|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
MM... and others that think that more guns in the hands of citizens is the answer... frankly, you know not of what you speak. How would taking away from law-abiding citizens a tool for self-defense somehow prevent non-law abiding citizens to act out, or to acquire the means to do so? ~ Marsh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
You cannot count on law abiding citizens to remain so...such as this person that committed this act...or others that would use a gun in the heat of the moment (crime of passion) that might otherwise be settled through other means.
Look... I have lived this stuff....seen it first hand... I won't question MM on his knowledge of war time battles...he is well versed in that. I am equally knowledgable regarding the impact of guns on the streets... we live in a gun culture and the result is too many deaths.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
I kinda knew this discussion would happen. My H and I were talking about this after watching CNN for most of the day (I'm home sick and he had the day off). H turned to me and said, you know what's going to be said "more guns are the answer" and he shook his head sadly.
I live in a gun free country. Mr Man in the Street doesn't have guns here, nor do the police. Guns are used for hunting and target shooting and are EXTREMELY hard to obtain. Our murder rate per capita is EXTREMELY low.
Someone (an American now living here) was quoted in our newspaper this morning saying "I need a gun to shoot rabbits on my property. So far I've been interviewed, my wife's been interviewed, my proposed gun cabinet's been inspected and I still haven't got a licence." He was saying that this process was one of the most positive things about this country.
But I know that every other excuse in the book will be found as to why these things happen and not one of them will focus on the candy shop availability of guns.
I work for a university with 33,000 students and 5,000 staff. It is also a large spread out campus. We have surveillance cameras EVERYWHERE but the logistics of reaching that many people by email, website, whatever, in a short time is enormous and I can't see my university having been able to do it under the same circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18149774/perhaps it is time to take a look at our place and how we are perceived in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,862 |
I can’t remember where I read it, but there is a saying that most people are sheep, a few are sheepdogs and some are wolves. Now the wolf and the sheepdog have some things in common... they both exist outside the flock and they both work on instinct, but there is at least one critical distinction between them...how they behave towards the sheep.
Now, in this case, a wolf got into the flock and many of the sheep are dead...
I don't understand the desire to muzzle the sheepdog.
~ Marsh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160 |
MEDC, would you please show us statistics on how often guns are used in "crimes of passion." Also, please explain why one group of civilians (such as yourself) who carry guns can be trusted to not commit such crimes, but other people can't. With respect, it sure sounds like you're saying you carry a weapon but you feel other people can't be trusted to be as mature and have the same common sense you do. Why is that? That sounds like elitism to me. I hope I'm wrong.
Please give us some statistics, demographics, on those you've seen using guns inappropriately in other than recognized and premeditated criminal acts such as murder, strong arm robbery, home invasion, etc.
Also, please note the statistics cited by MM above referencing the huge number of crimes where an innocent civilian is able to protect themselves against a criminal. Isn’t that alone reason enough to allow citizens to have weapons?
BTW, since I live in the most fantastic nation on the earth, I don't care how we are perceived in the rest of the world. Why should I? All those other nations are jealous of what we have attained and are continuing to achieve. They're following us, trying to catch up to us and doing their darndest to come up to our standards, not the other way around. It is for they, rather, to see how they are perceived here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
no... a formerly law abiding citizen bought a gun and went nuts with it. the wolf is easy to spot...the danger is always apparent...the sheepdog that turns of you is the real danger.
You don't understand the need to control the access to this stuff because you haven't lived it. I would have fallen on MM and your side of the fence in the past... no longer...I have seen the damage that it causes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,712
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,712 |
MM... and others that think that more guns in the hands of citizens is the answer... frankly, you know not of what you speak. Actually, I do. I am actually considered an expert on this subject...especially when it comes to firearms crimes in the U.S. Look at murder rates for countries with extreme control on guns.... then look at the US. Look at a place like the UK which has a higher rate of home break-ins (because the robbers know no one has a gun!!). Look at a place like Philly that has very easy gun laws...the murder rate is the highest in the country. I have used my hands to stop the bleeding from this warped type of logic. My community also has very easy gun laws. Have over 40,000 people in the community. Murder rate is almost non-existent. If the "easy gun laws" were the problem, then why isnt my city littered with bodies??? [The answer to criminals carrying guns is to lock them up forever for their crimes. Couldnt agree more!! But I would add that I want to make sure that BEFORE he does his crime, that I am not a victim of his crime. That way, he is either killed by me...or if he somehow survives (highly unlikely...I am a good shot!), then he goes to jail forever. I dont want me to be dead and him in jail. The best course is me alive and him in jail (or the grave). More crimes of passion would result in death if more people were armed. Many people use this red herring. The facts say differently! I have seen it first hand...and have had the blood on my hands. As I said earlier, many crimes of passion have been done with many instruments. I say this being a person that carries a gun with me everywhere in the country except for airplanes... where it is checked with my luggage. Awesome! The right to bear arms does not stipulate WHICH type of arms we can bear...no matter what the nuts at the NRA would have you believe.
