[Crazy Canuck]

(IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rant2.gif) (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/rant.gif)
and especially this model: http://www.cx4storm.com/

for those that wounder why:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/features...ting/index.html

my wife works 1 street corner away, and sometimes goes for lunch there... that day, she didn't... Thank God !

[2000Z-71]

A firearm is an inanimate object, a tool, nothing more and nothing less. To blame them as the cause or murder and violence is the simple solution that ignores the real problem and does nothing to change the situation.

Gun control is the belief that a 115lb. woman can defend herself against a 215lb. attacker intent on causing her harm. A firearm in that situation is an equalizer.

To claim that banning certain types of firearms would make for a safer society is a huge misconception. To use that same logic if we all drove 3 cylinder 45 horsepower hatchbacks, there would be no traffic fatalities, accidents, DUI's etc.

I have a real problem with somebody telling me that I should devalue my personal safety and that of my family because firearms make them nervous.

[marka]

Howdy,

A firearm is an inanimate object, a tool, nothing more and nothing less. To blame them as the cause or murder and violence is the simple solution that ignores the real problem and does nothing to change the situation.

Nobody is blaming anyone other than the person pulling the trigger. The disagreement here comes with where you draw the line on things that make it easy to kill people.

Bombs and their important parts are illegal for regular folks to buy. Presumably you don't have a problem with that.

Military weapons (in general) are illegal for regular folks to buy. Presumably you don't have a problem with that either.

I personally wouldn't mind seeing it also be illegal for regular folks to own handguns or shotguns/rifles with more than a three shot capacity. Its quite clear you _do_ have a problem with that.

Its all where you decide you want to draw the line. We differ on that, nothing more.

Gun control is the belief that a 115lb. woman can defend herself against a 215lb. attacker intent on causing her harm. A firearm in that situation is an equalizer.

You'll note throughout this discussion that folks haven't tried to restate the argument of the pro-gun folks into something it isn't. Perhaps you could offer the same curtesy.

I have a real problem with somebody telling me that I should devalue my personal safety and that of my family because firearms make them nervous.

And I have a real problem with someone that requires a gun to feel safe in normal society.

Mark

[2000Z-71]

Bombs and their important parts are illegal for regular folks to buy. Presumably you don't have a problem with that.

Not really, you can make a crude form of plastic explosive in your kitchen using Karo syrup and a few other common household chemicals. Tim McVeigh used fertilizer and diesel to make the Oklahome City bomb. All very common easily available items.

Military weapons (in general) are illegal for regular folks to buy. Presumably you don't have a problem with that either.

Not to split hairs but it depends what you define as a military weapon. The AR15 is the semi-automatic only version of the military's M-16 and is very common, There are also semi-automatic versions of the AK series and SKS that are legal for us regular folk to buy. There are some place like California where "asault rifles" are illegal.

The problem is the definition. California tried banning them several years ago. They found themselves in a corner by naming weapons on a list that were illegal to own. Quite simply all the manufacturer had to do was change a minor detail of the firearm and give it a new name and it was again legal. They have contiunually been adding to that list since its creation to try and keep up.

I do have one AR-15. It's a fun plinker and does make for a SHTF option.

I personally wouldn't mind seeing it also be illegal for regular folks to own handguns or shotguns/rifles with more than a three shot capacity. Its quite clear you _do_ have a problem with that.

That would make most everything in my toy box illegal. Even the most basic .30-06 sporter rifle typically has a 5 round magazine with room for an extra one in the chamber. I fail to see the logic of a 3 round maximum capacity.

Its all where you decide you want to draw the line. We differ on that, nothing more.

My point is it's a line that can not be drawn. When bad people want to do harm they will find a way be it with a firearm, knife, bomb, sligshot, rock, etc. Banning firearms only serves to disarm the law abiding and deprive them of a means of a defense.

Gun control is the belief that a 115lb. woman can defend herself against a 215lb. attacker intent on causing her harm. A firearm in that situation is an equalizer.

You'll note throughout this discussion that folks haven't tried to restate the argument of the pro-gun folks into something it isn't. Perhaps you could offer the same curtesy.

Where was I discourteous? It is a discussion and I was trying to make a point.

I have a real problem with somebody telling me that I should devalue my personal safety and that of my family because firearms make them nervous.

And I have a real problem with someone that requires a gun to feel safe in normal society.

Again define normal? I live and work in Phoenix which has a very high incidence rate of car jackings. I also have an 18 month old daughter who when in my car is strapped in the backseat in her car seat. In a car jacking situation, giving up the car with her still strapped in is not an option. Having a firearm and a concealed carry permit does offer me an option if escape is not possible. Having someone tell me that I don't have that option because it makes them nervous is not something that I am willing to accept.

edit: edited quote syntax for easy reading.

This post has been edited by Eugenio_SS: Oct 1 2006, 03:44 PM