Myth #3 - Guns are bad

[winsor 187]

Quote

If you're holding class on-line somewhere, I'd love to sit in.

I'm afraid I can't do a commute to the east coast though.

Unfortunately personal attendance is required, both for the classroom and range phases.

The focus is upon responsibility rather than rights, and everything students have "learned" from Hollywood is checked at the door.

Responsible firearm ownership gets little press, since it is usually a non-issue. Like a seat belt, the goal is to have it available and never, ever need it. If you ever really need either, you have other problems that won't go away.

In 25 years of being a Certified Pistol Instructor, I've never heard of one of my students abusing their responsibilities with a firearm. A couple have followed my advice (and example) by running like hell to avoid armed confrontation.

I contend that lawful firearm ownership and use is anything but a panacea, but abolition of armament in the populace is fundamental to tyranny.

If you do wish to take a Basic Pistol class, I can find a good instructor near you (shotgun and rifle are just as informative and challenging). I think you may be surprised by how different is your perspective after a thorough treatment of the fundamentals.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I just calls 'em likes I see's 'em.

New survey on how Americans "see 'em":

The highly respected research firm Zogby International has conducted the first installment of its 2004 Zogby Values Poll, surveying 1,200 voters nationwide on issues that included firearms and hunting.

Question: “Currently, 36 states have laws that allow residents to qualify for a permit to carry a firearm to protect themselves if they pass a background check, if they participate in firearms training and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Do you feel this is a good law or a bad law?”

Americans now feel this is a good law by a 79% to 18% margin. Support for right-to-carry is very strong across all precincts with better than 70% of those polled in virtually every demographic in favor of the law.

Question: “Which of the following two statements regarding gun control comes closer to your own opinion? Statement A: There needs to be new and tougher gun control legislation to help in the fight against gun crime; Statement B: There are enough laws on the books. What is needed is better enforcement of current laws regarding gun control.”

Voters nationwide believed by a 66% to 31% margin that there are enough laws on the books and what is needed is better enforcement of current laws.

Question: “Do you agree or disagree the NRA is right to fight gun control legislation on both the federal and state levels?”

Sixty-four percent of voters nationwide sided with the NRA in saying that the organization was right to fight gun control bills with 31% in disagreement.

Question: "Do you agree or disagree that American firearm manufacturers who sell a legal product that is not defective should be allowed to be sued if a criminal uses their products in a crime?"

Current members of the military and their families opposed this idea by a margin of 83% to 16%. Veterans disagreed with the idea by a lesser margin of 79% to 19%. Non-military respondents disagreed with the idea by an even smaller 68% to 30% margin.
68% of liberals and 70% of moderates disagree that gun manufacturers should be sued when a criminal uses their product in a crime.

Question: "Which of the following statements comes closer to your opinion? Statement A: Killing wild animals for food or sport is an American tradition and an essential part of wildlife management. Statement B: Hunting is a cruel sport and should be outlawed."

Ninety-two percent of gun owners and 73% of non-gun owners said hunting is a tradition and is essential to wildlife management. Five percent of gun owners and 20% of non-gun owners said that hunting is a cruel sport.

Question: "Some states in America are being overrun with growing populations of deer, bear, or wolves. When this happens, which of the following do you feel is the best option to take? 1) The state should lengthen hunting seasons; 2) Non-lethal methods of control should be used; 3) People should learn to live with wildlife."

By an overwhelming margin, 61% of voters in the survey felt that lengthening the hunting season was the best option compared to 18% who said non-lethal methods of control were better. Sixteen percent said that people should learn to live with wildlife.

Source: http://www.olearyreport.com/

"O’Leary, Zogby, SMU’s Tower Center
Zogby American Values Survey I - 2004"

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I contend that lawful firearm ownership and use is anything but a panacea, but abolition of armament in the populace is fundamental to tyranny.

"If you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you."
- Benjamin Franklin

"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
- George Orwell, author of "1984".

"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
- Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are
ruined."
- Patrick Henry

"After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didnt do it. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military."
- William Burroughs (b. 1914), U.S. author.

"For the right men have by nature to protect themselves when none else can protect them, can by no covenant be relinquished."
- Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan", 1651

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would subject innocent person to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for the unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventative but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a niversal decree."
- Cesare Beccaria, On Crimes and Punishments,Italian criminologist, 1764.

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms."
- Aristotle, "Politics", Chap. 10, Para. 4.

