Mike, your observations about Florida carry laws also include the right to defend oneself anywhere in the state. RE: #2, I couldn't agree more, a responsible person carrying a handgun would use every option to avoid a conflict that MIGHT escalate into a confrontation such as you describe. There has been a significant reduction in armed felonies and shootings as a result.
New ideas, new problems 2008
- Thread starter wbmusarra
- Start date
Mike, we're all entitled to our opinion 
, but it does seem the younger generations are far more willing to resort to knives / guns than the older ones. Or maybe this is a reflection of the generations in gun related crime ?
Maybe they don't think through the consequences, or simply don't care, but just as a guy who carries a lump of wood in his car is likely to use it in a road rage incident, so potentially is a gun carrier. They may hesitate or think long & hard, but they have the choice.
See the link I posted. It supports your last comment about gun crimes going down after the introduction of certain laws.
quote:
"Opponents of the right to bear arms predicted that right to carry would cause blood to flow in the streets, but the reverse has been true: violent crime in America has plummeted. "
, but it does seem the younger generations are far more willing to resort to knives / guns than the older ones. Or maybe this is a reflection of the generations in gun related crime ?Maybe they don't think through the consequences, or simply don't care, but just as a guy who carries a lump of wood in his car is likely to use it in a road rage incident, so potentially is a gun carrier. They may hesitate or think long & hard, but they have the choice.
See the link I posted. It supports your last comment about gun crimes going down after the introduction of certain laws.
quote:
"Opponents of the right to bear arms predicted that right to carry would cause blood to flow in the streets, but the reverse has been true: violent crime in America has plummeted. "
Al you make a valid point about home invasion and the crime rate. I think I should make it clear I am not against the right to bear arms or own a gun I am terrified of what they can do in the wrong hands. The question is how do you control where they end up and that is impossible to control. Dam hard one to answer. I often think about if I had a gun and the oportunity to take out some one that might have intentions of doing harm to my family I wouldnt hesitate in dusting them and I find myself becoming a little enraged with the possiblity. Just not sure I want a gun in my possesion for that very same reason and I consider my self normal.
I goin to the quack, I need to check on my sanity.
I goin to the quack, I need to check on my sanity.
Just remember that here in the U S we have "911" which will send you to an answer center. Atlanta just fired one of their staff after she was reprimanded about 9 times for sleeping on the job. Her last infraction she never forwarded the info to the rescue people(heart attack I believe) and when the authorities finally arrrived, the victim was dead. She is apealing her firing!!At the answer center, they will ask you at least 10 questions before routing it to the proper authorities. And if you talk real fast cause you are upset that someone is breaking into your house it will take a few "would you repeat that", so she can type your response into her computer, which has nothing to do with getting you help. We refer to this as governments answer to "Dial A Prayer". Maybe we should issue everyone with a Taser Gun!!
Stun Guns - Effective Self Defense Products for Man and Woman
Stun Guns - Effective Self Defense Products for Man and Woman
I don't know whether this is on topic or not but the discussion re: knives and guns and peoples increasing willingness to use them in a global sense surely comes from the proliferation of violence eminating a) out of "political intiatives" and the military enablement of those political policies, b) the media's obsession with relaying violence, murder rape and pillage on a global scale, (Breaking News my ass! more like breaking peoples spirit and desensitising them) c) Hollywoods similar obession with releasing violent "high concept" movies (thanks Don Simpson :veryangry: - quite a legacy) where everyone has a gun, always, and uses them at every opportunity, to solve problems mainly caused by, er guns.
How on God's earth can we hope to convince kids not to carry guns or knives when the adult population have been knee deep in blood gore and violence both in their real and fantasy lives for the past 50 years?
As I recall, about 60 million people died in 2 major conflicts in the 20th century - and if they had any last requests it was probably "don't let my kids go through this shit".
Somewhere along the line, we (collectively) seem to have let them down.
I'm not a pacifist by any means, but nor do I believe that "superior firepower" and "guaranteed lethality" provide any long term solutions whatsoever - so you can all be as "gun ho" (sic) as you like but it ain't never ever going to solve anything, nor are the policiticians on their own.
If democracy is to succeed then the people have to take more direct action, and no, not with guns... their "peacemaking" abilities are fatally flawed :thumbsdown:
Jaw jaw etc....
(PS I am a victim of gun crime in London UK)
How on God's earth can we hope to convince kids not to carry guns or knives when the adult population have been knee deep in blood gore and violence both in their real and fantasy lives for the past 50 years?
