Nor in any of this thread's posts, I might add.

Strange, isn't it. When people don't understand why you don't share their opinion, they revert to calling it 'fear' and 'ignorance' and 'stupidity'. Hi pot, meet kettle.

If it's not fear, then why do you care if I have guns or not?:confused:

There's a difference between fear of guns and fear of getting shot to death. I also care that you have guns because it doesn't take much for your gun to get into the hands of a "criminal". Then there's the general dislike I have for death.

Why do you care? Gun owners seem always so defensive.


Leave the gun. Take the cannolis.

I didn't specify what you were afraid of, I only reasoned fear is the only thing that would make you care .... and I was right.
I disagree that it wouldn't take much for my guns to get into the hands of criminals. Actually it would take a lot, so much in fact it wouldn't be worth their while. There are much easier ways for them to get guns. :D

What the fuck are you babbling about? Why do I care, what? And how am I being defensive? :confused:

I think it's a Sopranos reference, Bruce.

It's the original Godfather, you commie!

I was addressing the first two sentences. :cool:

XoB, generally speaking, "gun owners seem always so defensive"; because, THEY ARE defensive and THEY "CARE" enough to be active defensive rather than passive defensive. You may take Hippikos' statement as a compliment. ;)

See what I mean?

Now, take 2 Prozacs and call me in the morning.

Your post make no sense. You're babbling. You asked me nonsensical questions that had no bearing or connection to what I said.
YOU better take some Prozac or something stronger. :crazy:

I didn't specify what you were afraid of, I only reasoned fear is the only thing that would make you care .... and I was right.

Actually, according to research, fear is at the root of anger, not caring.

I don't think you have to fear something to think it's wrong. Of course, you could argue that there is a root fear, but that's based on a lot more things than the simple emotion brought about which is named fear. For example, I don't see a gun and immediately feel afraid. As has been pointed out, it's an inanimate object. However, when I see a gun in the hands of a loony, I feel fear, which is employed as my defense mechanism. I personally think there's a big distinction there.

What does everyone else think?

Oh, that shooting the loony is one possible course of action that could be constructive -- from everyone's point of view except the loony's.

It tends to take the pressure off to know he can't threaten your continued healthy existence without your having a rebuttal to hand.

PM John Major and the Australian Parliament euchred you Ozzies out of that, by and large, you know. Fortunately for reducing crime and increasing common sense, the pendulum now seems to be swinging the other way. Once you once again encourage self defense even unto extremity, your crime rate will permanently plummet: it's just human nature. One shouldn't make laws that fly in its face.

John Howard thanks UG, and there was a referendum on the subject of semi-automatic weapons only. Citizens were never permitted to carry concealable weapons prior to that referendum in any case. The only difference now is that people in the city who have no explainable use for a semi are not allowed to have them. People in rural settings are still allowed to have them for reasonable purposes.

I think you'll find the crime rate in Australia is substantially lower than that of the US. More facts required?

Yeah, walk into Wally World and plop down a few bucks. :worried:

I am a former gun owner/frequent shooter. My interests have shifted, but I have nothing against people owning guns, and would own some again now that my kids are grown...if I could justify the expense. And I'm pretty damn Liberal compared to Maggie and UG.

I am of the "if you didn't want to get shot, why were you stealing my car stereo?" school for the most part. Yes, I know that would be illegal. But, Liberal or no, I do believe that the fear of getting shot is a powerful deterrent to the criminal element. Also, I'm Liberal enough to not want the police and the army to be the only ones in my country who have guns. It strikes me as unfair.

Criminals can't buy guns at Wally World.

The phrases describing gun owners who aren't defensive are "former gun owners" or "citizens disarmed by their own government".

I didn't think there was a background check.

Unfortunately, the lady who is pissed off at her husband and his mistress (insert situation here) can, but that's just a criminal wannabe.

The fear frefered to in this thread, and to which Maggie refers by hoplophobia is the fear of guns, nothing else.

We are defensive because people keep trying to take our guns and restrict our Constitutional right to own and carry them, unrestricted.
If that stops, we will have no reason to be defensive... it is quite simple. They know that, they are playing stupid when they act like they don't know why we are insulted by their actions and attempts at actions.

Your failure to think isn't a good reason to spread misinformation.

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/nicsindex.htm

How do you identify loonies? Because they have a gun? Or because they just "look that way"?

Yeah, that post, earlier, made me laugh.

Nonsense. Would you care if I had a kitten? Would you care if I had a boat? Would you care if I had a toaster? No, you only care if I have a gun, because you're not afraid of what I will do with a kitten, boat or toaster.

The only reason you care, the only reason you think you're entitled to pass judgement, is your fear. :p

Fear
 

There are rational and irrational fears, right? Like: fear of fire, fear of heights, these are probably pretty good, instinctive responses.
Fear of deadly weapons, this seems to fall in the rational category. Fear of kittens or toasters, these would be irrational. ... :2cents:

btw: I'll take my answer "off the air" ...I don't plan to spend the next 50 posts defending a position I haven't stated. I know how these "debates" get.

Fear of a tool that is not being pointed at you is irrational... a car or pneumatic nail-gun is equally as dangerous as a gun (many of tools & poisons I have worked with are more dangerous than my guns), I don't see people freaking-out about them.
Irrational fear.

Is anyone here afraid of Russian nukes? Afraid of nuclear weapons getting into the hands of Al Qaeda? Afraid of North Korea getting nukes? If you are, why? If you're not, why not?

