Hmmm, not sure who said the quote about "Why would they want a gun..."

Personally, as a current gun owner, I really don't like having the damn things around. Mine are stored locked, actions disabled (bolt from the M4 in another location, slide from the Glock in another location, shotgun has a lock trhough the breech) and essential components dispursed. Since I travel a lot and there is the remote potential someone could illegally obtain the weapons by burglarizing my house (thus making me a contributor to whole gun crimes problem). Owning a gun comes with heavy, heavy responsibility. Frankly, I wish I didn't have that anymore. They used to be tools for my work. Now they are just an encumberance. In my job we didn't rely on the equipment they issued us from the armory unless it was for certain stuff like training where our weapons may get damaged, wet for days on end, lots of dirty, smoky full-auto firing drills, etc.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Tom, I'd be happy to provide a good home for your excess guns. They would live out their lives in the comfort of my safe and exercised occaisionally. Bikes and related gear are always welcome too.

And I yours...I would support a law requiring training or a competance demonstration before purchasing a firearm. We have Hunter's Safety training for kids (and it is moving towards being a requirement for adults), but this is required to purchase a hunting license, not a firearm. The laws could be stricter on who can purchase also...particularly any medical history should be taken into account. And if the gun owners rights are sufficiently protected, there is no reason we can't track gun ownership, which would help avoid them winding up in the wrong hands. I tend to think individuals should be allowed to sell guns directly without following the gun store laws. If this were in place, someone diagnosed with depression could have their guns held from them, etc.

My wife is originally from New Jersey (Long Branch/Highlands area) and refers to some people up there as "Shongoes." Have you heard this term? Are they the same ones you refer to as "Pineys?"

The booger is you and I , being generally rational peopleee, would take the effort to be in full compliance with the prescribed laws for firearms ownership. At which time we decided it was too much of a hassle we would eiher turn our guns in at the police station (can you even do that?) or sell them to another responsible gun owner with good references.

But you and I aren't the problem Dapper Dan.

The problem is a child who finds a loaded weapon ireesponsibly stored by an careless adult.

The problem is a criminal who has easy access to a firearm and ammunition and may decide to use it or accidentally used it during the commission of a crime.

The problem is a person who has a bad day, a substance abuse problem, or an unmanageable temper and in an instant uses a gun to resolve a dispute when, a split second after the bullet leaves the barrel, he/she regrets it.

That is the problem. And it is a serious problem.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Never heard of Shongoes. I'm not a native of the area. Pineys live in the Pinelands area of south Jersey, it's a compliment to some, to others, it's an insult. Technically, this didn't happen in the Pinelands, but close by. I only referred to Pineys because a thread yesterday mentioned them.

---

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

There is a very large financial institution in Canada that has a policy that if an employee attempts to stop a robbery they are fired - with cause. no severance, no ifs ands or buts. The money is insured. Are you saying that the next bank to get robbed would have recourse to this bank for making an explicit policy to let burglars get away and target the next bank?

---

____________________________________________

"which is like watching one of your buddies announce that he's quitting booze and cigarettes, switching to a Vegan diet and training for triathalons ... but he's going to keep snorting heroin." Bill Simmons, ESPN

I agree, these things are a problem. My point, and I hope you agree, is that these are societal problems, not "gun" problems. A little reseach will show that there is no coorelation between gun ownership and violent crimes, or even coutries allowing gun ownership and homocide. It is all dependent upon the society. Japan has a very low homocide rate. Yet, Japanese immigrants to the US have an equally low homocide rate. Banning guns would have little affect on criminals, except maybe they would more often use a knife or club. Children are killed by adults who leave swimming pools fences open. Should we ban swimming pools? I wish we could ban idiots and criminals, but until that day, I will pack heat.

Imagine your wife or daughter being threatened every day by a distraught boyfriend that he was going to find her and kill her. One day maybe he even tries, unsuccessfully, and is arrested. He continues to make threats in jail, and is released soon after. You KNOW he is going after her. The police will do NOTHING (providing protection to citizens in not their job nor policy). Now, do you really want handguns banned, or do you want her to have a fighting chance to protect herself?

