Is the USA a mini Somalia?

[d2wing]

Part of it is that in the U.S. we have mutual responsibility for our community and public safety. We are government of the people, by and for the people, although the current administration is doing it's best to end that. The need for each able citizen to bear arms
has been proven over and again the best way to protect public safety. Of course there are well know occasional failures but that is the price of a free society. The need to bear arms has not diminished at all. All this depends on citizens being law abiding and a moral people. I am not sure how all this secularism will work out for us. In many countries others are stepping into the moral vacuum of the secular. It is my hope that we can maintain more traditional values here.

 

[archigos]

My wife & I own a chicken farm so we need to deal with Mr Fox.

I was checked by the police, MI5, MI6 etc before I could have a shotgun permit.

In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

Incorrect. Self defense and defense from tyranny is a basic human right. The fact that you are denied that right does not make it any less a right - or you and I would be subjects of the same royalty.

 

[Teachu2]

Both Somalia and the US gained independence from British rule, the US in 1776 by war, Somalia in 1960 by well, frankly, abandonment. Both have vast natural resources, but Somalia's per capita GDP is ~$600 US, while the US number is $48,100.

Why? The US Constitution was a radical departure from anything that came before it. It layed the groundwork for a stable central government, with recognition of human rights above all else. It set up a nation where anyone with the desire and ability could thrive. No royalty, no caste system. A nation with respect for the rule of law.

Somalia has no Constitution, no functional central government, no rules. Anarchy in action.

It has to be difficult for Brits to comprehend the scope of freedoms Americans have. This vast country still has vast opportunities for those with desire and ability. Heck, with the advent of reality shows ability isn't even a requirement! Opportunity stretches across the continent, with huge areas of undeveloped land still.

No man is an island, but Britain is. Land area of ~93,000 square miles - a bit smaller than Wyoming. The US is ~3,500,000 square miles. Yet the British number ~62 million (667 people per sq mi) to the US at 312 million (89 per sq mile). Brits are 7x as dense!

Our heritage of taking up arms to rebel initially, to using them in the wars of conquest over the native population, to the stylized popular version of the settlement of the West, to the American Civil War, to gangsters of Prohibition, to the present - to us, firearms are integral to freedom. Armed people are citizens - we grant powers to our government. Unarmed people are subjects, who hope for power from their government.

We are a nation of choice. We chose to form, we choose what we wish to pursue for work, we choose the climate we wish to live in, we choose our President. We don't all or always choose wisely, but we endeavor to choose fairly.

Somalia? Not so much....

 

[mnrivrat]

Many gun owners here is the US do not waste our time associating our firearms with violence and/or criminal activity.

We can leave that mostly up to the media, and to those who do not understand that a firearm is simply a tool. and does not reflect good or evil like some would portray them.

We collect firearms , we hunt with firearms. we use them for all kinds of sporting events. Yes, we also use them for self defense - that is our right, and not a government given privilage.

 

[razorback2003]

There are certainly parts of big cities that are like a third world country or remind me of third world countries. These bad areas are where the huge majority of violent crime, drug dealing, huge unemployed and not willing to work population, and unsavory activities go on.

If you go to rural Nebraska or Missouri there is very little violent criminal activities. Even Boston or NYC has lower violent crime than New Orleans or Atlanta. It all depends on where you go.

 

[Nushif]

Frankly, I can understand where he's coming from.

We're sitting here talking about self defense, ready to go in a split second action all day long, "condition yellow," people putting 100 yard standoff distance between them and the line of their property, fortified houses, preparing for armored intruders armed with AR rifles and paramilitary trained gangs, how unsafe an apartment complex is ...

What is he supposed to get from this?

If I knew nothing about the US, and all I read here I'd be under the same impression. Lets face it folks. The way we sit here and talk all day we do seem as if we're living on a ragged edge of split second violence all day. Contemplating lethality of calibers ranging from .380 to 9x19 or the difference between the capacity tradeoff between .40 and .45.

Am I the only one seeing where he's coming from?

Reality is the firearm in the US has a history of a tool. But it doesn't often shine through in the community. There are times when we arguably do sound the part he's talking about.

