Guns in the House

[need2cruise]

I guess it shouldn't surprise me though.....that mentality.

You want one persons rights to be taken away, so you can feel "safe" in your home,yet no care as to what they feel is safe. You are saying your safety is more important than theirs.

 

[bicker]

But what about the family members who know their family member is an alcoholic?

Earlier in this thread some folks outlined a set of criteria that constitutes responsible gun ownership. What criteria are you talking about applying in this scenario you're putting forward? It sounds promising, but I need to know what criteria you're talking about before giving you a definitive answer.

Or knows they take presription drugs.......should they be held accountable too?

Please provide the same clarification.

Sorry--I disagree---a person is ONLY responsible for their OWN actions.......period.

I know you claim to want it to be that way (though again I suspect that your desire is limited to only some things, and for other things you're probably on the other side of the fence), but you're mistaken. I already outlined a couple of counter-examples for you, so I am mystified why you're still denying those realities. You can just say that you want things to be that way; you don't have to try to assert that things are that way, when it is so clear that that assertion is wrong.

 

[GinnyEmma]

How about restricting the type of weapon permitted? I mean, you hardly need a minigun to go hunting with and, frankly, it would be ridiculous in the role of home security!

Who cares why someone wants one, as long as it is acquired legally? If I want to collect something it isn't anyone else's business as long as I am not breaking the law.

If my neighbor wants to collect ak47's it is his/her business. I hope I don't accidentally get shot, but statistically speaking I am pretty safe.

 

[136368]

Who cares why someone wants one, as long as it is acquired legally? If I want to collect something it isn't anyone else's business as long as I am not breaking the law.

Jus' saying that it's a little weird to go hunting with an RPG and that using one for home security is a tad overkill. Pick up a gun if you must but please, ensure that it is fit for purpose and not the kind of thing a Terminator would pack.

 

[JessicaR]

Jus' saying that it's a little weird to go hunting with an RPG and that using one for home security is a tad overkill. Pick up a gun if you must but please, ensure that it is fit for purpose and not the kind of thing a Terminator would pack.

I dont understand. The end result is the same. Dead is dead.

 

[need2cruise]

Earlier in this thread some folks outlined a set of criteria that constitutes responsible gun ownership. What criteria are you talking about applying in this scenario you're putting forward? It sounds promising, but I need to know what criteria you're talking about before giving you a definitive answer.

Please provide the same clarification.

I know you claim to want it to be that way (though again I suspect that your desire is limited to only some things, and for other things you're probably on the other side of the fence), but you're mistaken. I already outlined a couple of counter-examples for you, so I am mystified why you're still denying those realities. You can just say that you want things to be that way; you don't have to try to assert that things are that way, when it is so clear that that assertion is wrong.

That's where you are wrong about me. I think each person should be held accountable for their own actions. You make the choices you make, not others. To say that someone should be held accountable for anothers actions.....that is the same mentality a lot of parents take nowadays for their children. People need to own up to their own mistakes and take the consequences for it..period. My views on that don't waiver based on which side of the fence I'm on.

Responsible gunownership is:
Obtaining a gun legally--including registrating it if it is required in the state you live in.
Obtaining firearms license--if required in the state you live in.
Knowing the mechanics of your firearm and regular practice shooting it.

There needs to be education around firearms. Adults as well as children. However, I think by starting firearm education at a young age, and ensuring every child in America understands firearms (same as we push sex education and drug education) will go along way towards decreasing children playing with guns. The guns are no longer a novelty to them and they understand the dangers behind them.

However, as with anything in LIFE, there are going to be people who don't care to educate theirselves and will push doing things their own way. Nothing can be done about that. Even taking away firearms, those same unresponsible people will still own their firearms. Your problem will never be solved.

Ignorance is at it's worst when dealing with someone who doesn't understand gunownership.

Do you realize that children who have died as a result of a firearm in 1998 was only 290, yet poisoning was 432 and MVA was 8,539? 205 died from a fall.........amazing........firearms wasn't even on the top 5 on the list for accidental child deaths.

And for ages 20-50......it was only #14 on the list for accidental deaths....

So---I think your odds are good that your neighbors won't be shooting a hole through your kitchen door at you while they are out target shooting.

 

[mamacatnv]

That's where you are wrong about me. I think each person should be held accountable for their own actions. You make the choices you make, not others. To say that someone should be held accountable for anothers actions.....that is the same mentality a lot of parents take nowadays for their children. People need to own up to their own mistakes and take the consequences for it..period. My views on that don't waiver based on which side of the fence I'm on.

Responsible gunownership is:
Obtaining a gun legally--including registrating it if it is required in the state you live in.
Obtaining firearms license--if required in the state you live in.
Knowing the mechanics of your firearm and regular practice shooting it.

