Vic buddy, I never said you lived in NZ, nor did I say you lived in the Outback, I can tell by your ID that you live in a major city. I also did not say that there was an attack in Aus by Japan. Re-read what I wrote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BSiple
Your'e right Victor, because they haven't tried since September 11th....

Keep making the sheep noises....

I agree, you don't need to live in constant fear, they just practice in the Outback. That was where the Sarin gas attacks where planned that were carried out in Japan, so I guess you don't have anythign to be scared about.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you read it, I am stating that the dry runs of the attack took place in the Outback, and then the actual attack was carried out in Japan. Remember the subway incident?

pwd, don't waste your breath, I think Vic might have tipped a couple back as he is having problems reading...

I couldn't agree more...

Well, CamB, you need to also realize who is being shot in the US.

Your average law abiding citizen in a nice neighborhood is more likely to be run over by a Porsche than be shot by a handgun.

Department Of Justice statistics show about 70% of gunshot victims have criminal records. It's criminals shooting criminals. And it's overwhelmingly concentrated in large cities, like LA, Chicago, DC, etc. And it's mostly gang and drug related.

Our society is a very free society, and there has been a lot of moral decay in the last few decades. Violent crime HAS gone down over the last 30 years or so, yet gun ownership has steadily increased. Thusly, more guns didn't equal more crime.

If you can take an objective look at it, here's a document highlighting a lot of arguments against owning firearms, with citations of sources of data refuting those arguments. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/downloads/GunFacts_v3.2.pdf

I am sure some people in NZ still managed to murder someone despite your state ban on one method.

Why must this be controversial. What is it about the idea of other people pursuing and exercising their rights that is so objectionable to the gun control crowd?

Could it be the high statistical incidence of responsible gun owners killing people?

I toss in my anecdotal accounts with all the rest. I find among gun owners a certain solidness and comfortable-in-their-own-skin quality totally at odds with the hackneyed “Dirty Harry” caricature mentioned in some places here. I’ve never met a serious gun person – or a person who enjoyed and took seriously his gun ownership – I haven’t liked and trusted. Moreover, I find among those who get their knickers in a twist over guns a general prickliness, and intolerance of opposing views – of any kind. No statistics to back me up -- just a lot of trips between South Carolina and Berkeley, the perfect polar opposits of attitude.

As for the low IQ nonsense, again, why must it be that those who take an opposing view are somehow deficient of judgment, incapable of thinking out the issue to the “only” correct conclusion. That, I believe, is condescension.

I own an .22 target pistol I haven't shot in 15 years. I have little interest in guns. But I belong to the NRA and actively support the right to gun ownership. Based on some of the stories I have heard from cops in my relatively high crime area of Hollywood, I would especially like to see more women owning guns, and trained and confident in their use. I get by with a protection dog. But my friend, who trains Malinois for the police and is a lot bigger and tougher than I am, never goes outside at night without both his dog and a concealed .45. His right.

So why do you need one "for protection"?

There's a lot of selective and pseudo stats in there, plus I don't particularly care about a large number of the items they're crusading for (or I often even agree with them). The biggest problem is the large number of exogenous factors influencing the stats. A similar problem is that crime measurement is notoriously unreliable, in particular across countries.

I can't help it. I have a problem with handguns (and to a lesser extent, military style assault rifles which would be useless for hunting). Remember, I'm not against guns, per se.

Can you name another item in society which is as freely available as a handgun and has the sole purpose (in the majority of cases) of being designed to injure or kill another person?

Or I'll give you guys another choice, in my humble opinion:

a) the US has a problem with handguns; and/or
b) US citizens are, as a group, not sufficiently responsible to own guns.

You have the highest rate of gun death in the OECD, and generally there is no relationship (in the remainder of countries) between gun ownership and gun deaths. So, I conclude that either the widespread availability of handguns is the problem, or you have a problem with the mentality of gun owners.

Our criminals don't shoot each other. Sure, they manage to kill or wound each other (excluding gun crime, I believe it is on a slightly greater per capita basis than the US), but they don't shoot each other. How can I not come to the conclusion that this is because there are very few handguns (but many other guns) here?

Oh yeah - our police don't carry either (well, some do - in particular the armed defenders squad - but not many).

