Rights aside, why do we NEED guns, in the USA?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi, razorburn. I'll keep this short.

I like your post, and I respect your opinion. But the reason why I'm leaving the address to that website up is because this is The High Road. This is not a community where racism is welcomed. There are people who seem to agree that discrimination based on race is not only okay, but practical and logical when it comes to working in a gun store and denying their customers' 2nd amendment rights based on appearance. If a moderator wants to remove that, I have no gripe about that whatsoever.

That's not acceptable, nor is it the spirit of this site. Therefore, I'm leaving the link up to show all those who agree with the original poster where they would be more welcome. If someone is not a racist, then I doubt that white supremacists will be able to recruit them. If they are, they can find a home and lots of like-minded folks there waiting for them with open arms.

As a black man, it's pretty obvious that I have no affiliation with that site. However, it is anyone's right to be whatever they choose - I might not agree with what those people say, but as an American, I'd fight and die to defend their right to say it. Those people have their right to free speech, just like we do. And that kind of speech is better left off of THR.

If I can help a troublemaker find his way somewhere he'd be more welcome, and he quits trolling on THR, then maybe it ain't so bad. :D
 
NEED?
I don't necessarily NEED firearms to get on with my everyday life. I buy them (and lots of them) in part because there are plenty of people out there who feel they have the 'wisdom' of telling others that firearms aren't NEEDED, or even better, they feel that certain people don't NEED firearms because of their skin color, age, how much money they make, or where they happen to reside. :barf:
 
The guy's an obvious troll. I don't think a shop like that could even exist most places. I know people here wouldn't go to a shop where they had to show an ID just to look and they are obviously bigoted. I think Cousin mike has already said it very well.

This is just some redneck troll that drives (or wants to drive) an aston martin and wanted to stir things up. The interesting thing though is seeing who agreed with him and show their own bigotry. It's good to see most here take the high road (as has already been mentioned).
 
I don't know if some of you are over reacting to the questions I've posed out of some sense of over sensitivity but, in looking back at what I'd already written, I don't see that I ever said anything about anyone's race, which seems to be the issue that many of you are raising. Having been born and raised in a liberal environment and having spent much of my life in far flung corners of the planet I'm one who tends to consider myself a member of the human race and the family of man. Anyone is a "brother." Unless they're female...;) And anyone, irregardless of their position on the tonal spectrum, can wear bling. Unless, of course, there's someone here who thinks only select ethnic minorities wear bling...? Funny, I just looked at my Rolex and the wrist it's on is still kinda beige under all that bling...but then, I don't get out much...;)

Anyone who thinks we deny anyone their rights on the basis of appearance is reading into what I'm saying, not what I'm saying. But when it comes to the business of selling firearms we're either making money or wasting time and appearance is tertiary to attitude. We don't need the business of anyone who walks in with the assumption that we are a public service handing out entitlements. We're in the business of selling to customers who treat us with the respect with give them.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, overall, the impression I'm getting is that most of you think there should be no laws or restrictions of any kind. Anyone who comes to buy any gun just needs to hand over their cash. That's it's not our responsibility if they've committed felonies in the past or intend to do so in the future, or not...? As long as they're an American, irregardless of who they are, how they behave in public, what they've done or what they intend to do, they have a Right and we are simply there to fulfill that right? Sounds a bit anarchic to me...

People buy guns for a very wide variety of reasons. Hunting, collecting, sports, personal protection or even to function as a sex toy. Do I care? As long as nothing is being pointed in my direction, in general, no. I own guns that I consider brilliant engineering and design acheivements. Some of them have a certain historical "value" to me. But some of them are always loaded and always with me because I, presently, live and work in one of the poorest and most depressed areas of the country. Our shop is within two blocks of the bus station where, every week, a fresh busload of parolees are dropped off. They come in to the shop hoping to cash their check from the dept of corrections and they want to look at guns.

What should we do? Show them any gun they like? Cash their checks, sell them the gun and trash the NICS form? Maybe give them a free box of shells while we're at it? Hey, they've paid their dept to society. They're still Americans, aren't they?

Most of our customers are honest souls who usually have some idea of what they're looking for and we're happy to help them find the right piece for the purpose. Whether it's a hunter looking for something new for the new season or a single woman looking for something small and light to carry in her purse or someone looking to fill out their collection of classic military arms. We assist and advise. But if anyone comes in and insists on that SKS or that TEC9 we'll sell it to them, if they have the cash and pass the NICS check. But, should we not care or is it simply our job to sell anything to anyone at anytime?

We either have fair gun laws that are in place to protect the wider community or we have no gun laws at all. And those of us who sell guns either have a responsibility to that community or we're just simply cash whores...

