Who doesn't want You to have Guns? Frightened Cowards and "The Man"

Originally posted by Rybo666
And if the criminal does not know? Then the possibilities are that someone is going to get shot and it does not neccessarily mean it will be the criminal.

It's a case of the fastest finger first.

There's already a good possibility that, in the event of a home invasion, the homeowner is going to get severely injured or killed by the perpetrator, regardless of whether or not the homeowner is armed.

In a lot of areas, yes, a criminal is going to have a good idea about the presence of firearms in the home. Throughout much of rural America, you can go to many small towns and find enough privately owned guns to literally equip some third world armies. In most cases, however, violent crime in those areas tends to be quite low. Why? Criminals generally know that if they break into someone's house, there's about an 95% chance that they're going to be greeted by a shotgun for their effort.

reply to post by olfredbear


Would you know you was robbing a gun holders home? Theres obviously a division in this thread with the U.K side believing the majority of guns should be abolished and the U.S believing guns are a wise idea. Some of you guys get your feathers ruffled to easily, somebody posts an opinion which you dont believe in and you have to start dishing insults and getting wound up.

reply to post by olfredbear




by quoting this amusing little story you have just demonstrated how much you are owned by the system.


And you know what, you have absolutely no clue why.

reply to post by Everton


Cities all throughout the US are facing dire budget deficits. Especially in cities that have been hit hard in this recession. Detroit, Cleveland, Youngstown, to name a few in my area. Local police departments have been stripped down to bare bones and these officers can basically just respond to calls or write traffic citiations to generate revenue nowadays. The notion of protection and prevention by the police is no longer a reality in most of these cities. The police cannot be everywhere.

Citizens have to protect themselves. Violent crime has no constraints in a world with a reduced visible police presence to deter them. The violent act only takes seconds to commit. Hell, in parts of Detroit you are best advised to safely run red lights after sundown.

Rybo666 and others, the only thing that matters to me is that this American will stand as a man and protect his family. If you elsewhere believe in pacifism in the face of imminent death, then by all means craft your laws accordingly. Here in the U.S. we fight for our rights and our lives, and we always will.

We will never submit to being disarmed. We are not subjects, but citizens. Each of us is King. Should global powers ever attempt to change that, they will find a rifle "behind every blade of grass."

Originally posted by ahmonrarh

Originally posted by JohnySeagull

I don't think its so much about feeling safer................

....Imagine if you weren't afraid anymore. Imagine if you weren't scared of death. Imagine if you weren't afraid of dying.

I'm not afraid of dying. I do not need a gun.







peace

While I share your sentiment, in that:

1)Guns don't automatically make one feel safer.

2) Do not fear death, as its inevitable...

But, After being:
1) robbed by gunpoint in front of my teenage home @ 17y.o, in our upper middle class home. My dad was a cop then, and though we called the on duty law...robbers not caught...hell, the detective got there 1hr later....prolly had other similar victims to attend to.

2)robbed, once again @ 17y.o while working @ a local pizza place in...oops...a "nice neighborhood".

3) Heading to a Braves baseball game & having a drunk/irate driver pull a gun from his car, pointing it in my wifes passenger window(from his driver window), after he swerved and grazed MY car? And her looking at me like "help?" (She's anti-gun too and convinced me to leave it home as: blah,blah,blah anti- gun rant)

4) Finishing a business contract with a partner @ a local coffee shop, and upon leaving we get robbed in the parking lot as we got to our cars...my gun in the glovebox, as coffee shop people get nervous when a concealed bulge is bigger than a smartphone.

I myself do not fear death...but I will not leave its approach up to another humans direct discretion. No thanks.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by ahmonrarh]

does this not make you realise your country is completey and utterlerly in the crapper. if you had produced your gun in all four of these situations there is a chance that you yourself or other family members could have been killed.

Originally posted by Everton
No country should have the public being eligible to access firearms in my opinion. Reason being is they cause harm/distress/souring crime rates and murder. Being armed to protect yourself is a silly idea, just use common sense and avoid gang infested streets at night. I dont see what good can possibly come from owning a weapon.

Prohibition only leads to criminal economies and corruption. It has been proven over and over again. Look at guys like Al Capone, Sam Giancana, or the Mexican drug cartels.

reply to post by kingmonkey



oh, ok... now I understand where you were coming from with the "afraid of guns" statement you made.

but to be honest, i've also considered the NO ONE HAS GUNS scenario...the dreamer in me pined for it. but the reality for all people worldwide, is that be it a gun, knife, rock or SPORK(the infamous spoon fork for the unknowing lol!) one would still possibly run into a conflict of some sort, be it one on one, or in larger numbers....it's in our basic nature as humans/ but so is individual peace of mind, imagine the duality in that. i believe that ants and humans are the only species that wage organized war against each other. dunno. seen that somewhere on tv, an animal program i seen once, maybe an entomologist can correct me if i'm wrong.

