[arnie]

I agree with Max that it's a cultural thing, and the US has a violet culture. I own several weapons, as I'm an avid hunter. To Arnie's point that we should only be allowed one gun: I have several for different hunting situations, i.e. waterfowl, upland game, deer and pigs. Each on of those situations requires a different tool (gun).

Most that are against gun ownership also see no point in allowing hunting as well. But that is a right that is allowed in this country and a sport I enjoy (and my friends enjoy my yearly game feed BBQ's as well). Being a culinary enthusiast, I can guarentee that wild game when prepared properly is unique (in a good way if done right!) and not something you'll find in a store.

So back to the original point: is gun ownership in this country causing all this violence. In my opinion it is not the root of it, and therefore banning guns will not cure the problem. I think that there are many factors. Our violent culture which is perpetuated by media, including TV, Movies and video games (as a dad of a preteen, there are several games that will not be in this house and we have long discussions as to why, and he seems to understand). Also, I think a big factor is our culture's way of dealing with mental illness - we don't deal with it in many cases, and we have put such a stigma on it that our first and sometimes only response is to ignore it. That in itself is a long conversation, but I think one of major issues in this problem.

The other thing is the way that many in our country look at gun ownership as having to be an unbridled right. By that I mean no restrictions what-so-ever. I am a long time gun owner and advocate. However, I and many of the gent's that I hunt with, tend to depart from the NRA in this respect. I feel that any gun should require a safety course before purchase. Much like the Handgun permit or Hunter's safety course or that is required in California for those items. No safety course is currently required for the purchase of a long gun and that's frightening. I know several people - family included - that have "guns for self protection" and no clue or desire to actually learn how to use them or store them properly. My kids don't go over there without me being present and I've stated that flat out to them (makes for great conversations at family get togethers... not!)

I also have to say that I'm not a big fan of legal "assault weapns", but hey, just cause it's not my thing doesn't mean I feel they should be outlawed. My shotguns are semi automatic and Feinstien and Kerry attempted to classify them along with all semi-auto guns as assault weapons in legislation several years ago. It doesn't make a difference what the appearance on the outside of the gun is, it's the hands that control it.

Now having said that, I have never heard a good argument for guns that can carry large clips other than "it's my American Right". Will outlawing large clips stop gun violence. No. Will it make it harder to unload a S#$@ -load of bullets into an innocent crowd. Yes. Would that require outlawing ownership of ANY large clip. Yes. Would it solve the problem right away. No... but it could help in the long run without taking away rights of gun owners. They would just have to reload more often. Too Bad, get over it. I have to admit, I have some aquintences that also believe they should have large clips for when the Ruskies attack. Any normal individual can shoot holes through that one pretty easy.

So Arnie, while I understand and respect your feelings and opinion, I don't think that banning guns is the answer. I think we need to go deeper to fix the culture. Pay attention to the shows your kids are watching and realize it has an impact on them. Don't allow them to play ultra violet video games, it has an impact on them and desensitizes them to violence. Talk to you kids about violence and how it effects others and discuss the more civilized ways to deal with issues. Talk with them about bullying and it's effects. How to deal with mental illness in the country and how we deal with it? Haven't got an answer to that - wish I did. Stop selling 100 round clips... or 50 for that matter (pick a number, I think over 10 is unjustifiable) and outlaw their possesion. Require locks and/or safes for the purchase of a gun and hold owners accountable if someone aquires and uses your unlocked gun in a crime (other than it was outright stolen). And mandate education for gun purchasing and usage. No... not registration, but make it so that ranges and gun clubs require safety course cert's to use their facilities... it would be in their best interest to have educated users on there property. Yes that would mean that the goverment know you have a gun, but it doesn't necessarily mean they know what kind and how many you have.

The change would be slow... but we didn't get here overnight either.

Dave, (and Others) with all respect, please re-read my threat... since I clearly state that I don't believe in an outright ban of guns, and therefore you probably need to rethink and rephrase your comments to my post.

That said, all the exact same violent movies, video games, websites, etc are also available in EU (e.g. Holland where I am from). Darn, we have some s$@t that makes US stuff look childish. However, there are very few shootings in Holland, because guns are illegal. So that "we are a more violent culture" argument doesn't hold up, because, in this case, Dutch are as violent and as exposed to the same violent media -and then some- as much as Americans are. Hence, given that everything else is thus equal it is (too easy) access to weapons that is thus the problem. Hence, I make the case and argument in my original post that gun access should be better restricted; but NOT made illegal. The latter, as I clearly stated, would make things even worse.

The argument that we "need" weapons to protect us from a possible tyrannical government is idealistically and philosophically nothing wrong with. Practically, however, I don't see what a little pistol will do against a whole army armed to the teeth. It is a self-serving and self-justifying argument because One would need a whole lot more fire power to make the case for self defense at that level. Hence, I don't see having a little popper "because the government may run amok" or "the commies will attack" can hold much ground either. In that case you'd need at least a tank for starters.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk