Why guns?

[HeavyHanded]

back to the OP ---

So out of general interest:
• If you guys carry guns, why?

I used to live in the city proper, the corner store a few hundred yards from my house was robbed at gunpoint by two men. At the time I acquired my CC permit the crime rate in my town was higher than NYC with shootings nearly every day. Crime was hitting all over the metro area, not just in the crescent of poverty around the city center. It seemed like a good idea.

• Have you ever had to use it?

No. I almost pulled it on a pit bull once, but held off and it turned out to be friendly and he and my dog had a great time. Another time I almost pulled it out when I came home from dinner and found my front door ajar. I saw the balloons at the last minute and didn't pull the gun on a house full of surprise party guests. I did once point a shotgun at a creep yelling on my front porch when I lived in a multiple unit house. The idiot was a drunk friend of my idiot neighbor. He took off - we moved shortly after.

• Isn't it better to get in a fist fight, hell, even a knife fight … than in a GUN fight?

If you find yourself in a 'physical force' confrontation I'd say yes you are better off in a fist fight. Unfortunately or fortunately the standard for use of deadly force is constantly being driven downward, to the point where some folks have been shot with no evidence of justification save what the survivor verbally provides. Shootings in defense of a dwelling should get the benefit of the doubt, shootings in the public sphere should get closer scrutiny IMHO. If you start to look at the facts surrounding some of the "Stand your ground" shootings, it sure seems as if many were unnecessary - not a majority, but quite a few. My point - in the US we're moving away from ANY physical encounter that would fail to legally justify deadly force, making a gun a more and more useful tool for a wider variety of disputes. Again, whether this is a good or bad development could easily depend on how many witnesses and their disposition toward you. From my point of view I AM becoming more uncomfortable with the possibility of being legally shot for defending myself with physical force to a genuine threat or unlawful physical force. This is far from hypothetical, even in NY if a defender responds with excessive force (based on the attitude of the "reasonable man") the initial aggressor can respond with deadly force. If the encounter is such that they cannot extricate themselves, they are under no duty to retreat, even in NY. As I mentioned earlier, the threshold is dropping and this is not going unnoticed in any state.

Fortunately violent crime is dropping everywhere, not just in places with high CC numbers (Freakonomics theory, cell phone proliferation, take your pick, it isn't due to a shortage of guns on the black/grey market). I currently do not CC but will again should I feel its the better choice. All that aside, I will always have a firearm in my home tho increasingly doubt it will ever do me any good except as a fun past time and a convenient exit dose should I develop a terminal, debilitating illness.

[singularity35]

Road rage is prevalent here especially with marginalized people(especially at people they look upon as more privileged) driving utility vehicles and killer traffic. A delivery van driver got down from his van with a large knife and started advancing toward me and my wife one time we were going in opposite directions on a one lane private road. I couldn't run and leave my wife behind on my motorcycle. I drew and was prepared to fire. Fortunately, the sight of the firearm was deterrent enough for him. He must have been having a bad day. I wouldn't have liked to fight off that guy with the large "rambo knife" with my fists or a folder.

[SVRIDER1]

I still want to know hodges answer to my post.

(post #218)

[Hog Feet]

It's interesting you equate an overwhelming democratic decision by the people with tyranny. In fact, it's the opposite.

Like Jim Crow Laws?

[syntaxerrorsix]

I would not consider Yemen or Pakistan, for example, to be free countries in the way we think of freedom. Both have endemic civilian gun ownership and free availability of weapons. There are plenty of examples.

It's interesting you equate an overwhelming democratic decision by the people with tyranny. In fact, it's the opposite.

Democracy by the people is no better than mob rule. A Constitutional Republic use to dissuade such nonsense. Seems the centralization of government and loss of state rights can erode the best of intentions.

Some folks just can't stand that.

[syntaxerrorsix]

Like Jim Crow Laws?

The race card... well played sir well played.

[Chuka]

The race card... well played sir well played.

I could be wrong but I think he's on your side buddy... regardless of that, I didn't see a "race card" being played at all there. It was an example of a poor choice the majority of people made that reduced certain citizens rights.

I also have to say what's said before, Powernoodle put the issue right on the head with his comments on the first page!

[syntaxerrorsix]

I could be wrong but I think he's on your side buddy... regardless of that, I didn't see a "race card" being played at all there. It was an example of a poor choice the majority of people made that reduced certain citizens rights.

I also have to say what's said before, Powernoodle put the issue right on the head with his comments on the first page!

Majority rule has no place in government. 51% of people should never be able to vote away 49% of other peoples rights.

Jim Crow laws were not an example of the majority of people.

Jim Crow arguments however ARE a retaliatory response to anyone that claims that States are sovereign and the States rights should be done away with and replaced with a centralized federal government.

[res1cue]

And actually the Jim Crow laws are more on topic than you may realize.

The origin of gun control laws in America can be traced back to the Jim Crow laws as an attempt from preventing black people from having the right to bear arms.

[syntaxerrorsix]

And actually the Jim Crow laws are more on topic than you may realize.

