This rant has been on my mind for awhile...

[hang fire]

If possible, I avoid all debate with antis, nothing positive can come from it. But if they get in my face pushing it, verbal Hades will descend upon them.

 

[beatledog7]

Keep in mind this basic premise when you think about gun control: is it more about control than guns.

Some elements of the US population want centralized control of every aspect of our lives, and they see controlling guns (since so many people can easily be led to dislike or fear guns) as an easy step along that path.

If they get the sort of "reasonable" restrictions they seek regarding firearms, they'll be emboldened to take it a step further and push for another restriction that "just makes sense given that we decided to have these other restrictions." This has already proven true.

At the same time, they'll reach for control of some other aspect of your life, again calling it reasonable restriction.

Pretty soon we'll all be wondering why we have to install TSA-approved locks on our front doors.

I don't wear a tinfoil hat--I simply pay attention.

 

[X-Rap]

Weapons have and will always be high on the list of those who wish to have control over others. In America the gun has always been the great equalizer and our culture has embraced it since Americans first hit the shores of this wild land. There are many cliches about we Americans and our guns, God made man but Sam Colt mad them equal, from my cold dead hands, when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns, Cooper even compared it to being God like in that we could strike down others with something akin to a lightning bolt.
Control is the operative word in the social engineers goals, laws and government are required in some form for order but when done in excess they always lead to some sort of tyranny and for that to happen the populous must be controlled. So even if as some say, we citizens cannot stand against a powerful army, in the big plan I think their intent is to have such control of our day to day lives that our spirit is broken anyway.
No smokes, no big gulps, no meat, wear your seat belt, wear your helmet, keep your animals this way, build your house this way, go to this school, learn from this book, soft tyranny is wrapping its roots around our freedoms every day with or without gun control.

 

[BADUNAME30]

You hit the nail on the head when saying that it is a human issue and not a weapon or tool issue. It all started when Adam and Eve sinned, direct result Cain murdered Abel. Take away guns, we'll use bows and swords and knives. Take away those and we'll use hammers and nails. Take those away and we'll use ropes, cars, anything we can use. Take away everything and we'll use our hands. Its an issue of mans inate evil nature, there is no good in man less he be born of a new nature only accomplished through Jesus Christ.

As far as gun safety classes in schools, good luck. Whenever we let other people teach our kids what we as parents SHOULD be teaching them ourselves, bad things happen. Case in point, sex ed. Thats a parents job and duty when they feel its right for their child. We as a society of lazy self serving parents have given others to much power and influence over our children. God intended mom and dad to be the instructors of children, no one else. Its time to wake up, the government cant help, legislation cant help. Its time to take responsibility for our own actions.

BINGO !! Godsgunman !!!
I could not have said it better.

 

[ultratec1]

Im not sure about everyone else's state but in mine when you get your permit to purchase/carry they run you through NCIC before they give you the permit, this way you dont have the waiting period. This means 0 days waiting, The way that it should be.

 

[orionengnr]

I'm sure the use of other weapons would go up. However, the other commonly available weapons tend to be less effective especially when used in attempts at mass killing. Still, the overall numbers of criminal homicides would likely go down eventually if all guns were outlawed.

The experiences of Great Britain and Australia run exactly counter to your supposition...

 

[Neverwinter]

Direct quote from their News Release, http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2010/01/26/index.html:

These new data from the Guttmacher Institute are especially noteworthy because they provide the first documentation of what experts have suspected for several years, based on trends in teens’ contraceptive use—that the overall teen pregnancy rate would increase in the mid-2000s following steep declines in the 1990s and a subsequent plateau in the early 2000s. The significant drop in teen pregnancy rates in the 1990s was overwhelmingly the result of more and better use of contraceptives among sexually active teens. However, this decline started to stall out in the early 2000s, at the same time that sex education programs aimed exclusively at promoting abstinence—and prohibited by law from discussing the benefits of contraception—became increasingly widespread and teens’ use of contraceptives declined.

“After more than a decade of progress, this reversal is deeply troubling,” says Heather Boonstra, Guttmacher Institute senior public policy associate. “It coincides with an increase in rigid abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, which received major funding boosts under the Bush administration. A strong body of research shows that these programs do not work. Fortunately, the heyday of this failed experiment has come to an end with the enactment of a new teen pregnancy prevention initiative that ensures that programs will be age-appropriate, medically accurate and, most importantly, based on research demonstrating their effectiveness.”

It's saying that there is a positive correlation between the increase of flawed abstinence programs and an increase in teen pregnancy. Just like there was a negative correlation between the sunset of the Federal AWB and the violent crime rate in the US. What does the continuing decrease in the violent crime rate after the end of the AWB say, that the AWB actually made a difference in violent crime? Doubt it.

