America Psychotic about Firearms?

J

Jeff Thomas

New member
Hmmm - psychosis - per the WWWebster Dictionary ( www.m-w.com/dictionary.htm ) "fundamental mental derangement (as schizophrenia) characterized by defective or lost contact with reality."

Now, when I debate self-defense and firearms with some people, I am honestly ... don't laugh ... beginning to think Americans are becoming literally psychotic about the issue.

The massacre in CO is a case in point. 60% of Americans apparently believe that 'easy access to guns' is the cause. Excuse me? Guns were available in most of our homes when we were kids, and I definitely don't mean just for RKBA-types. I mean the vast majority of this country. I'm trying to determine per capita firearms' ownership statistics, but it's tough. I strongly tend to believe that per capita firearms' ownership is down. I see no logic behind the thought that somehow guns are easier to get today - many more laws, and they were just not that hard to get 20 or 30 years ago.

Or, the 'no one needs a firearm to defend themselves' argument. Excuse me? How many incidents of self-defense do they care to read? (Answer, none) Check out 'The Best Defense : True Stories of Intended Victims Who Defended Themselves With a Firearm' by Robert A. Waters http://www.amazon.com - a new TFL member, and an excellent writer. LEO's tell me very openly, as you all know, that they can obviously not be there immediately if you are under attack.

Or, one of my all-time favorites, 'you can stop a violent attack with pepper spray, stun guns or even talking the person out of it'. Excuse me? I refer back to the discussion above, and ... whoa Nellie ... common sense. Which clearly ain't so common anymore, Toto. Yeah, I really want to get close to a homicidal maniac when he attacks me or someone else. Maybe I can talk him out of it if I'm just brave enough to whisper in his ear.

I'll close my plea to the choir by telling you about the latest attempt in Phoenix, Arizona to push the 'ignorance envelope'. You're really gonna love this - especially our LEO members. We have a local chapter of Big Brothers / Big Sisters here - guys and gals helping fatherless / motherless kids. Great program. The illustrious Board of Directors of this outfit decided that a police officer could NOT become a Big Brother. Why not? Well, he was responsible, had a good record, was a supervisor, was stable, was ... everything they could possibly want. However, he was one thing they didn't want ... armed, off-duty. Yea, that's right. They told him he could be a Big Brother if he no longer carried a firearm while off-duty, with his 'little brother'. He refused. I sent a letter today to the Board of Big Bros to let them know that I noticed they are idiots. Of course, in the article, the Executive Director was quoted as saying something like 'we have to think of the children first'. All I can say is that I'm glad she wasn't looking after me when I was a kid. With their big brother being an armed, off-duty peace officer, I'm not sure it could get much safer for most kids.


I rest my case. Apparently somewhere around 60% of Americans should be committed ... for extreme psychosis, and a disconnect with reality. Oh boy.


[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited April 28, 1999).]
 
On the same page as the Big Brother/Big Sister group was the Shelter for Battered Women that Massad Ayoob wrote about. He attended some function put on by the group and someone saw his holster. He and his wife had offered to shelter a battered woman in their home. When the Nervous Nellies running the shelter saw the holster they refused the offer. They then put the woman up in a motel where her husband found and killed her. Where do you think she would have been better protected?

That was several years back. May all them that are that disturbed by the thought of firearms rot in hell.

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
 
I am in lockstep with you, Jeff. Only problem is that they think WE are the psychos along, apparently with much of the rest of the world. I am really having it pounded home that what I was raised to think of as the "Free World" ain't all that damned free. At least not as I define freedom.
 
Roger that on the freedom question. When I'm at a ballgame and we sing 'land of the free and the home of the brave' I look around sometimes and wonder how many of those folks still believe it. Or live it.
 
Jeff: Wednesday's worldnetdaily.com has a column by Thomas Sowell which speaks to the psychology in the aftermath of shooting incidents. It is made even more profound by some of the quite sincere but ignorant comments in the column by Maralyn Lois Polak in the same issue.
 
Jeff,

Ditto on all that you said. My experience with people who are anti run the same path as your's.

I'll still carry openly for as long as I can just to provoke a conversation! ;)

------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."

www.countdown9199.com
 
Jeff Thomas: Col Jeff Cooper referred to this mental condition as "hoplophobia". Hoplo refers to "tool/weapon". Any SANE person knows a firearm is merely a tool, an inanimate object. "The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of it's own. Naturaly, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles" -J. Cooper
 
I agree that the mind set of the american people is slowly changing. This is the worst prolbem facing us today. Another example is the gun club I belong to. The Knights Landing Sportsmen's Club. Since 1948 there was an orphanage in Sacramento that we went to every year. Took all the kids between 12 and 18, ran them through the NRA hunters safety course. Supplied them with shotguns and shells, hunting licenses and then took them out for a weekend of pheasant hunting. Was always a pleasure to see these kids faces light up when they shot their first bird. Afterwords our wives would cook their birds for them and we would have a great sunday evening dinner.