The origin of gun control laws in America can be traced back to the Jim Crow laws as an attempt from preventing black people from having the right to bear arms.

Very true.

[Fortified]

The suggestion that Mr noodle made was that by voting to ban handguns, people in the UK had somehow voted for tyranny over themselves.
It would not be logical to compare that with the Jim Crow laws, which was a vote by one race for tyranny over another race. As you know, African Americans did not have the right to vote until 1965 and therefore were not voting for tyranny over themselves.

[Fortified]

Mr. Fortified, the original poster asked why some Americans lawfully carry guns. I gave what I believe is a very good answer. Your reference to Yemen or Pakistan - countries which are to large degree culturally, politically and socially stuck in the Middle Ages - has little bearing on that question.

I don't want to mischaracterize you, but you seem quite averse to the notion of free Americans choosing to lawfully and responsibly carry firearms. Thats your choice. But is does little to answer the original poster's question, or to further the thread topic.

Mr noodle,
You mentioned Europeans. What I think of Americans carrying firearms is irrelevant; I am not an American and have no experience of the 'home invasions' and other incidents that have been mentioned.

[Hog Feet]

I could be wrong but I think he's on your side buddy... regardless of that, I didn't see a "race card" being played at all there. It was an example of a poor choice the majority of people made that reduced certain citizens rights.

^This

[jnich67]

I haven't read every post here, and this may have been said already said, but from a larger perspective, the U.S. has a strong gun culture. It was a frontier nation after all. Then the importance of militia in winning independence, etc. The stress on the individual is even greater here than in Europe. All of this contributes to a strong gun culture. Then you have the other good reasons presented.

Jordan

[res1cue]

I am not an American and have no experience of the 'home invasions' and other incidents that have been mentioned.

I honestly hope you never will.

The suggestion that Mr noodle made was that by voting to ban handguns, people in the UK had somehow voted for tyranny over themselves.
It would not be logical to compare that with the Jim Crow laws, which was a vote by one race for tyranny over another race.

The fact that democracy can lead to the voting in of tyranny at all (for themselves, for others who can't vote, etc) shows why a pure democracy is a broken system.

Hence why the US is a constitutional republic: to safeguard the rights that we have purely because we exist (not because the government handed them out).

[mbscs4]

This subject is one that has been heating up in the forums and social media. Probably because it's an election year. We, as Americans have the right to bear arms (as has been stated before) to prevent the tyranny of government and to defend one's private property and person. This right is currently being highly debated and rightfully so (no pun intended).

While crime is down, we have seen an increase in gun violence especially in public settings. The recent incident in which an armed gunman (with no previous record) went into a crowded movie theater in Colorado and unloaded, shows that loose gun control may not be the perfect option. Aside from pre-meditation, (on which it is difficult to convict) he didn't do anything illegal until he pulled the trigger. That is just one example of what is becoming a more frequent occurrence. These public mass shootings are something that is becoming unfortunately, expressly American.

I am a veteran and gun owner. I don't CC. I know a lot of people who do. They do for protection. They do for peace of mind. They do because they can. None of my friends who CC have ever needed to. I have also had friends who didn't CC who have been mugged, robbed, and even abducted but all lived. Ironically, the friend of mine who was abducted while unarmed and lived, later got his CC license but died at 32 of natural causes. I don't CC because I also have never needed to, and the power of deadly force is more than I need to have at arms distance at all times. I prefer to have some buffer. Thankfully, I have never been in a position where I had to chose between an attacker's life or my own. I think that most Americans are in the same boat.

A gun has one purpose: to kill. It can be used for sport (hunting or target shooting), but it's intended purpose is to take a life. That intent is compounded when you bring assault weapons into the picture. There are an estimated two million assault weapons already in circulation in the United States. They are the weapon of choice in many mass shootings of innocent civilians all over the country, including the July 20th shooting in Aurora, Colorado that left 12 people dead and 58 wounded. It has been reported that there were citizens who were legally armed in the audience. Assault weapon shootings are responsible for a significant percentage of the deaths of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty because military-style firearms are increasingly favored by drug dealers and gang members.

While I think that the right for Americans to defend themselves with firearms should be preserved, I also feel that it should be re-evaluated. There is no reason why an 18 year old should be able to purchase an assault weapon, or maybe any gun. There are few 18 year olds who I have come across (including myself when I was 18) who were prepared to handle the responsibility of holding the power of life and death. There is no reason why the public should have access to assault weapons. You are taking the power of deadly force and multiplying it. To put that in the hands of any American who wants it is irresponsible and just plain dangerous. This has been proven many times over.

No guns work without ammunition. This is where I think the area of opportunity lies for keeping our communities safer. If we did not allow the public access to assault weapons and kept the sale of ammunition in check, I'm sure we could save some innocent lives while still affording the American public the option to bear arms and defend themselves. I'd imagine that the shooter in Colorado would have thought twice if when he purchased his 100 round drum magazine, he knew that authorities were alerted of the purchase.

