http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2958247Oh my.
Cyrano (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-04-08 02:01 PM
Original message
Dear gun people:
Let me state that this post, or a thousand like it, won’t change anyone’s mind on the state of gun ownership in America. Having said this, here’s my opinion:
Guns don’t kill people. Mostly, disturbed students, people off their meds, and assorted others do. The fact that they happen to do it with guns isn’t coincidental. Guns kill multiple victims far more efficiently than do knives, or lead pipes.
And, yeah, I know the argument that if just one other person at the site of a mass murder tragedy had possessed a gun, he/she could have shot down the “nut.†Given all the massacres that have occurred over the last dozen of so years in this country, I find it hard to believe that of the hundreds present, no one had a gun. Here’s a bulletin for many of you. There’s a tremendous difference between having a gun and using it.
But let me also state this. Anyone who believes that private gun ownership will protect us against an American government run amok has seen “Red Dawn†too many times.
I have been in the military. I have fired guns. I have owned guns. But I haven’t fallen in love with guns. And maybe this is the crux of the problem. Perhaps far too many believe that carrying a gun will save their lives or those of others. (Sorry, guys. Most muggers come up behind you and bash your skull in before you know what the hell is going on.)
So let me close with this. Like many of you, I too have plinked at tin cans. But unlike many of you, I don’t carry a gun. And unlike many of you, I sure as hell would never hope for the opportunity to use it.
Did that last sentence sound cruel? Take a moment and examine your own motives for carrying a gun. And then ask yourself if you would welcome the opportunity to use it. If you’re a decent human being, you might not like the answer.
Oh my.
It's difficult to imagine the large-proboscised primitive, all decked out in lace frills and linen finery, in the military, but one supposes it's possible.
Oscar Wilde built a big bonfire here.
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-04-08 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm a gun owner, and I must say...
I find all these arguments about "Oh, if only someone had been there with a gun" to be idiotic hypotheticals.
And, yeah, that revolution-against-the-gov't thing is similarly asinine.
I do keep a gun in my home near my bed for self-defense, but that's not the main reason I own them.
Basically, it boils down to this: I enjoy making loud noises and putting holes in stuff.
Taverner (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-04-08 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Interesting. I fully support 2nd ammendment rights, even rolling back gun laws
But I have no desire to pick up an expensive hobby (yes, gun collecting is a hobby )
I'd rather spend the money getting to the nearest reservation and buying some illegal fireworks. Does the same thing for me.
spin (181 posts) Tue Mar-04-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
46. Actually, shooting isn't all that expensive...
A quality .22 pistol such as a Ruger Mark III will set you back about $350. With reasonable care it will be shooting long after you're six foot under.
One hundred .22 LR bullets might run $7.00.
Many high quality weapons are available used in excellent condition and at a considerable price savings. Most people who buy weapons usually only shoot, at the most, a box of ammo through them.
True, if you decide to collect guns, it can get very expensive. I fail to see the attraction of collecting. All my guns are shooters and most have had thousands if not tens of thousands of rounds fired through them.
Shooting is a great hobby. I've met many interesting and intelligent people at the range, a cross section of or society that has included plumbers, factory workers, cops, lawyers, doctors and engineers.
Mountainman (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-04-08 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think it is time to stop attacking the ordinary gun owner and look for what it is that is causing the increase in violence in the country if that is the case.
If someone kills that doesn't mean everyone with the means to kill should be demonized. There are many reasons people own guns. Some collect, some hunt, some plink, and some have various identity problems. Yet all are not killers nor are they going to be.
There is something to be said for the idea that you salve your conscience by blaming a whole class of people who do something you yourself choose not to do, namely own a gun. I really doubt that most gun owners want to shoot someone. Nor do they relish the idea of getting in a gun fight.
SteppingRazor (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-04-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. What increase in violence?
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm#Crime
Serious crimes and property crimes have been decreasing for years.
I think that goes back to the statement made elsewhere in this thread that gunowners are pathologically scared. I don't think that's necessarily the case, but just look at what you said. You took it as fact that there is an increase in violence in this country, when that is not the case. Why? I don't mean to pick on you -- in fact, I think you're an example of an assumption that a huge percentage of Americans make -- but I do think that this assumption defines a lot of the "gun-nut" behavior.
Why do we assume there has been an increase in violence in this country when that is not the case?
Uh, the strep-throat primitive must not go onto Skins's island much; where the primitives are ALWAYS griping about the increase in crime.
It's a very big bonfire, well worth getting out the boat and rowing over to Skins's island, to see.
