Why carry a gun?

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/60#post_3485383
Please. That has to be the lamest attempt at justifying "use" of a weapon that I've ever heard. So if I walk out an sit in my car in the driveway, I'm "using it"? If I just rub it a little, open the trunk, or open the door, I'm using my vehicle? If that's the case, cars are used 200million times a day, and all those statistics and percentages of deaths being caused by cars can be reduced to a .0000001% fatality rate. "Using" a gun is physically firing the weapon, the same a "using" a car means to drive it.
You have the audacity to call someone else lame after posting this? LOL!!!! So if I set my burglar alarm and it isn't tripped I didn't use it?

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/60#post_3485386
The scary part is people like you, Reef, Darth, and mantis honestly believe that our society would denigrate itself to the point that a revolt requiring "citizens to come to arms" would actually occur. Did you have faith in our National Guard and police forces when they attacked innocent civilians at Kent St. in the 60's? How about the Los Angeles riots after Rodney King? The various riots Blacks created when MLK died? Those individuals followed orders, and people were injured and killed. To them, they were fighting "their cause against the establishment". If it did come down to our Federal Government protecting themselves against a rvolting citizenry, they wouldn't need many "boots on the ground". Tactical drones controlled at NORAD could wipe out the majority of dissendents. To be successful, you'd have to have at least 70% of the American citizenry to agree with your cause and why you're revolting against the Feds in the first place. The "opposition doesn't necessarily have to be our Armed Forces. They could be your next door neighbor who disagrees with you, and does agree with the federal government. Remember that little skirmish called the Civil War? If that happened today, deaths and injuries would pale in comparison.
In your examples you are talking about extremely isolated incidents with the exception of when King was killed and that was still small fraction of the population

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485485
You have the audacity to call someone else lame after posting this? LOL!!!! So if I set my burglar alarm and it isn't tripped I didn't use it?
Your burglar alarm can't be used as a deadly weapon. You keep claiming cars kill more people than guns, I showed you the reasons why there's more auto fatalities than gun fatalities, and you come up with some ridiculous anaology that simply carrying your weapon on your side constitutes as using it. Unless you actually FIRE a weapon, you're not using it. Unless you actually DRIVE a car, you're not using it.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485486
In your examples you are talking about extremely isolated incidents with the exception of when King was killed and that was still small fraction of the population
It's irrelevent. You still had military and officials of the government fighting against American citizenry who were merely revolting for their specific causes. Doesn't matter if it's 2000 or 2 million. Police forces all over the country have Riot Squads specifically trained to handle out of control crowds, regardless if they believe what they're doing is right or not. Didn't see ATF or FBI agents having any problems going after David Koresh when he claimed to be supporting his 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/60#post_3485482
You might be surprised how many gun owners would support a plain and simple clarification of the second amendment. I am not sure if modern politicians are able to craft such a document.
"Individuals have the right to keep and bare firearms and that right shall not be infringed, taxed or regulated beyond the exclusion of fully automatic weapons or explosive munitions. The government may require a permit at no cost for devices that would extend a firearm's capacity beyond 15 rounds."
I could sell that to most gun owners. It reaffirms our individual right and prevents the government from taxing or regulating us out of our guns. Having to get a permit so the government knows who has the high capacity mags is a small sacrifice.
As logical as you make this sound, the NRA would never allow it in a million years.

