"He had a gun, he could have shot somebody!"
- Thread starter SEKLEM
- Start date
- Status
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
That's my point. Thanks.
When you call an AR a tool or a modern sporting rifle - you state that is no different from a file from Home Depot or your tennis racket.
You whine to the antigunner that they are not dangerous and please let you keep your toys.
While you might think that some force of the universe will allow you to keep them because of your theory of inherent rights - that is not the case. The laws of the land and the Constitution protect your ability to have them. Unless, you want to actually fight (if that is implied - spare us on this forum). The constitutional protection is specific for these 'toys' and 'tools' for their use as weapons.
The tool/toy argument has been used by Zumbo and Metcalf to state explicitly that these guns should be controlled as they have no manly usage for real men in hunting, sport, etc. There is a significant part of the gun world that buys the sporting argument and would ban certain guns. They have no place in sport!!! Just heard that today on a local talk show discussing concealed and open carry. The caller was an NRA supporter but argued you should only have a gun out for sport! He was against all forms of carry.
If one thinks this is PC argument, that's good for you. That view is wrong and useless.
When you call an AR a tool or a modern sporting rifle - you state that is no different from a file from Home Depot or your tennis racket.
You whine to the antigunner that they are not dangerous and please let you keep your toys.
While you might think that some force of the universe will allow you to keep them because of your theory of inherent rights - that is not the case. The laws of the land and the Constitution protect your ability to have them. Unless, you want to actually fight (if that is implied - spare us on this forum). The constitutional protection is specific for these 'toys' and 'tools' for their use as weapons.
The tool/toy argument has been used by Zumbo and Metcalf to state explicitly that these guns should be controlled as they have no manly usage for real men in hunting, sport, etc. There is a significant part of the gun world that buys the sporting argument and would ban certain guns. They have no place in sport!!! Just heard that today on a local talk show discussing concealed and open carry. The caller was an NRA supporter but argued you should only have a gun out for sport! He was against all forms of carry.
If one thinks this is PC argument, that's good for you. That view is wrong and useless.
In a world where they can happily ban dangerous toys like lawn darts, why not ban dangerous toys like your modern sporting rifle?
Nothing for us to stand on, there. Better be non-PC and honest right up front: it's not a toy or a tool. It's a weapon. That's why we have and defend the right to own it.
Busybodies can sometimes ban toys, and even 'dangerous' tools like incandescent light bulbs, but the human right to self-defense trumps all that.
After all, self defense is the most basic of all human rights.
pax
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I will say again - drop the sexual content. We have discussed it.
Some repeats deleted.
Some repeats deleted.
I've had some time to reflect on my initial idea and realize the recklessness of the notion I had put forward. It is true that anyone with a gun does have the potential to shoot someone. The good thing is that most people are sane most of the time and they're not likely to use their firearm for any ill will. For those of us who took the time and effort to get our CCW licenses that furthers the likelihood of responsible people with firearms and I believe that doing so increases the security of our country.
It is said that a Japanese commander had said this about invading the United States in the second world war.
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
There is some debate as to whether he said it for sure, of if it was just an cleverly engineered confidence booster for American citizens, but may be true just the same.
So basically the plot to Minority Report.
It is said that a Japanese commander had said this about invading the United States in the second world war.
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."
There is some debate as to whether he said it for sure, of if it was just an cleverly engineered confidence booster for American citizens, but may be true just the same.
JimBob said:
So basically the plot to Minority Report.
Yet the Japanese attacked just the same. The army had their way.
While being able to see the other person's point of view is usually deadly to your own argument, it can still be good to know.
Did you ever know a murder victim killed with a gun?
Did you ever know anyone killed with a rock (or hatpin)? And I don't mean being stoned to death, either.
While being able to see the other person's point of view is usually deadly to your own argument, it can still be good to know.
Did you ever know a murder victim killed with a gun?
Did you ever know anyone killed with a rock (or hatpin)? And I don't mean being stoned to death, either.
The "rifle behind every blade of grass" quote is attributed to Adm Yamamoto, but there is no proof he ever said that.
