Unnamed: 0
int64 0
11.3k
| label
stringclasses 20
values | content
stringlengths 6
66.5k
|
|---|---|---|
9,400 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control was re we re mad as hell at the tv news in article c tshu ew magpie linknet com manes magpie linknet com steve manes writes frank crary fcrary ucsu colorado edu wrote that s all very well and good but i was refering to all homocides not just ones involving handguns what is this fixation on death by shooting as if it were somehow worse than death by stabbing what relevance are all homicides in this debate what do you think gun control advocates are saying that if we get rid of all handguns we will live in a homicide free world the relevance is that if you ve got x homicides and reduce the number of gun homicides in that group but x doesn t decrease by a significant amount have you made an improvement and is that improvement worth what you ve paid the issue is guns not baseball bats even a simpleton knows that he stands a better chance of surviving an attack with a baseball bat certainly of outrunning a bat wielding assailant if a baseball bat is a tenth as likely to kill a victim as a gun is that any comfort to that tenth as for knives see my earlier post i d much rather face a knife than a gun thanks i ve faced a knife and i was damn annoyed i didn t have a gun all the statistics in the world didn t change the fact that he was interested in cutting me fortunately the best defense against a knife isn t another knife anyone trained in unarmed self defense won t have much of a problem disarming a knife assailant untrained in knife assault which probably means of knife assailants anyone trained in self defense unarmed self defense isn t for everyone what s more it requires substantially more training to be safe and effective than a firearm it requires physical proximity and thus a greater threat to the victim which is a primary problem with stun guns you have to actually touch your assailant unless you re very good a large stronger assailant can simply ignore your blows long enough to incapacitate you david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu
|
9,401 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the usual in article viking ponderous cc iastate edu viking iastate edu dan sorenson writes yes i am pro gun and yes i do disagree with this statement nuclear weapons in and of themselves are dangerous radioactive decay of plutonium and uranium as well as the tritium in the weapon tends to be somewhat dangerous to living things can you say neutron flux can you say i get more background radiation from living in denver or having an office in a limestone building than i do standing next to a power reactor at full power or standing next to a nuclear warhead that is armed look up shielding in your dictionary you don t need six feet of lead to make decent shielding your dead skin cell layer does an excellent job on alpha particles and neutrons are slowed by mere water what do you think of you is but whatever the neutrons hit has a good chance of absorbing the neutron and becoming radioactive itself mostly that means water turning into harmless heavy water but some neutrons would also hit bones and the resulting harmfull secondard radioactives would remain in the body for decades i think an unshielded nuclear warhead could reasonably be considered a public health hazard as for a shielded warhead i think a fair amount of maintaince is required for it to remain safely shielded e g storage in a dry temperature regulated facility etc for private ownership to be unregulated i think a single individual must be able not only to keep the weapon but keep it in a safe condition if any random private citizen could not properly keep maintain and store a nuclear weapon then some regulation is clearly appropriate plus these things have no self defense purposes it s kinda hard to justify their use as a militia weapon when at best they are meant for battlefield use low yield weapons or at worst for industrial target obliteration translation cities and population centers if the militia has as its job the overthrow of an illegal government they are indeed useful weapons to the militia i disagree with this purpose the job of the militia is to defend themselves and their community if you look at the american revolution as an example the militias won by seperating themselves from and becoming independent of a repressive government they didn t overthrow it and those communities canada and england for example that didn t defend themselves were still under that same old regime if the role of the militia were offensive to go out and destroy repressive governments nuclear weapons might be appropriate but their jobs is defensive and nuclear weapons aren t suited for that there is also the question of personal and collective arms the second amendment definately protects ownership of personal weapons since the very nature of the militia requires members to provide their own arms but it isn t clear if it covers other arms certainly not all members would supply for example a tank only a few could or if they were to be used effectively should however those providing the heavy weapons have a disproportionate control over the militia and its fierpower the militias as the framers envisioned them were extremely democratic if only of the members supported the cause only would respond to a muster and the militia s firepower would be proportionately reduced militia firepower and the popular will were therefore linked but if a small minority of the members supplied a large fraction of the firepower in the form of heavy weapons this would all change the militia s firepower would depend on the will of a small minority not of the general public worse that minority would be quite different from the general public at the very least they would be much richer as a result i think the nature and character of the militia requires that each member provide a roughly equal share of the militia s firepower his personal weapons and some equitable fraction of a squad s heavier firepower frank crary cu boulder
|
9,402 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re statement of sarah brady regarding texas state carrying concealed legislation in a previous article nigel allen canrem com nigel allen says here is a press release from handgun control inc statement of sarah brady regarding texas state carrying concealed legislation to state desk contact susan whitmore of handgun control inc washington march following is a statement of sarah brady regarding texas state carrying concealed legislation a handful of lawmakers in austin today have told the public that their safety is of less importance than the interests of the national rifle association this action comes as local state and federal law enforcement officials continue their stand off with a religious cult that has highlighted the need for tougher gun laws not weaker ones like the carry concealed bill a handful of anti gun zealots are telling the public that their right to self defense is of less importance than the interests of handgun control inc this action comes as local state and federal law enforcement officials continue their assault on the branch davidian compound an assault which has already resulted in the death of one two year old child at the hands of federal agents this has highlighted the need for citizens to be able to defend themselves and their children against the excesses of their own government any suggestion by proponents that this bill will help to reduce crime is a distortion of the facts at best this so called crime fighting law has resulted in a percent increase in violent crime in the state of florida and i have never heard law enforcement officials bragging that more guns on the streets is the way to reduce crime any suggestion by opponents that this bill will increase crime is a distortion of the facts at best the aggressive outreach by officials in central florida to train and arm women has led to a dramatic drop in the level of assault and rape in that area of course this program is a rare gem as many law enforcement officials apparently believe that an unarmed citizenry will be easier to control and thus favor tighter restrictions the vote today is an insult to the law enforcement officials who are putting their lives on the line every day to end the standoff in waco the entire country now knows just how easy it is for an individual bent on destruction to amass an arsenal of weapons texas lawmakers who voted for this concealed handgun bill have shown total disregard for those law officials on the front lines and the families of those who have fallen the vote today is a tribute to the good sense of the public at large who are putting their lives on the line every day as they go about their lawful affairs the entire country knows how vulnerable the average citizen is both to attacks from criminals and from armed assault by our own police texas lawmakers who voted for this concealed handgun bill have shown total understanding for those innocent law abiding citizens on the front lines and the families of those who have fallen i urge the house of representatives to listen to the percent of texans that oppose this measure and reject this ill conceived legislation i urge the house of representatives to pay attention to the needs of their constituents and not be stampeded by ill conceived arguments from ideological fanatics nigel allen toronto ontario nigel allen canrem com canada remote systems toronto ontario ain t propaganda fun the opinions expressed by the author are insightful intelligent and very carefully thought out it is therefore unlikely that they are shared by the university of iowa or case western reserve university
|
9,403 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re what if the dividians were black as quoted from apr icd ab com by kdw icd ab com kenneth d whitehead oleary cbnewsh cb att com brian m leary writes questions for the media and the politically correct try asking people who don t understand why anyone would worry about the tactics used against the child molesting drug dealing gun running cop killing religious wackos in waco these questions if the people in the compound were black and the guys in ninja suits charging in with assault weapons and grenades were lapd what would you think the charges are essentially the same they used against operation move in philadelphia a few years back where the cops dropped an incendiary bomb on the roof of a tenement and burned down a whole block move was a black group there were some significant differences whereas the branch davidians are reported to have gotten along rather well with their neighbors the move people are generally conceded to have gone far out of the way to antagonize their black neighbors using loudspeakers to all hours of the night keeping large piles of garbage promoting rat and insect infestation and allegedly threatening to kidnap their neighbors children still the same sort of questions regarding use of force remain in that case you re like a bunch of over educated new york jewish aclu lawyers fighting to eliminate school prayer from the public schools in arkansas holly silva
|
9,404 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control was re we re mad as hell at the tv news in article c tm h ecf magpie linknet com manes magpie linknet com steve manes writes for chrissakes take out your calculator and work out the numbers here i ve preformatted them for you to make it easier handgun homicides population switzerland uk and then tell me again how switzerland is safer with a more liberal handgun law than the uk is without by rate or total number your choice please pay attention i and others were referring to total homicide deaths not just handgun homicides in terms of how likely are you to be killed regardless of how it s done cause dead is dead the uk has a higher homicide rate period you are more likely to be killed in the uk than in switzerland if you were to be murdered with a handgun then yes switzerland has a higher rate but to belabor the point you are more likely to be murdered in the uk in that sense the weapon is irrelevant the uk is more violent period al standard disclaimer
|
9,405 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control was re we re mad as hell at the tv news in article c tshu ew magpie linknet com manes magpie linknet com steve manes writes what relevance are all homicides in this debate what do you think gun control advocates are saying that if we get rid of all handguns we will live in a homicide free world they sure make it sound like that the issue is guns not baseball bats even a simpleton knows that he stands a better chance of surviving an attack with a baseball bat certainly of outrunning a bat wielding assailant even a simpleton knows a baseball bat is considered a deadly weapon if one cannot run away e g old infirm even middle aged if the assailant is younger a handgun is the most effective means of defense you won t even have to fire a shot of the time as for knives see my earlier post i d much rather face a knife than a gun thanks fortunately the best defense against a knife isn t another knife anyone trained in unarmed self defense won t have much of a problem disarming a knife assailant untrained in knife assault which probably means of knife assailants any real streetfighter and there are lots of them with or without a knife will kick the living sh out of most people trained in unarmed self defense for the majority of people a gun is the most effective form of self defense al standard disclaimer
|
9,406 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nazi memoribilia in apr raid dell com mikepb lupus dell com michael p brininstool writes swatikas were also common in american indian markings painted walls etc is it the swastika that is bad just want to back this up with a personal anecdote my grandparents have a navajo rug made in the s which they received in trade from the weaver while living in flagstaff arizona the decorative motif consists of large black swastikas one in each corner what s more the color scheme is black white and red to the casual glance it would undoubtedly appear to be a nazi relic of some kind yet they owned it ten years before hitler and the national socialists came to power as i recall they took it down in the s and didn t feel quite right about putting it back up until the s it still draws comments from those who don t know what it is ccm christopher c may u of ariz coll of medicine cmay ccit arizona edu do your part for liberty teach your children to hate big government do you care about freedom dreams may have inspired it and wishes promoted it but only war and weapons have made it yours robert ardrey armaque in armatos sumere jura sinunt ovid the wise man s understanding inclineth him toward his right hand but a fool s heart turneth him to the left ecclesiastes christopher c may u of ariz coll of medicine cmay ccit arizona edu do your part for liberty teach your children to hate big government
|
9,407 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nazi memoribilia in article cmay helium cmay helium gas uug arizona edu christopher c may writes in apr raid dell com mikepb lupus dell com michael p brininstool writes swatikas were also common in american indian markings painted walls etc is it the swastika that is bad just want to back this up with a personal anecdote my grandparents have a navajo rug made in the s which they received in trade from the weaver while living in flagstaff arizona the decorative motif consists of large black swastikas one in each corner what s more the color scheme is black white and red to the casual glance it would undoubtedly appear to be a nazi relic of some kind yet they owned it ten years before hitler and the national socialists came to power as i recall they took it down in the s and didn t feel quite right about putting it back up until the s it still draws comments from those who don t know what it is having lived played and worked on and near the navajo reservation for a number of years i can confirm this is an ancient pattern found in petroglyphs dated to years old also the indians never stopped making rugs with this pattern they just stopped selling them after the nazi s pre empted the swastika note also that the indian versions use both clockwise and counter clockwise swastikas ob guns it s the rare navaho family that doesn t own a rifle they remember being relocated by the us army and don t intend to do it again the hopi on the other hand have a dislike for weapons from my experience perhaps they just hide them better from strangers kirk hays nra life seventh generation the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing edmund burke
|
9,408 |
talk.politics.guns
|
national crime survey well i dropped by the library yesterday and picked up back copies of the national crime survey in an effort to examine what it said about self defense with a firearm i haven t ground through much in the way of numbers yet but a couple of things jumped out at me first only and specify the type of weapon used in self defense and refer only to weapon the second is that while assaults rose about from to w gun defenses reported fell by almost unless there s an explanation for this i m tempted to mark it as a reporting problem and as such going ahead with any examination of the numbers would be a waste of time anybody have an idea what might have cause a real difference and not just a reporting difference the survey doesn t appear to have changed significantly between and david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu
|
9,409 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re do they really believe in article apr colorado edu ajteel dendrite cs colorado edu a j teel writes q do you think that hic et al really believe that the laws that they are trying to get passed are for the good or are they just lying through their teeth and trying to disarm the populace i think that hci people honestly believe that passing more gun control laws will be in the best interests of public safety why do i think this because i used to buy the hci line during my freshman year their line made so much sense only people who need guns should be able to get them and the people who need them are the police and other elites unfortunately for us this position is highly emotional and not well thought out they never stop to think that hci s position basically says that the non elite are incompetents that s you and me folks and that the second amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting or other legitimate uses which excludes overthrowing tyrannical governments and defending yourself when the police have proven they can t protect you we all know that the end result regardless of the intention will be to have a much easier to subdue population for the un nwo this is definitely a motivation of many in power but i wonder to what degree this is planned vs just duped every pro control person i ve talked to is always left stumped when i simply argue the facts of gun control that it has yet to be proven to lower crime rates and weapons terminology and i m no expert but explaining exactly how an evil semiautomatic weapon really works does wonders i hvae personally found well reasoned arguments to be most effective against the emotional pro control people the trick is to get them to realize that the second amendment exists not for hunters but for the oppressed and the terrorized daryl daryl biberdorf n gjm d biberdorf tamu edu sola gratia sola fide sola scriptura
|
9,410 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control proud to be a canuck frank crary fcrary ucsu colorado edu wrote in article pqsruinniae hp col col hp com dduff col hp com dave duff writes the swiss population is and well was far larger than that i think your question should be losing sleep over a million expert riflemen certainly he could have conquered switzerland but a million armed militiamen especially in a mountainous area where tanks effectiveness is limited would have made it a real pain the question a conqueror would ask is is it worth the trouble the more difficult an invasion is the more likely the answer would be no certainly a million riflemen as opposed to a professional army of only ten or twenty thousand the best a country the size of switzerland could support makes invasions more difficult hitler invaded yugoslavia and occupied it the mountainous portions were sometimes patrolled by the wermacht but they were certainly not in control there were two major native factions opposing each other and the germans it was basically useless to the germans no production and a drain on their resources a armored division and a couple of infantry divisions which if my memory is correct were kind of stuck there up until the allies accepted their surrender i think that the allies also let the germans keep some of their weapons for self defense unitil they were able to get to the lowlands away from the resistance factions this is from memory and it is unreliable dale farmer
|
9,411 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re i believe in gun control in article c vg f kx apollo hp com nelson p apollo hp com peter nelson writes cj cleveland freenet edu john w redelfs writes i believe in gun control how about you i believe in gun control too assuming by gun control you mean always being able to hit your target peter or how about the clint eastwood line in pink cadillac i believe in gun control if there s a gun around i wanna be the one controlling it al standard disclaimer
|
9,412 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re lavishly funded gun epidemic propaganda campaign to commence in article c txek fcq magpie linknet com manes magpie linknet com steve manes writes morris the cat rats cbnewsc cb att com wrote well as neal knox of the firearms coalition points out the full force of the anti gun ruling class their multi millions their polling organizations their schools their news media their entertainment media the entertainment media a force of the anti gun ruling class is this the same media that s made billions producing films and television that glorify guns and gun users or is that another anti gun media you ve got to be kidding i m afraid he isn t they are a hypocritical lot al standard disclaimer
|
9,413 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control proud to be a canuck in article pqsruinniae hp col col hp com dduff col hp com dave duff writes does anyone really believe the swiss have had no war within their borders because every adult male owns a rifle i m a great admirer of the swiss but years of peace on their turf has zilch to do with gun ownership can you picture hitler with panzers and focke wulfs poised on the border losing sleep over a few thousand expert rifleman not just because of the riflemen they also have many hard bunkers in the mountains that would be nearly impossible to penetrate as for tanks they would be rather useless in such mountainous terrain hitler stayed out of switzerland because the swiss run the money in this world gee that s a new one he thought it was a different ethnic group since hitler was determined to control at the least all of europe do you think he gave a damn about international monetary concerns also there s a lot of gold in swiss vaults don t you think he new that if he could have he would have taken switzerland however crazy as he was he wasn t totally stupid it would have cost him a hell of a lot to take switzerland with no guarantee that an invasion would be successful he probably figured or his generals did when he was listening to them that it wasn t worth the cost al standard disclaimer
|
