Page 96 of 255 FirstFirst ... 46868990919293949596979899100101102103106146196 ... LastLast
Results 1,236 to 1,248 of 3305
  1. #1236
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,547
    Quote Originally Posted by jmac00 View Post
    Training might not be an entirely bad thing. although I would strongly suggest that training not only include the safe handling of firearms, but also a few hours of what the laws are in your state in regards to the use of "lethal force".

    I do not think it should be mandatory, but I think if a state were to offer it, similar to a hunting license, like a one day course, I bet you would see a lot of people willing to take that type of course.

    Hell I could make it a business model and make some money at it. $25/per head plus expenses. I could make that work

    p.s. notfornothing, but I shot my USPSA last night and did fairly well, only had one miss out of 64 rounds shot
    At the founding of our nation, the use of a firearm was probably considered to be as essential to life as the use of a telephone is today.

    That training then was just a part of the things that someone learned on their way towards becoming an adult.

    Since that type of training has, apparently, gone by the wayside, something needs to fill the void.

    I'm in full agreement that some sort of proof of baseline knowledge of firearms safety, operation and use-of-force laws should be a requirement.

  2. #1237
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post

    At the founding of our nation, the use of a firearm was probably considered to be as essential to life as the use of a telephone is today.

    That training then was just a part of the things that someone learned on their way towards becoming an adult.

    Since that type of training has, apparently, gone by the wayside, something needs to fill the void.

    I'm in full agreement that some sort of proof of baseline knowledge of firearms safety, operation and use-of-force laws should be a requirement.
    I agree completely.

  3. #1238
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    11,858
    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation … and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

  4. #1239
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,547
    Quote Originally Posted by the dangling wrangler View Post
    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation … and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.
    Eloquently put.

  5. #1240
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,547
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    I agree completely.
    I still think that we need to look VERY closely at our society and determine the reasons that we've got teenagers shooting one another over shoes, jackets and drugs.

    We need to look closely and figure out why so many people WANT to kill another human being.

  6. #1241
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    521
    X2.

  7. #1242
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,287
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  8. #1243
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    3,372
    You guys all seem to be self-proclaimed experts on what will curb gun violence and what will not. So far you have said that:

    Gun education will not work.
    Gun licensing will not work.
    Banning “assault” type rifles will not work.
    Banning large capacity magazines will not work.
    Banning guns in general will not work.
    Mandating gun safes will not work.
    Requiring hands-on training for CCW will not work.
    Psychology screening will not work.
    Raising age limits on purchasing will not work.

    Pardon me but I’m sure I missed a few others.

    If you guys are such experts on guns and then happen to be such experts on what causes gun related crime maybe you could answer a good question that is right in the center of your newfound field of expertise. What EXACTLY has caused gun related crime to be cut in half over the last 10 – 15 years? And since you all know so much about what causes gun related crime why haven’t you suggested more of this remedy? Why are you so silent about sharing this hidden answer you possess with us liberal morons?

  9. #1244
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,547

  10. #1245
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post

    I still think that we need to look VERY closely at our society and determine the reasons that we've got teenagers shooting one another over shoes, jackets and drugs.

    We need to look closely and figure out why so many people WANT to kill another human being.
    Definitely, we have a society that is crumbling, and it seems to be s combination of things. Start at the top and work your way down.

    We have companies that would do anything to make a dollar, which includes bribing politicians, buying doctors, paying off the media....and we have politicians, doctors, and media sources that allow it to happen when they morally should not. Our families are broken due to mom and dad both having to work, the kids are home alone, and or allowed to do whatever they want. We have people that see all of this going on and would rather rob the system than work for a living.

    All of this plays into how society functions, and this explanation is just a skim off the surface....there's so much more going on than I think the average person realizes or is willing to accept.

  11. #1246
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    11,858
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post
    Eloquently put.
    There's all kinds of information here http://jpfo.org/

    I'm not even Jewish, I just stumbled on to the site.

  12. #1247
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,287
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian GC View Post
    You guys all seem to be self-proclaimed experts on what will curb gun violence and what will not. So far you have said that:

    Gun education will not work.
    Gun licensing will not work.
    Banning “assault” type rifles will not work.
    Banning large capacity magazines will not work.
    Banning guns in general will not work.
    Mandating gun safes will not work.
    Requiring hands-on training for CCW will not work.
    Psychology screening will not work.
    Raising age limits on purchasing will not work.

    Pardon me but I’m sure I missed a few others.

    If you guys are such experts on guns and then happen to be such experts on what causes gun related crime maybe you could answer a good question that is right in the center of your newfound field of expertise. What EXACTLY has caused gun related crime to be cut in half over the last 10 – 15 years? And since you all know so much about what causes gun related crime why haven’t you suggested more of this remedy? Why are you so silent about sharing this hidden answer you possess with us liberal morons?
    thats funny, the only one giving anyone "expert status" is you. what exactly has caused the crime rate to go down........as simple as it sounds, privately owned guns, in the hands of law abiding citizens.

    Criminals are MORE afraid of a legally armed private citizen than they are of the police

    60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.
    Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, James Wright and Peter Rossi, Aldine, 1986


    A survey of felons revealed the following:
    • 74% of felons agreed that, "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."
    • 57% of felons polled agreed, "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."
    The Armed Criminal in America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Federal Firearms Offenders study, 1997: National Institute of Justice, Research Report, July 1985, Department of Justice
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  13. #1248
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    3,910
    Great Post Wrangler.

    For all of the "living constitution" crowd, see if you can follow this conservative viewpoint. If the objective in following the constitution is interpreting the original intent. You all say that you can't follow the original intent on the AR-15 matter because it didn't exist then. If the original language of the 2nd amendment is "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" and the founders knew first hand of the way that governments can become tyrannical then we can establish through original intent that the 2nd amendment was put in place to partially protect citizens from it's own government and to provide personal protection. Now to do that the citizen must have the right to be as well armed as our own militia. I'm not talking about nukes or Sidewinder missiles but personal protection.

    It would be a step in the direction of removing the threat of citizen resistance if our firepower were reduced to handguns or pellet guns or no guns. Almost everything government does normally results in the diminished liberties of it's citizenry.
    Governments don't tax to get the money they need, governments will always find a need for the money they get. Ronald Wilson Reagon

    Born Again KA

Page 96 of 255 FirstFirst ... 46868990919293949596979899100101102103106146196 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event