?

Log in

No account? Create an account

t3knomanser's Fustian Deposits

A Red Letter Day

How Random Babbling Becomes Corporate Policy

run the fuck away

Mad science gone horribly, horribly wrong(or right).

A Red Letter Day

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Terrorist
People are surprised, it seems, to discover that I am not only pro-gun, but vehemently so. I strongly advocate the responsible ownership of firearms. I actually feel guilty that I haven't maintained my skills in that area, and will be taking measures to correct that. Everyone should at least know the basics of how to safely operate common firearms. Everyone should know basic firearm safety. I feel that should be taught in schools.

When one of my coworkers learned that I had gone out shooting one weekend not that long ago, she was surprised and confused. I had shattered her stereotype of gun-users. In short, I had all my teeth and was not married to my cousin. The question some people ask is "why"?

Today is a great demonstration of some of the reasons I believe everyone should own a gun: 1, 2, and 3. The fact that reasonable people on my friends page read between the lines and feel the need to make proclomations like this is a reason.

Oh, and if you're ever looking for a group that has a nearly inarguable stance on why gun ownership and the second amendment are crucial, don't look to the NRA, ask these folks.
  • Hear hear! Not all gun nuts need to be right wing nutters.

    Guns are a critical "final veto" against government oppression. The United States would not exist if not for private ownership of firearms. Many people say that the typical small arms citizens hold can't stand against a modern army... I say look at Vietnam and Iraq, where the US military had far less reason to hold back than they would in a fight on American soil. We got our asses kicked in Vietnam and are barely keeping our heads above water in Iraq. No, armed citizens can't stand against an armored division. But they can take out critical communications and command locations, paralyzing government forces and winning the overall effort. People who use that argument are stuck in old thinking about wars of attrition, ignoring developments in maneuver warfare(which were really pioneered by Sun Tzu somewhere aroudn 600BC).

    The effect on crime is marginal as far as why we should have guns. Making the government hesitate before going all hitler on us is far more important IMO.

    As far as crime goes though, criminals would still have guns. A ban would probably reduce gun availability to criminals to some degree, but effective firearms can be made without electricity(to the extent that experts have trouble telling them apart from officially manufactured examples), so to think that we could stop criminals from having guns is ridiculous. The bad guys might end up with fewer guns, but the good guys would be disarmed to a much greater degree. The balance of power would shift in favor of murdering assholes.

    Japan is often held up as an example of an effective gun ban. What those people fail to mention is that personal weapons have been heavily restricted there since the 1600s. They also fail to consider the vast difference in culture between the US and Japan. American culture and Japanese culture are very different.
    • "The balance of power would shift in favor of murdering assholes." It's a lot more difficult to go on a killing spree with a close-combat weapon...
      • Criminals, by definition, don't follow the law. So, if we made guns illegal, they'd what- turn them all in? Not bring them across our porous borders? Not manufacture a simple device in their basements?

        Guns are far more permeated into society here than they were in Europe- Europe has a long tradition of keeping the peasants unarmed. The US only exists because the peasants were armed- and armed better than the British.
        • True, it would be difficult to get the guns out. Were the peasants really better armed? Or was it a question of logistics and tactics and motivation?
          • They were literally better armed- the weapons produced in the colonies included things like the Kentucky Long Rifle- better range than any musket. At the time, the weapons in use by major militaries leant themselves to one strategy- the volley. Line a bunch of people up, have them all shoot at the same time, and you'll probably hit stuff. You can't really aim a musket beyond 20-30 yards. Enter the Kentucky Long Rifle- a rifled barrel makes the weapon signifigantly more accurate. This did work better for the terrain- wooded and swampy territory don't lend themselves to the volley. A rifle can actually be aimed, reducing the need for the volley.

            It wasn't only the better weapons, but they played a big role in change the tactics that could be used. The guerilla force was able to do things that no major military could.

            Personally, I oppose standing militaries as a waste of public funds, and instead would support militias, which is what the Constitution really leant itself towards. There's no provision in the Constitution for a standing military.
            • No standing military = no offensive wars which would be good, I agree.

              In light of the massacre in this Amish community and the two incidents before that - when balancing the risk that irresponsible gun-owners shoot innocents because they snap or are criminals against the need to be able to defend oneself against a tyrannical government, I'd still argue for taking guns away from the general public. One simply cannot enforce responsibility, as can be seen time and again.
              • But that means trusting the Government with guns.

                Every Government is evil- some just moreso than others.

                I'd also like to point out that it makes more sense to deal with the underlying problem (proclivity for violence) than the symptom (people use guns for violence). England's violent crime has increased since they banned guns, although the body count has dropped. I'd rather have the low body count and the guns.
Powered by LiveJournal.com