WHY

[VinDyl]

This may have been covered here before but I just wanna vent. I was reading up on gun laws around the country just for knowledge sake. It just really pisses me off when I read that we need to control gun carry because the crime rate will go up if we let people carry guns. WTF don't they understand that the CRIMINALS wil always have access to getting illegal guns be it long guns or handguns. And if they thought for one second that the odds of the person they wanna try to assault was most likely gonna shoot back I am sure they may think twice. The reason most criminals with a gun use them is to have the upper hand. Like I said before in another post if the people in charge of "OUR" gun rights want to ban guns
then I say we start with THIER protection details and disarm the people that are to protect them from criminals with guns. So that they can be out in the "REAL" world with noway to protect themselves from crazy ass people. Do you really think for 1 second that they would want the people in charge of keeping them and thier families safe to be UNARMED?????? I doubt it so then why do we have to be disarmed? Why can we not carry our wepons EVERYWHERE we go? I can assue you that I always carry. And if by chance I am going somewhere I can't carry my 40 on my hip I have my "BUG" in my pocket. I will not be without a way to defend my family period. I would rather have to go to court and defend myself then have to bury a loved one. Lets remember this as we decide who the next asshole is gonna be living in the white house. And yes I said asshole because that what lives in the white house. All we can hope for is an asshole with a bit more love for our conntry than the piece of shit living there now. SORRY FOR THE RANT

[medsteele]

Yeah, this gets covered a good bit on this site. But it's always nice to see someone else who finally "gets it". The more, the merrier.

Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control. The places with the most crime generally have the strictest gun laws-- that should tell you all you need to know.

[LisaA]

You do not have to apologize for your rant. We feel the same.

Here is a story: My father was taking night courses to obtain an Associate degree in Business Administration. One required course was English. The final project was a paper on ownership of guns. My father took the view that all law-abiding citizens should own firearms, particularly for the purpose of protecting themselves. How did he convince the teacher to change her view from anti-gun to understanding the right to own guns? He presented two scenarios, one where a person (read criminal) knows that a family is unprotected and the other where there was a question in the criminal's mind whether the family had protection. His paper changed his teacher's mind. Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of my father's paper. I am certain, though, that his words were eloquent because they altered a die-hard anti-gun person's thoughts.

[internet troll]

I look at it as some people act on feelings, some on logic. When it comes to gun control a lot of people immediately connect guns=bad and feel that they must be a bad thing. They often come to illogical conclusions. Others (the people on this site) think and use logic like you did in your post coming to intelligent conclusions about guns and gun control.

edit to add, a pet peeve of mine is when a person starts off their opinion with "I feel" vs. "I think".

[cakeshooter]

Its all about power and fear.

When you think about it, the Democrats get votes through using fear.

Fear that people won't have jobs and/or money to live.

Fear that a disease will rampage the country and wipe everyone out.

Fear that if guns are on the streets, your children will die.

Fear of different groups of people (race, religion, orientation).

The list could go on. And they target the largest group of people that most easily gets afraid, and they prey on those fears, and earn their votes, and therefore their power, that way.



....of course once people actually start thinking for themselves, they still fear. They fear the liberals. haha.

[dman]

I strongly believe in being totally helpless , I still have harsh language.Besides , guns are evil and dangerous. By all means , take my wallet,
rape my wife , and most thankfully shoot us when you're done. Any body got a problem with that ?



Well I do and I'll smile while I pull the trgger !

Am I getting myself in trouble again ? It's just the pills , sorry !

[rwb1500]

I'm just going to assume the OP didn't just tell us he breaks the law and go browse the classifieds...

[GunLawyer001]

. . . .
edit to add, a pet peeve of mine is when a person starts off their opinion with "I feel" vs. "I think".

Depends on the subject.

I think that law-abiding citizens defend themselves with firearms many times every year, based on news accounts and the limited research that has been done.

I feel that being killed while attempting a crime is a form of "justice".

