Effectiveness of Gun Control? - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-26-2006, 12:06 PM   #46
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


The truth is that I've never heard of a pacifist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, supporting gun control.


Oh, and you can add to that list at least 50 of my friends and family. Christians, pacifists, huzzah for gun control. And about half of these people ARE Republicans or otherwise politically conservative. Once you've experienced what these guns can do to your family or your community, you'd understand.


Honestly, my underlying beef with the whole gun control thing is that a lot of people want to ban all guns outright. Like I said, I don't mind responsible people who've been background checked owning hunting rifles. Hunters have to take required safety classes (at least here) before they can use these guns. If some upper middle class guy feels he NEEDS a concealed hand gun to feel safe in his own house, why should HE not have to take classes and learn how to clean the gun, how to use it, WHEN to use it, where to store it, etc? It's just not fair.
__________________

__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 12:09 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Liesje



Honestly, my underlying beef with the whole gun control thing is that a lot of people want to ban all guns outright. Like I said, I don't mind responsible people who've been background checked owning hunting rifles. Hunters have to take required safety classes (at least here) before they can use these guns. If some upper middle class guy feels he NEEDS a concealed hand gun to feel safe in his own house, why should HE not have to take classes and learn how to clean the gun, how to use it, WHEN to use it, where to store it, etc? It's just not fair.
I agree with you. People who are going to own a gun should have to pass background check and training.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 12:11 PM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by redhotswami


I mean, I can see your statement about having the right to defend ourselves...Like I said, we all have our own defense mechanisms, but I just can't convince myself to that a gun is necessary to defend myself.
If someone were in the act of trying to harm my family or friends, I know I could bring myself to shoot that person.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 12:22 PM   #49
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
If someone were in the act of trying to harm my family or friends, I know I could bring myself to shoot that person.
That's definitely your personal choice, but many people don't feel the same way. I had a gun drawn on me as a little kid, right at my own house. My dad could've busted out his muzzleloader and started pointing back. Instead he backhanded the kid across the face and let the cops deal with the rest.

Honestly, I don't think I'm prepared to make assumptions about what I could or couldn't do. When you're in the situation, nothing is how you expected it to be.

I try to remember my grandpa, who I love deeply and greatly admire. He's the biggest pacifist in the entire family, yet he was the one that's survived the most wartimes, he's the one that was pounded unconscious with a crowbar while his son was getting beat down next to him with a broken beer bottle, he was the one who had a knife pulled on him, he's the one who's seen his kids shot at, beaten, threatened, and verbally harassed. His own safety and that of his family has been put on the line countless times, and yet the most violent thing I've ever seen him to is whack a fish against the boat so it died before it got filleted. If grandpa could survive all those years defending himself and seven others in a FAR more hostile environment then I'll ever know, I don't see why I need to put the safety of others, mainly children, at risk so I can have a hand gun lying around the house for "protection".
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 12:32 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
redhotswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Waiting for this madness to end.
Posts: 5,846
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
The truth is that I've never jeard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, supporting gun control.
oooh oooh! me!
__________________
redhotswami is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 12:50 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
redhotswami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Waiting for this madness to end.
Posts: 5,846
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


If someone were in the act of trying to harm my family or friends, I know I could bring myself to shoot that person.
And I think that's probably the fundamental difference between us. After having a gun pointed in my face, or even having friends/family being shot at....I could NEVER ever do the same to someone else. Too many close to me have been the victims of gun violence. I don't want my own hands to cause anyone else to suffer the loss and pain I've felt.

Like Lies said...sometimes in the heat of the moment we could do some things we never thought we would do...but I really really don't think I could shoot someone, no matter how threatened I or someone I loved felt.
__________________
redhotswami is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 01:14 PM   #52
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by toscano


I'm sure you can provide a source showing that the majority of gun-related homocides are caused by peace-loving Christians.

Failing that I'm sure you can provide a source showing it's self-avowed "peace loving Christians" who are the only ones who need guns.

Wacko.
No, just the biggest supporters of gun ownership. The reason criminals have guns.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 01:15 PM   #53
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


The truth is that I've never jeard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, supporting gun control.

Live under a rock?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 01:50 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Live under a rock?
I didn't type what I intended to type. What I typed was:

"The truth is that I've never jeard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, supporting gun control."

What I meant to type was

"The truth is that I've never heard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, who doesn't support gun control."
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 01:56 PM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by redhotswami


And I think that's probably the fundamental difference between us. After having a gun pointed in my face, or even having friends/family being shot at....I could NEVER ever do the same to someone else. Too many close to me have been the victims of gun violence. I don't want my own hands to cause anyone else to suffer the loss and pain I've felt.
If killing someone is what it takes to prevent that person from killing my family, I'd have to do it. The attacker has free will - he didn't have to commit the evil of trying to kill someone else.