9,414 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun control in article c l bgo magpie linknet com manes magpie linknet com steve manes writes i would be surprised if there weren t contrary studies i might add that sloan and kellerman was endorsed by the police departments of both seattle and vancouver and is considered by most of the references i have at hand the most exhaustive study of its kind even by those who take issue with some of the essay s conclusions s k s statistics speak largely for themselves without postulate and i might add vitamin c has been endorsed by a nobel laureate as a panacea for almost everything from the common cold to cancer in order to compare violent crime trends s k compared all violent crime categories from simple assault through various mechanisms of homicide wait a minute s k did not compare trends if they did they would have seen that the advent of canada s gun law had no effect on homicides total or handgun without a pre vs post comparison one cannot speculate as to the utility of anything all they have is a correlation and correlation does not prove causality if your point is that non whites commit more handgun crimes than whites then yours is the dubious assumption conventional social theory is that economic status not color is the primary motivating factor for crime especially violent crime what s your point anyway that white people are more responsible gun owners should we assume that it s a coincidence that there are comparitively fewer white people earning below the poverty line and living in tenement neighborhoods where most violent crime occurs hold it again you dismiss a point about demographics then you ask about socio economic demographics very slick differences between the two cities in the permit regulations render these two numbers strictly noncomparable on the contrary it s these differences that are the very basis of the study the easy availability of legal handguns in seattle and the much more difficult restricted weapons permit required in vancouver once again correlation does not prove causality looking at pre vs post data the canadian gun law had no effect not so cook measures suicides and assaultive homicides with firearms against a survey based estimate of the number of legal and illegal guns in circulation within a city sir if you were a canadian and owned a gun before the restrictive gun laws were passed and decided to hide it rather than turn it in would you answer truthfully a question about gun ownership from someone who calls writes or asks you on the street that is one problem with surveys nobody will answer an incriminating question another is that people will often tell you what they think you want to here again your author misses the core issue that vancouver citizens are prohibited from purchasing handguns on the basis of self defense they don t have a choice in the matter does that mean no vancouver citizens have handguns i think not you are discounting guns purchased beforehand and guns purchased for purposes other than self defense which can also be used for defense hmmm sounds like your author might like a bumper sticker that reads guns don t kill people black people kill people honestly his conjectures backed up by zero evidence zero studies and even less common sense aren t worth the considerable time it must have taken you to type in his assumptions look frighteningly close to those pseudo scientific studies that the white supremist assholes love the crap that takes published statistics twisted around in an attempt to prove the inherent criminal nature of black people he makes valid points about demographic differences you then resort to the kind of argument that the politically correct movement often uses to stifle any debate nice real nice this author s essay contains independent study upon which to base his conclusions just some strained disjointed statistical discourse attempting to blame seattle s murder rate on blacks one doesn t have to produce his own data in order to point out the flaws in the methodology and conclusions of another s study again you resort to pc tactics al standard disclaimer
|
9,415 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re another nytimes yellow sheet editorial in article pmol innod gap caltech edu arc cco caltech edu aaron ray clements writes thanks to the n r a the a t f is prohibited from researching the effectiveness of using taggants in explosives taggants are a cheap and technologically feasible microscopic additive that would help investigators at crime scenes like the world trade center bombing trace the explosives involved i want this man to tell me how in the hell you can take the explosives used in the wtc bombing considering that the consensus seems to be that the explosive was a fertilizer based one proper counter to this claim forensic analysis of the wtc bomb by means of taggants would have been as impossible as semantic analysis of nyt editorials by means of taggants the difficulty in both cases being to have persuaded the bull to consume the taggants before production of either item cdt rocket sw stratus com if you believe that i speak for my company or cdt vos stratus com write today for my special investors packet
|
9,416 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes pa utkvm utk edu david veal says jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes don t be silly of course you can the police have everything the gangs have and then some plus they ve got access to the national guard via the governor if things get too rough that s tanks for those of you who ve never seen them at play of course they ve got rifles and helicopters and as far as fully automatic weapons you can be a lot better armed if you want to hit what you aim at what seems to be happening here is the situation getting totally blown out of proportion in my post i was referring to your regular patrolman in a car cruising around the city vs gang members of course the police have access to the things that you mentioned but do they use tanks and such all of the time of course they don t and that s the point i was trying to make every day when i go out to lunch i always see cops coming in the majority that i see are still carrying revolvers not that there is anything wrong with a revolver but if you re a cop that is up against some gang member with a couple of automatics in his coat i mean semi auto handguns you re going to be at a disadvantage even with training how so i think you re making assumptions here that might not necessarily be true my personal choice would be a semi auto but revolvers are just as effective if not more so i have been at a shooting range where gang gang members were practicing shooting they were actually practicing taking out their guns as quick as possible and shooting at the target and they weren t doing too badly either relevancy please you sound shocked but that hardly proves anything the university cops here who are are state cops are armed better than the chicago police it seems most state cops are i don t know where you are originally from david but you live in tennesse and i live in chicago and see this crap everyday on the news and in the papers i think the situation is just a tad different here than there wait doesn t chicago have serious gun control if so why do the police need all that firepower in the first place sarcasm alert all the patrol cars i ve seen around here have shotguns clamped to the dash board imho that s all the police need to outgun just about anything jason the crystal wind is the storm and the storm is data and the data is life the player s litany from the long run by d k moran steiner jupiter cse utoledo edu
|
9,417 |
talk.politics.guns
|
letter to a liberal colleague l neil smith posted by cathy smith for l neil smith letter to a liberal colleague author s note adrian name changed to protect the guilty and the author are science fiction novelists who once worked with the same editor at a famous new york publishing house dear adrian i m way behind schedule on my current book again so this reply to your note criticizing the recent magazine interview i gave and generally attacking gun ownership will necessarily consist mostly of assertions you re free to believe or not i can back with evidence and logic i ve neither time nor energy to present now i ve written fully on this topic before and will again in the future when i do i ll make sure you get copies there are many arguments i might make from the futility and danger of delegating self defense to the police see don kates in the jan wall street journal to the real effect of prohibition shifting consumers from newly outlawed handguns or semiautomatic rifles to items like sawed off shotguns or homemade bombs but i ll limit myself here to commenting on the newspaper clipping you sent with your note first the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility second publication of some latter day scientific study doesn t alter the fact that the gun prohibitionists i discussed in my interview annoying you so much in the process were lying third the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility fourth as often happens with these things the study doesn t support the gun prohibitionists original numerical contentions anyway but simply adds a new layer of spurious claims to an older body of lies omissions and distortions fifth the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility sixth the fact that gun prohibitionists have been caught lying on countless occasions carl bakal author of no right to keep and bear arms even confessed to it publicly makes the value of this present study dubious to say the least seventh the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility eighth given your own lifelong service as a federal bureaucrat not to mention the cynical sophistication of your fiction you should be better aware than most people how progress in designing studies to prove whatever you want outstrips our ability to collect meaningful data a case in point we might agree on is the fact that it took another kind of prohibitionist or years to create studies proving that pornography causes crime more naive and probably more honest efforts in the s and s clearly indicate the contrary ninth the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility tenth another reason to doubt all such studies is that human behavior as the austrian school of economics demonstrates is far too complex and unpredictable to be meaningfully quantified the attempt to do so and then create public policy based on the resulting pseudo information is wrecking our civilization eleventh the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility twelfth the study is also worthless because it incorporates figures for suicide which is not necessarily a tragedy but basically another individual right sometimes with ancillary social benefits if anything perhaps suicide intervention should be a criminal offense thirteenth and finally the national rifle association officials quoted in the article whatever their shortcomings and they are many are correct in this instance the study is meaningless because the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural fundamental and inalienable human individual civil and constitutional right subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility and because of that adrian even if the study were valid it wouldn t deter me from a lifelong personal objective of seeing that anyone can own any weapon he or she prefers and carry it however whenever and wherever he or she desires without asking anybody s permission in this i m ably assisted by gun prohibitionists themselves whose yawping invariably moves previously unarmed people to go out and buy their first gun while they still can before the gun control act most of the shooting fraternity viewed handguns incorrectly as it turned out as inaccurate ineffective toys there probably weren t six million of them in the whole country now thanks to kennedy metzenbaum the bradys and their ilk america s greatest sporting goods sales team we probably manufacture at least that many every year the fascinating datum is that handgun control et al are perfectly aware of this so i guess you ll have to ask them yourself what their real motives are look gun making isn t an arcane or difficult art and by the way it s easier to make a fully automatic weapon than a semiautomatic the fact that i can still obtain my own weapon of preference the self loading pistol is the only thing which keeps me from pursuing this further even if it were difficult there are already a quarter billion firearms in america with an estimated half life of years possibly more for stainless steel guns are gonna be around a long time adrian whether you like it or not as for me to paraphrase elmer keith regardless of what the law provides or any court decides i m always going to be armed and i will always work to see that others are as well the bad news is that there are thousands more perhaps even hundreds of thousands where i come from we can t be stopped by passing laws we can only be forced to arm ourselves and others secretly and given both the practical and alleged differences between full automatics and semiautomatics perhaps more efficiently so what s the point l neil smith author the probability broach the crystal empire henry martyn and forthcoming pallas lever action bbs fidonet libertarian second amendment caucus nra life member my opinions are of course my own
|
9,418 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms in article apr sco com allanh sco com allan j heim writes papresco undergrad math uwaterloo ca paul prescod drugs are banned please tell me when this supply will dry up drugs are easier to manufacture easier to smuggle easier to hide no comparison then let s use another example alcoholic beverages bottles of whiskey are larger heavier and more fragile than bags of drugs barrels and kegs are larger and heavier still and are difficult to manipulate yet a lot of people managed to get very rich off of the smuggling of booze into this country during the years of prohibition there was a demand so an entire industry formed to supply it if alcohol were again banned today it would be much more difficult to manage a large scale smuggling operation the cops now rank just a narrow notch below the military in communications intelligence gathering and firepower in a similar vein the amount of marijuana smuggled into this country has greatly decreased this is because its value per pound is very low when compared to cocaine or heroin it s simply not worth the risk it s uneconomical now most reefer is domestic there is less pressure on the domestic producer showy raids notwithstanding and thus it is economical of note though domestic reefer is now very strong so a small volume goes a long way you cannot make alcohol stronger than proof not a good dollar pound deal firearms tend to fall into this low dollar pound area it would not be economic to smuggle them in all production would have to be local there are not all that many people who have both the skill and motivation to assemble worthwhile firearms from scratch high ranking crime figures could obtain imported uzis and such but the average person and average thug would be lucky to get a zip gun and would pay through the nose for it
|
9,419 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re that silly outdated bill was re koresh and miranda i wrote nice strawman indeed the discussion is not about whether there were tanks used in sixties riots instead it is about whether those tanks fired their main guns in one of those riots you claim they did that claim is ludicrous awesley replied i repeated what i had been told under what context i had heard it supporting the claim that tanks were indeed used in detroit in the issue has never been whether tanks were used in detroit in it has been whether they fired their main guns you did not merely claim that tanks were used you claimed that they fired their main guns to suppress sniper fire and that they were quite effective at this you continue to back away from this claim and defend something else that nobody is disputing awesley went on i spent a few minutes in a library today found their computer was down and they don t have a card catalog anyway it took about minutes to find this in nightmare in detroit a rebellion and it s victims by sauter and hines on page telling of the death of tonia blanding age when the tank was fired upon by snipers it turned in the direction the shots came from the fifty caliber machine gun mounted on the tank belched fire into the buildings after a short round into the front of the buildings the tank guns spit again tearing apart huge holes out of the side of the apartment well it s not the main gun well it s not the main gun gee that s only the entire point are you now going to admit that you were wrong i wrote will i see any pictures of tanks firing their main guns will i see pictures of buildings damaged by the shells will i read the reports of the tank fire i ll bet you dollar to doughnuts i won t it will take more than second hand accounts from a few old national guard sergeants shooting the shit to convince me that tanks shelled american cities in the sixties awesley replied well if you bothered to read them it wouldn t take long at all to find reports of tank fire although not necessarily of the main guns i will never read of tanks firing their main guns in detroit in the riots there is simply no way that such an event could have taken place without it being common knowledge even years later the american military firing shells from tanks in american cities on blacks would have been big news awesley goes on you can also read of the troops using grenade launchers to fire fragmentary grenades i doubt that as well to fire concussion grenades perhaps to fire tear gas certainly but you would be perfectly willing to let us believe they fired frags wouldn t you since it makes your other claim seem more plausible and on i don t expect to convince you you ll have to open your mind and eyes and actually do a little research to be convinced one way or the other let me know what you find i already know what you found nothing if i claimed that the marines used f s to launch rockets at buildings in trenton new jersey would you believe me would you suspend judgment until you had a chance to research it or would your bullshit filters kick in if tanks had fired their main guns in detroit people would have been screaming about it for the past two and half decades i would know about it unless you also claim that the national guard managed to cover it up if your mind is open enough to believe that well good for you i prefer to live in reality and here in reality i find it hard to believe that those tanks even had any shells much less fired them john l scott
|
9,420 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in u uicvm uic edu jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes deleted and as far as fully automatic weapons you can be a lot better armed if you want to hit what you aim at what seems to be happening here is the situation getting totally blown out of proportion in my post i was referring to your regular patrolman in a car cruising around the city vs gang members of course the police have access to the things that you mentioned but do they use tanks and such all of the time of course they don t and that s the point i was trying to make every day when i go out to lunch i always see cops coming in the majority that i see are still carrying revolvers not that there is anything wrong with a revolver but if you re a cop that is up against some gang member with a couple of automatics in his coat i mean semi auto handguns you re going to be at a disadvantage even with training i have been at a shooting range where gang gang members were practicing shooting they were actually practicing taking out their guns as quick as possible and shooting at the target and they weren t doing too badly either the university cops here who are are state cops are armed better than the chicago police it seems most state cops are define armed better go shoot a revolver and a semi auto like the colt does one fires faster than the other nope aside from which faster rate of fire is usually not desirable sure it makes the other guys duck for cover but just you trying hitting anything with a thompson in hose mode this is why the military is limiting it s m now to round burst fire simple semi auto would be better but the troops like to be able to rock and roll even if it is wasteful of ammo something often in short supply when the enemy is plentiful a revolver is equally capable as a semi auto in the same caliber a revolver also has the advantage that if it misfires you just pull the trigger again a double action revolver almost all of them can be hand cocked first but will fire merely by pulling the trigger a misfire in a revolver merely means you must pull the trigger again to rotate to the next round a revolver can be carried with the th chamber empty and under the hammer for maximum safety but still can be drawn and fired with an easy motion even one handed speedloaders for a revolver allow reloads almost as fast as magazines on semi autos can be faster depending on users a misfire in a semi auto will require you to clear a jammed shell first time spent which can be fatal and a vital second or so is often lost as you realize hey it s jammed before starting to do anything about clearing it most semi autos must have the slide worked to chamber the first round and cock the hammer some police carry their semi autos with the chamber loaded and hammer cocked but a safety engaged i do not consider this safe however you must trade off safety to get the same speed of employment as a revolver there are some double action semi autos out there but the complexity of operation of many of them requires more training some police departments switched to glocks and then started quietly switching many officers back to the old revolvers too many were having accidents partly due to the poor training they received not that glocks require rocket scientists but some cops are baffled by something as complex as the timer on a vcr anyone who goes anyone saying that the criminals obviously outgun the police don t know nothing about firearms turn off cops and hunter and pay attention i do not seek here to say semi autos are junk merely that assuming they are better for all jobs is stupid a cop with a revolver on his hip and a shotgun in the rack is more than equipped for anything short of a riot gun control is hitting what you aim at if you whip out a wonder nine and fire real fast you may find you don t hit anything good controlled fire from a revolver is more likely to get you a hit i own a mm beretta myself but consider it inferior as a carry weapon to something like the ruger security six revolver if i haven t hit what i m aiming at in the first shots something is quite seriously wrong somewheres while i might like having the backup capacity of those extra shots in certain cases overwhelmingly the of shots fired in criminal encounters is less than what do crooks overwhelmingly use in crime why the same nice simple revolvers that the police often use well actually some police prefer the much heftier magnum but anyway obplea don t flame me i prefer semi autos for most things but they introduce unneccessary complications to something as nerve wracking as an abrupt encounter with a lone criminal if everything had gone as planned everything would have been perfect batf spokesperson on cnn regarding failed raid attempt in tx
|
9,421 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in u uicvm uic edu jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes deleted the university cops here who are are state cops are armed better than the chicago police it seems most state cops are i don t know where you are originally from david but you live in tennesse and i live in chicago and see this crap everyday on the news and in the papers i think the situation is just a tad different here than there which crap the ridiculous assertions that uzis are mowing down cops right and left the assertions that dialing should be the proper and only option available to the law abiding citizens a factoid cops were killed in the whole country last year this is down from around in the early s wow a real explosion in cop killings there eh if everything had gone as planned everything would have been perfect batf spokesperson on cnn regarding failed raid attempt in tx
|