The former is a belief based on available facts. The latter is a feeling based on values and morality.

Thinking and feeling each have their place. Thinking about world hunger, without feeling, would lead you to think that letting the current poor starve to death would tend to reduce the problem down the road. That's a bit cold. On the other hand, feeling that we should give everybody first-class medical care for free, without thinking through the math, leads to massive bankruptcy and the destruction of America.

Let your thinking implement your feelings.

[dannyb]

It isn't just a matter of feel or think or logic, it's a matter of data. The data show that in our society, at least, tighter gun control generally correlates with higher crime. Correlation does not show causation. What does indicate causation is the fact that generally nearby areas that have less strict gun controls will tend to have lower crime rates than areas that have tighter controls. After that it gets complicated.

[internet troll]

Depends on the subject.

I think that law-abiding citizens defend themselves with firearms many times every year, based on news accounts and the limited research that has been done.

I feel that being killed while attempting a crime is a form of "justice".

The former is a belief based on available facts. The latter is a feeling based on values and morality.

Thinking and feeling each have their place. Thinking about world hunger, without feeling, would lead you to think that letting the current poor starve to death would tend to reduce the problem down the road. That's a bit cold. On the other hand, feeling that we should give everybody first-class medical care for free, without thinking through the math, leads to massive bankruptcy and the destruction of America.

Let your thinking implement your feelings.

I see what you are saying and agree to a point. In thinking about it perhaps I should amend my point to be that some people base their decision on feelings and will often ignore facts while others take feelings into account as a component while they think through their decision. You are right, there is a place for feelings in the decision making process but the feelings should prod the thinking process not be where the process stops. Sort of like people who think in purely concrete terms and never move on to abstract thinking.

The pet peeve part is based on personal preference. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, that does not mean I have to respect their opinions. When a person starts off their opinion with "I think" i find that they can often articulate their reasons and i respect that and their opinion even if I do not agree with them. I have also found that if they start off with "I feel" they often can not articulate why they feel the way they do and i do not have the same respect for their opinion.

Your example "I feel that being killed while attempting a crime is a form of "justice" should be the start of the decision making process to figure out where you stand on an issue. As you said it come from our values and morals. But I still think that people should take it to the next level to a more abstract realm. "I feel that being killed while attempting a crime is a form of justice, The reason I feel this way is that the person who committed the crime will not be able to commit more crimes. others will not be hurt by their actions". Feelings were part of the thought process but the process has gone beyond feelings back into an articulate thinking paradigm.

"Thinking and feeling each have their place. Thinking about world hunger, without feeling, would lead you to think that letting the current poor starve to death would tend to reduce the problem down the road. That's a bit cold. On the other hand, feeling that we should give everybody first-class medical care for free, without thinking through the math, leads to massive bankruptcy and the destruction of America."

Once again I see your point and agree that feeling plays a role in both but in the end I am thinking about my decision in both examples you gave. "I feel world hunger is bad," but that is just one component of my overall opinion on the matter. As you demonstrated in your second example depending on your thought process and how you look at it you can apply the same premise. Do the math, America can not feed the world, it would lead to bankruptcy and the destruction of America.

Same with your 2nd example about healthcare, starts off with feeling, but then you start thinking. You think about how we are a first class country with lots of sick people who could be cured if they had better access to health care. You feel it's cruel to let people suffer medically in one of the most advance countries in the world. But then you go back to thinking about the bankruptcy of America. Once again the final decision is based on thinking.

But as you said the situation dictates it. The reason i threw the pet peeve statement into the post was that I had a conversation with another person today about Barack Obama fresh on my mind. He stated that he felt Obama was a good President. When I asked him for his reason why, what made him a good president he really could not give me any particulars. He kept saying "Well I feel". I found it annoying, If he had given me reasons why I would have been fine with it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. but I respect opinions based on facts, not just inarticulate feelings which let to the statement in the post.