"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it."
- Jeff Cooper

"Though defensive violence will always be 'a sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men."
- St. Augustine (354-430)

"Whenever... the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence... From the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable...The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference--they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington

"...arms discourage and keep invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
- Thomas Paine

"One of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms - just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safe-guard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proven to be always possible."
- Senator Hubert Humphrey, 1960

[quade 3]

Polling the populace is an interesting idea when it comes to showing their likes and dislikes, however, it's a very bad idea if you are going to take what they belive as proof something is true.

For instance . . .
http://www.cnn.com/US/9706/15/ufo.poll/

Now, whether you do or don't believe, there is a significant number of people that believe otherwise, so clearly just the "belief" in something doesn't make it true -- even if you happen to be in the majority group.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Polling the populace is an interesting idea when it comes to showing their likes and dislikes, however, it's a very bad idea if you are going to take what they belive as proof something is true.

That is true. However, that info wasn't offered as proof of anything, but rather, to simply show that the majority of Americans are on the pro-gun side on the "gun" issue. Despite the attempts by gun-control proponents to portray pro-gun folks as radical extremists. They're actually very middle-of-the-road and common.

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

abolition of armament in the populace is fundamental to tyranny.

That is a very interesting statement. Is it directed toward the tyranny of government or of the populace?

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[Guest]

Once again, people don't get it.

Anybody with access to some steel tubing and simple chemicals (potassium nitrate, sulfur, charcoal, and lead) can MAKE A LETHAL FIREARM.

Mercury fulminate (primer for modern firearm cartridges) is ridiculously easy to make. Please see "The Big Book of Mischief".

Tim McVeigh and his cronies blew up a huge building, not with conventional explosives, but with ANFO, same stuff the Weathermen used in the 70's.

Harju rests his case, and weighs out of the gun-debate threads for another two years.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[Guest]

Quote

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence... From the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable...The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference--they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
- George Washington

So sorry, but this quote is BS. Washington never made this speech.

mh

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[downwardspiral 0]

I have the opinion that fear is the cause (association vs causation) of gun control laws. Meaning, those who are not comfortable or experienced with firearms become gun control advocates.

So just for fun I'd like to request that everyone post there stance on gun control and history/experience with firearms. Please be honest because dishonesty would only be a result of fear that I am right.

Let me be the first:

-Guns are good.

-My dad taught me to shoot a Luger(yes you read it right...a Luger) when I was 11. Learned to clear jams because Lugers are a German piece of shit.

-Team member of Highschool shooting team 92-93

-Rated expert on M16A2 service rifle in USMC from 93-97. Regulary scored 230-240 out of a possible 250. Yes I'm tooting my own horn.

-Rated sharpshooter on the 9mm (I forget the designation) in USMC from 94-97

-Experienced in firing many different types of weapons utilized by the USMC including the SAW, Mark-19 Fully Automatic Grenade Launcher and the .50 Machine Gun.

-Annualy go to the firing range to fire a 7.62 mm M1 Gurant and Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun using multiple types of ammunition including 1 ounce slugs. We take targets such as old computer monitors, keyboards, bottles and just about anything else we can think of to shoot at. Much more fun than shooting at a paper target.




Who's next?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[jkm2500 0]

-Guns are good.

-I learned to shoot a ruger 10/22 at the age of 5 years old.

-On the civilian side of training, several markmanship/gun safety courses. Owned a BB gun from the age of 8.

-Qualified expert on the M16A2 twice yearly for 6 years on active duty.

-Qualified expert on the M9 9mm, fired the M-249 SAW, The M2 .50 machine gun, and the M-60 machine gun.

I have literally shot tens of thousands of rounds both in the military and the civilian sector. I feel that Gun Control advocates are acting on fear. Because through proper training and use the gun is nothing more than a tool.

The primary purpose of the Armed Forces is to prepare for and to prevail in combat should the need arise.

[quade 3]

I played with guns a bit as a child. I grew up on the cusp of downtown and surburban Long Beach, California. Not exactly the roughest part of town, but we had our share of shootings none the less. Never really thought too much about it.

Like most kids on my block I had a bb gun and we played an extremely early form of paintball with them. We worn Navy surplus Peacoats and shop goggles.

Later moved on to fooling around with rifles on camping trips hunting rabbits and other small varmits.

Through an odd chain of events had the privledge of going down to San Diego bootcamp and learning a bit of marksmanship from some Marine D.I.s. No, I never served, but had thought about it quite hard and this was a part of the recruitment efforts on their part. I -had- thought about going hard core, but some small physical defects kept me from doing precisely what I wanted to do, so, since the draft had just ended and being in the military was definately not fashionable at the time, I declined their invitation to do other things.