9,422 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article qiebiinn c cae cad gatech edu vincent cad gatech edu vincent fox writes in u uicvm uic edu jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes deleted the university cops here who are are state cops are armed better than the chicago police it seems most state cops are i don t know where you are originally from david but you live in tennesse and i live in chicago and see this crap everyday on the news and in the papers i think the situation is just a tad different here than there which crap the ridiculous assertions that uzis are mowing down cops right and left the assertions that dialing should be the proper and only option available to the law abiding citizens a factoid cops were killed in the whole country last year this is down from around in the early s wow a real explosion in cop killings there eh well if we re going to discuss being a police officer in america today the fbi lists police officers killed feloniously and accidentally in that s apparently everybody at all levels year officers killed rate police officers includes one officer in mariana islands includes one officer each in guam and mariana islands includes one officer in guam and two in foreign locations includes one officer in american samoas and two in foreign countries includes one officer in guam and one federal officer killed in peru god i love the information age david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,423 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes in article apr sco com allanh sco com allan j heim writes papresco undergrad math uwaterloo ca paul prescod drugs are banned please tell me when this supply will dry up drugs are easier to manufacture easier to smuggle easier to hide no comparison then let s use another example alcoholic beverages bottles of whiskey are larger heavier and more fragile than bags of drugs barrels and kegs are larger and heavier still and are difficult to manipulate yet a lot of people managed to get very rich off of the smuggling of booze into this country during the years of prohibition there was a demand so an entire industry formed to supply it if alcohol were again banned today it would be much more difficult to manage a large scale smuggling operation the cops now rank just a narrow notch below the military in communications intelligence gathering and firepower in a similar vein the amount of marijuana smuggled into this country has greatly decreased this is because its value per pound is very low when compared to cocaine or heroin it s simply not worth the risk it s uneconomical now most reefer is domestic there is less pressure on the domestic producer showy raids notwithstanding and thus it is economical here s a question if most marijuana is domestic and producing it here is economical why would we expect it to be imported of note though domestic reefer is now very strong so a small volume goes a long way you cannot make alcohol stronger than proof not a good dollar pound deal yet it was done done quite successfully for a number of years somebody thought it was worth the risk firearms tend to fall into this low dollar pound area it would not be economic to smuggle them in your assumption is that this low dollar pound area is sufficiently low as to make gun running unprofitable on what do you base this and given that smuggling channels are already established and given the economies of scale would it really add significantly more expense to start smuggling firearms especially considering doing so would be less hazardous in terms of getting caught than drugs all production would have to be local now that was a jump in any case define local it s a big country there are not all that many people who have both the skill and motivation to assemble worthwhile firearms from scratch high ranking crime figures could obtain imported uzis and such but the average person and average thug would be lucky to get a zip gun and would pay through the nose for it wow you gotta love the speculation as i posted before we import billions upon billions of raw ores across the mexican border not only that but ships come in and out of u s harbors every day full stuff and customs doesn t even have the extra advantage of being able to sniff them out i d be willing to wager that a shipload of handguns would be worth more than a shipload of raw ore and you re virtually guaranteed to get it past customs because they d have to hand search every hold of every ship which came through it s not simply a matter of how much money are they worth but how much more money are they worth than other goods based on the likelihood of being caught less money than drugs but also a safer thing to smuggle david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,424 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting in article qfrhbinno cae cad gatech edu vincent cad gatech edu vincent fox says this measure as it will prevent the evil bambi killers from hunting and another will fight it for the interference with nature that it is such a measure would also have another benefit it would relieve the various states of the thorny problem of what to do with the hundreds of millions of dollars hunters pour into the economy annually i m sure that to attain sure a lofty humane liberal and ecologically not to mention politically correct goal the environmental and animal rights groups individuals supporting such a measure would be more than willing to add their names to a list of supporters seeking increased taxation to replace these lost revenues i am equally confident that these same entities given their noteworthy record in the area of social responsibility and respect for private property would feel morally and ethically bound to raise the necessary funds to acquire the hundreds of thousands of acres of land now held in private hands solely for use as private hunting preserves by the landowner s to do less than this would place these same groups individuals in the ethically untenable to say nothing of environmentally and politically incorrect position of sanctioning the logging and subsequent development and urbanization of these former private hunting lands which would no longer be useable by or of any benefit to the landowner s in such a capacity w k gorman
|
9,425 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re non lethal alternatives to handguns in article apr watson ibm com mjp vnet ibm com michael j phelps writes in article shepardc ftls netcom com shepard netcom com mark shepard writes how effective are personal defense products like mace pepper spray tasers and other non lethal stun devices compared to handguns any statistics on s and types in use these products seem very attractive compared to handguns because being non lethal they are more forgiving of accident or mistakes wrongful shooting such as the yoshi hattori case and allow the justice system to deal with the criminal rather than criminals simply being dead which has a certain vigilante feel which seems to bother anti gun people the more forgiving nature also has its down side it allows a criminal to use them w o the adw assault with a deadly weapon charge they also can have lethal or dangerous side effects some people have violent reactions to mace pepper sprays stun guns can harm people with weak hearts people have suffered eye damage from mace the stuff that is available now is less concentrated than it used to be some of the spray propellents are flammable the arguments i see against these non lethal weapons compared to handguns are lack of range lack of stopping power or effectiveness and limited ammo true how about cost sprays using any of the spray based eg mace pepper indoors is bound to affect anyone else in the room like the victim due to the nature of the stuff using the sprays outdoors in any sort of breeze mitigates its effectiveness from reading various articles it appears that mace especially the mace available to citizens is pretty ineffective on people under the influence of drugs or alcohol pepper spray appears to be more effective but has the inherent spray delivery problem it still does not appear to be anything better than a distraction that might buy you time to run like hell if you can consider that running like hell isn t always a viable solution for example if you are dressed in boots and the assailent is dressed in sneakers you might have a tough time outrunning them tasars and stun guns require contact with skin for max effectiveness a jacket like a leather one will mitigate its effectiveness the user must be extremely close to the assailent that puts them at a considerable risk of injury the user must keep the stun gun in contact with the assailent for some non negligible period of time tasar darts can be pulled out consider the problem a small women would have keeping a stun gun in contact with a average size man for any length of time w o sustaining serious injury have any anti gun groups suggested non lethal weapons to counter the pro gun argument that people will be left defenseless i haven t heard of any generally they contend that people don t need to or aren t able to defend themselves and what legal restrictions licensing apply to non lethal devices civilian ownership of stun guns is frequently illegal ny the sprays are also illegal in some states believe it or not they are still illegal in ny although about half the state thinks they are legal i believe that ny almost legalized them i have heard that the reason they didn t was due to their ineffectiveness i feel that the sprays are better than nothing but only if the user does not believe the hype this ll drop em in their tracks stuff and uses it as a diversion o n l y marks mark shepard shepard netcom com portola valley ca michael phelps external mjp vnet ibm com internal mjp bwa kgn ibm com mjp at kgnvmy and last but not least a disclaimer these opinions are mine what about guns with non lethal bullets like rubber or plastic bullets would those work very well in stopping an attack doug holland
|
9,426 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re high power assault guns in article apr stortek com vojak icebucket stortek com bill vojak writes alaska with uzi rnd magazine and big polar bear i d make that big mad and hungry with cubs nearby polar bear drew betz gozer idbsu edu brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho when you outlaw rights only outlaws will have rights spook fodder fema nsa clinton gore insurrection nsc semtex neptunium terrorist cia mi mi kgb deuterium
|
9,427 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article pa utkvm utk edu pa utkvm utk edu david veal says stuff deleted me what seems to be happening here is the situation getting totally blown out of proportion in my post i was referring to your regular patrolman in a car cruising around the city vs gang members of course the police have access to the things that you mentioned but do they use tanks and such all of the time of course they don t and that s the point i was trying to make every day when i go out to lunch i always see cops coming in the majority that i see are still carrying revolvers not that there is anything wrong with a revolver but if you re a cop that is up against some gang member with a couple of automatics in his coat i mean semi auto handguns you re going to be at a disadvantage even with training david this is the arms race fallacy that somehow bigger guns make an individual safer the problem is that for each corresponding level of offensive power the is not an automatic level of defense increase the problem is that there s a sort of lethality threshold that once you get past you re only talking about a metter of degree regardless of what cops are up against there s really no reason for the average beat cop to have anything bigger than a pistol on him as a personal weapon and maybe a rifle and a shotgun in the cruiser i mean think about it carrying a monster pistol or sub machinegun doesn t make the cop any less wounded if somebody shoots him a lot of police departenments have switched to semi automatics as better more reliable weapons and more stopping power but there s a point of diminishing returns this is a very very good point who cares what kind of gun you ve got if you re lying on the ground dead and as far as automatics go any gang member carrying around a couple of automatics an incredible rarity is going to be far more of a menace to himself and innocent bystanders than anything he might be tryinh to aim at one auto is hard enough to control anybody who could control two is going to get the police officer regardless of what the police officer is armed with more stuff deleted mostly mine my question is this what would a police officer gain from having a sub machinegun or similar personal weapon that he already doesn t have with a mm or mm semi automatic pistol i don t see as how the police should be hosing around full auto fire nor has my experience with police officers or the stats regarding how many police officers get killed by other cops made me feel such would be a good idea precise fire is far more preferable nor should they using bigger guns most standard sidearms have more then sufficient stopping power when properly applied all more powerful weapons would do is make the likelihood of death higher without really giving police significantly more options another very good point that is well taken it seems that when lots of lead is flying either the cops or the gangs someone innocent always gets caught in the crossfire david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al all points made above are well taken i guess i am in the mindset of having more makes it better which is obviously not the correct mindset to take in this discussion now that i think about the situation a little more carefully i see your point exactly david and i wholeheartedly sp agree like i said i m just assuming that more bullets and or bigger bullets is better once again though i want to state that i am a pro gun individual and do not believe that gun control is really a viable option here in the united states regardless of the drivel that i spout here jason
|
9,428 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article qie rinn b cae cad gatech edu vincent cad gatech edu vincent fox says stuff deleted all mine define armed better go shoot a revolver and a semi auto like the colt does one fires faster than the other nope aside from which faster rate of fire is usually not desirable sure it makes the other guys duck for cover but just you trying hitting anything with a thompson in hose mode this is why the military is limiting it s m now to aw come on it worked great in the s or the movie version of the s anyways round burst fire simple semi auto would be better but the troops like to be able to rock and roll even if it is wasteful of ammo something often in short supply when the enemy is plentiful a revolver is equally capable as a semi auto in the same caliber stuff deleted about how revolvers are just as good as semi autos all your points are very well taken and things that i haven t considered as i am not really familiar enough with handguns some police departments switched to glocks and then started quietly switching many officers back to the old revolvers too many were having accidents partly due to the poor training they received not that glocks require rocket scientists but some cops are baffled by something as complex as the timer on a vcr hell a glock is the last thing that should be switched to the only thing that i know about a glock is the lack of a real safety on it sure there is that little thing in the trigger but that isn t too great of a safety anyone who goes anyone saying that the criminals obviously outgun the police don t know nothing about firearms turn off cops and hunter and pay attention i do not seek here to say semi autos are junk merely that assuming they are better for all jobs is stupid a cop with a revolver on his hip and a shotgun in the rack is more than equipped for anything short of a riot actually i don t watch those shows and you re right at least partially i don t know much about handguns i m more familiar with rifles gun control is hitting what you aim at if you whip out a wonder nine and fire real fast you may find you don t hit anything good controlled fire from a revolver is more likely to get you a hit i own a mm beretta myself but consider it inferior as a carry weapon to something like the ruger security six revolver if i haven t hit what i m aiming at in the first shots something is quite seriously wrong somewheres while i might like having the backup capacity of those extra shots in certain cases overwhelmingly the of shots fired in criminal encounters is less than what do crooks overwhelmingly use in crime why the same nice simple revolvers that the police often use well actually some police prefer the much heftier magnum but anyway obplea don t flame me i prefer semi autos for most things but they introduce unneccessary complications to something as nerve wracking as an abrupt encounter with a lone criminal if everything had gone as planned everything would have been perfect batf spokesperson on cnn regarding failed raid attempt in tx no flames here all your points are well taken guess i still have a lot to learn but thanks to this discussion i already am guess i assume too many things like more bullets are better and that sort of thing of course you know what happens when you assume jason
|
9,429 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re non lethal alternatives to handguns douglas craig holland holland cs colostate edu writes lostsa crap deleted trim your articles what about guns with non lethal bullets like rubber or plastic bullets would those work very well in stopping an attack last i heard non lethal was a bit of a misnomer for these things jason democrat give us your money we ll solve your problems republican give us your money we ll ignore your problems libertarian keep your money solve your own problems steiner jupiter cse utoledo edu
|
9,430 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes promising field experiments are being done this year in several areas of the country relating to chemical contraceptive baits for deer preliminary data suggests that this will be a cost effective and humane method for preventing over population of habitats preliminary data regarding similar research into kangaroo overpopulation in australia do not in any way support the cost effectiveness of this approach it may be cost effective for deer if you quietly overlook the fact that the net cost to the state of deer hunting is negative i e a profit because the majority of hunters pay for licences the cost comparisons are probably being done assuming that people have to be employed to cull the animals which is not in fact the case you figure people are going to pay for licences to implant contraceptive pellets or spread baits there has been a fair bit of discussion about this here recently because the kangaroo population in the grounds of the governor general s residence has now reached plague proportions despite the whines of the rampant animal libbers the most effective method of controlling the population is still considered to be controlled shooting so now why should we allow hunting to prevent over population of the deer bear whatever sorry but that justification of blood lust is now gone with the wind once mass production of this stuff begins animal populations can be easily managed without a shot being fired this leaves only the fact that some people like to go out in the woods and kill things some people take satisfaction imho legitimate satisfaction in eating food that they have harvested themselves the pleasure derived from hunting is the same as that you get from eating fruit and vegetables grown in your own garden and in general game meat is probably much freer of unpleasant chemicals than what you buy from the butcher or the supermarket that may be a motivation but it cannot now be justified expect peta and like organizations to use this argument to get hunting banned period by cannot now be justified i guess you mean that you personally don t see any justification fine but what makes your opinion so important with no legitimate hunting with the papers filled with stories of senseless murders i guess there won t be a chance in hell of building a case for the rkba that will withstand either public opinion necessity or scientific scrutiny don t give me that silent majority wants guns crap they are and will be silent no votes for rkba no rkba certainly the last point is correct if politicians don t see any votes for themselves in opposing stupid legislation or in developing and supporting measures which might be effective in reducing the incidence of violent crime they won t do these things geoff miller g miller adfa edu au computer centre australian defence force academy
|
9,431 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re boston gun buy back from urbin interlan interlan com mark urbin rm just a short thought when you ask the question of the authorities or sponsors of buyback programs whether they will check for stolen weapons and they answer no it s total amnesty please note that the given for each firearm in the boston buy back will not be in cash but money orders how much total amnesty can you get if you leave paper trail behind in the latest case in denver they were giving away tickets to a denver nuggets basketball game how traceable is a money order i don t know haven t used one in years is that even an issue if the weapons aren t checked for being stolen ron
|
9,432 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card thomas parsli thomasp ifi uio no writes observations from a naive norwegian yup you said it i admire such honesty guns are made to kill people not to shoot target or to have something more macho than stamps to collect fire an anschutz then come back and talk to us you re letting ignorance and possibly fear cloud your thinking either that or this is sour grapes because we beat you in the olympic shooting events funny you d think biathalon would be a natural sport for the norse it is more easy to kill injure someone with a gun than with a knife or a bat as in baseball precisely that makes them the best method of defense for the citizenry not everybody has the time to train with a gladius you know but for some reason those who prey on others seem to have more free time to extend this a bit further you need only a certain level of competence to beat another with a range weapon getting in their face with a weapon and winning is much more difficult and requires more training time the average citizen just does not have i ve spent a few years practicing with a sword i can take the common person armed with one though self defense isn t the reason i own one my kid sister would have an even chance of beating me gun vs gun with only a month of training that makes firearms much better in our eyes it s not very wise to compare two completely different countries like usa and let s say island on issues like crime and violence excellent point perhaps you aren t so naive after all yes the problem is people committing crimes not the tools beeing used but should be taken into concideration taken into consideration in what respect though quite wrong let s make it a blanket statement for weapons in general this has been taken into consideration we call use of them aggrivated assault assault with a deadly weapon assault with intent to kill attempted murder and a whole host of others and tack on extra prison time we have a very strict gun legislation in norway but until recently it was possible for enyone over years to buy a shotgun shotguns are used mainly for hunting in norway but because it was so easy to accuire one it was the most used gun in crimes in norway i suspect it was about the only weapon available you conquered your land among others a full millenia before we were thought of and shortly thereafter weapons weren t quite so common i suspect that a few world wars made a difference too since in times of emergency weapons tend to be turned in or donated to needy causes i m curious though were the weapons used in the crimes bought shortly before the crime or were they aquired by other means any requirements other than just registering the shotgun and unbelievable the use of guns in crime fell there are now a new law against wearing long knives in public and why should it be allowed come on down to honest erik s used swords here s a slightly used short sword the battlefield supremacy weapon of the eleventh century only with trade in easy financing sorry i couldn t resist you guys still slicing each other with long knives or is this really not a problem what i as an scandinavian have problems to understand is that you americans have a more liberal view on guns and violence than on nudity and sex try showing a bare breast on tv insted of violence and murder i m all for that what gets me is that scandanavians and yes i m only a couple generations off the longship used to be some of the most feared warriors on the planet a mere millenia ago yet now seem to spend their time sitting in spas and doing a bit of topless sunbathing maybe you had a bit more time and a more homogeneous culture to become civilized with yes i know a little american history but is it a civil human right to have an assault gun in your home and or an handgun in your car yes we re too damned violent partially i believe because we are not a homogeneous culture and don t identify ourselves as americans first and foremost i m rather proud of my norwegian and danish heritage whereas i suspect you couldn t care less about that welsh blood in your veins thanks to a raid in ireland back in the time scale and the homogeneous culture are important equally important is a basic philosophical difference in personal versus collective good in america the individual is more important than the masses personal liberties are prized above all this is sadly changing of late but i trust you notice how this call for freedom makes laws that restrict individuals for little collective benefit hateful to americans i d hazard a guess that were america less interested in freedom and personal liberty and more interested in collective good we never would have sent our armed forces anywhere one poor effect of this culture we have is that we re looking out for ourselves and it is quite easy to identify with only a small segment of the population my grandmother tells of being discriminated against back in denmark because she spoke low dane whereas others spoke high dane it was shortly after world war ii as i remember that low dane was abolished so there was one common dialect we cannot fathom such a minor thing being a problem because we have even more obvious means of identifying an outsider the bad english is not my fault it s probably the keyboard software or the quality of the subtext on tv take heart yours is better than of what gets posted by native speakers any helpful hints for our educational system people have this annoying tendency to drop out of school and sell drugs over here and what kind of name is thomas parsli here you can use my great grandfather s before he changed it christian aarskog that s a great one for getting mispronounced i think that s why he changed it i don t think he needs it anymore dan sorenson dod z dan exnet iastate edu viking iastate edu isu only censors what i read not what i say don t blame them usenet post to exotic distant machines meet exciting unusual people and flame them
|
9,433 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun talk legislative update for states lvc cbnews cb att com larry cipriani writes iowa all firearm related bills are dead senate file dealing with off duty police officers carrying concealed remains viable the power of the word processor and a stamp at work the fact that around here the state rep generally lives no more than nine miles from any constituent doesn t hurt either dan sorenson dod z dan exnet iastate edu viking iastate edu isu only censors what i read not what i say don t blame them usenet post to exotic distant machines meet exciting unusual people and flame them
|
