I am Joe's Gun

Discussion in 'Politics' started by 2 Timothy2:1-4, Apr 24, 2007.

  1. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am Joe’s gun. I’m almost as much a part of his ‘apparel’ as shoes or socks. In fact, Joe goes without his socks more often than he goes without me.
    Joe keeps me hidden away whenever he can. Few people outside of Joe’s most trusted friends even know I exist.
    I can’t think for myself, I can’t reason and I can’t act on my own. I’m just a simple machine with few moving parts -- about as complicated as a stapler. I have no brain, no muscles and am neither good nor evil.
    Now I am a dangerous machine, I’ll have to give you that. Just like Joe’s lawnmower, chainsaw, straight-razor, (Joe is very old-fashioned) hedge clipper and automobile, I can be very dangerous in untrained or irresponsible hands.
    Fortunately Joe and the other law-abiding citizens who take their duty of self defense very seriously are committed to their responsibilities as gun owners. Joe knows and obeys the law. He takes me to the shooting range to practice on a regular basis -- a lot more often, in fact, than most policemen. Joe would never allow me to fall into the hands of a child or other irresponsible person and would never use me unless there was no possibility of ready escape or retreat.
    Joe thinks of me much like his insurance policy. He hopes and prays that he will never have to use me, but knows that if he has to, I could save him or his loved ones from death or injury at the hands of evil people who don’t care about, much less obey laws.
    (Handguns are used defensively almost 2 Million times every year, most often with no shots fired.)
    I don’t know why some people hate me and want to get rid of me. If they concentrated on the subhuman criminals who misuse tools such as guns, automobiles, chain saws, ice-picks, baseball-bats, pocket knives, hammers, machetes and authority, regardless of any law, and left law-abiding people like Joe alone you would all be more secure.
    At the very least Joe does no harm, as demonstrated in the 37 or so states where the citizens are ‘permitted their right’ to carry firearms. In these places crime rates have dropped and are still dropping far faster than the national average -- much faster than those places where firearms are essentially banned.
    It’s obvious that when I’m owned and carried by law-abiding citizens like Joe I do far more good than harm.
    It’s sad that many laws keep honest people like Joe from defending themselves while no law or regulation has ever, or can ever keep me out of the hands of criminals.
    I'm glad my brothers and I are carried by people like Joe -- you should be too.

    NOTE: The Eggman had to write this for me since, as I said, I have no brain, no muscles and no ability to reason or think. I’m neither good nor evil -- I’m a simple inanimate object, just like most other tools.

    [​IMG] < -- His Mark
    Permission to reprint this article, or to use on a Website, for news or other Non-Commercial purposes is herby granted with the following restrictions.
    • The text of the article should be included in it's entirety. Other than minor formatting and/or grammatical edits, it may not be edited or condensed. (You may make changes to reflect local laws and regulations. (All localities do not require fingerprinting, for example.)
    • The notice "Original Article Copyright 2007 by T.S. Eggleston" must be included.
    • You may omit the copyright notice if you choose to send the text as a "Letter to the Editor" to media outlets. Please, however, include something to the effect..."The following is submitted to you with permission of the author, T. S. Eggleston"
    • Though not required, a link back to the Jumpgate at http://www.the-eggman.com/ would be appreciated.
    http://www.the-eggman.com/writings/joes_gun.html
     
  2. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3
    I am nuclear weapons. I have no brain and no power to make decisions. If used improperly, however, I can blow this entire world into nothingness. Some would argue I'm good. I serve to preserve a "balance of terror" that really no longer exists. Why do some people think I'm inherently dangerous? I don't understand why. But then again, I have no brain just like the leaders who would consider using me.
     
  3. Filmproducer

    Filmproducer
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Good for Joe and his gun. Does his little op-ed peice make me feel all warm and fuzzy? No. Does it make me change my mind about gun control? No. Sorry.....
     
  4. Filmproducer

    Filmproducer
    Expand Collapse
    Guest


    :laugh: Very well put!
     
  5. Brian30755

    Brian30755
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Messages:
    550
    Likes Received:
    0
    Too bad a few of the students and/or faculty at Virginia Tech weren't packin'...could have saved a lot of lives.
     
  6. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yep. But the powers that be saw to it that they weren't.
     
  7. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am against gun control, but that kind of thinking scares me. I went to basic training. I went to jungle warfare school. I went through SF training. So I was absolutely ready to fire my M-16 but when I got into my first fire fight in Viet Nam, and someone was aiming an AK at me, my face went in the mud, I lifted up my rifle and fired without looking.

    Now with this you act like someone who has never taken a training course, never had any live fire practice is going to be of some service when a evil man who has planned his attack starts firing. What would probably happen is more people would have gotten killed.

