Sign in to follow this  
SEC=UGA

Gun Control

Recommended Posts

So much for the view of "law abiding gun owners".

 

 

:lol: that's like saying that you're a bad driver and shouldn't have a car cuz you occasionally violate traffic laws. What's that called, some kind of strawman illogical attack?

 

You only need it once...

That's similar to a philosophy regarding safety gear for motorcycling, All The Gear All The Time (ATGATT). You don't know when you might crash so you always wear it (helmet, jacket, pants, gloves, boots). I guess I just don't feel the risk is there to warrant me having or carrying a gun. I'm also not trying to stop others from doing it. I just think its a bad idea to have more guns in the hands of more people.

 

Since I wear a lid and other protective clothing every single time I ride a motorcycle and a bicycle, then I guess I should carry a pistol every time I'm awake.

 

I support the right to ride without a lid, but my family will wear one every single time. When my kids are old enough to learn to shoot, they will. My 4yo already knows that he's not allowed to touch a firearm unless I or his mom hand it to him and thanks to NRA's Eddie Eagle, he knows the routine...

 

Me: What do you do if you see a gun.

Him: Walk away, tell a grown up.

 

 

I've started to train him to know that most grown ups are idiots and that he should NOT go back near the gun when the grown up picks it up since most will wind up firing it out of ignorance.

 

Guns exist. It's reality. One can choose to stick their head in the sand or become educated. If you have a child, I think they should know how dangerous guns, bicycles, whatever are, know what to do, know how to minimize risks while maximizing fun.

 

My 14yo niece never touched or fired a gun before I took her to the range. Now she knows a little more and is safer for it. She's also going to join the gun team at school.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the point of carrying and signs, I believe that was part of the Ohio CCW law (the ability of businesses to post signs prohibiting firearms). We have one at our office, and most every retail business has them as well. However I hear many gun owners/CCW holders that say "Screw that, its just a sign telling criminals its ok to rob the place. I'm still carrying my gun." So much for the view of "law abiding gun owners".

 

You only need it once...

That's similar to a philosophy regarding safety gear for motorcycling, All The Gear All The Time (ATGATT). You don't know when you might crash so you always wear it (helmet, jacket, pants, gloves, boots). I guess I just don't feel the risk is there to warrant me having or carrying a gun. I'm also not trying to stop others from doing it. I just think its a bad idea to have more guns in the hands of more people.

 

 

I can't speak to Ohio's laws, as I haven't traveled there. I can tell you that in Texas a person with a CHL like myself can walk into any business with my gun unless they specifically cite Texas Penal Code 30.06 on their No Firearms sign. If it doesn't mention Texas Penal Code 30.06 then it doesn't matter how big the sign is, I can still carry. In my store I have a No Firearms sign, but I purposefully left out Texas Penal Code 30.06. As a matter of fact right under No Firearms I have lettering that says CHL holders welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak to Ohio's laws, as I haven't traveled there. I can tell you that in Texas a person with a CHL like myself can walk into any business with my gun unless they specifically cite Texas Penal Code 30.06 on their No Firearms sign. If it doesn't mention Texas Penal Code 30.06 then it doesn't matter how big the sign is, I can still carry. In my store I have a No Firearms sign, but I purposefully left out Texas Penal Code 30.06. As a matter of fact right under No Firearms I have lettering that says CHL holders welcome.

 

 

This is the sign we have in our office, and I see in many retail stores.

http://ohioceasefire.org/images/ocagv_weapon_free_zone_poster.pdf

 

It mentions the Ohio Revised Code, and I think is similar to your citing Texas Penal Code.

 

Anyway my basic point is I've had gun owners flat out tell me "I don't care what those signs say, I'll take my gun in because I may need it." Its the tough guy "laws don't apply to me" mentality that bothers many. And blows up in their face when they start the "if you outlaw guns only the criminals will have guns", because its clear that many of them would illegally own if it was against the law (making them criminals).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a concealed carry permit, so I have to carry my gun in my hand when I go out. I always get my sandwich really fast at Jersey Mike's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway my basic point is I've had gun owners flat out tell me "I don't care what those signs say, I'll take my gun in because I may need it." Its the tough guy "laws don't apply to me" mentality that bothers many. And blows up in their face when they start the "if you outlaw guns only the criminals will have guns", because its clear that many of them would illegally own if it was against the law (making them criminals).

 

 

You keep coming back to that as if it's relevant.

 

 

It's important to remember that the 2nd Amendment does NOT give you a right to own and have firearms. It's to protect the right that you were born with in this country. The founding fathers made the 2A, almost, an obligation to defend, violently if necessary, to keep and protect the 2nd.

