Originally posted by DelmerI know YOU can separate the two, but there's a reason we have, on average, 20,000 deaths from firearms in this country. People are using them for offense. And firearms work quite well for that purpose. If they didn't the military wouldn't carry them.
Speak for yourself, WIB. I don't have any trouble separating offensive and defensive actions.
Originally posted by wibSounds like a good reason for me to keep carrying for defense, especially from the military.
I know YOU can separate the two, but there's a reason we have, on average, 20,000 deaths from firearms in this country. People are using them for offense. And firearms work quite well for that purpose. If they didn't the military wouldn't carry them.
Originally posted by wibIt is all about regulation. To my knowledge the younger of the two D.C. Snipers stole a gun from a dealer "Bulls Eye", who had many guns unaccounted for. The bill that was passed just on, I believe Friday, would not hold the dealer responsible for the stolen weapon. I watched most of the debate on the NRA bailout bill on CSPAN 2 during last week.(I am a true geek)
There's a big debate going on in the US Congress about this right now. Conservatives want to pass legislation that would prevent American citizens from being able to bring a suit against gun manufacturing companies.
Here's the deal:
Bad guy shoots somebody.
Victim dies.
Bad guy is caught and convicted.
Bad guy has nothing worth suing for.
...[text shortened]... stab someone with a pair of scissors should the victim be able to sue the maker of the scissors?
Originally posted by socialist1917So what were your thoughts on it? I tend to feel it's not a bad idea, but they're passing this bill for the wrong reasons. Namely just because the NRA wants them to.
It is all about regulation. To my knowledge the younger of the two D.C. Snipers stole a gun from a dealer "Bulls Eye", who had many guns unaccounted for. The bill that was passed just on, I believe Friday, would not hold the dealer responsible for the stolen weapon. I watched most of the debate on the NRA bailout bill on CSPAN 2 during last week.(I am a true geek)
Originally posted by socialist1917Are you sure that's correct? I believe Federal and State firearms laws will punish the gun dealer for unaccounted for weapons. Perhaps this bill simply keeps him from being sued in a civil suit on behalf of a victim of a criminal who committed a crime with one of those weapons.
It is all about regulation. To my knowledge the younger of the two D.C. Snipers stole a gun from a dealer "Bulls Eye", who had many guns unaccounted for. The bill that was passed just on, I believe Friday, would not hold the dealer responsible for the stolen weapon. I watched most of the debate on the NRA bailout bill on CSPAN 2 during last week.(I am a true geek)
1 edit
No, take a look at the Congressional Record. Sen. Reed (RI) brought this up. This distributor wasn't punished, even after repeated violations, until the D.C. sniper case. It is required that after a weapon goes missing, the distributor must report it to the DEA within 48 hours or risk loss of license.
Originally posted by wibThe Senate was working on Defense appropriations when they took this bill up. Congress substituted the defense of America for the National Rifle Association. This should not be happening.
So what were your thoughts on it? I tend to feel it's not a bad idea, but they're passing this bill for the wrong reasons. Namely just because the NRA wants them to.
Originally posted by socialist1917Well, that's bad law enforcement for sure.
No, take a look at the Congressional Record. Sen. Reed (RI) brought this up. This distributor wasn't punished, even after repeated violations, until the D.C. sniper case. It is required that after a weapon goes missing, the distributor must report it to the DEA within 48 hours or risk loss of license.
Originally posted by StarrmanI've never carried one either, though I used to hunt when I was a kid and I had to carry one on watch in the Navy.
I'd be interested to hear why people want to carry guns. Okay, if you hunt for a living I can understand it, but I can't think of a reason I would ever want to carry one. I can barely use a pen responsibly and a gun needs a whole load more care.
Here in Virginia we have a "right to carry" law. This means you can strap a gun on, and as long as it's plainly visible to the public, you can go where you like with it. This does not override personal property rights though. So if a business owner tells you to take the gun off you either take it off or you don't come on the property. We also have concealed weapons permits. They're the same as right to carry laws except of course the weapon doesn't have to be visible when you carry it.
