Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemover
There are no such ridiculous laws here. A gun is USELESS for self-defense if it is locked, not quickly accessible to the owner, and/or physically separated from ammunition.
I store my weapon safely, but when I am home, or traveling with it, it is CLOSE to me, LOADED, and NOT trigger-locked.
|
I wonder where this constant need for having a locked and loaded weapon handy all the time comes from?
Is it a fear of becoming a victim, paranoia, self-righteousness, deep distrust in the police's ability to protect, a power/ego trip, do you live in the "bad” part of town, do you constantly see people around you being threatened/killed by gun wielding criminals, what?
You make it look like the wild-West was a Sunday picnic compared to modern day America.
That self-defense incident you speak of clearly came after you started carrying a gun, so is your justification possibly a self fulfilling prophecy?
Is it possible that (sub-conscientiously perhaps) you act/behave differently because you know you carry "heat"?
I wonder about the quality of life in a country where one seems to have the constant need of being armed in public or in one's own home, talk about siege mentality.
Alternately, if you feel that neither law nor law enforcement can protect you sufficiently then perhaps the lawmakers should make the appropriate change to weed out the undesirables in a much timelier fashion than it is done now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemover
Perhaps you don't trust yourself not to "murder" someone with a handgun... But I have no such insecurities. I am quite confident that I will not "murder" anyone with it, and I am also quite certain that my gun is incapable of murdering anyone on its own, so... I'm not worried.  |
I have never had the need or the desire to own a gun in any of the countries I have lived in so far, so the chance of me murdering someone by accident or by design is slim to none.
On the other hand, I remember an incident where a Japanese student was promptly dispatched having done the crime of not speaking sufficient English coupled with the unfortunate lack of sense of direction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikemover
No, most of those victims would be alive today if it weren't for the ACTIONS OF THE PERPETRATOR.
A gun is an inanimate object. Guns to do get up and go out to kill people. PEOPLE do.
The lawsuits against cigarette makers are absurd... No one is FORCED to smoke.
Equally ridiculous is the concept of suing a manufacturer for the actions of some random individual.
I don't know what kind of nonsense you guys are up to in Canada... but HERE, many of us still want to hold INDIVIDUALS responsible for their OWN actions.
And lastly... You should look into the definitions of "attributable" and "contributable"... I don't think "contributable" is even a word....
Mike
|
My original argument centered on the premise that easy access to guns (let it be a "self defense" instrument, a shotgun or an assault rifle) gives these deranged individuals the opportunity to commit multiple homicides in a very short time. My point is, had those guns not been available in the first place the victims would still be here smelling roses along with a large part of the more than 370,000 people who died in gun related incidents in the US, be it homicide, suicide or accident, between 1991-2001. Therefore, when a manufacturer produces a product and the only purpose for that product is to take life, then surely that manufacturer should be responsible when the product is used for its intended purpose.
Outlawing guns may not practical at this stage; however banning the manufacturing of ammunition should solve the problem in a few years.
On the other hand if nothing is done to address the situation then no one should wonder and act like it is some kind of act of god when a crazed one blows a gasket and takes innocents victims along. The chance of this happening is increasing every year guns are easily available.
It may not be fair for the “responsible” gun owners, but I also think that it is unfair to me that I can’t get from Tokyo to Kyoto in 2 hours instead of 6 because of soccer moms and Sunday drivers (therefore I enjoy every (very rare) moment when I can put the “pedal to the metal” on the Autobahn)).
As to “contributable”, it is a word, but not the right one in that context.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contributable
Alex