A LITTLE GUN HISTORY!

While 300 is an exquisite pice of film and mostly post digital work, it hardly qualifies as a historical film. Obviously man kills man, it's deeply rooted, but, death by stone and mob was the method many thousands of years before any spear, knife or bow was even thought of.

Peace out.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(robincx @ Aug 16 2007, 10:00 PM) [snapback]497481[/snapback]</div>

I think you get the general drift that people were killing each other long before guns were invented...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 16 2007, 07:26 PM) [snapback]497412[/snapback]</div>

That's a very honest point, Pinto, and I can agree. It is the calm foundation of our society that makes us free to choose to be disarmed and non-violent, no doubt. However, therein lies the hope for the future of our race. Do we really want our descendants to be fighting wars for the next thousand years? While this is quite likely the case, only non-violent resistance (Ghandi, MLK, etc.) and peaceful living stand any chance of making a change. Choosing to arm yourself against fear means choosing to not believe in a better future (or present).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AussieOwner @ Aug 16 2007, 05:09 AM) [snapback]496795[/snapback]</div>

I have had the occasion to draw my weapon three times twice to protect myself and my wife and once to protect a neighbors property, the last time was not such a good idea. All in all two out of three ain't bad. I'll keep my gun thank you.

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Aug 16 2007, 11:15 PM) [snapback]497670[/snapback]</div>

Fortunately Wildcow, there are many of us who think this way.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tyrin @ Aug 16 2007, 10:52 PM) [snapback]497509[/snapback]</div>

Choosing to arm yourself out of fear is prudent. It is an act of self-preservation. It is a statement that says, "I won't allow myself to be a victim." We can all join hands and sing Kum Bay Yah until we turn blue, but it isn't going to change the fact that there are some just plain mean and crazy people spinning around with us on this marble we call Earth.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tyrin @ Aug 16 2007, 09:52 PM) [snapback]497509[/snapback]</div>

I'm beginning to realize that the level of fear in this country has been steadily rising for years, if not decades...

I believe that, for the first time, the difference between the level of fear here and in many other 'developed' countries has become so great that it's now apparent to most people, except us

I believe it's being manufactured by our politicians, in an attempt to manipulate us (and that our enemies can actually exploit our propensity to manufacture fear, for their own purposes)

I believe that, fear, like some forms of inflation, is actually expectational and a self-fulfilling prophecy

I believe that fear, like terrorism, is an endless cycle which lives by the perpetuation of itself

I believe that, unless we are actively fighting the creation of fear, we are aiding those who wish to create it

I believe it is possible to break the cycle of fear

I believe that a lot of violence in America is being caused by our incessant focus on consumerism and matierialism, and the inordinately great value we place on them. And, more specifically, how fearful we are of *not* having this stuff.

I believe breaking these cycles may not be without dangers for those who choose to do so, but that it is possible, and in fact necessary for the long term good of our country

I believe that ultimate control and ultimate "safety" are illusions, and can not be fought for or bought, no matter how good the military or how much money we have in the coffers

I believe that, *the very act of defending something makes it more valuable, and more of a target.*

I believe that it is not possession of material objects, or the status of my employment, which makes me a worthy member of society

I believe that we --all of us, as individuals-- need to find comfort in the drift, not the anchorage

I believe that, at our very essence..."what is true for me, is true for all people."

This, I believe.

 

For me, I am not protecting my stuff, but protecting my life. I got carjacked once, fought with the two miscreants and ended up hospitalized with a shattered orbital socket from a baseball bat to the face and a stab wound.

Of course, all of this was before we were allowed to carry concealed weapons here in Ohio. If I were in this situation now, I would just hand the keys over, even if I was carrying at the time. You live and learn. However, if they got physical, I would have no problems with putting them down.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Aug 17 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]498016[/snapback]</div>

Woah...that's awful.

I had no idea.

I've been fortunate enough not to have experienced anything like this in my life. I can see how it might change one's viewpoint...but, how I'd react in the aftermath, I honestly can not say.

I guess the best that any of us can do is to make sure we've thought through what we're doing (whatever it is).

