Why do you have guns?

Status
Not open for further replies.

folkbabe

New member
Hi. I've been lurking for a little while but haven't posted before. :) I'm part of a group re-shaping a service program. I'm personally interested in learning more of the perspective of gun owners so the program can better take that into account. I realize this group is not represenative of the general gun-owning public but it is a group of people who are strongly committed to and/or interested in guns ownership. I'm want to listen (or read :D) not debate.

So, my questions are:

1) Why do you feel you want/need to own guns?

2) If your primary reason for gun ownership is self-protection, what else would make you feel more secure?

3) What do you think are the causes of violence in your community?
 
As it says on my webpage:

Guns are fun. They can be dangerous if used irresponsibly, but so can most fun things. Also, guns can be extremely useful, even life-savers and are generally very good investments. Neither of these things are true about, say, jet-skis.

Almost all communities in the world experience crime and violence. This is far more culturally dependant than anything else. Guns themselves have no totemic influence on human beings, a gun no more causes a shooting death than a Corvette causes a death in a traffic accident. Irresponsible use of either object can cause tragedy. Gun licensing would no more keep guns from the hands of the potential misuser than auto licensing keeps Firebirds and Jack Daniels away from teenage boys...

------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by folkbabe:
Hi. I've been lurking for a little while but haven't posted before. :)
[/quote]

The D-day is here: we have been invaded by the best and brightest of Ms. Magazine Forum. Welcome to TFL.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I'm part of a group re-shaping a service program.
[/quote]

What is a "service program"?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
1) Why do you feel you want/need to own guns?
[/quote]

In order of importance:
1.Defense of self and dependent sagainst organized crime aka US and foreign governments
2.Defense against freelance criminals
3.Ownership of weapons is a mark of a free person; especially welcome by contrast with my status in the USSR
4.Sporting interests (target shooting, trap)
5.Collection of mechanically interesting historic artifacts

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
2) If your primary reason for gun ownership is self-protection, what else would make you feel more secure?
[/quote]
Not necessarily in order
1.Physical fitness
2.Friends
3.Profession that is in demand
3.A country that operated on a "life and let live" basis

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
3) What do you think are the causes of violence in your community?[/quote]

1.Blatant disregard for human life by some people
2.Attempts by people and organizations to force their will on others, exacerbated by lack of legal or physical recourse against
some of such incursions


------------------
Oleg "peacemonger" Volk

http://dd-b.net/RKBA
 
Oleg covered my answers and then some.

------------------
Sam I am, grn egs n packin

Nikita Khrushchev predicted confidently in a speech in Bucharest, Rumania on June 19, 1962 that: " The United States will eventually fly the Communist Red Flag...the American people will hoist it themselves."
 
There are lots of reasons for owning firearms but I'm not going in to that because I think it's a clever trap. The right to Keep and Bear Arms is not a "needs" based right.

Ask yourself, why do we "need" 55 cable channels, or the thousands of newspapers in this country? Why do you "need" a trial by jury of your peers?

Similarly, we don't have to justify the ownership of small arms. It's an INDIVIDUAL right, and not open to negotiation based on "need".

I will go into the cause of violent crime in my area (Santee, CA). Simply put, it's caused mainly by young adult males who've got too much energy, not enough supervision and too little discipline. Add to the mix a lack of fear of parent(s) (or God), and a couple of 40 ouncers and BOOM! Soon enough someone is sticking a gun in a convenience store clerk's face. This is after the predictable escalation of violent acts by the perpetrator which will almost never be sufficiently punished by the courts.

Its easy to blame the media, guns, the dope or alcohol, whatever, but that negates the idea of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, which is one of the foundations of civilized society. Blaming the condition your brain is in, or the gun, or your dad hit you, or your skin color, or some overblown "Mickey and Maude" film, is the same old argument that "the devil made me do it." If that's the case, then we ESPECIALLY need to lock thier butts up because these little miscreants obviously have so little self control that any little environmental factor could set them off. Talk about dangerous! It would be hard for these people to walk down a street without coming under the influence of some inanimate object, waiting to cause them to act.

