Why I don't carry a gun!

[Shark_the_raptor]

Yeah, the right to bear arms is a critical right, but there should be limitations to it.
Example: You don't need an automatic rifle for anything or a very large handgun.

 

[Doubler]

I'm not making anything of anyone... and the fact you have plenty of shooting ranges IN THE NETHERLANDS has nothing to do with the situation IN THE UNITED STATES. Different country, different culture, different situations. I've seen ranges disappear, and I have read and heard about ranges disappearing, so, in America, the possibility is real.

Of course I can't talk about the US. However, knowing my fellow countrymen if even they don't complain about the ranges, few other people would
But if you're genuinely worried I certainly won't dispute you. Hope that trend doesn't continue, but it has little to do with the subject at hand.

The only reason race cars aren't driven home is because they are RACE CARS, not STREET CARS. That, and the regs for race cars differ from those of street cars... you see, quite a few race cars don't even have lights or turnsignals or speedos or window glass or insulation or...

That's what I was suggesting.
At a certain point even a car is better left under lock somewhere else. I thought it was fitting to mention race cars specificly since we were talking about 'sports' and why if you fired a gun at the range you wouldn't be allowed to take it home

I don't quite see how your link supports your position, by the way. Granted, I skimmed it, as I'm going to turn in in a few minutes, so perhaps I missed something. But take a quote like this one under 'motivation':

In fact, many respondents stated that a man who is armed with a gun is "prepared for anything that might happen" -- an opportunity to commit a crime or the need to defend oneself against the assaults or predations of others. Therefore, while handgun carrying among felons is in part a rational response to the nature of their criminal activities, it is, in equal measure, an element of the lifestyle arising from early socialization and from fear.

It actually casts a bit of doubt on your statement.

I'll be checking this thread again first chance I get. I hope to get your position clear

 

[PriestRevan]

I don't own guns to kill people, I own them for the same reason I own a fire extinguisher and a smoke alarm. I hope never to need my gun the same way I hope never to hear my smoke alarm or to ever need that fire extinguisher. So far, I've never needed to use either my guns or my fire extinguisher to protect my life and property. And I hope I never will...

"I" and "they" are two different situations.

You might not buy a gun to kill someone... someone else might.

 

[jagdwolf]

Yeah, the right to bear arms is a critical right, but there should be limitations to it.
Example: You don't need an automatic rifle for anything or a very large handgun.

guess what......the government is armed with such, so should the citizens that are ment to keep the government in check. I mean when it comes down to it if we all have muskets and the government has automatics, who gonna win.

The government is the servant of the people, not the other way around. As to personal protection. If I have to wait for a cop to save my ass from someone with a bat or a knife or a tire iron, im gonna be dead or badly hurt. Why should I have to wait for that and why should I have to suffer. Why I love Montana and the new bill that gonna get passed.

 

[Qoph]

I say, stay out of trouble and you won't get shot. Don't give anyone a reason to shoot you and they won't. Most shootings are from drug deals, gang wars, etc., and the victims aren't generally innocent bystanders. Unless they're a complete psychopath, they aren't going to shoot random people, and if they are a psychopath then they'll probably find some way to kill anyways.

I support the right to own a gun, but we really need more regulations/checks to make sure that the people that get them aren't going to use them for the wrong reasons.

 

[Takun]

Look, let's be serious. You think that any stockpile of weapons we can get in this day and age would make any fucking difference against our government?

Really.


Be honest.


Now I don't give a fuck if you have a gun. Really. But let's be reasonable here.

 

[Qoph]

Look, let's be serious. You think that any stockpile of weapons we can get in this day and age would make any fucking difference against our government?

Really.


Be honest.


Now I don't give a fuck if you have a gun. Really. But let's be reasonable here.

Yeah, I mean they could just nuke everywhere outside of DC if they wanted to.

Also, in the unlikely situation that someone randomly shot at you in the street, you wouldn't have time to react before it happened.

 

[Internet Police Chief]

Yeah, I mean they could just nuke everywhere outside of DC if they wanted to.

