Firearms proposal from da Basement

[Basementdweller]

The old NRA is scaring people to death.....

 

 

When you say home invasion....were you sitting on the couch and they kicked the door in. or were you asleep and they burglarized you home.

 

I am prepared to defend my family, I live in a bad neighborhood and I am not stupid. I have several hot weapons around the house, The family know where they are at and everyone knows how to shoot them. Both kids have been instructed to keep pulling the trigger till it clicks empty once they start shooting. Both have practiced it at the range that way.

 

I can defend my home with a revolver or pump action shotgun better than with an AR.

 

I am not preparing for the zombie apocalypse or afraid of the urban riot....

 

 

 

[Stosh]

I have hot guns in my house as well.

 

Yet I'm thinking what is even more scarier than a zombie attack from the NRA is when some governmental official sits me down as asks: "Are you or have you ever been a member of the NRA?" McCarthism all over again! If I give the truthful, "NO" answer I'm guaranteeing that the very next question will be: "Do you own or have you ever owned a firearm?" Now either I lie or hold my hands out for the cuffs.

 

For a long time I felt reasonably safe in my home because of the protection I have prepared myself for, both mentally and physically. But I don't think the NRA scares me half as much as a government bent on disarming me, my neighbors and friends leaving the only guns on the street in the hands of criminals because it is easier to disarm law-abiding citizens than it is to disarm criminals.

 

Again, any and all legislature that targets criminals, I'm 100% onboard with! Once that has been accomplished, the need for more than a hunting rifle in my home goes away. And surprisingly, none of this has to do with the NRA.

 

Even as I write this post, Feinstein's proposal grandfathers in all guns as they stand right now. That's a lot of guns in criminal's hands.

 

Stosh

 

 

[packsaddle]

"It might be interesting to have a poll of those who have never had their home invaded and are pro-gun vs. those who have and are pro-gun people."

 

Huh? Did you leave a word out?

I've had my home invaded and I'm all for reasonable controls as discussed nicely, I think, by Beavah and others.

 

Cambridgeskip, my bewildered friend,

See what you did? You can only blame yourself.

 

Beavah, WOW! And I thought Merlyn was plucky!

[WasE61]

So, I guess what we need to do is "better" regulate the "well regulated militia".

 

If the age limits are 17-to-45, well, we can enforce that. That would take the 200 or so guns my nutter Father-in-Law has and those few of mine as well.

 

Of course the "CDH" crowd, (Cold Dead Hand) wouldn't abide by that law either.

[Eagle732]

"I have formed a local group with several churches and other scout leaders to put pressure on our Congress man and Senators for change. We have drafted a letter and asked for a meeting with them thru our church minister."

 

Basement, when you have your meeting maybe you can ask that the laws be enforced that are already on the books. If you read my last post you'll know why I ask this.

[Beavah]

Yah, I've had my home burglarized. Dumb-ass teenager from a couple of houses down hit several houses in da neighborhood. I think he took a bunch of Halloween candy, an old camera, and about $30 in loose change. I happened to come home mid-afternoon one day and saw him scoutin' another neighbor's place by dumb luck a couple weeks later. Didn't run and grab a gun or any silly nonsense, just called da cops and kept him in sight. They found a fair bit of the stolen stuff at his place, and it was dealt with.

 

Had a former residence "invaded" one evening while asleep. Didn't go runnin' for a gun then, either. Turned out it was a buddy who had realized he had had too much to be drivin', so opted to come to my place and crash on da couch rather than try to make it home drivin' drunk. Didn't bother to ring da doorbell, figurin' we were asleep and wouldn't mind. We didn't really. Can't imagine ever bein' so fearful as to be aimin' at a friend with a loaded weapon in da dark.

 

Yet I'm thinking what is even more scarier than a zombie attack from the NRA is when some governmental official sits me down as asks: "Are you or have you ever been a member of the NRA?" McCarthism all over again! If I give the truthful, "NO" answer I'm guaranteeing that the very next question will be: "Do you own or have you ever owned a firearm?" Now either I lie or hold my hands out for the cuffs... But I don't think the NRA scares me half as much as a government bent on disarming me, my neighbors and friends leaving the only guns on the street in the hands of criminals because it is easier to disarm law-abiding citizens than it is to disarm criminals.

