New To Firearms

N

nelso

Inactive
I am relatively new to the world of firearms and gun ownership. I once considered myself a converted "anti." Then when I learned what a true anti-gun person was I realized I really was not one of "them." I was simply someone who didn't see a need for, nor did I see any use in being involved in firearms. Then Came my epiphany. Anyway. I am now a devoted supporter of CCW I got my Fla. CCW last year.) So after an entire lifetime (40 plus years ) of being a non gun guy, now I am in the mix with the rest of you. My point? It baffles me that so many of our elected officials, educated men and women, cannot see the reality that guns serve a purpose in reducing violent crime, assault, rapes, etc.
That gun control absolutely does not work!! And watching them sit in positions of power, writing policy is frightening. One of the most outspoken critics of our freedom, Rep. Charles Schumer, a devoted "gun grabber" has a CCW permit.
 
Welcome, nelso.

I think most people see the World thru their own daily lives.
- Those who would never think of defending themselves are frighted by those who would
- Those who never brush against the soft underbelly of "civilization" see guns as an evil that we have "evolved" beyond
- And those who are protected day and night by taxpayer paid bodyguard details would never consider the fact that "normal people" have a need for a weapon
The rest of us? Well, we're just paranoid. ;)
Rich
 
Hi, nelso...

and welcome to The Firing Line, one of the very best places on the
web for people who care about guns.

You may be "new to the world of firearms" but it didn't take you long
to figure out the hypocracy of a lot of the true "Anti-Gun" believers
who would, if they could, disarm the American public.

The politicians like Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinstein, both of
whom I've read have Concealed-Carry permits, and I am sure have
armed bodyguards, have lost touch with the real world you and I live
in. In my opinion, they have come to believe that being elected to
"serve" the people elevates them into some kind of aristocracy that
gives them privileges forbidden to "commoners" (you and me and 99.9%
of the rest of the population).

Walter
 
nelso,
Glad to have you aboard. It should be easy to see where Schumer and Feinstein are coming from since you once shared their mindset. Neither of them are really strongly 'anti' but the majority of their constituents are. Being politicians, they're simply trying to give the people what they want, right or wrong.
The answer is to get people engaged, just as what happened to you. Once you have ingrained your safety habits enough, take your friends shooting.
You're a success story and we can always use more.
 
Welcome friend. Anything in the world of international politics should never be of any suprise, just because a person is educated does not mean they are intelligent and have wisdom.

Happy shooting:D
 
Welcome aboard, Nelso! Just curious - what gun(s) do you own at present, and what's on your shopping list?

It baffles me that so many of our elected officials, educated men and women, cannot see the reality that guns serve a purpose in reducing violent crime, assault, rapes, etc.
Click to expand...
It is a documented fact that gun ownership and concealed carry reduces crime - I would recommend John Lott's book More Guns, Less Crime as the last word on that topic.

For alot of politicians, the issue isn't reducing crime - it is increasing their political power. Chairman Mao of the Chinese Communist party once said, "Political power springs from the barrel of a gun." Truer words were never spoken, and the politicians who would disarm us know this.

Even in America, the freest nation of the world, we have politicians who seek to make their political agenda - that would be socialism - compulsory. They recognize the fact that this can never happen with 80 million armed citizens in this nation.
 
A lot of politicians push BS without buying it themselves. They are pandering to people of the beliefs you happened to hold before (either wholly, or by default through not caring).

The majority of people don't support "ban of all guns"; but follow what I call the 77% rule. 77% of people support any given gun control measure (Assault weapons, baby-killer bullets, etc.)

A politician who doesn't leverage popular opinion is displaced by one who will. It is a plausible position for a viable politician to be anti-gun in policy.

Congrats on your epiphany. Very few have said epiphany, very few have one in the other direction. As I've said to antis: "You could lose your irrational fear, train and become like me; but I can't train to become like you".
 
Thanks

Thanks for the responses. Prior to getting my first firearm I basically read for about two years. I am one with an unsatiable thirst for knowledge when I latch on to a new interest. So long before my first purchase I researched. I already read More Guns Less Crime, Nation of Cowards, in addition to several other books. Am now waiting for some of Ayoob's books and Ms. Quigley's book Armed and Dangerous for my wife(who by the way loves to shoot now). Plus I am addicted to this site and was a frequent visitor to packing.org which seems to be finished. I try to read some new stuff every day. Knowledge is Power. I would never want to be a "gun guy" with no clue about the reality of responsibility.

In terms of current firearms? Well You guys who post that have more testicles than I. I am not very trusting of where internet communication ends up. So I am quiet on that one. My wish list? Ahhhhh...... I need a bigger safe. Hahahahaha!!! Would like to get a 9mm, .40 . maybe a .45 Okay. Maybe a couple of 9's and a few 40's. Need a .22 to plink around.
 
Most theorists regard the state definitionally as the only ones in society that can legally use force.

The USA is rather unique as it promotes the idea that the citizen legally maintains enough force to have a chance to resist the force of the state.

Most major politicians don't agree with this. They want the state to be the sole repository of force. In that mix, regular folks assume that this means the state will protect them.

Unfortunately, this is not true.

However, some people think that we can lower the risks to people by removing the most efficacious means of apply force which is the gun. With no guns in society, crimes would be less violent in nature. It has face or surface validity.

Given the choice of removing guns or having guns so you can fight, if it were the case that removing them made you safe, the naive person chooses removal. Many countries have bought into this logic.

This is the position of the 'liberals' who don't think deeply about gun issues.

In the USA, we have developed a tradition of beliefs that folks can protect themselves and protect against tyranny.

You can also find conservatives, esp. the economic kind, who aren't down with regular folks having guns as it does challenge our economic masters. The workers have been shot up by big business in the not so distant past. That's why GWB was a fan of the AWB. As mentioned in a closed thread, social conservatives are more gun friendly but have a tendency to be unfriendly to other important rights.

The surveys about gun control are bogus when done for political purposes. If asked if you favor gun control, you usually get a large positive response.

However, this has been studied in depth and most Americans feel that gun control probably means that guns are denied from criminals and laws that don't allow that are good. If asked if law abiding citizens should be able to buy guns, they say Yes. For the purist RKBA person, one problem is that this latter position means that most folks are OK with licensing. However, the NICS system will probably suffice for most Americans.

You do get extremes in belief. Vermont and Alaska have few if any resistrictions on carry. CA, NY, MA and IL have many restrictions on gun ownership.
 
Welcome aboard nelso! :D

Of course you should worry about privacy on the internet. Go outside tonight and wave for the camera so we can get a good idea of what you look like. But wear your tinfoil hat! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinfoil_hat

Meek
(Charter Member of the Thought Police)

Just kidding. ;)

Seriously, I recall O'Reilly's epiphany discussion. He used to make fun of RKBA advocates but seeing what happened after hurricane Katrina changed his story a lot. It seems that seeing something real cuts through a whole lot of theoretical BS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top