 

While I do think private business owners should have the right to define the rules in their private business, the constitution comes first in the order of this country's laws.

 

It is logically impossible for the US to make firearms illegal as that would pretty much require a constitutional convention and then the USA would cease to exist at that point.

 

So, when your gun totters come waltzing in your shop or elsewhere and proclaim, "laws don't apply to me", well, they're right... assuming that you believe in the constitution.

 

For most, it's much less about being a "tough guy" and a lot more about being pissed off that our (birth) rights are being attacked and eroded.

Edited by LordOpie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the sign we have in our office, and I see in many retail stores.

http://ohioceasefire...zone_poster.pdf

 

It mentions the Ohio Revised Code, and I think is similar to your citing Texas Penal Code.

 

Anyway my basic point is I've had gun owners flat out tell me "I don't care what those signs say, I'll take my gun in because I may need it." Its the tough guy "laws don't apply to me" mentality that bothers many. And blows up in their face when they start the "if you outlaw guns only the criminals will have guns", because its clear that many of them would illegally own if it was against the law (making them criminals).

 

 

The sign you linked says "Unless authorized by law.." A CHL authorizes you by law to carry a firearm. So they may not be in violation based on that. Again, I don't know the Ohio laws so I may be wrong.

 

I can still carry my weapon without any problems with this sign displayed:

http://www.flickr.co...mry/2396906557/

 

 

I CAN NOT carry my weapon if this sign is displayed:

http://farm1.staticf...f4a6c9f9e_z.jpg

 

ETA: I would never carry my weapon where I was not allowed to. While I personally feel that I should be able to carry anywhere with the possible exception of a Courthouse, I would not do so. The penalty is just too harsh as far as I'm concerned. I'd have my CHL revoked if I did.

Edited by Perchoutofwater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I support the right to ride without a lid, but my family will wear one every single time. When my kids are old enough to learn to shoot, they will. My 4yo already knows that he's not allowed to touch a firearm unless I or his mom hand it to him and thanks to NRA's Eddie Eagle, he knows the routine...

 

Me: What do you do if you see a gun.

Him: Walk away, tell a grown up.

 

 

I've started to train him to know that most grown ups are idiots and that he should NOT go back near the gun when the grown up picks it up since most will wind up firing it out of ignorance.

 

Guns exist. It's reality. One can choose to stick their head in the sand or become educated. If you have a child, I think they should know how dangerous guns, bicycles, whatever are, know what to do, know how to minimize risks while maximizing fun.

 

My 14yo niece never touched or fired a gun before I took her to the range. Now she knows a little more and is safer for it. She's also going to join the gun team at school.

 

 

Good for you... I'd bet that pretty much all of the kids who've gotten into and accidentally shot their parent's guns have not been properly educated about the dangers of them (this isn't to say that parents shouldn't do a better job of keeping weapons where they can't be gotten into, but I think it's just as much of a problem of the kids not comprehending the danger and respect for a firearm).

 

Early on in my life, I was taught not only to respect the deadliness of guns, but further, if you were holding one to certainly not point it at anything you didn't intend to shoot. I absolutely cannot believe that the kids who've accidentally shot someone were at all educated about the danger and deadliness of the weapon they happened to get into. Kids are smarter than we give them credit for, but they don't learn this on their own.

 

Anyway my basic point is I've had gun owners flat out tell me "I don't care what those signs say, I'll take my gun in because I may need it." Its the tough guy "laws don't apply to me" mentality that bothers many. And blows up in their face when they start the "if you outlaw guns only the criminals will have guns", because its clear that many of them would illegally own if it was against the law (making them criminals).

 

Maybe that's because they know that a violent criminal isn't going to follow the law either, making for deadly and helpless consequences. I mean, they are risking jail time for carrying illegally, so obviously they feel their safety is more important than the risk... However, it's kind of a strawman argument, since there are far more gun owners who do follow the law, and really only makes the case for not turning people into criminals for combating what the real dangerous criminals are going to do, regardless of law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel really sorry for folks that are have an irrational fear of an inanimate object. :shrug:

I feel really sorry for folks with such irrational fear of the outside world they live in that they feel the need to carry a loaded firearm concealed on their person everyday. :shrug:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel really sorry for folks with such irrational fear of the outside world they live in that they feel the need to carry a loaded firearm concealed on their person everyday. :shrug:

 

 

I'm a business owner, and make large cash deposits on a regular basis. Additionally I live in a rural area where feral hogs, dogs, and coyotes are frequently seen. I've had feral dogs and well as a hog attack one of my dogs. You can feel sorry for me all you want to, but I'm going to protect myself and what is mine. I hope you and your family never have a reason to regret your elitist attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel really sorry for folks with such irrational fear of the outside world they live in that they feel the need to carry a loaded firearm concealed on their person everyday. :shrug:

 

Is it irrational to purchase insurance to protect yours and your family's assets, income, health, cars, etc?