------------------
"Put a rifle in the hands of a Subject, and he immediately becomes a Citizen." -- Jeff Cooper

"The fact is that the average man's love of liberty is nine-tenths imaginary, exactly like his love of sense, justice and truth. He is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely. Liberty is not a thing for the great masses of men. It is the exclusive possession of a small and disreputable minority, like knowledge, courage and honor. It takes a special sort of man to understand and enjoy liberty - and he is usually an outlaw in democratic societies." -- H.L. Mencken, February 12, 1923, Baltimore Evening Sun

"If God had not wanted them to be sheared, he would not have made them sheep." -- Bad guy from the Magnificent Seven.

"Don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blow." -- Bob Dylan
 
Hi, Folkbabe, welcome to the dark side :)

I'll bite, I guess. My answers may be different than some of the others because I have a terrible secret. I don't *gasp* actually LIKE guns much. I've mentioned that in here, and they let me stay anyway, so I hope I haven't shocked anyone who is just finding out.

Why do I own a gun? A few reasons.

1.)I weigh 120 lbs.

2.)I have kids.

3.) Until recently, I drove a 12 year old car.

4.) I am often home alone and don't feel confident in my ability to cause serious harm to someone threatening me or my children without a weapon.

That sums up the self-defense part of the lesson. I can shoot if I need to. I practice, but like I said, guns themselves aren't a passion for me. They are a useful tool, one I honestly hope I will never need.

(Criminals have guns and taking them away from criminals is a whole lot harder than taking them away from law-abiding citizens. Them being criminals and all. :P )

The most important reason though, as the saying goes, has nothing to do with duck hunting. I love my freedom. I hate any attempt by goverment to limit that freedom, whether it is in the form of search and seizure laws, or limits on freedom of speech (even those that I hate) or gun control. Gun control, by it's nature, only affects those willing to abide by the law. (I may have said that up there). Many people who don't understand why "we" believe that this particular right is so important don't pay attention to the history of gun control. Historically, all gun registration has led to gun confiscation. At that point, only the goverment has the right to own guns. When the goverment has absolute power, inevitably, they abuse it. Our founding fathers, a bunch of old, dead, white guys, recognized this. They did their best to make the right to bear arms an individual right so that we would never have to fear a goverment that over-reaches it's boundries. Sadly, I personally believe that because of the belief that guns kill by themselves, we will reach that point too soon.

For some reason, those who would like to see guns controlled seem to believe that those of us on this side of the fence enjoy seeing little children die. I've been accused of that myself this past week. That bothers me to no end. There is no substitute for safety and guns, like many of the things that make our lives better, can be dangerous if not used correctly. Inflating the number of "children" killed each day by guns to include gang members who shoot each other does nothing for the gun control argument. I would like to see both sides of the issue actually work for things that would prevent accidental shootings. I'd like to see the same thing happen in regards to many other things that kill our children. I don't see this discussion happening anytime soon.

As far as what causes violence, as opposed to accidental shootings? A lot of things. Guns don't even make my list. Parents with no time for their children. A culture that believes more in what they call self-esteem than in self-respect. The materialism that runs rampant in our culture and makes children believe that if they don't have the right shoes or hat or whatever, they are somehow worth less. Movies and video games that make our children immune to violence and lead them to believe that it is "cool".

I don't know how well I have answered your questions. These are purely my thoughts, I'm sure you will get other, more coherent replies. But thank you for at least making the effort to understand.

And now, because I can never say things as well as these guys, the requisite quotes from the founding fathers.

"Americans need not fear the federal government because they enjoy the advantage of being armed, which you possess over the people of almost every other nation." James
Madison.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason, during Virginia's Convention
to Ratify the Constitution (1788).

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost
every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by
the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force
superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United
States"--Noah Webster

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be
trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in
possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of
Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can
they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
--Patrick Henry

"On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to
the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the
debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or
invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." --Thomas
Jefferson

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."-- Benjamin Franklin
 
"I realize this group is not representative of the general gun-owning public ..."

Based on your own admitted ignorance, how would you know?
Maybe we're just not representative of your own narrow prejudices.
 
