Here's where the gun debate should go!

[Gregg]

Moderator on vacation? It's not feeling very moderate in here.

***MOD HAT ON***

Nope. The topic is not particularly moderate. Right or wrong it stirs up a lot of emotion. People who choose to kick sand in others faces damage themselves and their arguments enough without being modded to death. The thread will die a natural death when everyone is exhausted. It will be reborn the next time a madman picks up a gun and shoots people.


***MOD HAT WAY OFF***

Sadly, we won't see the same level of passion every time 15 people are killed in a crash along the border just trying to come to this country. Most of us will never be disgusted enough with the obscenity of war to ever do anything more than vote for the guy who says he will end it. There are any number of issues in the real world that significantly impact 10,000 times the number of people that gun crimes ever will. But hey, let the world run out of potable water and forget 1,000,000 people dying of malaria as long as we can argue about whether or not someone should be allowed to buy inanimate objects. Making a stand here doesn't actually require us to DO anything. Does anyone else ever get the feeling our priorities are all ****ed up?

[Mrs-M]

Originally posted by Gregg.
Sadly, we won't see the same level of passion every time 15 people are killed in a crash along the border just trying to come to this country.

And rightfully so. Naturally occurring accidents are going to happen, and as our worldly population grows and people extend-outward to regions, traditionally and typically not inhabited by man, there will be more instances of accidents (and death), that is our world, but to promote, encourage, and sensationalize "guns", according to the level and magnitude that the US, does, takes accidents, death, and carnage, to a whole new entire level.

Answer something for me, Gregg. What twenty-year old needs to be carrying around a gun? Aside from a professional career in security, the forces, or some other personal-line of security/protection, "what twenty-year old needs a gun"? But it's out there.

My husband and I, talked a little about this last night, and at one point DH said, "I was extremely grown-up and mature for my age at 20, yet handing over a gun to me and allowing me to pack it around (freely), would have been a very dangerous thing to do".

[Gregg]

My husband and I, talked a little about this last night, and at one point DH said, "I was extremely grown-up and mature for my age at 20, yet handing over a gun to me and allowing me to pack it around (freely), would have been a very dangerous thing to do".

That is mind boggling to me. At NO point in my life (beyond just being a young child) was putting any kind of gun in my hand ever dangerous in any way to any other person. Not one time...EVER. I was taught from an early age how to properly and safely handle and fire guns of many different configurations. So was everyone I grew up with.

I've relayed the story before, but my high school had 100 kids in it. At any given time, and especially during hunting season, there were 200 or 300 guns in the back windows of pick ups or the trunks of cars in the school parking lot. There were semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, hand guns and bb guns...all kinds. There were also several thousand rounds of ammunition available because we all knew that a gun without ammo is a club. Not one time, EVER, was there ANY incident of violence involving a gun. Even awash in that sea of completely accessible guns and teenage hormones it was absolutely unthinkable to threaten or harm another person with a gun.

Contrary to popular propaganda, the guns have not changed since then. Yes, you can buy a few expensive and highly specialized models that were not available back then, but those are not what is readily available to most of us at the local hardware store. Mostly there are just different styles, just like clothes have different styles. The popular calibers are still the same. The rate of fire is the same. The accuracy of factory loaded ammunition is the same. The distance a bullet will drop at 600 yards at 65* into a 20 knot headwind is the same. It’s the people that have changed, not the guns. The problem isn't with the guns.

If a gun would have been dangerous in the hands of your DH he was neither mature nor well trained in its use. Period. Putting a gun or a steering wheel or a glass of whisky in the hand of anyone who is not mature and has not been properly instructed in its use is a problem. Putting any of those in the hands of someone who intends to use them to inflict harm on others is a problem. That's where we need to focus.

[ApatheticNoMore]

Sadly, we won't see the same level of passion every time 15 people are killed in a crash along the border just trying to come to this country.

there are instances of border patrol shooting people coming into the country as well :\

Most of us will never be disgusted enough with the obscenity of war to ever do anything more than vote for the guy who says he will end it.

I hear you, what are these unnecessary wars but killing? And hey we have a President that proclaims the right to murder outright. That's not supposed to have any influence on our morals or anything (the morals of the powerful don't apply to us - ubermench and all) but ...

