An Open Letter to Lovers of the Gun

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


That judge is my next gun I think it is perfect for hiking the back trails here in Az.

You are completely correct about out running wildlife.
My first hunting trip (deer) out of state was down by my uncle in Arkansas and (he forgot that in northern Illinois we don't have a wild hog problem) while walking to our stand a hog came charging out of the bush right for us scared the living hell out of me good thing uncle had his side arm (45) and put it down, to this day I remember the look in that hogs eyes and those razor sharp tucks and because of that I carry always when walking the trails.

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

And what the hell are you talking about rape for??? Are you seriously saying that our society would have less crime if we carried guns?? You do know you have more murders than we do?

reply to post by bluesilver


Arguing with you self is not a good sign.

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

Look at you moving the goal posts in between sentences.

All gun crime is violent crime, but not all violent crime is gun crime.

Now, he was talking about apples. You should resume talking about apples.

bluesilver

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

And what the hell are you talking about rape for??? Are you seriously saying that our society would have less crime if we carried guns?? You do know you have more murders than we do?

In one post you talk about the differences in recording crime. Then in the next post, you talk about the disparity in recorded crime.

Really? So, are the stats valid or not?

bigfatfurrytexan

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

Look at you moving the goal posts in between sentences.

All gun crime is violent crime, but not all violent crime is gun crime.

Now, he was talking about apples. You should resume talking about apples.

I'm not changing goal posts. We may have a figure that looks like we have more violent crime than you but we don't. Not all crime is violent. But we categorise more types of crime as being violent than you. If you compare our gun crime to yours it is lower. If you compare our murder rates to yours it is lower.

bluesilver

bigfatfurrytexan

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

Look at you moving the goal posts in between sentences.

All gun crime is violent crime, but not all violent crime is gun crime.

Now, he was talking about apples. You should resume talking about apples.

I'm not changing goal posts. We may have a figure that looks like we have more violent crime than you but we don't. Not all crime is violent. But we categorise more types of crime as being violent than you. If you compare our gun crime to yours it is lower. If you compare our murder rates to yours it is lower.

Gun crime is obvious. Yes. Less guns = less gun crime.

Gun crime is silly. Violent crime is violent, gun or not. I wouldn't consider non gun violent crime to be more desirable than violent crime including gun crime.

That said...yes. In our southern states we have a higher murder rate. I would bet that if England shared a 2000 mile border with Mexico, your violent crime rates would be a bit higher, too. If you look at our northern states, the violent crime rate is right in line with the rest of the "civilized world".

bigfatfurrytexan

bluesilver

bigfatfurrytexan

bluesilver

NavyDoc

bluesilver

thesaneone
reply to post by bluesilver

 

Why would it be bad?
An armed society is a polite society.

I would like to invite you and any other person that is afraid of an inanimate object to come and hang with me in Arizona, this way you will see how civilized responsible gun owners are.

Walk into the local grocery store and you will see at least a dozen people walking around with their gun on their hip or if you choose you can get a ccw card and conceal it like many others do.

If a criminal can see that you are holding, chances are they will not even think about starting trouble.

I suppose the issue is that on the whole, we don't need a gun to protect ourselves. I guess that means our society doesn't have as many criminals as you do. We certainly don't have as many gun related murders as you do.

Don't need a gun to protect yourself or don't protect yourself at all and hope the next guy gets victimized? Your rates of violent crime are actually higher overall. The difference is, I guess, is the mentality. Like a herd of sheep, your defense lies in the statistical probability that you will not be the one victimized...the other guy will. Also the mentality of "the life of the rapist is more important than the woman's vagina. Vaginas eventually recover from rape but death is forever so don't kill the rapist to stop him." I've seen both mentalities in the UK the various times I've been there.

The mentality of law abiding gun owners is we hope we don't have to use one but if we do we want to be able to have one and we don't care about the health or well being of the criminal. If he didn't want to get shot, he should have not decided to be a criminal in the first place.

Our rate of violent crime is not higher, we just record more things than you as being a violent crime.

If you really think we have more gun related murders than the US then you have no idea about what you are talking about.

Look at you moving the goal posts in between sentences.

All gun crime is violent crime, but not all violent crime is gun crime.

Now, he was talking about apples. You should resume talking about apples.

I'm not changing goal posts. We may have a figure that looks like we have more violent crime than you but we don't. Not all crime is violent. But we categorise more types of crime as being violent than you. If you compare our gun crime to yours it is lower. If you compare our murder rates to yours it is lower.

Gun crime is obvious. Yes. Less guns = less gun crime.

Gun crime is silly. Violent crime is violent, gun or not. I wouldn't consider non gun violent crime to be more desirable than violent crime including gun crime.

