Why are so many growers against gun ownership?

[blazin256]

yes guns pose a danger. but so do cars, so does any pointy object, so do eggs. maybe if you ever go jumped in a park by half a dozen black guys youd be singing a diff tune. i promise you tho if it ever happens to me again, somebodys going to the hospital. we are americans, we have the right to protect our life, property, limbs, etc in all facets of life. outlaw handguns and i guarantee you that wont get rid of the problem.

 

[Twistedfunk]

A pointy object is not a highly efficient killing machine. Killing is not the inherent use of all pointy objects. Yes, cars are dangerous but the ownership and legal ability to drive a vehicle are HIGHLY regulated. Also, while a car can be used as a weapon, much like my penis, its sole single purpose for existence is transportation, not Murder.

I have been jumped on multiple occasions but I CAN DEFEND MYSELF. I do not need to rely on an inanimate object to defend myself. Why should you. Why can't you get a stun gun if you are worried about self defense? You actually WANT to murder people who pose a threat to you? Yes, you have a right to protect all that is yours but why does that have to involve ending a life for you. Its an extreme.

blazin, have you ever been in a situation in which you required a gun to survive and NOTHING else would have sufficed?

 

[NoDrama]

Responsible home protection means you use frangible rounds, they don't penetrate worth a shit, barely make it through dry wall, but they stop an attacker cold. You can make bullets non existent and that won't stop people from shooting, Personally I can reload 15,000 rounds of various hand and rifle calibers with the stock I have on hand. The black powder rifles don't use modern cartridges (what in layman's terms people call a bullet) and if you get shot by one of them it leaves a huge hole .50 caliber. We won the revolution without cartridges.

You can own tanks, jets, helicopters, artillery. Some people think an assault rifle makes you a god. In modern war (Iraq) it takes about 250,000 rounds fired to get one confirmed kill. Large capacity Assault rifles hold 20-30 rounds in the magazine, your gonna need a lot of magazines if you are an average army shooter.

In the US we have about 80,000 people killed each year by guns. In contrast Smoking kills 435,000 each year, Being overweight kills 400,000, heart disease kills 910,000 each year. Accidents take 106,000. Cancer claims 434,000 lives. 106,000 deaths occur each year due to adverse effects to properly prescribed medications. You Would do much better to take any of these other issues on than to try and take something away from the good people of this country. At least that way you will be viewed as someone who wants to help others instead of harm.

 

[blazin256]

it doesn't involve ending a life. but whats the point of a stun gun, mace, etc, if they have guns. just how do u defend yourself against half a dozen people. guns are for self defense, not murder. and guns make a lot more noise then stun guns that get any one else around you aware that they know you mean business. add drugs to the equation and stun guns only seem to pump them up. its a fucked up world we live in, and i dont like bringing knives to a gun fight.
i see your point i really do. but regulating it wont do it justice. just like regulating cars doesn't bring down the fatalities involved. just like outlawing a plant doesn't work. just like regulating alcohol doesn't keep it out of kids reach.
having freedoms and liberties comes with a responsibility.

 

[blazin256]

and just how many cases involve assault rifles? i can only think of one and thats those guys in north hollywood that were robbing banks.

 

[blazin256]

and while ANYONE could have done what those two did, only those two ACTUALLY did it.

 

[NoDrama]

A pointy object is not a highly efficient killing machine. Killing is not the inherent use of all pointy objects. Yes, cars are dangerous but the ownership and legal ability to drive a vehicle are HIGHLY regulated. Also, while a car can be used as a weapon, much like my penis, its sole single purpose for existence is transportation, not Murder.

I have been jumped on multiple occasions but I CAN DEFEND MYSELF. I do not need to rely on an inanimate object to defend myself. Why should you. Why can't you get a stun gun if you are worried about self defense? You actually WANT to murder people who pose a threat to you? Yes, you have a right to protect all that is yours but why does that have to involve ending a life for you. Its an extreme.

blazin, have you ever been in a situation in which you required a gun to survive and NOTHING else would have sufficed?

When you're 85 and you get jumped by a gang of 25 year olds you'll be wishing you had a gun while they bust you up.

You know what I do with some of my rifles? I sit and wait for a doe eyed leaf eatin deer to cross my path every fall. When I see the right one, I put a hole in him, they don't normally get far. Afterwards I cut open his belly and remove all the insides, cut off his legs just below the knee and pack him home where I skin and process the lil bugger. Afterwards we eat some of him and the rest goes in the freezer. Fresh venison for 6 months out of the year, now if I can get my GF to come with me we can have it all year long and save $2,000 a year in beef costs. Next year is a Bison hunt, but I have to pay a fee for that. Some year I am getting an elk if they just draw my name on the lottery. I also shoot pheasant, ducks, rabbits, turkeys, quail, Geese, partridge and prairie chickens with a shotgun (remington 870 wingmaster in 12 Ga). I have a garden where we grow as much produce as we can in the shorter growing season we have. I probably save myself 5 grand a year by hunting and farming some of my own food. You city boys don't know what your missing when you hunt your own food, you learn more about life by taking it.

