I am just curious about everyone's thoughts regarding the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms. I am specifically curious to hear from those of you that live in countries that have been forced to give up your arms.

Are there more crimes now than before?

If you live in the US I am curious to find out who would willingly relinquish their personal firearms, whether used for protection or for hunting to feed families.

I know this may spur a debate, however, we had one recently in my American History class on this subject, but there wasn't anyone from a foreign country to speak up, only blogs that were posted on the internet about the rise in crime in places like England and Australia.

Just curious

Janine

Canada here.

While we don't have a total ban on firearms, owning one is not quite common.

In a major city like Toronto that is.

Out west they have a lot more.

Crime is the same.

I heard the arguments that if you ban guns, crime goes up since criminals know their victims won't have a gun on them.

Studies have also shown though that if a family owns a gun, they are more likely to use it on another family member than on a burglar. Using it on another family member either intentionally or unintentionally.

Personally, my family and I do not own a gun and have never owned one, and I have no desire to ever own one. Mainly for the reason above.

Yes, my thought on criminals and crime is that only the criminals will have guns.

No matter what, a criminal will find a way to commit a crime.

You say that if a family owns a gun they are more likely to use it on another family member. I really like to see the studies you are looking at. When I lived in Alaska practically everyone owned a firearm and it was basically used to protect yourself from grizzly bears and the like. I know I had to use on once while camping.

Firearms are also used for hunting, which many people do where I live now. These people use it to maintain their food supply so that they can use money that would be spent for other things.

But your point is well taken, I like to hear the different viewpoints on issues.

According to The Fraser Institute (a Canadian think-tank):

Published November 2003:

http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=nr&id=570

Selected parts:


Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.


Canada

The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.

Of course, when a “life sentence” means you only get 25 years and you can get house arrest for a gun crime. New Conservative PM Harper plans to increase that, which I agree with. Punishments have to warrant the crime.


The Canadian experiment with firearm registration is becoming a farce says Mauser. The effort to register all firearms, which was originally claimed to cost only $2 million, has now been estimated by the Auditor General to top $1 billion. The final costs are unknown but, if the costs of enforcement are included, the total could easily reach $3 billion.

Don't get me started on this….



When dealing with shooting in Alaska, that is different than living in a big city. Why does one really need a gun if you are living in a major urban city? Example, Toronto, Montreal, NYC, Chicago

It is not like the bears come out all the time.

Very VERY interesting, thanks for the info. That is kind of what I thought all along.

To me, the right to bear arms doesn't so much address crime as it alters what a government can or cannot do to its citizens and so to that end I would not relinquish any... although LOL I currently don't own one so maybe I have said too much here already? :eek:

Part of the reason most believe for a armed population is first for the right to protect thierself from the government also. Remember we just fought a war with the English ( sorry guys) they had military we had just citizens with guns that formed groups.

They knew that at some point the government may go to far even with the protection of the constitution.

Next of course I remember the words of Hitler, when he saved them from crime by taking away all the guns.

For myself, I am a gun collector of sorts, and have a permit to carry a concelled weapon if I want to. I would not easily give away my rights to own weapons.

Remember we just fought a war with the English ( sorry guys) they had military we had just citizens with guns that formed groups.


Just? That was like 200+ years ago!


for myself, I am a gun collector of sorts, and have a permit to carry a concelled weapon if I want to. I would not easily give away my rights to own weapons.

See, that is where you and I differ. I don't think any “ordinary citizen” should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon.

Well of course I am a retired law enforcement officer, with hours of weapon training, but I go the other way, I think if almost everyone carried one, there would be a lot less crime

I am an ordinary citizen who lives in a high crime area, Memphis is not the most friendly of towns when it comes to crime. I have a carry permit also. We have MANY carjackings in our area and when I HAVE to go to those areas I choose to carry to protect my children.

I do not have to carry, and honestly usually don't, but I like the fact that I am given a choice.

I live in a small town in Australia, I am 28 years of age and have only once seen a gun that was my fathers. When we were all told to hand in our guns my father happily handed it in, no ifs no buts. I believe every country is difference but I feel much safer in a country where it is illegal to carry a weapon, don't get me wrong I am well aware that there are people that do carry them, but the average Jo dose not carry one in their purse. I live approx 40 minutes from city, there is only two gun shops from my home to the city. To be honest its just not something you would if being attacked think about, I'd expect someone one if attacking me to have a knife not a gun.

Honestly I don't know what I think one way or another... what Captain Forest said about Canada and guns was great, as usual. In the part of Canada I live in, guns are not commonplace in urban centres... they are used on farms and for hunting, whether it be by locals or tourists. This is a great hunting area and we have lots of tourists coming up here to the hunting lodges and for hunting expeditions. Of course those are all shotguns or rifles rather than handguns or semi-automatics, etc. Actually I had never seen a handgun until my biological father shot his girlfriend and then himself with one. So given that horrible experience, they frighten me.

Similar to Lungie mentioned, most people in my area carry a knife for protection, I think. At least, when you hear of a murder or bodily harm on the news, it's almost always a stabbing or a beating, and only rarely a shooting.

All that being said though, I think Canada's national gun registry is a total farce... it targets law-abiding citizens who are gun collectors, hobbyists, farmers and hunters. The criminals of course are not going to register their guns! So I can see both sides of the argument quite easily. Fr Chuck is right too about Hitler and the guns. One of the reasons the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising were able to hold out for so long was that they HAD guns. Otherwise the Nazis would have overpowered them a lot sooner.

Interesting discussion!

But, my question Lungie is

Don't only criminals carry guns in your part of the world?

People here really do not carry knives, except maybe a pocket knife used to open things. Criminals here carry guns, and we have to be prepared to defend ourselves if necessary.

Oh and I forgot to add, if I felt that my life or the lives of my children were in danger, I would definitely carry a weapon. Some in-laws of mine who live in Israel own and carry uzis around with them. However, I'm lucky in that I live in a relatively safe area. Most of the violent crimes here occur between family members, rival gangs, and among members of the aboriginal population. The majority of other crime is vandalism and non-violent break and enters, which occur during the day while people are not at home. I do sometimes think it would be good if shopkeepers could have a gun in their store, or some kind of weapon though, because hold-ups in stores seem to be on the rise here, and more often thieves have a gun rather than a knife.

I'm in Eastern Canada and even the criminals don't have access to guns so they commit their crimes with knives, shotguns, hypodermic needles, etc.. Crime rate is very low here and I feel a lot safer here than in any large american city. I'm originally from Montreal and that's as safe as where I am now.

But isn't a shotgun still a gun?

You sure are safer than here in Memphis, I will tell you that much.

Thank goodness I live in a small safe bedroom community.

Hi,
United States here; from the great State of VA.
I own several guns, pistols, rifles, and shotguns. Use to be an avid hunter, but don't anymore.
I would definitely own a gun if I lived in any large city in the US... for personal home protection. Those who leave them lying around for their children to pick up and discharge shouldn't have one in the first place, but that's another story.
Any crimes committed with guns, would be committed with something else, if there were no guns. Some are even committed with a hunters' bow and arrows! Others with knives, some with pieces of glass, used as a weapon.
Relinquish my personal owned firearms? NO, that is a right as an American Citizen, with which I have been for over half a century.
I have never used a firearm, aimed at another person. But, if my family is in danger, I would have serious thoughts about protecting them and myself; and would not want to be the intruder. Hope it never comes to that.

I agree wholeheartedly with you on every aspect Fred!

We have SEVERAL firearms of every kind in our home along with a 12 and 4 year old. However, we are smart enough parents to keep them in a safe. We only have one firearm available if it comes to home invasion, which happens often.

Our children have been taught from very tender ages that "if you can see the gun you are not allowed in the room." And they follow those instructions to a T.

My husband is a gunsmith, a very gifted one at that, and is very educated in the use and misuse of firearms and he is passing this knowledge on to our children.

If guns were outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. But as NeedKarma said, criminals do not need guns, they will go as far as hypodermic needles to commit their crimes.

To be honest guys if I lived somewhere where I absolutely felt like I needed a gun to defend myself, my family or my property I would probably move.

I am frightened by the "armed population" of the USA. American tourists show up here from time to time, and come "armed"... I shudder to think what life would be like in a place where so many people walking the streets are armed!

Contrast to where I live - Western Canada - where many people own guns, you won't find too many people walking the street with them. So no need to be afraid of being shot at...

I believe in the right to have a gun, but I don't think it should be something you carry around with you all the time. American culture seems to dictate otherwise, which is what I think leads to so many problems with guns in the USA.

And yes - Gun control (in Canada) is a joke. It does nothing but force the law-abiding citizen to turn in or register their hunting rifles while leaving criminals able to buy all kinds of weapons illegally.

I think too that it's hard to compare the US to Canada... Canada in general doesn't have the same level of threat of gun crime that many part of the US have. So where you may need to carry a gun or have guns in your home in order to feel safe in many parts of the US, that's quite uncommon here. So it's like comparing apples and oranges. I've never even handled a gun (I don't hunt) and I hope my children never have to handle one for non-recreational purposes, either.

Well of course I am a retired law enforcement officer, with hours of weapon training, but I go the other way, I think if almost everyone carried one, there would be alot less crime

Again, I disagree.

If everyone carried one, then the chance the gun would be used would increase since it would be much easier to use it.

You get drunk, you pull out your gun and boom, shoot someone.



Relinquish my personal owned firearms? NO, that is a right as an American Citizen, with which I have been for over half a century.


