no matter what the stance. Sorry to be all crazed on this but as a father of 4 I would be absolutely enraged by something who thinks they need to teach my kids morals or ethics in their classroom. To me, that is MY job. That they are teaching contrary to the US Constitution and in complete disregard for SCOTUS case history... completely unprofessionally incompetent, and unacceptable.

winknplink
March 12, 2010, 10:49 AM
Nah, just call the local news and let them know. Media is anti-biased, but they can't turn a story down for the life of them.

robmkivseries70
March 12, 2010, 10:55 AM
This country was founded to insure certain freedoms. In order to retain those freedoms it is important to err on the side of less government. No rule of law is going to prevent all tragedies, nor should any thinking person expect it to. The broad scope of the Bill of Rights speaks directly to this notion.
Best,
Rob

GEM
March 12, 2010, 10:59 AM
I grew up in NYC. There were situations where a gun would have been useful. Nor was I programmed.

Bah. Don't feed the troll, nor think the whole state is like that. TX didn't have a CHL law till the 1990's.

car15bill
March 12, 2010, 11:01 AM
I never said I wanted to get rid of handguns, I want to change they way people obtain a CCW.



No, It would've had to've been 4 people living in the county, could not have been his soldiers as that is a conflict of interest.

and if you notice, people generally don't take bolt action rifles on shooting sprees or robberies, the 4rnd capacity and slow rate of fire kind of hinder that. In fact, most criminals probably wouldn't even look at a rifle or shotgun because it is not gangster enough
lopezni, I was just talking to a LEO last week, getting fingerprinting done for my hazmat endorsement. I brought up the subject of the stupid NY pistol permit hoops, he agreed that they are worthless, his reasoning being, who is going to ask 4 people who would give them a BAD reference?

there is no law that says you can only ask 4 people, and if they turn you down, you cant have it. So you make 4 new friends at the bar. Then you pass it, and nothing better than NICS has been accomplished, other than the fact that you had to buy a couple of rounds at the bar for 4 people to back you up.

So how does this law do anything other than get in the way of people who are strapped for time to make friends(me)?

9mm+
March 12, 2010, 11:11 AM
Quote:
However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone.

Please name one state that passes handguns out to anyone.

Yes, please do. I want to move there immediately.

budiceman
March 12, 2010, 11:46 AM
lopezni wonder what your sales are? You wouldn't sell much around here. BB guns can put an eye out you know. What do you need a rifle, shotgun or fire extinguisher for when you when you can dial 911?
Read my signature!!

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 12:13 PM
Yes, please do. I want to move there immediately.

x2...NC is nice but who can pass up free guns? Buying them for yourself is expensive.

Cosmoline
March 12, 2010, 12:37 PM
I think we've just seen a perfect example of anti-handgun programming.

Werewolf
March 12, 2010, 02:27 PM
Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun. Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done. I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol.



No, I live in NY, those things don't happen here.

also, I met some idiot who has no business owning any firearm say he was going to AZ to get a Glock and bring it back to NY. He said I'd like to see NY do something about that, I guess Plaxico needs a new roomate
Firearms dealer? Unlikely...

Troll? Probably.

Believes in freedom? NO effin' WAY!

WingRider
March 12, 2010, 03:52 PM
Post #57. I also agree with IQ tests for voters AND prospective parents:cuss:
Methinks someone has drunk the Hilary KoolAid:banghead:

lopezni
March 12, 2010, 08:02 PM
Wrong, I don't support Hillary, but I willing to bet many of you are Palin supporters. You know, lots of people carried pistols in the old west, wasn't a very safe time period.

car15bill
March 12, 2010, 08:36 PM
who says i'm a Palin supporter? and why do you think NY is any safer than any other state because of additional hoops to jump through? In Mi, you have to pass a NICS check before you could buy a gun, then go back and get every pistol registered on a different permit. Or you could take a class ONCE and bypass it from then on, with a CHP.

How are NY permit rules any safer? HOW? By wasting my time with an interview with the sheriff, and a redundant background check and fingerprinting?

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 08:40 PM
You know, lots of people carried pistols in the old west, wasn't a very safe time period.
The West was safer than NYC in 1876, in 1976, and in 2010.

The police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
The police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
The police have virtually no physical ability to protect individuals.

Protect yourself or don't protected at all.

The New York motto, "We don't have to protect you and we won't let you protect yourself."

TexasRifleman
March 12, 2010, 08:44 PM
Wrong, I don't support Hillary, but I willing to bet many of you are Palin supporters. You know, lots of people carried pistols in the old west, wasn't a very safe time period.

You do know that you've posted something that is completely untrue don't you? Of course you do.

Your chances of being a victim of violent crime in the old west was much less than today.

You're just making stuff up as you go now are you? Standard anti debating technique 101 here......

People who have to lie to make their point tend to have no point to make.

benEzra
March 12, 2010, 08:48 PM
Wrong, I don't support Hillary, but I willing to bet many of you are Palin supporters.
I'm a middle-of-the-road independent, pro-choice, pro-gay-rights, and have considerably more posts on Democratic Underground than I do here. I also hold an NC carry license (valid in ~30 states) and shoot USPSA with one of those eeee-villl rifles with a protruding handgrip and magazine.

Support for new restrictions on the lawful and responsible use of guns---whether you're talking about banning rifle handgrips and magazines that stick out, or restricting carry licenses (or handgun ownership in general) to the wealthy or politically connected via fees and red tape, has nothing to do with where one falls on the left-right political spectrum, and everything to do with one's view of authority vs. individual civil liberties.

If you don't like handguns or modern-looking rifles, don't own one. But between three and four times as many Americans lawfully and responsibly own handguns as hunt, and we will keep them, thanks.

Gouranga
March 12, 2010, 08:55 PM
Are you talking the old west in the movies or reality? Even the wild west was not the wild west. When they reintroduced the concealed carry laws in NC the argument AGAINST it was it would turn the streets in NC into the "Wild West". it has been law for more than a decade now. We have more than half a million permits issues in NC and tons more legally owned handguns. We have YET to have the wild west. We have yet to see what you have suggested would happen.

In fact in every state that they instituted CCW the anti's preached the "Wild West" argument and in EVERY state it failed to happen. What DID happen was cases of people being able to defend themselves and surviving attacks that likely would have killed them.

The fear mongers preached the same to me in NY and I believed it. I know better now. I walk the streets of NC with many others who carry concealed weapons and I feel safer the MORE of these permits that are issued. Had a guy in Charlotte tonight that shot a robber in the neck. A robber who likely has put dozens in the hospital already. Fortunately the robber survived and is in police custody. Without the CCW law, this robber would be free to hit another person tomorrow.

I would say this, if you REALLY believe this we have tons of states with concealed carry, show me 1, a single 1 where concealed carry holders have increased rates of murders, attacks, gun fights, etc...we have more than 40 states over more than a decade with these permits, WHERE is it? Where is the wild west? Really, the fear, the threats of wild west, totally untrue, totally unsupported by facts, totally false propaganda.

Deanimator
March 12, 2010, 09:34 PM
You know, lots of people carried pistols in the old west, wasn't a very safe time period.
Gun control in the United States has always been about keeping the "wrong" people from having guns. The "wrong" people have in the past included:

Blacks
Indians
Italians
Slavs
Mexicans
Irish
Catholics
Jews

To this you have added Muslims.

