Me And A Gun

[Beretta]

I'm going to post my reply to Razorphish one more time because it kinda coincides with what I would say to this reply, with a special tweak for you:

Thank you for "all due respect" concerning my stance on guns and children with guns. Um, my section is about all things replica, as can clearly be seen. I've talked about bags, cars, watches, shoes, clothes, travel, art, philanthropy AND my own thoughts and opinions, if I feel like expressing them. Everyone is welcome to provide a counterpoint against or in support of these opinions; I won't censor anybody because I don't like them or what they say. Posh's section is an exchange for ideas and learning.

Due to the largess of the site principals, I was given a great deal of latitude in what topics I wanted to present to the RG readers. If you don't like my social, education, art, relationship or other miscellaneous commentary, by all means ignore it and focus on the replica topics. Or just ignore the whole section completely; that is the beauty of free will.

Nobody's putting a BERETTA to your head and telling you to read my articles, YET.

I have no problem with your post at all. And I only meant by all due respect, is that I have every respect for your opinion, the time you spent to put it together, and your right or appropriateness (Is that a word?) to put it out there. Even if you put something out that was WAAAY out there....its your opinion, and your very much entitled to it and to posting it in the approprate place.

I only wanted to weigh in that at least for me, it showed up in the General Replica Thread. If I read your post correctly, I believe that I couldn't agree more. Avatars aside, my personal relationship with guns is based on my law enforcement /military association.
Guns and Kids dont mix - period.

[guest916]

Guess I'm just another redneck wacko. Grew up w/ guns of all description in the house. Dad (redneck wacko senior) was an avid enthusiast, ended up with more of an "accumulation" than a coherent collection. Learned to safely handle, disassemble, clean, and respect firearms from an early age. 'Course I grew up in an era of personal responsibility as well. Times have changed, and now children must be "protected" from any and all dangers whether real or only perceived. Guns were just as lethal when I was young, but common sense was a more highly prized commodity back then.

I wonder when the "nanny" crowd will shift their emphasis to autos and electrical appliances, since both kill far more each year than guns ever have or will. Guess it's impolitic to refer to facts in this type of discussion though. Fear is all the ammunition the do-gooder needs.

My kids grew up with guns in the house also, (granted I could afford a better gun safe than my dad could). Hope they haven't been scarred for life. Thankfully, they resisted the overwhelming urge to pocket a weapon and terrorize their high school.

Wish I understood the proselytizing mindset that feels free to insist that "since I don't approve of a given activity.. you shouldn't approve of it either". Haut couture makes me itch. The very though of enduring ballet gives me a migraine. OTOH, if you fancy an evening spent watching anorexic women stalk the runway (or dance in tights).. have at it. S'a free country after all. The very thought of eating bait (sushi) or raw fish eggs makes me gag, but if that's your cuppa I'm more than happy to pass the wasabi.

I have no plans to publicize the dangers of mercury poisoning, or display gory photos of the internal parasites consumed with uncooked fish. I'd appreciate if the bosom beating firearm activists among us would return the favor.

I enjoy a fall Sunday afternoon on the fining line. Whether officiating or participating, the smell of spent cordite just makes my day. Shooting, cleaning, collecting firearms is an integral part of my American heritage; one that I've enjoyed since childhood. Serving my community teaching firearm safely courses to gradeschoolers and handgun safely to single mothers is just part of who I am. You're welcome.

Oh yeah, and that's Dr redneck wacko to you.


PS: My firearms are all replicas!

[Posh]

Guess I'm just another redneck wacko. Grew up w/ guns of all description in the house. Dad (redneck wacko senior) was an avid enthusiast, ended up with more of an "accumulation" than a coherent collection. Learned to safely handle, disassemble, clean, and respect firearms from an early age. 'Course I grew up in an era of personal responsibility as well. Times have changed, and now children must be "protected" from any and all dangers whether real or only perceived. Guns were just as lethal when I was young, but common sense was a more highly prized commodity back then.