 

Yah, this stuff just makes me laugh. "I'm not afraid of a zombie attack, I'm just afraid of somethin' about as likely as a zombie attack!"

 

Government officials huntin' people down to ask 'em if they are NRA members? Really? Don't yeh think at that point they'd just go grab the NRA's membership roster?

 

Da problem we have to face as gun owners and enthusiasts in da U.S. is that most of the criminals get guns as or from law-abiding citizens, eh? We're not seein' shootings with illegally imported AK-47s. So perhaps yeh would worry less about all those criminals with guns if all of your relatively inexperienced friends who are buyin' guns wouldn't be leavin' 'em around to be stolen or private-sale passing 'em along to other less reputable folks when they get bored with 'em in a year or two.

 

I think it's just a liberty thing, eh? I don't mind at all if a firearm hobbyist wants to have guns. Those folks are mostly experienced and fairly safe.

 

But when yeh start havin' lots of inexperienced folks gettin' firearms for "protection" at a time when da U.S. is da safest its ever been, I start to worry about mass psychosis. Actually, what I really worry about is a lot of inexperienced folks bein' stupid with firearms, like da dingleberries at the gun shows last week. That, and suicides, and poorly secured weapons gettin' into the hands of kids or criminals.

 

I will agree that Senator Feinstein's bill is a relatively useless, feel-good piece of legislation.

 

Beavah

 

[JMHawkins]

Do you consider the right to own a fire arm as important as the right to vote or the right to free speech?

 

The right to own a firearm is the right to defend yourself. Some people think it's to defend yourself against a tyranical government. Some think it's to defend yourself against criminals. Some don't think there's a difference. But ultimately it's a right to possess the means to defend your life if you choose to do so. There are many arguments about whether it's necessary, or effective, or sane, or if and how much it should be regulated, but the point of the individual right is that my decision to defend myself is not subject to their opinions on whether I should or not.

 

couldn't you just change the constitution?

 

Others have mentioned the details, but yes the Constituion can be ammended, and it has been 27 times. We've clarified rights, changed the voting age, outlawed slavery, created an income tax, allowed woment to vote, outlawed alcohol, changed our mind (about the alcohol, not the income tax or women voting), and made changes to various election proceedures, qualifications, and what not.

 

The best way to think of the Constitution is the baseline agreement we all made with each other - a partnership agreement if you will. It's the fundamental rules for the partnership we have with each other as members of the same polity. Changes to it need widespread approval and supermajority support because it literally is the basis for the legitimacy of our government. Without it there is no legitimacy and the government would fall. All our public officials and military swear oaths to defend the Constitution. A "constitutional crisis" in the US is the equivalent of the War of the Roses over there - disagreement over who's in charge and what they're allowed to do. The last time we had a full-on one of those, we slaughtered each other from Bull Run to Appomatox Courthouse.

 

It can be changed, but not rashly.

 

Does anyone in the USA actually fear that the federal government would ever become tyranical? Really? You honestly think one day you mght become an Orwellian nightmare?

 

It is a bit of a stretch isn't it to think that the Government might become so tyranical as to do things like tell you what sort of toliet or lightbulbs you could have in your own home, or to create so many laws that several legal scholars would estimate the average citizen violates three or more per day purely by accident. Or to have the highest incarceration rate in the world (beating #2 Russia by nearly 50% and being about 5 times that of our Canadian neighbors). No reason to worry at all...

 

Um, Cambridge, is it too late to call off the whole Revolution things? You might have fewer laws over there these days.

[Papadaddy]

"Didn't bother to ring da doorbell, figurin' we were asleep and wouldn't mind."

 

Well, I DO mind...all my friends and my kids know that's a sure-fire way to meet their maker. We've had several home invasions in my hood and I'm not going to ask questions first.

[scoutingagain]

I confess our home has never been invaded. Heck half the time our door are unlocked. I live in a modest house, on a quiet street that has been invaded my mcmansions. I figure anybody looking to break in, is going to look at my house, look at my neighbors and realize the pickin's across the street are going to be much better, and they'd be right.