I have traveled to many places around the world. I have seen how other countries handle gun control. There is not necessarily one perfect solution. Some things are working, some are not. While there is not one perfect solution, there are options. I think that it is time that we as Americans explore them.

[heresthedeal]

The suggestion that Mr noodle made was that by voting to ban handguns, people in the UK had somehow voted for tyranny over themselves.
It would not be logical to compare that with the Jim Crow laws, which was a vote by one race for tyranny over another race. As you know, African Americans did not have the right to vote until 1965 and therefore were not voting for tyranny over themselves.

The Fifteenth Amendment (Amendment XV) to the United States Constitution prohibits each government in the United States from denying a citizen the right to vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude" (for example, slavery). It was ratified on February 3, 1870.

discussing/arguing about gun rights is like arguing about religion, without some sort of miracle you aren't gonna change somebody's mind. they have faith that their way is best, until they need a handgun and don't have one.

i carry just in case.
I'd rather have it and not need it then need it and not have it. i honestly didn't wait for my state to let me carry a gun for self defense, always figured it was up to me to protect myself and my family.

i do appreciate the convenience of it not being illegal now tho.

[dogwood dan]

i cary a gun for the same reason I put my seat belt on in a car. If I do not need it there is no harm in having it but if I do need it and and don't have it I am are rather screwed. As to why I cary a gun rather then a knife as someone once said "God made man Sam Colt made them equal" size and strength dose not matter in a gun fight, also no one ever wins a knife fight best case every one is cut up, worst case every one bleeds out.

[res1cue]

I am a veteran and gun owner

Thank you for your service!

They are the weapon of choice in many mass shootings of innocent civilians all over the country, including the July 20th shooting in Aurora, Colorado that left 12 people dead and 58 wounded. It has been reported that there were citizens who were legally armed in the audience.

1) No there weren't any armed citizens in the audience, because it was a gun free zone
2) his AR jammed, and he was forced to discard it
3) What other mass shootings in this country used some sort of "assault rifle"? I can only think of the Aurora incident and the DC sniper (which was less of a mass shooting and more serial murder). I believe more has been carried out with a handgun

[Hog Feet]

While crime is down, we have seen an increase in gun violence especially in public settings.

Do you have any stats to back this up?

The recent incident in which an armed gunman (with no previous record) went into a crowded movie theater in Colorado and unloaded, shows that loose gun control may not be the perfect option. Aside from pre-meditation, (on which it is difficult to convict) he didn't do anything illegal until he pulled the trigger.

Though the numbers of dead and injured is tragic in the colorado incident, the student showed himself to be quite capable of making bombs which could have been much worse.

That is just one example of what is becoming a more frequent occurrence.

Do you mean mass shootings or violence crime in general?

These public mass shootings are something that is becoming unfortunately, expressly American.

Norwegians might disagree.

I don't CC because I also have never needed to,

Hope you never need to.

and the power of deadly force is more than I need to have at arms distance at all times. I prefer to have some buffer.

???

A gun has one purpose: to kill. It can be used for sport (hunting or target shooting), but it's intended purpose is to take a life.

So a gun has one purpose except for its other purposes???

There are an estimated two million assault weapons already in circulation in the United States. They are the weapon of choice in many mass shootings of innocent civilians all over the country...

Where did you hear that?

It has been reported that there were citizens who were legally armed in the audience.

I missed that. Did they report who or how many?

Assault weapon shootings are responsible for a significant percentage of the deaths of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty because military-style firearms are increasingly favored by drug dealers and gang members.

What "significant percentage" of LEOs have been killed by "military-style firearms are increasingly favored by drug dealers and gang members"?

While I think that the right for Americans to defend themselves with firearms should be preserved, I also feel that it should be re-evaluated. There is no reason why an 18 year old should be able to purchase an assault weapon, or maybe any gun. There are few 18 year olds who I have come across (including myself when I was 18) who were prepared to handle the responsibility of holding the power of life and death. There is no reason why the public should have access to assault weapons. You are taking the power of deadly force and multiplying it. To put that in the hands of any American who wants it is irresponsible and just plain dangerous. This has been proven many times over.

How old where you when you joined the service? How old should people be before they can legally aquire the means to defend themselves? How old should people be before they are permitted to drive something as deadly as an automobile?

No guns work without ammunition. This is where I think the area of opportunity lies for keeping our communities safer. If we did not allow the public access to assault weapons and kept the sale of ammunition in check, I'm sure we could save some innocent lives while still affording the American public the option to bear arms and defend themselves.

It's like you are reading Sarah Brady's mind!

I'd imagine that the shooter in Colorado would have thought twice if when he purchased his 100 round drum magazine, he knew that authorities were alerted of the purchase.

I'll bet he thought twicce about that 100 round magazine when it jammed (like they often do).

I have traveled to many places around the world. I have seen how other countries handle gun control. There is not necessarily one perfect solution. Some things are working, some are not. While there is not one perfect solution, there are options. I think that it is time that we as Americans explore them.

"Gun control" is people control. We Americans ought to know better than to pursue such silly things.