YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4
Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Feb 20th, 2018, 8:21pm

Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members Login Login



   Waxology, a place to discuss
   Waxings
   Law, Justice, Legal & Related
(Moderators: torporchair, mitakeet)
   Supreme Blunder?
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Supreme Blunder?  (Read 2015 times)
aztaihun
Newbie
*



I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

   
View Profile

Posts: 6
Supreme Blunder?
« on: Jul 3rd, 2008, 1:22pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The DC gun ban was just determined to be unconstitutional.  So now guns are once again legal in DC and Chicago and LA and NY.  Many have pointed out that soon there will be gun shops selling guns in DC because it's also against the law to transport firearms over the border.  I have heard that according to the ruling there is no trigger lock or storage requirements included in the judgment.      
 
I have friends who have tried to tell me we need the 2nd amendment to protect our civil liberties.  
 
Your thoughts?
IP Logged
mitakeet
Administrator
*****



Font of useless information

   
View Profile

Posts: 338
Re: Supreme Blunder?
« Reply #1 on: Jul 3rd, 2008, 2:42pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I am a very firm believer in the "guns don't kill people, people kill people", so for me the ban was correctly overturned.  I think that the more guns that are concealed by law abiding citizens, the less likely there will be violent crime.  I view it as inexcusable ignorance that children a) get their hands on loaded guns and b) are not smart enough to know the dangers and the owner of the gun should be doing time.  The more restricted guns are, the more people at risk because if they get one but are not able to practice to be comfortable.  After a bit, only criminals have guns (they NEVER seem to find any lack, and besides, it is trivial to build one).  My view is anyone who whats to take a course to prove that they have minimal skills should be allowed to carry a concealed hand gun.  After all, we give drivers licenses to just about any moron who can walk into the DMV and the energy in a vehicle moving at 60 mph is way WAY higher than that of a gun.  I am curious, if you are interested in doing the research, how many people die by guns vs die by car.
IP Logged

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
--George Bernard Shaw
aztaihun
Newbie
*



I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

   
View Profile

Posts: 6
Re: Supreme Blunder?
« Reply #2 on: Jul 5th, 2008, 6:36pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I reject the premise that the danger of cars and guns can be compared and determine the inherent danger of either.  Guns are designed to kill things.  Cars are designed to transport things.  Many times the people operating the car shouldn't be and likewise for guns.  Would that prove that one is safer?  I'm not sure.  
 
I agree that people should have the right to guns.  They have their place in our world.  I guess I'd like to see something with more nuance: "Guns are allowed in counties where hunting is more common, and where guns are part of an "agrarian" lifestyle."  But in places like DC, we don't need any more guns.  There, if you have a gun I think the statistics show the likelihood of accidental death is greater than the likelihood that your be able to use a gun to defend yourself.  That would be an interesting statistic to compare.  But going back to your post, I think we agree that it is an abomination that children are allowed to touch guns before they are taught how.
IP Logged
torporchair
Administrator
*****



Weasonable?

   
View Profile

Posts: 474
Re: Supreme Blunder?
« Reply #3 on: Jul 29th, 2008, 8:17pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Taking responsibility for the gun(s) one owns is crucial. We can all agree on that.  
 
If I were in DC and buying a gun out of fear of being shot, it'd be bad business for the gun store to educate me, since I may then "think about it" and not buy.  
 
Hey, you got to get a permit and be able to draw and use your weapon to effect which is questionable even if you practice every weekend. Then, OK, when you go to sleep, where is the handgun? Loaded? Well then make sure it is where You will have Your hand on it if you hear any untoward noises! Why be shot with your own gun and allow your gun to join the other guns on the street? Yeah, sleep with it loaded under the pillow. You may lose your wife but not to intruders!
 
Maybe I'll have to think about that gun purchase, maybe I will buy some mace and motion detectors and an extra tire iron.  
 
Maybe Required Education on guns in School and gun stores would be a step...
« Last Edit: Jul 29th, 2008, 8:20pm by torporchair » IP Logged

"The facts, however, show that there are always new soaring dogs in evidence..."
-Franz Kafka from: Investigations of a Dog
mitakeet
Administrator
*****



Font of useless information

   
View Profile

Posts: 338
Re: Supreme Blunder?
« Reply #4 on: Jul 30th, 2008, 5:22am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

If our sorry nation can't even have effective sex education, how the heck can we have effective education on guns?  Despite proof that abstinence policies fail to be effective (guns or sex), that is what the noisy, grease seeking wheels want and rational discussion is nearly impossible.
IP Logged

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
--George Bernard Shaw
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board