Everyone is scared, everyone has guns.

[VinniE30]

[mrsleeve]

^
I like that

It's true that gun free zones do make an ideal location for a nutjob to do what he wants, but that's another price you pay with freedom. Private businesses have the right to choose whether or not they want guns on their property, and I think that's fair. It's likely for insurance purposes, but it's still a valid stance IMO.

While I tend to agree with you, your apartment is not a private business its YOUR private home and you are free (since you live in Canada) to defend your self while in it.

The legal force a No Gun sign carries in the US varies from state to state, some can post them and actually carry no weight, others can ask you to leave and press trespass chargers. I am also big on private property rights as well, and I dont frequent places that have a no firearms sign on the door. Yes its for liability reasons and so they cant be sued if someone defends them self, by the family of the aggressor.

Why Does a gun free zone have to exist. Those of us that legally carry a weapon are guilty of less then one half of one percent (.3 actually IIRC) of violent crimes committed with a firearm??? Are we really the ones to be worried about??? All any of these purposed gun control laws will only harm us law abiding citizens, not those that dont follow the legal code as it is now.


does it bother you that I am typing this with one of my Sig Sauer (after all one of the guns ass fuck used was a sig) 45s scattered on my desk doing a long over due detailed cleaning and tune up??? Does it also bother you that I have just ordered 2 new firearms and should arrive Tuesday or weds next week at my FFL one of which is capable of putting rounds on target at well beyond a mile away???

Edit: One will be here, next week, my new extreme long range tool is proving somewhat hard to get a hold at the moment from my guys distributors

[dannyyisntt]

Is that it's intended purpose? You and I both know it is not, you're simply rethinking how to use them and that is fine. That doesn't negate the fact that they came into existence for use on humans and that a different firearm could do the job effectively.

I have several different types of hammers laying about. Should I only use the claw hammer for wood work regardless of the fact that it shares the same purpose as my ball nosed? Just because it's useful in one area doesn't mean that it's the only purpose of it.

The same applies to guns. Simply speaking, a gun is a tool. A tool cannot choose how it's owner uses it. It's intended purpose is to aid the owner in whatever task they have choosen it for.

If people don't have weapons, they'll find another way to bring harm to each other. It's human nature. We're the most distructive species.

Feel free to give up your guns. But don't ask me for help when your family is in danger by enemies foreign and domestic. That being said, my guns are primarily for target use or hunting and will only be used as defense if there is absolutely no other choice. And I pray to god it will never come to that.

[cale]

A gun is a tool yes, but it's a tool who's job is to kill. Be it for hunting for sustenance or for protecting yourself. Its designated purpose means it's not a hammer, it's not a jerry can of diesel so you cannot so easily compare it to those things to dismiss the fact that regulation of them is necessary. Most CCW's holder will agree that regulation for it is needed, a free for all for them would be madness. But by your argument it's just a tool, so why isn't it as easily accessible as a hammer at a hardware store? Why can't a 14 year old go into the store and buy it?

You want to compare it to a hammer when it supports your agenda but reject my claim that it cannot be so easily compared. So what is it, is it just an every day tool or is it something different (likely different as I doubt you'll disagree with me CCW laws are necessary)? You can't have your cake and eat it too, or so they say.

does it bother you that I am typing this with one of my Sig Sauer (after all one of the guns ass fuck used was a sig) 45s scattered on my desk doing a long over due detailed cleaning and tune up??? Does it also bother you that I have just ordered 2 new firearms and should arrive Tuesday or weds next week at my FFL one of which is capable of putting rounds on target at well beyond a mile away???

Not at all, and again please stop referencing the recent shooting as though that's my motivation. It bothers me that a problematic culture developed which is now so deeply a part of your country that it will likely never be resolved. Had ownership of guns remained as it was likely to be at the time of the writing of the constitution we wouldn't be sitting here having this conversation, you'd own at most a rifle or two and that'd be it. You wouldn't have youth waiting till the day they're old enough to have their very own designed-to-kill-people AR as though that should be commonplace. That's not sensationalizing AR's, that's pointing out that it's fucked up that people think it's necessary to amass arsenals of weapons designed for war time to protect themselves.

