| Hell, I know people here on tBlog who shouldn't own a gun... |
![]() Blog For Free! Archives Home 2009 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2008 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2007 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2006 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2005 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2004 December 2004 November tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog |
posted by: Ladyg (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:43 am) I agree, it's gotten to where I hate to read the paper or watch the news. posted by: fractalmom (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:44 am) somehow though, .... (she's thinking) in Mexico, where owning a gun is totally illegal for any reason, where using a gun in a crime automatically means almost life in prison, they still have a higher crime rate, they still have gun violence, they still have semi and automatic weapons. although i don't really want to be portrayed as a gun toting redneck, i have always believed that, as in the 'old west' where just about everyone went armed... if everyone WAS armed, then it would certainly stop me from drawing a weapon, knowing that if/when I did, there was a certainty that the other person would also draw a weapon, and might just be a little faster, and have a little more in the reflex department than this old woman. other countries have showed us that outlawing guns doesn't work. i don't have a solution, or i would be the prime dictator LOL. but, it does make ya wonder. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:56 am) Reply to: fractalmom Um, the only reason so many Mexicans have guns is that they get them so easily in the U.S. and tote them back. That's a fact. Almost every single drug related murder (where a gun has been used) that's taken place there in the last five years has been committed with a gun obtained in the U.S. (Look it up.) Also, as for the assertion that other countries where gun ownership is more regulated or outlawed altogether not having lower violent crimes rates? Well, I'm afraid you haven't really looked into it. The stats are overwhelming. posted by: alaskawildflowers (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:57 am) There is a little saying, I don't know who started it, but it goes: "if you want peace, work for justice...." As you said, the root cause is NOT guns, it's the people USING the guns. What can each and every one of us do to help relieve another's pain, so that they are soothed, instead of tortured? posted by: fractalmom (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:58 am) Reply to: surrogate yeah, they are probably more civilized than we are. I still prefer being an American, and don't feel like apologizing all over Europe for being one though. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (10:24 am) Reply to: fractalmom That was a weird thing to say. Not even sure what you mean. posted by: barnabus1 (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (10:47 am) When the government takes away our guns, see how many million peopke die because of it...Only once in history has that not happened...and that only means...yet!! posted by: OldSchool (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (10:52 am) Love Chris Rock. To me, he is one of the funniest people alive. posted by: bawdy (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (1:50 pm) The 2nd amendment was written before the invention of auto and semi-automatic weapons, and the intent was for the purpose of defending the country. Your military is perfectly capable of that today without the aid of a bunch of beer bellied yahoos. And the people who wrote that amendment thought it was fine and dandy to own slaves. Attitudes change, and the amendments weren't written in stone. I think the types of guns people are entitled to own should be limited, and the bullets should bear some sort of signature to identify the person who purchased them. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (2:20 pm) Reply to: bawdy Yeah, but bawdy, you're sane. A lot of my fellow countrymen and women are just nuts. They equate loving our country with blind obedience to those things they've been told makes a "gud Amer-e-cun" -instead of using the brains they've been given. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (2:33 pm) Reply to: barnabus1 Tell me, do you just make stuff up? Surely you know that what you wrote here is pure bullshit, don't you? I'll assume you were kidding. posted by: PastorDave (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (4:33 pm) I do not own a gun. I fear guns. I fear what I might do with a gun, inadvertently, or perhaps motivated with too much adrenaline or fright. I fear what might happen accidentally should a child find my gun. However, my aversion to being in the proximity of a gun could be overruled by some situation. There could be a dangerous neighbor. Or someone on t-Blog could decide that harming me was a good idea! And you know what? If I were determined to own a gun, I guarantee you I could get my hands on one, no matter the "official" law of the land. Gun laws will not deter criminals, especially anyone hell-bent on shooting someone. I think this idea of forbidding gun ownership through the heavy-had of the law is symptomatic of this liberal do-good mentality that "I'm smart. Therefore I know better than you what you need. Trust me." Well, I don't trust you. Your good intention can bring me harm. Instead of trusting you, I want you to leave me alone. Well, you can try to convince me of the danger of gun ownership. You may or may not convince me. But don't force me through the heavy hand of the law. posted by: PooPotPie (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (5:36 pm) All I have to say is guns don't kill people kill people. How many people die in car crashes due to neglegence or being irrecsponsible? Should we revoke driver licenses as well? I mean I could get run over by some road rages ass. We can start with the people that own really fast sports cars and then work out way down to the golf carts. Ridiculos right? So would be taking away my right to bear arms. By the way, I was there when the TWC went down. I watched the first plane hit the tower. If something like that were to happen on land and we didn't have the right to bear arms, we might as well just give this wonderful country up. This all about money, any time you have a question put a dollar sign behind it. Take the money out of the equation and I bet Obama would find something else better to do with his time. No hard feelings I hope, still love to read your posts. ;-) posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (6:06 pm) Reply to: PooPotPie I'm glad you like my posts, but your comment doesn't really make sense. In your comments, there seems to be about five unrelated thoughts combined in an attempt to sound reasonable, but really, it's just five, or so, unrelated thoughts. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (6:09 pm) Reply to: PastorDave Of course you know that doesn't make sense, right? Of COURSE you can find a gun here if you want one, but it's not the case in countries where, because they're NOT rural agronomies any longer, they've decided for the most part to eliminate them from society. Bawdy's ideas are winners. posted by: Kram1000 (reply) post date: 04.05.09 (9:24 pm) A good post Surogate. But I think your fighting a loosing battle. I would feel safer taking on a nutter with my bare hands than running from his bullet in my back A gun doesn't make you tough. But the poor demented people that use them think they do. I have nationalistic pride in my country just as you do in yours. But just because we don't carry guns doesn't mean were going to let you take it of us. Just come and try and see what happens! LOL Here are some stats for your fire. Twelve days after 35 people were shot dead by a single gunman in Tasmania, Australia's state and federal governments agreed to enact wide-ranging new gun control laws to curb firearm-related death and injury. Between July 1996 and August 1998, the new restrictions were brought into force. Since that time, key indicators for gun-related death and crime have shown encouraging results. Firearm-Related Homicide "There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998." -- Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999. Australian Institute of Criminology. Canberra, Oct 1999 This report shows that as gun ownership has been progressively restricted since 1915, Australia's firearm homicide rate per 100,000 population has declined to almost half its 85-year average. Homicide by Any Method The overall rate of homicide in Australia has also dropped to its lowest point since 1989 (National Homicide Monitoring Program, 1997-98 data). It remains one-fourth the homicide rate in the USA. The Institute of Criminology report Australian Crime - Facts and Figures 1999 includes 1998 homicide data showing "a 9% decrease from the rate in 1997." This is the period in which most of the country's new gun laws came into force posted by: barnabus1 (reply) post date: 04.06.09 (9:55 am) Reply to: surrogate Australia is the only Country that took away all the guns from the honest law abiding citizens, and haven't as yet killed off a few million...Can't say that about other countries!!Germany, Russia China Uganda, Turkey, Guatemala etc... posted by: bawdy (reply) post date: 04.06.09 (1:32 pm) Reply to: surrogate Incidents like this do occur in Canada too, although not nearly as often as in the U.S. posted by: fractalmom (reply) post date: 04.06.09 (7:34 pm) you know, I'm not exactly sure what I meant either. Our country, of which I am very proud was founded by very smart, and independent people. Those who valued self control over government control. I think it is the basis under which our entire society was founded. Less government, more personal responsibility. I am a proponent of prisons. I do think they should be humane, but only just. Criminals do not deserve to be treated other than humanely, certainly not well. I see no problem with a limited diet, lock up and life in