I think that is the difference b/w Canadians and Americans. Americans seem to cherish every “right” like its gold. Owning a firearm can be dangerous, sometimes having a dangerous item is not such a good thing.


To be honest guys if I lived somewhere where I absolutely felt like I needed a gun to defend myself, my family or my property I would probably move.

I wish I hadn't just commented on your other post because I sure wish to comment on this one.

I agree with this.

If I was living in an area that unsafe, then I probably would leave that area, not make it worse by adding yet another gun to the mix.


I am frightened by the "armed population" of the USA. American tourists show up here from time to time, and come "armed" ... I shudder to think what life would be like in a place where so many people walking the streets are armed!

Contrast to where I live - Western Canada - where many people own guns, you won't find too many people walking the street with them. So no need to be afraid of being shot at...

I believe in the right to have a gun, but I don't think it should be something you carry around with you all the time. American culture seems to dictate otherwise, which is what I think leads to so many problems with guns in the USA.

And yes - Gun control (in Canada) is a joke. It does nothing but force the law-abiding citizen to turn in or register their hunting rifles while leaving criminals able to buy all kinds of weapons illegally.

I agree.

Owning a gun at home is one thing, but carrying it around on the street is an entirely different subject.

Re: Your Gun Control Comments.

Even the left wing party NDP and Jack Layton said in the last election campaign that criminal sentences for gun crimes need to be strengthened.

Guns? In my opinion, the right to bear arms is fundumental and cost many of live to obtain these rights. Your forefather saw tha there was a problem that when government usurps people rights, those people must have a way to defend themselves.

Government today would like to remove the guns from average people hand so that there can be no resistance to them.

Down under, since guns were outlawed, crime increase over 400%.

As Mr. Bush stated the Constitution is only a piece of paper.

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


If our forefather did not have any weapons to defend themselves we would still be a colony under England today.

One other thought, it is people who kill people and a gun is only a tool they use, most people have values, and will only use a weapon to defend themselves, I for one.

You would have a hard time getting Americans to give up there guns. For the most part law abiding citizens are very responsible, but unfortunately criminals and gang bangers can get a gun anytime they want and that's who you worry about. Evenso Americans will always keep their guns and wo to the ones who say different!

I believe that we should keep them with us at all times.
I don't go anywhere with out them.
My feelings about it are it is my god given right to keep them and they are going to pay hell taking them away from me.

Where in the Bible or whatever religion you believe in does it say that God allows you to carry a gun with you?

So, how can it be your God given right? Aren't all rights given by the state, and not by God?

If you take guns away from law abiding citizens only the criminals will have them.
Then what do we have no way to protect ourselves from the people who would take mine away from me.

Where in the bible does it say we are not allowed to protect myself.

I'm personally not telling anyone to give up their guns. I'm all for people protecting themselves. And I'm not against using guns for recreational purposes like hunting. But like I said before, Canada and the US are different countries with different circumstances. I don't even think we have "the right to bear arms" in our constitution here, or at least I've never heard of it. When you don't grow up around guns, you don't really see a need for them. I'm just glad I don't have to carry a weapon around with me to feel safe. I agree with what NeedKarma said earlier... if I lived in an area where I had to carry a gun for protection, I'd probably move, too.

Bottom line, I think different countries just have different experiences regarding guns. And that doesn't make one way right and the other wrong. You do what you have to, depending on where you live.

So there I was, with my sawed off shotgun and my 9. I would have won if it had not been for that darn bunker buster bomb, the f-18s and those tanks... well, so much for protecting myself from a tyrannical government! They outlawed anything that comes close to what they have. I guess that tells us a lot about the odds. Just ask that lady at Ruby Ridge, Idaho and her dead children as well, when you cross over.

Your pea shooters and BB guns are not a threat to anyone except to the person standing in front of you when you think it's unloaded! Guns only scare the citizens that don't know how to use one and are much too refined and civilized to learn.

As far as executing capitol crimes... does no good what so ever. Just scares the hell out of sane people. Even sane people commit crimes of passion.

I agree with Demonspeeding 2005. Where I grew up, I believe it was against the law to not have a gun!

Magprob brings up a good point...

If a "tyrannical government" came to power in the USA to a point where armed citizens were fighting with soldiers in the streets, do you really believe US soldiers would engage their own citizens in combat?

I don't believe that US soldiers would engage US citizens, I do believe if neocons get their way for the New World Order it would not be US soldiers, they would try to bring off shore troop, which would only create a total all out war.

There already are foreign troops on U.S. soil. The government knows that U.S. troops would turn over if ordered to shoot Americans in the street. Remember all of those bases they shut down a while back? They are still top secret and no tresspassing. What could those bases really be for? Hummmm!:confused:

But, some troops would shoot their own if ordered to. Some folks just can't survive without being told exactly what to do. Such a shame.

Where they foreign troops I saw firing on students during the demonstrations in the 60's?? Didn't look it to me;)

Kent state will be repeated unless we have learned our lesson!

Remember Katrina? Remember seeing armed military kicking in doors on relatively undamaged homes & literally dragging homeowners out, confiscating any weapons they owned? Can anyone tell me "What the HECK for"! That WAS AFTER a hurricane & those were families that had weathered the WORST! They were the fortunate ones; NOT flooded out, asking for HELP or homeless, right? Then what about Article 1V: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers & effects AGAINSTUNREASONABLE SEARCHES & SEIZURES SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED". Sad to say All of America just watched it happen on TV & to my knowledge, none QUESTIONED, objected or said ANYTHING! ~ Kinda' reminds me of a couple of other similar instances most heard about or watched on TV. In New Orleans, these were ordinary, peaceful Americans just weathering a STORM for pete's Sakes!It was never suggested any of those people had been accused of or were violating ANYTHING. Still, I saw them treated as roughly as hardened criminals and saw their lawful weapons being confiscated. DISARMED [by those who WERE, of course] From what I heard and saw, there was PLENTY for police & military to DO without kicking in the doors of people that had and were continuing to MANAGE on their own, peacefully in their OWN homes. Hummm I'd hate to suspect that part was a DRESS REHEARSAL; for what ALL of 'We The People'; FREE Americans can 'expect' during the NEXT 'emergency'?? Bird Flu? Another 'terror alert'? Does anyone realize that at any SECOND the President can announce & declare MARTIAL LAW? Sad to say, the Constitution AND Bill of Rights are being shredded as we're discussing the matter. Have we been sold out? That would be MY opinion. Scary, isn't it.

I agree with Phillysteakandchees, I'm frightened with the Armed population of America it seams like everyone wants one in their home JUST IN CASE someone else comes into your home with one. I guess it just sound strange to me as its just not like that in Australia. If someone came into my home I would be terrified but it does not consume my thoughts enough to have a lethal weapon in my home at all times JUST IN CASE. I agree that there are several objects that crimes are committed with like knives and needles but almost everything could be a lethal weapon. NeedKarma I agree with you totally if I HAD to have a gun to protect myself at all times, or frightened I'd have to protect myself with a gun.. I'd move!

But, my question Lungie is

Don't only criminals carry guns in your part of the world?

People here really do not carry knives, except maybe a pocket knife used to open things. Criminals here carry guns, and we have to be prepared to defend ourselves if necessary.

Yes criminals carry guns but I don't see the need to carry "in case" they target me, I hate the thought of millions of people carrying guns, it just seams so unsafe. Also our guns don't appear to be as accessible as in the USA, although if you really, really want one you can and if someone wants to kill you they will not wait until you draw your gun and have a shoot out. I don't believe that Australians have the opinion that we need to protect out selves at all times.

There already are foriegn troops on U.S. soil ... Remember all of those bases they shut down a while back? They are still top secret and no tresspassing. What could those bases really be for? Hummmm!:confused:
Do you honestly believe that formerly closed military bases house a secret "invasion force" that is just waiting to emerge and take over the United States? Do you think the country with the largest military force in the world is somehow preparing or keeping its enemies fed, clothed, sheltered, and supplied right in their own back yard so that some mysterious day it can be unleashed for a fight?


Remember Katrina? Remember seeing armed military kicking in doors on relatively undamaged homes & literally dragging homeowners out, confiscating any weapons they owned?
It makes complete sense in context of the event. Everyone is armed. There's no food, no water, no power, no law and order... basically, everything you need for a complete breakdown of civility. Without that authority exerting control, it would have continued to dwindle down into an "every man for himself" fight with citizens killing each other for a can of soup...

Gaining control over a paniced public is required to maintain public safety. No one likes that, but it's necessary. Single individuals can be rational, but a mob mentality is dangerous.


Does anyone realize that at any SECOND the President can announce & declare MARTIAL LAW?
And this is nothing new - When was the last time the entire USA was placed under martial law? Even on 9/11 there was no martial law imposed for the "public safety". This is a scare tactic you use to profess why your "gun love" is so important.

It's this kind of conspiracy theory that scares me... All these irrational fears, people runing around with guns, any attempt to bring order from chaos seen as "government oppression" ... where does it end?

Lungie, if you take the passive stance and just let an armed person control you, if it ever happens, then that is your choice. I, on the other hand, wish to be on an even playing field. I believe in killing before being killed if there is even just 1/2 a chance of survival. With that, you must be aware of your surroundings and prepared to do what is needed. Most people are not. Criminals know that, therefore, you present easy pray.

There are a lot of crazy people running around America and you just never know who the cable man is!

