Off topic: Guns

[duchman]

As john Bennet said, i created a new thread about guns.

My ? is, Why are you americans so facinated about guns??
I'm a member off a shootingclub, i've practiced with several guns,
Sore it's fun, but i don't see the point in keping a gun at home and being so proud of you gun.
Durring the election's there was a show on the dutch tv.
They interviewed texans, about who they voted for.
A lot of guy's said, I VOTE FOR BUSH, BECAUSE AS AN AMERICAN I WANT THE RIGHT OWN GUN'S.
I'm sorry guy's, but how low can you go? would you vote for al bundy if he elected him self and said" every american should own a gun?
A LOT of people die in the usa because gun's are so easy to get.
Would you turn in youre gun for a lower crime rate in the usa?


p.s Please don't turn this into a hollond vs Usa debate with lame remark about, weed, h0okers and such

[Oldskulbus]

Duchman,

There is a good reason why US people love guns: our country was created using them. If we hadn't of had them back in the day then we never could have beat the English and won our independence. Our founding fathers also realized how important it was for the common man to own a gun. They forsaw the possiblity of the government becoming to powerful and that the government could take the liberty away from its people. So they wanted everyone to own a gun so that the democracy would not be sacrificed. Yes I agree that we have a lot of problems becasue guns are easy to get. But... This was the way our country was created. It is the driving force for our democracy.

[sabrutat2]

Duchman, I do believe the yanks WOULD vote for Al Bundy if he ran for president LOL



Cheers

Stef

[John Bennett]

Re: Off topic: Guns

"My ? is, Why are you americans so facinated about guns??

Like Oldskillbus said. They are an intergral part of our culture. They always have been. Plus, as the member of a shooting club you can surely understand how fun guns can be.


"i don't see the point in keping a gun at home and being so proud of you gun.

We have guns in our homes to protect us from criminals. In the US a person's house is their sanctuary. It is common knowledge here that if you break into a person's home you accept the possibility that you will be killed for doing so.

Studies have show that this knowledge is an effective deterent to house breaking. Criminals respond rationally to this threat. House breaking is much less common in places where guns are widely available. House breaking is much more common in places where guns are not widely available.

Why are we proud of our guns?

There are certain groups in the US who want to outlaw guns. Gun owners here must fight these groups continuously to maintain their rights. This never ending fight generates pride. All good soldiers are proud.

" would you vote for al bundy if he elected him self and said every american should own a gun?"

That's just silly and you know it.


"A LOT of people die in the usa because gun's are so easy to get. "

A lot MORE people LIVE beguns are easy to get. The benefits simply out-weigh the costs.

"Would you turn in youre gun for a lower crime rate in the usa?

No. To illustrate why, I give you this quote by Patrick Henry...

‘‘Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined’’

Here's a couple more:

‘‘Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State.’’

— Heinrich Himmler

‘‘Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States’’

— Noah Webster, 1888

[Oldskulbus]

Good post John. Checks and balances make this country. The fact that the people are armed is the last check between our society and an authroitarian one which strips people of their liberty.

[SweepEm]

duche dude:
I am not going to rehash what was already written but it might be a difficult concept for you to grasp since you are from another country.
There are a lot of anti-gun groups in the world, and here in the US, but many studies have shown that with an increase in advertised gun ownership, there is a decrease in crime.
There is a city in Florida where they tried to make it mandatory to own a gun for protection. In this city, the crime rate went down, dramatically.

If you remember the Night Stalker, Richard Ramirez was terrorizing the city, mutilating and then killing people in the night. Many people lived in fear and went out to buy a gun. An interesting statistic was that the burglary rate while Ramirez was free to go and kill, was almost zero in most areas. If you're a burglar and know that there are a lot of home owners with guns, ready to defend their homes, you'll stay at home or change your profession.
My one friend slept with his gun under his pillow because his home fit a profile that the Night Stalker used to go into; near a freeway, single story dwelling, yellow color and a few more specifics..............
Every one sighed and was relieved when the Night Stalker was caught, every day folks to the hardened criminals too.

Another instance where it's been shown that you have to defend yourself is the LA riots. There is just not enough police and too many people to have the protection you need. I can tell you countless stories of my friends who were trapped in many areas during the riots and the lawlessness they witnessed.Many people are anti gun and want to outlaw all guns, but studies have shown that you take the guns out of the hands of citizens, only the criminals will have guns.
As you can tell, I am pro-gun and feel very strongly about this topic but won't go overboard with this.

I HAVE to carry a gun everyday, for protection because of crime.

[duchman]

thanks for the response guy's. It's nice to see some serious posts on the forum now and than.
I will post a reply tommorow. as soon as my dammed exams are over.


p.s Sweepem, duche is old, please call me aaron or webmaster of http://www.pattersonrules.org/

[Underdog]

Duch, the whole point of the matter is when you say:

"fascinated by guns".

This is something, that as a gun owner, a shooter and a gun enthusiast I've heard time over time.

We are not fascinated by guns, quite the opposite, we treat them as they are. Tools.

A gun is a manner to extend your will beyond your arm's lenght.

If your will is bad, so will be the gun.

But remember,

A malevolent person will have no problem arming himself, and the only barrier between him and the achievement of his twisted purposes will be only another gun, on the opposite side.

[SweepEm]

OK Erin



Hey UnderDog, good thoughts.



How's your family?

[Mik_36]

Hi,

I'm really glad nobody has taken offence to Aaron's question because it is a serious question that deserves a serious answer.

Aaron there is one thing that all anti-gun lobbiest have in common, nearly everyone of them has never lived in a very violent area.

Whether these are wealthy Liberals in the states or others that live in less crime riden areas.