And maybe some of you think we need guns because you define the constitution as a directive to overthrow our government if you disagree with their policies. And you envision that day coming because of bans in Chicago or San Fransisco. But, you know what? That's democracy in action. That's because the majority of Americans don't care about their rights anymore than they care about yours. Voter turnout at the mid-terms was 40% and that means that 60% couldn't give a fiddler's fart about any of it, least of all you or me. It also means that we are governed at the will of the majority of the minority. This is your democracy and if you don't like it, run for office or do something positive to change it, instead of just being miserable and defensive. Or would you rather just wait until we're shooting at each other in the streets over our differances? Like the Iraqis...

As far as I'm concerned, I need my guns as long I live in a country where anyone and everyone has the right to own a gun and no one takes my personal property away from me, on the whims of the minority or the apathy of the majority, until I've run outta ammo... But even if I lived in a country where I didn't perceive that need I'd still be a gun owner because it is, of course, more than a need. Guns are fun.

What I was trying to determine here was whether other members of this particular community felt that, aside from the political rhetoric about rights or their enthusiasm for "playing" with their guns, their gun ownership was also a part of any perceived need for self defense against the remote possibility of running into another gun owner with bad intentions and whether that was, perhaps, a more relevant and legitimate need than preparing to defend against, or participate in the overthrow of, your government because you don't happen to agree with or like the results of democracy...?

What's obvious, from many of the posts, is that a lot of you are naturally defensive, narrow minded and quick to judge. I thought there was something in the rules of this board about "Attack the argument, not the arguer." Sure looks like a lot of you want to make it personal. And therein lies my disappointment with this place. You guys would rather argue and point fingers than discuss or analyze.

You don't like me; you don't like my ideas; I'm not your kind of American because I raise issues that you don't want to address because they don't reflect your agenda? Fine. Ignore me. Just as I will you when I think you're talking out of your lower digestive system.

If all you guys want from this section of the board is for it to be a place to simply affirm your established beliefs then there's obviously little point in posting anything even remotely off your radar or by way of attempting to generate any kind of potentially useful discourse. The last time I checked my opinion was just as valid, and insignificant, as anyone else's...:rolleyes:
 
>That's it's not our responsibility if they've committed felonies in the past or intend to do so in the future, or not...?

I don't think anyone suggested that you shold unilaterally start selling guns to felons in your shop (especially since you'd be dragged off within a couple of days). Realistically, though, any felon that wants a gun will easily buy one illegally, so I don't think those laws do much good. You could argue that they only hurt the ex-felons who want the gun for long-term legitimate defensive carry... I'm not that interested in that argument, but you have to admit that gun laws don't really affect criminal gun ownershop much. Heck, the whole Red Army couldn't enforce gun control in Afghanistan!

Also, half those parolees are just victimless "criminals". And a lot of the real burglars, robbers, and Halliburton employees never go to jail at all.

>Most of our customers are honest souls who usually have some idea of what they're looking for and we're happy to help them find the right piece for the purpose. Whether it's a hunter looking for something new for the new season or a single woman looking for something small and light to carry in her purse or someone looking to fill out their collection of classic military arms. We assist and advise.

That's a pretty important job... one could make the argument that it's one of the most important jobs. Especially in a bad neighborhood. Best of luck to you.
 
Martin Aston, what a lot of folks here believe, and maybe haven't phrased it properly to make the point, is that few if any gun control laws have ever served to affect the rate of gun crime.

I suggest "Under The Gun" by Wright, Rossi & Daly. Univ. of Fla Press; 1985. Available through Amazon, last time I looked.

Their primary conclusion was that no gun control law ever passed in Florida had had any effect on the rate of violent crimes involving firearms in that state. While not specified, remember that this was post-GCA 1968 and its "yellow sheet" and the end of mail-order firearms.

So if the laws have not affected crime rates, why have the laws? What's the point of having anything that doesn't work? Doesn't matter if "doesn't work" includes laws, regulations or mechanical equipment of any sort...

Utility. Always think utility in achieving the intended purpose. As near as most of us can tell, the only utility of gun control laws is to control honest people.

Art
 
Thanks, telomerase. Good points. But doesn't it also raise the question of where someone thinks they're coming from if they know they're legally ineligible to purchase a gun but they try to anyway? Do they think the system is stupid and it doesn't work and they'll just have slipped through the cracks? Or are they trying to be responsible about it by trying to buy legally rather than going to the black market to which they, maybe, don't even have access?