There are any number of issues in the real world that significantly impact 10,000 times the number of people that gun crimes ever will. But hey, let the world run out of potable water and forget 1,000,000 people dying of malaria as long as we can argue about whether or not someone should be allowed to buy inanimate objects.

I hear you. Another thing is that I'm quite willing to put up with a certain increase in risk of crime to live in a free society. I would gladly put up with a certain amount of increase of risk of terrorism to repeal the Patriot act and all that followed etc..

Does anyone else ever get the feeling our priorities are all ****ed up?

Totally.

there will be more instances of accidents (and death), that is our world, but to promote, encourage, and sensationalize "guns", according to the level and magnitude that the US, does, takes accidents, death, and carnage, to a whole new entire level.

I don't think they should be sensationalized. I *REJECT* and reject entirely macho culture (that you are tough because you kill or because you carry a gun), but neither do I or anyone else see outlawing them entirely at this point.

[JaneV2.0]

I read a thought-provoking article on gun ownership in Switzerland yesterday. Its male citizens are armed by law with an amazing range of weaponry, yet their death by firearms statistics-- while high by European standards--are about 40% lower than ours. I understand Switzerland's armed neutrality stance, but really don't get the passion for firearms here. Unlike Gregg, I don't know many gun owners and wasn't raised in a gun culture. I'd like to see loopholes closed and licensing with competency testing like we have for drivers put in place, but in the end this issue isn't the hill I'm keen to make my last stand on.

[creaker]

I read a thought-provoking article on gun ownership in Switzerland yesterday. Its male citizens are armed by law with an amazing range of weaponry, yet their death by firearms statistics-- while high by European standards--are about 40% lower than ours. I understand Switzerland's armed neutrality stance, but really don't get the passion for firearms here. Unlike Gregg, I don't know many gun owners and wasn't raised in a gun culture. I'd like to see loopholes closed and licensing with competency testing like we have for drivers put in place, but in the end this issue isn't the hill I'm keen to make my last stand on.

I think a linked issue is the "rage" culture we have, the acceptableness of just "losing" it - I wonder what those numbers look like in Switzerland?

[Rogar]

No more commentary from me, but I did run across a recent Bill Moyers talk that runs about 5 minute. I am a fan of his and enjoyed it very much.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-m...b_1691100.html

There's a video of which I'd like to remind you. You can see it on YouTube. In it, Adam Gadahn, an American-born member of al-Qaeda, the first U.S. citizen charged with treason since 1952, urges terrorists to carry out attacks on the United States. Right before your eyes he says:

"America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely, without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?"

[Gregg]

I think a linked issue is the "rage" culture we have, the acceptableness of just "losing" it...

Bingo creaker. Therein lies the problem.

[Gregg]

You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely, without having to show an identification card.

But of course none of that is true. Why do suppose a terrorist would lie?

[peggy]

That is mind boggling to me. At NO point in my life (beyond just being a young child) was putting any kind of gun in my hand ever dangerous in any way to any other person. Not one time...EVER. I was taught from an early age how to properly and safely handle and fire guns of many different configurations. So was everyone I grew up with.

I've relayed the story before, but my high school had 100 kids in it. At any given time, and especially during hunting season, there were 200 or 300 guns in the back windows of pick ups or the trunks of cars in the school parking lot. There were semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, hand guns and bb guns...all kinds. There were also several thousand rounds of ammunition available because we all knew that a gun without ammo is a club. Not one time, EVER, was there ANY incident of violence involving a gun. Even awash in that sea of completely accessible guns and teenage hormones it was absolutely unthinkable to threaten or harm another person with a gun.

Contrary to popular propaganda, the guns have not changed since then. Yes, you can buy a few expensive and highly specialized models that were not available back then, but those are not what is readily available to most of us at the local hardware store. Mostly there are just different styles, just like clothes have different styles. The popular calibers are still the same. The rate of fire is the same. The accuracy of factory loaded ammunition is the same. The distance a bullet will drop at 600 yards at 65* into a 20 knot headwind is the same. It’s the people that have changed, not the guns. The problem isn't with the guns.

