DMD Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 What if everyone (subject to background checks like now) could have guns but only for home defense? I think there would be a couple of million hunters that are not happy. And they're armed too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I think there would be a couple of million hunters that are not happy. And they're armed too... Handguns, I meant. I was just trying to put a different spin on things. I've been mulling over getting a handgun just for home defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 (edited) If it was as simple as passing a law then we would already have eliminated the problem. Criminals will always have access to guns. The only thing more gun control laws do is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get guns and makes it a bunch more expensive. What gun control law do you propose that would have prevented yesterday's tradegy? It was already illegal for him to carry those firearms and probably illegal to have them on campus too. Getting rid of your circular reasoning and canned arguments would be a good start. As you'll recall, what I suggested was for fair minded gun owners to come to the table, meet society half way, and work towards solutions. I get this crazy feeling that what ever I tell you, you're just going to respond by saying why it won't fix the whole problem (assuming you even agree that there is a problem that needs fixing). Yes, I do have ideas. No, I don't think they would fix the whole problem. But my point is that people like you and I should be sitting down and working together to make balanced progress. Most gun proponents aren't willing to, though. However, I'll give you benefit of the doubt... For example, what would you say to a proposal that required people to go through the equivilent of "drivers training" class before they could purchase a gun? A substantive program involving safety, gun law education, target practice, and all things "gun." Responsible, state licensed instructors are involved who "certify" you within a class of weapon before you can buy a gun within that class (though, folks need to be able to inherit them without any trouble). You think this Cho guy would have passed? Would *you* have passed him if you were the instructer? Now, here's the real challenge for you: before dismissing my idea, tell me what you think it would take to make that kind of a class work. Assume for our purposes, the Supreme Court has already ruled that such classes do not conflict with the 2nd Amendement. In fact, assume they've ruled that passing such a class makes you a member of a "well-regulated militia." If you can't bring yourself to meet me half way in this example, fine. Then *you* propose a solution and I'll try to build off it constructively. I'm sure you think this exercise is silly. But I'll bet my house and home there are 33 families out there right now wishing there had been people like you and me brave enough to set down the preconceived notions and dare to be a little silly in an effort to make it harder for a deranged lunatic like Cho - who wasn't even a US citizen - to get ahold of a gun legally, without really getting in the way of "good" gun owner's ability to obtain and own guns. Edited April 18, 2007 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 Handguns, I meant. I was just trying to put a different spin on things. I've been mulling over getting a handgun just for home defense. i want to get one, the wife says no with the little man running around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 i want to get one, the wife says no with the little man running around. I'm away on business sometimes and my wife arms herself with a razor sharp knife and a baseball bat. I was thinking it might be better to just get a small gun. I'd have to teach her how to use the thing but I've spent half a lifetime around all manner of firearms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 I'm away on business sometimes and my wife arms herself with a razor sharp knife and a baseball bat. I was thinking it might be better to just get a small gun. I'd have to teach her how to use the thing but I've spent half a lifetime around all manner of firearms. lol! i've come home to find the butcher knife nxt to the bed! i would be afraid of her using it under duress, even with the training. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 What if everyone (subject to background checks like now) could have guns but only for home defense? As opposed to what? What would the purpose of that law be and how would it be enforced? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 (edited) I'm away on business sometimes and my wife arms herself with a razor sharp knife and a baseball bat. I was thinking it might be better to just get a small gun. I'd have to teach her how to use the thing but I've spent half a lifetime around all manner of firearms. Knives and bats are difficult to use effectively. You essentially have one blow to stop the attacker. Its fairly easy to disarm someone who is not skilled in using a knife as a weapon. And you can get inside the arc of a baseball bat (assuming you're swinging it) quickly. If your wife is small, forget about it. Perhaps they would frighten a chicksh*t, but I'm thinking that not too many chickensh*ts would invade a home and attack its inhabitants. If your wife is uncomfortable with a gun, by her some pepper spray. Edited April 18, 2007 by Furd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 As opposed to what? What would the purpose of that law be and how would it be enforced? No idea, I was just throwing it out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeductiveNun Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Jeez, I wasn't going to pile on to this whole thing, but seeing as I'm usually a thread-killer on any type of argumentative thread (which this has evolved into) I figured I should say my piece. And it's usually just because I post so late in those, not because I have any answers. 