We live on a semi-secluded one-block long, deadend street and my husband is often gone for business. A good friend keeps asking me if I would like to accompany him to the firing range and get a basic overview of guns - I have never fired one.

If I bought one, I would certainly need a class, this I know! And I am aware that if someone decided to mess with me here, the only chance I would have for survival now is to elude them. But then if something like that happened, I know I would live in fear of them returning too. And that is no way to live, frankly.

I keep putting it off, rationalizing that my neighborhood has a reputation of being one of the last bastions of gun-toting rednecks (which has its good and bad points too - see the thread in Etiquette about bad neighbors LOL) and because of that, a criminal would be exceptionally foolish to mess with anyone here.

Its really one of those things I go back and forth in my mind (when I am not ordinarily so indecisive) so this thread has been most interesting and valuable to me.

[B]Val... QUIT dragging your feet! Go with your friend & get TRAINED! The first thing women in particular need to get past is the tendency to 'anticipate' the recoil... which varies with the barrel length, etc. Some basics of other self defence would also raise your 'comfort' and 'confidence' level. You'll feel MUCH more confident & less skittish about it once you're COMPETENTLY trained. FEAR is the most valuable tool a perpetrator has. I suggest you find a great little book; 'Armed and Female'... I forget the author's name... Paxley Quigley or something like that. She is HIGHLY regarded, trains police cadets, does speaking engagements, etc. Just reading her book will add a lot, make you more alert and observant & less likely to become a victim. Safe neighborhood? Don't COUNT too heavily on it! Prepare, train, learn AND pray you never need it!

It is sooo much better to have one and not need it than to need one and not have it! Val, do it!

Thank you Marj Ann for enlightening me on that point! One I will be doing my own investigation into.

The military, and the cops both work for US civilians.

Date:
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 00:30:25 -0400

From:
"Ken Murrell" [email protected]

To:
"American Patriot Friends Network" [email protected]


To United States Citizens:

I am a 10th generation American. My Family Roots go back to Jamestown (the first colony), Virginia. I am also a U.S. Army Veteran (1965-68 Vietnam era volunteer), and I am an x-Criminal Investigator. My point in saying this is, many times I have (taken one step forward, raised my right hand and) sworn to support and defend The Constitution of The united States of America. I love MY Country and MY LIBERTY! I am qualified to point out something very important to all united States Citizens. Our Constitutional form of government is civilian NOT military! My point, the many American Flags we're seeing displayed everwhere today on TV (in the background of Courtrooms, the Halls of Congress, even in Churches and on Religious shows) are military flags! Any time you see an American Flag with pretty gold roping (braid and tassel) added to it, you are looking at a military flag! The very display of a military (Admirality) Flag represents military authority. U.S. Citizens please BEWARE of what you're NOT recognizing. You are being deceived! It's right before your eyes! In January 1961 (just 40 years ago) the farewell message from outgoing President Eisenhower warned America to "beware of allowing a large Military Industrial Complex to come into power." If any person in the world knew what that danger was, President/General Eisenhower certainly knew. He had more experience in such matters than any one man has ever had in the history of our government. All military personnel are trained (brainwashed) to kill. They are not trained to think of YOUR Constitutional Rights. The 'psychological profile' of a marine, a special forces soldier or a navy seal is not qualified to be turned loose on our civilian streets as a law enforcement officer! All U.S. Citizen's need to become tailors. Why you wonder? So that wherever we go, we can each carry a small pair of scissors. Then anytime we chance upon a military flag in a civilian setting we use our scissors to cut the first stitch. Then we proceed to RIP that gold military roping off OUR Flag! If we're going to have a showdown with the military let's get it on now and get it over with! The military, and the cops both work for US civilians. "LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OATH" I, ("The Cop") , SWEAR that I will support "The Constitution of The united States", "The Constitution of The State of (one of 50) ", and I will faithfully impartially discharge my duties as a police officer/Deputy Sheriff of city/county , according to law, to the best of my ability, SO HELP ME GOD! _______________________________________ (cop) Signature America, our only hope in this matter is that these soldiers and cops are Christians who have a conscience. We must remind each of them of what their "Individual" oath to God really means! Ken Murrell

Geez, as I read this whole thread I have a newfound appreciation for being a canadian. I don't live in fear of someone taking me out.

[B]I appreciate the interesting variation of views; I DO second MAGPROB's observation that what weapons the populous has will matter little against disabling tasers and other FAR more sophisticated weapons now commonly issued to police by their departments [now NATIONALIZED]. The sheer numbers + intimidation factor + SHOCK will basically overwhelm I sadly suspect. The complete dismantling of the u.S. Constitution has been too well & long planned for the 'powers that be' NOT to have a PLAN B for EVERY eventuality. Dumbing us down, removing OUR military, allowing millions of [preditory] illegals who are ALREADY verbalizing their intent to RECLAIM several States, enlisting & PROMISING pillage to gangs, Nationalizing our local P.Ds. arranging for armed, equipped foreign troops to quietly be here and on our 'borders', + MANY other proven factors SHOULD raise a distress FLAG to alert us to the Fact there IS 'Trouble Right Here In River City', folks... we've for the most part been too otherwise-occupied to notice.

The problem I see in the US there are to many people with blinders. They simply do see what is happen. There are not enough police to enforce the law, If you don't have so form of protection, when someone breaks into your home at 3:05Am, don't expect the police to be there to help you, they will show up after you are dead or have serious injuries.

Police do care about you, they only care about writing traffic tickets to steal your money from you. That is use to pad their retirement plan.

Police do care about you, they only care about writing traffic tickets to steal your money from you. That is use to pad their retirement plan.

Ah.

That's why my friends father died on duty... writing tickets to pad his retirement.

Puts his funeral in a whole new light.

Hmmm for the record I do NOT live in fear either and I don't care much for fear-based decisions either, which is why I am still thinking... all input being gratefully and carefully considered.

This thread points out some interesting differences between the US and Canada as only the US has a right to bear arms clause in our constitution. For the most part citizens even here in the REPUBLIC OF TEXAS take their guns seriously and responsibly and yes theirs always a fear of crime. Nobody carries guns around with them all the time but keeps them at home safely put away from kids. I personally have never owned a gun as I don't hunt or engage in activities or go to places where I need one. Most shootings in our cities can be traced to crime or drugs so unless you indulge in any of these activities then you should reasonably safe. There are always exceptions but I doubt the perception of the US being the wild, wild west is a valid one. There are some who carry their pistols under the carseat or in a shoulder holster but in the grand scheme of things there is more fear than actual need for fire arms, BUT having said that I don't think anyone who is a gun owner will ever let themselves be disarmed by the government. And I agree! :cool: :)

Prissy, go make Elvis one of them fried peanut butter and nanna sandwiches. Wait, make Elvis a whole plate full. Thankya babydoll!

Prissy, you calling me Prissy!! LOL, they actually serve them dang samitches here, believe it or not!

Too funny Magprob!!

Prissy, go make Elvis one of them fried peanut butter and nanna sandwiches. Wait, make Elvis a whole plate full. Thankya babydoll!

FRIED peanut butter and banana sandwiches?? Do people actually eat that? Grosss. :p

Yes, and fried dill pickles too!!

Everything here is fried! GROSS

I'll take a salad with ranch dressing on the side please. ;-)

Fried dill pickles?? Ugh that's even worse LOL!! I think I would die of starvation if I visited there haha.

I have heard though that Tennessee is very beautiful... and I think part of The Green Mile was filmed there... and the outdoor scenes in that movie were really nice. I'd like to visit sometime, just maybe I need to bring my own food! ;)

Fried pickles, nope you haven't lived until you've tried a deep fried Mars bar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_bar) ;)

Oh wow I just read the link about the Mars Bar and I didn't realize it had been discontinued in the US! We still have it here in Canada... it used to be one of my favorites... but raw not fried! ;)

the second amendment is the right to fry mars bars? =)

Oh my god, you peeps are too funny!
I have been thinking all day (no kidding here) about starting a thread on weird food combos all day, as the cooking forum is just NOT getting enough action!

So shall we??

Sure if you want to... I'm sure others will join in. :)

Second only to food, food is my favorite thing to do and talk about. Let's talk about food... why yes... let's do!

Magprob, you are hereby invited to the weird food combonations a/k/a gun control thread.

LOL, I think you may have been the one to initiate it with the peanutbutter sandwich post.

Well let me lean my A-K against the wall here and I'll just dig right in!

Here's the link to the food thread for magprob and anyone who wants to join in:

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/cooking/wierd-food-combinations-aka-gun-control-lol-27443.html

Have any of you been car jacked.
Have you lost afriend because for gangs and drugs.
Have you lost a brother because he stood up to the gangs.
I don't live in the bad part of town. The town I live in only has 600 people dogs and cats.
But I grew up on the wrong side of the tracks. I never used drugs joined a gang. But I would rather protect me and mine then become another statistic.

That is why I never leave home with out a gun. That is one of the reasons I love living were I do. Nobody bothers me and I don't bother them.

It is like the boy scouts always be prepared.
I was a boy scout.
I personnaly have been shot once and stabbed twice. There will not be a next time.
Everybody should learn to shot a gun and protect themselves.

Amen

I believe that we should keep them with us at all times.
I don't go anywhere with out them.
My feelings about it are it is my god given right to keep them and they are going to pay hell taking them away from me.


Where in the Bible or whatever religion you believe in does it say that God allows you to carry a gun with you?

So, how can it be your God given right? Aren't all rights given by the state, and not by God?


Where in the bible does it say we are not allowed to protect myself.

