Gutter ball for "Bowling for Columbine"! (long)

[aaron_mag]

Wow. Hadn't noticed this thread but any gun control thread is bound to cause controversy. In my family there are two gun nuts (my brother and my father) and one who is not too fond of guns (myself). They even have AK-47s and AR-15s.

My take on it is this....do people NEED guns like that AK-47 and the AR-15? Of course they do not need them. Should they be easily accessible for every idiot? Of course not. Here is the twist, however. Do people need paintball guns? Of course not and there are plenty of idiots that should not have them.

Unfortunately there is no way to segregate one from the others. I believe that recreational shooters have a right to participate in their sport in a safe and responsible manner just as I believe that paintball players have a right to do the same. To take away the rights of the majority based on the actions of a very small minority is tyranny of the minority to the extreme!

Lets look at an analogy. Someone has a communicable disease like aids. In a sense they can be a biological weapon so they should be locked up right? Of course we do not believe this because taking away the freedom of an individual based on a hypothetical danger is ridiculous! For me the same logic applies to rabid gun control. We will not have made ourselves any safer but just less free.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


And that is your opinion. A 6'5" intruder can be handled very easy by a 5'6" woman without the needs of a gun. How do all the woman in other countries do it?

How pray tell master of all knowledge? My wife has two little ones to care for. She doesn't have time to take martial arts lessons. Also if there are more then on intruder? Again the gun is the equalizer. There is no other form of defense that so levels the playing field. Take my sister-in-law for example, she is tiny. I could let her take a whack at me with a baseball bat and walk right through it. Can't walk through a bullet!

[Miscue]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


And that is your opinion. A 6'5" intruder can be handled very easy by a 5'6" woman without the needs of a gun. How do all the woman in other countries do it?

If a 200 lb male wanted to rape and kill a 130lb female, this could not be done because the female would be able to run away, overpower the male, find help before he could do so, or figure out some other means of dealing with the situation. This is the reason why women are neither raped, nor killed by men. This also means that, every man in jail for raping or killing a woman is innocent, because this simply cannot be done. Men particularly in other countries are especially innocent because women in other countries can deal with them. If women in other countries can do this, why can't U.S. women do it? This is because, guns are allowed in the U.S., whereas countries that do not allow guns have women who can fend off attackers because of this.

So, again... Why do Americans feel as though they need guns when other countries do fine w/o them?

This is reality -> X













This is where you are -> &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp X

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


How pray tell master of all knowledge? My wife has two little ones to care for. She doesn't have time to take martial arts lessons. Also if there are more then on intruder? Again the gun is the equalizer. There is no other form of defense that so levels the playing field. Take my sister-in-law for example, she is tiny. I could let her take a whack at me with a baseball bat and walk right through it. Can't walk through a bullet!

1de is right about this. First off CB I believe that you are a good sized male so you don't know what it is like to be smaller. I have been in the martial arts since I was a kid and I can tell you that size and athletic ability make a big difference. For awhile I did full contact kick boxing and I was around 180 and in pretty good shape. They used to throw me in there with a guy who had 50 pounds on me and I used to spend the rounds running like a chicken with my head cut off to make sure he didn't get in a good shot on me. This is the reason they don't put middle weight fighters in with heavy weight fighters in boxing. To argue that a smaller person in general will have no trouble defending themselves from a larger and stronger opponent is ridiculous. I like martial arts movies as much as the next guy but I can recognize the difference between fantasy and reality!

[1stdeadeye]

Here is an example!

Originally posted by Collegeboy


And that is your opinion. A 6'5" intruder can be handled very easy by a 5'6" woman without the needs of a gun. How do all the woman in other countries do it?

BOSNIA!

Yep, all of those innocent Muslim women that were raped and murdered by Serb death squads handled themselves just fine without guns didn't they? Do you think that civil war would have been different had the muslims been armed from the start? I bet the people in that foreign country wanted guns to protect themselves and their families.

Nigeria

How about the civil unrest there last year when the muslims in the north went on a killing and burning rampage? Do you think all of their christian victims would have liked a gun? Think that would have made a difference.

I could go on and on with examples. Also, don't compare us to Europe. It is not a valid comparrison. European countries are in general much older then the US. The US is a baby in the eyes of the world. Further, Europe has a much greater degree of homogeny then the US. Our diversity makes us strong, but also causes rifts. We have the right to defend our selves with firearms against danger. In Bosnia, those ethnic rifts caused mass murder. Why? The general population was unarmed. Again because of "America's Love Affair with the Gun" this can never happen in America. WE CAN FIGHT BACK!

[CasingBill]

catching up

CB...if you really want to know why other poeple in other countries don't have this percieved(on your part)fear, then why don't you go there and find out?? I think you owe it to yourself since you seem so bent on this quest for your version of truth.

Our founding fathers had the foresight to realize that a people who could not protect themselves from a tyrannical government would eventually find themselves in the predicament they were trying to avoid. Hitler and Nazis are the perfect example.

If all guns are outlawed in GB and Australia, how is it possible that there are still gun crimes?? It can't be! Do you mean to tell me that criminals still have guns? The perfect reason why we should all have the right to own guns. The bumper sticker is right. When guns are outlawed then only outlaws will have guns.

Side note: In NYC they are trying to ban the sale of paintball guns because they resemble real guns.

