Jump to content

Anyone do self defense? Lets all help each other?


Recommended Posts

Amigo,

 

Hey, I like Canada!

 

You are trying to make the facts fit your preconcieved ideas. Violence, including with firearms, in Canada has risen as the gun laws in both the US & CA have grown more restrictive. You probably have met lots of gunowners (besides me!) but they choose to be quiet on the issue - as do many/most gunowners here.

 

Plenty of folks in Canada do buy/own guns for self-defense but they are not going to say so. In Canada, you are not legally allowed to possess ANYTHING whatsoever for the purpose of defending yourself against a human....

 

Canada's gun laws are less restrictive in that they apply to everyone equally regardless of what country a person is from. Canada also allow people to own handguns - unlike some of the most violent places in the US, such as Chicago & DC...

 

I've watched "Bowling for Columbine". Michael Moore is a lying hypocrite!

 

Did you know that his ARMED WITH A PISTOL bodyguard was busted for violating gun laws?

 

Michael Moore bodyguard arrested on gun charge at JFK

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

A bodyguard who has protected outspoken moviemaker and gun-control advocate Michael Moore was arrested at Kennedy International Airport for allegedly carrying a pistol without a New York license, authorities said Thursday.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/breaking_news/story/273211p-233940c.html

 

But I guess that Moore's life and the lives of the rich and famous are more valuable than my own or those of my family?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

maybe you guys and I saw a different movie but I didnt really see a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun crime in bowling for columbine. Sure it might have been implied somewhat, but I do not think it was the main point being made. I do however see charelston hestons comments about racial groups as one of the most telling causes of gun crimes. The racial undertones that define america and american policy I believe are the number one cause of these problems. So next we make guns illegal then what? the only ones wh o have guns are the police, the military and the FBI fuck that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bowling for columbine's point was about ease of accessibility to guns and bullets. One of the major victories was getting a local store to stop selling bullets.

 

Also shown where many protests against guns by the people of the US, and how they are battling against the gun advocates.

 

I think it was clear that they were showing how ease of access to weapons in a nation, directly correlates to deaths.

 

That's a great point about the drugs and it's usage in the US despite being illegal. This is however, in my opinion, a lack of funding into enforcing laws and properly supporting the police system. If they had enough funding, manpower, and authority, perhaps they could do a better job of cleaning up the streets and catching those responsible. I think if the US spent a fraction of what it does on its military and initiatives taking over other nations and supporting capitalist business growth, on social programs, education, safety laws, and law enforcement, (and hell making veganism a required way of life ), surely things would be better.

 

I know that the majority of people in the US (such as yourselves), disagree with me, and believe that having a gun makes you safe. However, I personally think it just makes everyone value human life less, and also makes each of you capable of taking another huamn life much more easily, and even with rights that I believe are very immoral, such as being able to kill someone on your property. I believe there have been many of these issues on the states (at least that is what our news portrays), and a friend of mine told me his father once pulled over in front of someone's house to read a map because he was lost, and the owner came out with a shotgun, pointed it through the window at his head, and said "get off my property". This cowbow shoot-em up mentality is so primative! And besides, if someone ever wanted to kill you, they could, and your gun would more than likely not even be anywhere near you. When you are out walking or in public, someone can just shoot you dead. What good is your gun? Only if you have heads-up warning and you are in your house or close to wherever your gun is, and what if it is a false alarm, fear when there shouldn't be, for example what if a man is running away from someone who is trying to kill him and runs to your house for help but doesn't speak english or is so in shock all he can do is bang on your door and you get scared and kill him? What if teens have anger and want to kill someone and take their family gun? These things are happening in the US, and not in much else of the world, at least on a far less regular occurence. I believe the link to the stats I sent that showed gun owernship relation to death by guns, is a very relevant statistic on how this all works.

 

This is just my opinion and those who are against gun ownership, and seems to be proven by the statistics.

 

And as far as the government having guns so people should have them, again, they have much much more than that nowadays, guns would do nothing. Should we each have a tank, a plane, machine guns, bombs? Where do you draw the line to "rise-up" against your government?

Link to post
Share on other sites

VM...you think vegans should not carry guns??? As I look around at my famlily, and know what I go through every night at work, not knowing if I will come home to my family....whew...I better not get started....n/m...I do respect your view...although I do not agree...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it was clear that they were showing how ease of access to weapons in a nation, directly correlates to deaths.

