Is kerry pro-gun?

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: tec699
Suspossedly we live in a civilized society? Why do we need guns? We don't and the reasoning behind it is outdated:

1) To protect your family against the US government

-Yea sure. You and a bunch of your hillbilly friends are going to stop the US government? It isn?t going to happen. Before you can put your gun on a US military personal your family members are already shot and dead,

Ruby Ridge


2) To protect yourself against criminals

-The criminal almost always has the upper hand when committing a crime. How are you going to predict when a criminal is going to rob your family? You can't. Also, your gun is more likely to be stolen by a criminal if your house is burglarized. Finally, I don't have the stats but there are people that have been mistakenly shot by family members who thought that they were criminals.


3) To hunt for food and to lessen the population of deer.

-Why does anyone hunt anymore? I go to my local supermarket if I'm hungry! If the deer population is really that bad then the US government should deal with the situation.

Just my opinion guys.

Its funny, you site ruby ridge as an argument against guns while I see it as an argument in favor of guns.

 

[viivo]

Is Kerry pro-gun?

It would appear so.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: Painman

Originally posted by: judasmachine
but if you do bear arms just be careful what you say, you could be the next terrorist.

Originally posted by: Ari Fleischer
Be careful what you say, be careful what you do.

:| :|

ugh.... i didn't know how close to the truth i was... god i want to throw up.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: tec699
Suspossedly we live in a civilized society? Why do we need guns? We don't and the reasoning behind it is outdated:

1) To protect your family against the US government

-Yea sure. You and a bunch of your hillbilly friends are going to stop the US government? It isn?t going to happen. Before you can put your gun on a US military personal your family members are already shot and dead,

Ruby Ridge


2) To protect yourself against criminals

-The criminal almost always has the upper hand when committing a crime. How are you going to predict when a criminal is going to rob your family? You can't. Also, your gun is more likely to be stolen by a criminal if your house is burglarized. Finally, I don't have the stats but there are people that have been mistakenly shot by family members who thought that they were criminals.


3) To hunt for food and to lessen the population of deer.

-Why does anyone hunt anymore? I go to my local supermarket if I'm hungry! If the deer population is really that bad then the US government should deal with the situation.

Just my opinion guys.

Why do people like you insist that society/civilization will keep humming along in this direction forever? If history teaches us one thing it is that everything changes. The world is naturally unpredictable. If anything caused a prolonged breakdown is essential civil services this nation would freak, as would most modern nations.

An armed populace is a hard thing to bring to submission of an oppressive government even with military support. 10-20 million armed men and women would likely present a problem.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: tec699
Suspossedly we live in a civilized society? Why do we need guns? We don't and the reasoning behind it is outdated:

1) To protect your family against the US government

-Yea sure. You and a bunch of your hillbilly friends are going to stop the US government? It isn?t going to happen. Before you can put your gun on a US military personal your family members are already shot and dead,

Ruby Ridge

You remember how much trouble the USMC had with Fallujah? Sure, the US government is going to own you if they have unrestricted ROE. But that's not likely. Given equal weapons and better training (the training of US veterans > Iraqi armed forces veterans), never mind a much bigger population (even assuming all of the US military were brought back home), you really think the US government is going to win without huge casualties OR resorting to leveling cities (which is counterproductive, especially in this case)?

2) To protect yourself against criminals
-The criminal almost always has the upper hand when committing a crime. How are you going to predict when a criminal is going to rob your family? You can't. Also, your gun is more likely to be stolen by a criminal if your house is burglarized. Finally, I don't have the stats but there are people that have been mistakenly shot by family members who thought that they were criminals.

There are situations where you can't do much to effectively resist, armed or not. There are situations where you can easily win, armed or not. However, being armed is almost always to your advantage.

3) To hunt for food and to lessen the population of deer.

-Why does anyone hunt anymore? I go to my local supermarket if I'm hungry! If the deer population is really that bad then the US government should deal with the situation.
Just my opinion guys.

Spoken like a man who has never had venison tenderloin. Venison >>>>> beef.