There needs to be education around firearms. Adults as well as children. However, I think by starting firearm education at a young age, and ensuring every child in America understands firearms (same as we push sex education and drug education) will go along way towards decreasing children playing with guns. The guns are no longer a novelty to them and they understand the dangers behind them.

However, as with anything in LIFE, there are going to be people who don't care to educate theirselves and will push doing things their own way. Nothing can be done about that. Even taking away firearms, those same unresponsible people will still own their firearms. Your problem will never be solved.

Ignorance is at it's worst when dealing with someone who doesn't understand gunownership.

Do you realize that children who have died as a result of a firearm in 1998 was only 290, yet poisoning was 432 and MVA was 8,539? 205 died from a fall.........amazing........firearms wasn't even on the top 5 on the list for accidental child deaths.

And for ages 20-50......it was only #14 on the list for accidental deaths....

So---I think your odds are good that your neighbors won't be shooting a hole through your kitchen door at you while they are out target shooting.

 

[bicker]

I know you claim to want it to be that way ..., but you're mistaken.

I think each person should be held accountable [only] for their own actions.

Accountability for actions has nothing to do with whether you want things or don't. Indeed, what you've said here, is exactly the kind of thing I was referring to in the comment you replied to. Despite what you seem to be saying you want, people are accountable for their actions and their neglect.

To say that someone should be held accountable for anothers actions...

Let's stop you there. No one is actually saying that. You'd taken what people have said, and subtly corrupted it after several restatements, so now it is something you might have some fun arguing against, but has nothing to do with what people actually said to you.

What we're saying is that people are held accountable for their own neglect, not for the actions of someone else.

People need to own up to their own mistakes and take the consequences for it..period.

No, not "period"... Rather: that AND what I said. Both. Not just the one you like, in this scenario. (And again, I wouldn't be surprised if you would prefer "both" if we weren't talking about guns.)

Responsible gunownership is:

No: That's what you wish responsible gun ownership is. Other posters in this thread provided many more requirements, such as proper storage, security,etc., all of which should prevail. You are yet-again confusing yourself by assuming your preference is the only possible legitimate perspective, yet your limited scope of gun ownership responsibilities is not even shared by other gun owners in this thread.

Your problem will never be solved.

For the third or fourth time; that's a red herring. It is not necessary for something to be 100% effective in order for it to have sufficient positive impact to make enough of a difference.

 

[GinnyEmma]

Jus' saying that it's a little weird to go hunting with an RPG and that using one for home security is a tad overkill. Pick up a gun if you must but please, ensure that it is fit for purpose and not the kind of thing a Terminator would pack.

Why care? As long as someone is obeying the law. You can't use a rifle in Ohio to hunt. You can in west Virginia. Follow the laws and enjoy yourself. Maybe people collect because they are just fun to shoot. We target shoot. Using a .22 pistol is different than the rifle. Both are fun. If friends bring a gurand, if I am willing to bruise the crap out of my shoulder it is my business if i choose to shoot at ice at the creek. My life, my biusiness. I don't break the law. So it isn't anyone else's business. Same for my neighbors. They dont have to explain themselves to me. Just sayin'...

 

[AKL_Megs]

How about restricting the type of weapon permitted? I mean, you hardly need a minigun to go hunting with and, frankly, it would be ridiculous in the role of home security!

We have a shotgun and a .22, and if you break in to my house in the middle of the night, you are getting one pointed at you.

Both will stop you in your tracks. You just might need to shoot twice with the .22...

If you've ever shot a "minigun", you'd know what I mean.

 

[need2cruise]

Accountability for actions has nothing to do with whether you want things or don't. Indeed, what you've said here, is exactly the kind of thing I was referring to in the comment you replied to. Despite what you seem to be saying you want, people are accountable for their actions and their neglect.

Let's stop you there. No one is actually saying that. You'd taken what people have said, and subtly corrupted it after several restatements, so now it is something you might have some fun arguing against, but has nothing to do with what people actually said to you.

What we're saying is that people are held accountable for their own neglect, not for the actions of someone else.


No, not "period"... Rather: that AND what I said. Both. Not just the one you like, in this scenario. (And again, I wouldn't be surprised if you would prefer "both" if we weren't talking about guns.)

No: That's what you wish responsible gun ownership is. Other posters in this thread provided many more requirements, such as proper storage, security,etc., all of which should prevail. You are yet-again confusing yourself by assuming your preference is the only possible legitimate perspective, yet your limited scope of gun ownership responsibilities is not even shared by other gun owners in this thread.

For the third or fourth time; that's a red herring. It is not necessary for something to be 100% effective in order for it to have sufficient positive impact to make enough of a difference.

