Quote:
Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl
Well, I dont think YOU live that way, but based on some the wording of some posts, for certain others, honestly I really have to wonder. Some truly do remind me of doomsday preppers, who really believe the shit will certainly hit the fan in their lifetime, and I'm the nutjob if I cant see it.
I try and ask "well, why dont folks in other places, who legitimately have damn good reason to be more concerned than you based on recent past (not 200 years ago), why arent they in a panic", and you get no real answer to what I think is a fair question.
I dunno man, if most other people I asked couldnt see a monster, but I could, my first reaction would NOT be, "they are all wrong", or, "or I dont care why they dont see it, I'm still gonna prepare to fend it off". Instead my first gut reaction would be, "hmmm... maybe there is no monster". Have you ever heard the one about the proud mother exclaiming: "everyone is marching out of step except my Johnny" Yeah, I think maybe, just maybe, theres some of that going on.
Your high school story is interesting; (I guess they were right when they said there is no Free Lunch! ha ha)
Anyway, I grasp that some kids didnt know that they were missing. As a result, was their High School life that much worse? Was the cost of the additional safety too much? Or, were they able to have happy, fulfilled high school lives anyway? Flying commercial is a huge pain in the ass now. Would I argue that the safety stuff should all be rolled back to 1995? Nope.
People are OK with limits on the 1st amendment. Nobody is going around saying, "well first you tell me I cant yell fire in a crowded theater, and before you know it, I wont be able to criticize the POTUS in public."
You apply it to the 2nd amendment, and suddenly the argument which sounds crazy in the first case, becomes fine in the second case. 
I dont live in fear of being shot, so it's harder for me to understand the "I need to protect myself" argument. I've never been shot at, either, so that could change my tune. I hope I dont find out... I do get the recreational user tho, but I still think there's a place for stronger regulations. Adam Lanza's mother was a responsible recreational gun owner too, who legally got her guns and would probably have easily passed any mental health or background test you gave her. She probably wouldnt have hurt a fly.
In a controlled range, it would be safer to relax some things, and folks could then get to shoot full auto Uzi's or whatever they want. Fine with me, as long as the uzi doesnt end up in a closet, where a kid could find it when they break into your house while you are in Hawaii. But then, people would scream that keeping it at a gun club doesnt help them defend against gov tyranny, so you're back to zero.
If I did worry that much, instead of arming myself, I'd probably take the position of "if this is what it takes to have 'freedom', that aint free at all, and I'm outta here". Got a co-worker who left South Africa because of that very thing; when it gets the point where you must arm your vehicle against carjackings, starting over elsewhere seems like a better option. |
I can understand how it may look to non gun owners. I'm sure me having procured 17,000 rounds of ammo in the past 3 months may make me look like a nut job to some. But 1. it's not going to be cheaper 3 months from now and 2. i want to make sure i have ammo for my recreational shooting without paying through the nose for it or worse not being able to get it at all. I don't think they view you as a nut job for not seeing it but rather naive for not acknowledging the possibility.
They are not in a panic because they are the high schoolers who came to high school 25 years after they did away with free lunch period. Unless i'm misunderstanding your question, then my answer is, once you're disarmed, what is there to panic about? At that point what ever happens, happens. We are in a "panic" because we fear the 2nd amendment being stripped from the constitution. We still have free lunch period and recognize that the people causing the panic only represent .00004% of the gun owning population. And recognize that they are related in some way shape or form. Mass shooting are done by crazies and most other shootings are done in inner cities where gun laws are most strict. Not by the 99.99996% of gun owners.
There is a lot of fictitious monster sightings on both sides of the issue. In my opinion more so on the gun control side. Pro gun controllers are on an emotional witch hunt right now. 4 of the most recent shootings occurred with an AR. Those gun deaths make up a fraction of the over all gun death toll. By far most gun deaths occur with hand guns which seem to have skated by, with exception of magazine size. Which proved useless the last time they were limited. The pro gunners use the 2nd amendment as a basis for their argument to not limit their gun rights. We'll sight the unconstitutional passing of laws and EOs side stepping the constitution as an example of how the government is dead set on ruling the populous with an iron fist. Clearly, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. But when knee jerk, emotional reactions are put into the law books, and will not solve or help the issues at hand, pro gunners are going to be well bent out of shape about it. I don't think flying coach is any safer than it was 13 years ago. If it is, it's not because of the lines we stand it or the lack of water we're allowed through security.
No, the high schoolers probably don't miss out on anything. But because my brother never could walk on his own or drive a car or play football he doesn't know what he's missing either. Sad just the same. Keep taking liberties that don't mean that much and before long they will all be gone and we'll have a nation of beat down conformist who don't think freely and simply do as they are expected.
There is logic based on the legal repercussions of yelling fire in a crowed theater. The law maker can explain to us with reason why there needs to be repercussions for crying wolf when it can hurt other people. The same can't be said about laws infringing upon the 2nd amendment. There is little logic behind new NY gun laws... unless the goal is to eventually rid NY residents of their right to own firearms.
Adams mother was NOT a responsible gun owner. If she were, her son with a well documented history of mental illness would not have had access to those weapons. I am married, to a woman who knows how to handle each of my firearms. We do not have children. All the same, i just spent thousands on a safe to encase my weapons in an effort to ensure they don't make it out on to the black market by way of theft. Well, that and they are doubling in value right now.