Lots of folks here carry concealed. I imagine the main reason they do so is self defense.
Originally posted by StarrmanIt's a bit different when you've been raised around them . Unlike a pen , it is drilled into you at an early age(if you've had proper training/supervision) that a gun is dangerous and you must be extra cautious around guns . For example , when I was a young teen learning to hunt , about every two minutes my father would tell me to check my gun's safety to make sure it was on . It drove me crazy even though I knew it was important . Guess what - to this day I find myself automatically checking my safety about every two minutes .
I'd be interested to hear why people want to carry guns. Okay, if you hunt for a living I can understand it, but I can't think of a reason I would ever want to carry one. I can barely use a pen responsibly and a gun needs a whole load more care.
As to "wanting to carry guns" : I really feel naked without one when I'm in the back country . I've never been attacked by large wildlife , but know a lot of people who've had encounters with aggresive dangerous animals . They'll never go back into the mountains without a firearm again . I have had encounters with rabid small animals , and the gun did prove to be useful . Out in public , in "civilization" , I never carry a weapon - as in concealed handguns . I travel cross country frequently , and personally I think carrying a handgun would be more trouble than it's worth as the laws change quite dramatically from state to state . Granted , I don't carry large sums of money or valuables . I might sign a different tune if I did . But I've always gotten by fine with good common sense . In areas like reststops on the interstate late night ; I sit in my truck and watch the bathroom for a few minutes to see if anyone shadey is hanging around before going in . I get very brusk and almost aggresive if someone approaches me or my truck and tell them to back off . If some area "feels funny" , I listen to my gut and won't stop or get out there . The most important thing for self protection imo is to stay alert . I think some guys carry guns thinking that they no longer have to do this . They invite trouble by going to places they normally wouldn't , doing things they wouldn't if unarmed , and in doing so make themselves look like a traget of opportunity . I'm not against someone's right to carry if they're responsible and law abiding citizens . I just think it's of limited value .
Originally posted by StarrmanDo they allow you to carry a pen in Canada?
I'd be interested to hear why people want to carry guns. Okay, if you hunt for a living I can understand it, but I can't think of a reason I would ever want to carry one. I can barely use a pen responsibly and a gun needs a whole load more care.
Originally posted by Moldy CrowI have to wonder what the impact of having guns has had on creating such situations as the ones you describe. Although you do not carry a handgun, do you think there are those that frequent the same situations, who do? And do they progenerate such situations?
It's a bit different when you've been raised around them . Unlike a pen , it is drilled into you at an early age(if you've had proper training/supervision) that a gun is dangerous and you must be extra cautious around guns . For example , when I was a young teen learning to hunt , about every two minutes my father would tell me to check my gun's safet ...[text shortened]... o carry if they're responsible and law abiding citizens . I just think it's of limited value .
Originally posted by StarrmanA good friend of mine that I grew up with became a defense lawyer here. He once told me a statistic about crime and swore he wasn't exaggerating. He stated that of all the clients he's defended that have been accused of a violent crime, about 90% of the time one of two elements (usually both) were present:
I have to wonder what the impact of having guns has had on creating such situations as the ones you describe. Although you do not carry a handgun, do you think there are those that frequent the same situations, who do? And do they progenerate such situations?
1 was alcohol. Not guns or knives, alcohol.
Want to guess what the other one was? Hint: it's not drugs.
Originally posted by wibdomestic violence
A good friend of mine that I grew up with became a defense lawyer here. He once told me a statistic about crime and swore he wasn't exaggerating. He stated that of all the clients he's defended that have been accused of a violent crime, about 90% of the time one of two elements (usually both) were present:
1 was alcohol. Not guns or knives, alcohol.
Want to guess what the other one was? Hint: it's not drugs.