posted
Guns are great; guns are cool, and the bigger the gun, the cooler. Guns are like the steel version of a cigarette hanging from your mouth during high school lunch.
You think your more protected with them therefore as you gather you arsenal about you, you are. They give you a sence of power and security. Feelings of which are illusory.
Although I am reather opposed to the basement fortified gun emplacement with sandbags and .50 cal machine gun just waiting for the military to swoop down on you, I personally don't care if you have your .38 on the bedstand just iching for that robber to come in so you can teach him a lesson and splatter his brains all over the closet door. More power to ya! You are just as likely to be shot and killed as the robber is if he has a gun and is willing to use it.
Ya spins the wheel ya takes your chances. But at least you saved that lamp you found at the dump from falling in the wrong hands.
All I ask, gun wise, is that people who use the take great pains to keep them from misuse. I.e. if you are dead set on having guns around your family, teach them the proper use of it. If you are not around then take all precautions to keep that weapon from being used by a child while playing cops and robbers and killing Frank the neighbor boy by mistake.
~~~
quote:Of course they can. Just give them control of the military
Knock Knock.... Who's there.... A Clue.
The military is made up of the very people that they are going to try and overthrow. That has been the whole basis for the foundation of the military in this country. Made up of the citizen soldier...the volunteer army. You know, Duty, Honor, Country?
I can see it now:
Clinton: General Smith, I want you to move you division into Denver and secure the area.
General Smith: Um sir, is there a reason for this order?
Clinton: Yes, I am declaring martial law.
General Smith: Why is that sir, there have been no outbrakes of violence or civil unrest?
Clinton: I know, I am just power hungry and want to impose my liberal views on the rest of the country via the military.
General Smith: You're a loony.
------------------ Oh, goody, the Sea Monkeys I ordered have arrived. Heh heh heh, look at them cavort and caper. ~C. Montgomery Burns
posted
All hail First of Two! If you ever need a job in twenty years or so, ring me up. I plan to be living in Washington.
Jay:
"[Guns] give you a sence of power and security. Feelings of which are illusory."
So you're saying that guns do not, in fact, make you safer? Oh, do explain that one.
"You are just as likely to be shot and killed as the robber is if he has a gun and is willing to use it."
I dispute this "statistic" greatly. And even if it were correct, that gives you around 50% chance of being the one to assume room temperature, whereas if you DIDN'T have the gun and the robber did, it'd be a LOT higher.
"But at least you saved that lamp you found at the dump from falling in the wrong hands."
Oh, yeah. I forgot. I don't deserve anything I have, so robbers have every right to take my posessions. And if they decide to injure me on the way out?
As for your little hypothetical military conversation, are you really willing to risk your freedom on the assumption that a person such as your General Smith would exist? The kidnapping of Elian Gonzales shows that Clinton can get away with violating people's rights without being questioned by anyone.
------------------ "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)
posted
My thought about a person getting shot if said person has a gun regarding the sneaking bugler certainly was not a statistic. Although I do believe I had heard it somewhere that your chance of being shot with bullets flying all over the place goes up.
I'm certainly not willing to be shot over my CD collection as much as I love jazz. Are you possessed so much by what you own that you are willing to die for it? Is your butterfly collection such that you would take a bullet for it?
To quote from one of my favorite movies, "deserves got nuthin to do with it."
I think we have more to fear with the "us vs. them" attitude that seems to prevail in the far right today. The ideological emphasis of which seems to head toward individual armed camps all across the country. Certainly a regressive thought when one thinks about the extension of culture, civilization, and inclusion that we've worked for more than 200 years to achieve.
------------------ Oh, goody, the Sea Monkeys I ordered have arrived. Heh heh heh, look at them cavort and caper. ~C. Montgomery Burns
posted
I apparently missed the convention when my delagates voted me a part of the Liberal Conspiricy. Oh well. It's more fun here in Fantasy Land anyway.
posted
Ah, well you see Simon, you're one of those brainless twats who has been 'programmed' to think that way. For shame.
------------------ "Remeber, if there is a nuclear explosion, be sure to close your windows as the massive heat could cause objects within your home to catch fire".