1. You are safer in this world if you own and are proficient with firearms, as is your Constitutional right, than if you don't. I have a family whose safety I choose to be responsible for.

2. "More secure" than a gun? A bigger gun.

3. Lack of personal responsibility and feeling of general entitlement among the general populace, and the pervasive notion that the government should and will always protect us.

This board is for sharing, not interrogation. Questions for you, folkbabe: Were you being "upfront" with us in your post? Why don't you reveal what group or "service program" you are connected with? Surely you must suspect that most persons posting here don't want to voluntarily assist the anti-gun forces in any way. Are you trying to get information through deception?
 
Geez, you guys complain about preaching to the choir and then don't act very hospitable. She can be a service group of one for all I care. Or using the service group as a cover to ask questions she may honestly be wondering about. I don't care. I'm just glad to hear someone ask.

Chill out, huh?
 
1)First off, I dont make important decisions based on how I "feel". One of the advantages of having a large brain or being created in the image of God (take your pick) is that I can _think_ and _reason_. Your first question says much about your lack of familarity with gun owners.

Fundamentally I believe all creatures have an indisputable right do defend themselves. Plants have poisons, animals have claws, teeth, and quills, man has tools. Within the realm of tools available to affect the defense of ones self, the firearm has _proven_ to be one of the most effective.

You also used the terms "want" and "need". To me those terms have connotations of "grant" and "provide". You should understand that we are talking about fundamental, inalienable rights here not wants and needs. Again your question betrays a underlying disconnect with the way gun owners think (not feel).

2)Sorry, found another disconnect. Gun ownership is not something gun owners do because they feel insecure. Remember the feeling thing. Gun ownership is a choice people make when they realize that the preservation of their well being, the safety of their family, and the order of their community is a personal responsibility. Honoring this responsabilty requires that you take reasonable and responsible steps to affect your security. Gun ownership is one of the reasonable and responsible actions that many choose to take. Its about realizing that evil people have always existed and will always exist. It's the realization that YOU (not the government not the police) are the only person who is always available and 100% committed to you and yours. A hired gun can always be hired by someone else who has a few dollars more.

You wanted to know what you could do to make me feel more secure. The answer is nothing. You are responsible for your security and I am responsible for my security. Together, as a society, we can agree to make each of our jobs easier by removing from our midst people who do not respect other people's rights. But I can not and will not hand that responsability over.

3)Violence (I assume you mean criminal violence) in my community is caused by violent people who have not been taught self restraint or respect for the rights of others.


[This message has been edited by Bullwinkle (edited May 18, 2000).]
 
Howdy Folkbabe,
1 For the same reason you use the 1st amendment.
2 Nothing, well maybe a fullauto.
3 Parents that don't love and discipline their children. Kids are not pets.Parents can not feed and forget. Drugs/alcohol. TV/movies/video games, it isn't real.
Stay safe.
John
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by folkbabe:
I'm personally interested in learning more of the perspective of gun owners so the program can better take that into account. I realize this group is not represenative of the general gun-owning public but it is a group of people who are strongly committed to and/or interested in guns ownership. I'm want to listen (or read :D) not debate.

So, my questions are:

1) Why do you feel you want/need to own guns?

2) If your primary reason for gun ownership is self-protection, what else would make you feel more secure?

3) What do you think are the causes of violence in your community?
[/quote]

1) I enjoy them. Owning guns is a hobby/pastime for me. So is reading and owning books. I have well over $5000.00 in my gun collection & related equipment. I have no idea how much I have in books but I would guess at least 3 to 5 times as much money.

2) Self protection. Honestly I don't need guns for self protection, yet. I am not yet middle aged. I am Male, and I have been in martial arts and weight lifting for over 10 years. I still have them ready if they are needed.

I have intervened in and stopped two assaults (against women) personally with nothing but my attitude and loathing of people that prey on the weak. In both cases that I intervened the women involved were making lots of noise and everyone else in the area ignored the situation (I mean no one would even call the cops or security). Without my intervention and the lack of a bodyguard or weapon those women were at the mercy of their attackers in broad daylight, in public, with people walking by.

