On Handguns: Your thoughts? Leave comments
I heard an interesting remark today regarding guns:
"It is better to have a gun and not need one, than to need one and not
have it".
How do you feel on this issue?
Leave your comments here. (Registration not required).
Filed under: Politics by ramdac |
October 30th, 2003 at 12:25 am
I don’t like guns, but my entire family has hunters in it. I’m left-sided, but I’m kind of neutral on this issue. It’s tough, but the comment makes perfect sense. Would suck to not have one when you needed it.
October 31st, 2003 at 8:13 am
Not to get a political debate raging here or anything but I am 100% pro gun and pro concealed carry. The only person that can protect you is you. I will use the age-old argument that the criminals have the guns why cant a concerned, honest citizen. Anytime you ban guns all you are doing is creating a victim rich environment. I am a concealed carry permit holder which means I have been trained, photographed, finger printed and background checked and that the government says I am okay to carry a weapon to protect myself. So why should anyone say I cant. So yes it is better to have, be trained with and practice with a firearm and never need, and any time you can get out of a potentially life threatening situation without using the deadly force you possess is a good day. My $00.02.
October 31st, 2003 at 3:54 pm
I agree. If a criminal wants a firearm bad enough, he/she is going to get it, regardless of legal restrictions. If someone wants to kill someone bad enough, he/she can be pretty creative, with or without a gun. I do think that it is necessary to have a safe place to store weapons to keep them out of reach of children. And I think that it’s a good idea to have people trained, educated, and tested to carry concealed weapons. The dangerous ones don’t abide by the law anyway, so why not let law-abiding citizens protect themselves?
November 1st, 2003 at 9:14 pm
It’s better to never need a gun. Unfortunately, that just wouldn’t seem human (as humane as it would be).
November 2nd, 2003 at 10:53 am
sure in our perfect utopian world we all live in where there is no crime we dont need guns
November 2nd, 2003 at 4:19 pm
I do not own a gun much less a “handgun”. I also think that just because a person can get a permit to carry a handgun doesn’t necessarily mean that that person is either competent or law abiding. The simple fact of the matter is most people get these weapons because they feed into the “hype” of violence that perpetuates our lives. They must live shallow lives indeed if they feel the need to brandish a weapon with no practical application other than that of taking anothers life. And the notion that a criminal can get a gun so i should to is about the most ignorant thing i have ever heard…FLAME ON…
November 3rd, 2003 at 8:08 am
If a criminal can get a weapon then how do we protect ourselves? Should we relay on our Police department? I am a full supporter of our police force in the US but they are more than likely not going to be where you need them at the exact time you do. While someone is holding a gun to your head or a knife to your throat what do you tell him please wait while I call the police to come help me. You will be dead in an instant. 2nd I dont brandish my weapon, please look up the meaning to that word. I will never pull my firearm out and no one will see it unless I feel my life is threatened. If I wore it on a holster on the outside of my clothes (its a stretch) but that can be considered brandishing. If I pull it out and wave it around that is brandishing and I would never do that. I’m not flaming but I am making my point. I would like to get in a chat room or something and talk in real time. I think we both could probably hold up our side of the argument. FYI - the 10-31 0813 and 11-02 1053 comments are mine, I was just not registered when I posted.
November 3rd, 2003 at 1:19 pm
In response to #6. The law doesn’t specifically state that one must be “competent” or “law abiding”. It does state that you must not be using drugs, or have commited a felony. This wording makes the assumption, however, that everyone that has NOT commited the aforementioned offenses are both competant AND law abiding, which isn’t always the case. Another thing I’d like to bring up about comment #6 is about “brandishing”. To have a license to carry a concealed weapon means that one CANNOT brandish it unless one intends to use it. Doing so for any other reason is illegal. People who have these licenses know and understand this–or at least should know this.
I do not prescribe to the notion that “if a criminal can get a gun, so too should I be able to”. I believe that it is a right given to me by the constitution and until that right is revoked, there is no other need to argue my case.
November 3rd, 2003 at 11:04 pm
hmmmm.
well, i’m not all about gun control or anything. they certainly have their place just like anything else. but… why would you ever *need* a gun? the only situation i can really think of is like, say, the police getting called to a robbery, or if someone gets you in an alley and says “give me all of your money.” the whole reason you need a gun is because someone ELSE has a gun (or some kind of weapon). i guess i side with having a gun, because the only other solution is to disarm the entire planet… which is hardly realistic.