Turning my argument around on me eh?

I don't want this to become a heat religious discussion, but…

I have seen people on American TV saying that is was their god given right to go in and invade Iraq.

What?

How these people can know that god has told them to do a or b is beyond me.

Invoking god's name like that only serves to marginalize him.

Does god exist? I don't know, but who is to say he would be on America's side and not Iraq's?

America killed innocent civilians, isn't that against gods wishes?

But I digress…

The point I'm trying to make it that the right to bear arms is given to the citizens by the government, NOT god. Americans have such a right, Canadians do not (that is, in the constitution).

Would you guys like a sandwich?

I just had a sandwich.
For breakfast.

Go to the bible dictionary and look up armeagedon.
It says in the bible dictionary there will be war to end all wars.
Maybe we started that war who knows.
Look it up in the king james version of the bible.
Enough about religion or we will get this thread closed don't want that it is a very good read.

I am so sorry this has turned out to be a religious post, I did not mean it to go that way. We all have our own opinions, even though they may not agree, but that is what makes each one of us different.

I was mainly interested to see how gun control has helped to increase crime in other areas of the world.

Religious thread department is two doors down and to your left, boys! :D

Praise the Lord and pass the pickles!

Read the last line of post 70
I don't want this thread to close it is a good one.
Fried pickles are good but you can keep the banna and peanut butter sandwiches

The Police over here have only been armed a relatively short time but the number of "accidentals" is incredible.

If these had been U.S police I honestly believe they would have been prosecuted.

My only reason for this is from the films and TV movies where U.S. police have had to kill in "line of duty" and had one hell of a game proving their innocence or reason for killing.

The story of Jean Charles - the Brazilian electrician working in London - who was dragged out of his seat on the Underground train, pinned to the floor, face down (therefore of great danger to the police and public?? ) and had 8 (eight) bullets pumped into his head is pretty well known throughout the world.

On this occasion the police have been found not culpable - to the best of my knowledge with no reason or cause being given.

Since our Police have had an armed division they have LEGALLY murdered :- - a man with a table leg wrapped in paper (the calibre of the table leg was not specified but was deemed a threat) - another man walking with the girlfriend of a known or suspected criminal ( threat undetermined ) - a man whose home the police broke into where they found him naked in bed with his girlfriend- jumping up in alarm (wouldn't you? ) he was shot dead as being a threat.

If this were the Keystone Kops or something, the funniest one (and I don't mean in the comical sense) was the poor ******* in London driving a red Mini who was shot and killed because the car he was driving looked like the suspected one that the police were looking for. (How many red Minis in the country in those days?? )

Then last week the police break into the family home of a "suspected" terrorist, who apparently hearing the commotion in his own home - goes down the stairs and gets shot point blank in the chest.

He did not die -- but I am NOT taking bets on the police getting prosecuted even with a LIVE witness this time.

Therefore Mr Average American -- think yourself lucky - at least you have the chance of firing back at the B******s - we do not -- AND it is illegal to carry even a Knife here. It's a good job there aren't many pipe smokers around these days with those lethal weapons they used to carry around to clean the bowls of their pipes.

P.S. ----- A day or so after the brazilian guy fiasco - the Chief of the Metropolitan Police told us our thoughts should be with the poor armed Policeman who, like all our armed police -- were VOLUNTEERS!!

Sorry -- but to my mind this means that ever trigger happy Clint Eastwood , Charles Bronson etc, etc, is volunteering to shoot who the hell they like with (so far) complete immunity.

Although the majority of these killings have been declared unlawful - as yet no one has been prosecuted.

Funny old world " Innit "

I am so sorry this has turned out to be a religious post, I did not mean it to go that way. We all have our own opinions, even though they may not agree, but that is what makes each one of us different.

Yeah it's too bad how threads often go off topic. I've had a couple of threads I've started get closed because of religious fights in particular. That seems to be a particularly heated subject, even more so than politics.


I was mainly interested to see how gun control has helped to increase crime in other areas of the world.

Well as you've heard myself and other Canadians say, in Canada I don't think gun control has increased crime, here at least. My opinion, from experience in the foster care system, is that crime is increased by poverty and the drug abuse, gangs, etc, that often results from kids being raised in poverty. At least that seems to be true where I grew up.

Praise the Lord and pass the pickles!

This might be one of my fav quotes of all time... and that's saying a lot.

Yeah it's too bad how threads often go off topic. I've had a couple of threads I've started get closed because of religious fights in particular. That seems to be a particularly heated subject, even more so than politics.
.

Sorry Orange - but they will keep sticking the head over the parapet and it is just too tempting.

I will try to refrain in future.

PROMISE!! ;)

Sorry Orange - but they will keep sticking the head over the parapet and it is just too tempting.

I will try to refrain in future.

PROMISE !!!;)

Haha well it's not your fault, Jonegy... lots of people contribute to the arguments, and it's usually only when it gets nasty that they are closed.

KP have to spread some more love, so I will say:

Can I have some of those pickles please?

Pretty please KP, and have you joined us in the weird food combination thread?

Pretty please KP, and have you joined us in the weird food combination thread?

wow it was much easier than I thought to get you to say pretty please. =)

yes I've joined the wild and ever expanding food thread, though my posts are few are far between.


* and just for the record, I'm all for the second amendment giving the right for bears to have arms. Theyd look all goofy without them.

Okay, some of you here might like to know I've agreed to do a little research. I have a date at the firing range next Wednesday with my good friend Frank who is going to bring an assortment of hand guns. He'll teach a short course in basic firearms to me, all for the cost of a dinner... thai food no doubt! :p

Soooooooo, shall I post what the experience was like and any possible conclusions about exercising my Constitutional right as an American citizen to bear arms (and I don't mean the sleeveless shirt variety either!) ?

There goes my Smith & Wesson semi-automatic virginity :rolleyes:

Just don't let them make you shoot a Smith & Wesson 50 cal revolver, it will kick your bum!!

However, I have shot a 50 cal sniper rifle. It was fun to me!!

Actually, Val, I enjoy the range just for recreation.

Good luck, remain calm, do NOT stiffen up.

Most women are better shots than men. You go MOM!!

Most women are better shots than men. You go MOM!!!!!!!


I don't know if this is true (women better shots than men) but I dated a girl once who could fire a handgun quite well, worked for the drug enforcement agency, and had what they termed "sniper vision".

She was a lot of fun but boy... the fact she could probably hit me at 80 meters no problem was always bouncing around in my head.

Oh no this old thread again? Yes.

As promised here is the "virgin gun" report -

I fired mainly revolvers that were .22, 32, 38 and one 9mm automatic.
Nerves were a big problem as I expected but Frank was patient and taught me step by step. I almost cried once (I cry easily though, but I'm a girl so I get to). I soaked the clothes I was wearing and couldn't feel my hands for a while afterwards.

My aim was surprisingly accurate considering how badly my hands were shaking or how much I jumped at each noise (there were some guys there firing loud stuff, I mean "cardiac check" LOUD!).

I fired many different ways - hammer pulled back or not, slow or fast, siting or just point shooting - to see how it all was. I was pleased that every shot made the paper targets. Frank was pretty impressed that my very first shots out of the .38 and the 9mm both hit a perfect bullseye. We saved one of the targets with only one shot on it so I can frame it LOL.

He pointed out that I am consistently in an area about the size of a dinner plate, which is very acceptable for a novice. I only felt good hand fit with one of the revolvers and was surprised how I did not like the automatic (I almost ducked when the slide shot back - I am just way too visual for that, Yikes).

And I have signed up for a four hour course with the range instructor. Its very comprehensive and afterwards enables you to apply for a concealed weapons permit (I am not going that far). I liked the .32 but Frank and the range instructor both want me to consider a .38 revolver because it can take 357 ammo? But I have to say, the flash and bang still intimidates me pretty good and my neck, shoulders, arms and hands are killing me now, just from the enormous tension.

I still don't like guns very much but now I know. Don't be calling me Annie Oakley any time soon! And I'll be sleeping this off tonight too, trust me.

You will get used to the flash and bang.
It takes time for your muscle to adjust to the way you are holding the gun.
Don't give up.
It is a fun hobby.
It also lets you work off stem if you are mad about something

You will get used to the flash and bang.
It takes time for your muscle to adjust to the way you are holding the gun.
Don't give up.
It is a fun hobby.
It also lets you work off stem if you are mad about something

LOL Forgive me for saying Demon, you don't understand maybe that you are talking to someone who is very rarely mad and when I am, I am far more prone to work it off in the garden or in writing a protesting letter to someone (I am good at that)! LOL :D

I don't know if I could ever get to hobby status but I would REALLY like to wear off the enormous fear. I was pretty ramped up in it today and so I wonder how much practice its going to take just to have a sense of routineness to it for someone like me?

A few more lessons and you can vacation in Texas or go bear hunting in Alaska.

magprob agrees: Now you can party with your redneck neighbors and get drunk and shoot up in the air and stuff!

As for the bad neighbors, perhaps this is more my kind of message.. .

I love it!! I got that on e-mail. I don't think you sent it, but I thought of you and your neighbors.

BTW

How did the shooting go?

Okay, never mind. I went back and read it, LOL.

Great job. As I said it is well noted that women tend to be better shots than men. My husband is a master gunsmith and he has heard this many times over.

I am a better shot than he is, although he hates to admit it.

Epilogue: Today I bought a Smith & Wesson 32 Magnum Revolver, in stainless steel with a 4" barrel for $300 from a friend.

