The Gun Culture is Somewhat In Denial About Gun Safety.

Post Reply New Topic

I know what I suggest doesn't stand a bullet's chance in Hades of ever happening, I was just saying that the cars would be missed more than guns ever would. I was using a hypothetical situation to illustrate how much more reliant humanity is on motor vehicles than on guns and how losing cars would mean hardship for a great deal of people while losing guns would not. You can lose your gun and still make it to work, in other words.

Well, yes, but not quite. Many (or most) firearm owners in the United States have concealed-firearm permits (all states now provide such permits). Mine requires my criminal-history to be reviewed by the FBI every 24 hours. If I am (even mistakenly) arrested or sought for arrest for something so much as a misdemeanor (not only felony) offense involving violence, drugs or alcohol, my permit goes bye-bye within 24 hours and so do my firearms, until I can prove a resolution of the matter. So, for those firearm owners with concealed-firearm permits, at least, I think you would agree that 24-hour surveillance is adequate, wouldn't you?

I find it amusing that my original comment rubbed a couple of folks the wrong way when, if you break it down, is nothing more than a firm grasp of the obvious of how politics work in the good ol' USA. Do you really believe the NRA isn't primarily interested in lining the pockets of the gun manufacturers? I'll bet you believe that the war on terror is about protecting American citizens, rather than making defense contractors rich.

Furthermore, my comment stating that there is no “intelligent debate on any issue” wasn't aimed specifically at gun enthusiasts; rather at the sorry state of political dialog in this country.

Dox47, it might surprise you to learn that I don't want to take away your guns, nor do I side with gun control advocates 100%. Admittedly, I'm not a huge fan of the gun culture and the glorification of weapons.

You state that background checks have been proven ineffective...let's assume you're right and go from there. Surely you believe that we must continue to strive to keep weapons out of the hands of bad folks. If background checks as they now exist are ineffectual, then what's the solution? Shouldn't we strive for better methods to keep undesirable people from purchasing guns? Or are simply in favor of putting more guns into the hands of “good people?” Personally, the latter sounds like a recipe for disaster and further bloodshed.

Firearm manufacturers are quite able to enrich themselves what with 52 percent of Americans supporting the private ownership of their products. As I wrote earlier, the NRA is quickly losing credibility among firearm owners, and I suspect that includes a certain percentage of manufacturers, too. After all, they usually buy their our products.


The military industrial complex is the Borg hive. U.S. President Eisenhower warned us about it. I agree with him and you.


In that case, I actually agree with you. Between federal court opinions that have restricted speech and, specifically, the polarized dialogue about firearms, there is little room to discuss how large firearm manufacturers have, in fact, adopted some very good safety measures in their products. They realize that if preventable accidents kill off their customers, they will be out of business.


I and a lot of my firearm-owning friends agree with you about the glorification of weapons by some who have a kind of video-game mentality about their Second Amendment rights. But, apart from that mentality, collectors collect things including firearms and antique firearms. And, an "arsenal" isn't the four or five guns that one individual might own for the sake of deer hunting, duck hunting and personal defense (all of which require vastly different firearms).


I believe that criminal-history reviews ("background checks") are doomed from the start because no criminal (or other person who believes that he or she is restricted from firearm ownership, possession and use) will knowingly buying a new-purchase firearm if it involves completing the BATFE Form 4473 (which provokes the review). As such, it is a truism that criminals and other restricted individuals will almost always get their firearms from the black market. There is very little that even an enhanced review system can do to determine who these black-market sellers and buyers are aside from good old-fashioned detective work. But, that is something that is already going on and is separate from the review system.

Your arguments are getting much more rational and focused.

I don't live in the US.

(I, ironically live in a country that pretty much indoctrinates people into thinking certain objects are bad but others are totally fine.)

I'm cool with talking firearm safety.

Wonderful
Kicking the new year off with a gunz-r-bad thread with all the associated hand-wringing and ignorance.....

Who is saying guns are bad? I never once said they were bad. In response to another poster, I simply observed it would be harder to live without a car than it would a gun. That is not saying they are bad.

I also stated there seems to be somewhat of a disconnect between gun culture and gun safety.

Why so defensive?

Because that's what ultimately drives these anti-gun arguments. "I don't like 'em so they should be regulated out of existence for all practical purposes."


Where did you get this little nugget of information from? Not every gun owner is part of the "gun culture", far from it.
The range where I shoot and also serve as a range safety officer has been in operation for over 50 years without ANYONE being shot there.


Why so trollish?
You've been around this forum enough to know how threads on this topic go. If you started it all over one little isolated incident knowing what the response would be then you are intentionally sowing discord.
If it walks like a duck and quacs like a duck........

may shock you but humans went without cars far far longer then we have had cars and we could go on living without them again. theres bikes, horses, wagons, trains etc. watch revolution a bit to see how people could go without them.

heck my friend has car and walks 2 hours to work every day. here in the city next to us they bike a lot and use a very good public transportation. you like having cars so support cars, you don't like guns so you don't support them. its a classic support only what you enjoy type situation.just like how the hippies who ride bikes want to ban cars cause they don't like or use them so why should anyone else.

You were condescending and made ignorant statements that you still haven't backed up, yet you act surprised that people are not embracing them. Perhaps you're not as sensible as you seem to think.



Perhaps you should actually learn a little bit about people before opening your mouth and making a (bigger) ass of yourself, I'm not a particular fan of the NRA (who's talking about the NRA by the way?), and have made my opposition to the war on terror clear for years, including in that thread I linked you earlier. Maybe spend less time trafficking in false stereotypes and more time learning something about who and what you're talking about?

Also, since you bring up the NRA, perhaps you have some evidence supporting your claim? I'd take your word for it, but as you've shown us how much that is worth...



Which you were contributing to with your ignorant comments, making it hypocritical regardless of where you were aiming.



Which you don't appear to know anything about. Really, this is my problem; I know what I'm talking about, you don't, but you want your opinion to have parity with mine without putting in the work that I've put in to acquire my knowledge and credibility on the topic, which is not something I'm going to stand for, especially when it comes in such rude packaging.



See, you keep basing things on your opinion or what you consider "common sense", where as I look at the data and draw my conclusions from it, and the data says that controlling the guns is not the solution to violence, that controlling poverty and desperation is. Read my gun control challenge thread, I laid out most of my opinions on the subject there, as I've done continuously for the last 7 years now, and I've grown a bit tired of repeating myself.

Nobody's defensive, we're just annoyed at more of the same ignorant crap we've been dealing with for years. Do you enjoy people trashing your special interest when they know nothing about it?

On the plus side, it's been an absolute rout so far, I mean at this point if I have to wade into a gun thread you know I'm bringing an ass-kicking with me.

people who own guns are far more likely to die by gun than people who have no gun. accidents, suicides, being killed by a family member are counted in the statistic.

Much like people who own alligators are more likely to be eaten by them.

Simply observing a disturbing headline and then commenting on it on an internet forum is NOT being trollish.

Look at Steve Irwin, he was killed by a sting ray. That has nothing to do with the topic. I was simply wondering if the woman in question was simply so wrapped up in the gun culture she neglected gun safety. Nothing wrong with such a question.

All I suggest is after these two cases, women with light trigger handguns should review their safety protocols.