An armed populace can not protect an oppressed minority, but it can protect against gross abuses of the population at large by the government.

Guns seem to be like abortion, religion, and modern art - it's hard to have a calm, on-topic discussion about them.

The people who think they are a sacred right of manhood and the only thing that stops the black helicopters from swooping down and enslaving us all - crackpots.

The people who think guns should be outlawed and that all gun owners are the kind of people described in the preceding sentence - crackpots too.

What's wrong with the non-hysterical truth? Guns, if handled and stored properly by mature persons, are fun to shoot, interesting to collect, and safe. They also may have some self-defense value, and can have some self-reassurance value. Although a dog is a lot more effective.

I've had quite a few guns, used to do a lot of shooting, still have a couple of handguns stored away. When my kids are old enough, I'll take them to the range and teach them to shoot.

Your buddy IS A PILOT! Not a belt and suspenders hillbilly. Are you allowed to take your gun on a plane???

"Power comes from the barrel of a gun" so it is said. The People must always have the power.

I believe I have the right to do anything I want, as long as it does not infinge upon the equal rights of others. As for guns, I have the right to own, collect, shoot, hunt and everything else, as long as I don't infringe upon anyone else's rights.

Owning a firearm, for myself, and for many others I know, is not a power trip, or a small penis compensation. It's a hobby, it's a belief, it's a responsibility. I enjoy target shooting, which is akin to many other activities that are very acceptable. Accuracy is what it is about. Think about other things that focus on accuracy: Golf, billiards, darts, basketball, soccer... the list goes on and on.

I also like history. I hold a license from the BATF to collect firearms classified as Curio and Relics. In particular, I like WWII rifles and pistols.

It's hard to really explain WHY I own firearms, but I can attribute it to many things. Responsibility. Rights. Freedom. Self Defense. Independance.

My favorite quote about it is "dialing 911 takes seconds. Waiting for help could take the rest of your life."

See http://www.a-human-right.com/

Gyspies, intellectuals, others not sympathetic with the Nazis, etc. As for alighting to guns don't make a difference - that's so wrong I can't even begin to argue that point even on a psychological level.

I'll say this: if the Jews had been armed, the Nazis wouldn't have gotten the thorough ass-kicking received at the hands of The Allied forces - it might have stopped long before the ghettos were established and the ovens turned on.

A threatened man is a very, very powerful force to be reckoned with.

hey, wait a minute. Where did you get a left handed 1911 from? ;)

Apparently it might also have stopped if the allies had bombed strategic rail facilities and camps but let's not get OT in the OT forum.

How do we know for a fact that all Jews where un-armed? Re-runs of Schindler's List?

Victor - speaking of belt and suspenders hillbillies, I found this photo of Midnight Oil. Ain't they from around where you are?
http://image.allmusic.com/00/amg/pic...15177E4UEV.jpg
They look pretty hick-like to me. Yes, I know Garrett's evolved views - no one should eat meat, become a socialist, give Melbourne back to the pygmies, etc...
But I bet he owns a pair of suspenders, a belt, and to top it, wears them at the same time. :D

I know, it looks weird. The extractor is on the correct side, and most ambidexterous thumb safeties for 1911s don't have the 'cover' under the actual pad.

That's from Oleg Volk's site, the link in my previous post. He has a lot of great photos on the subject. ;)

dd74, they where obiously influenced by Americans. Don't you know? It's the only way to sell a record.

Victor...that's the best rebuttal you can come up with??? Pretty sad. Yep, my buddy is a pilot. When he flew F-111's for Uncle Sam, he carried far more firepower than a handgun, including Nukes. I guess they aren't too concerned about him carrying a handgun in the cockpit these days. Me? I don't like to fly...but I am an Oregon hillbilly...and damned proud of it! Oh, BTW, my PILOT buddy? He's an Oregon hillbilly too. He grew up in the same small timber town I did. Look closely...the next guy piloting the jet you are on may be wearing suspenders and a belt, a habit picked up while living in a small "hillbilly" town...

pwd72s (if that even is your real name!) that was not a rebuttal but a question. I'll put it a different way:

If your justification for gun ownership is "protection from terrorism", then how can this work when you can't take your gun on an aeroplene to protect yourself from box cutter wielding towel heads?

You should be lobbying for the right to bear arms whilst enjoying the benefits of air travel. Then ofcourse, the Ayatolla's would be enjoying the same rights and you would still be toast....

:D

BTW: seriously, I agree with PW. Guns probably would have stopped the 9/11 terrorists. That's why there are (or maybe are not - no one truly knows) armed marshalls aboard U.S. flights.

Oh and we call our Hilbillies "Ferals".

It's also totaly legal to shoot them too.

If everyone onboard flight 11 had been carrying a gun, Sept. 11 never would have happened. The plane, at worst, would have gone down in a field like flight 93. There's no way 20 hijackers would have been able to go against a plane full of armed patriots. If it had been policy for everyone to have had a gun on those planes, terrorists wouldn't have even targeted them as a means to their end.

If even the pilots had been armed, it easily could have made a difference.

Victor, you don't get it...I have no need to "justify" my ownership of guns, nor my reasons for owning them. You see, I was born in the U.S.A., I'm a citizen, not a subject, of that country. As a citizen, I am guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms under the constitution of MY country. Should you find yourself flying in U.S.A airspace? Keep in mind that it may not be only the pilot who has a handgun. It's not advertised who is carrying and who isn't. Your original argument was that handguns could not have prevented 9-11-01...I refuted that. Pretty damned well, I think, by pointing out that one person with a handgun has an edge over terrorists with box cutters. Now, you're changing the argument? Even a dumb hillbilly can see through that one...

:confused:

This is crap. Two guys from countries with stern gun control (in particular, no handguns) arguing with a bunch of guys from a country awash in them.

Nobody died because of a handgun in New Zealand last year, or the year before. Or the year before. (actually, I think the police shot someone recently, but that's different).

We don't have a handgun problem. You do - you just don't realise it is a problem. Without experiencing it, you will never be able to understand that freely available handguns are a little like freely available meth. NZ, and Australia, have crime - plenty of it, just like the US. The difference is that few people get shot. This is not because there are few guns (there are plenty). It is because there are few handguns (easily concealed) and no national attitude of shooting the crap out of each other - amply demonstrated in this thread.

Unfortunately, the significant number of (hand) guns already in the US, and the national resistance to any removal of them, means your basically screwed.

BTW - note important distinction between handguns and guns (general). If your so dependent on retaining the 2nd amendment, I believe rifles and shotguns would suffice.

Actually, that is bollox - if you actually had to try and defeat your own govt, nothing short of every household owning a tank, a fighter, or at least a minor arsenal of handheld weapons is going to be effective. The second amendment argument is baseless on multiple levels (what constitutes militia?, suitability of legislation which requires treasonous activity to take advantage of, impossibility of successfully rising against own govt, general outdated nature of concept ---> I cannot see how a rational person would not come to the conclusion that it should be sent the way of Prohibition).