    Remember, I am against the gov't being allowed to tell me that I can't own a pistol or a rifle, but schools are not the place for weapons. Classrooms are not the place for weapons.
     
  8. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    More than 32? Wow what a gun battle that would have to be. Your right though, schools are there to turn children into communists, and they should not even desire the right to bear arms by the time they are finished with them.
     
  9. Andre

    Andre
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,870
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do not believe that this argument is correct. Any correlation between gun ownership and dropping crime rates is not evidence (or at best only very weak evidence) of a cause and effect relationship. Gun ownership, as a single factor in a complex multi-factor environment, might actually be causally responsible for more crime, not less, even though crime rates are lower in places with gun ownership. How is this possible? It is possible precisely because other factors might might more than offset this (hypothetical) increase to crime caused by gun ownership. These other factors might be responsible for the lower crime rate, not gun ownership. Such factors could include improved social programs, reductions in gang influences, etc.

    But let's suppose that these other factors are "controlled out" by proper methods, and there was indeed clear evidence that gun ownership reduces crime. We need to be careful to ask ourselves whether crime measures are the only measures of relevance. What about gun accidents? I assume these do not get captured in crime statistics. If town A (with gun ownership allowed) has 4 murders and 4 accidental guns deaths and town B (with gun control) has 5 murders and 0 accidental gun deaths, is town A really the better place to be since it has a lower crime rate (assuming towns A and B have the same number of people) ?

    We also need to ask ourselves, especially as Christians who presumably believe that these "subhumans" are God's lost children, whether reduced crime is worth a possibly increased toll of death of the "bad guys". Consider towns A and B again (gun ownership in A, gun control in B).

    The following is a possible state of affairs:

    Number of gun accidents in A: 0
    Number of holdups with 0 deaths in A: 1
    Number of bad guys killed in A: 5

    Number of gun accidents in B: 0
    Numboer of holdups with 0 death in B: 10
    Number of bad guys killed in A: 0

    B has a higher crime rate - of that there is no doubt. But at least in B, no bad guys have been blown away into a Christless eternity. Perhaps the chance for their redemption later in life is worth the loss of our money to these criminals.

    Now I am not saying that things are necessarily this simple. I realize that people will counter that it is unlikely that there would be 10 holdups in B without the bad guys killing at least one unarmed good guy. That is possible.

    This is a complex problem with many dimensions. I believe in the right to self-defence but I am not sure that guns are the answer. This needs to be studied dispassionately and carefully. If it turns out that gun ownershipo reduces the toll of death and suffering, then I am all for it. If I were a betting man, I would gamble that guns makes things worse. But that is merely my speculation.
     
  10. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,439
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure where you got that argument from my post :confused:

    I guess the answer to liberalism in our schools - which is a very real problem - is fire arms in the classes. Then we could shoot the liberal professors. all in Christian love, I'm sure... maybe just before we administer the coup de grace, we could tell them about Jesus.
     
  11. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,240
    Likes Received:
    2
    And that is why you cannot have an intelligent debate about guns.
     
  12. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Shooting Liberals willy-nilly would result in a lot of dead
    Moderates*. BTW Moderaters are the ones that keep the
    liberals from killing off the knee-jerk reactionaries (AKA:
    conservatives).

    *Footnote: Most hyperconservatives can't tell the difference
    between Liberals and Moderates - there are more
    Moderates than Liberals - hese they would kill more moderates.
     
  13. James_Newman

    James_Newman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    5,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    The trouble is the moderates are always car-pooling with the liberals to the country club. Collateral damage is never pretty.
     
  14. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is wrong with Liberals & Conservatives in a Honda?

    Act 2:1 (KJV1611 Edition):
    And when the day of Pentecost was fully come,
    they were all with
    one accord in one place.
     
  15. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    Politcal Moderate=Liberal lite
     
  16. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3

    Liberals don't kill reactionaries. They don't believe in widespread gun ownership. Far right conservatives kill liberals with their assault weapons.
     
  17. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    More inane commentary.:laugh:
     
  18. Dragoon68

    Dragoon68
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's exactly what our government schools are doing! I agree with you on this one!
     
  19. Brian30755

    Brian30755
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Messages:
    550
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry, never meant to imply that those who had never held a gun would have been much help. Never meant to imply that those with no training or experience or permits should be able to carry a gun on campus. But if those with documented training, practice, and carry permits were allowed to carry their gun on campus.....well, the guy did stop to reload.....somebody could've popped him before he killed more.
     
  20. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,070
    Likes Received:
    216
    Bang opps I mean bump
     

Share This Page

Loading...