Hiring a professional to cull a deer herd is about $300/deer. Doing what the tree hugging hippies want to see done instead, ie sterilize the deer (usually it is not permanent, but only works for a season or two) is about $600/deer. Letting hunters cull the herd is a revenue maker. Considering that hunters took well over 150,000 deer in my state alone last year, and that the last report I saw by my state's DNR said the deer population is growing exponentially, lets say for my state you need to kill 250,000 deer per year to get a stable population at current levels (and since we are overpopulated in many areas, I'm underestimating by quite a bit). So, 250,000*$300=$75,000,000. And that is just for Ohio, and assuming you dont go the tree-hugger way and sterilize them, which would be many times more expensive, because it costs more per animal, and you have to do it more every year or two to the same animal to get the same effect. Now, lets subtract the money made off of deer tags, which IIRC are $20/ea. And 500,000+ of them get sold in my state per year. So that's an additional $10,000,000 to tack onto the cost of outlawing hunting while controlling the deer population. Plus, you've have to account for the revenue made off all hunting licenses in general; however I lack the figures to draw up how much that would ost in lost revenue.

 

[misle]

Here's another crime-rate/gun story from the BBC.

Gun crime has risen by 35% in a year, new Home Office figures show.

 

[phantom309]

Originally posted by: renierh

Originally posted by: misle
The only reason guns scare you is because you have been programmed by your TV and News to fear guns and think they are evil.

guns are made to kill or wound either animals or people. i can imagine they are fun for some people, but i fail to see how they can be used for anything positive.

This statement is so naive I'm flat-out at a loss for a reply.

 

[viivo]

Originally posted by: phantom309

Originally posted by: renierh

Originally posted by: misle
The only reason guns scare you is because you have been programmed by your TV and News to fear guns and think they are evil.

guns are made to kill or wound either animals or people. i can imagine they are fun for some people, but i fail to see how they can be used for anything positive.

This statement is so naive I'm flat-out at a loss for a reply.

A little devil's advocate: What positive things can guns be used for?

 

[phantom309]

Originally posted by: viivo

Originally posted by: phantom309

Originally posted by: renierh

Originally posted by: misle
The only reason guns scare you is because you have been programmed by your TV and News to fear guns and think they are evil.

guns are made to kill or wound either animals or people. i can imagine they are fun for some people, but i fail to see how they can be used for anything positive.

This statement is so naive I'm flat-out at a loss for a reply.

A little devil's advocate: What positive things can guns be used for?

When you have a family to protect, you'll understand.

 

[wpollack]

I have a couple comments to make on these issues.

1. Guns can be used in a positive way. I shoot skeet all the time, its a game, a fun sport. Why should my sport be taken away because everyone things guns only kill.

2. Its a fact that doctors every year kills 100,000's more pateints accidently then guns.

3. So what if the governement takes away all the guns from americans. Do you think that the criminals would not have theres. You can count on the fact that if guns are taken away from the innocent that more pople will be murdered. Do you think that a criminal would be more willing to rob some one and kill them if they knew that they were the only ones with the guns? I know I would.

Also in Austrailia the government did take the guns away from the general public and in the first year gun crimes increased something like 30%.

And on the subject of what is Kerry's stance. Who really knows. He will probly jump fence at least 60 more times before the election. I would hope that every person that is going to vote realizes that they are not just voting for a person they are voting for 1 person plus all of his staff. Do you really think John Kerry is going to bring in good staff? I doubt it.

I will really be afraid to live in america if Kerry is elected. He already promised that if he were elected he would pull almost all of our troops out of the middle east. I guess maybe he is pro terrosims because he sure is anti-american and everything that america believes in.

 

[JHutch]

Originally posted by: K1052
So do you carry a baseball bat around with you everywhere you go?

You would have to be a real moron to shoot yourself while cleaning a firearm. The first rule of gun safety is that the weapon is always loaded, even if you are sure it isn't.

They make pistol safes that work on finger movements that can be open in two seconds. Personally, I have a pistol in my nightstand that with a loaded mag since I do not have any children to worry about.

Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

No, I don't carry a baseball bat around, but in a house full of kids, I'm more like to have something close at hand like a baseball bat than happen to be standing beside the gun cabinet.

And the shooting myself in the foot was a joke. I didn't really mean people make a common habit of doing so. I don't offer that as a legitimate reason for gun control.

My point is simple. If someone breaks into your house, the only way you'd have much chance of getting to your gun in time to protect yourself from an armed criminal is if you slept with it under your pillow or in the drawer of your nightstand. Both of which, BTW, I consider extremely stupid and dangerous. And if you've ever seen a typical 4 year old operate, you'd know how incredibly stupid having a gun ANYWHERE but a locked gun cabinet is.

...

Now, for the anti-gun nuts further down... Guns for hunting is not only fine, it's necessary. If we (humans) have removed the natural predatory chain (mostly wolves in my part of the world), then it is our responsibility to act as the predator to keep the populations in check. Hunters, who ARE licensed, ARE trained and ARE responsible to the laws of the land, act as that predator.

However, the first gun-nut that tells me he needs something more than a shotgun or (non-automatic) rifle for hunting? That nut gets slapped as hard as the tree hugging moron that wants to provide birth control for deer.

*rolls eyes* Birth control for deer. Sure, right after we provide mandatory birth control for all teen-agers and everyone below a 80 IQ! *rolls eyes*

JHutch

 

[JHutch]

Originally posted by: wpollack
I will really be afraid to live in america if Kerry is elected. He already promised that if he were elected he would pull almost all of our troops out of the middle east. I guess maybe he is pro terrosims because he sure is anti-american and everything that america believes in.

Huh? Since when is not wanting to send our troops around the world to die in foreign lands un-american? Did I miss that memo?

(Besides, Kerry has said, very clearly, that he isn't pulling troops out until things are stable in Iraq, which means we'll have troops over there until my 4 year old son is old enough to join the military.)

JHutch

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: JHutch

Originally posted by: K1052
So do you carry a baseball bat around with you everywhere you go?

You would have to be a real moron to shoot yourself while cleaning a firearm. The first rule of gun safety is that the weapon is always loaded, even if you are sure it isn't.

They make pistol safes that work on finger movements that can be open in two seconds. Personally, I have a pistol in my nightstand that with a loaded mag since I do not have any children to worry about.

Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

My point is simple. If someone breaks into your house, the only way you'd have much chance of getting to your gun in time to protect yourself from an armed criminal is if you slept with it under your pillow or in the drawer of your nightstand. Both of which, BTW, I consider extremely stupid and dangerous. And if you've ever seen a typical 4 year old operate, you'd know how incredibly stupid having a gun ANYWHERE but a locked gun cabinet is.

JHutch

That's totally false. They now have small gun safes that you can install in a wall, which open instantly when you enter a code. So you could have one of those installed in any room in your house, including the bedroom, with a loaded pistol inside. Kids can't open it, but you can at any moment.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: JHutch

Originally posted by: K1052
So do you carry a baseball bat around with you everywhere you go?

You would have to be a real moron to shoot yourself while cleaning a firearm. The first rule of gun safety is that the weapon is always loaded, even if you are sure it isn't.

They make pistol safes that work on finger movements that can be open in two seconds. Personally, I have a pistol in my nightstand that with a loaded mag since I do not have any children to worry about.

Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

No, I don't carry a baseball bat around, but in a house full of kids, I'm more like to have something close at hand like a baseball bat than happen to be standing beside the gun cabinet.

And the shooting myself in the foot was a joke. I didn't really mean people make a common habit of doing so. I don't offer that as a legitimate reason for gun control.

My point is simple. If someone breaks into your house, the only way you'd have much chance of getting to your gun in time to protect yourself from an armed criminal is if you slept with it under your pillow or in the drawer of your nightstand. Both of which, BTW, I consider extremely stupid and dangerous. And if you've ever seen a typical 4 year old operate, you'd know how incredibly stupid having a gun ANYWHERE but a locked gun cabinet is.

