Guns as the great equalizer

Post Reply New Topic

I've known people who cannot "see the forest for the trees" if they feel their "gun rights" are being violated. This supersedes all else. Weapons which are not specifically used for hunting, like semi-automatic/automatic weapons, are quite dangerous when placed in the wrong hands.

I believe in the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms to defend one's self. But if somebody tells me that semi-automatic/automatic weapons are dangerous and should be banned, then I would concede this, and settle for plain ole rifles when I go out hunting.

I don't believe the banning of dangerous weapons is a violation of one's "gun rights."

*sigh*

So much disinformation out there, so much uncritical acceptance...

fwiw i don't favor what most would term gun control.

I do favor reasonable background checks for all purchases in the same sense that the NRA used to.

I think that people who live in homes that also include people who can't be considered responsible adults should be strongly encouraged to own and use a decent gun safe. Even just a reasonably sturdy wood cabinet or trunk with a padlock. I'm talking about basic measures taken to prevent firearms from being easily accessed by people who aren't competent to handle them unsupervised. And I'm not talking about using the force of law against people who are too big of a jackass to do it.

I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason, up to and including strictly because they have a boner for guns.

I'm saying that upper middle class white professionals who live in the suburbs don't need a gun for protection. The numbers suggest that they will never have a cause to use it.

Last several years i live in a boringly safe neighborhood of a drearily safe city. If things went to hell around here, I could see maybe getting one of the more flexible mossberg shotguns, or maybe a remington 1100 20 gauge 'youth' model.

As things are now, I've never owned a firearm, but i did used to go target shooting with my dad.

I believe strongly that people like kraftiekortie might enjoy learning more about the Second Amendment and firearms if those of us in their lives would make it accessible and interesting. I don't believe that ignoring our duty as "good Second Amendment ambassadors" is helpful in this case. If we are admonished to "take a friend to the range," should we avoid doing the same conversationally?

when you take someone to the range, they experience shooting and see why its calming and fun. they then can start to see why the antis are so stupid. I don't see how one could give the same experience verbally. I settle for attempting to show the falseness of their comments. I don't mind people that just say I personally don't like guns but don't care if anyone owns any and all types of them. its the I don't like guns and think all or some should be banned and base it off of lies(more often other peoples lies that they rehash)

I don't have anything against guns, ranges, etc. I don't feel a visceral disgust at guns.

And I understand why gun rights advocates see the potential for over-involvement on the part if governments in the lives of private citizens via regulation.

Calling me names and questioning my strength of character will not persuade me toward any cause.

I prefer the honey approach to the vinegar approach any day.

"Make my day" by being an amiable sort, rather than somebody who believes that acidic words will bring me around to potentially acidic viewpoints.