Bringing up the strawman of the "Bush did it" statement doesn't make the correlation disappear.


Right now, what we have in public education is an abstinence-only approach toward firearms. It isn't in the interests of our students to be taught in an environment which promotes mythological perceptions rather than fact-based education. See the GQ gun article: "Nobody in my circle back east had guns, nobody wanted them, and if anybody talked about them, it was in cartoon terms: Guns are bad things owned by bad people who want to do bad things." That kind of oversimplified, inaccurate mythology is detrimental.

It won't magically make all of them safer, but it does provide them the information and skills to be responsible firearms handlers. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

 

[CZguy]

To me it all comes down to personal responsibility. I'm in favor of safe firearm handling, seat belts, crash helmets, fire extinguishers, etc.

But, I feel that is my responsibility, not the government's. If I choose to act in a certain way, then I should have to deal with the consequences. We shouldn't all have to chip in to cover my mistakes.

 

[Ignition Override]

Jim West PA: That's an interesting quote, along with many other excellent comments here.

A museum somewhere in central Europe has a small exhibit of a woman's skeleton, from about 500-1,000 BC or so.
She died of a blow to the skull, and nobody knows the reason, nor the situation etc. What I can't figure out is how this was
possible long before guns were invented...was it an "assault club"?

The famous "Ice Man" "Oetzi" (maybe 3,000 BC) found in a remote area of the northern Italian border died of an arrow injury, discovered only by a CAT scan.

The antis also might not believe that three Roman legions with most of their camp followers were annihilated in three days near what is now the German city of Detmold.
They were ambushed in 9 AD (by Arminius-a Roman auxilliary leader) in the dreaded forest, between swamps and a hill, with little room to form the 'testudos'.
Without guns, how could this happen?

 

[JustinJ]

Justin step back
do you not get that the entire premise of gun control is FLAWED
by engaging them in 'how bad guns are' is a mistake

I don't believe i'm the one in need of step back as i appear to be the only one trying to see both sides of an argument. Just because gun control is flawed that does not mean there can not be valid arguments for it. What you need to remember is that our opinions and their opinions on gun control are just that, opinions. We can use facts to try and support our opinions but at the end of the day it is an opinion.

So answer Justin, who do you blame when your thumb is smashed missing a nail, the HAMMER or the NAIL
usually I blame the idiot swinging it (me)

The whole, "blame the person, not the gun" argument is another very flawed notion. Do you believe in regulation of any weapons? Say nukes? Should anybody be able to walk into a hardware store and buy some enriched uranium? At home nuclear power is always fun. But what if Tim McVeigh had been able to do just that? Assuming you are a rational person i'm sure you realize nuclear weapons and materials need to be regulated. So is that because you automatically blame the fissionable material or because you recognize that there are people who will use it for nefarious purposes?

The argument is flawed because those who support gun control do not see the issue that way. Until you recognize the reason a person holds a belief you will have a very hard time convincing them to change it.

Quote:
I'm sure the use of other weapons would go up. However, the other commonly available weapons tend to be less effective especially when used in attempts at mass killing. Still, the overall numbers of criminal homicides would likely go down eventually if all guns were outlawed.

The experiences of Great Britain and Australia run exactly counter to your supposition...

How so? And i suggest you find info from somewhere more reliable than a chain email.

 

[Ryanxia]

I'll just say two things;

If total government control equals safety, why are prisons so dangerous?

I believe every man should be familiar with a Bible and a gun, and they don't teach either in school.

Also, good to see another fellow Mainer on here.

 

[michaelbsc]

Regarding gun safety: I think it should be taught as a mandatory high school class. Along with lots of other safety topics:<br />
- Ladder safety.<br />
- Basic electrical saftey.<br />
- Hearing conservation and safety.<br />
- Eye protection.<br />
- HazMat, you know basic stuff of everyday chemicals, gasoline, degreaser, etc.<br />
- How to use a fire extingquisher.<br />
- Power tool safety.<br />
- Slips, trips, and falls.<br />
- Situational awareness.<br />
- Preventing back injuries.<br />
- Blood borne pathogens.<br />
<br />
<br />
the list goes on. It is so pathetic that high school grads know so little and so many are eventaully hurt/injured/killed or loose an eye by the simplest of things.<br />
<br />
To get back on topic: Everyone should have gun safety training. The four rules, etc. Even Anti's need it.

I have advocated this since I was in Jr High. And kids should be able to balance a checking account, plan a monthly menu, yada, yada, yada.

Our indoctrination centers are almost worthless. Kids leave with practically zero useful skills.

 

[Walkalong]

Enough.