Really? I did not get that at all from the movie and I have not seen any "proof" that this is true elsewhere.

 

I have no desire to see more police on the streets or to see this or any other government have any more power. More police and laws are also not the solution. Prisons are some of the most heavily policed and controlled places on the planet, yet violence and crime still occurs in prisons.

 

By the way, why do you continue to only focus on the US? Many other countries have high gun ownership rates and people around the world affirm their human right to defend themselves as they choose - Canada being an example of both.

 

Why would a person not have a gun with them? They should! In all but 2 of US states, it is now legal for a person to carry a concealed pistol and hundreds of thousands of people do. As for when it is appropriate to use a gun, there are clear ethical and legal guidelines about this that cover almost all situations. Even in Canada, where you can not legally possess anything for the sole purpose of defending yourself, you CAN use a gun to defend yourself under certain circumstances. For that matter, there are laws on the books up there to "allow" people to get a permit to carry a concealed pistol.

 

If the stats you shared are accurate, and I am not convinced that they are, they prove little. If guns are more available, they *may* be a more common tool used to cause deaths. A more relevant question would look at the total number of deaths and violence by any means, societal and other influences, etc.

 

Beyond all of this, the fact remains that the vast majority of folks who own guns for self-defense or sport never misuse their guns. It is entirely unfair to criminalize us. As has been pointed out, prohibition is not an effective tactic and generally leads to increased violence and crime.

More police and laws are also not the solution.

 

 

"This is just my opinion and those who are against gun ownership, and seems to be proven by the statistics." At least we agree that this is just your opinion!

 

Personally, I would like to see all armies and police forces abolished and the sooner the better. Having civilian based militia's is a preferable alternative for defense for now and changing the economic, social and political causes of violence and war is the overall solution, in my opinion.

 

As for whether or not an armed people is a threat to an unjust government - I think the facts speak for themselves: Most tyrants and oppressors of any sort prefer unarmed victims! Many, if not most, gun laws have come as a direct result of governments wanting to be able to more effectively control and/or murder off dissidents or other

"undesireables".

 

A "just government" would certainly have no reason to disarm the population and nothing to fear from their being armed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just believe the mentality of having a gun, is anti peaceful and doesn't come across as something "vegan".

 

For sure at least you must be against guns/weapons sold for hunting/sport, being a vegan.

 

The goal of a vegan is respect for all life, and the ideal is that all guns should be abolished.

 

I have never had a gun, and never will buy a gun, and I'm probably much less scared than any average american is of any serious crime ever happening to me. Why? Because guns are simply not around that much, and it is not a frequent occurence for people to be killed by guns here.

 

I don't meant to say the states is the only country with gun issues, Africa is definitely another one. I just hear a lot more about the US gun related issues because I'm in a neighbouring country, so our news and media covers a lot of US related issues. I suppose it is also because I was trying to find out if Lib was pro-guns, since he's in the US, and most people in the US are, but I feel it is an anti-vegan mentality to possess a gun (just my opinion). Neither of you need to justify yours! I'm not trying to attack or get into a debate, as none of us would ever budge (I'm completely against guns, and you guys are completely for it - so there is no point in discussing it really). Anyway, we have totally taken this thread off topic!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I just believe the mentality of having a gun, is anti peaceful and doesn't come across as something "vegan".

 

For sure at least you must be against guns/weapons sold for hunting/sport, being a vegan.

 

The goal of a vegan is respect for all life, and the ideal is that all guns should be abolished.

 

I have never had a gun, and never will buy a gun, and I'm probably much less scared than any average american is of any serious crime ever happening to me. Why? Because guns are simply not around that much, and it is not a frequent occurence for people to be killed by guns here.

 

I don't meant to say the states is the only country with gun issues, Africa is definitely another one. I just hear a lot more about the US gun related issues because I'm in a neighbouring country, so our news and media covers a lot of US related issues. I suppose it is also because I was trying to find out if Lib was pro-guns, since he's in the US, and most people in the US are, but I feel it is an anti-vegan mentality to possess a gun (just my opinion). Neither of you need to justify yours! I'm not trying to attack or get into a debate, as none of us would ever budge (I'm completely against guns, and you guys are completely for it - so there is no point in discussing it really). Anyway, we have totally taken this thread off topic!