9,434 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re that silly outdated bill was re koresh and miranda in article qibs flk vela acs oakland edu awesley vela acs oakland edu awesley writes in article apr csd newshost stanford edu andy sail stanford edu andy freeman writes i since there was no sniper fire doing nothing was equally effective as was yelling stop that of course if one wants to credit the tanks with stopping non existent sniper fire we might was well credit it with stopping an invasion by martians see firearms violence and civil disorders from sri and sniping incidents a new pattern of violence from brandeis university s lemberg center for the study of violence there was precisely one verified sniper in the riots a drunk firing a pistol out a window actually there was only one confirmed sniper to die in detroit according to sauter hines nightmare in detroit a rebellion it s what sources did sauter and hines use in congressional hearings later the newspaper folk admitted that their reports were completely wrong some of their excuses are understandable while others amount to gross negligence then there s their we lied as far as i know they never did the followup so people other than snipers can shoot firemen if they are shooting at snipers can t help blowing big holes in buildings that don t contain sniper nests or worrying about travelling sniper squads is a complete waste of time interesting just curious they do you believe that tanks did blow big holes in buildings in detroit i don t have any relevant knowledge about the counter sniper tactics or what the govt did with the big war toys that s why i ve only commented on what they couldn t have accomplished no matter what they did nope the sniper fire was coming from other police guard positions the guard certainly needed to learn but i don t agree with the idea that there were no snipers at all from p of sauter hines despite the force of the national guard in alliance with the army troops the snipers did not stop the snipers boldly lay siege to the fifth precent police station and took pot shots at the seventh firemen were under constant harassment from snipers fired from half closed darkened windows in high apartment buildings and from roof tops not in detroit not during the s that s newspaper copy and they admitted later that they were wrong andy
|
9,435 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting in article pa utkvm utk edu pa utkvm utk edu david veal writes in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes in article apr synapse bms com hambidge bms com writes self defense is a valid reason for rkba the vast majority get through life without ever having to own use or display a firearm you might have missed the u s news world report excerpt i posted it is fairly consistant with other such polls finding that approximately of households have at least one firearm how this translates into individual ownership is questionable but i think it s fairly safe to say that you re wrong about the vast majority ok a near majority actually own firearms but i will still claim that the vast majority never needs to use them or even threaten anyone with them what do they do right or are they just lucky in either case this means the average threat level in this country is rather low besides there are other means of self protection which can be just as effective as firearms please name them the key phrase is can be theories are nice but practicality is more important a taser to chose an exmpale outlawed virtually everywhere can be as effective as a gun under optimal conditions when dealing with your absolute average i think you have weapons on the brain i never said that these alternative means of self protection involved any hardware why are good neighborhoods good it isn t because every person is armed to the teeth it is because of attitude and cooperation in the good neighborhoods the residents make themselves aware of their neighbors and notice when strangers are lurking around good neighborhoods form groups like crime watch to increase this effect and the relative effectiveness of the police when hostiles are arrested the good neighbors step up and say that s the one officer he was robbing mr jones house in short the alternative to firepower is gangs or at least a benificent manifestation of that social cooperative replace lead with flesh the flesh makes a better conversationalist too and you can invite it over for a block party freedoms and rights are not dependent on public opinion necessity or scientific scrutiny new to this planet everything is dependent on either public or political opinion usually political to imagine that inalienable rights are somehow wired into the vast cold cosmos is purest egotism and a dangerous delusion in a very real sense everything the government does is based on public approval if for no other reason than at any particular time there aren t public servants commonly adorning trees but legality and legitimacy also matter if a government s charter makes a rule which the government then violates it is violated the basis for its existance enforcement of its will becomes a matter solely of force of arms oliver north the man is positively worshiped in many all american conservative quarters he and big ron set up a secret government and did all sorts of severely illegal deeds the kind of stuff you and i would be doing twenty to life for yet he walks free this bs happens all the time in fact it happens so much that no one really cares anymore legitimacy is a non issue legality is a non issue so long as we get t bones and our mtv who gives a rats ass no arguments against rkba can withstand scientific scrutiny they don t have to like so many other things the issue is one of perception rather than boring statistics excuse me sir but you were the one suggesting that arguments for rkba would not stand up to scientific scrutiny no i claimed that no one is interested in the statistical aspects of the argument pure emotion like the abortion issue every time some young innocent is gunned down in a drive by every time some kid is murdered for a jacket every time a store clerk is executed for three dollars in change every time some moron kills his wife because she took the last beer from the fridge every time someone hears a bang in the night the rkba dies emotion is hard to argue against but it must be done anyway if emotion is wrong argue away you can t win the stats are not all that clearly behind firearms and just yesterday you claimed they weren t behind them at all the protection factor does not strongly outweigh the mindless mayhem factor operating under the assumption that the same conditions absolutely govern both of them that the expansion of one automatically necessitates the contraction of the other firearms related mindless mayhem will be related to the availibility of firearms if they become scarce and and expensive a different psychology will take hold i think they would be used far less to settle trivial complaints
|
9,436 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes new to this planet everything is dependent on either public or political opinion usually political to imagine that inalienable rights are somehow wired into the vast cold cosmos is purest egotism and a dangerous delusion we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness declaration of independence july aaron arc cco caltech edu
|
9,437 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms as quoted from apr gnv ifas ufl edu by jrm gnv ifas ufl edu firearms tend to fall into this low dollar pound area it would not be economic to smuggle them in all production would have to be local there are not all that many people who have both the skill and motivation to assemble worthwhile firearms from scratch high ranking crime figures could obtain imported uzis and such but the average person and average thug would be lucky to get a zip gun and would pay through the nose for it you don t know much about modern automatic weapons do you just about anybody with basic manufacturing skill can turn out high quality submachineguns a couple of high school shop teachers were recently arrested for building submachineguns in the school shop i suggest that you go to the library and find a copy of smallarms of the world your entire premise is based on non factual assumptions you re like a bunch of over educated new york jewish aclu lawyers fighting to eliminate school prayer from the public schools in arkansas holly silva
|
9,438 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re non lethal alternatives to handguns holland cs colostate edu douglas craig holland writes what about guns with non lethal bullets like rubber or plastic bullets would those work very well in stopping an attack doug holland any projectile traveling at or near typical bullet speeds is potentially lethal even blanks which have no projectile can cause death if the muzzle is in close proximity to the victim i have heard of rubber or plastic bullets being used effectively during riot situations where the intent is crowd control rather than close range self defense i ve also seen reports of deaths caused by them the british in northern ireland use of a firearm for self defense is appropriate and lawful only in the gravest of situations at that point i consider deadly lethal force to be a proper reaction and so does the law furthermore use of less effective but still potentially lethal force has its own set of problems it may well take more applications of the less effective force to stop the incident this places all parties at some risk the victim because the attack has not stopped and the assailent since the aggregate damage done by the multiple applications may well be more deadly michael phelps external mjp vnet ibm com internal mjp bwa kgn ibm com mjp at kgnvmy and last but not least a disclaimer these opinions are mine
|
9,439 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes in article apr synapse bms com hambidge bms com writes the second amendment is about sovereignty not sporting goods perfectly correct but it won t make any difference hmm i beg to differ it will probably make a big difference at some point self defense is a valid reason for rkba the vast majority get through life without ever having to own use or display a firearm besides there are other means of self protection which can be just as effective as firearms thankfully it is true that the majority go through life without having to use a firearm howver there are situations where firearms are the most effective means of self protection what other means do you propose as equally effective freedoms and rights are not dependent on public opinion necessity or scientific scrutiny new to this planet everything is dependent on either public or political opinion usually political to imagine that inalienable rights are somehow wired into the vast cold cosmos is purest egotism and a dangerous delusion new to this country new to political theory alas i was speaking of principle without principle all attempts at republican forms of gov t are futile there are times when public and political opinion are contrary to principle which is why we have a constitution which enumerates gov t powers and presumes certain rights a major reason for this was to prevent a tyranny of the majority no arguments against rkba can withstand scientific scrutiny they don t have to like so many other things the issue is one of perception rather than boring statistics every time some young innocent is gunned down in a drive by every time some kid is murdered for a jacket every time a store clerk is executed for three dollars in change every time some moron kills his wife because she took the last beer from the fridge every time someone hears a bang in the night the rkba dies the stats are not all that clearly behind firearms the protection factor does not strongly outweigh the mindless mayhem factor given society as we now experience it it seems safer to get rid of as many guns as possible that may be an error but enough active voters believe in that course this is exactly why law should be based on reasoned thought not immediate perception of course it doesn t always work that way fortunately while there are no guarantees logic sometimes does prevail and if not there are still means for correction as far as enough active voters are concerned that is still an open question until the vote is made how do you intend to silence rkba supporters talk all you want talk about the good old days when you used to own firearms after a while such talk will take on the character of war stories and no one will be very interested anymore you portray a possible scenario for the future but how will you silence rkba supporters right now as long as public debate is allowed such debate will continue if we allow public debate to be restricted or denied then we will get a gov t we deserve al standard disclaimer
|
9,440 |
talk.politics.guns
|
cnn for sale bill vojak bv i read in the paper yestarday that ted turner wants to trim down bv his media holdings and is putting cnn up for sale the potential bv bidder time warner of course sigh just what we need maybe now s the time for us the nra goa ccrtkba saf et al to band together and buy cnn as our voice wouldn t that be sumpin broadcast the truth for a change and be able to air a favorable pro gun item or two olx there is no way they can get over here a maginot ye olde bailey bbs v bis v bis houston texas yob sccsi com home of alt cosuard
|
9,441 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re with friends like the paul prescod pontificating pp state edu cathy smith writes pp libertarians oppose both waiting periods and background checks pp or any prerequisite for exercising rights that are supposed to pp be guaranteed pp let me get this straight unlike the other idiots in this newsgroup pp you actually support anybody having unlimited access to guns pp inclucing criminals or would you prohibit them from owning them pp but not from buying them pp you are a supreme idiot you make the other idiots look like mensa members thanks paul for yet another fine example of the holier than thou gun control mindset why don t you add something intelligent to the debate like maybe nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah olx fight crime shoot back ye olde bailey bbs v bis v bis houston texas yob sccsi com home of alt cosuard
|
9,442 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my turn dan sorenson writing ds i d rather not get into the nationalized medical care debate ds here but i find it amazing that criminals often live better than the ds rest of the population in some aspects and that we re paying for ds them to do so as an example in november i had my annual dental here you are somewhat in error in all respects we are paying when we are not paying for their countryclub incarceration we are paying with our lives and belongings as their prey upon what would they practice their nefarious predatory acts if not for the citizens of this country what is amazing to me is the mindset of those who overtly and covertly perpetuate a justice system har that essentially mandates that some of us offer up ourselves as that prey while they suitably insulate themselves from the preyground olx church of crime justice come let us prey ye olde bailey bbs v bis v bis houston texas yob sccsi com home of alt cosuard
|
9,443 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms in article apr sco com allanh sco com allan j heim writes papresco undergrad math uwaterloo ca paul prescod drugs are banned please tell me when this supply will dry up drugs are easier to manufacture easier to smuggle easier to hide no comparison then let s use another example alcoholic beverages bottles of whiskey are larger heavier and more fragile than bags of drugs barrels and kegs are larger and heavier still and are difficult to manipulate yet a lot of people managed to get very rich off of the smuggling of booze into this country during the years of prohibition there was a demand so an entire industry formed to supply it i beleive this was the source of the kennedy clan s money so unless there s something i m missing i think your argument that guns won t be smuggled because theyr e more difficult to manufacture smuggle and hide won t wash if enough people want something somebody will try to supply it allan j heim allanh sco com uunet sco allanh jim jmd handheld com i m always rethinking that there s never been a day when i haven t rethought that but i can t do that by myself bill clinton april if i were an american as i am an englishman while a foreign troop was landed in my country i never would lay down my arms never never never william pitt earl of chatham nov
|
9,444 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article cmm thomasp surt ifi uio no thomas parsli thomasp ifi uio no writes observations from a naive norwegian guns are made to kill people not to shoot target or to have something more macho than stamps to collect it is more easy to kill injure someone with a gun than with a knife or a bat as in baseball it s not very wise to compare two completely different countries like usa and let s say island on issues like crime and violence yes the problem is people committing crimes not the tools beeing used but should be taken into concideration only as far as it affects the crime rate we have a very strict gun legislation in norway but until recently it was possible for enyone over years to buy a shotgun shotguns are used mainly for hunting in norway but because it was so easy to accuire one it was the most used gun in crimes the solution was to restrict the sale so it s now necessary to apply and register your shotgun and unbelievable the use of guns in crime fell did the rate of crime fall if not the ban was of no use it is the rate of violent crime that matters not the tools used it s the crime stupid there are now a new law against wearing long knives in public and why should it be allowed apparently that became the weapon of choice after the shotguns were banned after that they ll decide the car of choice is the saab and propose a ban on that what i as an scandinavian have problems to understand is that you americans have a more liberal view on guns and violence than on nudity and sex try showing a bare breast on tv insted of violence and murder yes i know a little american history but is it a civil human right to have an assault gun in your home and or an handgun in your car yes we still trust honest people here for the time being the bad english is not my fault it s probably the keyboard software or the quality of the subtext on tv disclamer not these are the views of all studens at my university all norwegians and probably whole of the universe thomas parsli thomasp ifi uio no jmd handheld com i m always rethinking that there s never been a day when i haven t rethought that but i can t do that by myself bill clinton april if i were an american as i am an englishman while a foreign troop was landed in my country i never would lay down my arms never never never william pitt earl of chatham nov
|
9,445 |
talk.politics.guns
|
a scoop of waco road please your lite posting for the day from rec humor funny in article s adf looking on ca bellas tti com pete bellas writes there is a new ice cream flavor inspired by the incident at waco it s called mount caramel it s full of nuts but you can t get it out of the carton cdt rocket sw stratus com if you believe that i speak for my company or cdt vos stratus com write today for my special investors packet
|
9,446 |
talk.politics.guns
|
newspapers censoring gun advertisements recently while looking around in traders sporting goods store a very well stocked firearms store i discovered a printed document that was being distributed by the good folks who work there traders btw is located in san leandro ca granted the document may be asking you and i to help out traders but in the big scope of things i feel that we would do all gun owners a favor by helping to this cause anyway here it is newspaper ad censorship are you letting the newspapers tell you how to live your life what s good for you what s not and exercise blatant censorship over what you read in their advertisments the newspapers have now decided to censor gun ads which is why you no longer see the ads that traders san leandro has run for many years these ads were run for the law abiding honest citizens who own firearms for sporting use or self protection they certainly have the right to do so under the second amendment right to bear arms if you are tired of newspapers who run sex and liquor ads galor yet refuse to run legitimate gun ads please send a letter to the editors indicating your displeasure over their censorship doctrine following is a list of bay area newspapers who censor gun ads perhaps you d like to send them your thoughts on this issue oakland tribune daily review alameda times star pob pob oak st oakland ca hayward alameda ca argus tri valley herald san leandro times decoto rd pob w juana ave fremont ca pleasanton ca san leandro ca contra costa times san mateo times san francisco chronicle pob pob mission st walnut creek ca san mateo ca san francisco ca san fran independent san fran examiner san jose mercury news evans ave th st ridder park dr san fran ca san fran ca san jose ca then there are six pages of facts i can not validate these facts and there were no sources but many feel and sound very true here are the topic headlines big media snow job blaming firearms for murder is like blaming hospitals for death i could use the same nazi journalistic technique of cbs and abc to prove that hospitals cause death how nbc cbs and abc have scammed the american people on gun control american tv journalism is based on nazi journalism why tv journalists lie the government with the help of the tv networks has succeeded in playing one group against the other gun laws are unconstitutional american gun laws are based on nazi gun laws the government is trying to devide and conquer the cia wants your firearms and so on for six pages so now we have the media trying help put gun dealers out of business by trying to limit their exposure to potential customers and preventing the customers from reading about sales of ammunition and firearms for sporting hunting or other recreational use let me know if you write to any of these bozos peter d nesbitt air traffic controller pnesbitt mcimail com oakland bay tracon cbr f pilot nra member ccx f s w magnum carrier
|
9,447 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card what seems to be happening here is the situation getting totally blown out of proportion in my post i was referring to your regular patrolman in a car cruising around the city vs gang members of course the police have access to the things that you mentioned but do they use tanks and such all of the time of course they don t and that s the point i was trying to make every day when i go out to lunch i always see cops coming in the majority that i see are still carrying revolvers not that there is anything wrong with a revolver but if you re a cop that is up against some gang member with a couple of automatics in his coat i mean semi auto handguns you re going to be at a disadvantage even with training i have been at a shooting range where gang gang members were practicing shooting they were actually practicing taking out their guns as quick as possible and shooting at the target and they weren t doing too badly either the university cops here who are are state cops are armed better than the chicago police it seems most state cops are i don t know where you are originally from david but you live in tennesse and i live in chicago and see this crap everyday on the news and in the papers i think the situation is just a tad different here than there however don t forget that the police in chicago can carry just about anything they want except for the glock which is not approved for carry guess they figure all cops are like the police chief of winnetka who happened to let off a stray round of mm this is the same anti gun police chief that wanted full auto uzis for his patrol cars perhaps in the judgement of the majority of chicago s finest a close to reliable weapon like a revolver is preferable to a reliable automatic i note that in germany where certainly the mm semi auto handgun is king some of the more elite police types want revolvers i don t think the issue is cost because chicago police certainly make on the order of at least k year your presumption of disadvantage i think is not borne out by the experiences of new york city s cops there the cops usually come out on top with their standard spl revolvers i ve seen s ws rugers and beretta mms in addition to the revolvers carried by chicago cops in the past i ve seen m s others have seen browning hi powers jason
|
9,448 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes firearms tend to fall into this low dollar pound area why either the numerator or the denominator could fluctuate the dollar value of a gun would of course go up if supply were restricted the weight of a gun might go down significantly as technology improved i don t think you have a basis to assert this it would not be economic to smuggle them in all production would have to be local there are not all that many people who have both the skill and motivation to assemble worthwhile firearms from scratch the skill is easily taught to anyone with a modicum of mechanical aptitude and the only motivator needed is money if guns were banned then this motivator would kick in big time now of course it is not a moneymaking proposition for every machine shop to make guns on the side when it ain t rebuilding engines ban guns and watch what happens you ll have to schedule a year in advance to get your brakes resurfaced
|
