Check out this website

Keifer

New member
I ran a webring search looking for some new gun sites to surf and came across this "ring"
(1 site listed). This logic this kid displays is amazing - she's probably a proud product of her public school education. Be sure and click on the "Final Thoughts" link. It summed up the depth of thought displayed throughout the site.
http://www.homestead.com/kag/home.html

Any thoughts?

Keith
 
I think the page itself is BS. I seriously doubt some little kid did it, probably was done with mom/dad ( who happen to be HCI members ) help. Here's a dead give away:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Because trust me, if nothing is done to remove the guns from our streets and our childrens hands, there will only be more and more of these tragic crimes.
[/quote]

Now if this is a kid then why is she saying "our childrens" ?

[This message has been edited by scud (edited March 23, 2000).]
 
Did anyone notice that there is a link to a discussion board there. Most of the "discussion" is frivolous tripe. Perhaps some intelligent comments from some TFLers could make the board more intellectually stimulating.
 
I could actually, like, hear, like a young girl, like tossing her hair, and like...
You get the picture.

She's been toasted.
 
Probably young teens. Or hell, young college kids from what I see here. I left a message on their board; nothing else works so I didn't get to look at the rest.

What a moron. "if this were about anything but guns, it would have been changed long ago."

Well, ain't I embarassed! I didn't even knew we had ever amended the other first ten amendments! But obviously we must have, because "Kaleigh" here says that "the gun lobby" kept the 2nd from being changed to "fit the times." So what changes have been made to the First, Fourth, Fifth, and so on? Did we give up the right to a jury trial when I wasn't looking? Moron.
 
Kids like this really get me going. They are the future of our country, and I feel it behooves us to try and educate the young. This is what I posted on her board:

Miss Kaleigh:
I will try to answer the questions posed by your page, and explain where the flaws are in your logic. After that, I shan't reply again in this board, as I believe that the best way to converse on this subject is via e-mail, which is why I included my address.

I will take your points one by one:
>Back then, literally a bear could walk into your back yard.

Agreed, and now, we don't have to worry about that. We have to worry about criminals walking into your back yard, your car, your home, with plans to take what is yours. Don't you feel that if a criminal were planning to hurt your mother, your father, sister, brother, you would hope that there's a way to protect them? Can you count on the police to do that, when the response time can be up to 1/2 hour? Someone could seriously hurt or kill your entire family in less than 2 minutes.

>And thats my point. If this law had to do with anything else then guns...

Miss, this is not a law. It is a right. There are considerable differences. A right cannot be taken away. Were that the case, then they could take away your right to freedom of speech and religion (Amendment 1); They could come in and search your home anytime, without consent (Amendment IV); The government could put you in jail without Due Process (Amendment V); Slavery would be legal (Amendment XIII); Your right to vote in elections could be removed (Amendment XV); Women could be disallowed to vote (Amendment XIX).

Would you like to see this document altered? Suppose a large number of people start deciding slavery is a good thing again, and the cry is raised to repeal the 13th amendment? Suppose men decide women don't have the ability to make an honest decision and their right to vote be taken away? Where does it stop? I disagree that the laws need to be changed. There are over 20,000 guns laws already, and the government does not enforce them. Did you know that young lady? that's TWENTY THOUSAND. If we enforce the laws already out there, violent crime would decrease dramatically.

>If we banned the guns, our crime rates would take a drastic drop.

There's an old saying "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. How well will you sleep at night knowing that only bad guys have guns and are on the streets, running around without any worry that anyone but police can stop them? There are a lot more criminals than cops. Additionally, all studies show that when the citizenry is armed, the crime rates drop, not the other way around. Florida recently changed its guns laws, making it easier to own a gun. The State as a whole has experienced a 40% DROP in violent crimes, and this is over several years, not a new development. Think this through: If you are a criminal, where would you feel safer robbing someone: In a city where guns are outlawed, and you know that no one has one, or a city where the person might be able to stop you, put you in jail, or possibly hurt you for trying to hurt them?

A last thought to ponder: Over 2,000,000 times a year a gun is used to prevent crimes. Very, very few of these times is the gun ever fired. Would you prefer to see a possible 2,000,000 more people dead each year than protect themselves?