 

[blazin256]

mmmm deer jerky....

 

[Twistedfunk]

I understand hunting. I understand owning a gun. I am not against either and I have stated this repeatedly. A rifle is not a handgun. Killing does not always have to be an option. If you are military, please disregard everything im saying and keep your sights on the enemy. To answer the topic of the thread again; I am a grower who is not against gun ownership but choose not to exercise the right. Why? Local laws and the danger that owning a firearm exposes to my children.

 

[Evil Buddies]

The problem is the fukked up people that do harm to others. The problem is us that we need to protect ourselves and use violence to do so. The problem is that we dont look to solve these problems and they get worse. The worse the problem becomes the less safe we will all be. We should be looking at ways to solve the problems and create peace. If we dont try and look to work together for peace what chance have we got on this earth for survival. There is a lot of people that want peace and dont want to be apart of violence. It's their right not to use violence as it's your rght to defend yourself. Peace and Love is the way, greed and power will decay.

Evil

 

[doc111]

Target shooting is simulating a kill, even if its just a fake target. How many shooting ranges use humanoid targets? Hunting, as you admitted, is killing. I can certainly understand gun collection, assuming one does not also collect bullets and the firing pins are removed. Besides that though, you pretty much said "Killing and fake killing".

And jerking off is simulated fucking but I'm pretty sure you can't get anybody pregnant and you can't get herpes! Target shooting isn't simulating a kill. It's shooting at paper targets. Some ranges do use human silhouettes but I'm confused. Simulated killing is NOT killing. I love your reasoning though. This just shows how much you know. Many shooting competitions use a simple bullseye paper target. Simulated killing.............lmfao!!!!! You anti-gun people crack me the fuck up!

 

[doc111]

So what you're saying then is, if no one has a gun then the guy who was going to attack me won't because he knows neither of us is carrying a gun. You didn't think that one through very well. The more likely scenario would be that my attacker knows he will get shot if he does not "jump the gun" and shoot me first. This is like talking to religious folks about God. You sound like your parroting some NRA pamphlet riddled with propaganda and flawed logic.

I carry no weapon, yet I challenge you to attack me with a knife or a bat. The ease of which using a gun to take of life is so profound that you simply need to point and squeeze. It is a simple to use and efficient killing machine, as was designed. It is frequently abused to threaten and kill human beings on a regular basis, as was designed. It is much harder to kill a human being with a non-ballistic weapon. The loaded gun provides people with an opportunity to end someone's existence in a flash of a second from a distance. It only has to be a passing thought. If you are carrying a gun and you have 1 second to react, that gun will be in your hand pointed at your victim before you can consider any other possibility. It gives ANYONE the ability to force their will upon other people and that right should not be so readily available and the responsibility entailed by handling one should not be so easily dismissed.

Owning a gun/bullets is a heavy responsibility and should be considered as such. I'm not against them. I just believe that there should be more restrictions on the type of gun you are legally allowed to possess within a certain region and that bullets should be much more expensive OR harder to acquire.

I am not against guns. But I refuse to disregard the danger they pose, for the sake of myself and my family.

He started reaching with the "simulated killing" comment IMO. Now he's completely lost any credibility he might have had. This comment really hammered this home for me; 'So what you're saying then is, if no one has a gun then the guy who was going to attack me won't because he knows neither of us is carrying a gun.' I think his logic is a little flawed.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

The naivety of many gun grabbers is mind boggling. Do they honestly believe that if firearms were prohibited; life would be all lolly-pops, sunflowers, and rainbow-farting unicorns?

By now we all should understand how ineffective prohibition is.

Disarm law abiding citizens and chaos will ensue. The oppression from the criminal element on an defenseless populace would be bad enough.

But....

Imagine what a rogue government, unchecked by the threat of a popular uprising, would be capable of under firearm prohibition.

All I can offer as a rebuttal beyond a (passive-aggressive?) LOL! is...
ROTFLMFAO!

 

[Twistedfunk]

And jerking off is simulated fucking but I'm pretty sure you can't get anybody pregnant and you can't get herpes! Target shooting isn't simulating a kill. It's shooting at paper targets. Some ranges do use human silhouettes but I'm confused. Simulated killing is NOT killing. I love your reasoning though. This just shows how much you know. Many shooting competitions use a simple bullseye paper target. Simulated killing.............lmfao!!!!! You anti-gun people crack me the fuck up!

Apparently you did not read my post or you decided to disregard every time i said i wasn't anti-gun. With that comment, I was responding to a response about guns not being used for anything other than a weapon to kill or threaten with violence. Human silhouettes was just one example but I can find more silhouettes of living things used for target practice. I'm not against it. I'm just calling it what it is. You don't need to lie or go to extremes or start twisting logic to prove your point to me. I'm not trying to argue with you. If you disagree'd with the comment then counter it but if you are going to kick and scream and laugh, that isn't going to prove your point to me.