...

Now, for the anti-gun nuts further down... Guns for hunting is not only fine, it's necessary. If we (humans) have removed the natural predatory chain (mostly wolves in my part of the world), then it is our responsibility to act as the predator to keep the populations in check. Hunters, who ARE licensed, ARE trained and ARE responsible to the laws of the land, act as that predator.

However, the first gun-nut that tells me he needs something more than a shotgun or (non-automatic) rifle for hunting? That nut gets slapped as hard as the tree hugging moron that wants to provide birth control for deer.

*rolls eyes* Birth control for deer. Sure, right after we provide mandatory birth control for all teen-agers and everyone below a 80 IQ! *rolls eyes*

JHutch

Text

 

[Red Dawn]

With members like Michael Moore and Moses (Chucky Heston) the NRA is a litte to extreme for me

 

[JHutch]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
That's totally false. They now have small gun safes that you can install in a wall, which open instantly when you enter a code. So you could have one of those installed in any room in your house, including the bedroom, with a loaded pistol inside. Kids can't open it, but you can at any moment.

Ok, do you have one of those installed in every room of your house? No? Then you better hope that nice criminal cooperates enough to wait until you're standing beside your safe before breaking in.

Look, guns are great tools ... for hunting, sport, even, in responsible hands, for fun (I'm thinking target shooting). They are not great tools for defense. With guns, the guy that points first (provided he doesn't miss), wins the fight. The chances of *you* pointing a gun before the criminal... very small.

JHutch

PS I do like those gun vaults. Mounted inside a wall, I think they would be great. I've never liked the big, locked gun case look, so hiding it from view would be more aesthetically pleasing for me.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: JHutch

Originally posted by: Dissipate
That's totally false. They now have small gun safes that you can install in a wall, which open instantly when you enter a code. So you could have one of those installed in any room in your house, including the bedroom, with a loaded pistol inside. Kids can't open it, but you can at any moment.

Ok, do you have one of those installed in every room of your house? No? Then you better hope that nice criminal cooperates enough to wait until you're standing beside your safe before breaking in.

Look, guns are great tools ... for hunting, sport, even, in responsible hands, for fun (I'm thinking target shooting). They are not great tools for defense. With guns, the guy that points first (provided he doesn't miss), wins the fight. The chances of *you* pointing a gun before the criminal... very small.

JHutch

First of all, in about 90% of cases involving a citizen using a gun as defense no shots are ever fired. But you are mistaken if you think that it is *impossible* to defend your home with a gun. There are numerous courses you can take that train you in both combat pistol shooting and home defense.

In most cases this training will give you the upper hand against some dumb crook/gangster anyday.

 

[JHutch]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
First of all, in about 90% of cases involving a citizen using a gun as defense no shots are ever fired. But you are mistaken if you think that it is *impossible* to defend your home with a gun. There are numerous courses you can take that train you in both combat pistol shooting and home defense.

In most cases this training will give you the upper hand against some dumb crook/gangster anyday.

I can agree that a gun will help you in a situation where the criminal is NOT armed with a gun and no shots are likely to be fired. But that wasn't the original argument. The original argument was that if I, as a law abiding citizen, didn't have a gun, I'd be at the mercy of the criminal who DID have a gun.

JHutch

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: JHutch

Originally posted by: Dissipate
First of all, in about 90% of cases involving a citizen using a gun as defense no shots are ever fired. But you are mistaken if you think that it is *impossible* to defend your home with a gun. There are numerous courses you can take that train you in both combat pistol shooting and home defense.

In most cases this training will give you the upper hand against some dumb crook/gangster anyday.

I can agree that a gun will help you in a situation where the criminal is NOT armed with a gun and no shots are likely to be fired. But that wasn't the original argument. The original argument was that if I, as a law abiding citizen, didn't have a gun, I'd be at the mercy of the criminal who DID have a gun.