My kids grew up with guns in the house also, (granted I could afford a better gun safe than my dad could). Hope they haven't been scarred for life. Thankfully, they resisted the overwhelming urge to pocket a weapon and terrorize their high school.

Wish I understood the proselytizing mindset that feels free to insist that "since I don't approve of a given activity.. you shouldn't approve of it either". Haut couture makes me itch. The very though of enduring ballet gives me a migraine. OTOH, if you fancy an evening spent watching anorexic women stalk the runway (or dance in tights).. have at it. S'a free country after all. The very thought of eating bait (sushi) or raw fish eggs makes me gag, but if that's your cuppa I'm more than happy to pass the wasabi.

I have no plans to publicize the dangers of mercury poisoning, or display gory photos of the internal parasites consumed with uncooked fish. I'd appreciate if the bosom beating firearm activists among us would return the favor.

I enjoy a fall Sunday afternoon on the fining line. Whether officiating or participating, the smell of spent cordite just makes my day. Shooting, cleaning, collecting firearms is an integral part of my American heritage; one that I've enjoyed since childhood. Serving my community teaching firearm safely courses to gradeschoolers and handgun safely to single mothers is just part of who I am. You're welcome.

Oh yeah, and that's Dr redneck wacko to you.


PS: My firearms are all replicas!

That's a perfectly acceptable view to take about guns. You can pepper your life with them and make one available to you or your children at every turn in your home, office, RV or boat. That's not redneck; that's simply AMERICAN. And I would be unpatriotic rabble rouser if I said otherwise.

The dangers of sushi are underplayed. I urge you to do a self-indulgent post about the dangers of a Spider Roll or a soft shell crab sandwich on the populace. I mean, here I am waxing poetic, and liberal, about guns and kids with guns when there's a danger like sushi whose true evil has yet to be unmasked. I really don't think you're redneck doctor; I believe you're a profile in courage.

[capt_cope]

Such wit. Perhaps your time might be better spent trying to unmask the sense of entitlement so many of this nation's children and young adults seem to be acquiring (dare I say even easier than they find a gun?) Perhaps you'd also be so kind as to explain to us all how reliance upon a government for our "rights" like health insurance or a welfare check relate to freedom.

In the event that you can't interpret sarcasm, I'll be blunt. You don't have to like guns, but before you make a mountain out of a mole hill, perhaps you might take a look at some of the more pervasive threats to our children and our society as a whole. Before any meaningful change could come from the complete ban of any projectile weapon our society needs to examine it's values.

Oh and to put it all in perspective, according to the CDC around 1600 "kids" as in under 18 were killed by guns in 2005.

Compared to nearly 19,000 neonatal deaths.

In all 28,000 "infants" as in children under 1 died in 2005. Maybe you should take a look at the evils of pregnancy next. That or the dangers of being born. Those two are the real killers of kids.

[Guanaco]

Such wit. Perhaps your time might be better spent trying to unmask the sense of entitlement so many of this nation's children and young adults seem to be acquiring (dare I say even easier than they find a gun?) Perhaps you'd also be so kind as to explain to us all how reliance upon a government for our "rights" like health insurance or a welfare check relate to freedom.

In the event that you can't interpret sarcasm, I'll be blunt. You don't have to like guns, but before you make a mountain out of a mole hill, perhaps you might take a look at some of the more pervasive threats to our children and our society as a whole. Before any meaningful change could come from the complete ban of any projectile weapon our society needs to examine it's values.

Oh and to put it all in perspective, according to the CDC around 1600 "kids" as in under 18 were killed by guns in 2005.

Compared to nearly 19,000 neonatal deaths.

In all 28,000 "infants" as in children under 1 died in 2005. Maybe you should take a look at the evils of pregnancy next. That or the dangers of being born. Those two are the real killers of kids.

Oh man, that's WIN right there!

