I am Joe's Gun

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.

 

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.....

 

:laugh: Very well put!

 

Too bad a few of the students and/or faculty at Virginia Tech weren't packin'...could have saved a lot of lives.

 

Yep. But the powers that be saw to it that they weren't.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

I'm not sure where you got that argument from my post

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.

 

And that is why you cannot have an intelligent debate about guns.

 

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.

 

The trouble is the moderates are always car-pooling with the liberals to the country club. Collateral damage is never pretty.

 

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.

 

Liberals don't kill reactionaries. They don't believe in widespread gun ownership. Far right conservatives kill liberals with their assault weapons.

 

That's exactly what our government schools are doing! I agree with you on this one!

 

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.