The history of gun control in the United States has been the history of racism, religious bigotry and ethnic prejudice. You've certainly done what you could to uphold that "tradition" here.

blaisenguns
March 12, 2010, 10:01 PM
and if you notice, people generally don't take bolt action rifles on shooting sprees or robberies,
-Lopezni

Whitman? Oswald?

Wrong, I don't support Hillary, but I willing to bet many of you are Palin supporters. You know, lots of people carried pistols in the old west, wasn't a very safe time period-Lopezni

So first try to alter the debate by insulting us,:fire: than incorrectly paint the 19th century american west as the cruel brutal place seen in hollywood, and the video games you, yourself vilify. Unless you mean an era that was ripe with opertunity, economic growth and when people were mostly curteous and law abiding and above all self reliant. If that is what you mean when you talk of "The Wild West" than yes I would love to live in a state that is like "The Wild West", were I could walk down the street without fear of being mugged (which didnt happen back then), trust my neighbors, and the government is small, than dang it lets go back to that. :what: Yes there was crime and murder in "The Wild West" but it was less prevelant than today, what YOU know of "The Wild West" is TV, movies and myth, please sir, educate yourself.

Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people.
-Lopezni

Sorry I have nothing to add but this:

Because I guaranty you if one or two people IN that room at the time had weapons on them that sorry POS would have gotten greased after the first couple shots. -rattletrap1970

Thanks for saying that rattletrap.

I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol. -Lopezni

That is just a d*** racist comment sir, and I think you should post an apology:fire::fire::fire::cuss:. Almost all muslims are good people, and such a comment has no place on a forum such as this or in a civil debate. Educate yourself sir.

I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one-Lopezni

WHO ARE YOU :banghead: to make such a determination? What gives YOU the right? Yes I advocate safe responsible firearms ownership but this country is founded so that we may all enjoy "the persuit of happiness." and yes some people are not so bright, but they have the right to work hard, earn money and use it to legally obtain anything they want. THAT is the country in which we live. Educate yourself sir.

I'm serious. You are capable of knowing things you haven't experienced. Do you deny that innocent people defend themselves with handguns every single day? I know you've never witnessed it, but you do know that it happens, right-waterhouse

Thank you waterhouse, very eloquent and well thought out.

I am sorry but you need to be called out on these things, Lopezni. You are basing your argument on nonesense, and I for one do not appreciate it. Yes I know I am a zealot. I am passionate about this subject, and when these arguments come up I often think of what the otherside thinks of us. In many ways we are like them, we will never change our mind on this subject, and there is nothing wrong with that. What this forum, and this country needs is mutual understanding that each persons opinion is there own to be had, and both sides should be able to sit down and CIVILY and INTELLIGENTLY discuss the subject. I would say alomst all of us are PRO-Gun zealots and it is wrong to just say "why bother", and labelling the otherside as ignorant and wrong. Yes that IS in many cases the fact, but it is worth the time to make the argument, and to have a civil discussion, but just remember that is what THEY think of US.

lopezni
March 12, 2010, 10:40 PM
The West was safer than NYC in 1876, in 1976, and in 2010.

I don't recognize NYC as part of my state.

Oswald?

Oswald didn't do it. Have you ever shot a 6.5 Carcano, it is the worst rifle ever made. The Italians at the beginning of production thought 6.5mm was .268. So the bullets keyholed coming out of the barrel. The ones after that weren't much better. So, you have to believe he got lucky and got a good one and happened to be the greatest sniper ever. Mob did it.

West" but it was less prevelant than today, what YOU know of "The Wild West" is TV, movies and myth, please sir, educate yourself.

actually I obtained a 4.0 in American History 1776-1865 and I currently have a 4.0 in American History 1865 to present. I can send you my transcripts if you like.

KarenTOC
March 12, 2010, 11:10 PM
I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one.

I don't recognize NYC as part of my state.

Some problems just solve themselves.

lgbloader
March 12, 2010, 11:44 PM
I am amazed at some of the stories at the camp fire tonight, folks.

LGB

benEzra
March 13, 2010, 12:00 AM
I don't recognize NYC as part of my state.
Yet NYC has the laws you advocate. Concealed carry only for the wealthy, famous, and politically connected, and handgun ownership in general limited to socially connected people with plenty of disposable income who work at jobs with generous leave policies, and with either the determination to plow through official intimidation and red tape, or the money to pay a lawyer to do it for them.

Oswald didn't do it. Have you ever shot a 6.5 Carcano, it is the worst rifle ever made. The Italians at the beginning of production thought 6.5mm was .268. So the bullets keyholed coming out of the barrel. The ones after that weren't much better. So, you have to believe he got lucky and got a good one and happened to be the greatest sniper ever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uy_T7D2-Y3o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1ayL8RXJTs&feature=video_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGOQ2oebB2M&feature=related

Italian bullets WERE .268. It only keyholes if you try to reload for it with undersized U.S.-made bullets, from what I've been able to determine. Milsurp ammo would have been .268.

Those videos show hits with a 6.5 Carcano at 420 and 650 yards. So I don't think hitting a slow moving, non-traversing target from a benchrest at 50 to 88 yards with the same rifle and a 4x scope would make someone "the greatest sniper ever."

actually I obtained a 4.0 in American History 1776-1865 and I currently have a 4.0 in American History 1865 to present. I can send you my transcripts if you like.
You have completed one U.S. history class and are taking another at this moment? Are you in college now?

In your "1865-present" class, do they present data on the Western homicide rates and compare them to the rates back east? I doubt most survey classes would go into that level of detail. If you do look up those crime rates on your own time, though, you will find that the "Wild West" was not so wild from a violence standpoint. The West may have seemed wild *morally* to stodgy neo-Puritan Easterners, but it was not the Schützenfest that Hollywood portrays it to have been.

NinjaFeint
March 13, 2010, 01:20 AM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary. I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one. I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun. Most people think you just pick one up and start shooting the bullets will go where your hand is pointing. Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in. You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.

So many things wrong here.

First off, shame on you for giving people on here another reason to think those of us in the Northeast have a learning disability when it comes to firearms and firearms rights.

Next being from the state of New York you should know sometimes you have to be in less desirable areas out of necessity. You should also know that dangers aren't entirely bound by socioeconomic parameters. This is why always being prepared is a good thing. My car is new and dependable with run flat tires but I still keep my Triple A card handy just in case.

I would also like to inform you that some of us who enjoy videogames also have a firm grasp on reality. I own guns and play videogames, these are two separate and distinct parts of my life. Just because I play Modern Warfare (because it's fun as heck) does in no way shape or form mean I want any part in any violent encounter.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now to the OP's point...

I grew up in a liberal state and believed cops and bad guys where the only folks who had guns. This changed when I reached a high school and started to seriously develop my own world views and opinions. I actually get more angry about folks who blindly follow an anti upbringing just because they have no views of there own than the people who are truly anti.

Ryder
March 13, 2010, 02:16 AM
My Canadian friends are programmed like that. Everything they know about guns they learned on TV. That means they knew nothing about gun safety before meeting me.

