PDA

View Full Version : Can We Talk About Guns?


choprzrul
12-07-2012, 9:37 PM
Can We Talk About Guns? (http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=22224&cpage=1#comment-151509) More anti blather:

...there’s a place for guns in the world. For example, a rifle or shotgun is, I think, a reasonable tool on a farm. But on the street in Oakland?
Third, let’s not ignore other aspects of violence. Kassandra Perkins was a victim of domestic abuse–but having a gun handy made that a deadly situation...

This person obviously has zero concept of the civil rights protected by the 2nd Amendment and what those rights mean to our lives.

I registered and commented. I am hoping some of the more well versed here can reach out and do some education also.

.

SilverTauron
12-07-2012, 9:42 PM
Second, there’s a place for guns in the world. For example, a rifle or shotgun is, I think, a reasonable tool on a farm. But on the street in Oakland?

Our civil rights are not subject to the Fourth Estate's opinion on the matter.

cdtx2001
12-07-2012, 10:02 PM
Kassandra Perkins was a victim of domestic abuse–but having a gun handy made that a deadly situation...

Well, at least she didn't have O.J. as an ex........:whistling:

warbird
12-07-2012, 10:16 PM
Please remember that people kill not guns, knives, etc. the problem we have is that the media is biased in giving anti-guns advocates much more time than pro-gun agruments where self defense, proper training, and the second amendment are presented. Anti-gun advocates steadfastly refuse to acknowledge current gun restrictions/laws are failing to prevent criminals from obtaining guns and that the issue of gun crime will not go away just because only law biding citizens are willing to obey the gun laws.

FoxTrot87
12-08-2012, 12:27 AM
We just need Alan Gura and John Lott as our spokepersons.

Would love to see a matchup.

Alan Gura & John Lott

vs.

Brady Campaign and Costas

CDFingers
12-08-2012, 6:06 AM
The conversations are continuing about whether and how much more gun regulation should be imposed upon us.

We certainly need to have the conversations. But I think the goal of the conversations should be to show that humans are a violent species. We will make weapons out of a chair if we need to.

Guns per se need no more regulations, especially in California.

What makes people vote for gun laws is fear, pure and simple.

If we study the reasons given for new gun laws, the only thing we can come up with in California is fear. Since criminals don't obey laws and will do violence when they want to, the fear that drives new gun laws serves only to restrict law abiding people from learning to use guns for fun. That's not good.

The conversation is good, however. The aim of the conversation is to find the middle ground nationally between "no guns for anyone evah" and "any gun for anyone at any time and place." Neither of those two extremes is ever proposed in any conversation. Those are just the outer limits of the debate.

CDFingers

choprzrul
12-08-2012, 7:25 AM
...there’s a place for guns in the world. For example, a rifle or shotgun is, I think, a reasonable tool on a farm. But on the street in Oakland?
Third, let’s not ignore other aspects of violence. Kassandra Perkins was a victim of domestic abuse–but having a gun handy made that a deadly situation...


There is the foundation of their fallacy. That was a deadly situation with or without a gun present. They make it sound like the gun jumped up and started shooting itself.

.

phrogg111
12-08-2012, 7:36 AM
For every gun law passed, one must be repealed.

In fact, all current gun laws shluld be combined into one place.

If more legislation is to come, they have tobrepeal prior legislation, and consider tbe constitutionality of it.

However, until the second amendment is changed, the right to keep and bear arma shall not be infringed.

It is a right, and until it is no longer in the bill of rights, then talk is irrelevant. My rights don't end where someone else's feelings begin.

-hanko
12-08-2012, 8:09 AM
Quote:
...there’s a place for guns in the world. For example, a rifle or shotgun is, I think, a reasonable tool on a farm. But on the street in Oakland?

Stupid bastage should spend an evening or 2 on Oakland before deciding.;)

-hanko

hornswaggled
12-08-2012, 10:47 AM
Just posted there. Those guys are dorks.

choprzrul
12-08-2012, 11:16 AM
Just posted there. Those guys are dorks.

Excellent job. I firmly believe that the more we engage these commentaries, the more we are going to have Joe Average swing to our point of view. Pointing out the fallacy of the anti's arguments will pay dividends.

.

RMP91
12-08-2012, 12:34 PM
The antis are using a new tactic...

Under the guise of having a "conversation" about guns, they hope to guilt-trip us into giving up our rights...

They are more despicable than the criminals and psychos themselves... That may sound extreme, but the antis are getting desperate enough to try and make us feel guilty about our AR15s...

Absolutely disgusting...

A "national conversation" to them means new bad laws...

tcrpe
12-08-2012, 12:37 PM
The antis are using a new tactic...