MEDC Actually, it does!!! The Founders, who wrote that Amendment, had a definition in mind when they wrote it. The definition when the Constitution was written was "the instruments of the soldier." They knew the meaning of the word they were using. Also, here are some other thoughts they had on the subject: A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. --- 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty . . . Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.--- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress at 750, 17 August 1789 "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in 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 band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787). I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.--- George Mason The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country . . .--- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, 8 June 1789 A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.--- Richard Henry Lee, Senator, First Congress, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer 53 (1788) "What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."-- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789 The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.--- Zachariah Johnson Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own 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 No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.--- Thomas Jefferson, proposal Virginia Constitution, June 1776, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334 Some court decisions: The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not merely such as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in on, in the slightest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying of a well regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free state.--- Georgia Supreme Court, Nunn v. State, (1846). We think it clear that our constitution provides our citizenry the right to bear arms for their self-defense.--- Indiana Appellate Court, Schubert v. DeBard, 1980 It is our opinion that an ordinance may not deny the people the constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms, and to that extent the ordinance under consideration is void.--- New Mexico Appellate Court, City of Las Vegas v. Moberg, 1971 The maintenance of the right to bear arms is a most essential one to every free people and should not be whittled down by technical constructions.--- North Carolina Supreme Court, State v. Kerner (1921) The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males capable of acting in concert for the common defense.--- US Supreme Court, U.S. vs. Miller, 1939 Some others... Professor Akhil Reed Amar: "The ultimate right to keep and bear arms belongs to the 'the people,' not the 'states.' As the language of the Tenth Amendment shows, these two of course are not identical and when the Constitution means 'states,' it says so. Thus... 'the people' at the core of the Second Amendment are the same 'the people' at the heart of the Preamble and the First Amendment, namely Citizens...Nowadays, it is quite common to speak loosely of the National Guard as 'the state militia,' but...in 1789, when used without any qualifying adjective, 'the militia' referred to all Citizens capable of bearing arms. The militia is identical to 'the people' in the core sense described above." Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm: "The Second Amendment was meant to accomplish two distinct goals...First, it was meant to guarantee the individual's right to have arms for self-defense and self-preservation. These privately owned arms were meant to serve a larger purpose as well...and it is the coupling of these two objectives that has caused the most confusion. The customary American militia necessitated an armed public...the militia (being)...the body of the people. The argument that today's National Guardsmen, members of a select militia, would constitute the only persons entitled to keep and bear arms has no historical foundation." Alan Dershowitz: "Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard, don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don't like."
Standing in His PresenceFBS (me) (48) FWW (41) Married April 1993... 4 kids (19(B), 17(G), 14(B), 4(B)) Blessed by God more than I deserve "If Jesus is your co-pilot...you need to change seats!"Link: The Roles of Husbands and Wives
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
All those other nations are jealous of what we have attained and are continuing to achieve. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> Wow, I'm speechless. And that's a first. Believe it or not, I think I live in the greatest nation on earth. But there you go.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160 |
That's from a treatise written by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, Marsh, in a book entitled On Killing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160 |
That's okay, Kiwi. You're entitled to feel the way you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
I also said to my H, I'm going to add to this discussion and his eyes nearly rolled right out of his head. He said "good luck to you". <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
I carry a weapon as I was trained to use it for the police department. The government recognizes the difference in training for a law enforcement officer than a military person... therefore we have been granted the right ... even after retirement to carry them anywhere in the country. All other license to carry are specific to a state or even a county.
As far as your request for me to supply stats... no need to... watch the news... its on there every single day.
And while I agree that this is the greatest nation on earth... we certainly can still learn to do a lot of things better than we do.... abortion and gun control come to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,178
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,178 |
MEDC said the "A" word.
KATIE BAR THE DOOR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,712
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,712 |
I can, at the same time, believe that not carrying a weapon is a legitimate way to contribute to a safer and more peaceful world, and also believe that there is such a thing as the legitimate use of violence. There's no conflict.
GC You can believe that.
Standing in His PresenceFBS (me) (48) FWW (41) Married April 1993... 4 kids (19(B), 17(G), 14(B), 4(B)) Blessed by God more than I deserve "If Jesus is your co-pilot...you need to change seats!"Link: The Roles of Husbands and Wives
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
Shoulda listened to my H. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,178
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,178 |
MM, I am equally dismissive of your dismissiveness.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044 |
I am actually considered an expert on this subject by whom?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 2,160 |
Okay, MEDC. No stats, all we have to do is watch the news, right? We can trust the media???
Sorry, MEDC, but with all due respect, I've also gone through law enforcement training and it's no better than the required courses here in Texas in order to obtain a concealed weapon carry. I see you want to believe retired cops are a cut above normal civilians, but unless you can support your conclusions, it remains an unproven theory.
If you someday find yourself willing to support your theory with facts, please feel free to email me with that because I'd love to see the information.
|
|
|
|
1 members (1 invisible),
494
guests, and
68
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