November 3rd, 2003 at 11:12 pm
anybody care to explain why America has double digit thousands of deaths every year involving handguns while many other foreign countries have stricter gun control, yet their deaths per year are below a thousand?
You need a handgun because criminals will have handguns, but given enough time with the right amount of gun control, criminals won’t have guns, atleast a large quanitiy of them won’t. the only criminals with guns then will be our federal government.
exciting…
November 4th, 2003 at 9:12 am
Maybe there should be stricter limits on ammunition….especially for automatic rifles and handguns….i saw some chris rock standup and he was talking about if bullets were like $1000 apiece….or maybe we could use rubber bullets like Israel….nannu nannu
November 4th, 2003 at 10:39 am
Ha! If bullets were so expensive here, people would just buy them online from Canada (like prescription drugs? heh)
If they were that expensive, people could always just pick up big rocks and throw them. Hell, we could do that anyway.
November 4th, 2003 at 11:33 pm
Regarding #10…
Take a look at the United Kingdom. They banned guns but crime is at an all-time high. They are even having rampant problems with (and I quote) “hooliganism”. Banning guns has not solved their crime problems at all, nor would it solve ours. Even if you tried, there are too many out there to get all of them in the first place. Besides that, it would only be fuel to the black market’s fire, leading to the production of even more dangerous, unregulated weapons.
November 5th, 2003 at 9:56 am
I 2nd that lillie…as for ammunition for automatic rifles and handguns, how do you know what it is going to be used in/for. There are plenty of carbine type rifles used for hunting that use handgun ammunition and such. There are even handguns used for hunting, not your “saturday night special” as the media likes to call them, but they are used. Even so it doesnt matter, any gun control is bad its just a way for the liberals to slowly wittle away at our second amendment right, and that right was not constructed with hunting in mind. This is a bit off the original topic though of is it better to have and not need than need and not have but closely related.
November 5th, 2003 at 4:29 pm
To quote #10:
“yet their deaths per year are below a thousand? ”
This is what we call an argument that uses percentages or absolutes to falsley represent data.
Ok. Lets assume Country “A” has the most strict gun laws in the world, and only 900 deaths occur that year (much like #10 has stated).
Well, What if the total population to begin with was only 1200? That’s a 75% mortality rate among the entire population.
I suggest whoever wrote #10 to present more evidence so that the conclusion can logically follow from it.
Thank you and drive through. I’ll be here all week. Be sure to tip your waitress.
November 6th, 2003 at 12:57 pm
Dude, where can you buy prescription drugs online from Canaduh at? I NEED MY VIAGRA!@#
By the way, I didn’t even read all of these comments because I’ve got a splitting headache but it seems you guys are bringing up that “Britain has less guns but less murder! Canaduh has same amount of guns but less murder!” crap. The fact that Mr. Michael Moore left out in his one sided movie was that the population of Canaduh is about the same as the population of California. Check out the numbers, the murder rate is the same. It’s all about population baby.
By the way Part 2, I did like that movie a lot even tho those facts were kind of dumb.
November 6th, 2003 at 5:19 pm
haha, you crackhead.
November 10th, 2003 at 1:34 am
Quote #5: “sure in our perfect utopian world we all live in where there is no crime we dont need guns :-)”
A perfect utopian world like Canada…
One day you won’t have an American neighbour to shoot at (if you’re alive)
November 10th, 2003 at 10:11 am
Canada doesnt have any crime? that should be the headline of every major newspaper world wide then
November 10th, 2003 at 10:42 am
“this must be what it feels like when god holds a gun”-Homer Simpson describing the sense of power one can derive from holding a gun…….
November 10th, 2003 at 11:45 am
RE POST #19: Have you seen Bowling for Columbine?
November 12th, 2003 at 1:05 am
guns are bad. guns are scary. the fact that ramdac owns a gun makes me glad i live over 3 hours south of him.
November 12th, 2003 at 1:51 pm
Louisiana Tech students should be scared of me. (I have no idea what that means. I went there.)