 

 

Since when is being vegan about respecting all life? Last I checked being vegan was about not eating animals. That being said I am all for animal earth and human liberation. However at the same time, I believe life as precious as it is should be protected by any means nessecary! Once again do you believe that war and violence is never nessecary? I bring up my WWII analogy once again, do you not believe violence was nessecary to end the holocaust? Violence as I said before is most def. not a positive thing, however sometimes violence against violence is the only solution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WHOA!!!!!! Seems to me someones been listenin' to a little too much Ted Nugent....The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING TO DO WITH RISING UP AGAINST THR GOVERNMENT!!!!!! By the way, that's called treason and its a death penalty offense! You need to read the whole thing...it starts with " A well regulated militia being necessary..." Back in those days you had to bring your own gun for your militia service, that's what that is all about!!! If that was true, why did Big George Washington personally lead 15,000 militia troops out of Philadelphia to crush the Whiskey Rebellion? They were Pennsylvania farmers who felt the govt. was acting unjustly and outside their authority. Think on a practical level, who in their right mind would say, "Hey guys, if I ever do something you don't like, feel free to shoot me in the face" These same founding fathers' refered to the American public as "the Great Beast"-(A. Hamilton)...John Locke...who they admired, also advocated the enslaving of poor white people ....Elbridge Gerry said the nations problems "flowed from an excess of democracy"...These guys trusted the average citizen so much that...

1) only wealthy property owners could vote till about the time of Jackson...

2) only office elected was the House of Reps...Pres. chosen by the electoral college...judges appointed and confirmed by Senate...and until 1920 the Senate was also appointed!!!! The H.O.R. which was the ONLY elected branch also serves the least time...2yrs...

3) Continental Army dissolved after the Revolution and it took an Act of Congress to create a full time military under J. Adams. in 1798! Prior to this it was militia and federalized militia that we relied on for defense...and the U.S. was NOT in the business of arms manufacturing!!!

4) J. Adams stated American people needed to "defer to their betters"

Now I like guns, I'm not anti-gun...but you should know better than to trust the logic of TED NUGENT!!! I know something about this period as I am studying to get a Ph.D. in early Am. history!!!! This isn't just my opinion, this is the stuff I have to read EVERYDAY!Please read THE WHOLE 2nd Amendment and use a little common sense!

As for it being a crazy world, yep it sure is...and innocent people get hurt all the time...but a little common sense prevention will keep you out of 99.9% of the trouble! And with a little training you can survive that tiny percentage left over!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It applies to the post someone made about the 2nd Amendment providing for armed insurrestion against the govt. IT IS NOT!!!! I was merely providing evidence of the founding father's contempt for the average schmoe! In fact, there was at one time a law past that said what kind of guns you had to own for militia duty...

Just think about this: how's armed insurrection against the U.S. govt. going in Iraq and Afghanistan? And those guys have RPGs! Anybody who wants to try it, good luck with your WWII/Vietnam era SKS against state of the art US weaponry...let us know how that goes for you...assuming theres any pieces of you left.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the main purposes for the 2nd amendment was the ability for the people to rise up against their government if they felt it nessecary.

 

Here's your quote...You need to read the WHOLE amendment, not just the part Uncle Ted likes to quote!

Here it is in its entirety...its the shortest amendment...

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the peopleto keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

And if there is confusion, they were kind enough to define militias in Art. I, sec. 8 of the Constitution. Pretty staight forward...

 

Having said that, I'm not anti-gun...just don't think the government gives you the ability to rise up...it didn't work for Daniel Shays (Shays Rebellion), Penn. farmers ( Whiskey Rebellion), nor Tim McVeigh...if you recall he cited the 2nd Amend. ...we made a hero out of him right? Oh no wait, we executed him!

Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the main purposes for the 2nd amendment was the ability for the people to rise up against their government if they felt it nessecary.

 

Here's your quote...You need to read the WHOLE amendment, not just the part Uncle Ted likes to quote!

Here it is in its entirety...its the shortest amendment...

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the peopleto keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

And if there is confusion, they were kind enough to define militias in Art. I, sec. 8 of the Constitution. Pretty staight forward...

 

Having said that, I'm not anti-gun...just don't think the government gives you the ability to rise up...it didn't work for Daniel Shays (Shays Rebellion), Penn. farmers ( Whiskey Rebellion), nor Tim McVeigh...if you recall he cited the 2nd Amend. ...we made a hero out of him right? Oh no wait, we executed him!