I take them shooting to the range when they come down. They like the thrill of doing something that is so "extremely dangerous and anti-social" :D Hahaha, I am such a bad influence. They've learned a lot about guns but I don't think they will ever be comfortable rejecting the misinformation they've been fed their whole lives.

armoredman
March 13, 2010, 02:31 AM
May I interject something? I live in your "Wild West", (or wild Southwest), and I am safer here than where you are. I have walked the streets of Tombstone, and lived to tell the tale! :) I also work with violent criminals daily, and you are extremely sadly misinformed if you think your 4 references and an investigator interview has anything with keeping guns away from criminals. Sorry, but it doesn't, not one bit. Even in places where firearms are completely outlawed for civilian ownership, guns keep popping up. Criminals, by definition, break the law.
BTW, are you in college working at a gunshop part time, or taking night school? Your grade comment inspires me to ask that. See, years ago I worked a GUNshop, a real one, with an indoor range, where we sold all kinds of guns, rented them too, (for range use, not take home for the weekend, just to make THAT clear. :D), never had any issues. I would have to say, if you had worked there, Liz might have fired you, for the racist comments if nothing else. I hope you continue to learn, and grow in years and experiance, and maybe, just maybe, you might see our point of view. If not, oh well, have fun in your world, and I'll have fun in mine. Word to the wise, you may not want to visit AZ, as we are actually considering letting ordinary citizens carry concealed without a permit at all. Maybe. ;)

blkbrd666
March 13, 2010, 02:31 AM
I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary.

Would make a great sign for the front of a gun shop! :D

cleardiddion
March 13, 2010, 03:39 AM
You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it.

Wouldn't give up my handguns if you paid me. Well, if you paid me enough I could upgrade! You can trust yourself to luck, but the way I see it my butt's worth protecting. I may or may not be responding to the quote with much disdain and perhaps a loss of respect for the individual.

TexasBill
March 13, 2010, 04:52 AM
Wow! It's hard to know where to start. Fortunately the issue of the FN 5.7 has been addressed (sorry, no cop-killer ammo despite the Brady Bunch claims). However we are left with claims about bolt-action rifles and shotguns. Some have already correctly responded with the names of Whitman and Oswald, but nobody has mentioned that the two kids responsible for Columbine were carrying sawed-off shotguns. One of the murderers who killed the Clutter family (as related in Truman Capote's In Cold Blood) used a shotgun. Shotguns were used alongside Tommy Guns in the St. Valentine's Day Massacre. Kip Kunkel used a Ruger 10/22 rifle in addition to his two handguns to shoot 29 people in Oregon (admittedly, the 10/22 is a semi-automatic rifle). Lyle and Erik Menendez used a shotgun to murder their parents. William Davis was sentenced to death last month in Oklahoma for murdering three women with a shotgun. You beginning to get the picture?

I don't want a rifle for home defense; there's too much likelihood of over-penetration and danger to my family and neighbors who are really nice people. A shotgun is handy but it's overrated; too many times, it's where you're not (most violent home invasions around here happen before bedtime). In addition, I want to have a hand free for a flashlight, cell phone or to change out a magazine. Yes, racking the slide is a scary sound, but it also lets the BG know where you are. I can keep a handgun with me, either on my person or on my desk, ready for immediate and warning-noise-free use, all the time.

I do know the caliber (both bullet diameter and chambering) for all my firearms. I also know how to check to see if a gun is loaded and do it religiously. I do keep my guns and ammunition under lock and key. Every member of my family knows how to safely handle a gun and shoot a gun. The fact the people of your acquaintance do not is more a reflection on them than it is on handguns, but if you want to surround yourself with idiots, that's your privilege.

I have no fantasies of killing people but I also have no illusions that crime can't happen to me or my loved ones or that the police will arrive in the nick of time. No criticism of the police; there are millions of people in the greater Houston Metro area and thousands of cops in an area larger than the state of Rhode Island. Do the math. The criminals get to pick the time and place and, all too often, the cops aren't even called until the festivities have come to an end.

LS240
March 13, 2010, 05:51 AM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary. I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one. I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun. Most people think you just pick one up and start shooting the bullets will go where your hand is pointing. Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in. You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.
So everyone who feels the need to wear a seatbelt obviously wants to get into a car accident right? Pure ignorance.

I live in a really nice neighbourhood. The DA of my county lives a couple blocks over. A popular local radio DJ is also in my neighbourhood. I personally know of several doctors within rock throwing distance of my house. As you can tell, this is not the ghetto. But guess what? Within a few days of my moving in a couple years ago a family was murdered in cold blood on their front lawn while packing their car for a vacation. This was about a block over from my house. I heard those gunshots that night. And yes, it was a random event, not personal. But I'm in a safe area so that kinda stuff never happens right?

Wake up and realize those who carry don't so because they want to get into a gunfight. If they did, they would carry a rifle, not a handgun. People carry handguns because it gives them a modicum of protection in the unlikely event they are ever targeted by a low life who cares more about his next fix than who's family members he murders. Those kinda people don't just stay in "bad areas". They strike anywhere and everywhere and you never know until it happens to you. And in that case, it is definitely a good thing to have a handgun on you. And if it never happens, what have you lost carrying that pistol? Maybe a few more calories from the extra couple pounds you haul around every day?

Deanimator
March 13, 2010, 07:52 AM
I don't recognize NYC as part of my state.
Some people don't recognize the Holocaust as a real event or the earth as round.

Oswald didn't do it.
I'll bet you have some interesting "theories" about 9/11 too.

actually I obtained a 4.0 in American History 1776-1865
Clearly you're another victim of our public schools.

And you didn't answer my question. Let me pose it again:

If an Islamic cleric isn't suitable as a character reference, is a Protestant minister or a Catholic priest?

Gouranga
March 13, 2010, 07:59 AM
To add to your American history knowledge consider these stats:

* In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.
* In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

* DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
* New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
* Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
* Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)
-- from "Frontier Violence: Another Look"

So in fact the gun control Meccas of the US the murder rate is HIGHER than your Wild West.

I doubt any of this is changing your mind. I would point out that the folks here have pretty much proven my points and provided ample evidence against all of the characterizations being thrown out. You can choose to look at it rationally or ignore it. It all up to you and it is a free country.

Some good info in here guys, really great info.

Gouranga
March 13, 2010, 08:05 AM
I don't recognize NYC as part of my state.

I will say this guys, growing near in Buffalo, NY we REALLY tried to pretend NYC was not part of the state. There is a lot of resentment about how taxes dollars are distributed. So on this point, I can absolutely see where he is coming from. It is however part of NY State. Because of its population it drives most of the laws in the state, so ignoring it does you no good.

If the case before the SCOTUS comes through as they are predicting you may be seeing the NYC and perhaps NYS gun laws changing within a few years and maybe the programming will begin to decline as well.

I just do not understand the rationale behind the guy who says HIS hunting rifle is safe and HE is a safe gun handler but nobody else deserves the right to own anything except what he has and nobody can possibly be as safe as him. Despite my programming in NY I have found MOST gun owners are extremely safe and respectful of the responsibility a firearm brings. I have found that I do not even notice MOST people carrying concealed because they carry safely, and they don't pull their guns except in EXTREME circumstances. I have also read enough news to see how much safer we are as more and more folks carry. The programming is tough to overcome sometimes but luckily all it takes is truth to do so.