How about future criminals?

When did we start punishing them?

OT... You may want to start a new thread, IMO.

If gun owners weren't so offensive, they wouldn't have to be so defensive. ;)

There is no call to be insulting. I will no longer converse with you on this.

Answer the question. If I shouldn't be afraid of a gun anymore than I'm afraid of pnumatic nail gun that is not pointing at me, then you shouldn't be afraid of Russian, North Korean, or Al Qaeda-ian nukes, right? Same logic.

So... are you afraid?

Pu-leeeeeze!

Good point, rkz...now tell your cohort:

.

Let's see, how does this work? Oh yeah, put people on the defensive, then when they get defensive point out they are defensive because they are scared and/or stupid.

But, I guess it's OK for you guys to do it. :3_eyes:

I take no responsibility for anyone else's posts.
I am neither scared or stupid. I have stated my past with weapons, the ranch, how I have used them my whole life; as well as my political beliefs with them.
I am very moderate, IMO.
If one does not like guns, don't buy one or get into a relationship with a gun owner... simple.
If it is that big a deal... move to a nation not built on the principle of the second amendment. Again, simple.

In other words: America, love it or leave it.

How is that the position of someone who is very moderate?

And yet you object to my being insulting (which I don't think I was), but not to someone who agrees with your point's being insulting. That's real moderate.:right:

>>>>>>> How is your face not a getting punched-the-hell-off?

Because my new LCD monitor at work is specially designed to be so thin, there is no room inside to hide the little people who would normally punch me in the face.

I am moderate when it comes to gun possession. I have no issue with three day background checks (no longer), I do not feel that people should be allowed to own military grade explosives, I have no issue with people being allowed to bring guns into government buildings, no violent felons owning guns.
The Constitution IS America, yes, if you do not want to be around freedom, you should not be in this country. Just like those who feel that there should be a limit to freedom of speech are not a good fit for living in this nation.
I could care less if they are here. I just think they are going to be uncomfortable.

Just like those people who feel that there should be a limit to a person's freedom to own slaves, or a person's freedom to limit a woman's right to vote. The constitution changes with the times. Why isn't it time to be civilized and change gun rights? I'm not endorsing limiting all guns, just the ones predominntly used in crimes.

Quite correct. You only know a loony with a gun *after* they've shot up the schoolhouse full of Amish children.

Stating that she was unaware (i.e., "I didn't think") of such a statute isn't really spreading misinformation. Of course, for those of us who have never held an incorrect assumption or opinion, I can certainly see where that would be offputting.

Illegal ones, mostly shotguns and revolvers? That is really going to bum-out all the trap shooters out there. It is a very popular hobby.

So, we stop making all shotguns and .38 revolvers, criminals are going to go "damn, we can't use our favorites any more... guess we'll just stop shooting now", is that it?

Keep in mind, making guns illegal will do nothing, people will still make them. Especially patriots.

Because arbitrarily abrogating people's right to defend themselves isn't "civilized", and to call it that is begging the question.

The misinformation was the claim that criminals could "walk into Wally World and plop down a few bucks" and buy a firearm. "I didn't think" was the excuse offered for spreading that misinformation after the fact.

The assertion was misinformed, and repeating it spreads it. That's pretty clearly "spreading misinformation".

Of course, were we talking about George Bush, I could scream "He's a liar!" and all the BushBashers would nod sagely. Here my much more limited claim was "Shawnee is spreading misinformation", and your response is "Not really". :-)

Do you really believe passing a law forbidding any of those would make any significant difference? None of the groups you cite seem to be shy about violating US law. And the same is true of domestic criminals.

Speaking of, I saw this the other day, and it reminded me of you:

Misusing "begging the question" reminds me of grocer's apostrophes, "open all nite" signs, being unable to correctly use "affect" and "effect" or "loose" and "lose", or writing things like "for all intensive purposes".

That a usage is common doesn't make it correct. Claims that "the language is dynamic" are used too often to cover frank ignorance.

That some twit heard the phrase "begging the question" and assumed incorrectly that he knew what it meant doesn't actually create a new meaning identical with "raising the question".

Somehow I doubt we'd be better off using "petitio principii" in place of "begging the question".

Nice feint. The question was: are you afraid of those things. Are you?

Willingly becoming peaceful IS being civilized. Resolving conflict non-violently IS civilized.

Don't see anything about peace or lack of conflict. While you may find it desirable, it's not a part of being civilized.:cool:

I identify them as the ones trying to shoot innocent people.

Anyone who isn't wary around nail guns should probably rethink their position. Those things can be very dangerous...by accident even.

Your postiton is that it is uncivilized to defend yourself? I think that's nonsense. Me, I'm completely peaceful...except if attacked.

I'd like to see you "resolve conflict non-violently" with a mugger or a rapist. How quickly your facile platitudes would dissolve...

There are habits of behavior that should be followed around guns, be the nail guns or otherwise. The same is true of aircraft on the ground, be they jets or propeller.

The dangerous area around a gun is the direction it would discharge if fired--"where it's pointed", which is why one is at pains to keep all guns pointed in a safe direction. With a jet you need to stay out of the intake area at the front and the exhaust. The arc of an aircraft propeller should be avoided, even if the engine is not operating.

They may be loonies. Or they may simply be criminals.

There's a difference between insanity and ethical impairment.

And your point is?