[Posh]

Such wit. Perhaps your time might be better spent trying to unmask the sense of entitlement so many of this nation's children and young adults seem to be acquiring (dare I say even easier than they find a gun?) Perhaps you'd also be so kind as to explain to us all how reliance upon a government for our "rights" like health insurance or a welfare check relate to freedom.

I really haven't met anyone in America who didn't have some sense of entitlement, whether it is the children and young adults you mention or people your age and older. Without entitlement, we wouldn't have the economic crisis we have now. Thanks to President Bush's push for an "ownership society" (ownership for everything except corporate or personal responsibility), there's people who thought they were entitled to a having a house and people who thought they were entitled to make a great deal of money for helping them achieve this end, both caring little for the consequences because reckoning was supposed to be a long way off.

And as for freedom, I'm sure you're aware that America is not as free as we would like to believe; it's just more free than, say, Myanmar. And welfare, whether most people want to realize it or not, is good for the American economy. "Welfare reform" was a ruse, a good one, that played to certain segments of the population's prejudices and misconceptions about the program and who it helped and why. Welfare will NEVER go away; you've created a class of permanent to semi-permanent consumers. They pump money into the economy and America is about money, the constant flow of money and credit. If I didn't work for an asset management, I would still believe this.

And to bring it back home to the topic at hand, weapons make money. And the gun lobby in America is more about money than it is about protecting your right to take someone's life.

In the event that you can't interpret sarcasm, I'll be blunt. You don't have to like guns, but before you make a mountain out of a mole hill, perhaps you might take a look at some of the more pervasive threats to our children and our society as a whole. Before any meaningful change could come from the complete ban of any projectile weapon our society needs to examine it's values.

My core values are very simple: one of them is in preserving the sanctity and dignity inherent in life. Anything that destroys and takes away human life is something in which I cannot personally abide. It's the feelings in that place where my heart would be and my personal relationship with G-d. G-d said, "Thou shall not kill." That's pretty straightforward to me; there's very little ambiguity in G-d's Word within the context of The Ten Commandements. A device that was invented solely to end a human being is something I have genuine concern about. Not many things were created with that sole intention in mind and the gun is one of them.

Oh and to put it all in perspective, according to the CDC around 1600 "kids" as in under 18 were killed by guns in 2005.

Compared to nearly 19,000 neonatal deaths.

In all 28,000 "infants" as in children under 1 died in 2005. Maybe you should take a look at the evils of pregnancy next. That or the dangers of being born. Those two are the real killers of kids.

It's actually funny you mention this. A great number of women die in childbirth worlwide wide, something we are fortunate to have less of here. So preganancy can be a death sentence for both mother and child. The infant deaths you mention are from things that are from unpreventable things like pregnancy complications, birth defects, prematurity and low birth weights, some of which stems from fertility treatments.

But if you'll notice, my post didn't say anything about the killing of kids by guns. I believe that kids shouldn't have access to guns anywhere in the world. I believe kids should have access to education, love, fun, safety and happiness. If one child dies by a gun, or any type of weapon, that's one too many for me.

[Guanaco]

This anti-gun Vs. Pro-gun is ridiculous, it's as pointless as debating who's better, Republicans or Democrats. We ALL know you're anti-gun and you have your reasons Posh, which I don't support, but still... and then you have us the gun owners who see nothing wrong in guns unless they're put in the wrong hands meanwhile anti-gun supporters believe they're bad for everyone... *sigh* Just give this a rest.

[capt_cope]

I can't argue with someone who is ignorant.

That being said, I will say this: more than one child has died because of a pool, an electrical outlet, a screwdriver, a car, a stove, a garbage bag, and a whole host of other items that I'm too lazy to type out.

You cling to this ignorant view that the only purpose guns serve is to kill people. Perhaps they were created with that intent, but then aren't there a whole boat-load of useful inventions created with one purpose yet they serve another? I'm willing to bet that large swaths of your everyday life is spent utilizing an invention meant to promote more efficient killing on the battlefield, human history seems to revolve around wars, battles, and killing.