The 1998 season they had a new director. A woman, who could not stand guns. We were told that she would not allow us to turn her kids into 'Armed Killers'. So much for a 52 year old tradition.

Yes times have changed and so have I. I no longer look at these people opposed to guns as poor misguided soles. I now tell them what I think. They are nowthing but sniveling cowards. Afraid to defend their own lives.

Richard
 
While gun control proponents and other advocates of a kinder, gentler society incessantly decry our "armed society," in truth we do not live in an armed society. We live in a society in which violent criminals and agents of the state habitually carry weapons, and in which many law-abiding citizens own firearms but do not go about armed. Department of Justice statistics indicate that 87 percent of all violent crimes occur outside the home. Essentially, although tens of millions own firearms, we are an unarmed society.

What we certainly do not need is more gun control. Those who call for the repeal of the Second Amendment so that we can really begin controlling firearms betray a serious misunderstanding of the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to the people, such that its repeal would legitimately confer upon government the powers otherwise proscribed. The Bill of Rights is the list of the fundamental, inalienable rights, endowed in man by his Creator, that define what it means to be a free and independent people, the rights which must exist to ensure that government governs only with the consent of the people. THINK ABOUT IT! This is a fair warning to us all if we wish to preserve this country for our childresn and grandchildren. Enough said...I'm writing another check today to the NRA, GOA, and the CRPA...
 
A short story for you to ponder.

A friend of mine who drives a semi was at a plant waiting to heve his trailer unloaded and to pick up a load. While waiting he took out a copy of SHOTGUN NEWS to read. The female shipping clerk started berating him for the magazine he was reading, and the fact he had anything to do with "guns" after what "they", the guns I guess, did in Colorado. She was still ranting when he left the office.



------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
 
Bookkie,

I think you will like this!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>This is an extract of an National Public Radio (NPR) interview between a
female broadcaster and US Army Lieutenant General Reinwald about
sponsoring
a Boy Scout Troop on his military installation.

Interviewer: "So, LTG Reinwald, what are you going to do with these young
boys on their adventure holiday?"

LTG Reinwald: "We're going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and
shooting."

Interviewer: "Shooting! That's a bit irresponsible,isn't it?"

LTG Reinwald: "I don't see why, they'll be properly supervised on the
range."

Interviewer: "Don't you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity
to
be teaching children?"

LTG Reinwald: "I don't see how, we will be teaching them proper range
discipline before they even touch a firearm."

Interviewer: "But you're equipping them to become violent killers."

LTG Reinwald: "Well, you're equipped to be a prostitute, but you're not
one,
are you?"

End of the interview
[/quote]

------------------
John/az

"Just because something is popular, does not make it right."

www.countdown9199.com


[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited April 29, 1999).]
 
Ah, this is eliciting some 'wonderful' stories. I honestly believe that being an American at this time in our history requires us to diplomatically, but very clearly, point out firearms' absurdities whenever they rear their ugly heads.

Diplomatically, because those who threaten others only confirm their absurd mindsets (unfortunately, that has happened with some of our legislators recently). And clearly, in that we almost allow them to begin to see how ignorant and illogical their statements really are.

An author friend took this approach recently. Anti-self defense fool says all guns should be banned!. My friend agrees (and baits), and asks what people should do if they are attacked. Some fools take longer than others, but most will eventually say something like 'dial 911'. My friend then says 'why didn't those poor kids and teachers in Colorado do that?' Whereupon the fool falls in and says 'they did, didn't they?'. And then my friend watches to see how long it takes them to mull that one over. Doesn't work for all of them, since it does require at least a minimal number of brain cells.
 
ROFLMAO!!
I liked that one. Could you tell?

I'm working on this with my fiancee. I screwed up last night and basically finally got mad at her for not taking my side (she still watches Rosie O'Donnell--all I said was that I would not watch an entertainer who tried to put my fiancee in prison for owning an object.) It frustrates me when she talks about how much she's given in because she'll "allow" me to have a gun in the house. After all, I could have the gun with or without her.
But that misses the point that it really is a big leap for her because like everyone else out there she really believes the gun will hurt her or her kids. I guess I'm lucky she's so open-minded or I wouldn't even get that much.
 
A person's views on guns are but one facet of a package of views about life itsownself. If there is a conflict of views about guns, I'll bet money there're conflicts of views on many other subjects.

This has been known to cause friction between people who otherwise think all's well in a relationship. It can lead to alimony and child support payments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top