"while handguns are used in vast numbers of crimes annually, they are used even more often by good citizens to repel crime (p.4)(approximately 581,000 crimes vs. about 645,000 defense uses annually"(Kleck, "Guns and Self Defense: Crime Control through the Use of Force in the Private Sector," 35 Social Problems 1 (1988) )

In reply to "As I have said before, you are more likely to shoot a member of your household than you are to shoot a criminal."

This is misnomer often perpetuated in the liberal media based on what has been proven to be a flawed study published in the New England Medical Journal. It was based on statistics collected in King County Washington back in the 70's and 80's. The study uses the statistics to show that the ratio of firearm related violent deaths in the home to firearm self defense killings is 43:1. The flaw is that, using the same statistics, the ratio of violent deaths of all types to self defense killings of all types is much larger. If you exclude firearms related killings, the ratio was 99:1. Furthermore, most of the non-intruder deaths were suicides, which are no more likely to happen when a gun is available (consider Japan), although a gun may be sustituded for some other means. Also, it was shown that the number of self defense killings was skewed, since "justifiable homicides" were not included . The statistics are basically meaningless, but the media loves to perpetuate this myth anyway.



Responding to a different poster regarding civilian vs police training, while I agree that it is reasonable to require training, police are trained for much different circumstances than a civilian. Civilians do not inject themselves into high risk situations, and when they pull their gun there is (or should be) no doubt that it is needed. Concealed carry permits require training, but you could prevent far more killings if you randomly trained the same number of drivers.

This is a true story. Our next door neighbors at our first house had their house broken into, one of the items taken was a .22 rifle from a locked gun cabinet. Turned out that the teenage son (a good kid) had several people over and apparently didn't know them all very well. Several days later that weapon was used to shoot a 15 year old (the shooter was 16) in the chest outside the front doors of the high school they both attended. Fortunately the boy survived and while this didn't involve a handgun it illustrates that even a locked gun cabinet is no guarantee that bad things can't happen. I have great respect for guns, I actually achieved the marksman ribbon shooting the M-16 in the USAF despite never having fired a real gun previously. I respect the rights of citizens to own guns, especially for hunting which is a huge cultural thing in the town I live in. However, I have never understood Americans never ending fascination with guns. It's like some testosterone thing left over from the cavemen. Some of you deny that you live in fear and yet it would seem that you go to bed each night wondering whether you or your loved ones are in mortal danger. Life is too short to be constantly looking over your shoulder for the boogie man IMO.

"I respect the rights of citizens to own guns"

I'll make it clear that my original post never advocated the banning of guns. I once owned a .22 and a shotgun.

I see no reason why responsible citizens engaged in hunting, sport shooting or collecting should be denied this right. However, I'll advocate strict controls on who should have these rights. It's ridiculous when any wanker off the street can just walk into a gun shop, flash a driver's license and walk out with a loaded handgun.

I'll advocate the same strict controls, in fact they are already in place. The scenario you mention - walking into a gun shop and leaving with a loaded handgun - is not legal in the US. There is a mandatory background check and waiting period on handgun purchases. There is not much evidence that it has had any affect on homicides, while it chews up a lot of police resources that could be put to better use probably. I like the concept anyway.

Remember what I said about U.S. society proving, over and over, their inability to manage the responsibility of owning firearms?

http://www.cnn.com/...ooting.ap/index.html

I rest my case.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

You know, Tom, I read that story this morning, and I thought: "What a F***ing moron!"

As soon as they said that he was doing a gun safety demonstration and shot himself, I thought, "He's gonna drop the clip and not clear the chamber." Sure enough...

Now, you and I both know that, barring a major mechanical malfunction, if he had actually cleared the chamber, the round would have been ejected. And if it somehow hadn't ejected, the only way it would have fired is if the safety was off and his finger was on the trigger.

My guess: The DEA is covering up what really happened to safe face.

My opinion: The unnamed officer should be relieve of duty and fired.

You listed the three basic rules of firearms safety many posts ago, and you are absolutely right. And it's still amazing how many people, even those with er, extensive, weapons training fail to adhere to them.

---

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

I guess I must've misunderstood your original point, then, as I assumed you were talking about gun ownership by private citizens.

Am I to understand that you don't feel law enforcement officers should be armed?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Why do the UK, Germany, Spain, France and Japan (all industrialized nations) have less than 10% gun related crime when compared to the USA?

How many people in the USA legitimately need a gun/rifle/machinegun to defend themselves every year?