It is, however, something he would have known, in general, as he spent several years in the US as a Naval Attache. He knew, first hand, about the size of the US, and its potential, if we ever got organized in a single cause. Something which many European and Asian leaders technically knew, but did not really comprehend, or believe.
That misconception was resolved by August 1945......sooner for many..
The Japanese never tried to invade the mainland USA. There is no evidence that they ever even considered it.
Our island possessions, on the other hand were prime targets.
It is, however, something he would have known, in general, as he spent several years in the US as a Naval Attache. He knew, first hand, about the size of the US, and its potential, if we ever got organized in a single cause. Something which many European and Asian leaders technically knew, but did not really comprehend, or believe.
That misconception was resolved by August 1945......sooner for many..
The Japanese never tried to invade the mainland USA. There is no evidence that they ever even considered it.
Our island possessions, on the other hand were prime targets.
kilimanjaro
New member
If Yamamoto didn't say it, he should have.
Japan was going to invade and occupy Hawaii after their glorious victory at Midway in 1942, but they had no plans to invade the West Coast of the US. Their fleet, once based out of Pearl Harbor, would have had no trouble dealing with our navy, the Canadian navy, or closing the Panama Canal. The US victory at Midway kept all that from occurring, of course, and also kept us in the war against Germany.
Things would be a lot different without what a few dozen American pilots were able to do at Midway, almost by pure luck.
Japan was going to invade and occupy Hawaii after their glorious victory at Midway in 1942, but they had no plans to invade the West Coast of the US. Their fleet, once based out of Pearl Harbor, would have had no trouble dealing with our navy, the Canadian navy, or closing the Panama Canal. The US victory at Midway kept all that from occurring, of course, and also kept us in the war against Germany.
Things would be a lot different without what a few dozen American pilots were able to do at Midway, almost by pure luck.
Would you buy a gun named Pinky Pie?
dakota.potts
New member
People often like to say of open carry that they shouldn't be forced to be OK with standing in a room with somebody who has a gun and can shoot everybody around them.
However, for a period of time I openly carried a knife. It was an 8" tanto with black sheath and black handle worn outside of my clothing. Even when I attempted to cover it, a sizable portion of several inches stuck below even most of my jackets.
Amazingly, people weren't bothered by me standing within inches of them while carrying an 8" combat knife (I say combat because it had little other utility use). This shows me that most people are afraid of the idea of a firearm and their opinions on their ownership and use, rather than on the danger of it. I carried the knife for months, even in urban downtown areas, and I received exactly one comment on it. It was from a gentleman standing next to me at Teavana in the mall, asking if it was a real knife (ie. not a training stick or something) and if they let me just carry it around like that. Not even law enforcement ever asked me about it. But had it been even a single shot musket or handgun, I can imagine how that would have gone.
However, for a period of time I openly carried a knife. It was an 8" tanto with black sheath and black handle worn outside of my clothing. Even when I attempted to cover it, a sizable portion of several inches stuck below even most of my jackets.
Amazingly, people weren't bothered by me standing within inches of them while carrying an 8" combat knife (I say combat because it had little other utility use). This shows me that most people are afraid of the idea of a firearm and their opinions on their ownership and use, rather than on the danger of it. I carried the knife for months, even in urban downtown areas, and I received exactly one comment on it. It was from a gentleman standing next to me at Teavana in the mall, asking if it was a real knife (ie. not a training stick or something) and if they let me just carry it around like that. Not even law enforcement ever asked me about it. But had it been even a single shot musket or handgun, I can imagine how that would have gone.
I'd add that it really is all about other people's assumptions, and what you look like, especially how you are dressed makes a huge difference to them.
These people have (or seem to have) NO ISSUES with being in a room with somebody who has a gun and can shoot everybody around them, IF that person is wearing a UNIFORM (particularly a police uniform).
To them, the uniform (and the badge) are some kind of magic talisman that negates the "evil" influence of the gun on the wearer, rendering them immune to the urge to shoot everyone that these people believe a gun creates when worn by someone other than police or military.
Without the clear visual signal of the uniform, they assume the worst. Childish, and rather stupid, in my opinion, but that's the level lots of people seem to operate on.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
That's a good statement for a close, given a request early and the tendency of folks to wander into sexual comments.
Closed.
Closed.
- Status