[Jonegy]

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! ;)

[J_9]

OMG, Magpie, you are way too funny!!

[kp2171]

"over sexed, overfed, and over here"

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

[Jonegy]

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

[rd68]

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).

[J_9]

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.

[NeedKarma]

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

[rd68]

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.

[valinors_sorrow]

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.

[rd68]

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.

[NeedKarma]

...I'm not responsible for what happens next.

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

[ScottGem]

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.

[rd68]

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.

[rd68]

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.

[NeedKarma]

...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?

[rd68]

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.

[ScottGem]

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.

[NeedKarma]

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.

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.

[rd68]

Oh, so he's saying it but not using words... I see.

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].

[rd68]

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.