 

[mantisman51]

I don't know about Colorado, but in Az a CCW permit allows you to carry even when there is a "no firearms" sign, except government buildings and we could've in government buildings, but Jan Brewer has vetoed it 2 years in a row. Still trying to reason with him, huh, Reef? Smoke a whole bunch of marijuana and then you might understand and communicate. I have given up pointing out the factual lies, er, errors he's spewing. I just wanted to point this out, because it's this way in Idaho and Arizona and my guess is most other states with CCW permits.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485494
I don't know about Colorado, but in Az a CCW permit allows you to carry even when there is a "no firearms" sign, except government buildings and we could've in government buildings, but Jan Brewer has vetoed it 2 years in a row. Still trying to reason with him, huh, Reef? Smoke a whole bunch of marijuana and then you might understand and communicate. I have given up pointing out the factual lies, er, errors he's spewing. I just wanted to point this out, because it's this way in Idaho and Arizona and my guess is most other states with CCW permits.
That's how idiotic the gun laws are in Arizona. So if a business in Arizona doesn't want someone carrying a weapon into their facility, they don't have a right to deny that entry? Wonder if the FBI or ATF would have a problem with this since Federal laws trump state laws. Sorry, haven't smoked a doobie in over 30 years. With your twisted logic, they must put some really screwy drugs in the water there in Desert Central.

 

[mantisman51]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/60#post_3485482
You might be surprised how many gun owners would support a plain and simple clarification of the second amendment. I am not sure if modern politicians are able to craft such a document.
"Individuals have the right to keep and bare firearms and that right shall not be infringed, taxed or regulated beyond the exclusion of fully automatic weapons or explosive munitions. The government may require a permit at no cost for devices that would extend a firearm's capacity beyond 15 rounds."
I could sell that to most gun owners. It reaffirms our individual right and prevents the government from taxing or regulating us out of our guns. Having to get a permit so the government knows who has the high capacity mags is a small sacrifice.
We have clarification through legislation and Supreme Court decisions. No full-auto, without special permit and things like surprise inspections, etc by the ATF. No explosives. No firearms over .50 caliber. No felons, mentally ill or domestic battery suspects can possess them. Background checks on all gun purchases at businesses. Many states have no open carry in public. Many have no conceal carry. Sorry, Reef, you are dead wrong. We have all the damn "clarification" needed and plenty more. It would be brainless politicians like bionic who would "clarify" the 2nd Amendment. You really think we need more "clarity" on this? There are over 2000 Federal "clarifications" on the 2nd Amendment. We don't need any more.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485490
It's irrelevent. You still had military and officials of the government fighting against American citizenry who were merely revolting for their specific causes. Doesn't matter if it's 2000 or 2 million. Police forces all over the country have Riot Squads specifically trained to handle out of control crowds, regardless if they believe what they're doing is right or not. Didn't see ATF or FBI agents having any problems going after David Koresh when he claimed to be supporting his 2nd Amendment rights.
I can't believe you cannot grasp this. None of the incidents you mention were a popular uprising, of course the feds did their job. You had what were irrational factions of people in isolated incidents.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485494
I don't know about Colorado, but in Az a CCW permit allows you to carry even when there is a "no firearms" sign, except government buildings and we could've in government buildings, but Jan Brewer has vetoed it 2 years in a row. Still trying to reason with him, huh, Reef? Smoke a whole bunch of marijuana and then you might understand and communicate. I have given up pointing out the factual lies, er, errors he's spewing. I just wanted to point this out, because it's this way in Idaho and Arizona and my guess is most other states with CCW permits.
I am not sure if CCW is prohibited if a private business has a sign or not. I just know you can't open carry if they do.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485502
That's how idiotic the gun laws are in Arizona. So if a business in Arizona doesn't want someone carrying a weapon into their facility, they don't have a right to deny that entry? Wonder if the FBI or ATF would have a problem with this since Federal laws trump state laws. Sorry, haven't smoked a doobie in over 30 years. With your twisted logic, they must put some really screwy drugs in the water there in Desert Central.
Do you give up any other rights because you are on private property? I know in Colorado there was a recent court ruling that the Public University system couldn't ban guns. Thats one were I can see both sides of the argument. I've seen drunken college students do some pretty stupid stuff. Not sure allowing them to have a gun in their dorm is the wisest choice but what you gonna do.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485506
We have clarification through legislation and Supreme Court decisions. No full-auto, without special permit and things like surprise inspections, etc by the ATF. No explosives. No firearms over .50 caliber. No felons, mentally ill or domestic battery suspects can possess them. Background checks on all gun purchases at businesses. Many states have no open carry in public. Many have no conceal carry. Sorry, Reef, you are dead wrong. We have all the damn "clarification" needed and plenty more. It would be brainless politicians like bionic who would "clarify" the 2nd Amendment. You really think we need more "clarity" on this? There are over 2000 Federal "clarifications" on the 2nd Amendment. We don't need any more.
You don't understand how precarious the individual right is. That was a 5-4 ruling that could be overturned in a wink because it was based on an interpretation of the wording. I'd gladly agree to permits for high capacity mags in exchange for a clear grant of the individual right that can't be misinterpreted and the guarantee we can't be taxed or regulated out of our ammo. I'll go one further. Throw in that no state or local government can infringe that right and I'll agree to making people show ID to buy bullets. I really don't have a problem being open about what I have if I know some cockeyed bass rasturd sitting on a court somewhere can't ban my stuff.

