My cold dead hands...

[RobK 10]

FOG, armed citizens weren't even given a chance on 9/11. Guns aren't allowed on planes, remember.

 

Bob, Rome was sacked by barbarians in spite of its army. All its people cared about were bread and circuses. You don't suppose that as those barbarians were flooding the city, the people were wishing maybe they knew something about fighting? I think it all ties together. A people who will not be responsible for their own defense, will not be defended. A people who know nothing of arms can know nothing about the proper operation of an army. Did you know about the ammo situation, Bob? Have you read all the reports about our depleted stores of cruise missiles? Do you know about the declining standards of physical fitness?

 

I see very disturbing similarities between Rome in it's decline and America today. I will not listen to the siren song of those who would have us give up our personal arms, who tell us not to worry because we live in "modern" times and no one can hurt us.

 

Bob, what you're really saying is that you refuse to prepare for the possibility, because you don't believe it can ever happen. I'm pretty certain myself that it won't happen in my lifetime. But if I don't prepare for it, and my children don't prepare for it, and their children don't prepare for it, then one day it will happen.

 

[Bob White 20]

I believe the only moderation that has been suggested is in the mindset held by some gun owners. No one has said change laws or restrictions. I only offered that a more logical reasoning for ownership would serve everyone better. You make it sound as if, without the average household owning a gun, our nation would be overrun by hostile forces and that's just not rational. It carries alot of stirring emotions but very little logic.

 

 

[RobK 10]

Bob, I've provided examples of nations falling in spite of mighty armies, and I've provided examples of relatively weak nations successfully defending against invaders through the agency of an armed populace.

 

You on the other hand simply assert that my position is emotional and irrational without providing a logical proof of the fallacy of my position. Moreover Bob, my position is NOT that the US would instantly be overrun without an armed populace, nor that the US could never be overrun with an armed populace.

 

But to say you need it to protect our country from the invading Huns is not an argument that has any logical basis, only pure emotion.

 

Prove your assertion, Bob! Please prove to me that an armed populace is NEVER useful in national defense. If you prove it, I will believe it!

 

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I just want to make clear, I still agree with Bob. FOG, I'm just going to ignore you. If all you can do is make personal attacks on me an my "lot" there is no point in discussing anything. I didn't even know I had a "lot." And you really have no idea what I think, other than what I have said.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

"FOG, armed citizens weren't even given a chance on 9/11. Guns aren't allowed on planes, remember."

 

There lies the rub. If citizens were allowed to carry guns on planes, the terrorists wouldn't have had a chance. BTW, don't yap about guns/airplanes/decompression, that's a non-starter.

 

 

[lasteagle83 10]

Wow, the spirit of Archie Bunker is among us....

 

There was an episode of All in the Family where Archie was interviewed on TV about skyjackings; he said everyone on the plane should have a gun, so when the hijacker says "I have a gun!" they could all say "So do we!"

 

Back to our regularly scheduled argument.....

[packsaddle 753]

OK, some of you will have to revise your image of me a bit but- I own numerous firearms and have a CWP. I was once a member of the NRA. I have received threats in the past and expect to in the future. My home is fully armed and ready for its defence. Every member of my family is trained in safe use and storage of the arms.

 

That said, I agree completely with what Bob White has written especially, "Gun ownership doesn't worry me.....but some gun owners sure do." I also agree with NJ on this topic. I am shocked at the ease with which I am able to anonymously purchase and sell arms if I wish, and that there is less regulation in the arms industry than for the manufacture of a beany baby. I think gun ownership ought to be regulated and owners ought to be trained prior to being licensed and allowed the firearm purchase. I think owning a firearm should be a privilege based on training and ability to take on the responsibility (like driving an automobile). This, based on nearly 5 decades of firearm use and experience.

[Fat Old Guy 11]

" that there is less regulation in the arms industry than for the manufacture of a beany baby."

 

You really don't know much about the gun industry do you? Firearms manufacturers and dealers are closely regulated by the governement and are under frequent if not constant scrutiny. Every gun that is manufactured (other than some special guns for the military) is assigned a serial number and that gun has a paper trail from the manufacturer until the time that it is sold at retail.

 

It is unlawful for a dealer to sell handguns to a resident of another state. It is unlawful for a non-deale to sell any gun to a resident of another state. It is unlawful to alter or eliminate or attempt to eliminate the serial number from a firearm. It is unlawful for a dealer or non-dealer to sell a firearm to someone that he has reason to believe is prohibited from owning guns. You are prohibited from owning guns if you have ever been convicted of a crime that could carry a sententence of more than one year (Teddy Kennedy can't own a gun), if you are a drug user, a habitual drunkard, or insane. It is a felony to attempt to buy a gun if you are prohibited from owning a gun.

 

This last point is interesting. The anti-gun folks talk about the tens of thousands of people that were turned away by background checks but less than a dozen were prosecuted. When asked, Chuck Schumer said that the law was intended to be used to prosecute people.

 

ATFE says that less than 3% of the guns used in crimes are bought at gun shows. Less than 2% of the guns used in crimes fit into the category of "semi-automatic assault weapon".

 

The laws are there, they just need to be enforced. Richmond, Va is doing that and their crime rate has dropped dramatically.

 

[packsaddle 753]

Fat Old Guy, I agree that greater enforcement is needed but that will not address every need. The serial number for an automobile is similar, it has to be there and must not be removed or altered. Big deal. It is left to the firearm manufacturer to determine the quality of materials, manufacturing tolerances, or safety features, or lack thereof. Less subject to regulation than a beany baby.

 

My experience is in agreement with my ATFE buddy who has just assured me that in my state as well as surrounding states, if I (or any other gun owner) wish to sell to another individual, there is no requirement other than an agreement on the price. There is no requirement to ask the person's identity, residence, nor criminal background for that matter. It is merely cash and carry. No wait. I observe large numbers of this type of transaction at flea markets, etc. There is no regulation that I can detect.

 

My most recent purchase, through a FFL dealer, took 15 minutes. I left with the weapon and plenty of ammo. I suppose I still pass the instant check but there certainly was no 'cooling off' period. I purchase components and ammo through the internet, no questions asked. And only a transfer fee for the actual firearm through a FFL agent. I merely believe that I should be held to a greater level of responsibility than currently is required. And the same for other owners of firearms.