LRS_Ranger
March 13, 2010, 08:52 AM
All I can say after 4 pages of fruitless displaying of logic and facts is what my old man taught me.. "Don't bother arguing with a fool, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience." lopezni: Remember that the same bill of rights that gives you the right to make illogical and racist statements about what rights others should have is the same bill of rights is the same document that gives me the right to defend myself the way I see fit.

Art Eatman
March 13, 2010, 09:40 AM
From Post #4: "I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary."

(Old joke: Q: "Have you lived here all your life? A: Not yet.")

I'll be 76 years old, come July. I've never had a major car wreck, but I have insurance. I've never had my house burn down nor been sued for some liability around my home, but I have insurance.

Any gun of whatever sort can be used in self-defense: It's just another form of insurance against an unlikely event.

"It's not the odds; it's the stakes."

I'll probably live maybe another ten years, and then you guys won't have to put up with me. Does anybody here want to put up a million-dollar bet as a guarantee that between now and the Big Goodbye, no threat will come upon me?

No, I've yet to need a handgun for a self-defense use. However, while I was away from home on business trips during my twenty years with my first wife, she had four separate occasions to be comforted by her Ruger Blackhawk, two of which were--shall we say--"dicey". But, the Blackhawk won the stare-downs.

The nice thing about a handgun is that a woman can hold her towel wrapped around her with one hand while facing down an idiot, with her handgun in the other. Your wife or girlfriend might like to consider that; mine did...

And even low-rent hoi polloi have the absolute right of self-defense against gratuitous violence.

I saw an earlier comment about bolt actions, and a reference to Whitman. Sing small around me on that one. I'm like that feller who said, "Hell, I was there." :D I don't read about it; I write about it from first-hand knowledge. (And I already have, if you search here or at TFL.)

I've been around this gun-argument since 1967. I've heard every notion known to mankind, pro or con. I've yet to hear an argument in favor of restricting honest people which had the intellectual competency of a mouse in heat.

lopezni
March 13, 2010, 09:56 AM
I just do not understand the rationale behind the guy who says HIS hunting rifle is safe and HE is a safe gun handler but nobody else deserves the right to own anything except what he has and nobody can possibly be as safe as him.

again, I never said people handguns should be taken away. I definitely never abdicated using a rifle for home defense. however as of yesterday I am now abdicating that people who think HI-point carbines are cool and are good rifles be put in camps

hso
March 13, 2010, 10:11 AM
however as of yesterday I am now abdicating that people who think HI-point carbines are cool and are good rifles be put in camps

You mean folks of modest means should be put in camps for wanting an inexpensive carbine that has been proven to be reliable and is minimally effective for using for home defense like the more expensive shotgun you advocate? Refer to your first post if you can't remember telling folks that a shotgun was all that was needed.

Your arguments have been like horse apples falling through the enormous holes in the logic you've used. You've stated outright erroneous opinion as fact in the face of statistics and facts presented to you, appealed to racism and bigotry on a board who's prime administrator is a Muslim, you've used sweeping generalizations and ad hominem attacks trying to discredit anyone who would point out those holes and the nature of your arguments to deflect attention from the facts presented to you and once again you return to racist imagery. In spite of claiming to be a gun dealer in NY, I'd find the opinions you've presented to be consistent with that shameful minority I see at some shows here in TN ranting about "camps" and "those people".

I applaud the members of THR who have taken the time to counter each and every fallacious argument and pointed out the consistently inconsistent claims you've made that serve to highlight the OPs contention that far too many people have been fed a line of hooey and have swallowed it hook line and sinker.

Deanimator
March 13, 2010, 10:14 AM
You mean folks of modest means should be put in camps for wanting an inexpensive carbine that is reliable and is minimally effective for using for home defense like the more expensive shotgun you advocate?
I'm sure he'll be along shortly to "clarify" that to mean that it only applies to "Muslim clerics".

The only thing he's "abdicated" (sic) so far is the role of rational thinker.

winknplink
March 13, 2010, 10:14 AM
Wow, how is this guy still here?

Is this THR material? Really?

All I can say after 4 pages of fruitless displaying of logic and facts is what my old man taught me.. "Don't bother arguing with a fool, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."

This ^ for the win. You can't argue with folks who treat opinion as fact...or a person who can't differentiate between the two. Continually throwing facts at his feet obviously does not work...this thread will go on forever as he obviously hasn't the common sense to know when he is wrong, nor how to cope with being corrected.

hso
March 13, 2010, 10:33 AM
winkplink,

Yes, it is. Group think is never a good thing. Having a diversity of opinion and vigorous civil debate is healthy and can help to get everyone to shake off their comfortable opinions and examine them again.

It also helps the huge number of people who simply visit THR "listen" to the debate and realize that their opinions that have been based on Anti propaganda might not be as reasonable as they thought. Helping fence sitters off of their uncomfortable position and onto the rational side is important in preserving and restoring our rights.

Whether lopezni is just a mole/troll, an unwitting bigot who thinks certain racial/ethnic groups can't be trusted, or someone who is naive and needs to examine the mis/disinformation they've been fed all their life against the facts presented here, it allows everyone here to see how to constructively deal with opinions like his.

And, as improbable as it seems, we might even get him to drop the lies and prejudice he's shown here and understand that gun owners are already are just like the responsible reasonable people he keeps advocating gun owners should be. ;)

winknplink
March 13, 2010, 10:44 AM
Good point(s).

I digress.

Gouranga
March 13, 2010, 10:50 AM
x2 hso....

As I pointed out, I was once among the rank and file who followed the propaganda lines. Almost all of them have been thrown out including a couple I have not ever heard (Muslim Cleric remark is a good example here).

Would be easy for anyone on here to throw out a quick dismissal of anti statements and walk off. Instead we have 5 pages of facts, stats and counter opinions to about every Anti argument I have heard. Not just that but thrown out in a rational, careful manner. Just having that info in one thread (I am sure it is in others as well), is worth the read, IMO. I mean you could almost print this out and make a pamphlet out of it to hand out to anti's or more importantly those on the fence on the discussion.

TexasRifleman
March 13, 2010, 11:05 AM
however as of yesterday I am now abdicating that people who think HI-point carbines are cool and are good rifles be put in camps

Yes, can't have those people without lots of money having guns can we?

Every time you post something you sound more racist and elitist. More of the typical anti gun rhetoric. There are some "special" people who should have guns, and the peons should be disarmed. Why am I not surprised.

Deanimator
March 13, 2010, 11:17 AM
Yes, can't have those people without lots of money having guns can we?
No doubt he'd apply the "paper bag test", and not just for guns, probably for voting and home ownership too.

Neverwinter
March 13, 2010, 12:34 PM
We can't ever be free of programming. It develops through your social interactions and the media that you consume. To participate successfully in society, you have to agree to be programmed into following certain mores.

The best you can do as an individual is to maintain awareness of how your programming affects your thoughts and actions while being open to information which merits reconsideration of your current principles.

winknplink
March 13, 2010, 12:47 PM
The best you can do as an individual is to maintain awareness of how your programming affects your thoughts and actions while being open to information which merits reconsideration of your current principles.

Oooh, Good post.