Yeah because that's a totally reasonable reaction, amirite

 

[jagdwolf]

Look, let's be serious. You think that any stockpile of weapons we can get in this day and age would make any fucking difference against our government?

Really.


Be honest.


Now I don't give a fuck if you have a gun. Really. But let's be reasonable here.

Thats the same thing that the british thought back in 1776. And thats the very same reason that the government tries to ban guns. There are not that many politicians and there are not that many secret service personal to stop them. Besides, there are militia's that are much more prepaired to answer our governments threats.

Besides, everyone may not agree, but it is our duty to make sure that the government keeps in step with what we want not the other way around. Its amazing here in montana on open radio people are openly talking about an armed relvolution as the only viable answer to the corruption that is coming out now. But thats ok, there were many Tories back in 1776 who loved the british, and many colonist who did not want any part of the war.

It will always be that way. And always has. Major governments have been toppled by a handful of people. Don't think this will come to a western style shoot out. Trust me, someones gonna park a big one on DC one day, and it will come from with in. And im not talking nuclear.

just my 2 cents, feel free to give change

 

[Qoph]

Yeah because that's a totally reasonable reaction, amirite

What I mean is that they pretty much have the power to do what they want without even having to see us. Whether we have guns or not won't affect the outcome.

 

[Runefox]

OK. So you're saying you need to carry guns because there are evil people out there? Huh.

OK, let's say you're walking home one day, and I'm walking behind you. I pull out a gun and point it (from a short distance) at the back of your head, bark "Freeze! Wallet on the ground, NOW!", and you're going to whip around, pull your gun and blow me away before I can react? Surely, there are a few people in this world who CAN, but the likelihood that you, Joe Average, will be able to do it, is a statistical impossibility unless I'm a complete fucktard. The same goes for if I have a nice knife on me. Even a steak knife will do, actually. Grab you from behind, knife to the throat - You're going to shoot me? Pointless endeavour. What are you going to do? Hope that other pedestrians (who actually give enough of a shit to help out), if there were any around, would carry?

It gets a little different when you're defending your home, and honestly, I'm all for it, though I'm a little sceptical that this is actually as big a problem as people make it out to be. Scary, yes, but I'm not totally sure you need to carry a hand cannon and keep it loaded just for the possibility that something like that could happen. If you've got a wide-open enough home, you should keep a shotgun or rifle locked and unloaded for something like that. If you've got a tighter space to move in, then a pistol is probably best, but it's not like you need to sleep with it under your pillow and carry it around with you or anything.

Though honestly, it speaks wonders for the state of the United States and other parts of the world where violent crime rates are high. Really, when you think about it, where is the government that's supposed to be protecting you from these things? Where are the education and social systems that are supposed to be keeping people off the streets and reducing the number of people who are forced/willing to go to such lengths to make a few dollars? Honestly, it seems a lot like a feudal system whenever I think about people talking about the need to defend themselves in this day and age.

I guess I'm really lucky in a way. The area of the world I live in has a very low violent crime rate, and the closest I've come to a real firearm has been my .177 air rifle (not airsoft) and a police revolver during a high school field trip half a decade ago. While I'd love to be able to pick up an AK-47 and go down to a range (we don't have ranges here, to my knowledge), I have a strong sense that no civilian should ever have any right, nor need, to own a working one, or any other automatic weapon.

 

[Endless Humiliation]

I've brought this up before, but I'll bring it up again here: It doesn't matter what a thing is designed for, all that matters is how many lives are taken by abusing a thing. Cars kill more people each year in the US than guns... that is a provable, statistical fact. You can't just dismiss the figures by saying: "Well, cars weren't DESIGNED to kill." All that matters is, people died.

I think it matters. They weren't "abused". Most car accidents are just that. ACCIDENTS.

I'm not dismissing anything, it's just...They're not comparable in my eyes. As someone not that interested in owning a gun or preventing gun ownership.

I mean you can say cars are more dangerous than guns, but then airplanes are way safer than either cars or guns, so...

Where does that get you?

People die from choking on ballpoint pens.