By all means feel free to continue to despise everything that takes the life of one child.

In the same world that children across the globe get proper educations, love, fun, happiness, smiles, hugs, and anything else you care to throw in, I'm sure guns won't even have been invented. Hell the first thing on your list would be a better distraction for you. The public education system in the US is terrible (at least here in Milwaukee it is) and surely it'd be a better goal to have educated children rather than unarmed ones?

[swissaddict]

[Posh]

This anti-gun Vs. Pro-gun is ridiculous, it's as pointless as debating who's better, Republicans or Democrats. We ALL know you're anti-gun and you have your reasons Posh, which I don't support, but still... and then you have us the gun owners who see nothing wrong in guns unless they're put in the wrong hands meanwhile anti-gun supporters believe they're bad for everyone... *sigh*

Stop reading it and stop replying if you a need rest. Or, better yet, start a post talking about your love for guns.

It's okay to have divergent views from one another and it's okay to debate them openly. When we stop, and there's no flow of ideas, because it's as you say, "pointless," then we stop learning. And THAT, to me, is worse than any gun.

Just give this a rest.

Oh, and don't tell me what to do.

[swissaddict]

When we stop, and there's no flow of ideas, because it's as you say, "pointless," then we stop learning. And THAT, to me, is worse than any gun.

LOL!

[Guanaco]

Stop reading it and stop replying if you a need rest. Or, better yet, start a post talking about your love for guns.

It's okay to have divergent views from one another and it's okay to debate them openly. When we stop, and there's no flow of ideas, because it's as you say, "pointless," then we stop learning. And THAT, to me, is worse than any gun.

Yeah it's OK to debate them, but when you try to nail your flawed logic to everyone contradicting you then it stops being a debate and starts becoming an argument.

P.S.

Don't tell me what to do either.

[milesd]

I only read the first post and I knew this was going to be trouble. After seeing that this was up to 12 pages, that's about how I feel about it.

[Posh]

I can't argue with someone who is ignorant.

That being said, I will say this: more than one child has died because of a pool, an electrical outlet, a screwdriver, a car, a stove, a garbage bag, and a whole host of other items that I'm too lazy to type out.

You cling to this ignorant view that the only purpose guns serve is to kill people. Perhaps they were created with that intent, but then aren't there a whole boat-load of useful inventions created with one purpose yet they serve another? I'm willing to bet that large swaths of your everyday life is spent utilizing an invention meant to promote more efficient killing on the battlefield, human history seems to revolve around wars, battles, and killing.

Is it still ignorance if the killing device in question was an nuclear weapon? Or am I just ignorant about their purpose as well? When exactly and on what weapon do I stop being ignorant, in your mind?

If a gun isn't for ending the life of another living thing, then it what is it for exactly? I'm being very, VERY serious when I ask you this question and I implore you to think before you type out your answer. No one's managed to answer this question for me.

And since I'm so ignorant, please, by all means, educate me. I'm your clay. Mold me.

[Guanaco]

If a gun isn't for ending the life of another living thing, then it what is it for exactly? I'm being very, VERY serious when I ask you this question and I implore you to think before you type out your answer. No one's managed to answer this question for me.

You cling to this ignorant view that the only purpose guns serve is to kill people.

He never said they aren't used for killing people, he said it's not their ONLY use which is true. And I'm sorry to say this, but thinking guns are ONLY for killing is truly ignorant, guns are used to hunt, for protection, leisure, etc. Not just for killing. Like he said, anything can be used as a deadly weapon, even a pencil or a pen which kids carry to school every day, it's all relative.

[swissaddict]

What determines a gun's purpose? The maker's intent (or some sort of combined intent of the persons who make the gun)? Is the purpose of a gun unique to each gun, or do all guns have the same purpose(s) by virtue of being categorized as "guns"? Is the reason guns were first made necessarily the reason guns are made now?