As I recall, about 60 million people died in 2 major conflicts in the 20th century - and if they had any last requests it was probably "don't let my kids go through this shit".
Somewhere along the line, we (collectively) seem to have let them down.
I'm not a pacifist by any means, but nor do I believe that "superior firepower" and "guaranteed lethality" provide any long term solutions whatsoever - so you can all be as "gun ho" (sic) as you like but it ain't never ever going to solve anything, nor are the policiticians on their own.
If democracy is to succeed then the people have to take more direct action, and no, not with guns... their "peacemaking" abilities are fatally flawed :thumbsdown:
Jaw jaw etc....
(PS I am a victim of gun crime in London UK)
Kieth aren't guns illeagle there? Hmmm So outlawing them isn't the answer.
Jim
Jim
Keith, you forgot shoot-em-up video games, and killah-rap. Your point is well taken, but whether there is a simple solution remains to be seen. We've opened Pandora's box, and. like nuke, Chem and Bio weapons, once out of the box, they're not going to go back in easily. There's also the $$$ in the arms industry. The ATF (Feds) destroy tens of thousands of guns annually. That sounds great, but it's a drop in the ocean and in my opinion almost meaningless.
I don't have an answer for the 'big' picture. On a personal scale, however, it seems we have two options in dealing with potential threats, a) depend on the state/police to protect us, or b) take responsibility for our own defense in case the police don't show up "in time".
Re. being victimised by an armed assailant in London, it may surprise some to know that weapons training here in the States requires you to hand over the wallet even with a gun in your pocket. The law does not protect you from shooting the assailant unless you feel your 'life' is being threatened. Robbery does NOT count. (They also teach you that, in the event you actually shoot someone, don't answer any questions until a lawyer is present, regardless of the circumstances. An armed citizen is obviously still very much liable. It is NOT a free-for-all shooting environment. The tenet is that it's marginally better to be alive in court than dead on the street.)
The choice has to do with individual beliefs and personalities. Some feel they would readily shoot an intruder threatening their family...and because of this willingness, they're afraid of themselves owning a gun. The logic, then, appears they would rather either stand by and allow harm to befall the family, or just as bad, fight back withOUT a weapon and possibly die in the process, leaving their family defenseless. No one can fault a person for coming to their own individual conclusions, and I respect their choices while wishing they never have to face the situation.
For myself, the answer is obvious, praise the Lord, but pass the ammo while we're waiting.
I don't have an answer for the 'big' picture. On a personal scale, however, it seems we have two options in dealing with potential threats, a) depend on the state/police to protect us, or b) take responsibility for our own defense in case the police don't show up "in time".
Re. being victimised by an armed assailant in London, it may surprise some to know that weapons training here in the States requires you to hand over the wallet even with a gun in your pocket. The law does not protect you from shooting the assailant unless you feel your 'life' is being threatened. Robbery does NOT count. (They also teach you that, in the event you actually shoot someone, don't answer any questions until a lawyer is present, regardless of the circumstances. An armed citizen is obviously still very much liable. It is NOT a free-for-all shooting environment. The tenet is that it's marginally better to be alive in court than dead on the street.)
The choice has to do with individual beliefs and personalities. Some feel they would readily shoot an intruder threatening their family...and because of this willingness, they're afraid of themselves owning a gun. The logic, then, appears they would rather either stand by and allow harm to befall the family, or just as bad, fight back withOUT a weapon and possibly die in the process, leaving their family defenseless. No one can fault a person for coming to their own individual conclusions, and I respect their choices while wishing they never have to face the situation.
For myself, the answer is obvious, praise the Lord, but pass the ammo while we're waiting.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Well said Mike. I cannot really add to this debate except to repeat banning guns does not stop gun crime. Two people were shot in Brisbane yesterday and guns are banned in Australia.
Hey Pete, I understand where you're coming from and you might rightly say, It's nowt to do with me, but, my point is, it's to do with everyone. We are all responsible in a way.. and the answer lays, not with the government, but with us, the people.
I don't give a crap, I've already got bullet holes in me, civilian not military, but I'm damned if I will show any weakness to these lightweights.... :furious:
I don't give a crap, I've already got bullet holes in me, civilian not military, but I'm damned if I will show any weakness to these lightweights.... :furious:
Last edited:
There are many guns in the UK - problem is, all the lunatics have them.....
We're not and never really have been gun minded despite our imperialistic and somewhat violent past history but give us a large rum and we'll kill anybody even if our left leg has been shot off. Just kidding, that was the Nelson touch..
