2nd Amendement Rights

[PeppyGPhiB]

My boyfriend has completely changed my opinion of guns. I used to be very anti-gun and thought no one should have them. But after I met him I decided that I wanted to learn how to load and shoot a gun in case I ever needed to. So, he took me to the range for the first time, and I now realize how careful and safe most gun owners are with their guns. They take ownership very seriously - they're not a bunch of wackos brandishing their guns about. However, I do think there should be some restrictions on the kinds of guns you can buy - no automatic weapons (done), but also restrictions based on what a gun is realistically used for. For example, at the range we go to sometimes, the shop there has a 50 caliber long-range gun...the kind that you have to use with a tripod on the ground. What is someone going to use that gun for? Surely not self-defense, and not hunting either. That gun could blow up a car hundreds of yards away, and in my opinion it has no business being owned by Joe Somebody.

Anyone who's seen Bowling for Columbine remembers the cartoon debate in it that pondered why there is so much gun violence in America. And they'll also probably remember from that that there was no clear answer as to why America is so different from the rest of the world in this regard - remember, Canadians have more guns per capita than Americans But what I do think separates the US from the rest of the "big" countries is our obsession and TOLERANCE of violence...period. Not gun violence, but any type of violence. We are a very aggressive, hostile country and it seems that more and more kids are not being disciplined when they act up. Well, those kids grow up...and then they turn into teenagers, then adults, who act up. And I should say that it's not just about disciplining them when they act up, but it's also about teaching them why they shouldn't act up in the first place...why it's not a desirable behavior.

For the past week I was down in L.A./Orange County, and I can't tell you how many times my friends and I sat someplace for lunch or whatever and watched pre-teens and teens disrespect the people and property around them. We saw kids kicking planters, spitting on cars, shoving people aside as they ran around a boardwalk, etc. That stuff may seem minor, but it's a lack of discipline and control like that that I think leads to some of the violent behaviors. These kids aren't being taught right vs. wrong by their parents. Sure, they may know what's right or wrong in the law's eyes, but what's right morally/ethically is not being instilled. We're not raising kids with character and good sense anymore...just "go for it", independent, and in some cases, book smart, individuals who don't care about doing the right thing.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I'm not worried about deterrence, as I've continually stated.

You don't remember saying that your gun under your pillow deters individual criminals?

You took it back after I questioned you but your first instinct was deterence.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

You don't remember saying that your gun under your pillow deters individual criminals?

You took it back after I questioned you but your first instinct was deterence.

Oh right. I forgot about that imaginary conversation.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Oh right. I forgot about that imaginary conversation.

psssst...it was in that other thread....

Originally Posted by DSTChaos

Your gun by your bed doesn't deter individual criminals unless you put "I have a gun by my bed" on every window and door.

But you actually didn't take the deterrence comment back. So you really did/do think your gun under your pillows deters individual criminals.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

psssst...it was in that other thread....



But you actually didn't take the deterrence comment back. So you really did/do think your gun under your pillows deters individual criminals.

I clearly said that my support for concealed carry on campus had nothing to do with deterrence, at least not in the "they won't come to campus and shoot us because they think we might have guns" way (which is what you seemed to reference a couple posts up).

I said the same thing about guns in the home, pretty much. You seemed to be referring to a community wide "they'll have guns, lets not do this" deterrent effect, while I mentioned an individual deterrent effect. By that, I mean "2 to the chest, you're not coming any farther towards me or mine" type impact. So sure, that individual effect could extend to campus carry too, but my rationale for campus carry is simply an extension of the already-existing carry rights. Certainly has nothing to do with the idea that people won't attack schools because they're concerned about guns, though if that occurred it would be beneficial (like some studies show for gun ownership in the home).

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I clearly said that my support for concealed carry on campus had nothing to do with deterrence, at least not in the "they won't come to campus and shoot us because they think we might have guns" way (which is what you seemed to reference a couple posts up).

I said the same thing about guns in the home, pretty much. You seemed to be referring to a community wide "they'll have guns, lets not do this" deterrent effect, while I mentioned an individual deterrent effect. By that, I mean "2 to the chest, you're not coming any farther towards me or mine" type impact. So sure, that individual effect could extend to campus carry too, but my rationale for campus carry is simply an extension of the already-existing carry rights. Certainly has nothing to do with the idea that people won't attack schools because they're concerned about guns, though if that occurred it would be beneficial (like some studies show for gun ownership in the home).

Deterrence can be specific or general in that people can be deterred through direct experience or through the experiences of others/general climate. I was not talking about community wide deterrence but, either way, a deterrent effect is a deterrent effect.