That said...yes. In our southern states we have a higher murder rate. I would bet that if England shared a 2000 mile border with Mexico, your violent crime rates would be a bit higher, too. If you look at our northern states, the violent crime rate is right in line with the rest of the "civilized world".

edit on 3/19/2014 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)

You missed my point. We include more crime as being violent than you.

The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

By contrast, the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person,’ including simple assaults, all robberies, and all ‘sexual offenses,’ as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and ‘forcible rapes.’ "

Once you know this, it becomes clear how misleading it is to compare rates of violent crime in the U.S. and the U.K. You’re simply comparing two different sets of crimes.

reply to post by bluesilver


Wow, you really have no clue on what you are talking about do you hell I'm even getting confused at your back and forth logic.

I suspect that your issue is not about guns but more about how us Americans live.

reply to post by bluesilver


And i already mentioned this.

What you are saying here is that there is no validity between comparing crime stats. So why do you keep doing it?

thesaneone
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

That judge is my next gun I think it is perfect for hiking the back trails here in Az.

You are completely correct about out running wildlife.
My first hunting trip (deer) out of state was down by my uncle in Arkansas and (he forgot that in northern Illinois we don't have a wild hog problem) while walking to our stand a hog came charging out of the bush right for us scared the living hell out of me good thing uncle had his side arm (45) and put it down, to this day I remember the look in that hogs eyes and those razor sharp tucks and because of that I carry always when walking the trails.

I was never fond of Taurus weapons. The Judge kind of changed my mind. The action isn't the best in the world, to be honest. Taurus weapons tend to lack some of that refinement. I have a Taurus .40 S&W that the slide was left very sharp. A little careless with hand placement, and the slide ripped the top of my right thumb open from one side to the other. I learned a few valuable lessons that day, actually.

reply to post by NavyDoc

We just need to remember that they don't understand our firearms rights and laws. And we don't understand their love of socialized and single payer healthcare.

Funny, as those that love the Govt crap seem to have the need to always tell others what and how to do things.

Okay, I get that Pratt was a gun owner, or still is maybe, not clear. This whole debate is about several things to which I'd like to address.

Guns are not the issue, the people who use them is. A gun is a tool, nothing more. The gun doesn't kill people, it can't think, it is an inanimate object like a hammer.

He talks about the things killing Americans which would be banned by Congressional fiat. I will direct your attention to automobiles, cigarettes, alcohol, drugs(notwithstanding), water on the floor, loose rugs, ladders, pens(the pen is mightier than the sword, reference the Bourne Identity), glass bottles and finally power tools. So he was just blowing smoke.

Statistically is crime going up or down, by country, by region, by population, by race, by socioeconomic factor or by full moon? Come on, you can argue on many levels either way.

I think for me, I don't know if I can pull the trigger when it comes down to it. I am not a hunter, I do shoot targets and golf balls. I would like to think I can, but that remains to be seen. I am a Veteran, but have never seen combat. Am I a coward? That remains to be seen.

Say we confiscate all the legally owned and 'registered' guns in America and close the gun factories and bullet factories. Aside from destroying jobs, what effect will this have on crime, won't other countries still manufacture weapons? Won't the criminals just go to another country get the guns and bring them back? Will the criminals turn in their guns as well? I very much doubt it.

Look I'm all for no crime in America. But that is not a reality. So I will push for the next best thing. Death penalty, don't coddle the criminal element make them aware that crime won't be tolerated. Keep the citizens armed. You want the kids safe and protected? Well don't let me stop you. Just allow schools daycare and any 'gun free' zones to be concealed carry zones, beef up armed security and metal detectors. Then if there is any trouble it can be dealt with rapidly. I do think that the owner identified gun, the 007 gun that only operates for the owner, is a good idea. But the criminals will still have the regular guns, or if they steal oig's I think they can defeat them or will try.

I don't claim to have any answers, I just don't to complain about what's wrong and not have any suggestions. I just don't like being held captive by the criminals and the government. I'm not the criminal but I am being treated like one. I also think that the Terrorist-In-Chief Obama needs to start doing the will of the people. I will not relinquish any of my firearms voluntarily and they are not for sale. But if it would guarantee that no one would ever be killed then I would turn them in. But what you would have is armed criminals and unarmed citizens.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.-Benjamin Franklin

Troy Lawson

bigfatfurrytexan

thesaneone
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

That judge is my next gun I think it is perfect for hiking the back trails here in Az.