9,449 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms firearms tend to fall into this low dollar pound area it would not be economic to smuggle them in all production would have to be local there are not all that many people who have both the skill and motivation to assemble worthwhile firearms from scratch high ranking crime figures could obtain imported uzis and such but the average person and average thug would be lucky to get a zip gun and would pay through the nose for it this is not borne out of reality the old soviet union had a very serious domestic handgun and submachinegun trade guns that were of commercial grade because they were produced in honest to goodness machineshops why would all production have to be local don t we have a road system that is the envy of the world i seem to recall incidents in the past where chinese entreprenaurs attempted to smuggle ak s semi autos into this country to get around import number limitations may have been gunweek where i read that years ago any person with high school drafting skills and vocational school machineshop training could produce a submachinegun you talk about the average person not being able get even a zip gun well now think of all that private cnc controlled machinery that is not being used for shifts a day do you think that if guns were being sold on the black market for say an enterprising mechanical engineer could be using that machinery to produce workable submachineguns for sale after all gunweek had an article and pictures on how batf was looking for the manufacturer of quite efficient silencers that were of commercial quality and finish look at it this way of the u s households have a handgun say at least half of those keep one for self defense you are talking a potential market of of tens of millions of people who would seek firearms for the purpose of self preservation only a fool would believe that market would not be filled regardless of government prohibitions
|
9,450 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re armed citizen april iftccu talk politics guns kendall lds loral com colin kendall am apr in article apr dazixco ingr com crphilli hound dazixca ingr com writes the armed citizen mere presence of a firearm without a shot being fired prevents crime in many instances as shown by news reports sent to the armed citizen perhaps so but note that of the accounts cited there was only one in which no shot was fired of the other twelve five described cases in which the assailant was wounded by a shot and six described cases in which the assailant was killed by a shot follow more than one months posting as more than one reader has noted there is some reporting bias here i have seen months where these numbers were reversed i don t keep a constant tally but it seems this particular issue had more shots fired than any other i can remember rick
|
9,451 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re ban all firearms woops i m not sure if i screwed up but this is either forgery or some sort of mistake aborted post that didn t abort on my part bogus article below if seen in another post should be ignored iftccu talk politics guns bressler iftccu ca boeing com rick bressler pm apr iftccu talk politics guns papresco undergrad math uwaterloo ca paul prescod am apr in article hydra gatech edu gt a prism gatech edu cochrane james shapleigh writes i certainly hope this is somebody s idea of a joke as poor as it it my earlier posting mentioning an illegal firearms manufacturing site being searched for by the feds in the florida area was evidently ignored let s look at this critically how many guns did this illegal manufacturing site make compared to and so on sorry rick
|
9,452 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re proper gun control what is proper gun control was re my gun is like my american express card iftccu talk politics guns mikey ccwf cc utexas edu strider pm apr i think most of us would rather be held up with a knife than with a gun but how the hell are you going to manage that you still haven t offered i ve been watching this knife verses gun bit for a while now even contributed a few comments but this stuff i d rather face a knife than a gun has got to come from ignorance i used to think pretty much the same thing then i got educated people do not as a rule understand how deadly knives can be or how quickly you can be killed with one most people don t understand that it takes less than an inch of penetration in some areas to cause quick within a minute or so death the death rates from handguns and knives are within a few percentage points of each other many people not realizing how deadly knives are try their luck and thus more get injured by knives a gun is deadly only in a single direction and it s only advantage is that it is a remote control weapon a contact weapon such as a knife controls a spherical area to feet in diameter most people have never seen knife wounds aside from slicing a finger by accident from feet or so a knife is very nearly an even match for a holstered gun in experienced hands even if the knife wielder has only moderate skill from inside feet or so a knife is a match for a drawn gun a knife is utterly silent it never jams and never runs out of ammunition it is limited only by the speed dexterity skill and ability of it s wielder criminals in general are young fast and strong it s interesting to note that the patterned slashing attacks used by many martial artists remarkably resemble the wild uncontrolled slashing attacks of novices i ve talked to several well trained martial artists they have unanimously agreed that if they ever go up against a knife they simply plan on being cut hopefully not as bad as the attacker practicing with firearms requires facilities and equipment practicing with knives requires only a small area and something to simulate a knife say a popsicle stick or tooth brush criminals practice their knife attacks in prison if you have not trained against knives with a firearm and do not realize these facts the first inkling you will have that something is wrong is the knife ripping through your throat or in the case of an experienced attacker parts of your body falling off onto the ground a year old man with arthritis can close that yard distance and gut you in about one and a half seconds dennis tueller with a broken leg in a walking cast managed it in two i ve seen people close that distance and strike in second i m old over weight and slow i can do it in seconds i ve seen morgue footage of people killed with edged weapons that you would not believe how about a single stab wound to the chest with a table fork in this case the attacker used the handle not the pointed end add to this the fact that hand gun stopping power is largely a myth except in the case of a central nervous system shot or a round that destroys the skeletal structure it takes anywhere from to twelve seconds for a bullet wound to take effect this is true of even heart shots there is the case of the police woman in l a the first recorded survivor of a shot to the heart that lady not only killed her attacker but chased him down to do it all four of her shots fired after she had been shot struck the perp atta girl the bullet entered her on a downward angle went through the apex of her heart down through the diaphragm clipped her liver and destroyed her spleen it then exited her back leaving a tennis ball sized hole she died about six times on the operating table but was out of the hospital in days and was back on full duty in eight months she was off duty at the time and not wearing her vest she was on her way home so happened to have her gun no she doesn t think civilians should have the same rights sigh the moral of the story is that even if you do manage to shoot a knife attacker you d better be planning on doing some dodging a good alternative is to shoot for and break the pelvis people can often walk a little on broken legs but a broken pelvis will nearly always anchor them many firearms schools recommend pelvis shots against contact weapons the target is as large as the traditional center of mass and is more reliable to stop somebody with a contact weapon assuming a caliber powerful enough to do the job hot s on up will usually do this remember folks the idea isn t to take em with you but for you to live and them to fail whatever the consequences for them this the reason killing them isn t our goal or in many cases even good enough to keep us alive i don t want to face a violent attack of any sort knowing what i now know i can t rightly say i d rather face a knife than an gun it would have to depend on the attacker and if i could pick and choose i wouldn t be there this is really the bottom line criminals do not fear the law criminals do not fear the weapon they fear the citizen behind the weapon that has shown the resolution and determination to do whatever it takes rick
|
9,453 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re proper gun control what is proper gun control was re my gun is like my american express card iftccu talk politics guns hays ssd intel com kirk hays pm apr some of the pro gun posters in this group own no guns the dread terminator aka the rifleman owned no firearms for several years while posting in this group as an example there are others good point kirk he s still around too he s responded by email to a couple of my posts and gosh darn he s gotten down right civil this happed about the time he got his first firearm wonder if there is a relationship here turns out that most people at least the ones who are not criminals to start with act responsibility once given the chance rick
|
9,454 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes in article apr synapse bms com hambidge bms com writes the second amendment is about sovereignty not sporting goods perfectly correct but it won t make any difference i agree sad but true self defense is a valid reason for rkba the vast majority get through life without ever having to own use or display a firearm besides there are other means of self protection which can be just as effective as firearms please name one freedoms and rights are not dependent on public opinion necessity or scientific scrutiny new to this planet everything is dependent on either public or political opinion usually political to imagine that inalienable rights are somehow wired into the vast cold cosmos is purest egotism and a dangerous delusion upon which our bill of rights is based some delusion no arguments against rkba can withstand scientific scrutiny they don t have to like so many other things the issue is one of perception rather than boring statistics every time some young innocent is gunned down in a drive by every time some kid is murdered for a jacket every time a store clerk is executed for three dollars in change every time some moron kills his wife because she took the last beer from the fridge every time someone hears a bang in the night the rkba dies the stats are not all that clearly behind firearms the protection factor does not strongly outweigh the mindless mayhem factor given society as we now experience it it seems safer to get rid of as many guns as possible that may be an error but enough active voters believe in that course if this were not true in practice then certain unethical politicians would not be passing gun control laws politicians are generally whores to public opinion this does not mean the the public is either well informed or correct as for the stats anyone can support anything with the right stats the right stats from what i ve seen are sometimes even used to support conflicting sides of the same issue how do you intend to silence rkba supporters talk all you want talk about the good old days when you used to own firearms after a while such talk will take on the character of war stories and no one will be very interested anymore used to own firearms while armed insurrection as the ff s of the const may have envisioned seems to me a somewhat fanatical approach to avoiding this political protest is still an option at this point i agree that it s argueably not enough and or too late if all else fails there s always pvc pipe and cosmoline chris miller chris morningstar com my opinions are my own obviously and by definition do not reflect the opinions of anyone else
|
9,455 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re some more about gun control in article apr beaver cs washington edu graham cs washington edu stephen graham writes in article qhpcn b transfer stratus com cdt sw stratus com c d tavares writes consider a similar structure a well educated electorate being necessary for the security of a free state the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed now does this mean only the electorate can keep and read books does it mean only registered voters can keep and read books does it mean only those who have voted can keep and read books does it imply any restrictions at all on the right to keep and read books but it would imply that the state had the right to regulate and enforce education that s nice but it doesn t answer the question there is a difference between the feds can mandate literacy and the feds can t interfere with literacy book possession as far as john q public with a gun the supreme court has already ruled in cases such as us v miller u s and us v verdugo urquidez s ct that that is exactly what the amendment protects this interpretation can be found as far back as the dred scott case in it s worth noting that us vs miller sustained miller s conviction of possession of an illegal firearm noting that a sawed off shotgun was not a proper militia weapon therefore us vs miller supports limited government regulation of firearms actually the miller court did nothing of the kind it remanded the case back to the trial court because the miller court didn t know if the weapon in question was a militia weapon doesn t it bother anyone that a major constitutional issue was taken up in a case where there was no defense miller had been released by the appeals court and disappeared only the govt was represented we don t know what would have happened with the reasonable all guns are militia weapons argument andy
|
9,456 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re boston gun buy back ron miller wrote when you ask the question of the authorities or sponsors of buyback programs whether they will check for stolen weapons and they answer no it s total amnesty good point about registration schemes being used only for harassment deleted i would also like to point out that this is receiving stolen property and is no different than a pawn shop owner doing the same thing myron petro nra uspsa dvc y all the opinions included in this post are my sole responsibility and are protected by the first amendment and guarnteed by the second amendment
|
9,457 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re clinton wants national id card aka ussr style internal passport the idea of the card is bull in and of its self but i m curious to know do they plan on making it a requirement to always have it on you or is it only going to be required to be presented when trying to ge medical aid btw anybody planning on shaving hillary s head to look for later dave days goverment logic or just the clintons david h slack boise surface mount center email slack hpdmd boi hp com telnet phone hewlett packard chinden blvd boise idaho m s
|
9,458 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re fyi batf reply on waco the san francisco examiner reports that clinton has issued instructions to federal law enforcement that they may not kill or injure anyone to resolve the waco situation so they ve built a fence around the compound and are now seriously considering building up the fence to prison camp levels pulling out most of the manpower and waiting however many months it takes john nagle
|
9,459 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re some more about gun control in article apr synapse bms com hambidge bms com writes actually the words a well regulated milita being necessary to the security of a free state is a present participle used as an adjective to modify militia which is followed by the main clause of the sentence the subject being the right the verb shall it asserts that the right to keep and bear arms is essential for maintaining a milita a free state yes i agree the first half of the amendment does modify the noun militia but the difinition of modify that applies to how well regulated modifies militia is to qualify or limit the meaning of for example wet modifes day in the phrase a wet day the amendment is similiar to the statement a wet day being annoying the right of the people to keep and wear boots shall not be infringed so how does a dry day pertain the right to use boots similiar what does the unorganized militia have to due with the right to own guns the sentence in the second amendment doesn t restrict the right or state or imply possession of the right by anyone or anything other than the people all it does is make a positive statement regarding a right of the people the people as in you and me as in the first fourth ninth tenth as well as the second amendment the existence of this right is assumed it is not granted by the amendment there is no stated or implied condition relating the right to bear arms to the necessity of a well regulated militia to the security of in other words the entire sentence says that the right to keep and bear arms is unconditional no not unconditional but shall not be infringed infringed is defined as to break or ignore the terms of or obligations an oath an agreement law or the like to disreguard violate to go beyond the boundaries or limits tresspass encroach this definition implies the following of some form of existing agreement laws and agreements are made in advance boundaries or limits of behavior are set by society as a whole the word unconditional implies no agreements or all previous agreements are off which is the opposite the words used in the first amendment are much stronger i e congress shall make no law are much stronger they clearly imply unconditional if the writers of the amendment wanted unconditional whay didn t they says congress shall make no laws pertaining the the right of the people to keep and bear arms the second amendment implies a sort contract between the people the people and the state the bigger part of the contract is the people have the right to overthrew the government and its laws at any time to guarantee this right the laws cannot stopped the people from forming a well regutaled militia the duties of a well regulated militia to the government are descussed in federalist no and the limits of of the governmental control of the militia are descussed in article i section article ii section and the second amendment of the constitution if only it were a modern document with a john lawrence rutledge smart index and hyper links stretching all research assistant through the world data net it was terribly frustrating to flip back and forth between interactive media group the pages and crude flat illustrations that computer science department never even moved nor were there animated umass lowell arrows or zoom ins it completely lacked a university ave for sound lowell ma most baffling of all was the problem of new words in normal text you d only have to touch an unfamiliar word and the definition jrutledg cs ulowell edu would pop up just below from david brin s earth
|
9,460 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re militia incredibly long in article qna m nq transfer stratus com cdt sw stratus com c d tavares writes in article c l n ll ulowell ulowell edu jrutledg cs ulowell edu john lawrence rutledge writes but do you knew how much organization is required to training a large group of poeple twice a year just to try to get the same people every year provide a basic training to new people so they can be integrated into the force and find a suitable location it requires a continually standing committee of organizers again my response is so what is mr rutledge arguing that since the local and federal governments have abandoned their charter to support such activity and passed laws prohibiting private organizations from doing so that they have eliminated the basis for the rkba on the contrary to anyone who understands the game they have strengthened it no i originally argued that the second amendment was a little bit and an anachronism these prohibiting laws are examples why the are an anachronism after all laws in made by representatives of the people these representatives of the people have already decided that the second amendment does not apply or is too broad in some cases since these representatives feel an unconditional interpretation is not wanted then it is probable that they majority of the people feel the same way if this is so it is an example of the people using their power of government if this is not how the people feel the people should stand up and state their wishes mox nix mr rutledge you are the only one here claiming that the rkba is dependent on the existence of a top flight well regulated militia why this is a false assumption has already been posted a number of times no i simple stated that the people have a right to join a well organized militia and i have also stated that a militia that meets once or twice a year is clearly well organized and this state of readiness that i have claimed the people have a right to is the same state of readiness expected of the militia as stated by hamilton if only it were a modern document with a john lawrence rutledge smart index and hyper links stretching all research assistant through the world data net it was terribly frustrating to flip back and forth between interactive media group the pages and crude flat illustrations that computer science department never even moved nor were there animated umass lowell arrows or zoom ins it completely lacked a university ave for sound lowell ma most baffling of all was the problem of new words in normal text you d only have to touch an unfamiliar word and the definition jrutledg cs ulowell edu would pop up just below from david brin s earth
|
9,461 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re fyi batf reply on waco in article c l k u elite intel com dgw elite intel com dennis willson writes on march i sent strongly worded letters critisizing the batf in their handling of the randy weaver and branch davidian cases to several politicians ore senators bob packwood and mark hatfield representative elizabeth furse and treasury secretary lloyd bentsen while i have never been a supporter of bob packwood i must admit that he seems to be the only one who has done anything but round file my letter well i didn t bother writing to boxer feinstein or eshoo the terrible trio who allegly represent me instead i wrote to bentsen my letter was not exactly strongly worded i simply stated that the batf approach was immoral military style assault firing into a house where they knew there were kids aparently bentsen forwarded my letter to the batf and they responded to me directly it follows the text of your reply pretty closely however i intend to send another letter directly to them in return prior to the service of the federal search warrant numerous efforts were made to locate and effect the arrest of david koresh away from the compound these efforts were unsuccessful even if david koresh had been arrested while away from the compound action would have been required against his followers who are just as violent as he during the subsequent search of the premises this section is not in the letter that i received the parts about atf logo and steenking badges or their loss of the element of surprise were not included either sincerely yours daniel m h l tt can t make out signature deputy director the same guy with the bad handwriting apparently signed my letter for richard l garner chief special operations division don
|
9,462 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re non lethal alternatives to handguns iftccu talk politics guns steiner jupiter ca boeing com am apr douglas craig holland holland cs colostate edu writes lostsa crap deleted trim your articles what about guns with non lethal bullets like rubber or plastic bullets would those work very well in stopping an attack last i heard non lethal was a bit of a misnomer for these things also you need to consider our legal system since any of these things can be lethal you are going to have a hard time explaining why you applied lethal force when you didn t think it was necessary if you thought lethal force was necessary you wouldn t be using rubber bullets would you ouch if you are justified in shooting them at all you are justified in using the best self defense ammunition you can get your hands on it might actually improve the legal outcome this is why hollow points hold up in court they are safer for you safer for innocent by standers don t as a rule go through the perp and actually safer for the perp if you are using military hard ball you may have to shoot him many times where one or two hollow points might stop him and do the job as a rule the fewer wound channels the better the chance for his surviving the incident rick
|