 

We did have a home invasion in town last week. Turns out the invaded home was a grow house for marijuana. Seems like the vast majority of home invasions involve drugs/gangs or other questionable activities. I have to wonder what's going on in someone's home that they feel like their a likely target.

 

This past fall, in CT not too far from Newtown, a father shot his own son entering a neighbors house where his daughter was babysitting. The kid had decided to try and scare his sister and called dad about someone lurking outside the house.

 

Like BD, I'll defend my family with whatever I have. However, in an the off chance someone decides to invade my house to take our stuff instead of the better stuff across the street, their welcome to it. 1st defense for us out the door and call the cops. Then call the insurance co. Have no desire to get into a shoot out unless lives are at stake.

 

Other Rambos can lay down their lives for their flat screen TV.

 

SA

 

 

 

 

 

[packsaddle]

That would be 'flat panel' tv. I have a flat screen tv. It still uses the old video tube technology. It's really big (gift from a neighbor who bought a flat panel to replace it) and it weighs about 200 pounds (tremendous amount of leaded glass). I say, if they can lift it, they can have it.

 

Incidentally, it's already outlived that flat panel the neighbor bought to replace it, lol.

[boomerscout]

the firearm used at Newtown was legally registered, and owned by a probably sane person. The shooter stole it.

I suspect most street crime guns are not registered to the person carying them

As to Columbine, Aurora, VA Tech, if there had been proper militia citizens there, they would have been able to return fire. Those citizens closest to the shooter should have drawn immediately with pistol, mace or taser. The answer, then, is to start local militias as the 2nd Amendment requires. The National Guard is not the militia as they are under Federal control

All mental illness? So, if I was shy I couldn't have a firearm? If I was obsessive-compulsive about handwashing, I couldn't have a firearm (I miss "Monk")

[Beavah]

It is a bit of a stretch isn't it to think that the Government might become so tyranical as to do things like tell you what sort of toliet or lightbulbs you could have in your own home, or to create so many laws that several legal scholars would estimate the average citizen violates three or more per day purely by accident. Or to have the highest incarceration rate in the world (beating #2 Russia by nearly 50% and being about 5 times that of our Canadian neighbors).

 

Yah, this is like watchin' a comedy show.

 

I think yeh need to check in on da definition of "tyranny". Toilets and lightbulbs? Really? Why da guvmint even makes it illegal to water your lawn in a drought or to have a fire in a time of high fire risk!

 

Here's da thing. I'm all for liberty, but yeh can't behave like a banker. Yeh can't claim da freedom to do whatever you want, and then shove the cost and the risk off on the general public while you take only the benefit.

 

Now, I'd prefer yeh behaved like a scout and took into account service to the whole community in your actions, the way I would hope an honorable banker would be focused on citizenship and service rather than how much he can make by unrestricted gamblin' "rights". But at a baseline, leavin' honor and service aside, yeh should pay for your own habits.

 

So you can have whatever toilet you want, so long as you and you alone pay for all of da upgrades to sewers and treatment facilities required. Yeh can have whatever lightbulb yeh want so long as you and you alone pay for da new power plants and grid upgrades and whatnot.

 

Now the best, most conservative way of handlin' this stuff is simply to set fees and taxes equal to the full cost for those services, eh? The cost of electricity from a coal plant equals the full cost of everything from health care for the miners for life to compensation payments for the downwind impacts of acid rain. Perhaps there should even be a bit of a progressive component; if all of your neighbors are conserving and you are profligate just to be a jerk, perhaps yeh should pay a bit more. Yeh can water your lawn in da midst of the drought so long as you pay the full cost of it, plus a jerk premium.

 

Either way, then yeh let da market decide. Yeh can have your 20-gallon flush toilet so long as you're not gettin' any subsidy from da rest of us.

 

Da problem is, 47% of da nation believes in private gain at public risk, eh? Or private liberty at public cost. Da NRA believes in personal liberty to own firearms, but wants da public to bear the risk and costs of that right. Just like da bankers. Because 47% of da nation believes in this neo-conservative nonsense, no responsible free-market liability/insurance, fee, or tax structure can get passed. So instead da fall-back is stupid regulation, eh? Regulate what lightbulb or toilet can be sold, regulate CAFE standards for auto fleets, regulate limits on "assault weapons", etc.