This is the model: http://www.gunsonthenet.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=50641563

I plan to stay up on it by going to the firing range twice a year.

I still don't like guns but the decision was spawned one very hot, very hard day after the second of four hurricanes threw down so many trees that our deadend street was blocked in. A strange man (not a neighbor) offering chainsaw help wandered into my yard. He was on the up and up fortunately but for a split second as I approached him, I realised suddenly how incredibly precarious my situation was. Not anymore.

Val
Now that you've started this love affair how do you feel about the right to bear arms?

Your hooked! Welcome to America Annie Oakley:cool: :)

I'm a firm beliver in rights to bare arms.I believe that if someone tries to break into your house you have the right to shoot not kill but scare them.It's called defending your family and not to mention breaking and entering.Also I'm a avid hunter I believe if you need to shoot an animal for food do it.PETA has no right to stop anyone who hunts animals. It's called food for family in my book.But the government taking guns away that's wrong that's just wrong.What if their home was being broken into. I bet they will have a gun handy I garrentee they would.don't you.I have at least 30 guns in my collection and no one will or tell me that I need to give them up.That right to bare arms to me.

If the vice president can shoot some body so can I!

I asked this question because I was interested in people around the world whose guns have been taken and I wanted to see what the rise in crime was.

But, also, I wanted to hear from the American public who may have to face this someday. Hopefully not in my lifetime though. My husband is a master gunsmith and we have talked about this at his shop.

Recently, here in Tennessee, the TBI (Tennessee Bureau of Investigation) has been tightening the reins when it comes to firearm purchases. I do believe what they are doing is the RIGHT thing, but we are beginning to wonder if the government is slowly taking our rights away.

We too, like rd68 have many firearms in our home, and would refuse to give them up for many reasons.

As a "nurse in training" and former med-mal researcher I know that more "injuries" are committed by "doctors" than by legitimate firearm owners.

Val, you did not go off topic in hy opinion. You learned how important it is to have the right to bear arms by learning to shoot. You were one of my other targeted people. LOL.

We do not have a single firearm in our house and neither do our neighbours yet firearm related crime is very rare and we feel safe. I like our setup better but that's just me. :)

I understand you Karma, but what about for recreation or for those people who live in places like the Alaskan wild (Homesteaders) who need the firearms to sustain life. Those people need them to hunt for food.

Sorry, I wasn't aware we were talking about having a gun for recreation or sustenance.

That is all part of it Karma. Here in the States many people use guns for recreation as well as sustinence. I have lived in remote Alaska where we needed one for sustinence. If it were taken away from me I would have been unable to feed my children.

Now that I live in the city I no longer need it for sustinence, but recreation now. I have to keep sharp in case I ever move back to the "wild" and need for food once more.

This is not just about crime. I was wondering about that too, but not solely.

The purpose of a gun is too kill. That was what it was thought up and invented for. Not air riffle shooting or what ever.

I think having the second amendment has brought the promlem on its own.

If some one has a gun, people are going to get a gun to protect themselves from that other person with a gun, and the other person is going to get a bigger gun to protect themselves from the person who is protecting themselves from them.

Circle. Its just like nukes, once one person has one, everyone needs one for protection and deterency, and it just gets bigger and bigger.

Unfortunately, once a law has been in place to make something legal, its bloody hard to make it illegal again.

It is much safer in countries where guns are illegal, as there is less want for one, less opportunity to get one, and less tolleration for them, and less in circulation.

It is true, that if someone wants a gun, they can get one. So making it legal is not going to deter those, and neither is making it illegal. But making it illegal will stop people getting them "just because".

I could never live in a country where there are nearly as many guns as dogs :p Protection? No. If no one had a gun, you wouldn't need the protection, and so, the whole situation has caused its self.

I hate guns.

Well, in a sense I beg to differ. I live in a country where guns are legal. If they make them illegal then the criminals will still be able to get guns, they already do, and we will have a harder time protecting ourselves.

Also, what about food? You say guns are only to kill. I have several guns and I have never killed anything except food. While living in Alaska I had to kill Moose so that my family could eat during the winter when we were unable to grow food.

It is hard to criticize a situation unless you have lived in that situation. I could never live in a country where I did not have the right to bear arms. This is not only for protection, but for self-preservation in the aspect of sustinence.

In the beginning firearms were developed so that people could hunt for their own food, not kill other people. That came later when crime was "invented." I have never shot at or harmed another human being and never will unless someone breaks into my home and threatens my children.

Just suppose someone breaks into your home in the middle of the night and threatens the lives of your children with an illegal firearm. Don't tell me there aren't any illegal firearms, there are everywhere in this world. How would you protect your children or would you let the burglar take their lives?

I haven't read through all the notes in this thread, but I do have a few things to add here. Oddly enough I got a call yesterday, one of the rare times I picked up a call from a number I didn't recognize. That was because the CallerID identified the caller as NRA. Sure enough it was that August organization doing a poll asking me if NY should do more to protect the 2nd amendment. My reply was that the NRA's paranoid objection to ANY reasonable gun control laws was a major problem in this country.

I will state that I have never owned a gun nor do I contemplate doing so. Though I have fired them on occasion.

I believe that people have the right to own weapons to be used for sport, hunting etc. But I firmly believe that there should be strong controls governing the purchase of such weapons. I don't recall seeing it mentioned, but the 2nd Amendment does not and never was intended to give an absolute right to owning arms. The second amendment was qualified under the need for a well ordered militia.

As for owning guns for protection of personal property. If you ask most law enforcement professionals, I think you will be told that there is greater likelihood for the home owner to get injured or killed then the person breaking in. RD68's comment about shooting to scare is inane. If you shoot at someone and they have a gun, they are more likely to shoot back. My house was burglarized many years aog and no, that did not induce me to get a weapon.

I think research will find studies showing that countries with strict gun control have less violent crime. The Dodge City mentality went out with the Old West.

J_9,
I guess you are totally blind to the posts from us Canadians in this thread. Handguns are illegal here, crime rate is lower here. I too love my kids but I would rather raise in a place with less hate and violence. I'm not afraid of people breaking into my house 'cause it so very rarely happens. That's the same reason why you probably don't have tornado insurance.

That's great you kill moose, but the point is guns are for killing. Ok, you kill animals, well, that could also mean humans. (im not saying you do :p) Killing. They are for killing.

Yes, to go back from the stage you are at is impossible.

Every one has a gun there, because its OK to do so, and a higher persent of criminals to. That means its more likely that the guy robbing your house will point a gun at you.

In this country because it is illegal, hardly anyone has one, and hardly any "criminals" do either. So, a guy breaking into your house with a shot gun, just never ever happens. (dont quote me, hopefully you see the point though).

So, the point is, if you make it legal, as it is there, it becomes a part of peoples lives, and is used in more situations, which means it is needed to defend more situations.

In countries where it is illegal, that is the opposite.

Using it for food, that's great. Using it to shot someone because they didn't give you a wallet. That's the problem you have. And that's because they are legal, AND incorporated into peoples lives, to a FAR greater extent to countries like england.

And, you can't do anything about it.

While I will agree with most of your post Scott, please see this link that was posted on page 2 by Captain Forest

http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared...sNav=nr&id=570

Selected parts:


Quote:
Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.



Quote:
Canada

The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.


I too agree that the laws should be tougher regarding the purchase of a firearm, however, criminals are going to buy them off the streets or steal them, criminals are not going to purchase guns legally. There are so many laws governing the purchase of firearms right now, and they continue to change almost daily.

P.S. I don't know how to quote older posts, so I just copied and pasted the above post.

Karma, I am not blind to those of you from Canada, look at my last post that quotes Captain Forest!

Don't need tornado insurance I don't live in a trailer. LOL

P.S. Folks this is not about bashing me!! I am not the one who made the laws, I am one of the ones who upholds it. I am not saying who is right or who is wrong, I am merely asking for opinion.

That's a dead link. I have trouble believing that the crime rate has plummeted in the US. The higher crime rate in Canada is heavily weighted towards Vancouver and Toronto so just stay out of there and you're OK. I could probably drag up 20 links that support my view but I guess it just wouldn't matter to you. I'll just enjoy my happy safe life here.

Guns suck.

But it looks like J_9 likes them,

It seems silly, crime...

Gun crime = high. Because there are more guns. Because they are legal.

Gun crime = low. Because there are less guns. Because they are illegal.

J_9 = guns = good = protection from crime.

Higher gun crime = legal guns.

Less protection from crime = lower gun crime = illegal guns = less guns = less protection.

hmm.

As I said Karma, this is not about bashing me. I did not create the freaking laws, I was merely asking for opinions. I personally do not like the crime rate here, and chose to live out of Memphis because of the crime. I wish I could afford to pick up and move to a place where there is no crime, but I can't.

If that was a dead link I apologize, I copied and pasted from page 2.

P.S. Folks this is not about bashing me!!! I am not the one who made the laws, I am one of the ones who upholds it. I am not saying who is right or who is wrong, I am merely asking for opinion.But whenever someone posts a different view you will post back reinforcing your differing view. How the hell do you know what it's like in Canada? You've never even been here so how can you tell me otherwise? Yet I have travelled throughout the US, I even have a sister that lives there.

As I stated before, I do not live in your area of the world, if I did, I may have another opinion on this issue. I only created this thread for opinions, I will continue to say I DID NOT CREATE THE FREAKING LAWS. I hate crime, I am afraid of crime, but because of the part of the world that I live it I have to live in fear.