 

[exavid]

Regarding the question to Wanderling about why the Russians left Afghanistan. The answer to that is the same as why the US will leave the place. Either the Russians or the US could easily conquer Afghanistan if the object was to hammer their large cities flat, kill most of the people in the country and take severe reprisals against any resistance. I doubt the Russians wanted to go to those extremes along with the cost in rubles and equipment. In the end neither the Russians or the US really has any national interest in the place. We can leave and let them do what they want to each other and slap them down now and then when attacks on us from there occur. The Russians have to patrol their border to keep them out. There is more threat to Russia than the US due to their proximity to Russia. We've again wasted way too many lives and money for little reason in the Middle East, not as bad as Viet Nam but pretty much the same results. Our military is ham strung again with highly restrictive rules of engagement as before. Iraq is already sliding into an Iranian takeover and once we leave Afghanistan it will be as we were never there. The US shouldn't engage in wars unless we mean to win them at whatever cost the enemy must pay. No more "nation building" BS. I'd much rather we brought our guys home, from the middle east, from Korea, from Okinawa, from Europe, etc. Let those folks take care of their own military needs.

 

[diesel]

U.S.A

You have a point, allot of us talk tactics and self defense like we are in a war zone.....guilty as charged i cant speak for anyone other than my self here but i grew up in a place where violent crimes/shooting/stabing that kind of stuff happened every day Dayton Ohio. i have long since moved away to raise my family in the country .
i can see how he might think the way he does but they call it the melting pot for a reason there is allot more people trying to get into america than there is people trying to get out
i say it is a good thing to be prepared to defend your self and family, that doesnt make me a gun nut, but it does allow me to sleep good at night,
that is when im not on the forums lol

 

[SunnySlopes]

Visiting this site I'm getting the impression that the USA is almost a Somalia-style war zone.

Fact is, foreigners have us confused with someone who cares what they think. We just love guns. And if memory serves correctly, the last time Britain was threatened, who did they ask for guns?

 

[David E]

What is he supposed to get from this?

If I knew nothing about the US, and all I read here.....
.

He should round out his reading/research to get a better picture.

Has he read anything at Rimfire Central? Any of the Skeet or Trap forums? Etc?

If someone only seeks information from one source, he's extremely naive to think everything is that way.

How is that our fault?

 

[Nushif]

He should round out his reading/research to get a better picture.

Has he read anything at Rimfire Central? Any of the Skeet or Trap forums? Etc?

If someone only seeks information from one source, he's extremely naive to think everything is that way.

Cause we are the pros at unbiased and complete fact finding in our collective rhetoric. AMIRITE?

 

[The-Reaver]

Sounds to me like he is still a little sore after 236 years.

Keep your government given shotgun, make sure to ask them for some toilet paper too.

 

[Teachu2]

One thing that is not often mentioned because it is very political incorrect is that about half of all murders here in the US are committed by Black people, with almost all the victims Black themselves. This despite that Blacks only account for about 12% of the total population.

If somehow the rate of murders among Blacks could be reduced to the levels of the rest of us then the US rate of murder would be close to the rate of murder for most Western European countries.

Not just politically incorrect - it ignores that "Blacks" live all over the world, including most Western European countries.

And nearly ALL the murders in Somalia are Black on Black.

 

[JShirley]

Is the USA a mini Somalia?

Yes. The minions of warlords roam our streets on pickup trucks with heavy machine guns and rocket launchers on the back. Our coasts are aswarm with pirates. Most of our citizens chew narcotics. Our children carry automatic weapons.


Seriously?

Let's leave out the fact that, in the last 10 years, there have been more murders committed with rocks in some countries in Africa than have been committed with firearms in the U.S.

Did you have a genuine question, or was this just a straight`up troll?

John

 

[idcurrie]

Think of it this way:

Bad people will be bad.

Good people will be good.

It's their nature.

Who do you want to have the balance of power?

Bad people will always find a way to own an illegal weapon if they want one. You can't stop it. If a criminal won't obey laws against arson, murder, and rape why do you think they will obey a gun control law? They won't. Get real.