1. If we assume we can go by the news accounts that this was originally a tif over a girl to be true, then the person who committed these murders had problems much more deeper seeded than can be solved simply with another call for gun control. 2. According to the individual who sold him the firearms (cited in a previous post), they were all purchased in a legal manner. Again, human nature cannot be predicted in a background check. Especially if there is nothing in the person's history that could suggest such a thing. Should we prevent anyone who was ever prescribed anti-depressants from ever buying a firearm? I'm sure there would be some form of argument against it using the Americans with Disabilities Act as a background. Personally, I don't think this is a bad thing. Clinically diagnosed mental instability does not a responsible firearm owner make. 3. Should we make all those guns illegal? Let me give you my personal gun ownership. I own a 12 gauge shotgun (pump action), a 20 gauge shotgun (bolt action), a .410 (bolt action), a .22 rifle (single shot), another .22 rifle (15 shot pump action), two 30-30 rifles both lever action, a .22 semi-automatic pistol, and a .357 revolver. Not once in my life have I ever thought about pointing any of those at another human being. There was one time when I thought of keeping my .357 by the bedside for protection, but I decided to keep it in the safe with the others. Now then, I wouldn't mind having a 9 mm semi automatic pistol just to have and target shoot with, but that's one of those purchases way down the road for me. I've had some of these guns since 1982. Number of times I've pointed them at another human being? Zero. Number of times I ever thought of bringing one out and going after another person who ever pissed me off? Zero. 4. Basically, for whatever reason, people have changed in their behavior quite dramatically in the last 15 years or so. We keep finding excuses for sick mofos who go on shooting sprees that they weren't nurtured enough or were from broken homes, or pick anything from Ursa's list that he posted, but do you gain any political capital by going after any of the root causes? No. Lead the charge against the inanimate object which cannot defend itself rather than the active individual who wielded said object. We have some very strict gun control laws already in place in this country. Enforcement of the current laws is just one facet of the problem. It's just not happening the way it should. 5. I am truly saddened by this tragedy. I recall years ago when I was in college every quarter during finals there was a bomb threat phoned in to the business school (the political science classes had their finals in the same bulding). Essentially, it was a case of the boy who cried wolf, since it had happened so many times in the past, nobody paid any attention. Granted it was 1990-1992 when I was in college, but again times were mcuh different. What saddens me the second most is that the innocence of being a child/student/human has been corrupted by those bastards who think it's all about them and what they believe to be true. What saddens me the most is those children who will never get to experience the joy of life that lay ahead of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjpro11 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I'm away on business sometimes and my wife arms herself with a razor sharp knife and a baseball bat. I was thinking it might be better to just get a small gun. I'd have to teach her how to use the thing but I've spent half a lifetime around all manner of firearms. i hate to give you the grim reality, but she might as well be completely defenseless in the event of a home invasion. i'd get the gun.. teach her to load, shoot, etc, assuming you have some experience, and feel a lot safer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 i hate to give you the grim reality, but she might as well be completely defenseless in the event of a home invasion. Not to sidetrack here, but does anyone actually fear a "home invasion"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Not to sidetrack here, but does anyone actually fear a "home invasion"? Not really, by the time you get through my german shepherd I could have all of my guns loaded and ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montster Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Not to sidetrack here, but does anyone actually fear a "home invasion"? well, loaf wasn't properly armed, and look what happened to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Getting rid of your circular reasoning and canned arguments would be a good start. As you'll recall, what I suggested was for fair minded gun owners to come to the table, meet society half way, and work towards solutions. I get this crazy feeling that what ever I tell you, you're just going to respond by saying why it won't fix the whole problem (assuming you even agree that there is a problem that needs fixing). Yes, I do have ideas. No, I don't think they would fix the whole problem. But my point is that people like you and I should be sitting down and working together to make balanced progress. Most gun proponents aren't willing to, though. However, I'll give you benefit of the doubt... For example, what would you say to a proposal that required people to go through the equivilent of "drivers training" class before they could purchase a gun? A substantive program involving safety, gun law education, target practice, and all things "gun." Responsible, state licensed instructors are involved who "certify" you within a class of weapon before you can buy a gun within that class (though, folks need to be able to inherit them without any trouble). You think this Cho guy would have passed? Would *you* have passed him if you were the