I put your entire page down to the fact that you are young, and haven't lived in the violent world that is really out there. I imagine that you have parents that protect you, and keep you safe, and I applaud them for that. However, know that there is a world out there that has a darker side, and that people need to protect themselves from it. More importantly, parents need to take a more active interest in their children, be aware of what's going on in their lives, so that when troubled children near the breaking point, a parent is there to help, and these tragedies you write about don't happen.

I want to thank you for allowing me to rxpress my views on your page.

Joseph A. Gerardi.
 
Joe - Outstanding response. I doubt you'll get a reply, but if you do, please let us know what she says.

I couldn't decide whether to reply or not. I doubted that an open and thoughtful debate was what she was looking for so I didn't bother. That's why I started the topic here.
 
I don't expect any well reasoned debate on the board, but I thought it would be good if the few anti-gunners who find the board encountered some intelligent pro-gun posts.
 
Joe was much more polite than I. Another good thing to do would be to scroll down and put a reply to "Sten Carbine's" assertions about guns. I don't have to tell you what the proper response is if you've seen the post.
 
Here's something from a participant on that forum:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
I almost filled out your silly survey,
but what's the point? Every question in it
is weighted so you can only answer one way
without looking stoopid. Why don't you try
making the survey questions actually tell us
something? Instead of asking whether or
not it's ok for a 'frail old lady' to defend herselfby shooting a would-be attacker, make it a '17 year old black male.' This way you might actually learn something.
[/quote]

And my intolerant gun-nut response:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Do me a favor and suggest better alternative answers: I would be happy to add them to the other options.

Are you suggesting that I rephrase the question "is it OK for a 17yo black male to shoot an attacker in order to preserve own life and limb?"

The answer, of curse, wouldn't change one bit. A 17yo has the same right to preserve himself as a 70yo, regardless of race or gender.

Originally, i wanted to make other viewpoints to look less attractive, but you are right, it annoys people. Would you be willing to help me re-design the survey to where it makes more sense?
[/quote]

This is eerily reminiscent of a town hall meeting in St. Paul where a bunch of 15-18y.o. black kids came in with one of the antis and kept chanting how all the white folk want concealed carry permits for is shooting down poor black children like them. Maybe they even believed themselves but I doubt that their handlers did.
 
Thank you for your kudos.

I think that every time we resond to these, we MUST appear polite, articulate and logical so that the antis don't use the "wild assed, likker-swillin', snake-eatin, baby-killin' gun-crazed NUT" title against us. (Even if that's what we really are! :) ) I think that if people see us in a "normal" light, then perhaps, just perhaps, they might listen and possibly even hear what we have to say. Additionally, I was into debate in school. The rules state that when they get louder, you get softer, when they get angrier, you get calmer, you prove your point, and generally frustrate the opposition even more, and you ALWAYS come out looking more intelligent. (Though in my case, that a hell of a stretch!) :)

One convert a day/week/month/year is still a convert.
 
The guy did respond and turned out I had mis-judged him...not just a straight-forward anti but with a twist.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
I don't have the time or any real desire to help you rewrite your survey
(other than this exchange) I just wanted to point out that a survey should
tell you something. I knew that you would think that it's okay for a 17
year old black male to shoot an attacker, but I think that there's a lot
people out there that might not. Using a frail old lady as an example makes
it impossible for anyone to answer in any other way. Make the question
complicated, and with a few POSSIBLE answers, not just one, and you (the
surveyor) will actually learn something about the people you survey.
However, if the point of the survey was just say what YOU think about gun
control, then mission accomplished. Don't worry about it, because that's all
it does.

Or you can REALLY turn the tables: Make the attacker a police officer.
Sure, the question might annoy people, but that's because it makes people
who take the survey actually think instead of mindlessy filling in the
blanks, checking the only answers that work. Anyway, gun control is a
complicated issue, IMO, and one that'll never really be solved. Good luck
to you, and be careful: Guns can poke your eye out.
-Andy
BTW: The question about police officers carrying high capacity handguns is
on the right track. "the cops are evil and want to kill everyone.
[/quote]
 
The 'Who Am I' and the 'Some Final Thoughts' links are dead. Don't have her email address. Otherwise, I would be happy to politely point out a few things about her ideas so far.
 
Back
Top