I'm sure it all has to do with cars and pick-ups... right?

Those who are unable or unwilling to commit acts of violence will always be subject to the tyranny of those who will.

I can't believe the bullshit I'm reading here today. The argument should be simple and easy to see. You need guns because of me.

I'm 6'5", and weigh around 250 pounds, I've run 3 miles in under 17 minutes. I've been trained to incapacitate and kill you. I'm bigger, faster and stronger than you and if a loose wire in my head causes me to enter your home with the intent to hurt you, what chance do you have of stopping me? None. If you manage to call the police, you'll still be dead. You can not outrun me and you can not fight me off in a close quarter encounter.

The only hope you have is a gun. You can shoot me several times standing with your back to a corner, protecting your family, facing the entry to a room as I approach. You need no special training but you do need to spend a many hours getting comfortable with your gun. Learn to load and unload it, learn to hit a human sized target center mass from 10-20 feet. Learn to do everything as safe, smooth, and fast as possible, in that order. Get professional instruction. Make sure your entire family is aware of the gun and where it is and why it is there. Don't make it accessible, keep it loaded in a lock box near your bed that only responsible adults know the combination to. Make sure you can open it in the dark- quickly. Practice, practice, practice.

If you suspect someone is in your house, gather your family in one room if you can, call the police speak clearly and loudly so the intruder may hear you and leave. Then shout loudly "Attention intruder, I have a gun and will protect my family, the police have been called, leave now or you will be shot." (maybe they'll leave) This way if the intruder is a drunk who wandered in the wrong house, your kid trying to sneak back in after sneaking out, or a friend playing a really funny practical joke you will not shoot them.

People kill family and friends mistakenly because they try to replicate the complex moves of an elite military group that they have seen on TV, they quietly get their gun and snoop and poop through their own house- and shoot their 16 year old headed to the kitchen for a glass of milk when he suprises them rounding a corner. Taking those classes will only make matters worse for most, you're not clearing a building, your making a hasty defensive position hoping to scare off a criminal off before he gets close to you.

I have given this same speech to every woman who has ever meant a damn in my life- mom, aunts, friends, girlfriends, etc. I stand in front of them a ask what would happen if I was coming through their bedroom window with bad thoughts in my head. There's one way to stop me, shoot me in the chest and head, several times if need be, until I stop moving.

Also, handguns are horrible home security weapons, at night an intruder may not see a black .38 small frame pistol, I have a 12 gauge pump shotgun for this purpose. The sound of that action is loud enough to get your attention and if you do come through my bedroom door you will be sure to see what's waiting for you. Again, hopefully that will cause the bad guy to rethink what he's doing and leave. If you can learn to handle that type of weapon and understand that it can shoot through walls (as in you need to know what's on the other side) it's also much easier to understand the concept of 'pointing' a shotgun as opposed to aiming a pistol.

And after all that, I have never pointed a weapon at another human being, never come close to shooting anyone. I have many, many guns, they have never killed anyone. I am a law abiding citizen and a member of the United States Marine Corps. I have no deep internal desire to shoot some jackass stealing my lawn mower. But if you come in my house looking for trouble- you will get it. I refuse to allow anything to happen to my family because someone who is bigger, faster, and stronger than me decided my house looked like a good target.

Tom, you should be ashamed of yourself, I know you hate a whole lot of women, but they more than anyone have the right to carry a gun so that they are not subject to the evil that lurks in the heads of some whackos.

Women, get a gun, get instruction, and get ready to protect yourself.

Everyone, protect your life and your family and be glad we live in a society that allows you to do that.

Assholes, oops I mean 'gun control advocates', don't quote me statistics that show how stupid most people are with guns. That does not alter my right to protect myself and my family. If you try to take that away from me in any way, you will get the fight of your life.

---

"Nobody gets out of here alive."

Recently a law enforcement officer was showing me his new firearm. He dropped the magazine and cleared the chamber, handing it to me with the chamber in open battery as is safe and customary. I cleared the weapon prior to examining it.

Once I examined his new firearm I re-opened the chamber and lcoked the slide to the rear then handed it back to him, grip first.

He (the trained law enforcement officer) proceed to sweep my face and chest twice in under five seconds with the barrel of the weapon. I said, "Would you mind not pointing your weapon at me?"