#1--I am not confusing or rewording what others have said. This has purely been between you and I, and I went based on your exact posting. The only one twisting words and misconceptions has been you.

As for what others have stated as responsible gun ownership---that is extra red tape on a personal right we already have and I disagree with some of them and that's why I didn't state that as "my" personal views on responsible gun ownership.

Also, as for limited gun ownership scope....you are far from mistaken on that. I based a whole thesis paper on gun ownerhip through history and currently and fully know the gun restrictions that various states have and I also am very aware of what gun control through history has caused. Not to mention, I have extensive gun knowledge and have no worries about my children ever touching a gun within my home and I can rest at night knowing they know what to do in a situation when a gun is present in a household they are in. Many parents can not boast the same thing.

And lastly, you are argueing for things that may happen, but haven't. I am purely argueing on our current rights. We have the right to own guns. Bottom line--end of discussion. If you are so worried about your neighbors hurting you.........move.....that's YOUR right.

 

[need2cruise]

We have a shotgun and a .22, and if you break in to my house in the middle of the night, you are getting one pointed at you.

Both will stop you in your tracks. You just might need to shoot twice with the .22...

If you've ever shot a "minigun", you'd know what I mean.

LOL--grab the shotgun!!!

 

[need2cruise]

Why care? As long as someone is obeying the law. You can't use a rifle in Ohio to hunt. You can in west Virginia. Follow the laws and enjoy yourself. Maybe people collect because they are just fun to shoot. We target shoot. Using a .22 pistol is different than the rifle. Both are fun. If friends bring a gurand, if I am willing to bruise the crap out of my shoulder it is my business if i choose to shoot at ice at the creek. My life, my biusiness. I don't break the law. So it isn't anyone else's business. Same for my neighbors. They dont have to explain themselves to me. Just sayin'...

 

[Anjelica]

And lastly, you are argueing for things that may happen, but haven't. I am purely argueing on our current rights. We have the right to own guns. Bottom line--end of discussion. If you are so worried about your neighbors hurting you.........move.....that's YOUR right.

 

[bicker]

#1--I am not confusing or rewording what others have said. This has purely been between you and I, and I went based on your exact posting.

No you haven't. I've made that clear. And I've made very clear what I'm talking about.

Despite what you seem to be saying you want, people are accountable for their actions and their neglect.

That is the relevant point.

The only one twisting words and misconceptions has been you.

No I'm not. I'm being very literal.

Also, as for limited gun ownership scope....you are far from mistaken on that.

I know that I'm "far from mistaken". I wonder why you'd say so.

You don't like gun control. I think that's clear to everyone. I don't think, though, that you're really internalizing what I'm saying in response. It seems like you're just refusing to acknowledge that your preferences aren't the law.

And lastly, you are argueing for things that may happen, but haven't. I am purely argueing on our current rights.

No, you're not. You've repeatedly objected when I outlined how laws could change to effect some of the assurance I've been talking about.

If you are so worried about your neighbors hurting you.........move.....that's YOUR right.

It is also your neighbors' right to address their concerns to their government and if they prevail in affecting the consensus view in society, then imposing on your gun ownership the various limitations, restrictions, and inspections that we've alluded to. It works both ways.

 

[Muushka]

We have a shotgun and a .22, and if you break in to my house in the middle of the night, you are getting one pointed at you.

Both will stop you in your tracks. You just might need to shoot twice with the .22...

If you've ever shot a "minigun", you'd know what I mean.

 

[136368]

I dont understand. The end result is the same. Dead is dead.

Yeah, but buying a support weapon to hunt with is like buying one of these:

...to go to the shops and back. Overkill. Ridiculous.

On the other hand, as my old RSM once told me, there's nothing quite as much fun as throwing grenades off of a cliff top

LOL--grab the shotgun!!!

That's my opinion! A shotgun is good for hunting and effective when it comes to home security. You don't need to go and buy one of these:

I mean, you'd look like a wally. On the bright side, the robber may be incapacitated with laughter

 

[GinnyEmma]

Lol, overkill is in the eye of the beholder. If you want to defend your house, hunt, target shoot with that contraption, and it isn't illegal, it is your business. Some people think any sort of weapon is overkill.

 

[JessicaR]

Lol, overkill is in the eye of the beholder. If you want to defend your house, hunt, target shoot with that contraption, and it isn't illegal, it is your business. Some people think any sort of weapon is overkill.

Exactly. Personal preference and legal - have at it.

 

[136368]

How on earth can you honestly think that an FNP90 is suitable for home defence? These are powerful, complex weapons and should require extra training, just as you need special training before you drive a bus or specialised training before you can prescribe Clozapine to psychiatric patients.