 

Ok since we feel the need to insist on getting technical, I think the point Iwas trying to make is that it was commonly implied knowledge as being part of the purpose of the second amendment. Also still irellevant from an ideological point of view. Also if a majority of the countries population decided to overthrow the government, they would not be able to do a thing about it. No one is talking about some fortified revolutionary group like what happened in WACO. Having said this, I think the government actually giving you a legal right to revolt would be a pretty unnessecary mute point dont you? If the people woke up and wanted a revolution, a revolution we would have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That wasn't being technical, that was correcting a false statement! Being technical would have been correcting you if you called it the 3rd Amendment...

It's "commonly implied knowledge" that vegans are 90 lbs weaklings! That doesn't make it true!

All I'm trying to say is...don't think the 2nd Amendment is your constitutional right to commit treason!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I just believe the mentality of having a gun, is anti peaceful and doesn't come across as something "vegan".

 

For sure at least you must be against guns/weapons sold for hunting/sport, being a vegan.

 

The goal of a vegan is respect for all life, and the ideal is that all guns should be abolished.

 

I have never had a gun, and never will buy a gun, and I'm probably much less scared than any average american is of any serious crime ever happening to me. Why? Because guns are simply not around that much, and it is not a frequent occurence for people to be killed by guns here.

 

I don't meant to say the states is the only country with gun issues, Africa is definitely another one. I just hear a lot more about the US gun related issues because I'm in a neighbouring country, so our news and media covers a lot of US related issues. I suppose it is also because I was trying to find out if Lib was pro-guns, since he's in the US, and most people in the US are, but I feel it is an anti-vegan mentality to possess a gun (just my opinion). Neither of you need to justify yours! I'm not trying to attack or get into a debate, as none of us would ever budge (I'm completely against guns, and you guys are completely for it - so there is no point in discussing it really). Anyway, we have totally taken this thread off topic!

 

Heya Monk!

I totally respect having your personal beliefs on guns and implementing those beliefs in your own life. It seems like you are into having those personal opinions forced upon me and others, and I am not cool with that.

 

I am opposed to the so-called "sport" of hunting yes, but that is only one type of shooting and not one that I consider a sport at all.

 

I do feel that discussions such as this are very valuable. It's important for all of us to remain openminded and willing to learn and change. Besides that, many folks have never really researched or considered these issues and/or have only been exposed to very limited info and views

about them - having an open discussion can help them formulate their own opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are certain types of "rules" which must be forced into societies, such as making racism and sexism illegal.

 

People do not deserve the right to think completely freely to do whatever they choose. Societies do have to create rules and force certain mentalities. We can't have KKK members allowed their freedom of rights now can we?

 

I do believe that guns should be banned and restrictricted, and that nobody in the general public should ever be allowed to have one. In an ideal world, there would be no weapons at all, no military, no wars, just a peaceful human civilization working as one species towards sustainability and a common good for all life.

 

Guns represent all that is wrong in this world. They are used to kill, and are symbolic of how humanity has degraded itself into wars and domination over human beings and other species. They represent a form of power than one can have over another. They are dangerous. They are a waste of resources. They create a false sense of security. If someone wanted to kill you or your family, they could easily, and your gun would not save you (for example someone can put a bomb under your car or shoot you in public, what good would your gun at home do you then?). And shooting things and blowing stuff up is not a sport. It's just destruction and promotes violent mentalities.

 

If I had the power to force such an ideal on the people of this world, I would do so, gladly

Link to post
Share on other sites

VM,

 

It is very saddening and disturbing to read what you just wrote...

 

I work for a world free of unnecessary violence, irrational prejudice and all forms of oppression. Choice and freedom are critical parts of making this world a reality. All people must be able to think and believe as they choose and we certainly should not ban or criminalize opinions/thoughts however much we may disagree with them.

 

As for "gun control" - victim disarmament laws benefit those who oppress and victimize, not the rest of us. Most were instituted specifically to disarm and disempower people that challenged the powers that be.

 

You have not presented much of a case for banning guns and have now better represented why many people choose to be armed: To have the ability to better resist anyone who would force their choices upon us is THE primary reason people must be free to arm themselves if they choose.

Edited by loveliberate
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe that guns should be banned and restrictricted, and that nobody in the general public should ever be allowed to have one. In an ideal world, there would be no weapons at all, no military, no wars, just a peaceful human civilization working as one species towards sustainability and a common good for all life.