Oh this happened in Rochester, MN not DC or NYC. If you are small, weak, or unwilling to suffer injury a handgun is the only real means to defend yourself. Unless you can afford a bodyguard.

As to what would make me feel more secure. Living among people that cared and were willing to exert some effort to help someone in need. I don't expect strangers to risk their lives for me. But I do think I should be able to expect fellow members of society to call the police if my one of my sisters or nieces is being attacked.

3) Causes of violence. The same as with any other animal. Fear, territorialism (which is a fight for resources ie food, shelter, pyschological/personal space, etc.), and competition for mates.

The reason violence is a problem, if it really is, is because of factors like: population density, lack of social unity (the good of the group is loseing to the amusement of the group)

I could go on for hours. I studied criminology a lot in college. I did a research project on murder rates. Bla bla. There are answers (there are costs associated with the solutions though) but politicians are not interested in solutions because if they solve problems they work themselves out of jobs. So they create problems like the war on drugs.

[This message has been edited by Glamdring (edited May 18, 2000).]
 
In order:

1) Why not? Literally, why would anybody else need me to not own guns? Worse, why should I pay any attention whatsoever to a complete stranger who feels that I shouldn't do what I want to on private property? Heck, the FBI just said I'm safe on public property after having conducted a background check, but who cares as long as somebody I've never met feels I need to be disarmed? The way this works is that I have the firearms, so it's up to somebody to explain why having a perfect safety record and no criminal record is inadequate, and nobody has yet been able to paint me as even slightly dangerous.

Pretending, for the sake of argument, that your reversal of burden of proof has any validity whatsoever, I would have suffered numerous potentially fatal snakebites without firearms, as several of the shots both hit the snake, and missed my foot by about three inches. I've saved more than one rancher a fair bit of money by elimination of assorted varmints. Most importantly, firearms are one of the areas that my Dad has spent six decades gaining experience in, and is thus something to spend time with my Dad on. I'm old enough (29) that there aren't many areas we can still do father-son things as father-son things, and I get disgusted with moral weaklings who want to take that away because they feel that a lump of metal is evil or will have the trigger-pulling-fairy come and do nasty things with it.

On a more general note, since it's gotten harder and harder to get firearms, crime has climbed and violent crime has absolutely skyrocketed. Doesn't this suggest that gun control and crime control are, at best, unrelated?

2) Although, in order, I own guns for a)occasional afternoon with my Dad, b)frequent afternoons with the friends-I-haven't-met-yet (and I can't get near a range or even a gunshow without meeting at least a dozen people I've never met who are wearing smiles and offering handshakes) at the range, c) an exercise in individual discipline and challenge, then d) self defense, what else would make me feel secure? Now that CHLs have lowered the crime rate (funny how that works) in Texas, I'd like to see a criminal justice system worthy of the name.

3) Violence in Houston? Lots of things, but it can be summed up with lack of consequences for antisocial activities. Once upon a time, we had public executions, and little kids learned not to do the things that got the Bad Guy hung. Now, we send crooks to jail for brief periods of time, never execute anybody, and kids learn that there are no consequences. As a great example, Clinton keeps bragging about all the sales that the NICS has stopped. Where are the convictions? The arrests? Commit a felony, and walk away? Consequences? Oh, yes, the kids are learning from watching that. Have no fear at all on that score.

Steve
 
folkbabe,
The following applies to me only, I cant and wont speak for anyone else.

To question #1:
I am in the criminal justice field, for over twenty years I responed to calls for police assistance, most often too late to do much but take the report or clean up the scene. This personal experience tells me that the police are not up to taking care of everyone so I choose to have a handgun to take care of me and mine, and yours if need be. The second part of the answer is that it is my right. I carry a handgun as an officer for my own protection, I cant protect everyone, so I expect them to do their part in protecting themselves.

Question #2
There is nothing that will make me feel more secure short of having an armed person around me twenty four hours a day, who would be awake while I slept, and would be replaced so they could sleep, and all in the peace of mind that nothing will happen while I sleep and my family sleeps. I dont see that happening so I must take all necessary steps to protect me and mine and yours if need be.