This is not to put them down or put anyone who lives in a decent area down, and I'm not putting you down either because frankly I like you and (in my sick sense of humor) you've made me laugh once or twice on this forum. (you guys are probably going to get pissed at me for encouraging him, he can be a little funny at times, in a very sick way)

Don't get me wrong Dutch people DO have to deal with crime, but it is just not on the same SCALE of violence that many Americans have to deal with.

When you've got packs (i.e gangs) of tamed apes (NOT A RACIST THING) running around your streets and you know that these ANIMALS would never even think twice about comming into your home and raping your wife and daughters (and probably your dog also) you will do what you have to do to protect your family from these kinds of Primates.

And when you know that all the police are going to do is show up a half hour after the fact to clean up the blood and bodies and maybe do a little detective work, your going to take your family's safety into your own hands.

I would get killed by my NRA friends for saying this, but I will give you this; a disarmed Britain or Norway may in fact be a slightly safer place (MAYBE), but a disarmed U.S makes the decent citizens of this country easy pray for the INCREDABLE number of criminals and primates we have over here.

Anybody want to doubt that we have way way way way more criminals (and violent criminals) in the U.S. than in places like Britain or Scandanavian countries, check out the crime stats and/or jail population.

And anybody who wants to say that the high amount of violent crime is BECAUSE we have guns, is crazy or stupid. If someone is going to commit violence they will (a) get a gun off the black market (b) get a knife or baseball bat, or whatever.

My point - Violent criminals will commit violent crimes, guns or not, the only thing that can stop them is when decent people are armed.

One of the things that many people outside the U.S are confused about is that they think that things like Columbine are our biggest problem over here, becuase they only hear about Columbine and not the violence on the street everyday.

The average American is probably AT LEAST 1 million times more likely to be the victom of street crime than the victom of an Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold, we need to put that into perspective, and others need to put that into perspective.

Granted things like Columbine are a tragedy but that would be the lesser of two evils than to have the American public vulnerable to gangs and violent criminals. And besides, having guns in a society does not necessarily mean that there will be school shootings, there was never any school shootings 30-40 years ago and we had guns back then also, which would suggest this is the side effect of other sicknesses in our society, not the side effect of having guns.

Thanx for asking this question Aaron, I honestly think that the OVERWHELMING majority of Europeans would agree with us if they better knew and understood our violent crime over here. But you can't blame them, they only see Columbine on T.V and nothing about our violent street crime

[sccr06]

Man, I was going to post some stuff on this but some of our other erstwhile members have put it far more elloquently already.

So I guess I'll just say, "Criminals and tyrannical government...bad. Guns for citizens...good."

[Underdog]

The disarming of UK was the worst act against people done in europe from long time. The crime rate is far from downing, quite the opposite, and if you think that UK maybe it's a safe place, try to watch a soccer final...

In Italy, gun laws are very strict, but your CCW is permitted by local authority, granting somehow a certain level of flexibility in the application of laws.

Bear in mind, my homeland (Sardinia) is one of the most armed places in Italy, and crime rate is amazingly low. Attack to shopkeepers are virtually unheard of.


Sweep, my father was sent home from hospital, and, while very weak, is out of danger, thanks. I've spent this time trying to relax from all the stress of previous months.

Thanks, dude.

[Mik_36]

Hi Underdog,
I agree with you that the U.K should never have been disarmed and it does not surprise me that the crime rate went up. I just did not entirely know the situation over there.

But what ever crime came from the disarming of the U.K., imagine that times about 1,000,000 and you would have what would happen in the States (just becuase we have a lot more violent criminals to deal with).

I don't want to give the impression I was for disarming the U.K., the only point I was trying to give is that disarming the U.K and disarming the U.S are two COMPLETELY different situations, that's all. If I came of as sounding like disarming the U.K was a good thing then that was not my intention.

To sum up:
Disarming the U.K = Bad.
Disarming the U.S = Incredably Bad!

But thank-you for calling me on that Underdog because I probably did sound like I was saying the disarming of the U.K was a good thing, and that was not the point I was trying to make, or come across like.

Hey I hope your father is doing better!

See ya later,

Mike

[Mik_36]

Oh ya, I should also say one of the reasons I brought up the U.K is because anti-gun lobbiests often point to the U.K and Scandinavian countries and say, "see if we disarmed we would have crime rates as low as those coutries", which is COMPLETE B.S., like I said before.

The U.S and U.K are in two completely separate categories when it comes to violent crime. That is not to say violent crime does not happein in the U.K, OF COURSE it does, it is just not any where near on the same scale.

Just to explain why I brought the U.K into this.

[sccr06]

I have never been able to understand the rationale of the anti-gunners trying to compare the US and UK in that fashion.
Despite the obvious size difference between the two countries and the GAPING cultural divide where firearms are concerned, I would never want to trade a lower crime rate (which we now see is a fallicy anyway) for the loss of the ability to prevent intrusion into my home.

Another argument the anti-gunners like to make is that, "Oh don't worry about the government trying to take away your hunting weapons" or " It can't happen here". What BS. California is a perfect example. When owners of the SKS rifle, determined to be a favorite of drug-dealers (more BS) and drive-by shooters (even MORE BS), were forced to register their lawfully purchased SKS, the CA state had a list of all those owners. It made it much easier for them to know who to look for when the SKS was eventually banned here. Owners were forced to turn them in for destruction or be in violation of CA state law.

What a travesty and an infrigement of their (our) rights. And are Californians any safer now than they were before the SKS was banned? No. I'm sure Rosie O'Donnel wouldn't agree with me but then I guess it must be nice to be able to afford your own personal security detachment (who by the way are all licensed to carry!).