Don't you guys get it? I hunted for sustinence where there was no crime (in the wilderness of Alaska), but now I live where crime is rampant, and I can do nothing about it.

but now I live where crime is rampant, and I can do nothing about it.Be my neighbour. :)

I would love to be your neighbour. But money issues prevent me from going where I would love to go, back to the wilderness of AK, where life is simple.

Thanks for asking though. I may come visit LOL

I'll leave the guns in the gun safe!!

I found the article CF linked to and scanned through it. I don't believe many of the statisitics support their conclusions. I'm sure If I spent the time researching I could find similar studies. One of the major points I noticed was that violent crime rates were much lower than the US to start with. So while rates may have risen they were quite low and may have increased due to other factors.

The main point that I think is relavent is that private, and legal gun ownership does not equate to safety. As I said, the legal gun owner is just as likely, if not more so, to be hurt or killed by using a gun during a robbery then the perpetrator.

One post made a point about family safety. Stressing that guns were secured to protect them from young children. But if the guns are so secured, then the likelihood of getting at them to protect oneself is greatly reduced. If they are not secured, then the likelihood of other tragedy occurring because of misuse is greatly increased.

First of all, Karma, thanks for the compliment, I think you are pretty cool too! BTW you live in Western Canada? I LOVE Banff and Lake Louise areas, I would love to live there. Whitehorse is another story, LOL, a totally different thread. Also, at least some of us here can agree to disagree and still have a laugh and be friends!!

Scott, yes I mentioned that I do have a gun safe. It is kept under lock and key and combination, but that is more to prevent robberies than protection. For protection I have a firearm located somewhere in my house where only my husband and I know where it is. As for the children, they know how firearms work and know that they MUST stay out of the room when a firearm is present. I have instilled a healthy knowledge of what a working firearm can and will do when and if in the wrong hands.

Finally, the Second Amendment clearly states

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

You Canadians need to stop the bashing on J 9 and our Americas rites. I to support the 2nd.If you can't deal with it then don't look at this site.I have a room full of guns but you don't see me killing a human just animals to eat. Yes I might occasionaly fire in the air to scare of tresspassers but I don't shoot them.I been in the Armed forces protecting your butts and all you want to to is bash our way of living.I'm sorry but your Government needs a wake up call.I'm sorry if this offended anyone but that's how I feel.And J 9 Keep up the good work.

Rd68, thanks for being part of our military and protecting the lives of me and my children as well as the lives of many people around the world. You truly deserve all the thanks and praise you can get for putting your life on the line for people like us.

If you can't deal with it then don't look at this site.I think you may be a little ignorant of the way the Web (and the Internet) works. You may also have noticed that I never bashed your 2nd amendment - nice try at baiting me though. Please realize that the USA isn't the only country in the world and doesn't run the show.

Have a great day with your room full of guns, I'm happy it gives you the comfort you need.

You Canadians need to stop the bashing on J 9 and our Americas rites. I to support the 2nd.If you can't deal with it then don't look at this site.I have a room full of guns but you don't see me killing a human just animals to eat. yes i might occasionaly fire in the air to scare of tresspassers but i don't shoot them.I been in the Armed forces protecting your butts and all you want to to is bash our way of living.I'm sorry but your Government needs a wake up call.I'm sorry if this offended anyone but thats how i feel.And J 9 Keep up the good work.

Who's "bashing" anyone?

First, As I pointed out the 2nd Amendment does NOT give an absolute right to keep and bear arms. There is the qualification of a "well ordered militia".

Second, you are missing the issue that J 9 raised. Whether gun control laws affect violent crime. What would happen if you fired to "scare off" a trespasser? Lets say that trespasser thought he was being attacked and decided to fire back! Where would you be? Another violent crime statistic!

Who's "bashing" anyone?

First, As I pointed out the 2nd Amendment does NOT give an absolute right to keep and bear arms. There is the qualification of a "well ordered militia".

Second, you are missing the issue that J 9 raised. Whether gun control laws affect violent crime. What would happen if you fired to "scare off" a trespasser? Lets say that trespasser thought he was being attacked and decided to fire back! Where would you be? Another violent crime statistic!This is where I would be if he/she started shooting back I would be calling the police and have them come with a corner cause their sorry butts will be layng dead after I shot back couse I don't miss.and nothing would be done to me seeing that I have NO TRESSPASSING signs up and they were BREAKING & ENTERING.
So yes I think I would shoot someone to protect my family.So don't mess with me or the gun rights of every gun owner in the states.As far as I'm concernd you can move to canada if you think guns should be band here.I've killed to protect my country and I'll kill to protect my family.

I'm going to guess that you live alone and don't host a lot of parties at your place. :D

I'm going to guess that you live alone and don't host a lot of parties at your place. :D:D No I don't live alone but if my wife sees this I might.:D

This is where i would be if he/she started shooting back i would be calling the police and have them come with a corner cause their sorry butts will be layng dead after i shot back couse i don't miss.and nothing would be done to me seeing that i have NO TRESSPASSING signs up and they were BREAKING & ENTERING.
So yes i think i would shoot someone to protect my family.So don't mess with me or the gun rights of every gun owner in the states.As far as i'm concernd you can move to canada if you think guns should be band here.I've killed for my country and i'll kill for my family.

Not necessarily. You shoot in the air, they react. Maybe they don't miss either so you don't get a second chance.

You might also try reading what I've said. At no time did I ever say that guns should be BANNED in the US. What I did say is that they should be under reasonable control. I'm not messing with anyone's ACTUAL gun rights. I'm proposing that those rights be upheld with reasonable controls.

Also the laws about justifiable homicide (which is what you are talking about) have been tightened in many jurisdictions. Firing on a trespasser without any indication of danger to yourself, might not get you the pass you think it might. In fact, if you fired first, they might have a better case of justifiable homicide if they killed you.

Okay, folks, no need to fight here. This is not what this thread was started for. We all have our own opinions and we have a RIGHT to our own opinions.

Yes, the second amendment states a "well ordered militia" which we here in the states as well as many other countries do have. But it also states that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

I knew this would start a debate, but I did not want it to start a fight.

And, Scott, yes you seem to be bashing everyone who does not share your viewpoint.

And, Scott, yes you seem to be bashing everyone who does not share your viewpoint.

Excuse me? Who and how?

I have not bashed ANYONE! I may have disagreed with some points being made, but I have not said anything personal about anyone.

Yes I know what the 2nd Amendment says. You seem to want to treat it as two separate parts. I disagree, I believe it has to be treated as a whole.

Not necessarily. You shoot in the air, they react. Maybe they don't miss either so you don't get a second chance.

You might also try reading what I've said. At no time did I ever say that guns should be BANNED in the US. What I did say is that they should be under reasonable control. I'm not messing with anyone's ACTUAL gun rights. I'm proposing that those rights be upheld with reasonable controls.

Also the laws about justifiable homicide (which is what you are talking about) have been tightened in many jurisdictions. Firing on a trespasser without any indication of danger to yourself, might not get you the pass you think it might. In fact, if you fired first, they might have a better case of justifiable homicide if they killed you.Ok I admit that if I do shoot in the air and they react.the only thing about this is my wife has another gun pointed right at them from a window.so one way or another they won't be leaving.And if they do shoot me they will be the ones going to jail not me that's why they have NO TRESSPASSING LAWS And no BREAKING & ENTERING LAWS to. But if I'm going to shoot someone it's to protect my family or to protect my country.You want to know why they want to band the 2nd it's because of stuped street gangs.If they want to shoot someone ship them of to Afganistan to find Bin Laden then we will see how long they last with a gun over their.They and you would toss your weapons and run I Guarantee it.And to me You have got to be one big... Well I won't say it on here but J 9 knows what I'm talking about.

Yes, Scott, you disagreed with what many have said, and I am sure that will not stop. However, the way you "disagree" comes across to some as bashing. I wish everyone would keep this civil, as I said before, we all have our own opinions whether others share them or not, they are opinions.

Yes there are no Trespassing laws and laws against breaking and entering. But they are not always what you seem to think they are. The mere act of trespassing does NOT give you the right to use a firearm, even to scare them off. You actually could be cited for reckless endangerment in some areas.

You would have to show imminent danger to justify your use of firearms. And let me make it clear, that if there was a case of immient danger, I would support your use of firearms to protect your family.

However, my opinion is that using firearms tends to begat more violence. That in case of a use of firearms the honest citizen is, at least equally, likely to become the victim as the dishonest one.


Yes, Scott, you disagreed with what many have said, and I am sure that will not stop. However, the way you "disagree" comes across to some as bashing. I wish everyone would keep this civil, as I said before, we all have our own opinions whether others share them or not, they are opinions.

When, at least in this thread, have I not been civil? Please point out one instance or retract the accusation.

You are very right about the Tresspassing Laws Scott. In many areas you may not use any kind of violence when involved in, let's say, a home invasion. If so, when the cops arrive you must be able to PROVE without the shadow of a doubt that you were in fear of your life.

I will not reatract any accusation. I also refuse to let someone bully me on this board. I am my own person with my own views, just as we all are on here.

I am taking the gun class tomorrow night and will let you know how it goes, if interested. Not meant to be contentious Scott but for the record, "shooting into the air" or anything else you cannot guarantee is dangerous because of how it can ricochet or pass through walls. They say you should take aim and fire at only that which you mean to harm, outside of target practice. That part has already been impressed on me by both my firearms happy friend Frank and the range instructor. I am taking gun ownership very seriously here.

