Who Needs A Gun? (Part Deux)
Wrong answer, OCM. The point of carrying a gun is deterrent. If the scumbag criminal element knows people are packing they will not commit a lot of the crimes they do.
Here’s an example (slighty OT): the US refuses to negotiate with kidnappers. Kidnappers now know that they can take as many Americans as they want and they will get nothing for them.
Italy (used to) pay ransom. Kidnappers had a field day with Italians. Same thing in Brazil. The criminal know they can count on someone to pay up so its worth it. Soon as EVERYONE stops paying, kidnappings disappear.
Same with these scumbags. They know guns are damned near “verboten” in Kraut land. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what the criminals will do.
Again, my suggestion is to license people to carry, not the guns. I don’t like the idea of unstable, over exciteable amateurs totin’ firearms.
For a madman in a crowded church—high velocity, armor-piercing is contraindicated.
Posted by Oink
04/04/2005 at 02:45 PM
>>If the scumbag criminal element knows people are packing they will not commit a lot of the crimes they do.
IMHO, it is better when criminals *don’t* know - ie. concealed carry, by law abiding citizens.
>>I don’t like the idea of unstable, over exciteable amateurs totin’ firearms.
That is why training should include post-event legal ramifications. While the SD situations leading up to a shooting are rarely cut+dry, the quagmire afterwards is significantly worse.
Oink - even “insane” people aren’t stupid. The kid in MN and the ones in Columbine did not attack a police station or NRA event. They attacked gun-free zones. John Lott describes this much better than I can in “More Guns, Less Crime”.
I hear the “friendly fire” argument a lot these days. It’s sensational, and it seems to make sense, except for this:
If you don’t return fire at all, then the madman has what is referred to as a “target-rich environment.” In other words, those folks that might have been hit by stray rounds are dead anyway.
Even if the madman is saving the bullet at the bottom of the magazine for his own brain, he’s shooting in order to kill as many as possible. One of his intended victims firing back does two things. First, it threatens the goal of the madman - to kill people. He can’t kill a whole bunch of folks if he’s dead. This forces the madman to focus on the defender, to attempt to kill the defender first.
Regardless of whether the defender or the madman is killed in this exchange, that exchange of fire does one other thing. It is a distraction, hopefully allowing innocents to flee.
Yes, crossfire can hit innocents, especially if the situation is particularly adrenaline-filled. But even counting those innocents hit, the death toll is far, far smaller.
Your average honest person with a gun usually has at least some training with that weapon. Many of us spend more time on the range than many cops. Granted, it’s still not “professional” training, but the sad fact is that we’re a bit more likely to hit our target than those cops.And by the way,
OCM, glad to hear you’re participating in BAG Day.
Is there anything in particular that you are looking for? If I may, let me recommend the Star BM. It’s not the fanciest pistol, but it can be obtained for well under $200. Spanish ex-police, many are worn but very serviceable. 9mm, but generally accurate enough to make up for the relative lack of power.Vilmar - I seem to remember an article a while back where Germany was debating a new law that required a registration on knives of a certain length. I can’t swear that it was the Germans, but some Eurabian nation was considering it.
OCM - Your going to get yourself a gun on 4/15?! Atta Boy! What are you going to get? Varmit rifle or hand gun? The part of the country you live in, if you don’t own one, get a 30/30 or 22/250. Plain hell on coyotes, prairie dogs, marmots, and wild dogs. Also, not to expensive to shoot or overkill on foxes, coyotes, or wild dogs. Keep them away from your goats( no teasing this time), horses and such.
Surprisingly, OCM, here in the Gunslinger-land of Texas, we don’t have very many gun fights on street corners. You see those more in places like Chicago and DC - where, incidentally, firearm ownership is banned for all practical purposes anyway.
To put it in more familiar terms, it’s sorta similar to pot, cigarettes, or alcohol: make it illegal, and everyone’s gonna want to try it, while at the same time, no one’s gonna know how to use it responsibly. We all know how effective Prohibition was, right? We all know that banning drugs discourages their use, right? No, those just discourage legitimate use of those things. The people that are going to abuse them will abuse them anyway.
With firearms in the hands of honest citizens though, if someone goes “whacko,” they’re purged from the gene pool rather fast. Deterrence is only part of the equation. Stopping those who do go nutso is the other half.
In the end, it all boils down to one thing - responsibility of the citizenry. If the citizenry is responsible, then not only will weaponry be safe in their hands, but the tendencies and attitudes which lead to criminal behavior are much less common, for they stem from irresponsibility.
The real problem out there is the self-centered relativistic pseudo-morality that has pervaded this culture. “If it feels good, do it.” Thinking is no longer in vogue; neither is considering the people around you.
When you see some deranged teenager shoot up a school, it’s because he wanted attention. Giving them attention is not the solution; teaching them that they are not and cannot be the constant center of attention is the solution.
When you see that same teen commit suicide after that shooting, it is because we have taught him that existence ends at death, and that death is a handy way to escape punishment. It is because we have taught that teen that if he or she wants to die, then they’re the only ones affected.
When you see all these problems, it is because we have told ourselves that responsibility is not our purview, but the government’s. Screw around with the football team and get pregnant? The government will help. The football team screwed around with each other and they all got AIDS? Talk to the government. Sally and Johnny are broke? The government will give them welfare.We have abdicated much of our responsibility.
Ownership brings responsibility, and responsibility indicates government. Like a teen driving his parents’ car, we tend to take less care of things because we do not regard ourselves as responsible for them. This in turn “proves” that we cannot be “trusted” with those things.
When a society owns the right to defend and protect itself, even with deadly force, that society develops the responsibility to handle the deadly force inherent to that right. But if the society does not own the right to defend itself, if that right instead becomes a privilege, loaned to us, then we become irresponsible with it.
OCM - It is about time you realized that I’m in control of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Yes your operatives are correct. I have GWB’s ear and Rove is just my lacky. From my secret base in the high plains of Grand, Glorious, Colorado I control the world. SO THERE, NAH NAH NAH NAH NAH NAH!!!
Now Then - Like a typical Libral, Dope Smoking, Communist Lover you refuse to answer a question with a answer. It is always a question for a question. Thats how commie pukes like you work. A simple “ what kind of gun are you going to buy” and what do I get, a bunch of Commie California Bullshit. I’ll bet you still can’t give a straight answer if you sit on it all night. Why, Because you ain’t buying shit. Otherwise you’d just plain say what the fuck you were going to get. But NOOOOOOOOOO you come up with some bullshit. Nothing but a Kerry loving puke
>> Who among you can honestly say that in 2005 you haven’t driven legally drunk?
That would be me. Never been busted - hopefully never will. I don’t want to lose my license...to carry.
>>We have abdicated much of our responsibility.
JST… wait a minute - I thought this was all Bush’s fault??!
>>TUFF: Me thinks you just admitted that you have driven under the influence but “never been busted”....
you are correct, but that was not your origional question
Settle down, boys!