Shadow material recognition...existentialism...on THR...you wouldn't happen to be a Carl Jung fan, would ya? ;)

hso
March 13, 2010, 12:51 PM
Neverwinter,

I agree, excellent observation. Our view of the world is subjective based on the sum of our experiences and influences, good or bad. When presented with objective facts we can either honestly take that in and modify our view of the world or dishonestly reject those facts to cling to our more comfortable perspectives. Humans don't like change and changing their mind on a whole network of supporting prejudices is particularly uncomfortable.

winknplink
March 13, 2010, 01:03 PM
When presented with objective facts we can either honestly take that in and modify our view of the world or dishonestly reject those facts to cling to our more comfortable perspectives. Humans don't like change and changing their mind on a whole network of supporting prejudices is particularly uncomfortable.

yup.

denial, projection, integration and/or transmutation.

Zoogster
March 13, 2010, 04:10 PM
* In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.
* In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

* DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
* New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
* Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
* Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)
-- from "Frontier Violence: Another Look"

So in fact the gun control Meccas of the US the murder rate is HIGHER than your Wild West.


One more thing should be added to this. Medical treatment back then was very crude. So the reality on violence would show it was even safer in the "wild west" than the pure statistics show.
Today a much greater number of those shot survive and are not part of the murder statistics.
A statistic on the rate of being shot or attacked with other lethal weapons rather than just murdered would show this. Modern cities would score even worse.

The Wild West where just about everyone owned a gun, and many carried one around, was a much safer place. Even when most of them were heavily populated by rugged cowboys, miners, railroad workers, etc, and the most common social places were taverns, bars, and brothels, and there was very few women.
So in an environment where the most common recreational activity after a hard day's work was getting drunk, gambling, and many people carried sidearms, it had better statistics than today's gun control capitols.

The myth of the dangers was primarily encouraged by east coast newspapers. They would tell long drawn own accounts of many of the murders out west. So there was few per year, but they received extensive coverage. Even more than local murders.The people in the east were fascinated with how different the culture was, and used it as a sort of fantasy.
This is why things like Buffalo Bill's Wild West shows were so popular for years, both on the East Coast and in Europe from the 1870s on, and similar shows into the early 1900s.
This kept the fantasy alive until Hollywood got in on the act and immortalized it in films.

DeepSouth
March 13, 2010, 05:23 PM
Any state that simply uses the NICS check as a basis to sell someone a handgun. Texas sold Maj. Hasan, a pistol that has a 20rd capacity, is known to have the capability to penetrate body armor, which he used to kill innocent people. In NY he would have had to obtain 4 references and interview with an investigator, after a throughout investigation was done. I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference. Florida gave Plaxico Burris a permit and he came to NY and shot himself with his pistol.

When the LA riots happened hundreds, if not thousands, of people could not protect themselves because of the waiting period. Is that how you want it? People who are in danger of loosing their lives not being able to protect themselves because they have to wait for 4 references.

BTW: What do you the chances are of an active Military Major, with no criminal back ground, getting a handgun in NY? I say probably pretty good


you said
"I don't think the judge would have accepted an Islamic Cleric as a reference."
I'll bet your wrong.



To the OP.
I Love Alabama. I have never met an anti face to face in my life.

cskny
March 13, 2010, 05:59 PM
Quote:
* In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.
* In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

* DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
* New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
* Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
* Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)
-- from "Frontier Violence: Another Look"

So in fact the gun control Meccas of the US the murder rate is HIGHER than your Wild West.



These numbers are entertaining, but how can they actually be statistically meaningful?

Just as one example, you don't think that comparable population density would have an overall affect on the numbers?

I mean, if you took 25 million 1880's wild west folks and put them inside the same town, would anyone expect the same ratio's per 100,000 to hold true?

And that's just one external factor difference. What about the lifestyle and work type/time required? Differences in potential social interactions and/or disagreements, etc.

I'm not trying to bash the point, but let's not get crazy about what those numbers really mean in a projection forward.

Gouranga
March 13, 2010, 06:28 PM
Well it is not apples to apples but then again, this is a point anti's bring up. I have read plenty of books and stories on it and the only way they have to quantify it is, the same stats they use now.

If there were shootings left and right as folks have tried to pass around, regardless of the population density I would expect Abilene for example to have a LOT more murders than none in 1869 or 1870. Especially when you consider they carried weapons while drinking in saloons, I would expect it to be MUCH higher.

Population density does make a difference in crime, that is certain and density in Abilene, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell in the 1870's I am sure is way below DC, NYC, Baltimore, and/or Newark but I would still expect these numbers to be closer if the Wild West was the crazed, insane world it is portrayed as.

Folks bring up the OK Coral and these big shootouts. I would counter with the gang battle at Lancaster speedway in NY and a major shootout we had in one of the Mecklenburg County parks a few years ago (with a mess of illegal guns).

Officers'Wife
March 13, 2010, 06:40 PM
I was a foster child in the city of Chicago from age 8 to 11. I can say that at least within the set of foster parents in that particular city there is a tendency to brainwash against civilian handgun use.

When I arrived at the farm in Indiana the firearm of choice was the rifle. To this day I have very little use for a handgun. However, when the person with that handgun acts as if he or she also possesses a modicum of common sense and common decency I don't worry about their choices in weapons.

Going back to my late uncle's observation: There are some that could own heavy machine guns without worry. Others that make me nervous when they pick up a butter knife. My uncle was far more qualified to teach life lessons than the city of Chicago.

shockwave
March 13, 2010, 07:40 PM
When the LA riots happened hundreds, if not thousands, of people could not protect themselves because of the waiting period.

Can't speak to that, but here in FL, to get a CWP, you have to get a certificate, so figure a week to sign up and then take that. Then you have to schedule a visit to the Dept of Agriculture, which is a 6-week wait, and then the paperwork takes 4 to 6 weeks to go through. So all told you're close to 4 months before you're legal to carry. Moral of that story is "don't wait until you need armament, but get yourself prepared in advance of trouble."

Zoogster
March 13, 2010, 08:02 PM
These numbers are entertaining, but how can they actually be statistically meaningful?

Just as one example, you don't think that comparable population density would have an overall affect on the numbers?


Not in this case, like I explained in post #114. The most common recreational activity at the time (with no electronics, and not enough women for most men to even have families) was getting drunk in social environments. Like taverns, saloons.
Population density does not matter in that case because 100 people in a saloon or 100 people in a modern night club is still 100 people.
Since this is what the majority of people did for recreation, most of the population put themselves into such densely populated environments on a regular basis, and consumed alcohol while in possession of firearms, and gambling on top of that.

By comparison today most people do not visit the local bar or night club after work each day. Those who do so frequently are within a specific and limited demographic, not the majority like back then. Most today go home. Where they are with a far lower number of people.
So one could argue that while a lower number of people lived per square mile, most packed themselves into high population density environments almost daily for recreation after work.

So in fact the percentage of people who chose to pack themselves together in dense environments on a regular basis was greater then than today. In the wild west with few women, not many families as a result (tends to lead to more violence), mainly rugged men, and a lot of weapons, where recreation was drinking and gambling in dense social environments....
There was far fewer violent attacks than today.

As I also said in post #114, a significantly higher number of those who were attacked died, so the rates of murder alone don't even show how much safer it was as many more attacked today survive the injuries and are not part of the murder statistic who would have been back then.