So, I do have some exposure to small caliber and even fairly bitchin' guns from the early to mid-1970s.

My current fairly anti-gun stance comes from a lifetime of living in Southern California. About 10-15 years ago SoCal could be a fairly dangerous place with random freeway shootings and gang wars. In particular, the street sweepers were particularly bad.

Further, I've done some fairly "interesting" side jobs, a little skip tracing and a little investigative journalism. As a result, I've seen some pretty ugly things and, unfortunately, feel I've been a part in causing some fairly ugly things when we caught people.

I had a co-worker's brother eat his gun when he felt a little too depressed and I had another lose at Russian roulette.

All in all, my personal experience tells me that a person is far more likely to hurt either himself or a family member than somebody trying to break in their house or car jack them. Of course, that's just me and my lifetime worth of experience. If you want to discount that, fine, but it's the world I've seen.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

All in all, my personal experience tells me that a person is far more likely to hurt either himself or a family member than somebody trying to break in their house or car jack them. Of course, that's just me and my lifetime worth of experience. If you want to discount that, fine, but it's the world I've seen.

Let me be the first to say that I am truly sorry about the losses you have experienced. I agree that owning a firearm is a HUGE responsibility. A responsibility that should be taken extremely seriously. No doubt about that.

Now that said...responsibility should only be taken away from those who have proven themselves irresponsible. IMO

Edited to say: reading it again I don't think the above statement makes much sense but I think it gets my point across
OK who's next?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[pds 0]

Quote

Quote

lemme guess... your a republican topic-nazi?

No.

Quote

no such thing as off topic here john.

Incorrect. This thread is about guns. Talking about republicans and the size of government, in a thread about guns, is off topic.

Quote

i am guessing it was not the off topic that bothers you but simply the percieved republican bashing. am i right?

Bzzzt. Wrong again.

As evidence thereof, you should note that I suggested he take that subject and start his own new thread if he wanted to discuss it. That can hardly be construed as me trying to suppress the subject.

You really should cease with the guessing. It makes you look bad when your guesses are always wrong.

guess i forgot the .

have a nice day.

namaste, motherfucker.

[quade 3]

Quote

Now that said...responsibility should only be taken away from those who have proven themselves irresponsible. IMO

Edited to say: reading it again I don't think the above statement makes much sense but I think it gets my point across

I totally understand your thoughts. No further elaboration is required, but consider that for most other devices that have the potential for the instant lethality that guns do, we regulate them fairly heavily -- often requiring education and licensing. Cars, motorcycles, airplanes . . . just to name a few.

Would you support that?

If not, then why not?

I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would be against this -- Winsor included. In fact, since he made such a big deal out of the education issues earlier, I'd be very interested in his comments.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[downwardspiral 0]

Yes I do in fact support education and licensing for those who own firearms. Also I would support currency. Not to mention the 5 day waiting period because this IMO prevents anyone from purchasing a firearm during a fit of anger. Seriously...anyone who can't wait 5 whole days should have planned further ahead.

What I don't want to see is what happened in the UK, Canada and Australia.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[winsor 187]

Quote

Quote

Now that said...responsibility should only be taken away from those who have proven themselves irresponsible. IMO

Edited to say: reading it again I don't think the above statement makes much sense but I think it gets my point across

I totally understand your thoughts. No further elaboration is required, but consider that for most other devices that have the potential for the instant lethality that guns do, we regulate them fairly heavily -- often requiring education and licensing. Cars, motorcycles, airplanes . . . just to name a few.

Would you support that?

If not, then why not?

I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would be against this -- Winsor included. In fact, since he made such a big deal out of the education issues earlier, I'd be very interested in his comments.

I'm entirely against it, because it is simply a tool to effect prohibition. If you hadn't picked up on that, you're not paying attention.

If you are unfit to possess firearms, you are unfit to populate a free society. I do not wish to be around anyone I could not trust with a loaded gun.

If you want to get to the root cause of the problem, regulate idiots. Stupid people shouldn't breed.

With our touchy-feely safety-based society, we have geared our standards to the lowest common denominator - and worked long and hard to ensure that it becomes lower yet.

Though specific implementations have given Eugenics a bad rap, we have effected proof by contradiction. I am appalled by those who embrace the dumbing-down of our society, and the anti-gunners are at the top of the list.

To those who can't envision why making the world idiot-proof should not be a priority, I respond that I do not consider it to be admirable goal since I do not feel that idiocy is a lofty standard.

Again, if you can't imagine a society that can shoulder the responsibility of firearm ownership without Government-assigned babysitters, that says a lot more about you than it does about the subject of firearm ownership in and of itself.