I will not reatract any accusation. I also refuse to let someone bully me on this board. I am my own person with my own views, just as we all are on here.

Views are one thing. But you talk about being civil and not bashing then you bash me with false accusations. Either back up your accusations with evidence or retract them. That's only fair. I'm not trying to bully anyone, I'm simply asking for fair treatment. Either prove what you say or retract it.

Anything I say here I believe I can back up. If I can't I will retract it. I do no less than I expect of others.

Scott<>


Not meant to be contentious Scott but for the record, "shooting into the air" or anything else you cannot guarantee is dangerous because of how it can ricochet or pass through walls. They say you should aim and shoot at only that which you mean harm outside of target practice. That part has already been impressed on me by both my firearms happy friend Frank and the range instructor. I am taking gun ownership very seriously here.

I agree with your instructors. I actually started to say something similar, but didn't want to give anyone ideas. If one is going to use a firearm for protection, then one has to be serious about doing so. The romantic notion of shooting a gun out of someone's hand is just movie stuff. I recall reading somewhere that police are trained to fire in minimum three shot groups for effectiveness.

A person must the take the responsibly for their action requarding firearms. I personally own weapons for protection. I know the police cannot protect me from home invasions, simply for the distant they must travel. Each state is different regarding that. But when it comes to my life and my family I will protect them, I will do so without regard to what the law states..

ScottGem, I do understand what my states law states, but if I don't protect myself, how will the law help me after I am dead?

I would rather deal with the law which in my state (Maryland) states you must give the intruder and chance to leave before deadly force can be use.

I see that the law in MAryland does not protect the home owner at all, and I have voiced my opinion to the state representatives, who doesn't understand the problem.

If a intruder is in your home, breaking, shots or stabs you, because you must give them a chance to leave, before deadly force is used, how does the law protect you?

My only option is to protect me and the family with whatever will be deemed necessary at that time.

For what its worth, its been a long road to arrive here at gun ownership for me. Much thought and discussion and research went into it. Along the way, I have reconciled myself to a full awareness that if I take aim at anyone, it will be as immediately as possible followed by firing. It will be with the intention to kill. If the circumstances didn't warrant this, I would not begin the sequence at all. I would not have bought the gun unless it was to be used for what its intended. This is not a balance of power or a means to intimidate or negotiate, but a tool, a method for stopping an event. That is all.

I feel I am realistic in my understanding of home invasions. I have already experienced fighting for my life and know well the accompanying terror/panic that it brings. It is, for those who don't know, an event that simply won't provide enough time or opportunity for much else. That tends to be the real shocker for so many. For many years afterwards, I could not fight back, so you are seeing the tail end of a big journey here.

If I end up taking a life, there will be profound feelings afterwards. There is no question of that. But I will be secure in my understanding that I was defending myself. I continue to learn and tomorrow night I seek to gain an understanding of all the laws pertaining to responsible home protection and gun ownership in order to be legal. I would suggest any gun owner out there do likewise.

This is serious stuff.

I understand what you are saying, but which is more important, loss of property or loss of life? From what I've read, most such burglaries do not involve violence.

If you use a weapon there is at least an equal likelihood of you losing your life. You have to make your own decisions.

Again, I was agreeing with you in that you, at least understand the decisions you are making.

So how do you propose I take a survey of which one he is? Trust me, this isn't about property in an occupied dwelling and if it was, the thief should have done better homework. I am not being flip here.

I hope that is the point of Americans having the right to bear arms or whatever it says. Most Americans are responsible citizens who take their guns seriously and they aren't the problem in the US criminals are!!

So let's get this straight.

In the U.S. I can presume that the great majority of the population if not actually owning firearms are probably familiar with them.

With this vast knowledge of firearms can anyone explain how come, when they get dressed in uniform they manage to shoot more of their allies than the enemy does??

"Friendly fire" isn't! ;)

OMG, Magpie, you are way too funny!!

"over sexed, overfed, and over here"

hmmm... guess if I'm 2 out of 3 that isn't bad. =)

Exactly J-9 - that is why I "presumed" rather than "assumed" :D

My reasoning is that someone who is familiar with the "equipment" should, by rights, be confident with that "equipment" and less prone to "hair-trigger"

OK - call me a whining Brit - but ( reaches for his wooden spoon ;) ) - in a recent "confab" didn't that helicopter have a Maple Leaf on it?? :p :D

ScottGem, I do understand what my states law states, but if I dont protect my self, how will the law help me after I am dead?

I would rather deal with the law which in my state (Maryland) states you must give the intruder and chance to leave before deadly force can be use.

I see that the law in MAryland does not protect the home owner at all, and I have voiced my opinion to the state representatives, who doesn't understand the problem.

If a intruder is in your home, breakin, shots or stabs you, because you must give them a chance to leave, before deadly force is used, how does the law protect you?

My only option is to protect me and the family with whatever will be deemed necessary at that time.I firmly agree mr.yet Thank you.


I hope that is the point of Americans having the right to bear arms or whatever it says. Most Americans are responsible citizens who take their guns seriously and they aren't the problem in the US criminals are!!!I agree with you.


The purpose of a gun is too kill. That was what it was thought up and invented for. Not air riffle shooting or what ever.

I think having the second ammendment has brought the promlem on its own.

If some one has a gun, people are going to get a gun to protect them selves from that other person with a gun, and the other person is going to get a bigger gun to protect them selves from the person who is protecting themselves from them.

Circle. Its just like nukes, once one person has one, everyone needs one for protection and deterency, and it just gets bigger and bigger.

Unfortunatly, once a law has been in place to make somthing legal, its bloody hard to make it illegal again.

It is much safer in countries where guns are illegal, as there is less want for one, less opportunity to get one, and less tolleration for them, and less in circulation.

It is true, that if someone wants a gun, they can get one. So making it legal is not going to deter those, and neither is making it illegal. But making it illegal will stop people getting them "just because".

I could never live in a country where there are nearly as many guns as dogs :p Protection? No. If no one had a gun, you wouldnt need the protection, and so, the whole situation has caused its self.

I hate guns.One question?What is a dog going to do if the intruider has a gun and all you have is a dog.The dog is more than likely going to be shot and their you are with no other protection. That would be like bringing a knife to a gun fight.I've seen this to many times over in Afganistan some of the rag heads wouldn't be armed with a gun it would be either with a dog or knife or anything else but a gun.and their we stand with our guns locked and loaded aimed right for them.Lucky for them we could not fire being they were not armed to shoot.(But sometimes you have to make adjustments).

I have 3 dogs, 2 of which are rather frightening in looks only. While dogs may deter some people they will not stop someone who is doped up on crack or the big drug here is Meth. This county in my state is one of the biggest counties for making Meth cause of the remote areas.

So, dogs will not solve the problem.

So why don't you make a plan to find another job in a safer area?

I have 3 dogs, 2 of which are rather frightening in looks only. While dogs may deter some people they will not stop someone who is doped up on crack or the big drug here is Meth. This county in my state is one of the biggest counties for making Meth cause of the remote areas.

So, dogs will not solve the problem.I would say that you are right on the money.It's the same here to eccept crack is the biggest problem Meth is not a huge one here yet but I'm waiting for it to be.My sister in law is on the crack bad she has already stole from me and my other brother.So I informed her about stealing from me next time she does it there won't be a next time.Never the less she denied it like all crack heads do.My brother on the other hand he made a diff. one,He walks up to her very calm and says if you do it again I'll kick your butt.Now wheres my money.Then he smacks her upside her nappy head.

Guns are not for everyone and up until recently they certainly weren't for me. But like it or not, people can, and do, threaten each other's very existence, rare though that may be for any one of us. For a long time, I told myself that if I am threatened to that degree - I'll move. So I moved a lot. Until moving didn't work anymore (I am married to a lovely man who won't move out of the US). Then I told myself so if I am threatened to that degree - I will temporarily run, hide or lose the fight and cease to exist. Valid options certainly. But one day something changed for me and I can't actually say what. I am willing to fight back, if I am ever faced with that sort of threat. And in that willingness, I believe I had best meet force with force. It is a skill I hope to never use. Like my aikido instructor said at the first class: "The best fight to have is NO fight but that may be easier to manage if you know you can defend in a way you believe you'll survive".

The fight or threat among human exists whether guns are in the picture or not. It has to do with we really haven't come along far enough collectively on this planet to realise that violence of any kind (with or without guns) is not the answer.

In the meantime, I choose to respond to certain threats in this manner. But don't decieve yourself that the threat is spawned by anything other than people. It is up to each person to determine how great it seems and how they care to meet it.

Guns are not for everyone and up until recently they certainly weren't for me. But like it or not, people can, and do, threaten each other's very existance, rare though that may be for any one of us. For a long time, I told myself that if I am threatened to that degree - I'll move. So I moved a lot. Until moving didn't work anymore (I am married to a lovely man who won't move out of the US). Then I told myself so if I am threatened to that degree - I will temporarily run, hide or lose the fight and cease to exist. Valid options certainly. But one day something changed for me and I can't actually say what. I am willing to fight back, if I am ever faced with that sort of threat. ANd in the willingness, I believe I had best meet force with force. It is a skill I hope to never use. Like my aikido instructor said at the first class: the best fight to have is NO fight but that may be easier to manage if you know you can defend in a way you believe you'll survive.

The fight or threat among human exists whether guns are in the picture or not. It has to do with we really haven't come along far enough collectively on this planet to realise that violence of any kind (with or without guns) is not the answer to anything.

