yeah but where do you draw that legal line? can you shoot the guy as soon as you see him, even if he hasn't noticed you yet? can you shoot him while he is running away from you, but still in your house? recently a jeweller here got convicted after shooting and killing a burglar in the back after the robbery, and claiming it as self-defence.

*edit - to hevusa

that is a defeatist attitude, and exactly what the MAN would have you believe.

"You are just a powerless drone, a simple cog in society, just one man among millions, worthelss really, just enough worth for a vote, and even that is unnecesary."

think about how the untrained vietcong defeated the highly skilled/trained/armed USA army.


think about how the Afghanis fought against a highly trained and armed and rich russian army

think about how the poorly trained and outfitted revolutionaries in the colonies defeated the rich, better armed, better trained military of mother england.

In Texas you can shoot ANY intruder into your home, or even yr property. you may face charges but it will be taken into account that you were protecting your home. It is NOT the home/business owner's job to determine why someone is breaking into their home/business, but it is their job to defend it and the people within..

I find it impossible to get past the fact that guns are essentially the most efficient way to put a cunting great hole in something. Cars are responsible for traffic accidents, but their main purpose isn't traffic accidents. This argument's popped up on this board before, and I always get the impression that guns are just something that a lot of Americans have a blind spot towards. Unlike anything else that causes death - say, smoking, red meat, cars or whatever - the solitary purpose of a gun is putting holes in things that probably don't need holes in them.

I feel I should have every right to shoot someone that has managed to break into my home. This is where I'm supposed to feel safe. This is my corner. I should have the right to keep things that way. There is no line to be drawn.

people should not be breaking into homes/businesses.

people should be defending themselves and their own.

it is as simple as that.

the anti-gun people should go yell their tired rhetoric at criminals/gangbangers/thugs, and see where that gets them

then that person will probably have a gun and so it goes around and around and around. i for one feel safer walking down the street knowing people are not carrying guns.

its like us foreign policy.

why is it the us sells guns to people with mental health problems?

l o v e

:)

guns are for killing.

so is bug spray.

so is a mousetrap

so are knives, swords, etc.

so is poison

all these things are widely available because it is not what an item is FOR but how and why it is used that makes it a horrible thing.

No, it's like everything.

Bug Spray is for killing bugs
Mousetraps are for killing mice.
Knives are for cutting things, such as fruit, veg or meat.
Poison is for killing vermin, such as rats.

I can't see any purpose that a gun serves other than putting holes in things; and, just a bug spray is the most efficient way of killing bugs, or a pneumatic drill (jackhammer) are the most efficient way of putting holes in concrete, guns' primary purpose are to put holes in living things; handguns are primarily for putting holes in people. I know a few gun sports people, so I'm not saying they're not a lot of fun (I have been on the range, it is a good laugh) but specialist, minority uses of guns aren't quite the same as their general purpose.

I can see what you're getting at, but I percieve a massive difference between the mis-application of rat poison and the precise application of a gun's primary purpose.

it's the roberts court that has decreed that. in the past, the militia argument was the prevailing one to uphold local gun bans, and still in the dissenting opinions the judges who voted no maintained the militia argument. so just because it was 5-4 and people voted along ideological lines it doesn't mean the text is clear-cut. it isn't.

i'd rather side with ruth bader ginsburg than with dog-fuckers scalia, alito, robers and the other retrograde fuckers whose name i can't think off the top of my head.

then again, remember that DC is under federal rule, so while the lifting of the ban might apply to the federal area, the issue is still being contested in the states.

even then, try walking into the halls of congress with a sidearm and see what happens to you.

then again, like i said, when i go to the cabin i sleep with a rifle next to me. fuck yes. 911 would take 1/2 hour to arrive. i'm not taking any chances.

There can't be a "movement" if it's intended to maintain things that are already in place... durrrr! call it "conservation", "rights activists", whatever... but "movement" is a jaded (seemingly intimidated) way to put it.

I hear guns can be useful against idiots.

Well, why would you have a swimming pool if you can't swim?

The stats related to crimes obviously aren't related to guns only, there are lots of factors: economy, society, population, presence of criminal organisations, drug trafficking, social exclusion etc etc etc etc.

The point we're trying to make is not that owning a gun makes someone a murderer, but the fact that stats show that vey rarely they can help someone defend themselves, in fact it makes it worse most of the time.

And it really increases the chances of accidents, husbands killing wives, neighbors killing neighbors,idiots killing other idiots because of road rage, people commiting suicide - all those types of "death" that make up for the majority of murders, not to mention accidents.

All guns used by crime were one legally manufactured as well, the less control the more they'll get hold of them.

So, guns are POTENTIALLY dangerous things. You can hurt yourself and others with them... so based on that principle why can't I purchase crack legally and eventually offer it to my friends - it's potentially dangerous too, in fact less dangerous if you analyse it well.

It's nec to have guns as a means of self defense against idiots with guns.

People often forget most people don't want to (or at least follow through...) with killing anyone.

The majority should win.

I don't own a gun, but people deserve the right to carry one if they feel safer owning one. I probably would, I've considered purchasing one. Look mighty sexy sitting on my night stand.

yeah sorry
this is wrong in a thousand levels

i missed this.
i guess nothing else needs to be said.

they need to defend themselves from imaginary evils.

This post and your avatar made me laugh in a nervous way.

I love when people can so easily say "yr wrong" without providing any reason for thinking so.

In this case it's because it's so obvious no one has to.

clue 1:
Control the population of dears, because people get into funny dear accidents on the road.

I highly doubt you know anything about Charlie. There was more love between members of Manson + his crew than there is between most families....thats for sure.

LOL.

clever.

I love this, I've yet to "attack" anyone...seems the anti gun folks are doing the most attacking...so odd. THAT worries me.

Everyone likes to fight, I suppose.

With LSD, anything is possible.

They weren't on acid ALL the time. They weren't at all when they'ed wait outside the courthouse, living in the streets, while Charlie was on trial.

I don;t know many people that would do that.

You can't be on acid ALL the time. but honestly...take 30 hits of acid in lets say.......two months period and have a psycho constantly brainwashing you while yer on acid....you'll "be in love" too...Acid rots yer brain man. Have you ever done it? You become extremely gullable while high.....So yeah this "love" is gonna grow when you have the mind of a 4 year old and this guy is all you have left.

I think this is going to be the best thread ever.

The anti-gun folks are attacking, just like people who are against racism are intolerant, right, right? Pacifists are attacking me with their pacifism.

Love in the Manson family. I like the way you said "you know nothing about Charlie" like he's your pal or something lol.

Some I know did a bit more acid than he should in the 70's. He still has all these flashbacks like opening the fridge and staring at the light.

He's not my pal. I've never spoken to him...but I can read, and I can def separate the bullshit people say, from the things he's said himself. Don;t care what he may or may not actually have done...I care about the things he's said because I get it.

Dude loves the planet...man. It's quite beautiful. The ignorant just follow that shithead attorney's "theories" though...I mean, all Charlie ever wanted to do was kill, right? The most famous serial killer that never killed anyone.

Yeah Charles Manson was such a beautiful innocent flower.

deer accidents do kill many people every year. MANY. I am sure the families of the dead would appreciate your concern for them.

and when the population runs unchecked due to no natural predators, thousands, if not tens of thousands of deer starve and die in winter.

hunters EAT the venison you know. It's delicious.

mmmm.... venison. not just delicious but super-healthy. i wanna get me a hunting license for this fall. and a big freezer.

and salmon fishing! oh i wanna go salmon fishing. salmon salmon salmon salmon wonderful fish. those you hook though-- it's a bizarre thing.

i'd write more about the delights of wild game but i just had breakfast & have work to do.

This country has so many more vital epidemics that are almost taboo to talk about while guns are always at the forefront and the most convenient cop-out. Why not focus on the poison and corrupt ethics of pharmacuticals; obesity; unemployment and dwindling economy and most importantly drug abuse epidemics. Gun control is not an epidemic.... it's the culmination of most of the things mentioned above that are the root of the countries crime and murder problems. Ceasing all guns would do absolutely jack shit unless you magically eradicated the countries poverty and drug abuse epidemic. How many murders (guns or not) are caused in direct relation to either drug abuse or poverty?

Why are pharmaceuticals not in the conversation regarding murders and murder rates? I don't know where y'all get your news but as far as I can tell, there is almost always a factor of illegal drugs or pharmaceuticals involved with murders. To make a reference to one countries murder rates to another without looking at the big picture such as poverty, drug abuse and economy is just retarded (at best).... because those are the factors that lead to crime, not having guns available.

The VT shootings and Columbine: convenient time to talk about banning guns right.. weren't the shooters on antidepressant medications? Have we not learned that that poison can create monsters?... yet, if you mention them in relation to the story, you will be sued out of submission by the pharmaceutical companies. How many mothers have we seen drown there kids in tubs and butchered their children with knives as a result of being on anti-depressents (A: all of them)? It's not OK to question the integrity of the drugs though because you will be sued.

You want to talk about numbers.... I'm pretty sure more people are killed by alcohol and drunk driving than by firearms. Should we lump in banning alcohol into the conversation? I'd sooner see alcohol go than firearms, wouldn't the country be safer then?

Guns are just at the thin surface of all and any epidemic worth debating. They are a simple-minded cop-out for the naive masses.

I'm willing to bet that those opposed to guns talking here have little to no experience with guns. I've never heard anyone opposed to guns, who actually spent any amount of time with them. I see it as a completely ignorant, paranoid opinion.... the no further than the bloated stereo types expressed here.... it's laughable. It's like anti-gun people are coming from another planet, or they lump their whole outlook together based off of lifetime of watching COPS TV to no end.

My whole neighborhood owns guns. We're all different people, different walks of life, but all have guns. The key is, we're all law abiding people with wholesome morals.... thus is our privilage. I love the fact knowing we're all armed. It's our own form of "neighborhood watch". After Hurricane Katrina, we were all cut off from communication and there was a lot of crime, robbing and looting. Not in my neighborhood and not in any others where residents were armed.

I see a general stereotype in here that those who own guns represent a lower intelligence and lower demographics. That's simply an ignorant stereotype again expressed by those who don't really know the reality of the situation. There is a small percentage of gun rights activists who are just obsessed and you will see them at NRA meetings and all... but to assume they represent the majority of all gun owners is just stupid.

I think that anti-gun people have a pacifist attitude in a modern day minimalists-hippie kinda way and frankly I think what scares them more than knowing the next person could own a gun is the consideration for the responsibility of owning a gun themselves.

I have a concealed carry permit. I felt like I needed it because I was doing photography sessions in bad urban areas (mainly Baton Rouge and New Orleans) where on top of taking out all my expensive gear, lighting, power supplies, cameras, etc.... I was out with models, and the whole ordeal attracts a lot of attention, often the wrong kind of attention. I felt like protecting myself, all of my gear and most importantly the models. I never hoped to shoot anyone (w/ a gun - bad pun) and only hoped it'd work as a deterrence if really needed. I've been around guns all my life so am comfortable with them. I've never shot anything with fir only snakes and stuff, bottles, cans and lots of targets.

Recently here where we live, there was a jail escape by like 4 inmates in for murder. There was a HUGE manhunt for them. All were caught except for one who escaped to an older couples camp in an isolated woods area. The couple pulled up to the camp and saw the window open and a light on. Not knowing what was going on, the old man approached the camp are to see what was going on. He was met by the inmate who was approaching him with a knife taken from the camp. Well, the old guy had a pistol with him and sent the convict running. This lead to his capture as well probably saved other lives aside from themselves. Also, my brothers friend who shot a robber... probably saved innocent peoples lives. The thief was a career criminal and as you can imagine, your crime escalates as your need to feed your addiction does. This guy would have eventually killed someone.... so Rene likely saved some innocent poeple(s) lives from this already dangerous piece of shit by putting him down.

can you pacifist hippies comprehend that? How quick would that couple have been butchered had they not had the right to own a gun? Where's the logic in taking protection out of responsible, law abiding citizens hands leaving them defenseless against those are going to threaten others lives regardless?

here's the story (watch the second video for an interview w/ the armed couple): http://blog.nola.com/tpnorthshore/20...n_trailer.html

I have a question: of all of the anti-gun people here.... how many have actually shot guns? My theory is that it's more of a fear of the unknown and inexperienced than it is rational thinking.

Quick, someone look up the rate of concealed gun carriers crime and misuse of firearms....

no such thing exists......unless one realizes NO ONE is a beautiful innocent flower.

FreshChops is the light and the way....

I was right about this being the best thread ever.

Ol' Charlie Manson is a different thread altogether.

knox, have you read abouyt his "childhood?" (I put that in quotes because being abandoned, raised in juvenile detention centers for years, being beaten, sodomized, abused by inmates as well as guards, beaten by police, abuised by foster parents, etc is not a CHILDHOOD)

Like Charlie says, he is a monster that society created, in every aspect. and society is scared shitless of it's bastard offspring.

Again, Rob says it best. He looked for love and eventually he found it. Sad things had to turn out so harsh.

+ I should add...he found it through YOUNG ADULTS that had SERIOUS problems before ever even meeting him. For a while, they were doing realy good for themselves.