Deanimator
March 13, 2010, 08:17 PM
These numbers are entertaining, but how can they actually be statistically meaningful?
I'll bet you think that the heavily debunked "43 times" fairy story is "statistically meaningful".

Nothing that doesn't support repressive, invidiously racist gun controls is going to be "statistically meaningful" to you and those of your ilk.

Justin
March 13, 2010, 08:53 PM
I'm not trying to bash the point, but let's not get crazy about what those numbers really mean in a projection forward

The point is that the statistics are useful in dispelling the myth that anti gun people perpetuate that the old west was somehow an inherehntly violent place, and that allowing modern citizens to carry defensive arms would return us to a supposedly violent society.

Certainly one can't draw a direct correlation between the old west and modern America, but then if such statistical comparisons are invalid, then so too is the argument that modern concealed carry by citizens in the 21st century will turn them into brutish savages who have shootouts on mainstreet.

Really, I'm somewhat surprised I even have to point this out.

Patriotme
March 13, 2010, 09:25 PM
I was thinking the same thing Deanimator. Why is an Islamic Cleric any less reliable than my baptist pastor? I have met many Muslims, and while we disagree on religious beliefs, they are no less or more moral than I. They LOVE the US, and would defend her. We have Muslims serving in the military who risk their lives day in day out for us to have the right to live.

I really do not want to play gang up on a poster here. Really, you voiced your opinion, and we all have them. Nor is it my intention to slam all NYers. I lived there for 25 years and have many fond memories of the western part of the state. My point of contention was the "training" I received. I used to think that all this hype that TV and such can influence how you think was garbage but when you look inside you see stuff like this.

I mean getting to irrational fear, I grew up afraid of handguns, the first one I bought, I was really nervous, like I was doing something wrong. I committed myself to the range 3 times a week for 3 months until I learned that gun like it was an extension of my own hand. My wife is the same way. My father when I talk to him rationally, on his fear of me with a handgun, admits it is irrational. Doubly so when you consider my sister is a cop in NY. She and her husband (who is a cop as well) have a lot of handguns and are always armed. That does not make him nervous at all(as they are cops and cops should have guns).

My father also recognizes, I have fired my weapon more than 10 times as much as my sister and brother in law combined. I have received more firearms focused training than they did.

It is amazing to me the level of programming and not only that but how DEEP it goes. When you are fearful of these weapons so deep, when anti's spew ridiculous claims (i.e. all handgun owners WANT to shoot someone), it becomes instant truth to you.

You look at the posts across this site, you see folks who do not take gun safety lightly. In my experience they represent the majority.

As to the other point I do not ever put myself in danger deliberately. The gun is NOT a ticket to go start trouble or some badge of courage. Because I literally carry the power to end a life and/or cause extreme harm to another human being I am doubly careful in avoiding situations that could turn violent, confrontational, etc. Once again, this has been the status quo from gun owners I know. I also do not have a bunker in my back yard, though I have 4 daughters so I may need one to live in for a week every month when they hit their teens.

In short, everything I was taught on guns in NY was totally incorrect. it was an example as to another danger in gun bans. I am not a criminal but the statement Lopezni shared (which is pretty brave to throw up in this community), paints me as one. That mentality is borne out of such an environment created by gun bans. I can say this as well, it was NOT easy to break out of it. If any of you talked to me 8 years ago, I would likely have the same things to say that Lopezni did about many members of this board. Sad to say it but it is true.
We actually only have a couple of thousand Muslims serving in our military. Considering that we have about 3 million (unless you use inflated CAIR numbers) in the US that doesn't seem like a large amount that love the US and wish to defend their country.

Justin
March 13, 2010, 10:03 PM
Let's not get this thread locked by turning the discussion to one of religion.

cskny
March 13, 2010, 10:36 PM
There's not enough information to draw dramatic conclusions about those numbers. They are entertaining, not enlightening. That was my only point.

It's not a 'gun' thing. It's not an 'anti' or 'pro' thing. It's simply a comparison "thing". I'm glad to see some people get it. These are fun numbers to talk about on a barstool, but they have no real dramatic social meaning either way.

You simply can't take numbers and compare them without understanding the underlying environmental and social components that contribute to those numbers and comparisons. It would be like taking car accident rates in 1908, comparing them to car accidents rates in 2009 and trying to draw conclusions about road safety without factoring in anything else It might be entertaining (to those of us who like analysis), but not particularly valuable or enlightening.


Zoogster, as far as I can tell you state some impressions about social behaviors, not facts. Your posts are filled with words like:

'significantly, was greater then, mainly, frequently are within a specific, etc'.

There's no numbers or definitions around anything you're saying, nor do you give any idea where you're getting this info. It's beautiful in a sense, because it SOUNDS so specific but yet can't be proven or rejected because it doesn't actually say anything specific.

Generalized ideas cannot normalize the information you're trying to compare and frankly, the items you speak of are far from an exhaustive list of the variables you would have to consider in such a comparison. I personally don't even believe that some of your generalizations are correct, but that doesn't matter. I doubt you could realistically do a real comparison, there would be too many assumptions and unknowns.

cskny
March 13, 2010, 10:48 PM
The point is that the statistics are useful in dispelling the myth that anti gun people perpetuate that the old west was somehow an inherehntly violent place, and that allowing modern citizens to carry defensive arms would return us to a supposedly violent society.

Certainly one can't draw a direct correlation between the old west and modern America, but then if such statistical comparisons are invalid, then so too is the argument that modern concealed carry by citizens in the 21st century will turn them into brutish savages who have shootouts on mainstreet.

Really, I'm somewhat surprised I even have to point this out.



Justin, those statistics cannot accomplish the goal you're stating because they are void of the other variables required for a comparison. They cannot confirm or dispel ANYTHING, period. Yes, if both sides are trying to use them that way, both sides score 0 points!

And come on, you can't say:

"Certainly one can't draw a direct correlation between the old west and modern America..."

And then go on and try to make the correlation anyway! Just leave it with the statement: You CAN'T draw a direct correlation, period. You've already won the discussion at that point because you're correct, the rest of the sentences just weaken the point.

Frankly, I'm surprised that I have to point that out :)

Skillet
March 13, 2010, 11:17 PM
Originally posted By GunFighter123, post #13
It is being taught at EVERY public school in America

Kids can not go to school wearing a Ruger , Colt ,S&W shirt without being pulled out of class and haveing the parents bring them a more "appropriate" shirt

No more playing Cowboys and Indians , G.I. Joe , Cops & Robbers etc. etc. -- and just look how good America is because of it

I'm sixteen (i know what am I doing on this site talking about guns and such (I just like them))
I have a CZ-USA sticker on my car. I also have a CZ-USA shirt. it's a good thing almost nobody who isn't a gun owner knows what that shirt even means because I most certainly would be pulled out of class if my power tripping school dean arrived on the scene. But yet kids get away with wearing heineken shirts and chicks that are pretty much nude on them. but NO, NO guns...

I think we have a perfect example of a classical conditioned selective anti on this thread. While, yes, there is idiots that probably own guns, do we really use what your opinion of them as idiots a valid argument to take EVERYBODY's handguns away? While yes you did state several times that you do not want to take handguns away, you also stated that you don't think that they should give handguns out to just everyone, and that not every idiot should have one. first off, your opinion of whether someone is an idiot is just that. An OPINION. what if they did the same for cars? Oh, we can't sell this car to YOU, because we cannot sell cars to just ANYONE. doesn't that sound rather dumb?