Question #3
The causes of violence are violent people, who will act as such no matter if they are armed with a gun or a rubber band or just their hands, fists or feet. It is a way of thinking or not, a life style, the only way they know how to resolve a dispute. They have no respect for themselves or others, and they dont care about anyone but themselves. Our prisons are full of these kind of people. If the meek are going to inherit the earth they best get armed first so they will be around to collect the inheritance.

------------------
No man is above the law and no man is below it,nor do we ask any mans permission when we require him to obey it.
 
Why I own guns.

They are fun. I enjoy going to the range and shooting stuff, be it paper targets or cans. It is something I enjoy. It is also very good stress relief for me. A couple times a month I take all the stuff that is creating stress in my life (blue books, and homework mainly) and get the final say. I find it rather satifying to put a bunch of holes in a homework assignment that I did poorly on.

Self Protection isn't a real issue. I live at home with my parents, but I am rarely home with my guns. My parents know where the guns are, but my mother is afraid of them.

As for self protection, if my state let me, I would conceal carry, but since I can't do it legally I don't. as someone stated earlier, what would make me feel more secure than a gun is a bigger gun. Also, disarming the criminals, but the likelihood of that happening are less than me graduating this from school this quarter and I can't graduate this quarter because I didn't fill out the proper paperwork.

The causes of violence in my community are economic. A lot of haves and the have-nots are feeling left out.

I too would like to know what service program you are working for, but also understand is you can't disclose that.

This place is full of good information. About guns and gun owners.

I would also like to point that that there is no "general gun -owning public". There is no such thing as a generic firearm owner. Although the media often portrays gun owners as rural white males, there are just as many firearm owners who are minorities for urban or suburban areas. We as a group rarely agree on political issues, even issues related to firearm ownership. There is no political party that represents a majority of firearm owners. We are young and old, male and female, some of us are extremists, some are idealists, some are middle of the road. The VAST MAJORITY of firearm owners are not the militant white supremacists that the media makes us out to be.

garrick


------------------
It ain't mah fault. did I do dat?
http://yellowman.virtualave.net/
 
More than asked for,

Keep And Bear Arms .com Launching Soon

Letter to My Anti-Gun Friends
by Angel Shamaya
with contributing editors
Reprinted from the free KeepAndBearArms.org Email Report
Inspired by This Document

Dear Anti-Gun People,

I am opening a dialogue with you to better comprehend your position through reviewing your responses to a few questions. After you've read my questions and the provided links, I'll answer any questions you may have regarding my strong belief in the right to keep and bear arms, and I hope you will truthfully answer the questions I pose to you below:

1) Do you believe the government is always honest with the people?

2) A woman who is unarmed is easy prey for an armed rapist. But there are many places in America where a woman cannot legally carry a gun to protect herself from attack. Do you think it is better for a woman to be raped than to fend off a rapist in self-defense with a gun? If so, why? If not, then do you advise women to resist armed rapists with their bare hands?

3) Britain has effectively disarmed its citizens. Their own Olympic shooters had to ship guns out of the country or turn them in to be destroyed. But if more gun control decreases crime, why is Britain experiencing an epidemic of gun-related violence? (See http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/gun)

4) Washington, D.C. has a per capita murder rate of 69 per 100,000 with the strictest gun control laws in the country. Indianapolis, with much more gun freedom, only has 9 murders per 100,000 residents. If disarming people makes cities safer, how can this be?

5) There are tens of thousands of cases of people getting no response from the 911 system--including scores of cases where people were still wounded or killed after having dialed 911. If a criminal is already inside your house, garage, or car, is dialing 911 really the most effective way of immediately dealing with the situation?
(See http://www.channel2000.com/news/stories/news-970713-124534.html)

6) Police also have no legal requirement to protect you when you call for help. People attacked by criminals and injured after calling police for help cannot sue in court and win. This places the responsibility of personal protection in the hands of each individual. Does it make sense that the individual be denied the same access to tools for self-protection that police enjoy? (See http://rkba.org/research/kasler/protection and also http://dial911.itgo.com)

7) Every national gun licensing and registration in history has led to confiscation. Gun registration in America has already led to confiscation in New York and California. (See http://www.sierratimes.com/arjj020700.htm) If you support gun registration in America, would you please explain how having their guns registered helped the citizens in China, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, the Soviet Union, or Uganda? Do you think gun registration was beneficial to the Jews in Germany, the Cambodians under Pol Pot, or the Chinese under Mao Tse Tung? (See http://www.jpfo.org/L-laws.htm.)