People die from a lot of different things, most of them stupid.

 

[Takun]

Thats the same thing that the british thought back in 1776. And thats the very same reason that the government tries to ban guns. There are not that many politicians and there are not that many secret service personal to stop them. Besides, there are militia's that are much more prepaired to answer our governments threats.

Besides, everyone may not agree, but it is our duty to make sure that the government keeps in step with what we want not the other way around. Its amazing here in montana on open radio people are openly talking about an armed relvolution as the only viable answer to the corruption that is coming out now. But thats ok, there were many Tories back in 1776 who loved the british, and many colonist who did not want any part of the war.

It will always be that way. And always has. Major governments have been toppled by a handful of people. Don't think this will come to a western style shoot out. Trust me, someones gonna park a big one on DC one day, and it will come from with in. And im not talking nuclear.

just my 2 cents, feel free to give change

Technology was way different back in 1776, that's why. The type of weapon that a civilian can get when compare with the weapons of the military isn't even close. Blessing and a curse. If the government gets out of control, we're pretty fucked as civilians for awhile.

We have to keep weapons out of the hands of radicals....but then what if we become the radicals?

Bah, this just makes me more depressed.

My personal $.02. Right to bear arms. We should have it.

 

[Mayfurr]

My personal $.02. Right to bare arms. We should have it.

But what about sunburn?

 

[Ro4dk1ll]

Oh hey, did I get in in time to see Roose be a retard again? I always love that part of his threads :V

 

[Takun]

But what about sunburn?

Multi-tasking. I fail at it. =|

 

[Werevixen]

Nice job, you get cookies.

Though, before you get more than one; do you hunt for sport, pleasure/boredness, or is there a actual reason?

I huntin' wabbits because they're a fucking plague here, it's just pest control. I don't lock up my gun as my closet doesn't have a lock, but I put it high up and out of sight nonetheless.

 

[lilEmber]

I -love- how in every thread Roose creates about firearms (and there's a lot of them), if you disagree he will say you're not educated enough and either post a ton of links, tell you to do homework, or insult your opinion while saying it's your right to have one; like a moron his entire life seems to revolve around guns and getting everybody gun aware, as if the government is out to get the people; a criminal lurking around and a gun will stop him.

Me as a criminal, you can have a Minigun on your car, a RPG in your trunk, carrying a rifle/shotgun and a handgun ready to be drawn, at all times no less, and I will still get what I want from you; if that's killing you I'd be able to do it with my bare hands, a knife, or my own firearm without any issue. Not only would you not be able to draw the firearm or use any of your weapons, you wouldn't even see it coming.

A criminal doesn't shout out to you (usually) before he stabs you in the back or slices your throat. If he wants to kill you, you're dead; if he wants to take your money it's just that, money. It's not worth killing him over it, or getting killed yourself.

Apparently Roose compares a firearm to a fire extinguisher, but these things are -mandatory- in most places, unlike firearms; fire extinguishers are created to protect and save lives, unlike firearms; fire extinguishers can't be used to kill somebody no more than a stick can be, unlike firearms which give you that extra reach and power.

You don't need them. If you think you do, you're lying to yourself.
Having anymore than a firearm at home is pointless; you really, really don't need to be carrying it on you at all times, only a officer needs to do that. It won't save your life; if a criminal wants you dead, you're dead; if you pull a firearm he's going to shoot/stab first, or shoot somebody else. If you shoot first, you go to jail for murder (unless he's shooting up the place or stabbing people, but how many times in the past year have you seen that in your hometown?)

 

[Irreverent]

While I'd love to be able to pick up an AK-47 and go down to a range (we don't have ranges here, to my knowledge),

While the AK-47 and variants is deemed prohibited by the CDN government, the SKS, CZ585b and Valmet Hunter (if you can afford one, about $3-6K) are not. Government policy doesn't have to make sense.

And as for ranges in NL......at least two dozen, if not more. And that's just the centre fire ranges, not including clays or trap. PM me if you want some links.