9,463 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun lovers was re my gun is like my american express card hell a glock is the last thing that should be switched to the only thing that i know about a glock is the lack of a real safety on it sure there is that little thing in the trigger but that isn t too great of a safety you re getting warmer the little thing in the trigger has to be depressed before the trigger can move what this means is the damned thing won t go off until the trigger is pulled this makes it just about there have been some problems but we re assuming the gun is functioning correctly as safe as a revolver the gun when working correctly is totally drop safe now in police work this is a consideration there is not a single documented case i m aware of where a police officer was killed because he failed to operate the safety on his firearm there are quite a few documented cases where criminals got hold of the cops gun and couldn t figure out how to get the safety off in time to use the gun thus the proprietary nature of the safety to the criminal at least very likely prevented the office from getting shot the purpose of a safety is to make the gun safe from unintentional fire this does not mean it should be so complicated as to slow down intentional use thus the glock safety is perfectly adequate from a safety standpoint but not necessarily the most desirable from the standpoint of open carry where it is easily grabbed by somebody else by this criteria it does make a lot of sense as a concealed carry piece from the standpoint of police use it is no better or worse than a revolver as far as being proprietary to the officer in the method of firing it the ideal solution may someday be biometric sensing of the user so that the firearm can t be used by anybody but it s owner but for now the wide variety of safety systems helps unless the criminal happens to be familiar with that particular type of firearm rick
|
9,464 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re gun lovers was re my gun is like my american express card iftccu talk politics guns vincent cad gatech edu vincent fox am apr this isn t rec guns so maybe this is getting a bet technical but i can t resist a revolver also has the advantage that if it misfires you just pull the trigger again sometimes depends on why it misfired a double action revolver almost all of them can be hand cocked first but will fire merely by pulling the trigger i can t imagine doing much combat type shooting single action a misfire in a revolver merely means you must pull the trigger again to rotate to the next round assuming the cylinder will rotate a revolver can be carried with the th chamber empty and under the hammer for maximum safety but still can be drawn and fired with an easy motion even one handed never hurts to err on the side of safety but if you ve got one of those new fangled hammer blocks or transfer bar safeties it s unnecessarily redundant i d rather have the extra round speedloaders for a revolver allow reloads almost as fast as magazines on semi autos can be faster depending on users quite true speed loaders are a little less convenient to pack around than magazines though a misfire in a semi auto will require you to clear a jammed shell first time spent which can be fatal and a vital second or so is often lost as you realize hey it s jammed before starting to do anything about clearing it true but this is a training function most semi autos must have the slide worked to chamber the first round and cock the hammer some police carry their semi autos with the chamber loaded and hammer cocked but a safety engaged i do not consider this safe however you must trade off safety to get the same speed of employment as a revolver cocked and locked for single actions or hammer down on double actions are the only carry modes that make sense the series colt s for example are quite safe to carry this way there are some double action semi autos out there but the complexity of operation of many of them requires more training agreed now that i ve shot off my mouth a bit let me back some of this up it is true that a simple misfire on a revolver doesn t cost you much on the other hand i ve had all sorts of interesting things happen over the years for example i ve had factory ammunition that has had high primers a high primer will tie your revolver up somewhere from seconds to minutes while you try to pound the action open to clear the problem an auto jack the slide and continue i ve had bullets come out of the case keeping the cylinder from turning see clearing paragraph above about the worst that can happen with a semi auto is a double feed this can be cleared in seconds most revolvers are more fragile then semi auto s there are all sorts of close tolerance parts and fitting involved dropping the gun or a blow to the gun or all sorts of things can take it out of action many of the problems that can be cured on the spot with a quality semi auto take a gun smith for a revolver in short a revolver may be less likely to malfunction but as a rule when it does you re out of the fight the majority of malfunctions that occur with semi autos does not fall into that category vincint makes many good points in this post but leaves off the opposing view of most of them a real good starting place is ayoob s the semi auto pistol for police and self defense in general i d agree the revolver is an excellent first gun and self defense weapon for somebody that does not have the time and inclination that is necessary for the training and practice needed to use a semi auto effectively as a self defense arm most cops are notoriously indifferent to firearms if the department isn t going to train them they aren t going to take the time on their own there is no doubt that training is an issue the amount of training required for effective use of a semi auto is probably several times that of a revolver many cops don t bother for myself i d hate to be limited to one or the other i d rather pick what fits better with my personal inclination what i m wearing that day and so on like the moderator on rec guns says buy em all that said i have to admit that often my advice to people thinking of buying their first defense arm is right after taking a class get a ruger or smith revolver sorry colt fans colt revolvers are ok too if this post had gone the other way i d be arguing for revolvers rick
|
9,465 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re the pill for deer no hunting iftccu talk politics guns jrm gnv ifas ufl edu am apr the vast majority get through life without ever having to own use or display a firearm i suppose that depends on how you define vast majority you are correct about majority somewhere between out of three and one out of will at some period in their lives experience a violent assault the risk is generally higher than emergency medical problems like heart attack and stroke vast is probably too loose a term with approximately americans using firearms each year over a year period we get roughly since some may have to do this more than once million americans with experience in using firearms for self defense yields percent of the population yes i know that is a real rough estimate we re closer to million now but many of these are minors and should be included etc thus the percentage if anything is low at any rate most minority groups in this range are not usually referred to as tiny minorities so i don t see how the other part of the group can be referred to as the vast majority a little more work might support a simple majority of americans never use own or display a firearm certainly when you are talking about ownership you are wrong nearly half of your fellow citizens own one or more firearms besides there are other means of self protection which can be just as effective as firearms please provide a list of other means that are as effective then you might convince your local police departments to switch good luck rick
|
9,466 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns in backcountry no thanks in article b aad c e uinpla npl uiuc edu reimer uinpla npl uiuc edu paul e reimer writes in article qkftjinnoij cronkite cisco com pitargue cisco com marciano pitargue writes stuff deleted about causes of people in er and your factoid about shooting victims in the er count how many come in due to automobile accidents and automobile crimes maybe we should outlaw cars marciano pitargue cisco com there are a lot of automobile accidents but atleast there is some regulation to try to combat this such as drunk drivers get back on the road in no time to kill again seems the driver s license process does not work for this when i got my drivers license i had to take a drivers safety class because you wanted one while you were underage i have to be licensed to drive only on public roads my car must be registered only if it is to be driven on public roads other than between segments of my property i must at least where i live have liability insurance on both myself driving and my car if someone else had an accident with it only on public roads hmm wouldn t manditory saftey classes registration of both the owner and gun and manditory liability insurance be nice for gun owners perhaps if it gave them permission to shoot in public roads and parks paul reimer reimer uinpluxa npl uiuc edu jim jmd handheld com i m always rethinking that there s never been a day when i haven t rethought that but i can t do that by myself bill clinton april if i were an american as i am an englishman while a foreign troop was landed in my country i never would lay down my arms never never never william pitt earl of chatham nov
|
9,467 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my in article apr vax oxford ac uk jaj vax oxford ac uk writes what all you turkey pro pistol and automatic weapons fanatics don t seem to realize is that the rest of us laugh at you you don t make me angry you just make me chuckle steve it s nice that you find me laughable but i don t quite understand is it because you think my firearms clash with what i m wearing or that my nra sticker isn t on straight please state your judgement i find it sad that people won t accept the responsibility to defend themselves and i laugh with the same contempt you have for me at the sheep who expect the government to protect them what he didn t realize was that we took a photo of the back of his truck and showed it to our friends when we got back to vancouver canada where i m from originally people were guffawing at the basic stupidity of such a sticker and the even greater stupidity of the person who put it there in the first place you and your friends sound like a bunch of smug intellectuals now that i live in britain i can see how the rest of the civilized world perceives you gun nut morons oh i guess you are i m still waiting for you all knowing academic likes to solve the worlds problems let us know when you have the answers or punch lines as this case may be the only problem is that canada i hear is suffering from your national eccentricity in that easy to purchase weapons are being smuggled cross the border so it s not a yankee thing are canadians actually as uncivilized as we americans hell here in britain the cops don t even carry guns well if it s anything like here it wouldn t matter if they did they wouldn t be able to use them hell as i recall in people s court even rusty carried a gun never know some plaintiff might go nuts you shouldn t waste your time watching tv steve it will corrupt your mind anyway all you gun nut rush limbaugh fans please keep up your diatribes against brady and other evil liberal media plots you re so damn funny you provide endless amounts of entertainment in your arguments and examples of why someone should be allowed to carry a piece keep us all chuckling ditto to you self righteous one lay your derogatory tirade on thick steve y all can keep laughing and i ll keep feeling safe and secure steve johanes
|
9,468 |
talk.politics.guns
|
reminder denver rally tomorrow monster rally for the right to own and carry weapons tomorrow sunday april from to p m the denver libertarian party will sponsor a rally at the state capitol in support of the individual right to own and carry weapons speakers will include former colorado deputy attorney general david kopel radio host ken hamblin dlp chair david segal pistol instructor lenda jackson and novelist l neil smith your presence and participation are highly welcome for more information call david segal at cathy smith my opinions are of course my own
|
9,469 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re militia incredibly long in article c n vy ej ulowell ulowell edu jrutledg cs ulowell edu john lawrence rutledge writes in article qna m nq transfer stratus com cdt sw stratus com c d tavares writes again my response is so what is mr rutledge arguing that since the local and federal governments have abandoned their charter to support such activity and passed laws prohibiting private organizations from doing so that they have eliminated the basis for the rkba on the contrary to anyone who understands the game they have strengthened it no i originally argued that the second amendment was a little bit and an anachronism these prohibiting laws are examples why the are an anachronism after all laws in made by representatives of the people these representatives of the people have already decided that the second amendment does not apply or is too broad in some cases since these representatives feel an unconditional interpretation is not wanted then it is probable that they majority of the people feel the same way if this is so it is an example of the people using their power of government if this is not how the people feel the people should stand up and state their wishes i ll point out that the whole point of the difficult amendment process was to require a super majority to change the supreme law making it impossible for a majority of the people to simply change the law on a whim simply changing the meaning based on the representatives of the people effectively destroys the amendment process the state s you know are also entitled to a say under that process mox nix mr rutledge you are the only one here claiming that the rkba is dependent on the existence of a top flight well regulated militia why this is a false assumption has already been posted a number of times no i simple stated that the people have a right to join a well organized militia i ll note that that right could be considered protected under the first amendment s protection of peaceful assembly unless you would consider a militia inherently non peaceful then they ve stated the same thing twice david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,470 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my in article apr vax oxford ac uk jaj vax oxford ac uk writes what all you turkey pro pistol and automatic weapons fanatics don t seem to realize is that the rest of us laugh at you you don t make me angry you just make me chuckle that s nice we strive for entertainment value i remeber being in bellingham washington and seeing a pick up truck in front of the car that my friend and i were in it had a bumper sticker proclaiming gun control is a firm grip on a now i m sure that that wanker thought he was pretty cool what he didn t realize was that we took a photo of the back of his truck and showed it to our friends when we got back to vancouver canada where i m from originally people were guffawing at the basic stupidity of such a sticker and the even greater stupidity of the person who put it there in the first place in the first place you have to realize the feeling goes both ways canadians laugh at the u s and americans simply shrug and woner why the hell we let them be a state in the first place i knew somebody else who went to one of your gun mart superstore places just so he could experience the sight of people putting guns and ammo into shopping carts i didn t believe it myself until i drove by one in vegas last year interesting strategy posting here with complaints about people elsewhere now that i live in britain i can see how the rest of the civilized world perceives you gun nut morons courtesy is apparently a dead commodity in the rest of the civilized world gun nut morons indeed the bbc recently referred to the american penchant for pistols automatic weapons etc very appropriately it was called a national eccentricity we ve got guns they ve got a monarch and an economy on the verg of collapse finger pointing across the atlanticis a waste or time the only problem is that canada i hear is suffering from your national eccentricity in that easy to purchase weapons are being smuggled cross the border canada has been blaming the u s for their problems for years the simple fact of the matter is this ten years ago they crowed about how great their system was because they d gotten rid of the guns and the u s would be so much better if they d just get into the divine light shining from the north we pointed out that it was cultural differences and pointed to their pre control crime rates we also pointed out that the history of the entire world contained smuggling and that whenever something was wanted it was smuggled in if the problem were based on u s guns it would have surfaced years before now more canadian criminals want guns and they are being provided canada has its own version of the drug problem yet drugs are prohibited in the u s hell here in britain the cops don t even carry guns that s another funny thing you see a us border guard and he s got his or on his belt with tons o spare ammo never know maybe some canadian shopper might get out of hand hell as i recall in people s court even rusty carried a gun never know some plaintiff might go nuts saw a news report out of britain that armed crime is on the rise and several police agencies are considering have permanent firearms officers to deal with it according to u s news world report british handgun deaths have risen over over the past twelve years the u s number has dropped maybe they re smuggling them across the u s u k border yeah that s the ticket cya have a nice day steve learn a little common courtesy and politeness david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,471 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns in backcountry no thanks in article b aad c e uinpla npl uiuc edu reimer uinpla npl uiuc edu paul e reimer writes in article qkftjinnoij cronkite cisco com pitargue cisco com marciano pitargue writes stuff deleted about causes of people in er and your factoid about shooting victims in the er count how many come in due to automobile accidents and automobile crimes maybe we should outlaw cars marciano pitargue cisco com there are a lot of automobile accidents but atleast there is some regulation to try to combat this when i got my drivers license i had to take a drivers safety class tennessee at least does not require any sort of safety class to get a driver s license all that is required is one twenty question quiz and to drive a car around the block without crashing i have to be licensed to drive in all probability no you don t you are required to be licensed to drive on public roads a license is not necessary on private property my car must be registered most states do not require the registration of cars that are not used on public roads those that do california i know of do so for tax purposes more than anything else i must at least where i live have liability insurance on both myself driving and my car if someone else had an accident with it many states do not currently require this and most again only make this requirement for public roads a car sitting unused is not required to have insurance hmm wouldn t manditory saftey classes registration of both the owner and gun and manditory liability insurance be nice for gun owners the two are not the same as i pointed out above there are significant difference between making rules for use on public property and making rules for ownership the other half of the objection is trust similar things to this have been tried in many local jurisdications across the country and have been abused in far too many cases safety classes which are never sheduled never funded or only one or two is held a year for a limited number of participants registration lists in new york chicago and california have been used for confiscation many gun owners would in theory support these planes although the numbers overwhelmingly show that competence is not the problem that intentional misuse is they ve simply seen it abused and are leery of the next person who comes down the pike with a reasonable suggestion they ve already seen abused david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,472 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re criminals machineguns there s only one way i know of to tell an ar from an m pick it up hold it about a foot from your face and look closely at the saftey lever if it has two positions its an ar if it has three its an m there are numerous internal differences as well but since one would have to field strip the weapon to see them they are not valid in this discussion so in conclusion there is very little external differences to distinguish an ar from an m except at close very close range david bixler auburn university all standard disclaimers apply
|
9,473 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns in backcountry no thanks in article c lrpq o idacom hp com guy idacom hp com guy m trotter writes hi in canada any gun that enters a national park must be sealed i think it s a small metal tag that s placed over the trigger the net result of this is that you can t use a gun to protect yourself from bears or psychos in the national parks instead one has to be sensitive to the dangers and annoyances of hiking in bear country and take the appropriate precautions i think this policy makes the users of the national parks feel a little closer to nature that they are a part of nature and as such have to deal with nature on it s own terms guy hello i understand this philosophy the bears are a national treasure the area is their sanctuary and people who enter it do so at their own risk it is better that that rare human be killed by a bear than that bears be provoked or shot by unbear savvy visitors the bears aren t having a population explosion humans are so it is better that a human be killed than endanger the bears i don t agree with this philosopy but i understand it the psychos are a bit different they are not a national treasure but i suppose the decision has been made that to allow provision for defense against them would also allow provision for defense against bears again i suppose it has been decided that it is better for the rare human to be killed by a psycho than to take a chance on threatening the bears personally i wouldn t go into an area where i would be managed so as to reduce my safety but come to think of it i guess i live in a managed wilderness myself joan v
|
9,474 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re some more about gun control in article apr mtu edu cescript mtu edu charles scripter writes in article c bu m k ulowell ulowell edu jrutledg cs ulowell edu john lawrence rutledge wrote excellent exchange deleted it seems to me the whole reason for the second amendment to give the people protection from the us government by guaranteeing that the people can over through the government if necessary is a little bit of an anachronism is this day and age maybe its time to re think how this should be done and amend the constitution appropriately abraham lincoln first inaugural address march this country with its institutions belongs to the people who inhabit it whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it rep elbridge gerry of massachusetts spoken during floor debate over the second amendment i annals of congress at august what sir is the use of a militia it is to prevent the establishment of a standing army the bane of liberty whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people they always attempt to destroy the militia in order to raise an army upon their ruins so now we know which category mr rutledge is in he means to destroy our liberties and rights what i find so hard to understand is how come some people apparantly not connected with government or otherwise privileged will go to great lengths redefinitions re interpretations in a full bore attempt to throw away the protection of their own rights under the constitution almost makes me think of lemmings running into the sea during a lemming year i really wonder that jefferson and madison would say to these folks when all government in little as in great things shall be drawn to washington as the centre of all power it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated thomas jefferson excellent quote pat rwing uucp without prejudice ucc pat myrto seattle wa if all else fails try uunet pilchuck rwing pat wisdom only two things are infinite the universe and human stupidity and i am not sure about the former albert einstien
|