[TurboJake]

The guns job is to contain combustion or compressed gas and send a projectile down the barrel in a given direction. Nothing more. However, the projectiles job does vary.

What is a tranquilizer gun?
What is a flare gun?
What is a nail gun?
What is a stun gun?
What is a dart gun?

I'll give you a hint. I left the answer in italics. These are not meant to kill anything, but are the same exact principle as an AR. Which usually can also hammer a nail. Act as a hole punch. Act as a prybar. Even a saw. Or a plank if need be. There's a million ways to use a gun that is not killing anything. To fool yourself that thinking that a gun is purely meant to kill is just naive.

Say your 300 miles in the desert without water but with your gun. And you come across a barrel of water conveniently lost there. Unlikely, yes. But you could say, shoot that barrel with your gun and have some life saving water!

If you've ever done any roofing, or ever will. You are or will be glad a tool known as the gun exists.

[cale]

A barrel of water....really? That is single handedly the saddest attempt to justify something I've ever read.

All of those things are guns yes, but those are not the items we're talking about are we? Tell me, what are the origins of firearms and what has their predominant function been? Utility yes, but overwhelming so for the purpose of killing with weapons developed for warfare purposes for specifically killing other people. Again trying to compare a firearm to an object designed with harmless intent is foolish. Perhaps we should also institute regulation and liscencing for bending down and pickin up rocks too, may hit someone in the head with one!

[TurboJake]

A barrel of water....really? That is single handedly the saddest attempt to justify something I've ever read.

All of those things are guns yes, but those are not the items we're talking about are we? Tell me, what are the origins of firearms and what has their predominant function been? Utility yes, but overwhelming so for the purpose of killing with weapons developed for warfare purposes for specifically killing other people.

Obviously you don't get the point and aren't taking it seriously. It was just an example.

As for the origins of the gun, that's besides the point. The origin of a vast many things were intended to do damage or kill. The blade was invented to kill food/enemies eons ago. But you can use it as a cutting tool. Hammers have been speculated to have been invented to kill, but is used to build. That cell phone in your pocket or on your desk, stemmed from the military using radio to communicate farther and farther, to kill at a distance.

A gun is a tool. How you, the holder of that gun use it, is your direct responsiblity. You can use use brake fluid and sudafed to make meth. Or you can use it to help you stop your car, and clear up a sniffle. Seriously, its called accountability.

EVERYTHING has a dark side to it. It's all how you, the holder of that tool, use it.

[mrsleeve]

^


Thank you I was going to use the battle ax Vs wood chopper, Bow and arrow, The war Hammer (what modern Claw hammers are patterned from, I mean I could hand any of my Estwings to a 15th century human and they would know it can be used to drive a nail but would rather carry it into battle) the sickle handy for cutting wheat and enemies. An many of our modern tools and mechanisms were originally developed for war and primary function was to KILL PEOPLE. GPS, the internet, Nuclear Power, Space launch Vehicles, the fucking airplane the interstate highway system, all have gotten to where they are or can thank their creation to warfare and a primary job of being a more effective killing machine.

Nearly every tool in our lives has been advanced in some way or directly to be a more efficient war and killing machine.


The 70's era Remington Model 700 in 30-06 I have and the 70's era Winchester model 70 in 270 I have. Identical rifles (other than the Win's Caliber) were bought buy the Army and Marines during the Vietnam conflict and given to sniper teams in country. Since those mechanically identical rifles are in my safe make then "Sniper rifles" NO not in my hands they are not, its the intent of and the guy behind the glass that makes them "Sniper Rifles".

A firearm is nothing more that a tool for a verity of jobs, sometimes it might be a unpleasant job but even unpleasant jobs are a necessary job at times.

[cale]

So are you going to address my comments about regulations or are you just going to keep ignoring it and spinning it to whatever is convenient and supports your beliefs? Hammers and nail guns should not be available to felons.

[mrsleeve]

You said it your self, we already have the regulations in place because society thinks we should be adults before you can buy something that requires a cretin level of maturity.

Federal laws state you have to be 18 to buy long guns, and long guns ammo. 21 for handguns and ammo.