I think you need to rethink your logic, Lopenzie, and really look into what others are telling you and the hard facts.

I am an example. I am a responsible gun owner (not legally, of course, my dad owns them) and I'm sixteen years old! some would consider that trouble, and trouble written all over it. But I was raised right, and from day one I was taught firearm safety. And I know what I am talking about. I have to deal with kids and teachers that are against guns ((un)educated to be against guns) every day.
So please don't just throw away my words because I'm sixteen years old. Just listen.

ol' scratch
March 14, 2010, 02:57 PM
I've lived in NY my whole live and I have never been in a situation or seen one where having a handgun would've been necessary. I don't have a problem with handguns other than most aren't very practical or worth the money. However I do have a problem with states that just pass them out to anyone. I don't want every random idiot who wants a handgun to be able to carry one. I sell firearms and I see people who can't even operate a bolt action rifle and they want to carry a handgun. Most people think you just pick one up and start shooting the bullets will go where your hand is pointing. Most people I've met whose only interest in guns are handguns, want their world to be like one of the stupid video games they live in. You want to protect your home get a shotgun, otherwise if you feel the need to carry a gun on you, you probably are hanging around places you shouldn't be or one of those people who hopes for an excuse to use it. Hell, I've even met people who own a handgun and don't even know the caliber bullet it fires.
Lopezni, you live in New York. I am glad a shotgun fits your purposes in New York. There are times when a handgun is more useful.

My Grandfather carries a handgun on his property because he lives near the Ypsilanti, Ann Arbor Michigan area. Recently, they have had a rise in crime. This crime is spilling into rural areas that are not typically as protected. Also, as the economy went south in the area, people have started dumping dogs in the rural area he lives in. On two occations, there has been cause to shoot dogs that were menacing. Grandpa is getting older and can't handle a shotgun as he once could. When he goes outside, he carries a pistol for defense and has used it do dispatch one dog-a pit bull that was obviously intent on doing him harm.

The other dog, an unknown breed, tried to attack my uncle while he was cutting wood. If he had relied on a shotgun, he couldn't have pulled it into action as quickly as his pistol.

When I was younger in Northern Michigan, there was an issue with feral dogs. They attacked a number of people. I used to like to fish in some pretty out-of-the-way places. I had to fight a dog off with a fly rod ONCE. After that, I made sure I was carrying my dad's .357.

Different tools for different situations. Don't assume that handguns don't have a purpose. If they didn't, the police wouldn't need to carry them.

metalhd9034
March 14, 2010, 03:46 PM
It's a NY thing definitely.

lions
March 14, 2010, 05:15 PM
In fact, most criminals probably wouldn't even look at a rifle or shotgun because it is not gangster enough

What a well thought out and reasonable method of deciding which guns you think I should use.

If you are so opposed to handguns why do you sell them in your store? Apparently it doesn't take much for you to push your beliefs aside. I almost find it hard to believe that you truly dislike a type of firearm because it is "gangster enough".

ironvic
March 14, 2010, 05:23 PM
Lopenzi: Turn in your FFL!

ol' scratch
March 14, 2010, 05:50 PM
again, I never said people handguns should be taken away. I definitely never abdicated using a rifle for home defense. however as of yesterday I am now abdicating that people who think HI-point carbines are cool and are good rifles be put in camps
You mean concentration camps? Your posts just get better and better. And to answer an earlier post concerning 'gangster' firearms and what people would use in crime. You mentioned that criminals wouldn't use shotguns or bolt actions. Let me remind you that there have been crimes committed using both. As a matter-of-fact, The Firearms Act of 1934 has a provision concerning shotguns.

whalerman
March 14, 2010, 06:16 PM
I commend all who have posted on this thread. I'm not sure how you've been able to keep civil, but you've done it.

Things started off with Mr Lopezni asking a question about living in NY and how that could influence one being "programmed" to be anti gun. I grew up in NY, then had the good fortune to live in Texas for 20 years, returning to NY when my parents needed some help. I work in law enforcement, so I'm familiar with what I see as cause and effect issues regarding handgun licensing. I understand Mr Lopezni's views, but agree with few of them. The handgun laws we have in NY are designed to discourage citizens from attempting to obtain handgun licenses. Because of that, only a few can navigate the system, which makes people ignorant of the many aspects involved. They don't know the pleasures of handgun target shooting, or hunting, let alone the advantages of using one for defense. This ignorance, and I do not use this term to downgrade the good people of NY, has been going on for a couple generations now. A dealer cannot even let a person touch a handgun until they have undergone FBI fingerprint checks, personal interviews, reference checks, year long delays, all subject to the ultimate whim of the local authority. Is this about crime? Clearly not. Why shouldn't a father be able to teach a son or daughter about handguns before it is time to be on their own? But you better not, not in NY.

Mr Lopenzi has, in my opinion, indeed been programmed by an atmosphere where gun ignorance has been taught at an early age. NY is a fine example. The people who question it have learned to keep quiet.

lykoris
March 14, 2010, 06:17 PM
I thought the title was interesting, social conditioning of a populace to a certain mindset...only to read over the past 6 pages the most successful deflection/hijack by lopezni in post three.

I really have to take my hat off to you lopezni for such a successful job, from views of the wild wild west, mall ninjas, JFK assassination. WOW, you really know how to stir the pot.

And to reply to the question of the OP rather than feed a troll I would say that is how all of Western Europe is literally programmed through TV, newspapers, radio, magazines.

Firearms ownership is part of a culture and with any culture can be gradually altered given enough time.

I had a very interesting conversation today with a friend of my mother-in-law who was Anti with all the typical arguments from MSM. When I pointed out errors she finally said she was anti and that was that, no way of changing her mind even if her arguments are incorrect.

I find it interesting how sub-conscious exposure to anti-firearm media can become so deeply ingrained that people are anti without even understanding why they are anti.

Program the voting majority of the people to be anti-gun and you'll have no trouble passing firearms legislation.

My point of view as a european.

Deanimator
March 14, 2010, 06:26 PM
You mentioned that criminals wouldn't use shotguns or bolt actions. Let me remind you that there have been crimes committed using both.
Maybe he doesn't consider the murder of Medgar Evers by Byron de la Beckwith a CRIME. We KNOW that de la Beckwith used an M1917 "Enfield" to shoot Evers. From Wikipedia:

On June 12, 1963, Evers pulled into his driveway after just returning from a meeting with NAACP lawyers. Emerging from his car and carrying NAACP T-shirts that read "Jim Crow Must Go," Evers was struck in the back with a bullet fired from an Enfield 1917 .303 rifle that ricocheted into his Jackson, Mississippi home Note: M1917s are in .30-06. P-14s are in .303. Lee-Enfields are in .303.

Apparently Lopezni doesn't consider that a criminal act.

Isher
March 14, 2010, 06:45 PM
ol' scratch -

Mucho thanks.

Gonna need some time to absorb this case law.

That being said, I'm more than a little suspicious

Of "law" which delimits free speech

According to one's age, sex, social or economic standing, etc..

