The "Stand Your Ground" Law....

[BawanaRik]

You can brew and distill alcohol in bathtubs. You can grow weed in your spare closet. Consumption of either of those items is typically a victimless crime that your neighbors won't mind. Gun manufacturing is a touch more complicated currently than distilling plants and sugar into potables. Hopefully 3D printing technology won't significantly change that in the upcoming years.

It has changed it already. Welcome to the Twenty First Century Mr Rodgers!

 

[Unrepresented]

But it does give me a certain satisfaction that there is a sense of right and wrong in the universe.

That warm feeling from believing, if only for a second, yes there is Karma!

If your sense of "right and wrong" involves executions in the streets by criminals rather than by a jury of our peers with the right to quality legal council, I doubt we'll agree on much in this thread.

 

[Unrepresented]

It has changed it already. Welcome to the Twenty First Century Mr Rodgers!

I have seen more discussion than impact from the tech, thus far.

 

[yodedude2]

...Criminals aren't as emboldened when they have to think twice about getting killed - someone has to have a suicide wish if they break into a house in Texas at night. <snip>

home invasions are not so uncommon here, anecdotally speaking.

 

[fmoore200]

Wasn't it in the two fingers rage quit thread where somebody said "conservatives are out numbered on TB"?

Well unrepresented, and his liberal gun control ideas, seems to be thoroughly out numbered.

Balance has been restored!!

 

[Turock]

Downplaying the victims doesn't make their deaths any less offensive. Even people with criminal records deserve to not be shot in the street.

I'm not downplaying thugs shooting thugs, but we disagree about their deaths being "less offensive". Actually, I'm just pointing out where the real problem lies.

With over 300 million people and 250 million guns, using your logic, the murder rate should be much, much higher.

Are you also of the belief that spoons make people fat?

 

[jmattbassplaya]

Wasn't it in the two fingers rage quit thread where somebody said "conservatives are out numbered on TB"?

Well unrepresented, and his liberal gun control ideas, seems to be thoroughly out numbered.

Balance has been restored!!

Another TB'er said this once and I think he is correct - TB is more libertarian than conservative or liberal.

 

[BawanaRik]

If your sense of "right and wrong" involves executions in the streets by criminals rather than by a jury of our peers with the right to quality legal council, I doubt we'll agree on much in this thread.

Hardly executions. I believe the term is keeping it real.

I don't believe the state should be engaged in deciding who lives and dies, no matter the availability or lack of "quality legal council".

Looking at any stats and it's clear that "quality legal council" counts for naught when the charge is possession of a Y.

 

[BawanaRik]

Another TB'er said this once and I think he is correct - TB is more ******* than ******* or *******.

I think you are right.

What could be cooler than just allowing people to live their own lives.

And TB is a cool place.

 

[BawanaRik]

I'm not downplaying thugs shooting thugs, but we disagree about their deaths being "less offensive". Actually, I'm just pointing out where the real problem lies.

With over 300 million people and 250 million guns, using your logic, the murder rate should be much, much higher.

Are you also of the belief that spoons make people fat?

We need to outlaw spoons! And forks!

Considering the numbers of guns out there and the few deaths that occur it's hard to find a product that is so safe.

Swimming pools? Nope.

 

[jmattbassplaya]

My thoughts are this - we have tried prohibition in the past and it has simply not worked in this country. People will always find ways around laws if they really want to (especially criminals). Furthermore, millions of fine citizens own their own firearms and will go their entire lifetime without there being a major incident involving any of those guns. To deny those people their right because a small minority of people can't keep it together is not reason enough to ban them. Like with drugs, alcohol, sex, and numerous other things, prevention and education seems to be the smartest way to tackle this issue. Let us educate our youth on how to be responsible are guns. Let us also work on more preventative measures that will restrict the purchasing of firearms by people with mental health issues. And let us also be more stringent with our gun laws and go after people who do acquire guns outside of the proper channels.

