should gays arm them selves (US)

[Genersis]

Never happened. In case it was missed I gave an example of a thief who tried to rob a gun store filled with armed people (including a uniformed cop, crazily enough) and also a college shooting where armed students stopped the shooter. And when Charles Whitman (a former marine who used strategy and cover in a shooting at a Texas college in the 60s) opened fired he was cornered before police got there by students shooting back. None of the students shot each other.

Though I'm uncomfortable comparing Israel to the US as the circumstances are so radically different (but then there are huge differences between the US and Switzerland as well...) teachers started carrying guns in response to PLO terrorists shooting up schools and the chaos you imagine never happened there either.

So all in all I'm inclined to say that what you imagine isn't what would happen.

Well good.mile:
I'm not familiar with the cases you mentioned(obviously:redface.

I guess the image i have in my mind could be an unlikely one.
That being the assailant roaming the corridors shooting all who the person crosses paths with.

But i'm still not at all comfortable with people taking firearms into such premises.
Much like bringing firearms into community centres or churches...

[Blue]

This is an old argument, and we can talk until we are blue in the face and we won't change anyone's opinion of gun ownership.

If you are anti gun, you can't understand how carrying a lethal weapon and, knowing I know when and how to use it can possibly give me more peace of mind that not having a gun within 100 miles of me would. There is nothing I can say or offer as an example that would let you understand that.

I can't make you see how I see the responsibilities that come with, owning and carry a gun. You have only my word that I am well aware of how serious and how big those responsibilities are.

All I can do is hope that if you ever find yourself in a situation where a gun in the hands of a skilled, responsible gun owner is the only thing that will save your life, one of us is there for you, with our gun.

[East]

I can't make you see how I see the responsibilities that come with, owning and carry a gun. You have only my word that I am well aware of how serious and how big those responsibilities are.

Heres the thing with this thread and the pro gun people...you all talk about laws and act as if gun owners are magically above reproach and suddenly the most law abiding citizens on the planet..that they are all responsible just because they "know" the law...that they don't break the damn law...and they DO...ALL THE TIME...just like people who drive cars (another lethal weapon) break the law daily by speeding, texting, tailgating, talking on the cell phone...they kill themselves and others.

As a bartender I not only had to deal with thinly veiled threats by macho assholes who had a gun and didn't like being cut off when they were drunk...I also got to hear personal stories about lovers and husbands and wives and kids who had guns pulled on them...drunk assholes who decide to play cowboy....LOTS AND LOTS of personal stories...my lover's Dad routinely pulled a gun on his family when he was drunk...(nice Catholic Family)...yet he would tell you with a straight face all about the responsiblities of gun ownership....he actually sounded alot like the people on this thread defending guns....word for word in some cases.

I get the part about protecting oneself and grudgingly I am not against gun ownership though I dislike guns because I think the possiblity that there may be a gun inside deters home invasions but to begin categorizing gun owners as some kind of saint who just because they own a gun knows better than to break the law...puh-leese. Just like the drivers know better than to break the law...but they do....

[dfiant]

And here is the thing. There is a difference between buying guns and using them legally, and buying them and using them illegally. If you buy a gun legally then turn around to kill someone with it, you're just as bad as the guy who buys a hammer and bludgeons a guy to death with it. People demonize guns because governments want them demonized. that's just how it is.

You have to understand dfiant, you live in a different culture than the citizens of the United States do. You are surrounded by water and share no land borders with any other nation.

Cultural differences.

Sorry, going to come right out and say it...what a crock of shit

Cultural differances my arse.

I have never argued the legality of gun owner ship....all I have expressed my concerns about is the AVAILABILITY of guns, and that my friend is a universal problem, so cultural differences can suck my dick.

Having guns so readily available to ANYONE who wants them (Let's face it that is exactly what the right to bare arms comes down to), anywhere in the world and then propagandist governments (and others) harping on about gun control is like putting out a fire with petrol.

A gun free world is unrealistic, but a world where you and looney's all can buy firearms to 'PROTECT' yourself seems to be a little counte rproductive. If the availablity of firearms was restricted that would begin to remove the need to 'PROTECT' yourself.

It's all common sense, gun ownership isn't.

[Blue]

No, I simply want people to not lump all gun owner together. Just because I own a gun does not mean I am going to break the law with it anymore than owning a car means I will break the law with the car.

I've seen more than my share of the same crap, and it's just that, crap. Immature, macho, irresponsible crap. I'm the first one to call the police if I see a drunk with a gun. Personally, if I could, I'd take the guns form those idiots - all they are doing is making it harder for me, and other like me, to keep our rights to own firearms. Those people don't fit my definition of responsible gun owners.