I say there is no inherent purpose for guns. Of course, guns can be used for many things, including killing, injuring, recreation, sport, getting food (hunting), robbing (intimidation), collecting (admiration of firearms), and many more. Guns have many uses, but no particular purpose.

[Guanaco]

What determines a gun's purpose? The maker's intent (or some sort of combined intent of the persons who make the gun)? Is the purpose of a gun unique to each gun, or do all guns have the same purpose(s) by virtue of being categorized as "guns"? Is the reason guns were first made necessarily the reason guns are made now?

I say there is no inherent purpose for guns. Of course, guns can be used for many things, including killing, injuring, recreation, sport, getting food (hunting), robbing (intimidation), collecting (admiration of firearms), and many more. Guns have many uses, but no particular purpose.

Exactly.

[/thread]

[Kollektor]

Posh, with all due respect, the quote in Hebrew is "Lo Tirtzach," which means "Do not murder." The infinitive for "kill" in Hebrew is "Laharog," a completely disparate word altogether. Get to know your God better, because if He wrote the Bible, there's a whole lot of condoned killing going on there. It's like an abotoir. In fact, there is a command to act about annihilating the nation of Amalek, including their women, children and even animals. If I recall, Amalek is said to be a descendent of Esav. Abraham was commanded to kill Isaac (etc., etc.)

I only post this, because "Thou shalt not kill" is a gross misinterpretation of the original text. I, myself, am not religious, but if the premise to your outlook is based on textual translation, you really owe it to yourself to read the original text in its native tongue. I could go on and on about other mistranslations but I'd boor everyone into suicide by... gun, birth, cars, seconds at 12, or whatever.

Anyhoo, back to guns, sex and rock-n'-roll...

And now, a quick non sequitor to my favourite skit....

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IwwztaZUkUw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IwwztaZUkUw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Posh]

I only post this, because "Thou shalt not kill" is a gross misinterpretation of the original text. I, myself, am not religious, but if the premise to your outlook is based on textual translation, you really owe it to yourself to read the original text in its native tongue. I could go on and on about other mistranslations but I'd boor everyone into suicide by... gun, birth, cars, seconds at 12, or whatever.<object width="425" height="344">
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IwwztaZUkUw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></object>

This is semantics. I prefer the word kill. This makes my stance unique even within my own family. And my interpretation, along with my relationship with G-d, is my own. Somebody can replace the word "kill" with "murder" or "dance," I'm still going to look on somebody who takes somebody's life away as a horrible person. If you think it's "murder" and you can "kill" whomever you please based on this view, by all means go ahead. Everybody has their own psychological constructs in which to see and work with the world in which they live.

Some people can take another person's life and sleep at night. Good for them. The government needs some sociopaths in order to have an effective department of war.

G-d has the right to to take lives and command for lives to be taken, obviously, because He is G-d. Recently, He hasn't done this, to my knowledge. When and if He does, I'll be first person looking for a gun.

[Guanaco]

Why do you write God as G-d?

[Kollektor]

Certain religions have a caveat about writing the name of the Creator. The name is forbidden to be used in vain. Moreover, it is forbidden to destroy the physical manifestation of the name. So, for example, if you were to write the name of God on a piece of paper, you would be forbidden to tear or burn the paper. Instead, you would have to bury it. There are many streams of thought on this subject, but the above addresses the standard spelling "G-d." I figured everyone knew this, and even playfully poked (NOT in a Biblical sense) a member for being snide. My bad (Joewatch ;-).

Anyway, Guan, now ya know

[Kollektor]

Actually, Posh, God kills EVERYBODY and every living thing on Planet Earth. We all die. By the millions and millions. Evil?

People who are killing terrorists are not sociopaths. If we didn't have these people, we would be ruled--or murdered--by sociopaths. Are you suggesting we all march to our deaths like sheep to the slaughter? Should we bow to terrorists and let them guide our national policy? Should we change our religion because we are being forced by sword?

As far as semantics go, killing and murdering are diametric opposites; and frankly, I'm surprised to see you taking this stance.