9,475 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns in backcountry no thanks in article qpavfinn jp clem handheld com jmd cube handheld com jim de arras writes in article b aad c e uinpla npl uiuc edu reimer uinpla npl uiuc edu paul e reimer writes in article qkftjinnoij cronkite cisco com pitargue cisco com marciano pitargue writes stuff deleted about causes of people in er due to automobile accidents and automobile crimes maybe we should outlaw cars there are a lot of automobile accidents but atleast there is some regulation to try to combat this such as drunk drivers get back on the road in no time to kill again seems the driver s license process does not work for this i can testify to this my cousin spent a few weeks in the hospital and his friend was killed because of a drunk driver the son of a b is back on the streets officers from the scene are still p ed about that one to take a drivers safety class because you wanted one while you were underage i have to be licensed to drive only on public roads my car must be registered only if it is to be driven on public roads other than between segments of my property i must at least where i live have liability insurance on both myself driving and my car if someone else had an accident with it only on public roads and this obviously doesn t always work else why would they offer uninsured motorist coverage hmm wouldn t manditory saftey classes registration of both the owner and gun and manditory liability insurance be nice for gun owners i object to mandatory registration because i don t trust my government not to use any information i give them for their own purposes i am licensed to carry a concealed pistol in my home state but they never asked whether i actually owned a firearm a safety class before issuing a permit to carry is reasonably provided such classes are regularly available to the public of course most places would consider my time in the reserves and on a competition rifle team to count perhaps if it gave them permission to shoot in public roads and parks hey now that s an idea paul reimer jim now unless you have an agenda against private ownership of firearms why would you want to harass the person trying to legally defend themselves or exercise their rights i know defending oneself family whoever is a right at least as far as my mm and i are concerned also as far as the state of alabama seems to be concerned why don t you push for stricter prosecution of those who use firearms in the commission of a crime i ve already pointed out how we aren t nailing dui s hard enough comparing the us with other countries seldom works but the european attitude towards alchohol and dui seems to work their attitude towards weapons isn t really a valid comparison because they ve historically done their best to keep the populace disarmed and submissive while our country was founded by a bunch of rugged individualists who told the european monarchies for the most part to take a flying leap used more polite language though we even weaseled out of our first international treaty and then convinced the french that it was in their best interests not to complain but first we had to overcome the fact that the brits were doing their best to restrict us to squirrel guns and such so we d be properly submissive while they forced us to pay for their wars of course most american history classes these days tend to gloss over facts that do not fit the image they wish to convey i m glad my amer hist teacher was a libertarian who had us review a good portion of the federalist papers and debate their origins and meanings enough rambling james james s cochrane when in danger or in doubt run in this space gt a prism gatech edu circles scream and shout for rent
|
9,476 |
talk.politics.guns
|
cnn for sale w k gorman maybe now s the time for us the nra goa ccrtkba saf et al to band together and buy cnn as our voice wouldn t that be sumpin broadcast the truth for a change and be able to air a favorable pro gun item or two i would like to see this happen i don t think it will i don t think the average gun owner will take any notice of what is happening until they break down his door but i will go on record publicly to the effect that i will contribute a minimum of to the buy out fund if it can be organized and made viable anybody else want to put their money where their mouth is there ar million gun owners out there if and it s a big and not very realistic if we got hold of cnn the anti gun bullshit would stop right there why won t it happen because nobody will get off their ass and make it happen nuts any nra headquarters weenies listening to this man any rtkba organization honcho listening it s time to stop fighting the brady s and the schumer s now there s an interesting meaning to the acronynm bs from the comfort of the office we had better get serious with our time and money and get after it or we might just as well pack it in now olx gun control advocates must have had a sanity by pass ye olde bailey bbs v bis v bis houston texas yob sccsi com home of alt cosuard
|
9,477 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re carrying arms in article apr spdc ti com dwhite epcot spdc ti com dan white writes i have a question about the second amendment that has bothered me for awhile the amendment guarentees our right to keep and bear arms currently the gun prohibitionists are trying to restrict or eliminate our right to keep arms with the brady bill and the assault weapon ban however haven t we already lost our right to bear arms it seems that in most states like texas a citizen may own a gun and carry while at his home or business but a citizen is severely restricted from bearing outside these areas here in texas you cannot carry in your car except when traveling which is usually defined as traveling across a county line how did this come about are there any court rulings on the legality of restricting the carrying of a weapon outside the home there are but not any that would help texans in many states such laws have been found to violate the state constitution but the federal second amendment does not apply directly to the states it was written to limit the federal government only the fourteenth amendment was written to extend the restrictions of the bill of rights to the state level however the exact wording of the fourteenth amendment is very vague the supreme court has been dancing around the issue without facing it directly for over years in practice the bill of right indirectly applies through the fourteenth applies to the state governments only if the supreme court has ruled that particular provision the court has made no such rulings on the second amendment frank crary cu boulder
|
9,478 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nd amendment dead good in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes the bulk of firarems are used against unworthy and unnesessary opponents those who posessa a cool jakcet you want those who would argue with you about a parking space those who would take your woman in short trivial and worthless causes that s open for debate certainly an excessive number of people are murdered every year but people also do save innocent lives with firearms the media just don t tell us when it happens too much of this has ruined you cause there is no recovery in the near future federal martials will come for your arms i think there are more of us than there are federal marshalls no one will help you you are more dangerous to their thinking than the criminal this is your own fault crap it s simplistic thinking on the part of feather headed dolts the nd amendment is dead accept this find another way nuts don
|
9,479 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nd amendment dead good in article qrn ainn rq clem handheld com jmd cube handheld com jim de arras writes the nd amendment is dead accept this find another way it ain t dead yet and even if it were repealed remember it just protects our rkba it does not grant any rights there would then have to be additional laws passed to outlaw gun possession even if they outlawed private posession of firearms there would be no moral force behind that law i imagine compliance would be low don
|
9,480 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my in article apr vax oxford ac uk jaj vax oxford ac uk writes what all you turkey pro pistol and automatic weapons fanatics don t seem to realize is that the rest of us laugh at you so what we think you re pretty hilarious too i love how you brit s kiss royal arse that you re willing to throw out freedom of speech for the sake of protecting the reputation of the royal sluts that the british government advertised in american newspapers send a gun to defend a british home british civilians faced with threat of invasion desperately need arms for the defense of their homes during wwii american rifleman november that the obscene publications act and the misuse of drugs act have been used as justification for the police to seize masterpieces such as william s burrough s junky hunter thompson s fear and loathing in las vegas and tom wolfe s the electric kool aid acid test british courts have never recognized the right to assemble or to demonstrate that evidence obtained form coerced confessions is allowed in a trial that only serious felonies warrant a trial by jury that suspected terrorists must prove their innocence instead of the government having to prove their guilt that the secretary of state may issue an exclusionary order which bars someone from ever entering a particular part of the united kingdom such as northern ireland or wales that the bbc banned paul mccartney s give ireland back to the irish as well as john lennon s give peace a chance during the gulf war yes england is very very funny and very pathetic i knew somebody else who went to one of your gun mart superstore places just so he could experience the sight of people putting guns and ammo into shopping carts i didn t believe it myself until i drove by one in vegas last year so what laughter is a way of dealing with things we find uncomfortable i thought the las vegas show girl ads on las vegas street corners were pretty funny yes indeed there are many strange and wonderous things in this country i wouldn t have it any other way now that i live in britain i can see how the rest of the civilized world perceives you gun nut morons the bbc recently referred to the american penchant for pistols automatic weapons etc very appropriately it was called a national eccentricity i don t disagree with that i don t think it s bad either the only problem is that canada i hear is suffering from your national eccentricity in that easy to purchase weapons are being smuggled cross the border so what if they didn t come from here they would come from elsewhere disguised as cocaine anyway all you gun nut rush limbaugh fans please keep up your diatribes against brady and other evil liberal media plots you re so damn funny you provide endless amounts of entertainment in your arguments and examples of why someone should be allowed to carry a piece keep us all chuckling you can laugh all you want for us it s a matter of life or death i don t find that funny in the least as for england as our allies become more open britain grow yet more secretive and censorious perhaps the real british vice is passivity a willingness to tolerate constraints which others would find unbearble in britain an unfree country by terrence dequesne and edward goodman pp larry cipriani l v cipriani att com
|
9,481 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns gone good riddance in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes of those who vote your cause is considered an abomination no matter how hard you try public opinion is set against the rkba nope here in northern california a newspaper recently did a survey asking if people favored stricter gun controls a full said no here in one of the most liberal it wasn t always a swear word areas of the country nearly half the people don t want additional controls let alone revocation of rkba this is the end by the finish of the clinton administration your rkba will be null and void tough titty misguided dolt though he may be though i still maintain less dangerous than bush clinton does not publicly support revoking the second amendment surrender your arms soon enough officers will be around to collect them resistance is useless they will overwhelm you one at a time your neighbors will not help you they will consider you more if an immediate threat than the abstract criminal well i ll help my neighbors too fucking bad you have gone the way of the kkk violent solutions are passe avoid situations which encourage criminals then you will be as safe as possible such as it is violent solutions are passe i take it you propose disarming the police then please don t mention rkba in the same breath as the kkk rkba is about being able to defend yourself and others not about killing the innocent actually your mention of the kkk is rather funny considering that the first gun control law in the us were created specifically to disarm black people don
|
9,482 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article cmm thomasp surt ifi uio no thomas parsli thomasp ifi uio no writes drivers licence forgot that usa is the land of cars getting one in scandinavia and northern europe is not easy average time is about hours of training and the cost is rather is the license required for driving a car exclusively on private property such as a farm here in the united states the license is required only for the use of public roads abuse by the goverment this seems to be one of the main problems any harder gun control would just be abused by the goverment either some of you are a little paranoid no offence or you should get a new goverment you do have elections we also have a nation of million people many issues and usually only two candidates for a given office a president might be willing to abuse mild gun control laws and create a de facto ban something a majority of the people would object to and still be elected the voters might look at issues like the civil rights of minorities health care etc and vote for the lesser of two evils i don t think this is a matter of paranoia since local governments in for example new york and chicago have abused existing mild gun control laws to create a virtual ban guns n criminals most weapons used by criminals today are stolen known criminals can not buy weapons that s one of the points of gun control in which case the united states already has adaquate gun control laws according to federal statistic only of gun wielding criminals legally purchase their own guns from licensed dealers if that s the point of gun control to prevent criminals from legally purchasing guns then america doesn t need any additional laws to accomplish this mixing weapons and things that can be use as one what i meant was that cars can kill but they are not guns how is this any different from guns there are legal purposes for owning and using a gun they are appropriate tools for hunting target shooting and self defence like cars murder isn t their only or even a common use if of all murders was done with axes would you impose some regulations on them or just say that they are ment to be used at trees and that the axe is not a problem it s the axer i certainly couldn t imagine the american public accepting regulation of axes while the politics of other nations may be different in america there is strong opposition to any intrusive law that primarily would effect the average law abiding citizen who had not done anything wrong think about the situation in los angeles where people are buying guns to protect themselves is this a good situation is it the rigth way to deal with the problem a good way to deal with which problem it is an excelent way to deal with the short term problem of rioting and violent attacks of course it doesn t do anything for the long term issues that start riots but at this point what can these individuals do about long term social problems if everybody buys guns to protect themselves from criminals and their neighbor who have guns what do you think will happen i mean if everybody had a gun in usa there are according to surveys guns in of american homes in many parts of the country this is closer to those places where almost everyone owns a gun are on average safer than those where guns are less common last word responsible gun owners are not a problem but they will be affected if you want to protect your citicens this is i think a fundamental difference between american government and that of other nations here it is not acceptable to punish or restrict the average law abiding citizen in the name of some vague common good frank crary cu boulder
|
9,483 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re what to do if you shoot somebody in article u uicvm uic edu jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes i have heard many opinions on this subject and would like to hear more from the people on the net say you re in a situation where you have to pull a gun on somebody you give them a chance to get away but they decided to continue in their action anyway and you end up shooting and killing them my question is what do you do should you stay and wait for the cops or should you collect your brass if you re using a semi auto and get out of there provided of course you don t think that you have been seen as a data point from tennessee a friend of mine and a police officer essentially recommends that if you can fade away even if you were perfectly justified you re likely in for a great deal of hassle a side note carrying a gun concealed is a misdemeanor what kind of laws are on the books regarding this type of situation what would be the most likely thing to happen to you if you stayed and waited and it was a first offense what would happen if you took off but someone saw you and you were caught it s one of those by state things pretty much david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,484 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns gone good riddance in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes you are loosing there is no question about it of those who vote your cause is considered an abomination no matter how hard you try public opinion is set against the rkba not so surveys have shown while the public thinks certain types of gun control may be acceptable they do believe they have an individual right to keep and bear arms and that the police should not have discretion over who may and may not own firearms this is the end by the finish of the clinton administration your rkba will be null and void by the end of the clinton administration a lot of things will be screwed up hell we ll probably be just like england tough titty tough titty my how eloquent you are as for your claim i think clinton has a big fight ahead of him if he thinks he s going to pass some comprehensive gun legislation he will sign the brady bill if it gets to his desk we will do whatever we can to either keep that from happening or modify it such that it is acceptable to us you had better discover ways to make do without firearms sorry that s not possible and that s why we won t give them up either legally or illegally american s will keep their firearms the number of unregistered weapons in new york city is in the millions there aren t even close to that number of violent criminals there the number of cases of firearms abuses has ruined your cause if the gov t was serious about stopping violent crime they would keep violent criminals in jail for a long long time where they belong instead of letting them out on early release there is nothing you can do about it hey we can go into politics too if we feel like it those who live by the sword shall die by it i don t believe this one bit the press is against you the public the voting public is against you the flow of history is against you this is it snore like i take advice on the rkba from a brit no way surrender your arms soon enough officers will be around to collect them resistance is useless you watch too much star trek actually this is an understandable attitude from a brit you are a subject of the state they will overwhelm you one at a time not necessarily there are ways of resisting oppression without getting caught by the gov t your neighbors will not help you they will consider you more if an immediate threat than the abstract criminal the abstract criminal like the ones who killed a relative of mine while she was working in a carry out too fucking bad you have gone the way of the kkk violent solutions are passe while undesirable they are sometimes unavoidable if you don t want to resist a criminal attack by all means do nothing i will a take my chances resisting violent attack and b stand a better chance of being unharmed than someone who does nothing avoid situations which encourage criminals then you will be as safe as possible such as it is what a joke criminals want a disarmed population how can you keep criminals from preying on us after our best means of self defense is taken away larry cipriani l v cipriani att com
|
9,485 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nd amendment dead good in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes yea there are millions of cases where yoy say that firearms deter criminals alas this is not provable not provable it s about as provable as the number of votes vast for bill clinton in the last election if you accept the information available you can prove one way or the other if you refuse to accept it nothing is provable i think that that there are actually few cases where this is so fine support your assertation but you haven t supported any assertations just yet the national crime survey that secret arm of the nra estimates between and with gun self defenses from assaults and is considered to considerably under report when broken down by weapon there is no form of self defense including dowing nothing which is more effective at avoiding injury or death the bulk of firarems are used against unworthy and unnesessary opponents those who posessa a cool jakcet you want those who would argue with you about a parking space those who would take your woman in short trivial and worthless causes ok support this assertation hell support one too much of this has ruined you cause there is no recovery that s nice in the near future federal martials will come for your arms that s nice too the nd amendment is dead accept this find another way why on earth should we if you re correct we ve nothing to lose by continuing to argue against it and everything to gain david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,486 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article cmm thomasp surt ifi uio no thomas parsli thomasp ifi uio no writes abuse by the goverment this seems to be one of the main problems any harder gun control would just be abused by the goverment either some of you are a little paranoid no offence mr parsli i have to take exception at this there are verifiable previous examples of levels of u s governments abusing gun control restrictions i don t think it is paranoid to worry that what has been abused in the recent past might be abused in thye future after so many times of getting burned any sane person will stop putting his hand on the stove or you should get a new goverment you do have elections i d love to but as long as the politicians grab power to sell pork back to their constituents there s not a lot i can do it s silly to suggest that if there s anything we can t trust the government to do and therefore the government should be allowed to do it then we should change governments down that road lies total government power i ve never been a fan of totalitarianism guns n criminals most weapons used by criminals today are stolen this is very likely known criminals can not buy weapons that s one of the points of gun control and because gun control are strict in whole scandinavia and most of europe we dont have any problem with smuggled guns the north american continent is not europe no matter how many people would like it to be drugs are very illegal and they re here for years canada has crowed about its gun control if it is necessary to control guns over the whole continent then canada should have always had comparable rates to the u s yet they still don t unless you can tell me why the canadian border is so much more magical than the mexican border which is shorter and far more heavily patrolled then i really can t accept that argument mixing weapons and things that can be use as one what i meant was that cars can kill but they are not guns no there are approximately deaths due to guns in the u s two thirds of which are suicides unfortunately i don t have suicide rates for norway however this makes the per gun death rate about half the per car death rate the issue i hope i think we all agree that the criminals are the main problem guns are not a problem but the way they are used is and what are they for i think this discusion is interesting when you think of ex jugoslavia they should all have weapons it s their rigth to have them and if they use them to kill other innocent people the problem is humans not guns the problem s been humans since before we had stone axes the fct of the matter is simply this if nobody ever assaulted anybody whether there is a weapon of any sort around would be totally irrelevent yet weapons are built i d suggest then that the murderous impulse in humanity pre dates weapons anyway the bosnians et al have been making an excellent attempt to kill each other for half a thousand years taking away their guns even if we could would neither halt the killing nor reduce the brutality if of all murders was done with axes would you impose some regulations on them or just say that they are ment to be used at trees and that the axe is not a problem it s the axer an example don t flame me just because not exactly are killed by guns in the u s approximately of murders are commited with firearms with handguns with non handguns the reason i say that guns per se are not the problem is that our non gun rate exceeds most of europe s countries entire violent crime rate i don t really think we ve got more knives or fists in any case i think examples of gun control applied to the u s have been abkect failures just like drug prohibition and other forms of prohibition until you deal with why people are doing what they are doing you won t solve your problem and if the problem is violent crime you shouldn t concentrate on the tools instead the vast majority of guns is never ever misused on the order of over the entire lifetime of the gun this says to me that you can t make the argument that the gun itself causes the misuse think about the situation in los angeles where people are buying guns to protect themselves is this a good situation the situation is not good in that people fear for their lives but recall the scenes of the store owners during the last riots protecting their shops with guns would it have been better they too lost their livelihoods is it the rigth way to deal with the problem the problem of poverty and rage in los angeles no it isn t however if that problem becomes a violent action then yes it can be appropriate whether or not some person has been hurt by their condition won t make me less dead if they burn down my house with me in it you have to examine which problem you re referring to if you re discussing someone violently assaulting you then it is a perfectly legitimate response to make them stop hopefully simply letting them know you re prepared to shoot them would be enough as it was with the above mentioned store owners if everybody buys guns to protect themselves from criminals and their neighbor who have guns what do you think will happen i mean if everybody had a gun in usa of households have some form of firearm usually a long gun that accounts for a level of access for at least million americans firearm ownership is most likely among educated well off whites the group least likely to be involved in violent crime you may take that for what it s worth david veal univ of tenn div of cont education info services group pa utkvm utk edu i still remember the way you laughed the day your pushed me down the elevator shaft i m beginning to think you don t love me anymore weird al
