Thread: Supreme Court finds individual right to own guns

Originally Posted by Pudu

You are right about perception.

My house is in Washington DC. Three years ago a little girl was shot to death in her front yard in a drive-by that missed, 2 blocks away. I'm about to move back there with my three year old daughter and one year son. When I hear someone say that everyone should be able to do whatever they want with regards to firearms up to the point where they screw up, it frustrates me. "Screwing up" in my neighbourhood likely means someone is dead - and when it's an innocent little girl playing in her front yard it makes you want to do anything to prevent that sort of thing happening, not just punish someone who does it.

I don't advocate banning guns because I know it'll never happen. But claiming your right to fire off rounds on the weekend using any weapon conceivable trumps my desire to raise my kids in reasonably safe environment, I gotta tell you rings pretty hollow. Call it "comfort" if you wish, but it's a comfort I would wish on everyone in the country.

I know asserting your rights to own guns isn't the same as disparaging my concerns for the safety of my family. In the same way, advocating gun control in the form of registration, training etc. isn't designed to trample your rights or spite your hobby or interest. For both sides it should be about solving the current problems we face. That will take compromise.

Calling for no restrictions whatsoever on weapon ownership will serve you about as well as screaming for a ban on all weapons would serve me.

Point in fact: The weapon used in that drive-by was illegal to own in that city and had been for thirty years, that didn't keep some piece of dreck from using it in a reckless manner to kill a little girl.


Somehow I see no connection whatsoever between me going to the range on weekends and your daughters safety. Are you going to let her run around there? Heck living downrange at the firing line near me is probably safer than living in parts of D.C.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

Point in fact: The weapon used in that drive-by was illegal to own in that city and had been for thirty years, that didn't keep some piece of dreck from using it in a reckless manner to kill a little girl.


Somehow I see no connection whatsoever between me going to the range on weekends and your daughters safety. Are you going to let her run around there? Heck living downrange at the firing line near me is probably safer than living in parts of D.C.

The problem is that they can't legislate just for you. They need to figure out the statistics and take their best shot at keeping as many weapons out of the wrong hands while (we hope) letting them remain in the right hands. While gun violence is high, they'll err on the side against us.

Unfortunately, it falls to us to change that calculus.

j

Originally Posted by Wildtim

Not that I don't think training is a good thing or that requiring it would be wrong. I just take issue with requiring it because Then the government would be in charge of who could own a gun, either by limiting the number of courses allowed to be taught, or by charging astronomical costs for them.
...

Point in fact: The weapon used in that drive-by was illegal to own in that city and had been for thirty years, that didn't keep some piece of dreck from using it in a reckless manner to kill a little girl.

Somehow I see no connection whatsoever between me going to the range on weekends and your daughters safety. Are you going to let her run around there? Heck living downrange at the firing line near me is probably safer than living in parts of D.C.

You've illustrated my point better than I could have ever hoped to describe it.

Jim, you've got your work cut out for you. I'm considering adding my voice to John's and Tim's, only louder.

Seriously gentlemen, I was only trying to illustrate the importance of understanding the other perspective.


If you want me to play the game the pointless way;
1) I can guarantee you 100% that neither the recent ruling nor what you advocate will lower the number of illegal guns in the District.
2) Yes, I fully intend to let my kids run around in their little yard and the terrific parks on Capitol Hill. It's a great neighbourhood for kids. - Every single house in my current neighbourhood in Africa has electric fencing and some combination of barbed wire and vicious guard dogs. The US ain't got nuthin on southern Africa when it comes to prolific violent crime. And I have it easy here - check out the stats for Johannesburg.

Sarcasism alert!!!

Pudu, Areyou suggesting that we here in the US may not have the most violent gun totingest society in the world? gosh if I listened to the news I would never know that. every day we are told that we are the most violent country with more crime than anyone else, and this incorrect impression is believed by the world at large.

I bet even your neighbors think they live safer than the people of LA.

Originally Posted by Wildtim

Sarcasism alert!!!

...I bet even your neighbors think they live safer than the people of LA.

You bet correctly sir.

Originally Posted by Pudu

You bet correctly sir.

Which just goes to prove that it is how the media represents us to the world not how we actually are as a culture or what we do that determins the worlds opinion of us.

"Screwing up" in my neighbourhood likely means someone is dead - and when it's an innocent little girl playing in her front yard it makes you want to do anything to prevent that sort of thing happening, not just punish someone who does it.

Pudu


Sir,

I have handled firearms for well over forty years. I have owned guns for almost that long. I have loaded my own ammunition for twenty years. I used to shoot seven to eight pounds of powder per year. That Sir, is an average of over fifty rounds a week.
I have held a Concealed Carry Permit for (I think) fourteen years. In all that time and through all that powder (not counting the Factory ammunition I have shot) I have NEVER injured anyone. I have never had an accident and I have never "Screwed Up." I have trained a lot in gun safety and aside from guns, I am probably the most safety minded person you will run across, for a while.
"Screwing Up" is another way to say "They DIDN'T know what they were doing and they had no business with a gun!" Guns are not to be played with and they are not for making you feel "Macho."
I am a huge supporter of the Second Amendment. But the ownership of a gun caries an awsome responsibility. Every right carries more responsibilities than the freedom the right grants you.
Sure, I have the RIGHT to own a gun. BUT, I have the responsibility to keep it out of unauthorized hands. I have the responsibility to keep it in proper working order. I have the responsibility to handle it in a safe and prudent manner. I have the responsibility to ALWAYS know where it is. I have the responsibility to never and I mean NEVER, when I am carrying it, to let my temper get the best of me. I can't respond to insults as I might like. I have to walk away from a situation that potentially might escalate into violence. My Permit grants me ONE right, the right to Carry Concealed. It carries many responsibilities and restrictions.
TRAINING is the word. You have the right to own a gun, but you also have the responsibility to be properly trained, not only in how it works, but how to SAFELY handle it.
A gun is not malicious. It doesn't have a will. It is a tool...a highly specialized tool and it is entirely subject to the will of it's possessor.