 

[SwitchGear]

I carry a pistol because my rifle won't fit in my pocket. ;>)

 

[burk48237]

Wasn't it in the two fingers rage quit thread where somebody said "conservatives are out numbered on TB"?

Well unrepresented, and his liberal gun control ideas, seems to be thoroughly out numbered.

Balance has been restored!!

Without getting into a political fight, I'd suggest that in the US Gun control views cross political views. I personally know many I would consider to the left of the political spectrum who have a CPL and carry a pistol. In fact if you look at polling you'll see that a vast majority of Americans (close to 70%) believe in the right to keep and bear arms for protection. Even an "assault weapons" ban has less than 45% support in most polls.

So you can't judge a persons politics by their Gun control views in the US.

 

[experimental bassist]

I don't get to vote for my criminals.

I get to vote for mine, except around there they're called politicians.

Okay, seriously, I understand what you are saying, but Invalid Link Removed is not your friend.

 

[claudel]

Those who choose to go about their lives in a disarmed condition are certainly free to do so.

However, there is no justification for attempting to make such a choice for others.

I have no obligation to be victimized because a third party believes that "guns are icky"...

 

[experimental bassist]

Without getting into a political fight, I'd suggest that in the US Gun control views cross political views. I personally know many I would consider to the left of the political spectrum who have a CPL and carry a pistol. In fact if you look at polling you'll see that a vast majority of Americans (close to 70%) believe in the right to keep and bear arms for protection. Even an "assault weapons" ban has less than 45% support in most polls.

So you can't judge a persons politics by their Gun control views in the US.

Very true.

I live in Virginia in the Blue Ridge mountains, surrounded by conservatives but also near a liberal college town.

I was born and raise with guns, shooting since i was old enough to understand they were tools and not a toys.

I guess with that upringing I consider them tools. They are not scary, they are not evil.

I have a concealed carry, and more often than not have a small .357 mag revolver on me. I'm not paranoid, I don't "expect trouble" (if I did I'd stay home!).

I'm also very much a liberal.

No, I do not fit neatly in any political box and I'm perfectly fine with that.

I've had to display my weapon two times in my life on another human being, both times I felt I was in imminent danger, both times it diffused the situation and allowed all parties to go about their separate ways.

First was a man who saw my spouse alone in post office after hours and sneaked around a column "waiting" for her to leave. I happened to be in the car, armed with my revolver, seeing the whole thing, so I got out and went to talk to him. I didn't have to actually draw my weapon, I was open carrying, he saw me, my companion on my hip, didn't want to talk and went about his business.

Second I was at my house and a woman ran to the front door and began pounding and screaming at the top of her lungs for help. My spouse let her in, I noticed a large male quickly walking up front yard behind this woman. I went outside to confront this man. Although that time I did draw my weapon, I didn't draw down on this man. He immediately calmed down, and walked away across the street to wait for the police to arrive. Although this situation seemed like an obvious case of domestic abuse, who is to say the whole thing wasn't a ruse by both of them to get into our house and rob us?

I could fill several more paragraphs with similar incidents that my friends and family members have shared with me, incidents that involve confrontation but do not escalate to bloodshed and that I firmly believe violence was PREVENTED on both sides because there was a tool there at the ready.

 

[Toolmybass]

I agree, our laws are highly suspect

Im pretty sure there is a book avail in our bookstores up here and is solely based on crazy laws in the States that are real head-scratchers .eg: Alabama (Lee County)..."It is illegal to sell peanuts in Lee County after sundown on Wednesday."

'MERICA !!

 

[Unrepresented]

Wasn't it in the two fingers rage quit thread where somebody said "conservatives are out numbered on TB"?

Well unrepresented, and his liberal gun control ideas, seems to be thoroughly out numbered.

Balance has been restored!!

I am in the minority no matter the subject, nothing new here.

I'm not downplaying thugs shooting thugs, but we disagree about their deaths being "less offensive". Actually, I'm just pointing out where the real problem lies.