JHutch

Uh, and you are actually trying to argue that, that is not the case?? Yeah, and I suppose bringing a knife to a gun fight is a wise idea as well. :disgust:

 

[0roo0roo]

2. Its a fact that doctors every year kills 100,000's more pateints accidently then guns.

gee, can you think of a reason why this arguement is a bit disengenous?

 

[wpollack]

Huh? Since when is not wanting to send our troops around the world to die in foreign lands un-american? Did I miss that memo?

(Besides, Kerry has said, very clearly, that he isn't pulling troops out until things are stable in Iraq, which means we'll have troops over there until my 4 year old son is old enough to join the military.)

JHutch

First of all, I don't like when troops die anymore then any other american, but they are fighting for freedom. Freedom which is needed very badly in that part of the world. Considering the fact that 99% or terrorists come form those countries I do think that the troops should stay there and fight. Maybe if we can free that area and teach people the correct way of life through freedom then there will be less terrorism. I don't know about you, but I don't particualry want to be sitting at work and have a plane come through the window. Keep the fight away from home and keep the troops there to fight it.

And Kerry def. did not say that his plan was to leave the troops there until there was piece. He said that when he is elected he will immediately bring troops home.

Bring them home, but bring them home when they are done creating peace. And I am sure they will be over there until your sons, sons able to join the militray and even later, but thats what it takes to get the job done then thats what america has to do.

 

[wpollack]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

2. Its a fact that doctors every year kills 100,000's more pateints accidently then guns.

gee, can you think of a reason why this arguement is a bit disengenous?

I don't see why this topic is not valid. This statistic is very real and has a point. I am not talking about deaths that occur by Medical doctors I am talking about ACCIDENTAL deaths that occur by doctors, through wrong medication etc. So why not ban doctors. Doctors help us survive just like guns do, but we don't ban them!

 

[Vic]

The anti-gun argument is that of a naive idiot.

First, the anti-gunner thinks that banning guns will stop gun crime. WRONG. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Since banning guns, the crime rate per capita in England, Australia, and Finland has soared higher than the United States.

Second, the anti-gunner thinks that government can be trusted with the absolute power of controlling a population that can't defend itself against said government. The first thing Hitler did when he took power was outlaw guns. Within 12 years of doing that, he had killed more than 6 million Jews and more than 5 million other "undesirables". An armed populace could have stopped that tragedy, if only through the sheer numbers of the population.

Be clear about your position and quit lying, anti-gunners. You want to leave the law-abiding population undefended to criminals so that crime will increase and you want a government that could turn tyrannical so that it could murder portions of its defenseless population at will. THAT IS WHAT YOU STAND FOR.

Otherwise, guns have had an extremely positive effect on society. For one thing, almost all industrial inventions derive from the gun. It was first and provided the blueprint for countless later inventions, from chemicals to both the external and internal combustion engines. For another, the gun equalized the playing field and provided the opportunity for free citizen-controlled democratic nations to arise from under the despotism of kings. Sure, much harm has also come from the misuse of guns. But more than 3 times as many people are killed in traffic collisions in the US each year as are murdered (from all causes). Shall we outlaw cars too? :roll:

 

[Mookow]

Vic, why cant you please just think of the children?

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Tiles2Tech
Well, this might explain it:

"I don`t want to be the candidate of the NRA, I don`t want our party to be the party of the NRA."

--Senator John Kerry

Source: NRA - ILA

Good for him. It doesn't mean he is against repealing the Second Ammendment.

no kidding. the nra is just an extremist group these days. they think you should be able to continue buying guns from "hobbiests" at gun shows without background checks or waiting periods. all reason goes out the door with em

Well I'm persoanlly more agressive than the NRA, since governemnt is told "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." infringed means background checks, registration, fees of any kind, round limits, bore size, rate of fire are all in violation of the sprit of the law. If they told Jews they have to pay a fee or be a non-felon to practice thier religion it would'nt fly period.

Besides, who needs guns more, a crimminal just released back into his hood with violent felons and drug dealers everyhwere or suburban BOB?

So you feel the same way about nuclear arms ? I wouoldn't mid a few.