Regards,

Jeeter

Originally Posted by Brother Jeeter

"Screwing up" in my neighbourhood likely means someone is dead - and when it's an innocent little girl playing in her front yard it makes you want to do anything to prevent that sort of thing happening, not just punish someone who does it.

Pudu


Sir,

I have handled firearms for well over forty years. I have owned guns for almost that long. I have loaded my own ammunition for twenty years. I used to shoot seven to eight pounds of powder per year. That Sir, is an average of over fifty rounds a week.
I have held a Concealed Carry Permit for (I think) fourteen years. In all that time and through all that powder (not counting the Factory ammunition I have shot) I have NEVER injured anyone. I have never had an accident and I have never "Screwed Up." I have trained a lot in gun safety and aside from guns, I am probably the most safety minded person you will run across, for a while.
"Screwing Up" is another way to say "They DIDN'T know what they were doing and they had no business with a gun!" Guns are not to be played with and they are not for making you feel "Macho."
I am a huge supporter of the Second Amendment. But the ownership of a gun caries an awsome responsibility. Every right carries more responsibilities than the freedom the right grants you.
Sure, I have the RIGHT to own a gun. BUT, I have the responsibility to keep it out of unauthorized hands. I have the responsibility to keep it in proper working order. I have the responsibility to handle it in a safe and prudent manner. I have the responsibility to ALWAYS know where it is. I have the responsibility to never and I mean NEVER, when I am carrying it, to let my temper get the best of me. I can't respond to insults as I might like. I have to walk away from a situation that potentially might escalate into violence. My Permit grants me ONE right, the right to Carry Concealed. It carries many responsibilities and restrictions.
TRAINING is the word. You have the right to own a gun, but you also have the responsibility to be properly trained, not only in how it works, but how to SAFELY handle it.
A gun is not malicious. It doesn't have a will. It is a tool...a highly specialized tool and it is entirely subject to the will of it's possessor.

Regards,

Jeeter

+100.

John P.

Originally Posted by Brother Jeeter

Sir,

I have handled firearms for well over forty years. I have owned guns for almost that long. I have loaded my own ammunition for twenty years. I used to shoot seven to eight pounds of powder per year. That Sir, is an average of over fifty rounds a week. ... A gun is not malicious. It doesn't have a will. It is a tool...a highly specialized tool and it is entirely subject to the will of it's possessor.

Regards,

Jeeter

Sir,

your attitude towards firearms is commendable.

I take the same approach towards motorbikes. When I got my bike I immediately completed a safe driver course. I always ride, not only with a helmet, but with proper footwear, gloves, and leathers. I've driven across North America a couple of times on my bike without incident. When I see young guys spend ten minutes writing a learners exam and then running out to purchase something with a better thrust to weight ratio than the Space Shuttle, using it to drag one another and practice wheelies on public streets - it drives me crazy. They are giving me a bad name, driving up my insurance rates, driving up the price of helmets, bikes, and safety equipment (through pointless lawsuits). I think if people want the advantages of riding a bike but are unprepared to accept the responsibilities of doing so - well too bad for them. Licensing and registration exist, but I think proper mandatory training would go a long way to fixing the problem, as would restricting the kind of bike you can ride on a learner's permit. It won't eliminate it but I believe it will help. And it doesn't impair my enjoyment because I already use safe riding practices - if it had been mandatory it wouldn't have affected my attitude or my respect towards riding. Just because there will always be some wheelieing idiot on the streets doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bath water.

I know that my actions and attitude does affect others in this regard, just as theirs affects me. We don't live in isolation from one another.

If I were a responsible gun owner it would drive me equally crazy to see people treating firearms with undo respect and wisdom. Surely the people who go out and buy a hand gun, who have no training in handling one, and leave it lying in their underwear drawer where kids can mess around with them unsupervised, or from where a burglar could very easily make off with it when no one is home to threaten him with it - surely these people, besides creating most of the societal problems with guns, are also making the lives of responsible gun owners more difficult.

If we can all agree that approaching firearms with a degree of respect is the key to safety, why is registration and training so onerous? There will always be people who disregard the rules of our society. We can't legislate against them, as has been pointed out above. We can however make it harder for them to do so without preventing people who take gun ownership seriously from enjoying their passion and desire for self defense.

It is obviously a regional issue. I suspect the gun crime rate in Wyoming is not the problem that it is on the east coast. Shouldn't cities affected by the problem be allowed to address it in this manner. Starting in 1993, when the Brady law went into effect gun crime stats decreased every year. There are solutions to these problems as long as it is approached in good faith and with a reasonable attitude by everyone - as an example, in my opinion it would be silly for anyone with military experience using firearms to take more training when purchasing their own weapon.

The thing in this thread seems to be to quote my earlier post, so let me do that as well.

Originally Posted by Pudu

For both sides it should be about solving the current problems we face. That will take compromise.

Calling for no restrictions whatsoever on weapon ownership will serve you about as well as screaming for a ban on all weapons would serve me.