 

Is it irrational to lock your doors on your home or car, or get a security system?

 

At one point does it go to irrational fear rather than simply protecting oneself against the unknown, just the same as insurance?

Edited by delusions of grandeur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I feel really sorry for folks with such irrational fear of the outside world they live in that they feel the need to carry a loaded firearm concealed on their person everyday. :shrug:

 

Yea. If you want to pack heat in your own backyard then more power to you. It does make one think yer paranoid though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could be wrong, but I read somewhere that 100% of all home invasions and break-ins occur in the home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People compensate for their subconscious issues in a myriad of ways. The more serious the issue, the larger the compensation. The need to carry a firearm in public is a very big compensation IMHO. Gun owners act as though the weapon is the only means by which they can ensure their security, which to me, demonstrates that they feel pretty impotent otherwise.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People compensate for their subconscious issues in a myriad of ways. The more serious the issue, the larger the compensation. The need to carry a firearm in public is a very big compensation IMHO. Gun owners act as though the weapon is the only means by which they can ensure their security, which to me, demonstrates that they feel pretty impotent otherwise.

 

BS, we're not talking about a sports car here....

 

Again, it's pretty simple... If there were no guns that could be had even illegally, then you'd have a valid point about overcompensating, but umm yeah, I'd say I'd be quite impotent in a situation where a criminal had a gun and I didn't. If that's overcompensating, then I'd say it's undercompensating to assume that you can ensure your safety without one.

 

But I guess by your argument, the police and armed forces are just paranoid nutjobs with small peters. ;)

Edited by delusions of grandeur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I do think private business owners should have the right to define the rules in their private business, the constitution comes first in the order of this country's laws.

 

So, when your gun totters come waltzing in your shop or elsewhere and proclaim, "laws don't apply to me", well, they're right... assuming that you believe in the constitution.

 

For most, it's much less about being a "tough guy" and a lot more about being pissed off that our (birth) rights are being attacked and eroded.

 

 

So the constitution trumps all other laws regarding guns, so therefore there are no gun laws that are legal and constitutional?

 

 

ETA: I would never carry my weapon where I was not allowed to. While I personally feel that I should be able to carry anywhere with the possible exception of a Courthouse, I would not do so. The penalty is just too harsh as far as I'm concerned. I'd have my CHL revoked if I did.

 

 

Well that is a refreshing viewpoint and one I haven't heard many gun owners or pro gun folks say. What do you think about LordOpies view that the constitution trumps all other laws?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the sign we have in our office, and I see in many retail stores.

http://ohioceasefire...zone_poster.pdf

 

It mentions the Ohio Revised Code, and I think is similar to your citing Texas Penal Code.

 

Anyway my basic point is I've had gun owners flat out tell me "I don't care what those signs say, I'll take my gun in because I may need it." Its the tough guy "laws don't apply to me" mentality that bothers many. And blows up in their face when they start the "if you outlaw guns only the criminals will have guns", because its clear that many of them would illegally own if it was against the law (making them criminals).

 

Did you hear about that guy that went into 7-11 in NY and demanded a 17 oz soda!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BS, we're not talking about a sports car here....

 

Again, it's pretty simple... If there were no guns that could be had even illegally, then you'd have a valid point about overcompensating, but umm yeah, I'd say I'd be quite impotent in a situation where a criminal had a gun and I didn't. If that's overcompensating, then I'd say it's undercompensating to assume that you can ensure your safety without one.

 

But I guess by your argument, the police and armed forces are just paranoid nutjobs with small peters. ;)

 

You're right, we are not talking about a sports car, carrying a weapon is much more demonstrative.

 

Cops and armed forces carry weapons as part of their job. They carry them whether they want to or not. Now, if you want to have a conversation about the kind of people who choose to go into law enforcement, then we can start another thread, but the same argument applies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the constitution trumps all other laws regarding guns, so therefore there are no gun laws that are legal and constitutional?

 

 

 

Well that is a refreshing viewpoint and one I haven't heard many gun owners or pro gun folks say. What do you think about LordOpies view that the constitution trumps all other laws?

 

 

I get the feeling that you're only interested in arguing, versus discussing and learning something new.

 

fwiw, I don't advocate violating the law. Just trying to enlighten you as to the thinking some have and how they are "right" in a righteous way... which can land one in jail.