owning a weapon, in my eyes , is no different than owning a car. both are tools, require training and familiarity and RESPONSIBLITY for those that own them. you must be responsible for the repercussions for misuse of either. but to deny the world vehicles, in that they have and do kill, either by intention, or accidentally, is as silly as the gun/no gun debate. i was looking for stats to express the 2(weapons/vehicles), but not many sites have one readily avails that didnt lump all people that died from gun or vehicle deaths together, be it accidental, murder, self defense, by law enforcement etc.

but for the anti-gunners, most stats did say "BY 2005, GUN DEATHS MAY SURPASS VEHICLE RELATED DEATHS..." though in what ways and how, they didnt explain....so have fun!

but, in terms of my "being on the business end" experiences. all i have to say is that, those things happened due to many factors. some greater than myself, but the lesson they displayed were great enough for me to take note:

what does society lack for all people, that would make one man desperate enough to take from another person or persons? why take the risk of imprisonment or worse, an early death? that issue needs to be addressed on a larger front.

pay attention to your instincts, and do not second guess or reverse yourself for anyone. better cautious, than caught up.

if you feel that you must defend yourself, determine in what way, seek training or educate yourself in the manner conducive to that manner in which you want to defend you and yours.

and understand the pros and cons to the actions in which you choose said defense and be fully, fully accountable for those actions.

pardon my bias, as growing up in an american law enforcement household, entering military service and my own individual drive to try to remain self reliant when it comes to my own safety and my loved ones, has led me to my thinking......well....that and those GUN IN MY FACE, DO AS HE SAYS scenarios really reinforced my upbringing....lol!

maybe next we could get tanks for vehicles or fighter jets to fly in, maybe automated machine gun nests for home security or run around the streets with our kevlar bullet proof suits on while armed with laser target missile launchers.
Should make it such a safer place for everyone then. Why be scared when armed.

Originally posted by Everton
Picture this, a young man purchases a gun for self defence purposes later down the line...

Picture this a man purchases a gun because his store gets robbed repeatedly. Years later three guys come in and try to rob his store again. When he tells them there is no money they start beating his employees and threatening to kill them. He pulls out the gun he bought years earlier and shoots the robbers. He feels sick about shooting anybody, but he finds solice in the fact that he saved the lives of law abiding citizens.

Harlem Shop Owner Kills Two Robbers

"You can't even imagine what it's like when you have to do something like that. You feel sick, sick to your stomach. It's terrible," he told CBS 2.

Augusto said he was sitting at his desk in the back when one of the suspects entered and threatened him with a gun, while he heard another beating up his long-time employee at the front of the store.

"I tried to get him to go away. I told him it didn't make any sense, put away your gun, there's no money. Then he went down there and helped them beat up on my guy," he said.

After his attempts to discourage the robbers failed, Augusto opened fire with the licensed shotgun he'd bought 20 years ago following another robbery....

Augusto said he lost his own son 12 years ago, so he says he feels terrible about what the parents of the dead men are going through Friday.

"I wish they'd left, that's all. It wasn't my choice. It was their choice," he said.

Outlawing guns would not have stopped the robbery. It would have stopped Gus from saving the life of his employees.Prohibition only leads to black market economies, corruption, and increased crime. Ask Al Capone, Sam Giancana, or the Mexican drug cartels. Prohibition is great for business.

reply to post by redgy


Great point! How far will it go untill we realise that weapons are bad?!

My thought is at the moment pretty damn far!

reply to post by JohnySeagull


honestly johnny, no it didnt at all, because in 2 of those situations, I WAS TOO YOUNG TO LEGALLY OWN A WEAPON. to do so and have used it, would've constituted a felony. jail attire doesn't well fit on me, nor does the record that follows later.

and in the last 2 situations, in order:

I chose to ignore his belligerence, due to his apparent intoxication, as there was a beer bottle visible in his cup holder, and he left no damage, just lite paint transfer, on both vehicle. plus my orders to him that "no, you hit me, so chill out with the yelling, and leave." were met with a gun.

and the final issue: i ignored the gut feeling that something was amiss as we walked to the cars, and i knew leaving myself and my partner unprotected was a mistake, who thinks they'd get robbed across from 3 million(2,199mill EUR) homes? though that gunman/accomplice were arrested (we have trial soon) he, had assumed that we were like most other people....anti-gun/oblivious to his intent. that particular duo robbed a total of 8 people that nite. i met the other 6, when they had to come ID the robber/his accomplice. they all expressed shock that they were robbed and all of the 6 (couples...on dates) didnt like the taste of being forcibly relieved of their belongings. my blackberry/bluetooth/description made the arrests possible

but versus ranting on how my country is in the crapper(which is true, especially now) please come down off the horse and research your countries own crime rates. and if they are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the US, present and then we can discuss how/why.

i dont know man.....but bend over and take it like a man really REALLY doesnt work for me.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by ahmonrarh]

I think some of us are forgetting a very important fact. The founders of the federal government of the United States of America (it. the states themselves) gave we the people the unalienable right to keep and bear arms.