Gun control puts the power into the hands of bad people.

The second amendment puts the power into the hands of good people.

Do you think a criminal would give a second thought to mugging a good person who they know is unarmed? How about if there's a good chance that the person IS armed?

How about a home invasion?

Let's take columbine for example. A trajedy. Why? Because of gun control.

No, seriously. Hear me out.

At columbine, those crazy kids obtained the firearms illegally. They weren't theirs. They had evil intentions and would act on them no matter the obstactle. Due to gun control (gun free zone) the balance of power was in favor of the bad people.

Now, imagine, if you will - that the good people had firearms in that situation too.

Imagine that every teacher, principal, janitor, cafeteria worker, etc also had a firearm.

How do you think that situation would have played out? Would there have been as many innocent victims? Or would the bad guys quickly become dead?

-OR-

Would the bad guys have not even attempted the act knowing that the good guys had the means to defend the kids at the school?


When seconds count, police are only minutes away.


Also, the second amendment prevents a tyranical government from being able to rule the people.


P.S. I am a Canadian and unfortunately firearms ownership is a priveledge here. That does not mean that I do not understand what the founding fathers of the USA intended and envisioned.

 

[LAK]

There is as much to shooting as there is to any other sport. How this applies to defensive shooting combines what is both an art and virtually a science in itself with several facets.

There are some parts of this country that currently experience a high level of crime; consider that where this is less so, the consequences of being a victim can be no less very high. So many reasonable and prudent folk take it very seriously, regardless of the percentage risks.

 

[Walkalong]

Frankly, I can understand where he's coming from.

I can't, as his comparison is ludicrous. No reasonably educated person, with obvious internet access, taking the slightest effort to research both countries, would make that statement.

More like someone kicking the anthill to watch folks react.

 

[Wanderling]

Tommygun - you are of course correct. But we don't have a "well regulated" militia do we ? Not even a poorly regulated one. So when a bunch of individual citizens with no experience or training to fight as a regular army and no real modern battlefield weapons think they keep the Government in check because of their collection of small arms, it seems pretty naive to me. At least back in the revolutionary days the arms employed by the army were exactly the same as the arms employed by the lay people. Today, the technological gap alone is immense. And then you still have the issue of training and organization and discipline.

Americans are very proud of their freedoms. And for most of the history nobody had anything close. But the world has changed in the last 60 years. Most western countries (using the term loosely, I would include Israel and Japan here too), have freedoms now. The freedom to own firearms is but one of them. I think, personally, that the level of citizens control over government actions in the US is not as high as in some other countries due to our two-party political system, our rather disfunctional candidate selection process, and no real instruments of day to day feedback / control of elected officials - we have nuclear option of impeachment but that's, frankly, about it. Today, the US is a free country with a certain set of rules, Britain is a free country with a different set of rules, and chest pounding on either side is silly.

Regarding Afghanistan - the Soviets left it because they shouln't had entered in first place. It was a poorly thought though misguided decision driven by internal Party politics, against the best judgement of the Army. Still, they achieved their objectives and I should say controlled more of the country than the NATO does now. But Afghan is impossible to fully subdue.

 

[Blackhawk30]

This IS why so many Americans own guns.To protect themselves from the thugs ,like the one that got dragged off the bus AND from the cops.Many feel Amerika is being turned into a police state.






<The only guns I saw were when an old black guy was dragged off a bus for not paying the fare and was forced to lie on the ground at gunpoint by maybe five armed officers with drawn weapons.>

 

[Highgate]

1. What kind of shotgun do you keep to dissuade Mr. Fox from the henhouse ?

Remington 870, 28", full choke. Also an A5 3" 30" full choke - but I don't use that much. Both very old, very cheap ($300 each roughly) used guns.

2. What kind of shells do you keep, and how many are you permitted ?

I have a few birdshot but I have mostly UK or US BB. I'm allowed as many as I like UNTIL the total powder weight reaches some limit which would require me to have an explosives licence. This seems to be around 15000 cartridges I believe. I would need a major bank loan to buy this quantity! Alos even though permitted, if the local police firearms officer saw I had that amount of ammunition he would most likely cancel my permit!