In the meantime, I choose to respond to certain threats in this manner. But don't decieve yourself that the threat is spawned by anything other than people. It is up to each person to determine how great it seems and how they care to meet it.Preach it sista preach it. I do have to say you made a point.Diff. People have diff. ways to go about violence. But me I think I'm in my own little area (Land).If you pass my boundries They will be dealt with in more ways than one.I'm not saying I'll kill someone and I'm not saying I won't. All I'm saying is if they mess with me or my family I'm not responsible for what happens next.

...I'm not responsible for what happens next.Actually you are. You are responsible for all your actions. Jus' sayin'...

I have 3 dogs, 2 of which are rather frightening in looks only. While dogs may deter some people they will not stop someone who is doped up on crack or the big drug here is Meth. This county in my state is one of the biggest counties for making Meth cause of the remote areas.

So, dogs will not solve the problem.

Guns won't "solve" the problem either.

Let me try and make this clear. I am not against gun ownership. While its not for me, I can appreciate others who feel they want to own them. Either for sport and/or for protection. I am for reasonable gun control laws that can help keep guns out of the hands of people who are not responsible or honest enough to use them responsibly.

Nor do I think that will "solve" the problem either. The solution, as I see it is a utopian society where there are no have nots, who will try to take from the haves. But we are a vey long way from such a society.

Getting back to dogs. No they aren't the solution, but they can help. Thieves want things easy, otherwise they probably wouldn't have become thieves. If they hear a dog, see a burglar alarm protection sticker, note the area has a neighborhood watch or other forms of protection, they are more likely to go elsewhere.

But if one does encounter someone doped up with a gun, having their own weapon makes them at least as likely to get hurt as the doper.

There was a story on the news this morning about an 11 yr old shooting a 5 yr old (he died) while playing with a gun. They didn't give all the details so I don't know whether the gun was licensed or what. But there are stories about such tragedies frequently.

We don't allow people to get behind the wheel of a car without making sure they have some competence. Should we do no less with a device designed to kill?


Actually you are. You are responsible for all your actions. Jus' sayin'...

Just what I've been saying. The Wild West mentality should have died out long ago. We do not live in a vacuum. Everyone needs to step up and take responsibility for their actions and how those actions might affect others.

Actually you are. You are responsible for all your actions. Jus' sayin'...That's just a saying,I know I would be responsible for what I do.But they would make me be responsible for what I do to them.

Guns won't "solve" the problem either.

Let me try and make this clear. I am not against gun ownership. While its not for me, I can appreciate others who feel they want to own them. Either for sport and/or for protection. I am for reasonable gun control laws that can help keep guns out of the hands of people who are not responsible or honest enough to use them responsibly.

Nor do I think that will "solve" the problem either. The solution, as I see it is a utopian society where there are no have nots, who will try to take from the haves. But we are a vey long way from such a society.

Getting back to dogs. No they aren't the solution, but they can help. Thieves want things easy, otherwise they probably wouldn't have become thieves. If they hear a dog, see a burglar alarm protection sticker, note the area has a neighborhood watch or other forms of protection, they are more likely to go elsewhere.

But if one does encounter someone doped up with a gun, having their own weapon makes them at least as likely to get hurt as the doper.

There was a story on the news this morning about an 11 yr old shooting a 5 yr old (he died) while playing with a gun. They didn't give all the details so I don't know whether the gun was licensed or what. But there are stories about such tragedies frequently.

We don't allow people to get behind the wheel of a car without making sure they have some competence. Should we do no less with a device designed to kill?



Just what I've been saying. The Wild West mentality should have died out long ago. We do not live in a vacuum. Everyone needs to step up and take responsibility for their actions and how those actions might affect others.If your not against it then why are you saying that we the people of the states should have no rights to have guns.Criminals should not have them,gangs should not have them.And whoever leaves a gun out for a child to get a hold of it doesn't need one either That was eresponsible and ignorant on their part.Land owners and people that have a permmit and police should have guns They are the cautious ones.Land owners = HUNTING,Permits = RIGHTS, police = PROTECTION.Armed forces = Keeping Your American butt safe.

...then why are you saying that we the people of the states should have no rights to have guns.Ok I'll bite - where in this thread did he say that?

Ok I'll bite - where in this thread did he say that?WAKE UP!! He's been saying that this whole time but not just in them words.Yep your pure canadian you can't see what's going on.Sorry for that remark I'm just speaking my mind.

If your not against it then why are you saying that we the people of the states should have no rights to have guns.

Please show me anyplace where I have ever said Americans should have no rights to have guns! I strongly suggest you read things more carefully before you have another case of foot in mouth disease. You are the one who needs to wake up. I have NOT been saying that at all. My position has always been that we need REASONABLE gun control legislation. Not the banning of gun ownership.


Criminals should not have them,gangs should not have them.And whoever leaves a gun out for a child to get a hold of it dosn't need one either That was eresponsible and ignorant on their part.Land owners and people that have a permmit and police should have guns They are the cautious ones.Land owners = HUNTING,Permits = RIGHTS, police = PROTECTION.Armed forces = Keeping Your American butt safe.

Here I agree. But this begs the question of how do we keep them out of the hands of gangs and other criminals. How do we keep them out of the hands of irresponsible and ignorant users?

The answer is effective and reasonable gun control legislation.

WAKE UP!!!!! He's been saying that this whole time but not just in them words.Yep your pure canadian you can't see what's going on.Sorry for that remark i'm just speaking my mind.Oh, so he's saying it but not using words... I see. http://boards1.wizards.com/images/smilies/crazy.gif

I believe my being Canadian has nothing to do with it, unless you're a redneck. Sorry for that remark I'm just speaking my mind.

Oh, so he's saying it but not using words... I see. http://boards1.wizards.com/images/smilies/crazy.gif

I believe my being Canadian has nothing to do with it, unless you're a redneck. Sorry for that remark i'm just speaking my mind.:D Touché good comeback [Applause].

Please show me anyplace where I have ever said Americans should have no rights to have guns! I strongly suggest you read things more carefully before you have another case of foot in mouth disease. You are the one who needs to wake up. I have NOT been saying that at all. My position has always been that we need REASONABLE gun control legislation. Not the banning of gun ownership.



Here I agree. But this begs the question of how do we keep them out of the hands of gangs and other criminals. How do we keep them out of the hands of irresponsible and ignorant users?

The answer is effective and reasonable gun control legislation.Even though you don't write it in.But that what your really saying.I might be a little dumb but I'm not plumb dumb. I can see where your going with all your little remarks about gun control.You might have some people like NeedKarma fooled with your thing about gun control but not me.I see the hidden messages your writing down.

I have thought a great deal about violence and I have a hypothetical solution (that works but won't be used LOL) for consideration. Let's say you're dealing with a group of people where a fight broke out. What I would do is severely punish the person who threw the first punch. It is important to recognise everyone's need for self defense so I would let everyone else off the hook. Now I know that some of them were not using self defense but rather used the fight breaking out as an excuse to initiate some action of their own. But trying to sort those out from the true self defenders is a "rumplestiltskinian" task so I wouldn't even attempt it.

Now with the first person being severely punished, the incident of fights breaking out would be curtailed. The level of punishment for the first offender could be raised until it all stopped. The trouble with this is:

If we all were to vote on this solution, we would vote it down despite its ability to solve the problem. And the reason why is because many of us can still relate to the one who throws the first punch. Some of us have reconciled our own dark side enough that we could vote for it, but not everyone. This is why Gandhi said: "We must be the change we seek in the world".

Can you imagine a world wide cease fire?

Even though you don't write it in.But that what your really saying.I might be a little dumb but i'm not plumb dumb. I can see where your going with all your little remarks about gun control.You might have some people like NeedKarma fooled with your thing about gun control but not me.I see the hidden messages your writting down.

No, that's not what I'm saying, just as you aren't really saying you will shoot anyone who steps foot on your property (or are you really saying that?).

What you are seeing is your own paranoia about gun control. Like many who hide behind the alleged protection of the 2nd amendment, you seem to be opposed to any reasonable gun control legislation. You think that each law about gun control is an attempt to deny you of your perceived rights.

You claim to see hidden messages where I tell you there are none. Did it ever occur to you that NeedKarma is the one seeing the truth and you are the one being fooled by your own prejudices? Because that IS what's happening.

I will state my position again. I believe that Americans have a right to own firearms for sport, for hunting, for personal protection. I also believe that Americans should be required to show that they will be reasonable and responsible in the exercise of that ownership. I do not believe that firearms should be unilaterally banned.

That is my position. If you want to read anything else into it, then you are making a mistake.

Scott - Stop With The Hidden Messages!! 1111!! You're Trying To Brainwash Me1!! 1!!

Scott - Stop With The Hidden Messages!!!!1111!!! You're Trying To Brainwash Me1!!!1!!!!!!

Hosing down Needkarma to rinse off the brain wash :D

People who live in the USA are lucky they have the right to defend themselves. In Canada, it is nearly impossible to own a handgun unless in a gun club and carrying one is not allowed. Even long guns must be registered and must be stored unloaded and locked in a cabinet separate from ammunition. Even unarmed people who defend themselves in their own homes from a burglar can face assault or murder charges. Even stun guns and pepper spray is not legal for civilians. I love Canada but the rules about self defence are clearly ridiculous.

Because we very rarely have to self-defend ourselves. I rather like it that way.

I am now closing that thread seeing that it is a year old.

Meanie :p