Blue skies

Winsor

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Mercury fulminate (primer for modern firearm cartridges) is ridiculously easy to make. Please see "The Big Book of Mischief".

I have personal experience of this, and it is NOT "easy". The process is actually rather nasty and dangerous.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Douva 0]

Quote

No further elaboration is required, but consider that for most other devices that have the potential for the instant lethality that guns do, we regulate them fairly heavily -- often requiring education and licensing. Cars, motorcycles, airplanes . . . just to name a few.

Actually, no education or licensing is required to own or operate a car or motorcycle, only to operate a car or motorcycle on public streets and highways. Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe any license is required to own an airplane, only to operate it in federally controlled airspace, which is admittedly everywhere; however, people are allowed to operate ultralights without a license or training.

My point is that we regulate who can operate these vehicles in public the same way most states regulate who can carry a gun in public. Go to just about any farm in America, and you're likely to find an unregistered pickup truck being legally operated by an unlicensed preteen kid. A lot of those same kids will be carrying unlicensed an unregistered gun in that truck. The kid can't drive the truck to town, and he can't carry a gun in town. If he wants to drive the car to town, he has to turn sixteen, take driver's education, and pass written and practical driving tests. If he wants to carry a gun in town, he has to turn twenty-one, take a concealed handgun course, and pass a written and practical concealed carry/shooting tests.

So tell me again how exactly we regulate guns less than any other potentialy lethal device?

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[quade 3]

Quote

. . . because it is simply a tool to effect prohibition. . . .

I realize a certain portion of the population feels this way. I'm at a loss to understand why. I'm not sure I understand the logic of the conspiracy theory to license them first only to have them prohibited at some later date.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Quote

Actually, no education or licensing is required to own or operate a car or motorcycle, only to operate a car or motorcycle on public streets and highways. Somebody correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe any license is required to own an airplane, only to operate it in federally controlled airspace, which is admittedly everywhere; however, people are allowed to operate ultralights without a license or training.

The principle is that you can generally kill yourself, when the issue becomes the possibility of doing harm to others, then regulation becomes more stringent. This is why a person gets a learners permit and can drive himself, or is signed off to solo in an airplane or can fly solo with no signoff in an ultralight, but when it comes to an aircraft capable of carring passengers, it requires at least a private pilot certificate. To carry passengers for profession reasons, a commercial certificate is required.

The ownership of a gun presumes that at some point you'll use it, either for hunting or target practice. In either case it would be fairly easy to instantly and fatally injure others. To me it does not seem unreasonable to therefore educate and license those individuals wishing to participate in these activities.

So then you should not be against legislation that would require education and licensing for purchase as long as there is an exemption for people that will never fire them -- museums maybe.

Of course, my guess is that just isn't going to satisfy you -- is it?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[sdgregory 0]

Okay here goes.

1. GUNS ARE GOOD!

2. Learned to shoot the old fashioned way. I became a Marine! One shot one kill baby!. Qualified Dual Cross Rifles M-16.

3. Qualified Dual Cross Pistols Barretta 9-MM 92FS

4. Fired more rounds through SAW, M-60, .50 cal than I can possibly count. (Melted one SAW barrel just cause I wanted to see what would happen.) "Three to five round bursts, asshole!" That was fun.

6. Finished top five in my Toledo gun league of 75 shooters using Ruger 357 Magnum with Tasco red-dot sight.

7. Remington 700 Varmint just because.

8. 350 WIN SPFS.

9. Glock 23C 40 cal (I may be wrong, it bould have been a 27C)

[winsor 187]

I suppose you support a two-week waiting period to buy gasoline. How about a 5-gallon limit?

Ignorance and cowardice are powerful forces.


Blue skies,

Winsor

[quade 3]

Quote

I suppose you support a two-week waiting period to buy gasoline. How about a 5-gallon limit?

Perhaps a better logical argument for you would have been steak knives.

Quote

Ignorance and cowardice are powerful forces.

Insulting the opposition isn't really an effective way to get them to agree with you.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

I'm not sure I understand the logic of the conspiracy theory to license them first only to have them prohibited at some later date.

I don't understand it either, but ask California, New York, DC governing bodies about it. They might know a thing or two.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[quade 3]

Quote

I don't understand it either, but ask California, New York, DC governing bodies about it. They might know a thing or two.

Really? Since you seem to have pointed out these states in particular, maybe you know of something written by these states you can point me to stating that the ultimate goal of regulation is the eventual prohibition.

I think it's a paranoid assumption.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver