Re: Guns [was Property Rights]

Rick (
Sat, 29 May 1999 01:22:03 +0100

>Bad news Rick, you can add me to that category, until the second
>amendment is repealed, nobody is taking my guns, period.

Even if it means shooting a police officer following the orders of his supervisor? If you answer no to that then you are completely countering your own point. Is you precious little gun(s) worth someones life? If you think so then you must be wacked - no other reason. (No offense intended).

>Not paranoid in the slightest, pragmatic. I have the right to
>protect myself, and will do so, period.

My original point was how a guy was willing to kill innocents doing their job rather than hand over the guns. How the hell are you protecting yourself. Do you have to hide behind your guns with all your problems? Does that mean if someone hassles you you are willing to shoot them? Frankly, unless someone comes at you with a gun of their own and you shoot then you are nothing but a potential murderer.

>If you do not wish to own a gun and be responsible for your own
>protection, that is your choice, but you do not have the right to
>make that choice for me.

Bullshit, sorry dOOd. Face to face unarmed I could most likely whoop your ass to hell. Since I'd rather learn how to do that than rely on a small projectile that is most likely going to cause death. I don't need to hide behind a gun unless I'm being shot at myself. Like I've stated before, there are other ways of protecting yourself other than branding a gun so freely. And for your information - I was not making that choice for you, I was stating an opinion.

>Alarms rarely stop anything but the simplest burglars, sniping the
>phone line (easily accessible) renders most useless.

Sorry, I forgot, you must be in the US, in most other countries they actually have internal and inaccessable phone lines that every joe schmoe can't access so easily. If you invest in a good alarm system, then they can be very effective. Don't talk like guns are the only way of protecting yourself for sure, try spending more time on stopping people getting in rather than looking to shoot someone who can enter easily.

>The police? Fine if that's what you want, and they happen to be
>available, of course they're not responsible if anything happens to

That is a true statement and I agree with you. I guess this point depends on the efficiency of the police in certain peoples area. Again however, there are other ways of protecting yourself other than going straight for a gun. Prevention and protection is the best cure, by which I mean more focus should be spent on stopping someone getting into your house than flooring someone AFTER they are in your house.

I am talking a lot about home protection I know because thats the issue I'm referring to. Other than sports, most people quite simply don't NEED a gun on them all the time, unless you're paranoid that someone is after you. Unless of course, you're an armed robber, now THAT is understandable ;)

>The second amendment was written long after the earth cooled, and
>most of the 20,000 gun laws in this country violate the second
>amendment. If your so determined, as we have pointed out you should
>start by repealing the second amendment.

Screw the constitution. Its ridiculous. Why do people in the US always dictate the constitution, does no one ever put common sense before their so called 'rights'? I'm not trying to start an international slagging match here, I'm just asking a legitimate question. Forget about the right for the moment, just because the right exists, it does not mean you have to cover it with a comb. If a police unit comes to your house with a genuine reason (in their eyes) to revoke your weapons, and you are willing to shoot them just because of an apparent right to do so then one is a potential murder, no matter how decent a person one is. No right is worth killing an innocent doing their job. Anyone who thinks otherwise should get their priorities straight.

>In all the recent incidences, numerous gun laws were broken,
>passing more won't stop them.

No, but trying to stem the free-flow of them could help in the future.

>It's interesting that the anti-gunners keep ignoring the fact that
>in both the most recent serious shootings, the perps were on
>prescription mind altering drugs.

Also note, I'm not an ANTI-gunner. Not at all, I'm debating the state of mind behind the debate of 'guns are ok', 'I'd rather kill than have my guns taken away'. A gun does NOT represent freedom. At all! The only thing a gun represents in the way of freedom is the murder of those that threaten to take away the freedom of carrying a killing tool (and in this day and age that means a legal notice that you are not fit to carry a gun). This is not 100AD (when most US phone lines were apparently installed - j/k), people should focus more on what freedom they have than what they would do if anyone tried to take away their gun. What if? Well I'd ... What if? Well I'd ... What if? Well I'd?

>The second amendment has nothing to do with sport hunting.

No but the issue is guns. Locate the connection.

>We will fight to stop any new violations of the second amendment.

Fair enough. One thing that would lighten my opinion of the NRA is if they were at least willing to compromise instead of getting all defensive. There is a hell of a lot more at stake than the simple right to bear arms. As I mentioned above, I am not against guns when used correctly, I am merely expressing MY opinion on how many people 'opposed to new laws' sound more wacko and care-free 'trigger wild' than a human life is worth.

Someone else said that they WOULD stop officers taking away their guns because THAT would violate THEIR right. That is wacked. Listen, think about it. Why not let the officers take away the guns and then file a lawsuit stating that your rights were violated. That way you don't end up dead (because that is what would happen in a shootout with the police).

There is always two sides to every story and the best side will always prevail in this debate if people would just take a minute to consult their priorities and common sense. Frankly, it disgusts me to hear how so many are willing to open fire and ruin innocent familities all for a silly right that can be flexible. Have so many people lost it that they don't think of the consequences of such potential acts? Hell, its clear now to the rest of the world why so many high school kids can so easily act like serial killers.