 

[doc111]

The naivety of many gun grabbers is mind boggling. Do they honestly believe that if firearms were prohibited; life would be all lolly-pops, sunflowers, and rainbow-farting unicorns?

By now we all should understand how ineffective prohibition is.

Disarm law abiding citizens and chaos will ensue. The oppression from the criminal element on an defenseless populace would be bad enough.

But....

Imagine what a rogue government, unchecked by the threat of a popular uprising, would be capable of under firearm prohibition.

All I can offer as a rebuttal beyond a (passive-aggressive?) LOL! is...
ROTFLMFAO!

Ha! Good one! How are you this fine morning Johnny? I've been informed by Padawanbater and UncleBuck that they've lost a lot of respect for me lateley. Oh, whatever shall I do?

 

[doc111]

Apparently you did not read my post or you decided to disregard every time i said i wasn't anti-gun. With that comment, I was responding to a response about guns not being used for anything other than a weapon to kill or threaten with violence. Human silhouettes was just one example but I can find more silhouettes of living things used for target practice. I'm not against it. I'm just calling it what it is. You don't need to lie or go to extremes or start twisting logic to prove your point to me. I'm not trying to argue with you. If you disagree'd with the comment then counter it but if you are going to kick and scream and laugh, that isn't going to prove your point to me.

I am not out to prove any point to anybody. I don't give a shit what you think of guns. You have your opinions and I have mine. You say you aren't anti-gun but you make statements like 'simulated killing' and the other gem of yours I quoted about the guy without a gun not attacking you. This is the same type of drivel spouted by the anti-gun folks so you may SAY you aren't anti-gun but you sure do talk like it. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..................

 

[Johnnyorganic]

Ha! Good one! How are you this fine morning Johnny? I've been informed by Padawanbater and UncleBuck that they've lost a lot of respect for me lateley. Oh, whatever shall I do?

I'm good and hope you are the same. Everyone else, too.

I know your are inconsolable over their scorn, but I'm sure you'll get over it eventually.

I'll always remember what my ex-wife told me when I informed her my friends thought she was an ungrateful, spiteful cunt.

She replied, "What other people say about me is none of my business."

That said, I should probably add something on-topic:

 

[doc111]

I'm good and hope you are the same. Everyone else, too.

I know your are inconsolable over their scorn, but I'm sure you'll get over it eventually.

I'll always remember what my ex-wife told me when I informed her my friends thought she was an ungrateful, spiteful cunt.

She replied, "What other people say about me is none of my business."

That said, I should probably add something on-topic:

View attachment 1113085

The funny thing is the comments that both of them got all pissy about were meant as jokes. I've noticed a lot of liberals take themselves a bit too seriously at times.

I like the poster. If that doesn't sum up why we need guns I don't know what will. Keep fighting the good fight Johnny!

 

[Twistedfunk]

I am not out to prove any point to anybody. I don't give a shit what you think of guns. You have your opinions and I have mine. You say you aren't anti-gun but you make statements like 'simulated killing' and the other gem of yours I quoted about the guy without a gun not attacking you. This is the same type of drivel spouted by the anti-gun folks so you may SAY you aren't anti-gun but you sure do talk like it. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..................

Hey mr. super defensive argument guy. I'm agreeing with you. I'm just pointing out that some of the logic used behind some the arguments ive seen here is, technically, flawed. It just so happens that anti-gun enthusiasists use it against Pro-gun people to make them look like idiots for , as you say, "spouted drivel", and rightly so. I'm just keeping it real. A loaded gun is a dangerous weapon, no matter how you twist it. If I did not have children, I would own a gun. Choosing against owning a gun does not make me anti-gun. It makes me a responsible parent.

 

[doc111]

Hey mr. super defensive argument guy. I'm agreeing with you. I'm just pointing out that some of the logic used behind some the arguments ive seen here is, technically, flawed. It just so happens that anti-gun enthusiasists use it against Pro-gun people to make them look like idiots for , as you say, "spouted drivel", and rightly so. I'm just keeping it real. A loaded gun is a dangerous weapon, no matter how you twist it. If I did not have children, I would own a gun. Choosing against owning a gun does not make me anti-gun. It makes me a responsible parent.

Kudos on being a responsible parent then. I'm not getting defensive. There is flawed logic on both sides of the argument. At the end of the day a gun is a tool. Nothing more. Some people want to act like guns are some sort of mystic hunk of metal with evil intentions. Fact is, most guns have never been used to harm anyone and most will never be used for that purpose. In my years as a paramedic I saw far more injuries and deaths from kitchen knives (and I worked for a large inner city department)! The vast majority of automobile fatalities are caused by someone who is impaired. We regulate the hell out of automobiles and in spite of M.A.D.D. and S.A.D.D. and all the commercials trying to educate people of the dangers of drunk driving people still do it and people still die from it every single day! You can't paint all gun owners with the same broad brush. I agree that people need to be responsible but the same can be said for any potentially dangerous TOOL. What do you think would happen if guns were suddenly outlawed tomorrow? Do you honestly think the country would be any safer? I highly doubt it.