Th real reason your chances of being shot with your own firearm supposedly "go up compared to that of shooting a criminal" is that the likelihood of a criminal entering your home (especially if the fact you own weapons is obvious and/well-known) drops between 80 and 95% when you're armed.
So before weapon:
Likelihood of getting shot: *** vs. Likelihood of criminal entry :***************
but after:
Likelihood of getting shot: ** vs. Likelihood of criminal entry :**
Your REAL odds stay roughly the same,(actually, they would dip in your favor, since the likelihood of a crook shooting you ALSO goes down when the playing field is even), but because of the false return given by the lesser likelihood of entry, it APPEARS as though they go up.
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Here's my single problem with that logic, Daryus....
You're presuming that because one has a gun, one's abode has less of a chance to be burgled. But....wouldn't they need to KNOW you have a gun BEFORE they burgle? I'd think that most breakers & enterers wouldn't find out until they encounted you & your Dobie-O-Matic sittin' in the drawing room in wait.
------------------ "Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
You missed something, but it's an understandable mistake. The point is that if you _weren't_ allowed to have guns, the thieves would KNOW that you didn't have one, and thus EVERYONE's chances of being burglarized would be far higher.
Jay:
"I think we have more to fear with the "us vs. them" attitude that seems to prevail in the far right today."
The reason we HAVE that attitude is that we know that YOUR beliefs are far more dangerous. Which is more dangerous: decrying an enemy as such and fighting them tooth and nail, or simply allowing that enemy to do as they please?
"Is your butterfly collection such that you would take a bullet for it?"
Oh, so if someone's burglarizing my house, I should just let them, instead of trying to stop them? Of course, you neglect the fact that the intruder could also have it in mind to harm you, but I guess I should just let them do that, too, because it's so dangerous to try and stop them.
------------------ "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)
[This message has been edited by Omega (edited June 20, 2000).]
------------------ "Remeber, if there is a nuclear explosion, be sure to close your windows as the massive heat could cause objects within your home to catch fire".
posted
Is "burglarizing" a real word? Or one of those made up US words like "proactive" or "fundamentalist"?
------------------ "A fully functioning, cybernetic, technologically advanced team of superheroes... and NOBODY'S got a flashlight?" - Polly Ester; Samurai Pizza Cats
posted
Note Omega ol pal, I have no problem with you defending yourself in the confines of your home, but there should be limits (nationally) on the type and calibre of weapons. However this BS about you rising up against the govt with your sawnoff is a real croc. I mean, for a govt to come to dictatorial power they need the backing of the army. Just between you and me, how much chance do you think a bunch of gung-ho civilians would have against the US armed forces?
------------------ "Remeber, if there is a nuclear explosion, be sure to close your windows as the massive heat could cause objects within your home to catch fire".
posted
Come on Daryus. They'll be doing it for the good ol US of A. So what if they can't run up a flight of stairs without having to sit down? They'll have right on their side. And a feeling of smugness. Which is more than enough to defeat a fit bunch of people trained to kill.
------------------ "A fully functioning, cybernetic, technologically advanced team of superheroes... and NOBODY'S got a flashlight?" - Polly Ester; Samurai Pizza Cats
------------------ "Remeber, if there is a nuclear explosion, be sure to close your windows as the massive heat could cause objects within your home to catch fire".
"how much chance do you think a bunch of gung-ho civilians would have against the US armed forces?"
That would depend on how many people constitute a bunch. It really seems like you're suggesting that we wouldn't have a chance, so we may as well not try. Ain't optimism wonderful, guys?
"So what if they can't run up a flight of stairs without having to sit down?"
Who edits your news, anyway? We're not THAT out of shape.
------------------ "To disarm the people [is] the best and most effectual way to enslave them." - George Mason, American Statesman and Author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776)
posted
The government already has the backing of the military, it's called the Chain of Command. That's why the Joint Chiefs report to the President, and not to Congress. The president, as commander in chief, has direct control over the armed forces and how they are used. Sometimes this is a good thing. Other times, not so good.
As for the formerly mentioned hypothetical conversation, you forget that the President's next response can always be: "All right, you're relieved. I'll find someone who WILL."
Remember Sherman?
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
Printer-friendly view of this topic
