Your voice on guns

[Scorpiоn]

*PS. I'm sure that if I slept with a loaded gun under my pillow I would be in severe danger of shooting myself.

Along the same lines, I can't quite understand these wise-guys who stick their side arms down their "trousers".  Least of all, in the front!

I think the steam is finally running out in this thread (finally - but not before I add some more wood to the fire... ), but in a country where everyone is afraid of everything, of course there's going to be this many deaths with guns.  People are edgy in America.  Now, the ol' case of "The chicken and the Egg" comes in: Did the guns start the fear, or did the fear breed the guns?

Nonetheless, it's not the government's responsibility; or your congressman's; or the president's; or your dog's, it your/our responsibility to create a mindset and attitude to where guns could run rampant around the country, and no one gets killed.  Of course, with the aforementioned fear in America, I don't see it happening.  In the near or far future.  I still try anyway.  Guns are tons of fun, but I don't joke with them.  They are instruments of death, and I think most people forget that - that the gun is only harmful if you point it at someone.  I don't see a whole lot of people who act responsibly with guns nowadays. It's like they're toys.

Like I said, I'll keep shootin' my rifle and side arm down on the range, and hope they stay legal - for awhile anyway.

Cardinal Rules of Gun Handling
1: Never point your gun at anything you don't plan to shoot - EVER.
2: To your knowledge, all guns are loaded
3: Ensure your target is a target.
4: The trigger and finger should never come in contact unless shooting.

[Woodlouse2002]

"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. "

Could we not assume that there was a misunderstanding on the part of the scribe and the second amendment is simply giving the people the right to roll up their sleeves?

[Katahu]

Ain't this a touchy subject.

My opinion, gun owners [new and old] should be required to attend gun-handling classes [which should also teach gun ethics] regularely so that gun owners can remember the responsibilities in which ownership of a gun brings. And other things.

In the USAF, we have a program that requires ALL air forces personel [of all ranks] to attend briefings that will constantly remind them of many things [safety, professionalism, work ethics, financing, etc. anything] on the back of their heads. The breifings even remind us [time and again] to wear bike helmets and reflective gear.

To me, it's better to make a gun owner sit in a class and be reminded of things [constantly] about a gun than to spend valuable resources on laws that don't work well.

[ozzy72]

[quote]I can't quite understand these wise-guys who stick their side arms down their "trousers".

[Blackhart]

Traffic laws don't keep people from dying in car accidents, but outlawing cars would.

The proffered tenet doesn't fly.

No cars, no traffic accidents? Sooner or later some fine young lad is going to run his bicycle off a bridge and die. Or someone is gloing to fall off a bike without a helmet, crack his bean and then you have one. Or fall off a horse for that matter.

Take away guns and there are still going to be killings and murders. Another method will be found.

Before there were guns, there were a lot of folks that were very proficient with a knife and saber. Poison was a lot more popular too.

The murder rate is not due to the availability of guns, it is due to the breakdown in morals and taboos. And God being driven from our schools and society in general.

Whether you believe in God or not is not the point. The point is, when God was a prevelent factor in society, the looming threat of Hell and God's displeasure, a lot more people toed the line so to speak.

It is not quite that simple. There are many factors involved in the breakdown of society, but that is a big one.

Some say it is sad that we in America need guns to defend ourselves. I ask you, what would happen in the EU if everyone still carried swords and daggers?

[Chris_F]

Whether you believe in God or not is not the point. The point is, when God was a prevelent factor in society, the looming threat of Hell and God's displeasure, a lot more people toed the line so to speak.

I would have agreed with you if you had substituted "ethics" for "god".  I think you'll find that there was a lot of murder, crime, and violence during the middle ages, when "god" as a concept was at its greatest influence in western society.  I think you'll also find at best no relationship between "god" as a concept and murder/crime/theft today in other countries (and may even find countires with a strong concept of "god" have a higher murder/crime/theft rate then those who don't).  

For example, what is the murder rate in Europe versus Pakastan?  Japan versus Iran?  I honestly don't know the answer, however it is not clear to me that Europe and Japan have much higher murder rates then Iran and Pakastan, while it is clear to me that "god" plays much less of a role in the lives of the typical European or Japaneese citizen versus the typical Pakastani or Iranian citizen.

[Blackhart]

True. But when God was a big part of Western Society, the belief in same provided the ethics. Since God has been removed, no alternate source of ethics has presented itself.

And parents have defaulted.

I had stated the loss of morals and taboos which pretty much covers your thought on ethics.

[ATI_7500]

The connection of murderings and ethics doesn't seem that important to me.
How many murders are talking to a priest and pray before they're led to the electric chair? One hell of a lot.

There were always whackos and there will always be. In former times, they had a dagger, now they have guns.

[Blackhart]

Ahhh, but have you noticed the correlation in numbers of whackos then and now?

[Chris_F]

There were always whackos and there will always be. In former times, they had a dagger, now they have guns.

Technology has made us all effective, in every endeavor, for better or for worse.  In this case the specific technology (guns) is widespread enough that no quantity of legislation will keep them out of the hands of those who use them improperly.  Heck, our world leaders are having a difficult time keeping WMD out of the wrong hands, why should we believe that it's possible to keep such a prevelent resource out of the wrong hands?

[Chris_F]

Ahhh, but have you noticed the correlation in numbers of whackos then and now?

There are more people around so there are more wackos and more non-wackos.  But on a per-capita basis I'd have to say there were more wackos then.  The media has distorted the perception of reality, which confuses the issue.  But I think there were definately more wackos then.  Especially if "then" refers to the height of religous involvement in western civilization: i.e. the Dark Ages.

[Blackhart]

Nope, talking about the last 40 years or so.

[Chris_F]

Well, 50-60 years ago (1944-1954) roughly coincided with the end of WWII and the hole in the population that created.  Eliminating a big chunk of the young male demographic does wonders for crime rates.  Then there was a big skyrocket in crime rates 30-40 years ago (1964-1974) as the baby boomers got old enough to start breaking stuff.  I think the trend is more demographic based then religion based.

[Blackhart]

Nevermind