8) Why are the media and the government working in unison to disarm America when the most in-depth scientific studies on the subject of private gun ownership shows that more guns in the hands of citizens REDUCES violent crime? (See http://www.reasonmag.com/0001/fe.js.cold.html) What agenda for the US do they have planned that requires disarming the citizens of our country?

9) Criminals get guns, knives, and bludgeons any time they wish, and they disobey whatever laws they wish--including laws against robbery, rape, and murder. Why would you want to make law-abiding citizens easier prey by taking away their guns?
(See http://www.the-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/2000/01/16/stinwenws02004.html?999)

10) We rarely see both sides of the gun debate issue on national television. Why is that? It has already been proven by the most in-depth scientific study on the subject of guns and crime that more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens means less crime.

11) The ACLU and most Americans think a door-to-door search for drugs is a gross violation of civil rights. Many gun banners would like to see door-to-door confiscation of guns. Are you willing to have Your Home searched for guns (or anything else) any time the government wishes to do so?

12) Every year Americans citizens legally kill 3-5 times as many criminals as are killed by all the law enforcement officials combined. Up to 2 1/2 million times a year, citizens use guns to legally thwart crime--usually when they are the intended victims. If citizens are disarmed, these intended victims will be defenseless against armed criminals. Are you saying that millions of Americans each year should have no right to stop criminals who are victimizing them? Would you prefer to give many more criminals the ability to succeed each year?

13) Today, many men and women have reason to believe that the Federal government is intent on disarming the American people as a means to significantly greater control--the way citizens in disarmed China, Germany, the Soviet Union and Cuba are controlled. If these people are right, does this concern you?

14) There are 360-450 citizens in America for every law enforcement officer. (600,000/750,000 to 270,000,000) Do you believe each law enforcement officer can protect 360-450 people from violent criminals?

15) When they express anger, law-abiding gun owners are presented as "extremists" in today's media. American public servants surrounded by armed bodyguards and/or living in neighborhoods with private security are telling law-abiding citizens we cannot carry or even own (some cities/states) a gun--not even to protect ourselves and our families. Do you see the hypocrisy? Can you understand why tolerance pushed beyond a limit of fairness leads to justifiable anger? Can you understand why being told we cannot enjoy the same safety our leaders enjoy invokes outrage? Is a politician's life more important than your life? If so, why?

16) Mainstream media, which uses the publicly-owned electromagnetic spectrum to broadcast, has clearly proven to be biased against guns; it is not presenting both sides of the issue. (See http://www.keepandbeararms.org/media_bias.htm) On the other hand, http://www.citizensofamerica.org has a media program that presents the pro-gun side of the story. If you believe in "equality" regarding public property, should COA be given free media time to present their case? And just why IS the media so biased in the first place? (And why might the government be anti-gun?)

17) In many areas of the nation, a woman who is being stalked by her ex-husband must wait 10 days to purchase a gun--even if her life has been threatened. Why should law-abiding people in fear of their lives wait 10 days to get a gun when criminals have no waiting periods?

18) Criminals often kill people who've already turned over their money and put up no resistance. If a woman does not resist and the criminal intends to rape her, she will be raped. Do you think the government has a right to require women to submit to rape? If so, why?

19) Are we supposed to simply Submit when confronted with an armed rapist or murderer and leave our ourselves at their mercy? If so, why? Can you see how our society would revert to utter lawlessness if everyone agreed to simply submit to armed criminals?

20) Many anti-gun people use child gun-related accidents and/or deaths as a reason for banning guns. Seeing that more children drown every year than are killed by guns, do you support banning swimming pools?