But still, you gotta hand it to that ex-con lady. She tried the legal route. And now, I suppose, she may well have gone out and found something to her liking out of the trunk of a car in a back alley somewhere. And maybe she'll just keep it handy for self protection. Or maybe she'll use it to complete the attempt she started all those years ago... Who knows. But, should we care?

And, again, isn't it because there's a black market where ineligibles can buy most any firearm, that the rest of us need our guns as much as we otherwise simply enjoy them?

FWIW; to those who question our request for ID before showing a gun that was as a result of a particular incident. A customer came in looking to buy a handgun. He seemed knowledgable and determined. Couldn't decide if he wanted a revolver or an auto. We showed him several guns before he eventually decided to go for the Glock. He didn't even haggle over the price and handed over a wad of cash. We gave him the paperwork and asked to see his ID and it turned out he had an out of state drivers licence and that he was just passing through. He didn't know that out of state residents couldn't buy handguns here. Our mistake was in assuming that he knew that. We rectified that mistake by posting several signs and by politly requesting ID up front. That out of stater may have been a pleasant 45 minutes trying to make a sale but it felt awfully sour in the end.

Do car dealers sell cars to people who don't have drivers licences? Do they go through all the paperwork without knowing if the customer is even going to be breaking the law as soon as they drive off the lot?
 
Exactly, Art! But if the gun laws that exist don't work for the benefit of the good guys doesn't that mean that we, who sell guns, should be more responsible about what we do? And, again, isn't that why us good guys need our guns?

Obviously, most bad guys are going to be able get what they want from the black market but just as many will try to get their clean record friends to buy them what they want because our prices are better.

How often have we had this sort of conversation:

Guy comes in and makes a B-line for the handguns. "I want to buy that Glock." "Which Glock, there are three of them?" "Which one's the Nine?" Hmmm...
 
Mr. Martin, do you prefer your martinis shaken or stirred? :neener:

I thought you got your nose bent and signed off this board. Then you show up again. That proves to me that we are a bunch of guys that are OK. You know it too. Can't stay away.

We either have fair gun laws that are in place to protect the wider community or we have no gun laws at all. And those of us who sell guns either have a responsibility to that community or we're just simply cash whores...

This is a quandary. It appears that you would have opposed the bill that congress passed preventing liability lawsuits for the gun industry.

2a is extremely clear in the type and quantity of gun laws we should have.

To reiterate........NONE.

I think you should apply for a job at atf. They need your type.

You assume the responsibilities of an agency that should never have been created to do the work that should never be done.
 
Last edited:
A huge portion of "gun laws" today aren't even enforced. There's way to many "gun laws" to keep track of and even follow. I ran an experiment and guess what happened? Exactly what I thought would, absolutely nothing.
 
No, cropcirclewalker (is that what your mother actually named you?), we're simply following the law of the land. That's what having and keeping an FFL means. Don't like the law? You can break it or change it. Up to you.

FWIW, I think liability lawsuits against the gun industry are absurd. Next we'll have non-smokers with lung cancer suing Ford and General Motors...

And I came back because the thread hasn't been locked or deleted and I thought I saw some indications that some of you might be getting a clue as to what I'm on about instead of just pitching insults at me or making cheap school yard gags about my name.
 
A brother covered in bling isn't likely to want that SKS because he's going after whitetail...
Please do not attempt to obscure your previous remarks by saying we are all brothers of the human race and the family of man or some such rubbish. The term "brother" is a word that refers to a black man. The word brother is used to refer to a black man in Japan, in Kenya, in Somalia, in Korea, in the Philipines, in Australia, Singapore, and all across the United States of America. How do I know? I have been to these countries, and have had my friends who were black called "Brother". I, on the other hand, was called Joe or gaigin. I do not believe for one minute you meant to refer to any man who walks the face of the earth as a "brother". The word "brother" was used to refer to someone who is different from yourself. Otherwise you would be equating this man who wears bling and who might be a criminal wanting an SKS with yourself, would you not?

You may try to squirm out of your words, but sometimes, a simple apology works so much nicer. We all make mistakes, and we all have the ability to recognize them rather than deny them. These are your words. If you regret saying them and do not really harbor the racism they imply, simply say so. Do not, however, try to deny the meaning. That only implies that you believe those you have offended are stupid.

That being said, I work with a nurse who hunts. She is a joyous black woman. Some might call her a sister. She deer hunts, as a matter of fact, and has already killed her first deer this year. Know what she uses? A SKS. If she sent her 19 year old son into your store to buy some 7.62X39 ammo, how would he be treated?

Also I need to ask......If the owner of your gunstore does not want to sell SKS rifles and TEC9's, then why does he stock them?
 
Allow me to point out a few other fallacies for you Martin.