 

Guns represent all that is wrong in this world. They are used to kill, and are symbolic of how humanity has degraded itself into wars and domination over human beings and other species. They represent a form of power than one can have over another. They are dangerous. They are a waste of resources. They create a false sense of security. If someone wanted to kill you or your family, they could easily, and your gun would not save you (for example someone can put a bomb under your car or shoot you in public, what good would your gun at home do you then?). And shooting things and blowing stuff up is not a sport. It's just destruction and promotes violent mentalities.

 

If I had the power to force such an ideal on the people of this world, I would do so, gladly

So....I guess you'll be giving up Muy Thai? It's pretty violent...and it creates a false sense of security...wasn't it you who came up with the 5 guys with bats scenario?

Just my own 2 cents...hand guns , I believe, do create a false sense of security and will help little in most self defense situations...but that's not to say its not a valuable tool for sport shooting (non-living targets of course) or other , more complex, self defense situations...(NOT home invasion or muggings!) I like shootin' stuff...its fun and harmless...and I don't have a violent mentality. That would be like me accusing you of having a violent mentality for studying MARTIAL arts...need you be reminded that martial means "suited for war" ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point on the martial arts.

 

Handguns do have a limited range of application and I advocate that any one training for defending themselves not limit themself to any one defensive tool. Within those limitations however, handguns are a powerful and very useful tool. Their strengths include that they:

- facilitate the application of a considerable amount of force

- are effective over a relatively long distance

- are comparitively easy to carry & conceal

- are very handy in close quarters

- can be used with only one hand if need be.

 

Sounds like a worthy defensive tool to me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Martial arts was originally intended to be about developing the body and the mind and perfecting one's self. It was not designed for war. It was unfortunately used in that manner down the road (the japanese and koreans took the hard styles from watching chinese styles - removed all the soft, and were aggressive and used these in wars). This aggressive nature then passed on to other martial arts, and it is this aggressive nature that has nothing to do with what the original intent was.

 

I don't take muay thai. I do capoeira and wing chun. However, I am considering muay thai, not to use for defending myself, not to use for wars, but to learn the art, and to develop my physical being in conjuction with my mind. We do live in a physical world, and focussing on physical improvement is not a bad thing! Problem is finding a non-aggressive school to learn at - as most are all filled with aggressive guys that just want to fight and have bad karma. I would not compete in sports or tournaments though. I'm against that. I am OK with training with a friend as that is all in good fun and for improvement. Even animals in the wild have mock fights to improve their physical ability to defend themselves and condition themselves. So they use less force than they would and draw a line (ie; dont' kill each other)', but still give a serious bashing to each other and bleed etc, to make sure they are conditioning themselves.

 

My major theme throughout this thread is that real life self defense is not something that can be made a sport out of, and is also not something regularly taught, as it would injure those that you train with. It's much harder to teach, and also less financially prosperous for a business (ie: most martial arts that make you run around for the first 45 mins of a class and then only give you the last quarter of the class of "real" instruction, which is totally useless in real life scenarios, ie: taekwondo. If you teach someone basic essentials and just run those through routinely, it makes for far fewer classes and less income.

 

I'd have to say I disagree with the idea that having a gun protects you from having values or rules forced upon you. Just look at all the evil american ways of life forced upon society, and your guns are not doing anything to stop it! Are you pro the Iraq/Afghan wars? Are you pro patriot acts? Are you pro Bush? Are you pro corporate/cruelty/environmental disaster policies? Are you anti-kyoto? Are you pro being the number one environmentally damaging nation in the planet? Probably not! But I don't see all of you that have guns using those to do anything to stop it. And if you did, you'd all be shot dead or put in jail anyway. The guns you have do nothing and are no match against military controlled societies (which you are by the way). The solutions lie in creating an educated compassionate uniform society that shapes their civilization in a peaceful manner. Using a gun is no way to shape society. People outside the USA believe the US is one of the most brainwashed and supressed and dangerous societies in the world to live. If having guns meant less oppressive and safer nations, then the USA should surely be ranked amongst the top in the world since it's gun ownership percentage is the highest. I myself have not been to the staes in 18 years, and have no plans of ever going there, based on the mentalities of your society. It is far too dangerous, people are brainwashed, and far too aggressive a society for me.