21) Current federal law now limits the capacity of a gun's magazine to 10 rounds. Police often empty their guns without ever stopping a criminal. If you were out alone at a roadside rest area and were approached by 3 hardened criminals with obvious intent to do you harm, would you want to be limited to only 10 rounds?

22) Cars are commonly used to commit crimes. Far more people die in cars every year than by guns--and no Constitutional Amendment guarantees our rights to own cars. Because more people die every year in cars than by guns, do you support a ban on cars? There are also an alarming number of crimes committed under the influence of alcohol. Would you support a ban on alcohol considering it didn't work the last time they tried it?

23) Mayors of several cities in America are suing gun manufacturers under the guise of recovering costs of gun-related injuries which took place in their cities. Because more people are hurt or killed in cars than by guns, do you support these mayors in suing car manufacturers?

24) Numerous cities in America criminalize carrying guns for self-defense. These same cities make exceptions for people carrying money and jewels. Do you agree that money and jewels are more important to protect than people's lives?

25) The National Guard is paid by the Federal government, occupies property leased to the Federal government, uses weapons owned by the Federal government, and punishes trespassers under Federal law. Do you truly believe the National Guard is a State agency?

26) The National Guard is also what is commonly called the modern-day militia in anti-gun propaganda as a way of trying to deal with the Second Amendment. If the Constitution was referring to the National Guard with the term "militia," how can we account for the fact that the Second Amendment was ratified in 1787--while the National Guard was created by an act of Congress in 1903?

27) The FBI and ATF (agencies of the Federal government) gunned down 81 innocent women and children and burned most of the evidence down to the ground in Waco and have withheld evidence which would (and still may) convict them of wrongdoing. They murdered Randy Weaver's wife. The police and other state agencies shot to death Donald Scott in a bogus drug raid in California. Why would you trust these government agencies with fully automatic weapons but not trust a law-abiding individual with a simple self-defense handgun?

28) The law-abiding gun owners of today are presented as "gun nuts, extremists, militia fanatics, and killers" in the communications media. Is it possible they are depicted this way to sway public opinion toward disliking guns? If so, why would the media and the anti-gun politicians do that? How is this different from the way the news organs of Nazi Germany, China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, and Cuba propagandized against the segments of their societies that opposed complete state control?

29) Many documented statements by anti-gun groups claim that the Second Amendment refers to the power of the States to keep and bear arms. In other sections of the Constitution, we find the following: "the right of the PEOPLE to peaceably assemble," the "right of the PEOPLE to be secure in their homes," "enumeration here of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the PEOPLE," and "the powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the PEOPLE." Do you honestly believe "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms" refers to the States but excludes Individuals?

30) Handguns are the cheapest, lightest, most portable, easiest-to-use, and most effective means of self-defense. This is why they are used by police officers. Denying people the right to use this tool leaves them defenseless against criminals on the street. Why do you advocate that law-abiding people not be allowed to protect themselves with the best means of self-defense available?

31) The Federal government and the United Nations (See http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_exnews/19991207_xex_un_coming_yo.shtml) have been working in unison for years to systematically disarm American citizens. Is it even remotely possible that the government has something planned that so many Americans would be against that it is critical that they disarm us? If so, do you see that supporting their disarmament plans could be working against the American citizens committed to preserving freedom?


I do appreciate your thoughts on these matters and look forward to your reply. I am committed to answering every question you send me by giving each one careful attention and a thorough, intelligent reply as soon as possible. If you pose a question I cannot intelligently address, I will seek out an answer until I can.

Respectfully,

Angel Shamaya http://www.keepandbeararms.org
webmaster@keepandbeararms.org
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Karanas:
Maybe we're just not representative of your own narrow prejudices.[/B][/quote]

Sir,

you have a point but *please* be polite to a newcomer. Humor me.

Oleg
 
Hi. Sorry I took awile to get back. I had an exam review session. :)

First of all, thank you very much for responding. I'm trying to learn and your responses were very helpful. You fulfilled what I suspected from reading the other posts that you are a polite articulate group. :) I think I'll read them over a few more times to help myself absorb them. I'm gonna try to answer all the questions but I just got through reading all the responses and I apologize if I miss a few of the questions.