We have laws that tell us what we can and cant have, how and where we can travel with them, where and when those of us that are licensed can carry and have them on our person. We have laws that bar felons, the mentally unfit, habitual users of mind altering substances etc... from obtaining, baring and keeping firearms . We have back ground checks for purchase, its illegal to sell to someone that you know or suspect fit of any of the above descriptions in a private party sale. Some states require federal and state paper work for private party pistol transfers

We have 1000's of pages of Federal and state laws and regulation on firearms. Its not that we dont already have sufficient "common sense " gun laws we have since 1934, and have been expanded on several times since then 1968 and 86 at the federal level, the states have varying degrees of further regulation. CT has the 4th or 5th most restrictive gun laws in the country and look what just happened there. Kid not allowed to buy or possess steals mommies weapons and goes nuts

There were plenty of laws in place to prevent nearly all the media frenzy events in the past 15 years, but those pesky laws didnt stop them now did they. I fully endorse ENFORCING the laws we have, we have plenty of them especially in places like CT, we dont need more.

[naplesE30]

As someone who has never even held a handgun I fully support ccw. As so many have stated laws only affect law abbiding people. The crazy nut jobs of the world are going to do what they will regaurdless of any legislation period. Restricting ccw only makes the nutjobs more powerfull and the ordinary citizen more vulnerable..

Its true you dont hear about crimes that are thwarted do to ccw because there is usually no tragedy in it..... A guy was shot or deterred before he could kill, is much less of a strory than a guy kills x number of people. Sadly heroism is quickly forgotten. It is also impossible to tell how many lives are saved by preventing a potential attack from happening.

On that note upon my sister and brother in law's advice (one an FBI agent other being a police officer and tach team member) I will be applying for a ccw permit and looking to purchase my first firearm. One is much more likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time then to be attacked at home. I hope and pray that it will never even be unholstered outside of a gun range. But their is no way that I am going to deny my family every protection we are afforded by the law. I could never live with myself if something were to happen and I didnt do everything I could to prevent it, and I guess being trained, equipped, and prepared would fall into that category. Honestly, the very thought of owning a gun makes me nervous, let alone carrying one. But I am sure as with anything, becomming familiar and proficient with it will change that.

[Pac1373]

I may take this opportunity to point out to some peeps itt, that the mighty AR family of guns is more designed as an implement of "wounding" than it is an implement of "killing" yes, it can and will kill you, however many less "black" weapons for hunting or what not carry and deal a greater amount of energy and projectile mass. AR's, AK's and other "Assault weapons" (yech, hate the term) have a stigma that is not directly proportionate to their actual "killing ability"...

[Pl3wA]

all we need is a common enemy. then, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. in short, we need more terrorists, and cyborg robot assassins, and space pirates, and stuff

[decay]

Is that it's intended purpose? You and I both know it is not, you're simply rethinking how to use them and that is fine. That doesn't negate the fact that they came into existence for use on humans and that a different firearm could do the job effectively.

said this elsewhere, but it bears repeating here.

hypothetical: i have hostile intent, and an AR15.

you need to worry about me and anyone within 500m of me (no concealment/cover assumed).

take away my AR15 and give me a scoped hunting rifle (say, .30-06).

now you need to worry about me and anyone within 1000m of me.

good work?

[evandael]

So in the nature vs. nuture argument, you would obviously always choose nature?


Sticks in the mud, some of you are sticks in the mud. Playing semantics with the word gun, desperately grasping onto archaic 200+ year old sentiments, blaming individuals as the lone actors in the perversion of a society that is becoming more afraid and neurotic and heavily armed by the day.


We're all part of this, and part of this is the proliferation of weaponry. I get it. I could go buy a gun as a means of protecting me and what's mine, I could get the requisite licenses and follow all the laws and be responsible with it. But I never, ever, ever think that pulling a gun (or even suggesting that I'm carrying) and/or taking a life is the answer. Violence begets violence. Fear begets fear. As a personal choice then, I will not carry.


That all of you want to just ignore that there is something fundamentally wrong with our society's approach to mediating disputes, and instead just arm up and defend yourself, reacting to symptoms of the problem rather than the causes.. it's not very reassuring for the future or for the prevention of even more of these horrific events.