There are some highly proficient, well trained law enforcement officers who are highly effective combat gunmen. And there are also some who require more training.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

I realize I am beating a dead horse, but since you asked, and they are very good questions....

Q: "Why do the UK, Germany, Spain, France and Japan (all industrialized nations) have less than 10% gun related crime when compared to the USA?"
A: Let's start by getting the facts... (sorry about the format, table is at http://www.guncite.com/...ontrol_gcgvinco.html)
International Homicide Rate Table (Death rates are per 100,000)

Country........Year...Total-Homicide..Gun-Homicide..Non-Gun-Homicide..%-Gun-Ownership
United States...1999......5.70...................3.72..................1.98.........................39.0
England/Wales..1997......1.41...................0.11..................1.30.........................4.7
Germany..........1994......1.17...................0.22..................0.95.........................8.9
France............1994......1.12...................0.44..................0.68.........................22.6
Spain..............1993......0.95...................0.21..................0.74.........................13.1
Japan..............1994......0.62..................0.02...................0.60.........................n/a


Now, I don't have statistics for all "gun related crime" handy, so I'll just focus on homocides. You can see the US has the highest gun homocide rate by far (among these), but gun ownership is not all that much higher than France. The interesting column is non-gun homocide. US has 3.72 times more non-gun homicides (per 100K) than all the others put together (the sum is 1.00), while 1.08x the sum of the gun related. Which points out that the US is just more violent in general. Why? Well, for example, Japan is basically a police state, with near unlimited right for police to search, and for practial matters they can arrest and detain indefinitely without a hearing. Confession rate is like 95%, so you can imagine it isn't much fun to be arrested, guilty or not. Another reason, and the main one, is the social structure of the US. For instance, the homocide rate in Mexico is 17.58, and it is also very high in the US among Mexican immigrants (and very low among Japanese and UK immigrants). Canada, New Zealand, Switzerland, Finland, and Norway all have high gun ownership levels but very low homocide rates (and Isreal depending how you count). Russia and N. Ireland, among so called "industrialized nations", are the shining examples of extreme gun control but yet an extemely high homocide rate. So, in general, I think the answer to your question is that those countries have fewer "criminals" in general. BTW, comparing countries gun homicides to US, we have respectively 25%, 21%, 20%, 17%, and 11% (not <10% quoted), although crime has typically been going down so this is somewhat skewed by the different years compared.

Q: How many people in the USA legitimately need a gun/rifle/machinegun to defend themselves every year:
A: Depending on the survey used, somewhere between 2.5 million and 800K defensive uses per year in the USA. BTW, the severe restictions on class III firearms have had no statistical impact on crime. Very very few "assault rifle" crimes have ever been committed. Even the anti-gun establishment admits it is just a step towards making all ownership illegal, not based on actually making the country safer.

Thanks for reading more of my gun-nut propaganda :-)

Dan

bruiser98 wrote: "I'm 6'5", and weigh around 250 pounds, I've run 3 miles in under 17 minutes"

Are these at the same time? I just got done watching "Soldier," you must be one of those genetically engineered new soldier guys.

trianimal, you and I are good to go for weapons handling: Trained, experienced and qualified.

The average REMF-ass, civilian type dweeb off the street isn;t qualified to weild the deadly capabilities of a swiss army knife, let alone an M4, Glock, H&K or other combat weapon.

They are a "no go" at this station. They have never had an "explanation, demonstration and a practical application" and still think S.P.O.R.T.S. is something you watch on ESPN.

Nothing worries me more than an armed idiot.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Did you know this? You are probably in the militia whether you know it or not.

U.S. Constitution, Amendment II--[/url]
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

U.S. Code, TITLE 10, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 13, Section 311--

Sec. 311. - Militia: composition and classes

(a) [/url]The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) [/url]The classes of the militia are -

(1) [/url]the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) [/url]the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia

Should we have mandatory firearms training for all US male citizens starting at age 17? Should we require all men between the ages of 17 and 45 to keep a rifle and ammo at the ready?

<<Should we require all men between the ages of 17 and 45 to keep a rifle and ammo at the ready? >>

Just one?;)

Brett

I knew it, tri bri. My tour of duty with the unorganized militia ends this year. And I am bummed. I guess I go back to being a civilian type dweeb on July 29.