As for the other horror stories, yes accident can happen, that's how kids end up shooting themselves or another child in most cases where that has happened. Foe me, part of owning guns is insuring that if they are not in my immediate possession, they are locked one of my two gun safes. (The large one where all but my carry sidearm are kept and or the small one in my bedroom, where my sidearm goes when I'm in bed.) And again, I am of the opinion that anyone keeping a gun in a closet , drawer, shoe box, or any other unlocked location besides in their immediate possession is irresponsible.

[East]

There is the OTHER elephant in the room that I tried to avoid but since at least one poster on here decided to evoke the "liberal media" to prove a point...let me remind people on a GAY BOARD the very much ANTI GAY crap that comes from the NRA....

Dropping Law Firm Over DOMA Decision More Evidence Of NRA's Anti-Gay Bias
May 06, 2011 4:26 pm ET by Media Matters Action Network


The National Rifle Association (NRA) dropped the law firm King & Spalding shortly after the firm announced their decision to not defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on behalf of the U.S. House of Representatives. King & Spalding had previously represented the NRA on important cases, including the Supreme Court decision McDonald v. Chicago.

King & Spalding announced late last month that they would not defend DOMA after pressure from groups suggesting the firm's work on DOMA would be in violation of their own non-discrimination policies.

Conservatives were quick to punish King & Spalding, with Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli promptly terminating his office's relationship with the firm.

What does DOMA or any LGBT issue have to do with guns? Nothing, but given that the NRA's board is packed with conservatives with long histories of being stridently anti-gay, this shouldn't come as a surprise.
Here are some lowlights from NRA board members on LGBT equality:

NRA board member Ted Nugent recently took to the Washington Times to complain about the NBA fining star player Kobe Bryant for using an anti-gay slur. From Nugent's column:

If the NBA had any true gay convictions, the NBA should host a Homosexual Night. During halftime, the homosexuals could come down on the court, hold hands and prance around the court to music by the Village People. The NBA could then give each homosexual a pink basketball as a symbol of solidarity [....]

Homosexuals are a protected class in America. If you think what happened to Mr. Bryant was a travesty, just wait until you see what homosexuals in the military do when they claim they have been mistreated because of their sexual orientation.

NRA board member Oliver North suggested that repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) would lead to members of NAMBLA, a group of pedophiles, being accepted into the military. North's comments, as documented by Think Progress:

Stunning assault on the all-volunteer military, the very best in the world. Barack Obama now intents to treat them like lab rats in a radical social experiment, and it can be very, very detrimental. ... In other words, this isn't about rights. This isn't about fairness. It's all about national security. And apparently, Mr. Obama has forgotten it. ... Now, here's what's next. NAMBLA [North American Man/Boy Love Association] members, same-sex marriages. Are chaplains in the U.S. military going to be required to perform those kinds of rituals? Do they get government housing?

NRA board member Cleta Mitchell pressured the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) to kick out the gay conservative group GOProud. According to other board members, she was "stridently opposed to allowing the gay group to participate," and "led the charge to kick them out of the event."

NRA board member Wayne Anthony Ross referred to gays as "degenerates" in a letter to the Alaska Bar Association. Ross also stated that a bill that sought to protect the civil rights of gays and lesbians would actually "give extra rights to a group whose lifestyle was a crime only a few years ago, and whose beliefs are certainly immoral in the eyes of anyone with some semblance of intelligence and moral character."

In 2002, a panel at the NRA's annual convention reportedly featured a series of anti-gay comments. NRA board member Susan Howard moderated and was joined by fellow board member Grover Norquist. According to an account by PlanetOut featured in Pink Pistols' newsletter:

American Spectator columnist Grover Norquist said liberals "don't want [men] to date girls" and gun owners don't get as much media coverage because "we don't have annual parades so that everyone can appreciate that gun ownership is an alternative lifestyle," the Web site reported.

NRA board member Matt Blunt lists among his accomplishments as Missouri governor:

Upholding Traditional Marriage. The Governor stood with the overwhelming majority of Missouri voters in his support for protecting traditional marriage from activist liberal judges. In August 2004, Blunt support[ed] Missouri's constitutional definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman.

NRA board member Larry Craig co-sponsored the Marriage Protection Amendment, which would have amended the Constitution to prohibit gay marriage. (Craig's political career ended after he was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's bathroom.)

NRA board member Dan Boren co-sponsored legislation to prevent the District of Columbia from performing same-sex marriages.

NRA incoming President David Keene actively opposed repealing DADT. Keene, who was the chairman of the group that puts on CPAC, broke with fellow NRA board member Cleta Mitchell over allowing GOProud to attend CPAC, but the group was not allowed to speak at the event. Keene also opposes gay marriage and declared the issue "not open to debate."