With over 300 million people and 250 million guns, using your logic, the murder rate should be much, much higher.

Are you also of the belief that spoons make people fat?

"Thugs killing thugs" is downplaying murder.

Another TB'er said this once and I think he is correct - TB is more libertarian than conservative or liberal.

Agreed.

Hardly executions. I believe the term is keeping it real.

I don't believe the state should be engaged in deciding who lives and dies, no matter the availability or lack of "quality legal council".

Looking at any stats and it's clear that "quality legal council" counts for naught when the charge is possession of a Y.

I don't think anyone should be "kept real" in the streets by criminals.

 

[burk48237]

There would be a corresponding decrease in the availability of guns for criminals.

There are 300-400 million guns already in circulation already in the US. What do you propose we do with them? do we confiscate them? Do we ban hunting with guns? Do we disarm people who have legitimate needs for firearms (private security-people who handle large sums of money-people whose work takes them around dangerous animals)?

If so, aren't we devaluing human life based on economic standing? Most politicians have armed security, most of the wealthy live in guarded gated environments. Are they the only people whose lives have any value? Essentially isn't the mayor of Chicago saying your life is worthless when he has armed guards while his citizens are barred from carrying and were until the courts stepped in bared from even possessing them?

2) Our laws are not designed to prevent people from being shot. Our laws are designed to punish people who shoot people. There is a significant difference between those two positions and one I would like to see corrected.

Nonsense, we have hundreds if not thousands of laws designed to prevent criminals from acquiring or carrying firearms. And our government rarely enforces them. Almost every criminal sentence is automatically increased if the criminal even possesses a gun during a crime much less uses one. And yet in many cases those are pled out. Perhaps we could start by actually prosecuting people for attempting to purchase a gun illegally, before we add more laws to the books?

Gun importation is statistically a minimal percentage of our gun problem. And I am fine with it being more effectively controlled.

Illegal gun importation is the pipeline for most criminal gangs. There is a reason the AK-47 is such a common gun among street gangs. It is relatively simple to acquire large quantities throughout the world.

Owning a gun won't make me safer, other people owning less guns will. Unless I have my gun drawn and aimed at every would be criminal every moment of my life, and have the foresight to know when I will be attacked, I can be shot, robbed, beaten, raped, whatever. It's hard to play a bass with a weapon sited nonstop.

A gun in a safe at home will offer me a false sense of protection, but with any legitimate crime will do me absolutely no good.

Tell that to the 1 1/2 to 2 million Americans who prevent a violent crime from happening to them with a firearm every year, and this includes several mass shootings prevented. Two of our school shootings were stopped by teachers who went out to their cars and used personal firearms to stop the shooters.

I'm not wealthy, I can't afford to reside in some crime-free gated suburb with a cop on every corner. Why do you want to deny me the choice to protect myself because you are wealthy and don't need it, or are oblivious to the danger around you. For most of us the Police show up just in time to examine the body.

Downplaying the victims doesn't make their deaths any less offensive. Even people with criminal records deserve to not be shot in the street.

No, but for those who don't live in the States it puts some perspective on the nature of gun violence. The saddest part of Gang violence in the US isn't that they're killing each other with guns. It's that many are kids, and many innocent bystanders around them get killed.

We had a recent shooting in Detroit where a six year old found a gun in a house and killed a four year old. The first reaction of the media was to lament guns in the house. But the reality is the people who lived in that house were violent felons who couldn't purchase a gun legally. The bad thing about criminals shooting each other is they have kids too, other-wise I'd just say give them more bullets.

 

[fmoore200]

Without getting into a political fight, I'd suggest that in the US Gun control views cross political views. I personally know many I would consider to the left of the political spectrum who have a CPL and carry a pistol. In fact if you look at polling you'll see that a vast majority of Americans (close to 70%) believe in the right to keep and bear arms for protection. Even an "assault weapons" ban has less than 45% support in most polls.

So you can't judge a persons politics by their Gun control views in the US.

I was just having some fun with generalizations