You are completely correct about out running wildlife.
My first hunting trip (deer) out of state was down by my uncle in Arkansas and (he forgot that in northern Illinois we don't have a wild hog problem) while walking to our stand a hog came charging out of the bush right for us scared the living hell out of me good thing uncle had his side arm (45) and put it down, to this day I remember the look in that hogs eyes and those razor sharp tucks and because of that I carry always when walking the trails.

I was never fond of Taurus weapons. The Judge kind of changed my mind. The action isn't the best in the world, to be honest. Taurus weapons tend to lack some of that refinement. I have a Taurus .40 S&W that the slide was left very sharp. A little careless with hand placement, and the slide ripped the top of my right thumb open from one side to the other. I learned a few valuable lessons that day, actually.

The Taurus in my opinion is one of the better revolvers you can buy, I'm sure there are worse. I had a S&W .44 Magnum 6" barrel in CA. That gun was great, but I got rid of it. I picked up a Taurus Model 66 at Gander Mtn. here in MI and that is every bit as fun to shoot as the S&W .44. It also holds 7 not 6. It is also a dual action, which you can fire without cocking back the hammer, cock the hammer back and fire or there is an intermediate position in between uncocked and cocked. The rear sight is adjustable, obtaining accurate groupings is relatively easy. Very nice. I also have the Taurus .380. It is a semi-automatic. You should have gone with a Glock or Hi-Point for a .40 semi. The Judge is a very attractive gun. A .45 round and a .410 shotshell. Only drawback would be 5 round capacity. But still seems like a great gun. I would highly recommend the Judge. Taurus revolvers are an excellent value for the price.

troylawson

bigfatfurrytexan

thesaneone
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

That judge is my next gun I think it is perfect for hiking the back trails here in Az.

You are completely correct about out running wildlife.
My first hunting trip (deer) out of state was down by my uncle in Arkansas and (he forgot that in northern Illinois we don't have a wild hog problem) while walking to our stand a hog came charging out of the bush right for us scared the living hell out of me good thing uncle had his side arm (45) and put it down, to this day I remember the look in that hogs eyes and those razor sharp tucks and because of that I carry always when walking the trails.

I was never fond of Taurus weapons. The Judge kind of changed my mind. The action isn't the best in the world, to be honest. Taurus weapons tend to lack some of that refinement. I have a Taurus .40 S&W that the slide was left very sharp. A little careless with hand placement, and the slide ripped the top of my right thumb open from one side to the other. I learned a few valuable lessons that day, actually.

The Taurus in my opinion is one of the better revolvers you can buy, I'm sure there are worse. I had a S&W .44 Magnum 6" barrel in CA. That gun was great, but I got rid of it. I picked up a Taurus Model 66 at Gander Mtn. here in MI and that is every bit as fun to shoot as the S&W .44. It also holds 7 not 6. It is also a dual action, which you can fire without cocking back the hammer, cock the hammer back and fire or there is an intermediate position in between uncocked and cocked. The rear sight is adjustable, obtaining accurate groupings is relatively easy. Very nice. I also have the Taurus .380. It is a semi-automatic. You should have gone with a Glock or Hi-Point for a .40 semi. The Judge is a very attractive gun. A .45 round and a .410 shotshell. Only drawback would be 5 round capacity. But still seems like a great gun. I would highly recommend the Judge. Taurus revolvers are an excellent value for the price.

I agree on their wheel guns being decent. My father n law did have issues with his 357 (cylinder lockup).

As far as their semi autos? I refuse to sell them in my store. Utter garbage IMO.

Well, I didn't read all of this thread just kinda skimmed past the first page ..... I don't "like" guns, a man with a gun killed my cousin ..... however .... I have family members who rely on guns for their livelihood their business is guns, and they are awesome at it! I have other family who love to hunt and they are very good at it too. Guns aren't for me, but who am I to tell you ... NO!! I have never shot a gun, I think it would be fun to learn how to shoot one .... but I know the people I would want to be with in the case of a zombie apocalypse

WhoDat09
Well, I didn't read all of this thread just kinda skimmed past the first page ..... I don't "like" guns, a man with a gun killed my cousin ..... however .... I have family members who rely on guns for their livelihood their business is guns, and they are awesome at it! I have other family who love to hunt and they are very good at it too. Guns aren't for me, but who am I to tell you ... NO!! I have never shot a gun, I think it would be fun to learn how to shoot one .... but I know the people I would want to be with in the case of a zombie apocalypse

edit on 23-3-2014 by WhoDat09 because: the gun didn't kill him on it's own

Well your the essence of how non gun owners should treat the subject. Your treat it with respect not fear. You realize the danger but also acknowledge its ability to deter it. You understand that we wish not to take lives but that we wish to defend against loss of life at the hands of tyranny on ANY front.

People like you make me proud.