How do you propose my 88 year old grandfather protect himself in his house? If an intruder breaks into his house, how can he defend himself? He can't even get out of bed. But I bet he can reach over to his night stand and hit whoever comes into his bedroom with a .38.

[aaron_mag]

Re: Here is an example!

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
I could go on and on with examples. Also, don't compare us to Europe. It is not a valid comparrison. European countries are in general much older then the US. The US is a baby in the eyes of the world. Further, Europe has a much greater degree of homogeny then the US. Our diversity makes us strong, but also causes rifts. We have the right to defend our selves with firearms against danger. In Bosnia, those ethnic rifts caused mass murder. Why? The general population was unarmed. Again because of "America's Love Affair with the Gun" this can never happen in America. WE CAN FIGHT BACK!

Now I got to call you on this BS! We do not have mass murder due to our ethnic rifts because of an armed populace? That is just ridiculous. How about we don't kill each other because of ethnic rifts because our culture promotes acceptance. How about because we have a stable economic and political system?

Do not compare us with Europe? Europe is a good comparison with the United States. Don't forget that Germany had its own Columbine type events.

Europe also has strong cultural traditions and has a right to those strong cultural traditions. Guess what? America has a cultural history and that includes the mid west and hunting. Should mid westerners be forced to give up their cultural heritage? This is the argument that holds weight for me.

To say that I need a gun in America while I don't need one in Europe because here we have ethnic diversity and there they do not is absurd. It implies that we are less cohesive as a society than European countries which is certainly not true. You also mention that we are a new country versus the European countries. Are you advocating that guns should be banned more and more as the United States ages as a country? I thought not....

[CasingBill]

[Collegeboy]

I am a 6'4 300 pound man who is presently walking around on one leg. Being a big guy I know that a 5'6 woman with a baseball bat or any hard stick that hits me in the head or in the knee or in any other vital area (I am not going to mention that other area) will be able to take me out easy.

People in GB and Oz can own a gun yet most choose not to own one in their house for protection. People in Germany can own a gun (for sporting purposes) yet most choose not to use one for protection. Why?? Why are Americans so obsessed with the gun?? These are all questions which MM set out to answer in his documentary.

Miscue. Maybe the female had no means of protection around her. You assume that if she would of had a gun with her then everything would have been fine. But chances are the woman wouldn't even use the gun, and be in more trouble with it then without it.

I have no idea where you get this reality and me being far from it bit. Why don't you try and answer the question before you go spouting of.

[CasingBill]

stats

If you check the stats. All other crimes in GB and Australia have increased. Why? Because good citizens have lost there means of protection. crime stats

[Skreemer]

For all the folks that point out how great gun control is take a look at a few places on the map:
Northern Ireland,
That little pre-school in england that got shot up buy a guy that bought and illegal handgun,
Beirut,
France sometime last year where an Armored car was attacked with RPG's and then the remainder of the guards were gunned down,
The british MI6 building where some dissedent launched an RPG at it,
The prison in France where there was an RPG attack on it and prisoners were freed.

What's up with this? When will these countries get around to banning RPGs? Why is the RPG a weapon of choice for these acts?

Isn't it amazing how gun control works?
Oh and for those that keep bringing up the same question over and over again that has been answered with many opinions. How do you describe that you "want" something? How do you personally describe you "need" to have one thing over another when there are many alternatives?

[aaron_mag]

I actually partially agree with CB on the whole self defense issue. If the primary reason for owning a gun is self defense why not allow one type and bann assualt rifles like the AR-15. Lets allow people to have one good brand of American pistol and ban everything else. This should take care of people who are worried about self defense.

Now I don't really believe that we should follow a policy like the one above. This is because I don't think the primary reason gun owners want guns is for self defense. The real truth is that they are sportsman and enjoy shooting for its own sake. They enjoy several varieties of firearms because the are aficianados of fire arm engineering. The self defense argument is very limited. The argument for me is that hunting/sports shooting is a recreation that 99.5% of the participants practice in a safe manner (much like paintball). To punish legitimate users for the actions of those that usually purchased the fire arms illegally doesn't make much sense.

EDIT: Of greater interest is what do you do with people who are irresponsible for guns. How about the guy who illegally gave the guns to the Columbine shooters? How about the guy who loaned his AR-15 to the DC sniper. Is it okay to casually loan these weapons? What do people think about these issues?

[Russ]

aaron-mag,

If I loan you my car, then you get drunk and crash into a schoolbus killing 9 children...should that be MY fault?

[Smegma]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
...chances are the woman wouldn't even use the gun, and be in more trouble with it then without it. [/B]

"Chances are", how the heck do you know the chances. You're saying that the woman would rather go defenseless and risk death than using a gun, I doubt that.

[Smegma]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
I actually partially agree with CB on the whole self defense issue. If the primary reason for owning a gun is self defense why not allow one type and bann assualt rifles like the AR-15. Lets allow people to have one good brand of American pistol and ban everything else. This should take care of people who are worried about self defense.

True dat, but for your information, nearly all of the modern AR-15 rifles that you speak of have fixed magazines and cannot be used as an assualt rifle (not many rounds to spray). Other such "assualt rifles" are nearly impossible to get LEGALLY (class III liscense exlcuded) and almost all of these types of weapons are banned, or modified to a certain extent to where they would make impractical assualt rifles (capacity restricitions). If your gonna ban everything else, at least ban everything but shotguns. Those are truely the best home defense weapons.

** I live in Califorina, im only telling you what I know here.