Former NRA President Charlton Heston gave a controversial speech to the Free Congress Foundation that was perceived as offensive by civil rights leaders of many backgrounds. Joan M. Garry, then executive director of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said of the speech:

We find portions of Mr. Heston's very carefully-worded remarks to be both offensive and misleading. Mr. Heston's sentiments concerning lesbians and gay men no matter how carefully veiled are nonetheless transparent. Such disparaging remarks serve as fuel for those who fear difference and promote intolerance.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I suspect most of the people who own guns even if they are gay also vote for people who intend to discriminate against ME and all other gay people. The NRA crowd as a whole (of course there are exceptions) are certainly not my friends because they make it clear again and again it is SO MUCH MORE than guns they care about.

[TommyinKY]

Just because some gun owners are conservative hate mongers doesn't mean you should paint all gun owners as conservative hate mongers. It's the same with those who misuse firearms do not reflect all gun owners. It's the same as any other segment of the population. There are stereotypes which people have set in their minds and it's hard to see past them to see real people rather than a cliche.

I think I gave this example in another post asking about firearms ownership.

In Heller vs. D.C. (the supreme court decision that verified an individual right to bare arms) one of the original plaintiffs was Tom G. Palmer a gay man who survived an encounter with a group of youth intent on doing severe harm to both him and his partner. The threatened to kill them and "no one would find the bodies" After fleeing from then he pulled a pistol from his backpack and the group of men ran away.

The whole reason he decided to join the law suit was because D.C. didn't allow a person to carry a weapon or have one in a serviceable state should they need it for defense in their home. It was against the law for firearms dealers from open a shop within 300 feet of a residence, school, playground, public library or place of worship which kept them out of the city till June 2011 when the first one opened. It was also illegal for a citizen to have a firearm shipped to DC from an outside state, even Virginia, and it was illegal to take a firearm into the District personally. These laws effectively kept firearms out of the hands of its population except a few that where already legally there before 1979 when these laws where past.

Washington D.C. has the countries strictest gun laws even now and they where even more strict in 2008 when Heller was decided. Since then they have been forced to change their policies to allow more access to firearms and in a configuration that allows for their use. As a result DC has become safer. They still have no concealed weapon permits outside of those in government positions.

Now for the statistics.

in 2007 the population of DC was 588,292 the number of murders were 181 that's 1 in 3250 persons.

in 2008 the population of DC was 591,833 the number of murders were 186 that's 1 in 3181 persons.

June 26 the Heller decision came down and the district began the to make slight alterations to its gun laws.

in 2009 the population of DC was 599,657 the number of murders were 144 that's 1 in 4164 persons.

in 2010 the population of DC was 601,723 the number of murders were 132 that's 1 in 4558 persons. That's a 30% drop in murders since 2008.

These numbers come from the FBI Unified Crime Reports available at: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr

The 2011 UCR is still in production and hopefully they will show the same results.

This was only a small change in the level of violence after the Heller decision however DC only made small changes to their gun laws allowing people to have a gun in the home that was ready for use rather than fully disassembled.

However these are only statistics from the FBI take them how you will.

[dfiant]

None of that changes FACTS that 36 were killed in Port Aurthur in 1996, the 5th worst recorded in history, 76? Killed in Norway, in countries that have tight gun laws but guns were smuggled into the country from a country were you can freely buy guns. Weak gun laws affect the world, that the other 5 and a half billion people other than Americans.

Statics can be skewed to suit anyone's argument for or against, for example did gun owner ship in DC increase or decrease proportionately? And hundreds of other questions that can skew statistics.


Statistics hide facts hence statistics tend to be little more use other than for propaganda.

[East]

Statics can be skewed to suit anyone's argument for or against, for example did gun owner ship in DC increase or decrease proportionately? And hundreds of other questions that can skew statistics.

Very True...I learned this is Debate 101 in HS.

I could use the statistics of my own home town (San Jose CA) to "prove" just about anything I want. As we are the 10th largest city in the USA....on many occasions we have been named the safest big city in the USA...and check out the cities that are NOT safe...many have the gun toting folks...
Here are the current 10 safest big cities in the US

1 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI
2 Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI
3 Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA
4 Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH
4 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA
6 Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA
7 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA
8 New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA
9 Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN
10 Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH

Alot of "scary" librul cities and towns...alot of blue states....hmmm...wonder what that "proves"?

[East]

Just because some gun owners are conservative hate mongers doesn't mean you should paint all gun owners as conservative hate mongers.

I don't...but I do know that alot of the ones who aren't hateful have no problem supporting the ones who are.

Personally I have more respect for the hateul ones. At least you know where they stand. The worst for me is when gay people vote for people they KNOW are going to discriminate against gay people and even worse than that...make excuses for them.