Cam - this is the first time I've completely disagreed with you. But I need to first know what exactly the handgun problem is inside the U.S.? Where do you get your information about the so-called problem? I ask because per gun legally owned by persons in this country, very few are used in crimes. If such a percentage were the inverse, I truly believe The States would have blown themselves up by this time.

Secondly, NZ and Oz don't have anywhere near the population of the U.S., so that right there is an unfair comparison of gun crimes between your country and ours. Also, we aren't what's portrayed in the awful movies and slanted news reports you see. No one is gun crazy - at least that I know of. Conversely, most guns used in crimes (not all, but most), have been compromised in some manner, where it has either been stolen or passed from criminal to criminal. It's like a stolen car being used in a bank robbery that has also mown down kids at a park. The car was stolen, but don't blame it. Blame the thief. But under your observation, if a gun was a car, cars would be taken away - from everyone.

Where you are correct is in the assessment that we will not defeat our government with our weaponry. No, that will never happen. We defeat our government in polling booths. So yes, in its purest and oldest interpretation, the right to bear arms is outdated. However, it is still a right.

Personally, I'm very "so what" about guns. I can take them or leave them. But it's the right of gun ownership that I support. The freedom to own and keep one.

In fact, my support of gun ownership has as deep an implication as my belief in a woman's right to choose, gay marriage and a person's right to worship in the way they see fit - or refuse the idea of God in total. Gun ownership is another important right; it is a freedom. And to take that freedom away risks the other freedoms we enjoy in this country.

Why own a gun?
 

Because they are fun.
Because I have a moral right to defend myself and my property. They even the playing field between a small woman and a big brute running off his head on drugs or drink.
Because it does not give me an illusion of safety, it gives me a measure of safety.If I cannot own and carry a handgun legally, then it is bad law and I shall not respect it.
We've been around this topic on Pelican many times, neither side has ever convinced the other, those with no experience of realities continue to preach their mantras about the police protecting us and I don't understand why you need a gun and I live in a slum ghetto and I don't need a gun to protect myself in my home and I feel perfectly safe walking in my street.
Well, I, my husband and mty daughter have been issued carry permits because here is a demonstrable need and the authorities accept they are not able to offer adequate protection in my home or in the street. They are not issued as easily in Italy as in the US.
I do not think I am unsafe in my home or in the street. I know it for a fact.
If you don't want to own a handgun, don't. Do not question my right to own one or to use it.

Your'e right - apologies for not reading your post correctly. I must point out that when I typed my reply earlier it was about mid-day local time and I was as sober as a judge.

Now, however I have just returned from the local and consumed the best part of 10 bottles of beer and am still going.

Still reckon you blokes would be better off not having to scheiss in your pants every night holding onto your little guns under your pillows incase the oogetty-boogetty man comes after your plump little spotty white asses.

Notice I never said guns where necessarily a bad thing?

Edit: Spelled Oogetty-Boogetty wrong. Damn Alocohol.

I see what happened here, you saw "sheep" and automaticallly thought NZ.:D

I think you guys on the outside looking in see very little, if any, of the real picture regarding USA/gun ownership. The vast,vast majority of guns (handguns included) in the country are used for sport only and kept under lock and key by responsible owners.
I've lived in many places around this country and never felt the need to keep a gun loaded and handy for home defence; yes I'm sure there are areas where the threat of the hoogetty-boogetty man is real, but far more are just plain paranoia or the idea that since you have a gun, might as well keep it handy.
Your "plump little spotty white assess" line almost smacks of racism, plenty of non-white butts worry about security, and plenty of white ones fall under the Hoogetty-Boogetty heading.

I guess the news in OZ will never have something like this "Hundreds of millions of Americans slept quietly and unarmed without incedent last night"

Thanks for the correct spelling of "hoogetty-boogetty man". I don't by any stretch of the imgination intend to sound racist with the spotty white plump asses comment. Maybe just making an ASSumption about the majority of insecure gun toting Porsche driving Americans.

Sort of a little like most of you guys think New Zealanders sodomise sheep, the French are all cowards, Germans are all Nasty Nazies, Ozzies all live under a rock in the desert and Iraqi's need McDonalds.......if you get my drift.