prison. I don't even have a problem with the death penalty for horrendous crimes against the goverment, or children, or the helpless, or mass murderers. I also believe in my right to bear arms. Doesn't mean I choose to exercise that right. I also believe in the right to free speech, but there are many times I choose quiet instead. I don't want my government to tell me what I can, or cannot own. I do not want my government to tell me how to raise my children. I do not want a government to tell my doctors how to treat my illnesses. I want to pay taxes for the infrastructure such as fire departments, city councils, police protection, libraries, etc. I do not want the number of houses I own limited. I do not want the number of children I have limited. I do not want the types of or number of guns I own limited. I want left alone by my government, except to make and enforce those laws which are minimally necessary for the common good. I also do not want a representative of my country going around apologizing for who and what we are as a nation. I want someone who is proud of being American, and not afraid to stand up to other world powers. But then, not too many people are at all interested in what I want, so there ya have it. posted by: Bonegnawer (reply) post date: 04.07.09 (5:57 am) Hmm. I do not think that allowing anybody to be armed would help much in such situations. Somebody that is going to empty his magazine in the faces of his associates is probably not very fazed by the thought he could be hurt. They tend emphasize their point by putting a bullet through own head anyway. The psychopats who plan would adjust they targets accordingly, going for the unarmed to maximize the bodycount, or wherever the cold clockwork in their heads leads. Lastly, do i have to much imagination to think that bad things start happen when there is stupefying confusion, tangible fear and that awfull metalic smell of blood in the air? Who do i shoot ?! Which one is the madman with the gun and crazed look in eyes !?!! is it surrogate, with the Christ's phone# on his cell, or could be it the preachy pastor ??! he is such a quiet guy... As personal anecdotes go, my experiences in the army suggest that scared people with too much adrenaline in system shoot first and than start asking questions. Pulling all teeths from dog, because it bites when kicked, will surely lead to less dog bites. Some fear that it also will lead to more dog kicking. neither will lead to more love. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.07.09 (6:55 am) Reply to: barnabus1 Better keep researching there Barnabus. I can think of a dozen more off the top of my head. Ever heard of Canada? England? -oh... figure it out for yourself. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.07.09 (6:56 am) Reply to: Bonegnawer Well thought out and VERY well put. Thanks. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.07.09 (6:59 am) Reply to: Kram1000 Thanks Kram. -And thanks for the Stats. Like you say, it won't matter to those who are convinced that just because the country changes doesn't mean we should adapt to the changed situation. posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.07.09 (7:21 am) Reply to: fractalmom Less government. I'm all for it. It's a nice concept, especially for an infant country with just a few souls living in every square hundred miles. Having said that, I too think we should all be self-reliant. Are you? I'm not. Personally I've never met anyone who is. So, if we are mature enough to realize that it's a fantasy, shouldn't we address the realities we have to deal with in this real world? When the second amendment was written, how many people were living in this country? How many bullets could someone reasonably fire within, say, ten seconds? Look I could lay out fifty reasons why change merits change. Always has, always will. And I could prove to you that the founding fathers WANTED us to be able to adapt the constitution to changing conditions; hell; expected us to. But that won't matter. Sad. But I know there's no changing the minds of people who believe that what they learned when they were young were ULTIMATE truths, as opposed to an idea of A single truth. Sometime, read the correspondences between Jefferson and Adams that took place for MANY years after they were both out of power. Fascinating stuff. These were not men who thought they had all the answers. These were men who knew they were dealing with the present, and praying that they'd set up a reasonably good and FLEXIBLE framework, for the future. posted by: Bonegnawer (reply) post date: 04.12.09 (4:22 am) maybe next in the series you should write on "people who should own a gun" ? gotta know both sides of issue ;) posted by: surrogate (reply) post date: 04.12.09 (7:47 am) Reply to: Bonegnawer Good Idea. I'll think about that. posted by: inkspector (reply) post date: 04.16.09 (6:12 am) I think all the TV shows or movies with guns (and count how many there are! AKA "entertainment") encourages some people to get one anyway they know how. |
Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
|