What is a "service program"?
Oops, I obviously wasn't clear with what I wrote since this question was asked in several different forms by many people. The group is a non-profit service organization (ie, exists to serve people). We're trying to shape the local program of the the organization. I'm not naming the group because I don't represent it, I'm merely trying to get a better understanding myself so I can be a more effective contributer to the group. Listening to the concerns of gun owners is one way to do that. Anyway, the local program has for a long time seen as its mission to build a more non-violent city and world. Note that active non-violence is more than the lack of active violence. Many of our programs (and the ones that I'm most interested in) focus around community building. One of the things we've found in listening to community residents in the neighborhoods we work in is that the reason they do not go outside to talk with neighbors is because of real or percieved gun violence. As a result of this, are in the process of deciding if we want to focus on gun violence. Some of the programs we have been working on are addressing the root causes/forms of violence in society, providing positive alternatives for children, and empowering people to see other ways of solving problems than violence. As a whole, almost everyone involved in the group sees violence as more than just street violence but that is what we are concentrating on at this point. It is the street violence which people consistently name as the reason they don't live in the city or want to move out of the city. In the interest of full disclosure, the availability of weapons is one thing that we have looked at in the past on the international level and we may well be linking that to the availability of weapons at home. This doesn't neccessarily mean gun control but it might. That's the main reason I asked my questions. I want to hear the reasons why people have guns so I can understand instead of just randomly passing judgement on other people.

Were you being "upfront" with us in your post? Why don't you reveal what group or "service program" you are connected with? Surely you must suspect that most persons posting here don't want to voluntarily assist the anti-gun forces in any way. Are you trying to get information through deception?
I'm not playing a "gotcha" game nor is this an elaborate trap. I'm legitimately interested in hearing your concerns. I'd like to see the org serve all people and it can't do that if we don't know what you would like to see change in your communities. Additionally, listening is a way to build community. I'm not interested in debating with people, I'm interested in connecting with them. I'm not the "anti-gun forces", I'm someone who wants to learn how other people feel. It's not a gun-control group (although many of the people in the group do support gun control) if that is what you are asking.

I said: this group is not represenative of the general gun-owning public

Karanas said: Based on your own admitted ignorance, how would you know?

Chink said: There is no such thing as a generic firearm owner.

What I meant is that I don't expect a represenative cross-section of the people who own guns to be posting to this board. There are many reasons for that but the main one is that (assuming gun owners come from a cross-section of the public) the internet is not something which is used by a represenative portion of the public. For one thing, older people are statistically much less likely to be using the internet. So are poorer people. Also, this board is a self-selecting group of people who wish to discuss guns. Those people who wish to discuss guns are not neccessarily represenative of the people who own guns. I certainly didn't mean that there is some generic gun owner, quite the opposite. I strongly suspect (from what I've read on this board) that the group which posts to this board is more homogeneous than the general public. Does that clarify what I said?

Again your question betrays a underlying disconnect with the way gun owners think (not feel).
You're right, I don't know that much about gun owners as most of my friends do not own guns. I'm not really comfortable discussing this issue with my friends who legally own guns (mostly because I haven't known them that long) which is why I turned to this board. (besides that the people on this board are much more articulate and have thought more on the issues) I've discussed this a bit with my friends who illegally own guns (who I know through different circles than my friends who hold legal guns) but their perspective is very different from most of yours. If it helps on the feel/want/need issue that's the way I talk in general. It may partly be a gender socialization thing. (women are socialized to talk about "feelings" while men are socialized to talk about "thinking". It's useful to me to know that it upsets/alienates folks who are into guns for me to talk that way.

Ok, I'm sure I didn't find all the questions when I went back but this post is long enough. Once again, what I am interested in is hearing what you are saying not in debating. I didn't give some of the information at the beginning because I didn't want to "lead" your answers (besides that I didn't think it was important). Listening can, of course, be a two way street and I'd be happy to talk as well, it's just that wanted to hear a voice I felt was missing from my regular conversations. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top