 

However, I would like to cease and desist on this debate about guns. Trying to convince americans not to have guns is a more daunting task than convincing them to go vegan, so I'd just rather not continue it.

 

I'd give my life to see a law passed that would protect the rights of animals, and make them equals to man, and stop the suppression. To see the world enforce this value upon the ignorant and suppressive human beings would be a beautiful day, and I couldn't care less about respecting those humans personal beliefs/values. They are simply wrong, and there is nothing more to it, just as the racists and sexists must be abolished, so too must the speciesists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!!!!! Where the hell did you get your info about martial arts?! Not for war?? The "-jitsus" were ENTIRELY for warfare! Know anything about life in feudal Japan? Quite brutal-I suggest reading the "Hagakure" by Yamamoto Tsunetomo (1659-1719)...(one of his complaints in the 17th/18thy century was the softening of marial arts!) And yes...China's were developed for warfare as well!...the "-dos" are what you speak of, where there is less emphasis on warfare and more a pursuit of a "way" hence aikijitsu becomes aikido...jujitstu to judo...etc...it was only after social tensions/violence eased that allowed the arts to be pursued for more spiritual purposes...why else would they incorperated bone breaks, punches and such? man...saying martial arts weren't for war is like saying guns weren't developed for war...they were ...but it doesn't mean that they didn't evolve into other purposes...

 

If you trully want a MA that refutes violence I would look into Aikido...most of the people involved are very nice and not your typical martial artists!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've found myself in the precarious position with disagreeing with both sides on this issue...I do not particularly like guns, and I like very few gun owners...I don't own a gun, only very occasionally do I shoot with friends using their guns, I believe in stricter gun laws...BUT I don't think they are the source of all evil in America...I've said it before, I'll say it again...

"Guns don't kill people, men with mustaches (and flat tops) do!"

 

I was amused with your anti-American rant and agree with 85% of what you said...but, Americans aren't dicks because of guns, they're dicks 'cause they are spoiled...and very self centered! (Unlike the saintly Canadians )

Link to post
Share on other sites

VM,

My friend, thank you for sharing your thoughts. There is a lot that I could say in response but I'll limit myself to a couple of things for now:

Please do not generalize about everyone who lives here in the usa. It is a massive & diverse country. As with anywhere, people here have a wide variety of opinions on any given issue. Many folks here agree with you on these issues we've been discussing. For that matter, many people in Canada & elsewhere around the world are more in line with the views I & others have put forward.

 

I also hope you will reconsider your choice to not visit the usa! I greatly enjoyed your company during our short visit and hope that you will not choose to let our differences get in the way of being friends or your fear get in the way of your experiencing all that the people and places in the usa have to share.

 

Not to mention all the vegan goodies you'll mis by not visiting Portland!

 

"To see the world enforce this value upon the ignorant and suppressive human beings would be a beautiful day, and I couldn't care less about respecting those humans personal beliefs/values. They are simply wrong, and there is nothing more to it,"

 

This sounds like a direct quote from any average totalitarian, fascist, religous fundamentalist or similar person... Beyond how "simply wrong" it would be to force your vision on others - where do you draw the line of who/what is worthy/ok by you? How do you enforce your values? With violence or perhaps even guns?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning stricter gun laws...it is a common practice here in Texas (at least the panhandle) to give away free shotguns with the purchase of pick up trucks...I'm not s**ting you, there is always some dealership offering free shotguns with purchase of your new pick up...that is ridiculous...I'm also in favor of a wait period, just enough time for background checks...including at gun shows, I've had a few felon friends who got their guns at those events...just to clarify my comment that I dislike most gun owners, I really mean the very vocal, NRA/Ted Nugent types that flourish here in Texas...

Concerning gun laws in other places...would you doubt that guns are prevalent in those societies and that they are also some of the most violent societies? But that was more of a cheap shot joke...I DON'T think guns are the problem, I think it's the attitudes of the people. I would say the South is far more violent, from the begining of the US and it has to do with BS codes of valor/honor...Latin Am. has much of the same with machisimo. Its not the guns , its the people, and the guns are a dangerous tool for SOME people.

Rather than everyone owning a gun, I think if everyone knew a Martial art ( my choice would be Aikido since its strictly defensive) the world would be a safer place. Not likely to happen, but neither is a vegan world, but its worth a shot...as a famous anarchist once said "It is not that we ever achieve [the perfect society], but that we constantly strive for the [perfect society]!"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...