 

[jagdwolf]

Technology was way different back in 1776, that's why. The type of weapon that a civilian can get when compare with the weapons of the military isn't even close. Blessing and a curse. If the government gets out of control, we're pretty fucked as civilians for awhile.

We have to keep weapons out of the hands of radicals....but then what if we become the radicals?

Bah, this just makes me more depressed.

My personal $.02. Right to bear arms. We should have it.

Yes there were not ak 47's and rpgs back then. but technology existed. rifles and pistols were evolving just as they are now. blunderbuss to muskets, catapults to cannons. thats one of the main reasons it said bear arms. See back then if you could afford it you could have a cannon. Yes a cannon. that was not limited to the military. Fast foreward to present. Its not only about self protection, its about keeping the government in check.

As to what I would do if someone were to put a gun to my head, I would give them my wallet. However, let me put this to you. IF that were the case would you really want to risk that if it were not me, and someone else, that I was not there to witness it. Its not the fear of the victem, its the possible 10's of other people who would put a gun to your head. See, if I saw that happening, I would defend the victems life. Give you one chance to put your gun down or die. Thats what is meant by everyone having the right to bear arms. Its not the victem you have to worry about, its the other armed citizens.

 

[Takun]

Yes there were not ak 47's and rpgs back then. but technology existed. rifles and pistols were evolving just as they are now. blunderbuss to muskets, catapults to cannons. thats one of the main reasons it said bear arms. See back then if you could afford it you could have a cannon. Yes a cannon. that was not limited to the military. Fast foreward to present. Its not only about self protection, its about keeping the government in check.

As to what I would do if someone were to put a gun to my head, I would give them my wallet. However, let me put this to you. IF that were the case would you really want to risk that if it were not me, and someone else, that I was not there to witness it. Its not the fear of the victem, its the possible 10's of other people who would put a gun to your head. See, if I saw that happening, I would defend the victems life. Give you one chance to put your gun down or die. Thats what is meant by everyone having the right to bear arms. Its not the victem you have to worry about, its the other armed citizens.

There still wasn't the huge gap in gear and weapons there are now. Helicopters, riot gear, and the like. If there really was a revolution, I'm sure the only thing holding the government back would be it's reputation.

 

[Digitalpotato]

I don't carry a gun because I don't have any need for one. If I were to just carry a gun with me at all times, then I would probably use it once every ten years and be a Dale Gribble for the other ten.

 

[Gavrill]

I carry a gun because I have penis envy

 

[jagdwolf]

There still wasn't the huge gap in gear and weapons there are now. Helicopters, riot gear, and the like. If there really was a revolution, I'm sure the only thing holding the government back would be it's reputation.

Point well made and taken. I am not suggesting that it would be a cake walk, and there would be a lot of blood shed, but I also am very sure, keep my muzzel shut, that there would be strikes on major political targets that would be very devistating. If you think about this logicly if you were fighting to take over a small town of 30K who has a law enforcement of say 500. (thats really pushing it) and 20% of the 30k were armed and hunting, how long do you think the 500 would survive, second you would hit there base of operations and possible cut power to the grid.

People are not stupid, and were not all gamers sitting behind a computer pawing off. There are some go olde boys around the country and gangs that are not all yeehaw, pop me another cold beer, and where the 4 wheeler.

But were not there yet. But good points none the less. thanks for sharing!

 

[Nargle]

If this world wasn't such a scary flippin' place, I'd disagree more with the OP. I HATE guns, and violence. But unfortunately you aren't going to stop criminals with intent to kill from getting their weapons from other sources if you ban them here. All that will do is leave the good guys vulnerable, since they're the only ones who would actually give them up anyways.

That being said, I still won't carry a gun, even though I'm a young vulnerable female in a pretty flippin' scary world. That's because I don't trust myself with it, and I never want to accidentally make a mistake that could take someone's life. I've known people (People close to me, not some distant news story) whose kids have found their gun and shot themselves. Even though I don't plan on ever having kids, I still don't want to be near a dangerous object that could potentially take a life.

Hopefully a tazer, some pepper-spray and a little caution on where and when I'm going will suffice =/