Quote:
Originally Posted by Chojin
In what situation would you actually use the gun, though?
|
The situation I can't forsee where my mouth, fists or my feet couldn't avoid the danger. As I said, I didn't get the gun until I had someone other than myself to protect, as well. I would place a loved one's life ahead of a man that would break into my house any day. The thought of what might happen in the absence of some sort of equalizer is pretty sobering.
Additionally, I'd rather not be remembered as the nice guy that believed so much in people that he died with nothing but a dog to defend him from an armed intruder. I'd rather not be remembered as the guy that let his ideology get in the way of doing whatever was required to protect the woman he loved.
If someone busts down my door in the middle of the night, his life is forfeit. He knows that when he invades my home. I'm not going to make a silly, possibly fatal decision like he's to dumb to know the risk he's taking. At the point my life is on the scales with that sort of criminal, I'm not going to factor in for the path that brought him into my house to threaten my existence or that of those I love and are duty-bound to protect.
I live in a state that favors the right of a property owner to protect what's his. I probably wouldn't live in a state that didn't respect my right to defend myself. While it's admittedly fucked up to know that a man's dead body in my home is Ok as long as it's A.) in the house, and B.) the body of a man I can say threatened me, I'd rather have the law lean my way than toward the criminal trespasser.
That being said, I also have a 150 pound dog to warn me if someone is even standing on my porch. He sleeps at the foot of my bed and can hear a pin drop out n the street. If someone makes it into the house after hearing his baritone bellowing, I'm pretty sure I'll know that person's intentions are less than honorable. I trained him to differentiate between threats and random noise, and he quietly takes off to investigate suspicious sounds several times per night.
Now, I don't want you to think I'm some sort of paranoid survivalist, but I have prepared the defenses of my home and the lives of those that live here to such an extreme degree because I value these things much more than I value the life of someone that would harm or kill me or mine for such a stupid reason as whatever cash he could get out of my belongings at a pawn shop.
Whatever an intruder's motivation, I know it's in conflict with mine and obviously more evil than my own intention of living peacefully. I feel that this sort of attitude is my minimum obligation to anyone seeking shelter in my home with my approval.
Pretending to be protecting my home without allowing myself the advantage or the equalization of a firearm is as silly as attempting to paint my house without a brush. I can always re-paint, but I'll never forget the guilt of letting an ideology stop me from saving the life of someone to which I'd obligated myself to protect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chojin
Because we don't have ANYTHING at airports that can detect guns. The UK isn't as small as you think, either, and are physically closer to places that have cheap weapons.
|
Have you been listening to John Kerry? As long as the guns are shipped in containers or stored in the hold of a plane, there's really no problem with smuggling them in. By setting up a prohibition, you create a blackmarket which drives the price of the product up, attracting those that will apply enough thought to the problem to overcome any obstacles.
As I and El Blanco said, there's also nothing to stop a criminal from making a firearm. Some blackpowder, a piece of PVC tubing with a cap and a lighter can make a weapon effective enough to kill you while only requiring a potatoe as a projectile. Are we gonna outlaw potatoes as well? PVC? Matches?
Holding a gun no more makes someone a violent criminal than were they holding a joint or a baby. If they're doing all three at once, I'd agree that's likely a problem. Killing, wounding or threatening someone with a gun is more illegal as driving drunk. Holding a beer is not likely to ever be considered illegal or even dangerous, but a decision to drive a car while doing so repeatedly is probably more dangerous than random firing shots into the air.
The UK is much smaller than North America, and it has much fewer entry points. Security is impossible in this country. Many, many weapons are produced in Mexico, too... more than enough to supply any criminal willing to violate your prohibition that's expanded the scope of his activities past the usefulness of a potatoe. We can't stop 8,000 illegal immigrants flooding up from Mexico each day. You want me to believe we could stop guns from being illegally imported?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chojin
Firearm prohibition is different from drugs and alcohol in that gun use is not a 'vice.' You don't get chemically addicted to firing a fucking gun. Why is that hard to understand?
|
Prohibition is prohibition, and it never works in this country. We still have slavery, in the form of illegal immigrants; discrimination against women and minorities; and plenty of drugs, despite all our well-intentioned prohibitions. It has nothing to do with addiction, but I'll argue criminal behavior is a form of addiction if you want...
And I've never fired my gun. She did, but I wouldn't kill someone just to save my own skin. In fact, my cousin just moved into an apartment on her own, and I'm taking her to the firing range this weekend to show her how to use the gun I'm about to give her. Now that it's just me and Oscar, I don't need the damn thing as much as she does.