Not for hunting or skeet.
Not for target practice or "plinking".
Not for self-defense or home defense.

We were guaranteed this right so we would have a fighting chance to take our government back if it veered toward tyranny (which 99% of goverments have done is history).

To abolish it, by force if necessary, if it became destructive to it's means (protecting YOUR liberty, justice, freedom, etc.)

For those Americans who believe we are quickly approaching this situation, you MUST peacefully take back your government, starting at the local, city, and state level. The states created the federal government, and the states can change it, reshape it, or abolish it if it is the will of the people.

Will the Federal Government of the United States use their military might to fight this..?

I don't know. They might try. But they would be ignoring two major facts. 1. We have many great men and women in the military (and police too) that understand their oath of office is to defending the constitution. 2. There are over 100million gun owners in this country, and over 150 million guns.

NO Military could ever defeat a guillrilla war against the population of the US.

So i say to you this: It is your RIGHT as a law-abiding American citizen to purchase and possess as many firearms as you want. There is no law that defines and "arsenal" not is having a store of weapons and ammo. Know you rights. Practice your rights, or they will be taken aways from you, ironically, at gun point.

reply to post by redgy


The only problem is that most weapons such as that are already banned under explosive ordnance laws and are not considered small arms. The one exception would be a machine gun, but most people don't have a spare $10,000 lying around to buy one, not to mention having to deal with all of the federal red tape that goes along with it. The very few that have that kind of spare cash use them as firing range toys.

There is no proof (that I have heard of) that an armed society is a safer society.

Do you really want to live in a society where your preacher has a pistol strapped to his side...or a teacher...or students...or your doctor is packing heat?

Do you really think that is a sane society?

I am not opposed to gun rights because I feel that if guns are outlawed only governments will have guns...so having guns needs to be a supported right BUT that doesn't mean that they are appropriate at all times or settings.

By the way the NRA...GOP and right wing hysteria about the government trying to take away gun rights is just that, hysteria and self promotion.

Gun rights are written into the constitution and by necessity it would mean there would have to be a change in the constitution to do that and that takes a 2/3 majority in both houses AND in 2/3 of the states legislatures to do that...and that is simply not going to happen.

Strict gun control increases violent crime.
On Jan. 16, 2002, Peter Odighizuwa, a 43-year-old student from Nigeria, walked into the Appalachian School of Law offices of Dean Anthony Sutin, 42, a former acting assistant U.S. attorney, and professor Thomas Blackwell, 41, and opened fire with a .380 ACP semi-automatic handgun – shooting them at close range.
Also killed in the same building was student Angela Denise Dales, 33. Three others were wounded.
As soon as the gunfire erupted, two students acting independently of one another, Tracy Bridges and Mikael Gross, ran to their vehicles to retrieve firearms. Gross, an off-duty police officer in his home state of North Carolina, got his 9mm pistol and body armor. Bridges got out his .357 Magnum.
Bridges and Gross went back to the building where the shots were heard and as Odighizuwa exited, they approached from different angles. Bridges yelled for him to drop his weapon and the shooter was subdued by several unarmed students.
Gross went back to his car and got handcuffs to detain the shooter until police arrived.
Most news reports of the incident failed to mention the presence of two armed students and their role in subduing the shooter, saying only that he was tackled by bystanders.
Odighizuwa was tried for the murders and sentenced to multiple life terms in prison.

Virginia Tech, like many of the nation's schools and college campuses, is a so-called "gun-free zone," which Second Amendment supporters say invites gun violence – especially from disturbed individuals seeking to kill as many victims as possible.
Foreign-born student Cho Seung-Hui murdered 32 and wounded another 15 before turning his gun on himself.
A year earlier, the Virginia legislature banned all guns on campus in the interest of safety.
www.wnd.com...
April 22, 2007 © 2008 WorldNetDaily.com

reply to post by Everton


HEY Disinfo agent I live in America and i have the RIGHT to BARE ARMS! When it comes down to protecting my loved ones im going to protect them 100% Got it!? And if you think its a silly idea and it scares you that more Americans wanting to protect themselves then i suggest you move out of the United States thats if you are here.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by mrfire9]

While pro-gun control advocates may believe they are improving safety, they are actually depriving honest people of the ability to defend themselves against criminals. Evidence shows that Increases in gun control have a direct connection to increases in violent crime rates (including rape).

A 1985 study by the National Institute for Justice shows criminals fear the armed citizen more than they fear the police.
www.nraila.org...

www.wnd.com...

www.worldnetdaily.com...

www.nraila.org...

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws ISBN:0226493644 by John R. Lott Jr.

www.nrawinningteam.com...

reply to post by nhpatriot

amen to that NHpatriot. not jumping on a panic tip....do you belive we have time to change things from within? as though i didnt express these sentiment here in this thread, done it already in another...is there time?

(i wish the mods would've fixed my fat finger mistake, screenname wise)