|
9,487 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re what to do if you shoot somebody in article u uicvm uic edu jason kratz u uicvm uic edu writes say you re in a situation where you have to pull a gun on somebody you give them a chance to get away but they decided to continue in their action anyway and you end up shooting and killing them my question is what do you do should you stay and wait for the cops or should you collect your brass if you re using a semi auto and get out of there provided of course you don t think that you have been seen for me it would be an obvious choice armed self defence is clearly and strongly protected by the colorado constitution and the laws of the state in the very clear cut situation of your hypothetical i wouldn t have anything to fear from the police unless i had been publicly carrying the weapon concealed something i m not in the habit of doing even then the worst i d have to deal with was a class misdemeanor even if the situation were not so clear and i might have to worry about arrest for manslaughter or homicide it would still be safer to wait for the police if i were to leave and try to avoid police involvement i d be committing several felonies and ruining my chances of claiming self defence in court if it really was self defence the prosecuter would ask why did you run away and hide from the police in other states however this decision might not be so clear cut if someone in say washington d c were to use a gun in self defence he would automatically be guilty of several felony violations of that city s gun control laws such a person s choices would be between certain conviction for a couple of felonies versus possible conviction for half a dozen frank crary cu boulder
|
9,488 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns gone good riddance in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes surrender your arms soon enough officers will be around to collect them resistance is useless they will overwhelm you one at a time are you certain you didn t mean to post to alt french captain borg borg borg you d better rush home i hear kruschev calling come to papa jrm gnv ifas ufl edu i am endeavoring ma am to construct a mnemonic memory circuit using stone knives and bearskins spock humble typesetter
|
9,489 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re tanks against civilians was re that silly outdated bill koresh in article scottj iamac dml georgetown edu scottj magic dml georgetown edu john l scott writes picking nits over tanks firing the main gun or not deleted i think the point is being missed that it is apparantly acceptable for big government big brother to use tanks to control the people as long as they don t use the big gun but everything else is allright tanks deployed against civilians let alone firing on them with crew served weaponry a heavy machine gun is crew served is something both our press and government howl about instantly when done in some other country against civilians that have at most one shot at a time light small arms certainly nothing that places the people in or behind the tank in any real danger molotov coctails a round from a rifle or pistol deals with anybody approaching with one of those and snipers too often turn out to be strays from other cops guard army gunfire i don t know about the other people in this group or on the net but the idea of tanks being used to control civilians in anything that pretends to be a free society is outrageous when big government feels it is necessary to use that kind of force to stomp out protests even violent of the citizens that suggests that the government is totally out of control since that is effectively the government declaring war on its own people if the government was living up to its responsibility government of the people by the people not the lords and other elites who want to keep their good thing going the citizens wouldn t feel the need to be resorting to acts that need to be squashed with a military boot people do things like that because they have become convinced that it is the only option that remains other attempts to have grievances redressed have been ignored and yes there is a criminal element that will exploit this but the fact remains that the government has been unresponsive or such acts wouldn t be apt to happen still not an excuse to open up on civilians with tanks heavy machine guns or whatever its the old might makes right philosophy that is the hallmark of a government going rogue they don t like it tough we will simply squash them under an iron boot actually addressing their grievances in other than token fashion with huge volumes of hot air is just too inconvenient sort of a variation on mushroom management keep them in the dark smother them with shit and crush them when ready and these are the folks that many liberals are trying to arrange things so that they will have a monopoly on coercive force firearms that are than expensive toys by gutting the bill of rights cuz it just isn t progressive or doesn t fit in with modern thinking anymore unbelievable and i do believe amid the smoke confusion etc of a real riot situation that it would be possible for a tank to get away with firing the main gun into a building at close range one would hear an explosion among many explosions it is loud but it is not going to stand out like a pound bomb or a tactical nuke there would be a hole blown in the wall and some rubble but with tanks knocking over walls and other sources of buildings turning into rubble and other covering racket such as gunfire including s tacking away it would not stand out that much and could be explained by musta been a gas leak i think it could be done and not be reported under such conditions it is possible it is not like a tank driving down a quiet street on a sunday afternoon turning and firing you know that would stand out and be pretty impossible to cover up john l scott pat rwing uucp without prejudice ucc pat myrto seattle wa if all else fails try uunet pilchuck rwing pat wisdom only two things are infinite the universe and human stupidity and i am not sure about the former albert einstien
|
9,490 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns gone good riddance jrm gnv ifas ufl edu wrote you are loosing there is no question about it of those who vote your cause is considered an abomination no matter how hard you try public opinion is set against the rkba care to show some real numbers instead of something hci make up i thought so all foaming at the mouth shouting but nothing is ever said this is the end by the finish of the clinton administration your rkba will be null and void tough titty well we ll just have to wait and see about that won t we or are you quite satisified with living in your little fantasy snip cases of firearms abuses has ruined your cause there is nothing you snip the press is against you the public the voting public is against you the flow of history is against you this is it not true it is only those who are ignorant and are afraid to understand accept and deal with the real problems behind this violent society who are proposing gun control as a band aid solution may be i should refresh your memory with a quote from prez clintion it s the criminals stupid hey why is he cutting the budget for more prisons may be someone need to remind him of what he promised on second thought why bother surrender your arms soon enough officers will be around to collect them resistance is useless they will overwhelm you one at a time your neighbors will not help you they will consider you more if an immediate threat than the abstract criminal oooh waco ii coming to your living room soon when was the last time you turned off your tv can t remember i thought so too fucking bad you have gone the way of the kkk violent solutions are passe avoid situations which encourage criminals then you will be as safe as possible such as it is wait i got it this is a late april fool post right i didn t think anybody is stupid enough to post something like this good one guys this group was getting boring without holly and susan francis chiu professional student programmer tax payer
|
9,491 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re we re undertaxed poll kennejs a cs okstate edu kennedy james scot writes in article apr cunews carleton ca akasacou alfred carleton ca alexander kasacous writes in article veal utkvm utk edu veal utkvm utk edu david veal writes no what you said was that we had spent money on guns rather than people as canada does which is ridiculous once again i have over estimated the general level of intellegence of the average reader of rush limbaugh canada per capita spend more money on people where the us spend more money per capita on guns what exactly do you mean when you say the u s spends more per capita on guns than canada does are you talking about the u s government or are you talking about the purchase of guns by private citizens or both if you are referring to private citizens then your point is irrevelant because what individuals do with their money is essentially their business if on the other hand you meant that the u s government spends more per capita on guns than canada does then your point is relevant so if this is true then the u s needs to get its priorities straight people are more important than guns that is not to say that guns aren t important i m just saying that if the u s government does spend more per capita on guns than they do on people then something is awry he meant the us spends more per capita on guns than canada which isn t really surprising because we were so busy protecting the western world from the ussr that all other countries could slack off on their defense spending i would like to see if the us spends more per capita on people than canada does this is a true apples apples comparison where the previous post was apples oranges
|
9,492 |
talk.politics.guns
|
randy weaver trial update day note these trial updates are summarized from reports in the idaho statesman and the local nbc affiliate television station ktvb channel randy weaver kevin harris trial update day friday april was the fourth day of the trial synopsis defense attorney gerry spence cross examined agent cooper under repeated objections from prosecutor ronald howen spence moved for a mistrial but was denied the day was marked by a caustic cross examination of deputy marshal larry cooper by defense attorney gerry spence although spence has not explicitly stated so one angle of his stategy must involve destroying the credibility of agent cooper cooper is the government s only eyewitness to the death of agent degan spence attacked cooper s credibility by pointing out discrepancies between cooper s statements last september and those made in court cooper conceded that you have all these things compressed into a few seconds it s difficult to remember what went on first cooper acknowledged that he carried a mm colt commando submachine gun with a silenced barrel i thought a colt commando was a revolver cooper continued by stating that the federal agents had no specific plans to use the weapon when they started to kill weaver s dog when spence asked how seven cartridges could be fired by degan s m rifle when degan was apparently dead cooper could not say for sure that degan did not return fire before going down spence continued by asking with how many agents and to what extent had cooper discussed last august s events cooper responded if you re implying that we got our story together you re wrong counselor spence continued to advance the defense s version of the events namely that a marshal had started the shooting by killing the weaver s dog cooper disagreed assistant u s attorney ronald howen repeatedly objected to spence s virulent cross examination of agent cooper arguing that the questions were repetitive and spence was wasting time howen also complained that spence was improperly using a cross examination to advance the defense s version of the events u s district judge edward lodge sustained many of the objections however both lawyers persisted until judge lodge had the jury leave the room and proceded to admonish both attorneys i m not going to play games with either counsel this has been a personality problem from day so start acting like professionals spence told the judge that when all the evidence is in we ll see that his agent larry cooper testimony is not credible that he was panicked and cannot remember the sequence of events spence continued we re going to find that there is a very unlikely similarity almost as if it had come out of a cookie cutter between the testimony of mr cooper and the other witnesses spence then moved for a mistrial on the grounds that howen s repeated objections would prevent a fair trial we can t have a fair trial if the jury believes i m some sort of charlatan if the jury believes i m bending the rules or engaging in some delaying tactic or that i m violating court orders judge lodge called the notion that his repeated sustainings of howen s objections had somehow prejudiced the jury was preposterous and denied the motion for a mistrial lodge did tell howen to restrict his comments when objecting the trial resumed with the prosecution calling fbi special agent greg rampton the prosecution s purpose was simply to introduce five weapons found in the cabin as evidence however the defense seized on the opportunity to further address cooper s credibility defense attorney ellison matthews harris other attorney questioned rampton about the dog rampton stated that there were no specific plans to kill the weaver s dog without being detected matthews then had rampton read a septtember transcript in which rampton had said that cooper had said that the purpose of the silenced weapon was to kill the dog without being detected if the dog chased them rampton then acknowledged that he believed that cooper had said that but he could not remember when he then stated that i did not conduct the primary interview with deputy cooper but i have had conversations with him since the interview was conducted monday april will begin the fifth day of the trial scheduled is the continued cross examination of fbi agent greg rampton
|
9,493 |
talk.politics.guns
|
randy weaver trial update day here is a copy of my first update on the randy weaver trial after a large response about email messages i ve decided that there is sufficient interest here on t p g to warrant posting file follows hi folks as perhaps the only boise resident on the list i guess it kind of falls on me to keep people updated about the randy weaver kevin harris trial yesterday marked the seating of the jury apparently no other legal activities occurred the jury was selected and things start today more interesting is what happenned outside about a dozen weaver supporters showed up to stage a protest outside the courthouse one woman carried a sign that read who stands trial for the murder of vicki and son s name i forget weaver on the evening news she said i am here protesting because i believe in freedom of speech and freedom of religion i thought we all did nice sound bite grin the news reporter also interviewed some guy named tim who refused to give his last name not to prejudge the guy but he looked like a neo nazi he also said he expected many neo nazis to show up throughout the trial tim had been handing out leaflets in support of weaver and harris and the news had footage of a boise cop telling him to move along or he d arrest i don t know the finer points of this one perhaps there s a law against political activity within x feet of a courthouse or something what happenned to the first amendment most ominous of all was that the local reporter filmed an agent of the gestapo err atf with a minicam filming the protestors welcome to the world of big brother anyhow gerry spence came out and asked the protestors to leave because he didn t think it would help weaver s case any he said he was confident that once the evidence came out that weaver would be aquitted more stuff as it comes available drew
|
9,494 |
talk.politics.guns
|
s brady bill loopholes hi i ve just finished reading s and have several questions about the brady bills s and hr are these the current versions of the brady bill what is the status of these bills i ve heard they re in committee how close is that to being made law s and hr seem fairly similar are there any important differences i missed s seems to have some serious loopholes a s doesn t specify an appeals process to wrongful denial during the waiting period other than a civil lawsuit s has an appeals process once the required instant background check system is established but not before b the police are explicitly not liable for mistakes in denying approving using existing records so who would i sue in a above to have an inaccurate record corrected c s includes an exception to waiting period clause for if a person can convince the local chief law enforcement officer cleo of an immediate threat to his or her life or life of a household member but s doesn t say exactly what is considered a threat nor does it place a limit on how long the cleo takes to issue an exception statement true have i misunderstood any other holes with just s what s to stop a person with a clean record from buying guns grinding off the serial numbers and selling them to crooks at minimum what additional laws are needed to prevent this seems at min a gun counting scheme would be needed e g john doe owns n guns so if s passes i wouldn t be surprised to see legislation for stricter harder to forge i d s plus national gun registration justified by a need to make the brady bill work please comment i m mainly interested in specific problems with the current legislation i don t mean to start a general discussion of the merits of any all waiting period bills ever proposed marks shepard netcom com
|
9,495 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nd amendment dead good date apr from jrm gnv ifas ufl edu yea there are millions of cases where yoy say that firearms deter criminals alas this is not provable in my case i am alive thanks to a gun that is provable even in your twisted logic i think that that there are actually few cases where this is so no wrong again brain trust the bulk of firarems are used against unworthy and unnesessary opponents huh what planet are you from the nd amendment is dead accept this find another way wrong not as long as freedom remains ps get a dictionary faustus gun of the month club hmmm glock mm this month sig next
|
9,496 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my in article apr vax oxford ac uk jaj vax oxford ac uk writes what all you turkey pro pistol and automatic weapons fanatics don t seem to realize is that the rest of us laugh at you you don t make me angry you just make me chuckle i remeber being in bellingham washington and seeing a you consider laughing at others civilized behavior what was i supposed to learn from your article treat people like dogs i am not impressed by your attitude
|
9,497 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re nd amendment dead good in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes in the near future federal martials will come for your arms no one will help you you are more dangerous to their thinking than the criminal this is your own fault the nd amendment is dead accept this find another way you know in many ways this might be just the kick we need to straighten things out in this country also people would have a need to replace guns with something else perhaps deadly sprays that would make mace and oc seem like water they would be lighter and easier to conceal guns are really old in design and as long as we have tons of them no one is motivated to design something better i m sure we could come up with some real nasty stuff if we tried and getting rid of these guns would get us moving on this track asap this is what we really want right stuff that s smaller lighter and far more deadly remember in this country we ll really scramble to accomplish impossible feats if we are motivated enough and i think self defense is high on our list of motivators
|
9,498 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re guns gone good riddance in article apr gnv ifas ufl edu jrm gnv ifas ufl edu writes you are loosing what s loosing of those who vote your cause is considered an abomination no matter how hard you try public opinion is set against the rkba i vote i don t consider rkba an abomination this is the end by the finish of the clinton administration your rkba will be null and void tough titty i m sure sarah brady would be delighted to hear your ranting and raving however clinton has not publically stated that he would like to repeal the second amendment tough titty to you you had better discover ways to make do without firearms the number of cases of firearms abuses has ruined your cause there is nothing you can do about it those who live by the sword shall die by it are we going to make do without like the people in new york city you know new york city that gun ban utopia you dream about with the millions of unregistered handguns new york city by the way has a very high crime rate perhaps you should know about a gungrabber s nightmare idaho here in idaho the police give concealed carry permits to anyone over without a criminal record there are no gungrabber schemes such as foids waiting periods gun a month or ltcs and horror of horrors you don t even need a permit to carry a concealed weapon while outside of city limits although you do need a permit for concealed carry in an automobile i feel a hell of a lot safer in boise than i would in your gun ban dream state e g washington d c the press is against you the public the voting public is against you the flow of history is against you this is it the voting public in idaho is staunchly pro gun both senators are nra endorsed a rated buy a clue pal surrender your arms soon enough officers will be around to collect them resistance is useless they will overwhelm you one at a time your neighbors will not help you they will consider you more if an immediate threat than the abstract criminal get out your wallet and buy another clue there are millions upon millions of pre i e non ed firearms out there they have a half life approaching eternity and cosmoline is not exactly tracked by the feds too fucking bad you have gone the way of the kkk violent solutions are passe avoid situations which encourage criminals then you will be as safe as possible such as it is gun control laws were passed to protect the kkk from blacks drew betz gozer idbsu edu brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho when you outlaw rights only outlaws will have rights spook fodder fema nsa clinton gore insurrection nsc semtex neptunium terrorist cia mi mi kgb deuterium
|
9,499 |
talk.politics.guns
|
re my gun is like my american express card in article apr ucsu colorado edu fcrary ucsu colorado edu frank crary says i have never seen anyone else practice marksmanship by taking their gun out of their coat as fast as possible and start shooting that is the recommended way to practice with a ccw too aim alone is no d goo for defense if you can t get the gun rapidly very true but the way it was being done was just a little unusual it looked to me like they were practicing to shoot someone the point that i forgot to bring up here and this has nothing to do with being a gang member or not is that it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon in this area or in the state of illinois for that matter this is not to say that people in illinois don t carry concealed weapons illegaly but practicing like that when there are other people around wasn t too bright of an idea there isn t necessarily a conflict between practicing with a concealed weapon for self defence and practicing to shoot someone armed self defence does occasionally involve shooting an attacker frank crary cu boulder i agree if you don t practice at all and carry a gun for self defense you most likely would be in big trouble if a situation were to arise jason u uicvm cc uic edu
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.