 

We can't rightly complain about such regulation until yeh adopt the honorable banker rule, and put citizenship, service, and fairness first, eh? We all need to pay da full societal cost for our free choices, and commit ourselves to be good citizens and not jerks. Then we have earned our freedom.

 

Beavah

 

[Beavah]

the firearm used at Newtown was legally registered, and owned by a probably sane person. The shooter stole it.

I suspect most street crime guns are not registered to the person carying them

 

Yah, that's a theory, eh? Too bad there's no research to test it.

 

Here's da thing, though. If yeh have lots and lots of legally owned firearms around, then it becomes very easy for a criminal or not sane person to get a hold of 'em. Just rob a house where all these forum members keep loaded guns lyin' around. Or snatch da purse of any of da inexperienced ladies who some folks have described as new carriers. The point is that through easy access and private sales, we are supplying da criminals. And then our fear of criminals makes us want to buy more guns, further increasin' da supply! In the mean time, we pay for cops to arrest da criminals and seize and destroy guns.

 

It's a great racket for da gun manufacturers, eh? Can yeh imagine a better business?? No wonder they have such a well-financed lobby! Can't blame 'em. With 300 million guns out there in a nation of 300 million people, we already have one firearm for every man, woman and child who isn't in nursing care. That's a pretty saturated market, eh? Yeh have to do something to increase demand!

 

As to Columbine, Aurora, VA Tech, if there had been proper militia citizens there, they would have been able to return fire.

 

Yah, you've been watchin' way too many Hollywood movies, eh? "Shootout at Central High School!"

 

Do everyone a favor. Spend some bucks, and go take a full law-enforcement shooting course, with real practice and real scenarios in crowded, confused situations. Learn a bit about what you're talkin' about before yeh propose this stuff.

 

And for da record, da National Guard is not federal.

 

Beavah

(This message has been edited by Beavah)

[JMHawkins]

Of course Beavah, Tyrants always argue they are protecting the greater public from the menace of a select few. So do reasonable public officials. That's the path to power for the tyrant, the illusion that they're nothing more than reasonable public officials. There's no difference in kind between the actions of a decent governmetn and a tyranny, it's only a matter of degree.

 

Decent governments imprison people (criminals). Decent governments demand money from the citizens (taxes). Decent government place restrictions on people (laws and regulations). Tyrannies do nothing different, they just do more of it and with fewer inhibitions. Every government is an incipient tyranny. They're like campfires, good if they're small and controlled, but they require watching lest you burn the forest down.

 

George Washington said government was like fire, a useful servant but a fearsome master. Our campfire is getting pretty hot Beavah, which is why I'm not in favor of throwing another gasoline soaked yule log onto it.

[Beavah]

Nah, I don't buy da fiction.

 

In a democracy or republic, government is just how we people come together to build a community instead of a bunch of isolated homesteads. We strive to form a more perfect union; we establish common justice, we work together for tranquility and da welfare of the whole community, we provide for a common defense. Government ensures da blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity because da alternative is mob rule, which becomes warlord rule and tyranny.

 

There's a reason why various whacko cults in da U.S. stockpile weapons and fear da evil guvmint. Whether it's Jim Jones or The Way or whatnot, those sorts of petty tyrants live off of isolation and fear of common enterprise. They reject real science or real history, oppose research, and try to create their own reality, precisely because the open collaboration and exchange and common enterprise of democracy inevitably undermines such individual tyranny.

 

Yah, and typically, like bankers, they want all of da protections and benefits of da public polity, while rejecting da financial obligations and duties of citizenship that come with those benefits.

 

In the real world, we specialize, eh? Most folks can't set up their own phone system, repair their own computer or refrigerator, etc. So we pay professionals to do those things. That's one of da things that makes communities stronger, and advances civilization - relying on each other. Same with contributing to a common, professional police force, and a common, professional military. That way we don't have to all spend one day a week in militia drills. We get both a more effective common defense, and more personal freedom.

 

Beavah