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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Without any doubt.

For self defense - that of one's family and household. Protecting property; keeping one's castle - and everything in it under one's rightful control.

To feed oneself and family. Yes, in many places USA it is still possible, practical and economical to hunt for food. Even if it is supplemental to that purchased.

For sport; serious formal competition, and yes - informally for just for fun.

--------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
 
Just wanted to add one small comment. I went to two gun shops before i turned 21. At both i asked to look at 2 pistols, one said no, one said yes. While i did not buy a pistol from the one that said yes(i found a great deal on-line). I now drive 5 miles to that store that let me handle there firearm before i was 21, and buy all of my stuff (non firearms) from them. Now guess were the other store is? about 100yds from my front door. Hum

ps I wanted to add that with so many things being a felony, that I bet every American has commeted one act to make them a felon. So lets not sell guns to Americans. There just felons that have not been caught.
 
I'm going to side step the whole question of elitism and racism and get to what I think is the heart of our backwards-British-car-named poster.

It is the question of individual liberty vs the "good" of society.

Martin has repeatedly used "the good guys" and "the bad guys". Groups. It seems to me his question is whether or not the good of society outweighs the individual right to own a firearm.

I believe what makes this experiment called America different is that we were based on the concept of individual freedom, not "group" freedom. Group freedom, like our friends in Europe, ends up being ruled by elitists -- those we feel they can see the best way to protect the "good guys" from the "bad guys".

The problem with this is that in the end protection is the responsibility of the individual, not the group. Seatbelts are a great idea, and perhaps we as a society are better since they have been mandated in our cars, but it is still up to the individual to "click it".

Since in the end protection and safety become the responsibility of the individual, shouldn't the individual enjoy the freedom to own the tools to back up that responsibility?
 
shouldn't the individual enjoy the freedom to own the tools to back up that responsibility
Click to expand...

Yes, but isn't it over-simplistic to assume that everyone that wants a firearm wants it for legitimate defensive purposes?

A firearm in the wrong hands surely doesn't help RKBA and is an absolute gift to "anti's".

I think Martin and others in his position do have a genuine moral dilemma, if he genuinely believes that a firearm that he sells is likely to be misused, isn't it better for all of us if he refuses to make that sale? If he makes the sale under these circumstances, and the firearm is used in a crime, doesn't he bear some moral culpability?
 
Yes, but isn't it over-simplistic to assume that everyone that wants a firearm wants it for legitimate defensive purposes?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but I would say it's just as much of an over simplification to say that laws will stop the bad guys.

I think Martin and others in his position do have a genuine moral dilemma, if he genuinely believes that a firearm that he sells is likely to be misused, isn't it better for all of us if he refuses to make that sale? If he makes the sale under these circumstances, and the firearm is used in a crime, doesn't he bear some moral culpability?
Click to expand...

Two very difficult questions:

1) "... refuses to make that sale?" Perhaps. But if he genuinely believes that the firearm will be misused just because a "brother" is buying it, perhaps not.

2) "...doesn't he bear some moral culpability?" If he knowingly made an illegal sale to someone he knew was going to break the law, sure. But the problem is how can anyone really know what somebody else is going to do? If the person has every legal right to purchase the weapon, why stop them? And again, if you want to get in to morality, why is it so much worse to sell to a blinged out "brother" than a nice clean cut white McVeigh? How is one person being pre-emptive better than the law being pre-emptive? Laws should focus on what happened, not what could happen. We live in an infinite universe, ergo there are an infinite number of possibilities. We can't go on about what might happen, we have to deal with what happened.

That said, I can understand his dilemma. I've pondered the same thing the few times I've sold any of my guns. "What if ...?" On the other hand, if he's not comfortable selling to everyone who has a perfect legal right to purchase, perhaps he's in the wrong business.
 
We don't need our guns to defend ourselves against governments;
Click to expand...

Ah, so I guess the Founding Fathers were wrong. Oh well, good luck with that!

(You uh...do know the whole "pen is mightier than the sword" thing only works on people armed with pens...right?)

We need guns to insure our freedom. You see how fast the progress toward fascism is with an armed populace...how much worse would you think it would be if we were all disarmed and powerless?
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah...little problem there: we're "progressing" alright, but it's not toward fascism. It's toward socialism--far, far worse. All the same evils and more.
 
"RIGHTS ASIDE..."

is a pretty strange way to look at any issue in a free country? How can you start out by ignoring the rights of free people?
 
I now drive 5 miles to that store that let me handle there firearm before i was 21, and buy all of my stuff (non firearms) from them. Now guess were the other store is? about 100yds from my front door. Hum
Click to expand...

Yep. We all have the right to vote with our feet. Those who like "being part of the club" will go to clickish stores. But "clubs" rarely grow and a store that is not increasing it customer base is not growing.