If someone were trying to kill my family and a policeman showed up, I would expect him to try to stop the person and kill him if necessary. Why should I expect a cop to do something that I would be unwilling to do myself if the cop weren't around?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 01:58 PM   #56
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,685
Local Time: 02:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I didn't type what I intended to type. What I typed was:

"The truth is that I've never jeard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, supporting gun control."

What I meant to type was

"The truth is that I've never heard of a paficist, be it a Christian or NonChristian, who doesn't support gun control."
That makes more sense...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-26-2006, 02:05 PM   #57
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


That makes more sense...
I can definitely see how what I originally wrote would have you thinking "What is that nut smoking?"
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-27-2006, 12:27 AM   #58
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 03:02 AM
80's thanks for the informaton on Switzerland. I found it quite fascinating.

The key things that stuck out for me where the following:

Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
This is in a very large part due to Switzerland's unique system of national defence, developed over the centuries.

Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.

Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.

Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.
This is actually what the authors of the bill of rights had in mind when they included the second amendment. They were pretty distrustful of large standing armies controlled by a strong central government and I suspect they may have found a "well-regulated" militia to be a valuable guard agaisnt tyranny. Had this concept lasted, perhaps something similar to what Switzerland has is what we would have in this country.

However, the reality is we have nothing like the organizational or cultural structure in place to facilitate the wide-spread ownership of military style weaponry in the U.S. The key factor in Switzerland, I think, is the training and focus on gun ownership as part of one's military responsiblities. Granted it carries over into shooting for sport etc, but it seems everyone is well-trained, and has an engrained sense of responsiblity. In a sense, the "restrictions" are built in culturally so to speak, so that actual gun restriction laws are unnecessary. The whole way guns enter the lives of the Swiss is in a regulated fashion.


This part really struck me as well:

Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
Despite the lack of rigid gun laws, firearms are strictly connected to a sense of collective responsibility.

From an early age Swiss men and women associate weaponry with being called to defend their country.
I'ts this sense of collective responsiblity and the sense that the ownership of guns is for the defense of their country that is lacking in the United States and thus make gun control laws necessary. In a country as focused on individual independence as we are, the whole concept of collective responsiblity has less sway in my opinion.

I'm kind of fascinated by Switzerland as a whole, really. Here's this country that's quite wealthy, doesn't have the crime, drugs, urban issues etc that other countries do. And yet it's isolated. It's not a major player on the world stage, so to speak. I always kind of assumed in order for a country to be well-off, "developed" it had to be hugely powerful as well. Do you suppose the founding fathers envisioned that the U.S. would end up being somewhat like Switzerland instead of the global behemoth it is today?

Sorry that's a bit off-topic.

Anyways, I think this issue is ruined by the "nuts" on both sides of the issue. 80's I appreciate your willingness to recognize the need for some sort of regulations regarding gun ownership. And Lies, I appreicate your making allowances for hunting rifles etc. It seems like this is one of those debates where the "no kind of guns ever" voices and the "all kinds of guns at any time" voices drown out more moderate views.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 10-27-2006, 01:03 AM   #59
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean

Anyways, I think this issue is ruined by the "nuts" on both sides of the issue. 80's I appreciate your willingness to recognize the need for some sort of regulations regarding gun ownership. And Lies, I appreicate your making allowances for hunting rifles etc. It seems like this is one of those debates where the "no kind of guns ever" voices and the "all kinds of guns at any time" voices drown out more moderate views.
I agree. I grew up with gun violence and come from a family of outdoorsmen. Both experiences have shown me that hunting rifles and guns that are designed for defense just aren't the same and don't often overlap. I support gun control and if it came to an all-or-nothing decision, I'd have to go with nothing. Hunters are also quite skilled with bows, in fact most of my family are far more accurate this way. Banning hunting rifles would create a host of other environmental problems, at least here in Michigan, but I guess if that's what it would take to get weapons out of the hands of people who use them on people, I could live with that. But like you're saying, the all-or-nothing attitude really makes absolutely no sense, from either side of the issue.
__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 10-28-2006, 07:46 AM   #60
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:02 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


No, just the biggest supporters of gun ownership. The reason criminals have guns.
And the case study of our ban shows that when we take away that gun ownership the criminals still have guns and the dent on gun violence is minor. Do wars happen because countries have armies?
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com