If a gun would have been dangerous in the hands of your DH he was neither mature nor well trained in its use. Period. Putting a gun or a steering wheel or a glass of whisky in the hand of anyone who is not mature and has not been properly instructed in its use is a problem. Putting any of those in the hands of someone who intends to use them to inflict harm on others is a problem. That's where we need to focus.

I think Mrs. M was referring to the fact that a 20 year old often hasn't the life experience or maturity to hold their emotions in check. A 20 year old is still a kid, in many ways, and I'm guessing she is thinking of the many stressful situations, school, girlfriends, new jobs, etc...where someone with very little 'life experience' might find themselves with very spun up emotions and not have the skill to deal with it.
I think this links with what she was talking about earlier about hate where it was a pile-on instead of trying to see what she meant. Mrs. M, if you don't mind, may I take a stab at it?

I think what she was looking at is the lack of civility in public discourse that we didn't have 30, or even 20 years ago. I don't think i have to give the links, but I will, again, if you want. Have you listened to Rush Limbaugh? This man is on the airwaves 2, 3, 4 hours a day, and it is just a constant litany of hate filled talk, in his monotone (which by the way is a tool of brainwashing) hour after hour, day after day. And you have one of the two major political parties that regularly defend, and pay homage to this guy. This isn't just some fringe nut job, which we have always had and always will, but a major player on the national political stage. And he is just one voice among the many.
We have that congressman from Florida, Alan West, who has said he believes 60-70 of democrat congresspeople are communist. There is Michele Bachmann who wants an investigation into unamerican activities by democrat congresspeople and now says the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the White House. She found 4 other congress persons to sign on with that one! These are elected leaders! Congressmen/women!
We have Fox News which is 24/7 GOPTV promoting lies and constant 'wars' all aimed at democrats/liberals. And you have a republican leader who said, up front, getting rid of the democrat President was job #1. Mind you he said this when this president was first elected and the country was in an economic free fall. Helping the country wasn't job 1, or helping the people through this horrible economic time wasn't job #1. Nope, getting back in power was job #1, period. They weren't in the slightest interested in helping this president help this nation, and everything they have done since then shows that.
WE have Santorum, standing before an audience and getting cheers and whistles by saying Obama was a snob because he wished everyone who wanted to go to college could.

Why am I giving these examples? Because, even though we have always had political rivalry, and hate mongers on the fringe, and heated debate, never in our history did we have an entire political party, as a whole, stand and cheer hateful speech, and demonize half of their colleagues as well as half of the Nations people. We haven't been this polarized since the civil war, and the constant demonizing drumbeat from TV and radio and even our political leaders has lead to this climate of hate. I believe this is what Mrs M was talking about.
You all had hunting rifles in your trucks at school. Fine, but you didn't have them strapped to your hip, spun up by the hour of Rush you listened to on the way to school, bolstered by images of tea baggers wearing guns to political rallies as political 'speech', and yes fantasizing about violent video games and bloody movies where sex is banned but blowing someones' head off is OK.
No, guns haven't changed, but we have, and society has, and political discourse has. Now to say liberals want to take away everyone's guns is simply not true, and really dishonest when some continue to say it. (NRA, many on the right) It's meant to stop the conversation, period. It's meant to stop reasonable discussion on sensible gun control. It's meant to get people spun up and in the stores to stockpile weapons and ammo. And who are they stockpiling it against? Why the liberals, of course! We are the ducks in the shooting gallery. WE are the ones who Limbaugh and Fox News and Bachmann and Allen West and Rick Santorum and the NRA are demonizing, day after day after day. Can you blame us for being a little nervous?

I can think of a lot of reasons one would have a gun. A cherished gift from a parent, hunting, clay target shooting (which actually sounds like a lot of fun!) etc...Saying you keep a gun because you are ready to fight your government is getting into Ted Kaczynski territory. Tin foil hat stuff. And that's another thing. We used to recognize crazy talk. WE don't anymore. WE celebrate it, and quote it as if it were meaningful, and give equal voice to every crack pot and crazy theory out there!

I guess this is just a really long way to say enough already. But unless the reasonable among us agree there is a problem, and probably some solutions, nothing will get done.