A hackneyed thought experiment: If--God forbid--a terrorist was about to murder someone you love, and you have a gun in your hand, would you turn it against the terrorist? If you "turn the other cheek," then in essence it could be argued that you just murdered your loved one insofar as you were able to prevent the act. Whether or not you perceive this to be an act of murder on your own behalf or as an act of free will by the killer, evil reigns irrespective. Nobody has to feel good about killing, but in a world where evil is present, "killing" is sometimes very necessary.

As you point out, maybe the terms are relative to a degree. Relative to societal constructs, relative to cultural perspectives; relative to religious beliefs or ethics. For example, in some religions, the act of infidelity might warrant a death sentence. The executor would not be considered a murderer by that society. Neither would the committee that judged the man. However, the Hague might condemn both the committee and the executor as murderers. Ethical? Can we know what objective reality is? What right and wrong really are in any objective sense? Of course not. But for some reason, most humans on the planet would not view an act of killing in self defense as an act of murder. Majority rules? Common sense? Who knows.

I personally believe that a horrible person is one who enjoys killing others. But the act of killing itself is in a vacuum, to be judged by circumstance.

This is semantics. I prefer the word kill. This makes my stance unique even within my own family. And my interpretation, along with my relationship with G-d, is my own. Somebody can replace the word "kill" with "murder" or "dance," I'm still going to look on somebody who takes somebody's life away as a horrible person. If you think it's "murder" and you can "kill" whomever you please based on this view, by all means go ahead. Everybody has their own psychological constructs in which to see and work with the world in which they live.

Some people can take another person's life and sleep at night. Good for them. The government needs some sociopaths in order to have an effective department of war.

G-d has the right to to take lives and command for lives to be taken, obviously, because He is G-d. Recently, He hasn't done this, to my knowledge. When and if He does, I'll be first person looking for a gun.

[Guanaco]

Certain religions have a caveat about writing the name of the Creator. The name is forbidden to be used in vain. Moreover, it is forbidden to destroy the physical manifestation of the name. So, for example, if you were to write the name of God on a piece of paper, you would be forbidden to tear or burn the paper. Instead, you would have to bury it. There are many streams of thought on this subject, but the above addresses the standard spelling "G-d." I figured everyone knew this, and even playfully poked (NOT in a Biblical sense) a member for being snide. My bad (Joewatch ;-).

Anyway, Guan, now ya know

I didn't know that, thanks for explaining.

[rattlerviper]

Posh given your logic the only purpose of clothes is to cover bare skin. Perhaps you should shop at Walmart since the only purpose of clothing is to prevent public nudity.
The only purpose of a watch is to tell time so why not buy a 10 dollar watch at walmart why you are at it?
The only purpose of a car is to get from point A to point B so if you have less than 4 people in your family you need a Yugo.

The thought that the only (or even main) purpose of guns is killing people is seriously flawed. Can they? Yes no argument there, but so can a nice suit jacket or a pen or a dog. Perhaps we should ban EVERYTHING that has ever taken a human life?

Are you for banning goverments owning weapons? This includes the military and police...I think the records show that goverments have taken far more lives and made far poorer choices in the use of firearms than the general population ever could.

[rattlerviper]

Certain religions have a caveat about writing the name of the Creator. The name is forbidden to be used in vain. Moreover, it is forbidden to destroy the physical manifestation of the name. So, for example, if you were to write the name of God on a piece of paper, you would be forbidden to tear or burn the paper. Instead, you would have to bury it. There are many streams of thought on this subject, but the above addresses the standard spelling "G-d." I figured everyone knew this, and even playfully poked (NOT in a Biblical sense) a member for being snide. My bad (Joewatch ;-).

Anyway, Guan, now ya know

That would be us jews. Though honestly it is only supposed to be the Hebrew name...The true name...of god that deserves that respect. Too many of us either do not know our own religion or become over zealous in it.

That wasn't aimed at you Kollektor, just a general clarification in case someone is curious.