 

[mantisman51]

That all makes sense. It does give me pause to think about it framed that way. I don't know what makes me fear more, risking a 5th Soviet Committee member on the Supreme Court or allowing modern, radical leftists help reshape the 2nd Amendment. We are winning the argument. Every poll, including the very left-leaning NBC/NYT poll, shows Americans overwhelmingly support the traditional view of the 2nd Amendment-personal right versus collective right. So, I'm just uncomfortable giving an inch at this point with Obama and Holder in office.

 

[darthtang aw]

Please.  That has to be the lamest attempt at justifying "use" of a weapon that I've ever heard.  So if I walk out an sit in my car in the driveway, I'm "using it"?  If I just rub it a little, open the trunk, or open the door, I'm using my vehicle?  If that's the case, cars are used 200million times a day, and all those statistics and percentages of deaths being caused by cars can be reduced to a .0000001% fatality rate.  "Using" a gun is physically firing the weapon, the same a "using" a car means to drive it.
Guns are USED as a deterrent. If a guy with a gun calls you an jackass....are you going to start a fight with him? even if he never touches or draws his weapon? Did the gun play a factor in the "altercation"? yes. Prime example. It is well known I carry a gun on my Block. Even the Officer accross the street knows. One of my neighbors had a verbal altercation with me in my driveway. when he started walking towards me with "intent to do bodily harm" I just reached behind my back slowly and he stopped. He left, cooled down...came back later and we discussed the issue civilly. Now, funny thing is, my handgun I had just put away in my dresser drawer right before this. My gun wasn't on me. Yet the gun was still "used".
The scary part is people like you, Reef, Darth, and mantis honestly believe that our society would denigrate itself to the point that a revolt requiring "citizens to come to arms" would actually occur.  Did you have faith in our National Guard and police forces when they attacked innocent civilians at Kent St. in the 60's?  How about the Los Angeles riots after Rodney King?  The various riots Blacks created when MLK died?  Those individuals followed orders, and people were injured and killed.  To them, they were fighting "their cause against the establishment".  If it did come down to our Federal Government protecting themselves against a rvolting citizenry, they wouldn't need many "boots on the ground".  Tactical drones controlled at NORAD could wipe out the majority of dissendents.  To be successful, you'd have to have at least 70% of the American citizenry to agree with your cause and why you're revolting against the Feds in the first place.  The "opposition doesn't necessarily have to be our Armed Forces.  They could be your next door neighbor who disagrees with you, and does agree with the federal government.  Remember that little skirmish called the Civil War?  If that happened today, deaths and injuries would pale in comparison.
When have I ever said society would bring itself to the point revolt? Do I believe our government will eventually collapse? Sure...but more in the way the Soviet Union collapsed due to economic reasons. My guns are owned as a defense from a large criminal element. Not for war preparation or defense from the gobernment.