It smacks to me of the infamous redlining

Of certain neighborhoods, racial and/or economic levels by

The mortgage and insurance outfits

Brought up to a supposedly Constitutional level.


isher

Hunt480
March 14, 2010, 07:24 PM
Mr Lopenzi has, in my opinion, indeed been programmed by an atmosphere where gun ignorance has been taught at an early age. NY is a fine example. The people who question it have learned to keep quiet.

Just think this is the mind set of a firearms dealer in NY...We all know the nation has been being programmed ANTI by all the major TV networks for years with OPRAH and the like.
Then again people being unable to think for themselves and beleiving everything they see and hear on TV seems to be worse than ever now.Maybe thats another thread?

Geno
March 14, 2010, 08:09 PM
lopezni:

You seem to be correct about any common fool possessing a handgun and not knowing how the Hades to use it. Witness this article in which just such a moron got his fool-@$$ kilt-dead!! And don't even get me started about defending one's self with a handgun, because you'll just end up getting it taken away and used against you. Oh that this poor, dumb criminal would have listened.

Geno

Link: http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/22837686/detail.html

Police: Man Disarms, Shoots Gunman
1 Gunman Fatally Shot; Police Looking For 2 Others

POSTED: Sunday, March 14, 2010
UPDATED: 5:47 pm EDT March 14, 2010

7130 MIDDLEBELT ROAD, ROMULUS, Mich. -- A couple unknowingly walked into an armed robbery in progress Saturday and ended up fighting back, and killing, a gunman, Romulus police said.

Police said three black men wearing ski masks walked into the Super Y Market on Middlebelt Road at about 9:30 p.m. with guns drawn.

A gunman confronted a man and a woman entering the store and ended up getting into a tussle with the man, which resulted in the man disarming him and shooting him twice, police said.

The gunman was killed.

Police said the two other gunman fled out the store's back door and got into a 2004 black Pontiac Grand Prix with the license plate CCR0052.

Police are searching for the two gunmen who got away.

Police said they consider the gunmen armed and dangerous and are asking the public to report any tips to 734-941-8400.

whalerman
March 14, 2010, 08:12 PM
Mr Hunt480, that's why I would tell folks like you to be thankful for the place you live. You're a Georgian. Here in NY, we love our government so much, we've completely ruined our economy and the future for our kids. The only real answer is to work for a government agency or a school district. For two generations now, the very best of our youth have left for other parts of the country. Now we are left with people who believe all that is told to them, whether by MSM or by their local and state political hacks. It isn't a pretty sight. Good people, yes. But a rotted foundation.

Do I have to ask the question of whether this kind of sheep thinking carries over to gun issues? I doubt it. Best regards to Georgia.

Hunt480
March 14, 2010, 08:25 PM
Mr Hunt480, that's why I would tell folks like you to be thankful for the place you live. You're a Georgian.
Amen.I hear ya screamin

mokin
March 14, 2010, 11:17 PM
I remember the revelation of "anti" programing (not thinking)durring a discussion with my sister-in-law 15 or so years ago. She grew up, I believe, in Kansas City. Until she became aquainted with my family, she associated handguns with either police or crimminals. It is remarkable how much lopezni's post echos her sentiments.

armoredman
March 14, 2010, 11:58 PM
Skillet, my kind of youngster!:)

Skillet
March 15, 2010, 12:16 AM
haha thanks

blaisenguns
March 15, 2010, 09:33 PM
Oswald didn't do it. Have you ever shot a 6.5 Carcano, it is the worst rifle ever made. The Italians at the beginning of production thought 6.5mm was .268. So the bullets keyholed coming out of the barrel. The ones after that weren't much better. So, you have to believe he got lucky and got a good one and happened to be the greatest sniper ever. Mob did it.

Ok, solely for the sake of argument lets say that is true. Kennedy was still not shot with a shotgun or pistol, no matter who did it.

actually I obtained a 4.0 in American History 1776-1865 and I currently have a 4.0 in American History 1865 to present. I can send you my transcripts if you like.

Good for you. I got As in two semesters of Spainish, and dont speak a word of it.

Please do yourself a favor and stop talking, lopezni.

Babarsac
March 15, 2010, 10:02 PM
I just LOVE it when anti-gunners try to play to the imaginary bigotry of the diverse community of gun owners.

As a liberal gun owner up here in Northern VA last year I took my girlfriend (who's black) and my room-mate (who's Jewish) out to the range. They all had a great time and are now looking into becoming gun owners themselves. For the icing on the cake I drove them there in my car which has my NRA sticker right next to my Quaker school bumper sticker. I swear I saw a few heads pop in the rear-view mirror. :D

That being said I grew up in a very liberal family but was never taught that guns were evil.

I guess I must be using a different dictionary because when I look up liberal in Webster's I don't see a single mention of firearms.

hnk45acp
March 16, 2010, 04:32 PM
I've lived in NY for 40 years and was almost programmed to be anti-gun, I thought about it and decided not to be. You can do it too, it's easy use the thing on top of your neck and work it out. I've never "needed" a gun either, I've also never had to plead the 5th but I'm glad it's there for me.

gesshots
March 16, 2010, 04:41 PM
Cogradulations on obtaining your CCW. Now more then ever is the time to deprogram
others by example. Good luck.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

GEM
March 16, 2010, 04:56 PM
People have run simulations of the Kennedy shooting with the rifle in question and could make the shots. Boring, nutty arguments don't make the case.

As I mentioned above, another NY person who is programmed.

Bohemus
March 16, 2010, 05:07 PM
I'm sixteen (i know what am I doing on this site talking about guns and such (I just like them))
I have a CZ-USA sticker on my car. I also have a CZ-USA shirt. it's a good thing almost nobody who isn't a gun owner knows what that shirt even means because I most certainly would be pulled out of class if my power tripping school dean arrived on the scene. But yet kids get away with wearing heineken shirts and chicks that are pretty much nude on them. but NO, NO guns...

I think we have a perfect example of a classical conditioned selective anti on this thread. While, yes, there is idiots that probably own guns, do we really use what your opinion of them as idiots a valid argument to take EVERYBODY's handguns away? While yes you did state several times that you do not want to take handguns away, you also stated that you don't think that they should give handguns out to just everyone, and that not every idiot should have one. first off, your opinion of whether someone is an idiot is just that. An OPINION. what if they did the same for cars? Oh, we can't sell this car to YOU, because we cannot sell cars to just ANYONE. doesn't that sound rather dumb?

I think you need to rethink your logic, Lopenzie, and really look into what others are telling you and the hard facts.

I am an example. I am a responsible gun owner (not legally, of course, my dad owns them) and I'm sixteen years old! some would consider that trouble, and trouble written all over it. But I was raised right, and from day one I was taught firearm safety. And I know what I am talking about. I have to deal with kids and teachers that are against guns ((un)educated to be against guns) every day.
So please don't just throw away my words because I'm sixteen years old. Just listen.

Interesting about the shirt, I know guy who, when he was 16, carrier .357 S&W revolver and stored his .22lr rifle in rectors office because he had shooting trainings right after school. Schoolmaster was fine with it because he was bringing his medals and trophys to school..

hso
March 16, 2010, 05:13 PM
We've done about all the good we're going to do here and have started to wander off for lack of focus so it's about time to close this one.

If you enjoyed reading about "Programmed to be anti-gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!