I have a similar issue. There is a gun store just down the block. I will not darken their door step again. I was treated to the "you gotta prove you are worthy of out attention" routine. I guess they wanted me to prove I didn't carry a listening device from "THEM". *dramatically looks around for black helicopter*

I now happily wait until I'm in AUSTIN or when a gun show is in town to by stuff. I've purchased a couple of “gotta have it now” weapons at local shops, but I have yet to find one that didn't leave me with the feeling that I was trying to buy a used car. But the one near my house is the worst.

Let me amend that, I did find one nice local dealer, but it was a local dealer that has a booth at the HGCA shows. If I was going to look for something that I needed NOW, I'd gladly arrange my weekend to go the 40 mins out of the way to him.

So I feel very comfortable from an economics stand point letting business owners ruin their bottom line. But I don't feel so good about the damage they might do to noobs and fence sitters.
 
Actually, that is not the question. The real question is "Statistics aside, why do we NEED civilian disarnment in the USA?"

You have to put them on the defensive, since it is our rights and liberties they are depriving us of.
 
"...doesn't he bear some moral culpability?" If he knowingly made an illegal sale to someone he knew was going to break the law, sure. But the problem is how can anyone really know what somebody else is going to do? If the person has every legal right to purchase the weapon, why stop them? And again, if you want to get in to morality, why is it so much worse to sell to a blinged out "brother" than a nice clean cut white McVeigh? How is one person being pre-emptive better than the law being pre-emptive? Laws should focus on what happened, not what could happen. We live in an infinite universe, ergo there are an infinite number of possibilities. We can't go on about what might happen, we have to deal with what happened.
Click to expand...

I'm not in favor of any law requiring the seller to be responsible for what is done with a legally purchased gun, however, I would simply wish to remove myself from the entire situation. If someone wished to purchase a firearm from me, and I was fairly certain they wanted it to harm innocent people, I will not sell to them. I in no way wish to be associated with him. Yeah, he could get it from somewhere else, but that doesnt make it right. I dont want to be associated with any crime, I wont go selling my prescription drugs to junkies just because they'll get them elsewhere. If I happen to lose a few sales because I refused sell a gun to someone that I thought was a genuine threat to society, I can deal with that.
 
[QUOTE}We don't need our guns to defend ourselves against governments;[/QUOTE}


PLEASE tell me that was a typo. Have you ever bothered to read the last 100 years of history in our country? Have you bothered to look at the patriot act or the summery of the patriot act 2? Neither of which have ANYTHING to do with terrorism.

The original Patriot Act, was not allowed to be viewed by congress until AFTER it was voted on and only IF it was voted through. By chance did you see the margin it won by? Pretty frightening.

The Patriot Act 2, is even worse, and was voted in by the same margin and was also under the same rules as the Patriot Act, except it is STILL classified, although details were leaked, and there are summeries of it, the actual text of the act itself (which is now a law of the land a LAW or bunch of LAWS rather) is not to be viewed by the public.

We DO need to defend ourselves against our governments. Our forefathers knew this, which is why the second amendment was put into the constitution in the first place. They just didn't realize how many people would be willing to give up some liberty for the illusion of safety. They couldn't see such a alrge number of liberals(no offense to the liberals who work to protect our second amendment rights, you are by far the exception to the rule and I thank you, as much as I condemn the backstabbing conservatives who supposedly uphold our rights) in this country intent to take total control by means of destroying parts of our constitution.

No less then 7 of our constitution rights have been stripped by the Patriot Act 2, so you may want to rethink that statement. Not trying to flame you on this. Just trying to show you that we really DO need to defend ourselves from a tyrannous government. The tyranny of our government is not an if it will ever happen or a when, because it already HAS happened. We live in that tyranny today. There are many people you could ask who have perfect evidence but sadly and conveniently(for our government) they are DEAD!

Rev. Michael
 
My little brother has a gun that has been (in all probability) used to defend against a tyrranical government. It's brown bess musket from the revolutionary war era.

Yeah, it was a long time ago, but there are still guns alive that remember it.

Kind of a silly original post really, I suppose the original poster has turned to stone now that the sun is up.

One of the most important reasons that modern people buy guns, of course, is to show off. The same reason they buy jewelry, expensive cars, mansions, designer clothes, and so on. I know that has been a motivating factor for me in some of my gun purchases.
 
Outlaws said:
I guess you haven't seen some of these judges who give rapists 3 month sentences?

You can serve your time, but the 2nd only applies to the law abiding, and for good reason.

I don't want felons having firearms. I personally would hang everyone one of them instead of using the prison system, but thats just me.
Click to expand...

I have to heartily disagree with you Outlaws, if you were just talking about violent felons I would tend to side with you, but now-a-days, there are so many acts that are considered a felony. For instance, transporting your firearm to the range in the wrong manner is a felony in some states. Should someone who makes this mistake be hung, or never allowed to own a firearm again?
 