Under the guise of having a "conversation" about guns, they hope to guilt-trip us into giving up our rights...

They are more despicable than the criminals and psychos themselves... That may sound extreme, but the antis are getting desperate enough to try and make us feel guilty about our AR15s...

Absolutely disgusting...

A "national conversation" to them means new bad laws...


Once they have us disarmed, they will force their will upon us. Before the advent of the firearm, there were no free societies.

ElvenSoul
12-08-2012, 12:40 PM
Did Sandy just not happen?

Moonshine
12-08-2012, 12:51 PM
Maybe I'm off base here but I'd think you'd be much more likely to need a shotgun in Oakland than on a farm. Last I checked men in ski masks illegally armed with handguns don't often rob farm houses...

choprzrul
12-08-2012, 1:52 PM
Maybe I'm off base here but I'd think you'd be much more likely to need a shotgun in Oakland than on a farm. Last I checked men in ski masks illegally armed with handguns don't often rob farm houses...


Without a doubt, the bad guys know that 1) there will be several big dogs, 2) 1 or more people on the property will be armed, and 3) the neighbors along several miles of country roads will have noticed their out-of-place vehicle.

Bad guys don't like bad odds.

Hence, our position.

.

.

Meplat
12-08-2012, 3:04 PM
Can We Talk About Guns? (http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=22224&cpage=1#comment-151509) More anti blather:



This person obviously has zero concept of the civil rights protected by the 2nd Amendment and what those rights mean to our lives.

I registered and commented. I am hoping some of the more well versed here can reach out and do some education also.

.

I refuse to squander my intellectual energy trying to educate one so cognitively crippled.

Ford8N
12-08-2012, 3:53 PM
Without a doubt, the bad guys know that 1) there will be several big dogs, 2) 1 or more people on the property will be armed, and 3) the neighbors along several miles of country roads will have noticed their out-of-place vehicle.

Bad guys don't like bad odds.

Hence, our position.

.

.

Yup to all three... :iagree:

hornswaggled
12-08-2012, 7:41 PM
I refuse to squander my intellectual energy trying to educate one so cognitively crippled.

Hearts and minds :)

choprzrul
12-09-2012, 5:01 AM
Hearts and minds :)


Your comment got me thinking about just who we are engaging with on that article. Here is what I get when clicking on the article's author name:

Lisa Fullam

Lisa Fullam is associate professor of moral theology at the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley. Her research interests include virtue ethics, medical and sexual ethics, and Ignatian spirituality.

Yikes. We are entering the belly of the beast!

While we most likely won't sway anyone's opinion on this article alone, I see it as one small step in a war of attrition. The more they see the law and court rulings layed out in front of them, the more they are going to stubbornly realize that they are attacking civil rights.

So, yes, hearts & minds. One small step at a time.

Maybe we need a sticky thread where all of these anti articles can be posted up and responded to.

.

-hanko
12-09-2012, 9:43 AM
Without a doubt, the bad guys know that 1) there will be several big dogs, 2) 1 or more people on the property will be armed, and 3) the neighbors along several miles of country roads will have noticed their out-of-place vehicle.

Bad guys don't like bad odds.

Hence, our position...
Correct-o-mundo.;)

.hanko

LoneYote
12-09-2012, 3:40 PM
After reading all of that I still have two simple questions.

1. If firearms are only for killing people why do police carry them since their job is to protect and server not kill?

2. What is it that makes police officers so amazingly super human that they can walk around with firearms?

phalanxbl
12-09-2012, 11:03 PM
There was an incident a few years back where a wife fatally stabbed her husband with a sword. In fact, she had bullied her husband for years, often threatening him with the blade. One day, she made good on the threat and actually ran him through. No gun involved, but still just as lethal.

Point is, you cannot pass any amount of legislation that will stop domestic violence as it is occuring. Due to the nature of domestic violence, taking place in private makes it unlikely anyone outside of that home is going to notify authorities until *after* the violence has already occurred.

Resources are better spent educating kids on how to handle disputes, so when they grow up, they become stable, functional adults who can resolve conflicts properly. Or at the very least, if an agreement cannot be made, to at least have the self control to walk away from it. It'd also help if people were wiser about who they got involved with, romantically.

Of course, if things do become violent, a weapon is actually an equalizer for the physically weaker spouse. Given the facts of human biology, that most often is the woman.

choprzrul
12-10-2012, 4:51 PM
The antis have discovered our civil rights oriented posting and are attempting to propagate their blather. Additional voices would be helpful.

As soon as I can use something besides this phone, I will be posting again.

.