The point has been made a couple times in this thread that law-abiding gun owners in the US, i.e. those with proper registration, permits, whatever you need, aren't the ones committing the gun crimes, or at least they're responsible for an extremely small percentage. This makes sense. What good is gun control when the crimes are being committed using uncontrolled guns? The Canadian government made a weak (and very costly) attempt at instituting a nation-wide gun registry, and all I could think of was what the hell good is that going to do? Are the criminals really going to show up and say "uh, yeah, I'd like to register this AK, even though the serial #'s been scratched off..."?

I think the whole gun issue has a lot more to do with fear and paranoia. I'm an outsider looking in (to the US) and what we tend to see is a lot of paranoia - self defence, terrorists, etc. especially within the media. Seriously, handguns are NOT going to protect you from terrorists. Since 9/11 every airline incident makes headlines, even if it's just some drunk moron that ends up getting arrested. Do you REALLY want every plane in the sky to be half-full of gun-toting vigilantes who think everyone acting up on a plane is a terrorist? You'd have a much higher body count than 9/11 in a few weeks. Ok, I'm slipping into hyperbole a little here (which seems to be the order of the day when discussing guns, abortion, religion, etc.) but there's no way I'd set foot on an airplane if citizens were allowed to carry guns on it. The fear factor seems to be multiplied on an airplane, compared to, say, in a shopping mall.

I can completely understand wanting to own guns for collecting, sport (target shooting, hunting), pretty much any reason except self-defence. Wasn't there a stat somewhere that said you're more likely to be injured or hurt by your own gun? I think responsibility is the real issue here. While I don't agree that a gun is the same as any other potentially dangerous tool or device (cars, hammers, drills and skills saws weren't designed with injury or death in mind) I do believe that a dangerous device in irreponsible hands is the problem. But then, I highly doubt that even irrespobsible but legal gun owners are behind many gun deaths or injuries. I really don't believe that gun crime perpetrated by criminals with illegal weapons will be solved by gun control.

if you guys knew chris (cantdrv55) he is actually asking the question and not looking for the reaction he got. you guys blaming him for stiring it up should look no further than the mirror.

now, why do i own guns? i sleep better with them in the house.

There are a lot more pistols in the cockpit than you will ever know about. I am the chief pilot for our operation and firearms are authorized in EVERY cockpit for every pilot if they want to carry. You see, all of us are ex-military and were trained properly with weapons years ago.

We are a private operation and not operating under the TSA rules, so we did not have to get approval to carry as did the airlines. Its not something that many talk about but would guess that a majority of the planes have weapons onboard these days for the flight crew.

We also carry Tasers in most of the airplanes. If this does not stop them then they are dead meat.

Oh, by the way, not all of us are living in the outback like you aussies. If you want to generalize then we get a free hand to do it as well.

JoeA

For an encore, cantdrv55 could start a discussion about religion and tie it into a rant about Hitler.

kitchen, hot

Please!:rolleyes:

HEH...HEH...HEH.....Cause I like to play with them...fondled them...caress them.....they make me feel big and powerfull....I paticularily like the 45 automatic cause of the big loads of lead it shoots out....anyother questions you wana ask...

Absolutely...had the pilots been armed or had an Air Marshall been on board.

I used to have a CCW permit, used to drive late at night and sometimes take naps on the side of the road.
Two of my friends have had to branish thier guns during camping excursions to keep from being raped or worse.
I still keep my pistol now to kill rattle snakes close to the house, but havent had to use it in a few years.

Re: Why own a gun?
 

Once again Isa you have gotten straight to the point. This is like the Mac /PC arguement, it can go on forever. If you do not like them it's simple, don't own one. Yes I own one, several actually, but most are for the collectability of them. They can be a good investment. I am licenesed to carry, and I do, (PPKS), but I am not necessarily authorized to use it. That point is key. Even with the new laws in Florida you can spend 3 years min. in a 6x9 if you aren't aware of the laws. If you DO decide to own a hand gun. Get trained not only in it's safe use,(spelled not at a gun show) but the laws of your state. It's equally important.

In the end my feeling on owning one is in the event that I would, God forbid, HAVE to use it, I would rather be tried by 12 than buried by six.