 

[darthtang aw]

You might be surprised how many gun owners would support a plain and simple clarification of the second amendment. I am not sure if modern politicians are able to craft such a document.
"Individuals have the right to keep and bare firearms and that right shall not be infringed, taxed or regulated beyond the exclusion of fully automatic weapons or explosive munitions. The government may require a permit at no cost for devices that would extend a firearm's capacity beyond 15 rounds."
I could sell that to most gun owners. It reaffirms our individual right and prevents the government from taxing or regulating us out of our guns. Having to get a permit so the government knows who has the high capacity mags is a small sacrifice.
I would definitely agree with that! I own 7 30 round magazines for my rifle. I would have no issue paying for a permit to own them. I wouldn't even mind a 10%sales tax to the fed either along with the permit.

 

[darthtang aw]

There are over 2000 Federal "clarifications" on the 2nd Amendment. We don't need any more.
And that is the problem...a ridiculous amount of "laws" that vary state to state, municipality to municipality...and it muddles and confuses many things. A federal clarification on the 2nd amendment....would wipe away a lot of those "clarifications".

 

[mantisman51]

Actually the House passed a measure to coordinate all CCW laws and guarantee the rights of CCW permit holders across state lines. Prince Harry wouldn't let it come to the floor for a vote and Obummer said he's veto it. EVEN THOUGH every single state would have access to a database of all CCW holders. Seems it would have made things much safer. But that is not the goal of the democrats(like bionic). The goal is to erode and eventually end gun rights. That is why I am a knee-jerk reactionary to any new 2nd Amendment tampering.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485511
Do you give up any other rights because you are on private property? I know in Colorado there was a recent court ruling that the Public University system couldn't ban guns. Thats one were I can see both sides of the argument. I've seen drunken college students do some pretty stupid stuff. Not sure allowing them to have a gun in their dorm is the wisest choice but what you gonna do.
They tried allowing CCW on college campuses in Texas, but it got shot down (no pun intended).
Do I give up other rights? Sure you do - no smoking, no drinking, no shirt, no shoes, no service.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/392453/why-carry-a-gun/80#post_3485523
Guns are USED as a deterrent. If a guy with a gun calls you an jackass....are you going to start a fight with him? even if he never touches or draws his weapon? Did the gun play a factor in the "altercation"? yes. Prime example. It is well known I carry a gun on my Block. Even the Officer accross the street knows. One of my neighbors had a verbal altercation with me in my driveway. when he started walking towards me with "intent to do bodily harm" I just reached behind my back slowly and he stopped. He left, cooled down...came back later and we discussed the issue civilly. Now, funny thing is, my handgun I had just put away in my dresser drawer right before this. My gun wasn't on me. Yet the gun was still "used".
When have I ever said society would bring itself to the point revolt? Do I believe our government will eventually collapse? Sure...but more in the way the Soviet Union collapsed due to economic reasons. My guns are owned as a defense from a large criminal element. Not for war preparation or defense from the gobernment.
You sound like a walking Zimmerman. Pretty sad that you're known as the "nutjob who packs" in the neighborhood. "Don't confront that guy. If he even thinks he's ihntimidated with you, he'll draw his pistol and threaten to fire." You must live in a real nice neighborhood.

So because you walk around with a weapon, you can do or say as you want knowing you're the "tough guy with the itchy trigger finger"?

 

[bionicarm]

You people need to move to Idaho. Sounds like it's the Shang-Ri-La for fanatical gun owners:
http://slideshow.msnbc.msn.com/slideshow/news/light-foot-militia-rises-in-idahos-backcountry-48043262/?__utma=14933801.1795512979.1342443245.1343922100.1343936020.32&__utmb=14933801.1.10.1343936020&__utmc=14933801&__utmx=-&__utmz=14933801.1343832967.27.5.utmcsr=msn.com|utmccn=(referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/&__utmv=14933801.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc%7Ccover=1^12=Landing%20Content=Mixed=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=www.nbcnews.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Earned%20to%20Mixed=1&__utmk=83524246