So what you're talking about really isn't deterrence unless you're arguing that people who are faced with gun wielding citizens will not attempt to offend in the future. It's more of a self-defense argument, which makes sense based on everything else you've said. You know that "deter/deterrence" has a lot of criminological and legal theory and meaning behind it so to say having a gun under your pillow/having guns in a classroom has a deterrent effect means something different than what you intended.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Deterrence can be specific or general. I was not talking about community wide deterrence but, either way, a deterrent effect is a deterrent effect.

So what you're talking about really isn't deterrence unless you're arguing that people who are faced with gun wielding citizens will not attempt to offend in the future. You know that "deter/deterrence" has a lot of criminological and legal theory and meaning behind it so to say having a gun under your pillow/having guns in a classroom has a deterrent effect means something different than what you intended.

It was pretty clear what I was saying, considering I specified how I was using the concept of deterrence. I'm pretty sure you knew what I was saying as well.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

It was pretty clear what I was saying, considering I specified how I was using the concept of deterrence. I'm pretty sure you knew what I was saying as well.

*waving at you as we type past each other*

If I say I didn't know what the hell you meant or whether you knew what the hell you meant, that's what it is. It isn't up to you to change what deterrence means. So now that we agree that you meant "self-defense" instead of deterrence, OKAY, move along lookieloos...nothing to see here.

[Senusret I]

You are sooooo too young to resurrect "lookieloos."

[Kevlar281]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

However, I do think there should be some restrictions on the kinds of guns you can buy - no automatic weapons (done), but also restrictions based on what a gun is realistically used for. For example, at the range we go to sometimes, the shop there has a 50 caliber long-range gun...the kind that you have to use with a tripod on the ground.

It’s probably a bipod.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

You are sooooo too young to resurrect "lookieloos."

My friends and I used to say it all the time. Running gag. LOL.

Usually we said it with a Southern state trooper voice "move along...lookieloos...nothing to see here!"

[shinerbock]

Sorry, but I'm pretty sure the Second Amendment guarantees me the right to have a Barrett .50 cal. I need it for home defense. It's a really big home.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

Umm, the school boards are deep in the pocket of the NRA???

Driver's ed (classroom & behind the wheel) was mandatory when I was in school too. Is that not the norm anymore?

Driver's ed is not provided by the public school system in my area anymore, although it was when I was in high school. However, it was not mandatory. If you don't want to get a driver's license, there's no need to take driver's ed. Driver's ed is mandatory to get a driver's license. If we're going to compare the two, then the same should hold true for owning a gun. Mandatory gun safety for those who are going to own a gun.

I'm somewhere in the middle on this issue. While I see no reason for anybody other than military to have automatic weapons, and I would never touch a gun, let alone own one, I'm not opposed to other people owning them. Most of the men I know I have hunting rifles. If gun laws were enforced, we'd go a long way toward reducing violence by guns. Yes, it is people who kill people (if you want to use bumper sticker phrases), but a gun (or a bomb) sure seems to be the easiest way to kill someone.

It's a tough one and a complex one. From what I heard on the news about NIU, it was 90 seconds from the time the shooter began killing until he turned the gun on himself. I don't think anybody would have stopped him in that short a time period.

We face a real dilemma in this country. Freedom vs. Security. It's been emphasized since 9/11 and the Patriot Act and everybody seems to have their own personal limit on where we draw the line between the two. There's a middle ground somewhere, but it's very murky. I tend to lean toward the Freedom side of things. I might feel differently if someone carrying, with a permit, shot up my work place or my kids' school.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Sorry, but I'm pretty sure the Second Amendment guarantees me the right to have a Barrett .50 cal. I need it for home defense. It's a really big home.

I think you need a 20 micmic, but the ammo is $50 per round...

[honeychile]

Usually a gun permit allows one to carry a concealed weapon. In a perfect world - and why I like the counties which teach Weaponry Safety - is that everyone (except those who opt out) knows how to handle guns safely. One of the very best classes that is open to everyone is the NRA's Personal Protection Course. There is so much more to personal protection than just "putting a gun under a pillow", and that's the main thrust of the classes. That's why someone from the NRA usually teaches these classes, and they stress what to do before deciding to arm oneself.
Also, being licensed to carry in one state does not necessarily mean you're able to do so in other states. Some states have reciprocal agreements, but not all.

As I've said several times before, Washington DC has the strictest gun laws in the country, and one of the highest crime rates. When that changes, I may change my mind. Until then, I'm usually packing.