instructer? Now, here's the real challenge for you: before dismissing my idea, tell me what you think it would take to make that kind of a class work. Assume for our purposes, the Supreme Court has already ruled that such classes do not conflict with the 2nd Amendement. In fact, assume they've ruled that passing such a class makes you a member of a "well-regulated militia." If you can't bring yourself to meet me half way in this example, fine. Then *you* propose a solution and I'll try to build off it constructively. I'm sure you think this exercise is silly. But I'll bet my house and home there are 33 families out there right now wishing there had been people like you and me brave enough to set down the preconceived notions and dare to be a little silly in an effort to make it harder for a deranged lunatic like Cho - who wasn't even a US citizen - to get ahold of a gun legally, without really getting in the way of "good" gun owner's ability to obtain and own guns. Conceptually I have no problem with the idea of "gun training" being required before the purchase of a fire arm. The biggest problem I have with this idea is the big boost in the cost of purchasing a gun. Additionally I'm not quite sure what this buys you. Explain to my why Cho would not have passed ... he seemed to be fairly proficient with the pistols he purchased? Or are you saying that the gun training will also include a psych evaluation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Can probably be a subtitle to one of Ursa's list: Severe Lack Of Discipline Kids don't get their asses whipped anymore for fear of lawsuits and/or child abuse cases. Lack of God and Religion Yes, there are different beliefs in this country, but the majority are christian oriented as our founding fathers were. Say what you will and some will chastize me for this, but this is exactly what is ruining this country. We are too afraid to step on someone's toes. TO HELL WITH THAT! We need to get back to basics people or this country will see more and more incidents like VT and Columbine and then some. Frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of watching this great country of ours go down the toilet. Something has to be done but i fear it is already too late. I really hope and pray that I'm wrong. Open up your eyes everyone! Look at what's happening and then ask yourselves why. My heart goes out to all the victims and their families. Nothing like a national tragedy to help forward a religious agenda. What a windfall. Religion doesn't own morality. There are many examples much to the contrary. So save the sales job for the Religion forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 i want to get one, the wife says no with the little man running around. I prefer dogs. Big, noisy dogs. Best security system out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 A good read. 765 is as high as a few of our cities, namely NY and DC, which have strict gun control. DC continues to lead the world city murder rate after 27 years of banned handguns. Why do you think that is Jimmy, instead of some place where everybody has guns like Utah or Texas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Why do you think that is Jimmy, instead of some place where everybody has guns like Utah or Texas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I prefer dogs. Big, noisy dogs. Best security system out there. They certainly are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 18, 2007 Author Share Posted April 18, 2007 I prefer dogs. Big, noisy dogs. Best security system out there. +1 i want to get a rhodesian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 i hate to give you the grim reality, but she might as well be completely defenseless in the event of a home invasion. i'd get the gun.. teach her to load, shoot, etc, assuming you have some experience, and feel a lot safer. The idea is to be able to attack someone in the act of clambering through the bedroom window, which is open in summer. While both hands are occupied doing the climbing, Mrs M would gut the burglar like a fish. Home invasion is an entirely different story and so rare I'm not going to worry about it any more than I worry about being hit by a meteor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 Is the hunter smoking a cigarette? There will soon be more restrictions on that cig than the gun he is carrying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 The idea is to be able to attack someone in the act of clambering through the bedroom window, which is open in summer. While both hands are occupied doing the climbing, Mrs M would gut the burglar like a fish. While it is extremely unlikely, depending on the laws of your state, your wife might be exposing herself to liability, both criminal and civil. Most laws concerning self-defense gives one the right to use deadly force if he/she has an honest and reasonable belief that imminent death, sexual assault, or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another would occur in the absence of force, or something to that effect. If your wife rushes up to somebody clambering through the window, with both hands occupied and "guts" him, one could argue that it was not reasonable for her to believe that she faced imminent harm. Particularly if she has a duty to retreat. And particularly if the guy turns out to be unarmed. Many states have laws that provide that you have no duty to retreat in your home. In some states, there are laws that provide that there is a rebuttable presumption that someone who uses deadly force inside of their home or dwelling had a reasonable fear of imminent harm. You may want to check this out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 i have to admit i'm kind of amused at all the posts lamenting how this reflects on american parenting culture, yada yada yada. this puke was born and raised in korea, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.