3. ( if the answer to #1 permits it) Would you be allowed to obtain a rifled barrel for use on your firearm, should the need or occasion arise ?

I could apply for a Firearms Certiciate for a rifled weapon. I would howver:
- be 110% checked by the police etc
- have a stated & very valid reason for the weapon
- be told by the police what calibre etc to use
- be restricted to a certain place or places for my shooting, such places having been checked & approved by the police
- be restricted to a maximum number of cartridges - maybe 100.
Overall it would be a REAL nuisance to obtain a rifled weapon.
Handguns are TOTALLY banned here.

4. Would you be allowed to load your own ammunition where you reside, and if so, would you be interested in doing so ?

I think I could - but I might need a licence to buy the powder. However I know so few people with firearms I haven't met anyone who does it. I would probably be too nervous to try it myself - I don't fancy picking bits of exploded shotgun out of my teeth!

5. What is the cost of a box of your favorite shells, and where and how frequently do you practice shooting ?

Expensive! About 75 cents in US money per cartridge when bought in 250 cartridge amounts. (The clay pigeon shooters pay maybe half this for their lighter weight cartridges) Don't forget that the UK is very heavily taxed. for example my diesel fuel costs me $8.80 per US gallon. Due to these tax levels we have relatively little 'disposable income' at the end of the month, so 75c a shot is painful. We do however have our National Health System which is 'free'!

I practice on our farm - maybe 20 shots a week. I used to practice more but the neighbours wrote letters to the local council complaining about the noise. They were ignored - but I decided to back off a bit.

 

[Highgate]

Fact is, foreigners have us confused with someone who cares what they think.

Err, OK.

We just love guns.

Err, OK.

And if memory serves correctly, the last time Britain was threatened, who did they ask for guns?

What ARE you talking about?
Whose soldiers are dying alongside yours in Afghanistan? Mostly British.
My son spends time in Afghanistan in the forces. He has a BRITISH rifle.
When he is away from home we dread the phone ringing, just as parents of US soldiers must do.

My original query was about the place of firearms in US domestic society.

No more, no less.

 

[JShirley]

No, you deliberately picked one of the most violent armpits of the world for comparison. You were seeking an emotional reaction. That's pure trolling.

 

[JohnM]

My original query was about the place of firearms in US domestic society.

No more, no less.

You certainly phrased you question in such a manner to incur a lot of wrath.
And ended up creating a thread hardly worth a comment.

 

[JohnBT]

Quote:
And if memory serves correctly, the last time Britain was threatened, who did they ask for guns?

What ARE you talking about?
_________________________

I can answer that. The U.S. National Rifle Association collected guns at the beginning of WWII and sent them to England because England needed them. More than 7,000 guns.

I copied the following from the NRA site some time ago.

"the NRA's call to help arm Britain in 1940 resulted in the collection of more than 7,000 firearms for Britain's defense against potential invasion by Germany (Britain had virtually disarmed itself with a series of gun control laws enacted between World War I and World War II).

After the fall of France and the Dunkirk evacuation in 1940, Britain found itself short of arms for island defense. The Home Guard was forced to drill with canes, umbrellas, spears, pikes, and clubs. When citizens could find a gun, it was generally a sporting shotgun ill suited for military use because of its short range and bulky ammunition."

Other American groups did the same.

www.twinbuttebunch.org/index.php?fuseaction=misc.sendguns




Be prepared.

Speaking of Somalia, whatever happened to those two men who drove a couple of hours from Manchester to Devon to rob and kill Joss Stone with a sword. A sword? The two men who got so lost the neighbors called the police. The two men found with masks and rope and stuff and a to-do list that included 'throw body in river'.

 

[HOOfan_1]

In the UK owning a firearm is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.

That type of attitude by the British Government is why they haven't ruled in the United States for 236 years. I think we have been doing pretty well over here for those 236 years. We haven't had an internal war for nearly 150 years.

Somali War Zone? Seriously?

You came to a forum dedicated to discussing firearms and you found people discussing.....firearms. What did you expect, discussions of how we take our Earl Grey before an afternoon of riding down foxes?