Obviously, most bad guys are going to be able get what they want from the black market but just as many will try to get their clean record friends to buy them what they want because our prices are better.
Apparently you have never priced stolen guns on the black market. They are cheap. Twenty bucks will get you a gun. Your "bad guy" doesn't want or need a three inch Python or even an SKS. He needs a cheap gun he can toss in a dumpster as he runs. If it's a Python, fine. If it's a Lorcin, fine. He doesn't care. Two rocks on 11th and Adams St. will get you a gun. Just pick your choice of crackhead to fetch you one. Better yet, since your bad guy is a criminal, why should he not simply steal his own? Are your prices better than free?

Do car dealers sell cars to people who don't have drivers licences?
Yes, of course they do. Not having a drivers license does not mean you cannot own a car. Many people have others who drive them. They may be wealthy, they may be paralyzed, they may be blind. They can, however, buy their own car.

to those who question our request for ID before showing a gun that was as a result of a particular incident......That out of stater may have been a pleasant 45 minutes trying to make a sale but it felt awfully sour in the end.
You know, you may also lose sales from people who are eligible to buy because they hear an opinion expressed in your store, by your co-workers regarding brothers in bling wanting an SKS and how it can't possibly be for hunting whitetail.
 
Rights aside, why do we NEED guns, in the USA?
Because we are a free society.

Why do you need a car, a bicycle, a house (you CAN live in a tent), a tv, or a computer.

You don't need them, but they are nice to have. So are firearms. Firearms are legal.

Firearms can be your friend. Go up against a grizzly or a gang of thieves without one and see what I mean.

Firearms are fun to shoot. Go to a firing rang and just watch.
 
this thread is gettin big!

so, history points to the obvious....
one day our society will collapse as we know it - proofs in the puddin as my grandma always said.
Will this happen tomorrow? I dont know....
Will this happen next year? decade? 50yrs? Got me...but it will happen
But, I will have a gun or 5 to protect me and my own (passing the guns down through the family) if it comes to that.

Only a fool is unprepared for what is GOING to happen - Just a matter of WHEN.

ON A COMPLETELY UNRELATED YET RELATED NOTE TO THIS THREAD

This thread started as a question...not about this guy and who he sells guns to for what reason...
WHO CARES what he thinks? or does? as long as he isnt hurting anybody....his business is HIS business?
Comon people?
 
"I thought I saw some indications that some of you might be getting a clue as to what I'm on about "

I think we caught a clue a long time ago.

And a Rolex ain't bling. Gaudy, yes. Flashy, yes. Bling, no. Not even close, unless maybe you're wearing it on eleven solid gold chains around your neck or have it glued in your navel.

John
 
Forgot, re: "one day our society will collapse as we know it - proofs in the puddin as my grandma always said."

You know, the actual phrase is "The proof of the pudding is in the eating."

I don't know why it got shortened, I've never found anything in the pudding. ;)

John
 
<<The only gun law I'd like to see added to the books is that everyone should have to take a CCW CLASS before being issued a CCW license. I think the major problem with accidental shootings in this coutry stems from people not knowing propper gun safety. Not to mention that not everyone that carries knows the laws about carrying.

Some states already require this, but Washington is not one of them. As the victim of an accidental shooting, I would support this becoming law.>>




Our department "suggests" that applicants for a handgun license, should attend the CCW course. However, the classes fill up fast and are $30.00. We do also provide the applicant with information on firearms and legal considerations as a free packet with the application.
 
We NEED very few things: food, water, shelter. For everything else we must thank our omnipotent government for allowing us to have.

You say
I don't see that I ever said anything about anyone's race

You said
A brother covered in bling isn't likely to want that SKS because he's going after whitetail

It's no fun getting flamed, but we're not that bad, lurk around for a while and see what you think.
 
I don't see that I ever said anything about anyone's race, which seems to be the issue that many of you are raising.

No, you just co-opted the tactic of so many closet racists: "A brother covered in bling isn't likely to want that SKS because he's going after whitetail.". No, no racist sentiments in that at all...:scrutiny:
 
It went on point out that the reason behind [Russia] not wanting to send troops over was because there are too many guns in the hands of civilians so it wouldn't be practical from a military standpoint.

I'd love to see proof of this.
 
. . . too many guns in the hands of civilians . . .

I don't think it was Russia/USSR.

Admiral Yamamoto is reputed to have said,
“You cannot invade America. There is a rifle behind every blade of grass.”

And it NEEDS to stay that way.
 
Oh, and that NEED thing?

Of course we NEED guns!

It's set down in that bunch of Constitutional amendments -- you know, the
Bill Of Needs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top