When I was in the Navy in CA I was temporarily assigned to Base shore partol. I was driving home after work in my uniform one friday with my duty belt on the back seat when I got pulled over (for supposedly swerving which I wasn't) and arrested for having a nightstick in the car. In CA it it is (or was then) a felony to have a billy club (nightstick included) in your car so I got to spend the weekend in the felony tank at SD county jail. What a treat that was esprcially in my dress whites. It did get dropped to misdemeanor and I had to pay a fine with a suspended sentence, but if they would have prosecuted it as a felony as it was set up to be I would not be able to own guns now....for having a nightstick that I used at work. It's still on my fbi record as arrested for a felony and it does not say what came of it. I had to get proof of what happened when I got my CHL and that caused a long delay.

It's also nice to know there are narrow minded rednecks that would have had me hung if I had been convicted of the felony of having that nightstick in my car. Which according to their stupid law I should have been........convicted, not hung.
 
Yes, but isn't it over-simplistic to assume that everyone that wants a firearm wants it for legitimate defensive purposes?

A firearm in the wrong hands surely doesn't help RKBA and is an absolute gift to "anti's".
Click to expand...
Yes, but isn't it over-simplistic to assume that everyone that wants a computer wants it for legitimate computing purposes?

A computer in the wrong hands surely doesn't help the right of free speech and is an absolute gift to the "anti's".
 
Putting the racial angle aside, having a gun store in a high crime area is going to attract the bad people in that area. Same goes with a liquor store, your not going to get the yuppies buying wine for a dinner party, your going to get bums who scrounged up change to buy a 40, junkies that need booze because they can't get drugs, and poor working men that want to get drunk so they can forget where they live.

Martin's store is either in a high crime area, or for some reason is attracting a non responsible criminal element. If you sell nothing but tec 9 and hi-points, your going to attract a criminal element. Every gun store I have been in the average customer is on average between 30 and 50, usually male. I can count on my fingers how many times I seen a young hoodlum want to look at a gun in a store and I only seen one young guy buy one. The guy had tattoos all over him and some piercings. I kind of hung out at the store because this store was in a somewhat seedy area and the owner is a friend of mine and was working alone. The guy apparently just turned 21. We were all talking and the guy seemed to be somewhat intellegent, and from the neighborhood. Find out that he is living with his girlfriend and she is pregnant. the more you talked to the guy the more you realized that he was a good guy that was concerned about his new family. He bought a .40 XD and was on his way without problems. The owner who is pushing 60 year old was happy I hanged around.

The funny thing is I bought my first Shotgun when I was 20, because my family got threatened by a drunk neighbor down the street. I was just coming back from school and it was the first time I ever seen my dad worried about what another man might do to the family. We had guns in the house but I never owned my own. I went to a gun shop and bought a 12 gauge pump, and a box of buck shot. If I remember correctly I had long hair and I might have been wearing some sort of heavy metal tee shirt.

Sometimes scary looking young men need protection when thing go bump in the night.
 
We also don't Need the following:

1) cars capable of doing more than the posted speed limits
2) pick up trucks as commuter vehicles
3) alcohol (beer/wine/liquor)
4) vacations
5) theme parks
6) ice cream
7) more clothes than you can wear
8) nicer house than your neighbor
9) professional sports
10) thick juicy steaks

the list goes on and on and on of stuff we don't NEED, what it all comes down to, it is all the stuff we WANT and we justify to ourselves, our spouses and society as a whole why we want it. If we are particularly convincing, the "want" sounds enough like a "need" that we assuage any guilt we may have or have foisted upon us.
 
There are plenty of felons i would trust my life to, and there are plenty of people that have never been in jail that i would never trust my life to.

Look at Ca laws, there are so many laws that are felony charges but hurt no-one AND are legal in other states. Please tell me why you are a felon if you do somthing in one state and its bad but cross state line and its not a felony charge. Perhaps thats what we shouls look at, how is it that other states get alone fine with less laws but other states need more laws?

BLING in general, is over sized "things" you wear off your body that is "generally" Gold plated or jeweled to show different things about you. Example a dollar sign thats 3 inches tall and gold to show your rich. Your name in big block letters, with rubys around it. Many times this includes but not limited to necklaces, rings on fingers, toes, ear rings, Belts, belt buckles, cuffs, and so on. Generaly worn by people in poor areas, also lots of gangs wear bling, but not always. There is also the stereotypical black rap singer that has bling on him, but now a days white singers may have it to. AKA know as Hip Hop Jewelry, Bling Bling, Iced Out Jewelry

Here is a link to a site that sells it.
http://www.icedoutgear.com/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Why should we support the US military?
2
Replies
41
Views
1K
steelhead
S
C
  • Locked
Rational Reasons Why We Should Not Surrender Our Arms
2 3
Replies
57
Views
2K
RioShooter
R
C
  • Locked
It Is Simple And Basic.
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
Maxwell
M
D
  • Locked
Why do we still buy their oil and their heroin?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
2K
abaddon
A
Kenneth
  • Locked
Prohibition Laws Lead To Gun Control Laws And Violate All Of Our Natural Rights.
Replies
6
Views
366
Bubba613
B
Back
Top