To be honest, it's quite incredible, given our history, that 95% of our population do not bear arms or even want to...it's only the recent influx from Eastern Europe that has brought the epidemic knife carrying scenario (and the attendant and inevitable injury and death) to the forefront of crime in the UK.
Bingo.
Attitude is everything - and I don't mean "get outta my way". A positive and open minded attitude is key to advancement.
There's a thoroughly rooted economy in the US, the big three car makers are being discussed, what else is there?
Here's a thought - a free market attitude that allows the others on the free market to think of everybody as fellow players, rather than the ogre from the swamp.....
oke:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Keith, to make myself clear, I was bought up on a farm and served in the military and for a short time was a member of a pistol club and shot competitively. I like guns and believe that I should be able to own a firearm for my protection and the protection of my family.
But because a maniac killed 35 people in Tasmania, our Government had a knee jerk and banned guns.
I being a law abiding citizen handed mine in, as did millions of others.
Of course the manic fringe and the crooks who operate outside the law did not. So the good guys are dis-armed and the bad guys are armed and gun crime continues unabated. Total lunacy.
But because a maniac killed 35 people in Tasmania, our Government had a knee jerk and banned guns.
I being a law abiding citizen handed mine in, as did millions of others.
Of course the manic fringe and the crooks who operate outside the law did not. So the good guys are dis-armed and the bad guys are armed and gun crime continues unabated. Total lunacy.
Point taken Pete but I am not anti gun or means of self protection.. just the way they are portrayed in vid games, movies, TV etc etc., ad infinitum ad nauseum... For new generations to learn responsible "self protection" (by whatever means), we must surely control the media and gaming crap that are setting themselves up as role models with all the connotations that go with their avalanche of extreme violence. If it means censorship? So be it. One of the best selling games is Grand Theft Auto in the UK. If you can, have a look at it and wonder what this will do to immature minds. That's where we have to start....
And please any "defender of absolute freedom" out there, no more bleating that "there's no evidence of a link between violent video games, movies etc, and peoples subsequent behaviour."
Bullshit! In the toilet....:toilet:
I think the link you are looking for is the lack of parental involvement in the raising of their children. If you think that something is bad and has a negative effect on your children, you had better teach them why and what it is and to stay away from it. As they mature you might even consider teaching them to improve things. That would include videos, movies, music, people, businesses etc. Judging by the number of individuals who seem to be enjoying all of these bad things, I must assume a lot of people have done a piss poor job of teaching their charges! Prohibition did not work for booze, it isn't working for drugs and it hasn't worked for sex and as Pete has pointed out it hasn't worked for guns! The giving up of ones rights a little at a time is the surest way to socialism or worse and is exactly what is happening in the U.S.A.. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights have been trashed over the years with "executive orders" and anti property rights legislation to "protect " us. I for one am not willing to give up my rights - even a little at a time.
Last edited:
I submit that instead of advocating censorship we should be advocating personal responsibility. People with any reasonable measure of personal responsibility should not have any diffficulty distinguishing between video games and reality.
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
People with any reasonable measure of personal responsibility...........
Mark - I think it's called hitting the nail on the head. It's the disenfranchized hoody with the limited education and the general parental disregard of the offspring (as per 40bud's post) is often where the problem occurs.
Pistols are just a bigger version of the knife though according to our Prime Minister today, knife crime is down by 50%?
Mark - I think it's called hitting the nail on the head. It's the disenfranchized hoody with the limited education and the general parental disregard of the offspring (as per 40bud's post) is often where the problem occurs.
Pistols are just a bigger version of the knife though according to our Prime Minister today, knife crime is down by 50%?
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
40 Bud and Mark, ditto you are right on the money the decline in people taking personal responsibility for their actions and the bringing up of their children has been on the slippery slide for decades. (Yes I'm an old fart).
This diminution in personal responsibility and self discipline gives officialdom the excuse it is looking for to create new laws and restrictions to "protect us".
What BS. Every law passed and every restriction "for the good of the majority" is an erosion of your rights and puts more power into the hands of the administrators, which of course is what they want.
Keith, I agree that violent movies and games should not be accessible to young impressionable minds, but the censorship should be the responsibility of the parents not the Government.
This diminution in personal responsibility and self discipline gives officialdom the excuse it is looking for to create new laws and restrictions to "protect us".
What BS. Every law passed and every restriction "for the good of the majority" is an erosion of your rights and puts more power into the hands of the administrators, which of course is what they want.
Keith, I agree that violent movies and games should not be accessible to young impressionable minds, but the censorship should be the responsibility of the parents not the Government.
Last edited:
Similar threads