 

But it seems like you're not interested in considering a different, possibly historical, point of view. And with that... :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SEC

 

Wow really, those are your examples. DC and some other states with tough gun laws that have large urban areas with a lot of crime.

 

Answer this, if half of the guns in the US just vanished overnight, do you think we'd have more or less people shot to death in the period after that.

 

Or maybe we should just follow the idea of Kennesaw, and require every US citizen (head of household) to own a gun. Then surely shooting deaths would plummit rapidly to near zero.

 

To answer your question, I just want fewer guns in general. Fewer people being shot in wild rampages like this one (and many others we've seen recently). Less people who think that using their gun to settle an argument is the best alternative. Fewer guns in the hands of people that will end up using them for evil.

 

 

One more thing, I was reading up on the law in Kennesaw and there seem to be many outs for those who don't want to own a gun. And nobody has ever been prosecuted for not owning one. (If they were penalty is not known and would be determined at that time.) Also didn't see any info on how many people own guns, before or after the law was enacted. So its pretty hard to draw any real correlation here, just like all the other examples you and others on the other side have thrown out.

 

I guess my point is we seem to live in a more violent society than other "civilized" parts of the world. People in the use resort to violence more often, and access to guns means more deadly violence when that happens. I think we all want the same thing (less violence, tragic death, etc.) But one group thinks more guns is the solution, while the other thinks less guns would help.

 

 

Hey, Steve, what other examples would you like for me to use to demonstrate that restrictive gun laws don't curtail actual gun violence (seriously, I'll take the time to look it up.)

 

If half of the guns in the US "vanished" what would happen? Well, answer me this, half of who's guns? You'll find that a very miniscule percentage of legally owned handguns are used in violent crimes. Or we can look at this way... Jesus has an AK, a glock 9 and a S&W .40, none of which he purchased in a legal manner. If he lost 1.5 of his guns, he would still have 1.5 guns. With this 1.5 gun, he would still pop a cap in Caesar's ass and if he is a decent shot he would kill him.

 

Now, to the next one, I've lived in and around Kennesaw for most of my life. While it would be a stretch to say "everyone" in Kennesaw has a gun in their house, I would hazard a guess that a large % of households own a fire arm. The % of households has probably dropped over the past 14 years, but the total number of weapons has probably increased dramatically and is probably higher than the national average. Interestingly enough, there is still a very low murder/gun violence rate. Which takes us back to the idea that, hey, guess what, just because there are an ass load of guns in an area doesn't necessarily mean that more people are going to be killed by guns. And while you are correct that this law has never been enforced, I think you see that even with lax gun restrictions you don't always see a spike in gun related violence.

 

When you state that you want fewer guns, why is that? Even with fewer guns, guns are still going to find their way into the hands of the criminal element; gang members, drug dealers/smugglers, and other assorted criminals.

 

While tragic, incidents like the one that occurred in CO, where some nut job who was legally able to purchase a weapon shoots up a theater, make up less than .01% of the gun fatalities each year. But due to this, you want to restrict the rights of the law abiding public to purchase guns.

 

You did hit the nail on the head at the end, though. We live in a violent society, but, that is not the fault of firearms, that is a fault of culture. And don't be mistaken, when I decide to carry my pistola with me, it is because I am going into an area in which this culture lives. Why, because they have guns too.

 

And, again, the reason why fewer guns won't help is because the only people who will have fewer guns will be the law abiding citizen (or the victim, if you will.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that is a refreshing viewpoint and one I haven't heard many gun owners or pro gun folks say. What do you think about LordOpies view that the constitution trumps all other laws?

 

 

I think The Constitution should trump all laws in theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People compensate for their subconscious issues in a myriad of ways. The more serious the issue, the larger the compensation. The need to carry a firearm in public is a very big compensation IMHO. Gun owners act as though the weapon is the only means by which they can ensure their security, which to me, demonstrates that they feel pretty impotent otherwise.

 

 

plenty of gun owners have plenty of martial arts training and a gun is just a tool in their quiver of options. if you think that most gun owners prefer to shoot first, then I think you need to meet more gun owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You did hit the nail on the head at the end, though. We live in a violent society, but, that is not the fault of firearms, that is a fault of culture.

I think it goes beyond culture, I think humans have violent tendencies, regardless of society or time period. It allowed us to climb the food chain.

 

I think the part that makes us "human" is that we attempt to control and/or improve ourselves. A happy, well-adjusted person who owns a gun is far safer and "better" than a nut job behind the wheel of their car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

plenty of gun owners have plenty of martial arts training and a gun is just a tool in their quiver of options. if you think that most gun owners prefer to shoot first, then I think you need to meet more gun owners.

 

No, I don't think that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.