If I could hope for one thing, more than anything else, it'd be that. And (not passing judgment, just making an observation) it sounds like you have.

I just wish that we weren't all so materially driven (it may be a fantasy, but I'm hoping anyway)...those kids might not have messed with you if they didn't feel such a need to get what it was that they thought you had.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 17 2007, 05:06 PM) [snapback]498024[/snapback]</div>

Well, they got a Nissan Maxima which they promptly crashed into a telephone poll and burned the clutch out of because they couldn't drive a stick. They also got away to carjack another day. I got plastic surgery and a permanent scar on my nose from having a switchblade put through my right nostril a la Jack Nicholson in Chinatown.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 17 2007, 03:26 PM) [snapback]497976[/snapback]</div>

Did you submit this to NPR for their "This I believe" series?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Aug 17 2007, 03:44 PM) [snapback]498016[/snapback]</div>

I'm sorry to hear about your experience, and glad you survived. It sounds like you are now not only more cautious in protecting yourself (i.e., the gun), but have also realized the idea that not everything is worth fighting for (the car).

My concern is the guy who has the gun but not the experience you have. I'm afraid he would draw the gun first, and someone would be dead when there was no intent of violence, just theft.

 

I don't know I go off to do a few errands, get distracted by some other threads, and then find several pages in this thread that I need to read through. However, while away I have been thinking about some of the points raised here.

One of the things that I have found in similar discussions with some of my US work collegues who own guns is that there seems to be almost a fotress mentality shown by all gun owners when anybody even suggests placing a few more controls over the access to firearms. At first I thought that it was something like the optimists and pessimists thing - you know - is the glass half full or half empty. The gun owners are the pessimists, always seem to think that bad will happen.

Then I read Pinto Girl's comments,
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 17 2007, 10:26 AM) [snapback]497412[/snapback]</div>

And I remembered a lot of the news post-Katrina, where things were far worse from a law and order aspect than many 3rd world countries, such as Indonesia, Thailand, India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh after the Indian Ocean tsunami two years ago.

Is it a case that the US has such a thin veneer of civilization?

Then I read Pinto Girl's next views:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 18 2007, 05:26 AM) [snapback]497976[/snapback]</div>

Is it actually that a lot of people are just fearful that civilization is going to end, or even that the world is just going to hell?

I was in the US on 9/11. I saw the fear and everyone's reaction to it. I have seen, and experienced, the over reaction by all levels of the US to that fear. Please, that act was dispicable, and certainly I do not condone any terrorist act, but every time that I now visit the US, which is four or so times a year, I now get treated as though it was my fault. Is it a manifestation of the fear that you gun owners have?

I can see why some of you fear
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Aug 17 2007, 04:15 PM) [snapback]497670[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Aug 18 2007, 06:44 AM) [snapback]498016[/snapback]</div>

But then, is it a case that the US, or at least some of the population still believe that this is still the wild west where the fastest gun wins the argument?

There is hope for you. Not everyone thinks that. As Tyrin says
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tyrin @ Aug 17 2007, 12:52 PM) [snapback]497509[/snapback]</div>

As was said in another thread, you can always expect a good argument when it comes to the subject of guns, and certainly this thread has proven that. There is also, in that other thread, the comment that part of the 2nd Amendment was the fear that the federal government could go bad, and thus, if every individual had access to arms, there could be effective resistance to that government.

Is this still the case? Do you still fear your own government?

I, maybe blindly, feel, that, at least here in Australia, that as the government is elected by the people, there is no way that the government could force those same people to something that we all objected to. In other words, we do not fear our government, so we do not need to protect ourselves from it. Rather, we expect our government, and the police paid for by the government (the police in Australia are paid by each state) to protect us. Thus we, as individuals, do not need guns.

But, as this thread appears to me, the major reason that people in the US want to own a gun is fear. And if that is the case, I can only hope that there are more like Pinto Girl and Tyrin who look on the positive side.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tyrin @ Aug 18 2007, 05:40 PM) [snapback]498436[/snapback]</div>

It is really a moot point, as most states will not allow you to use deadly force in the protection of property, but rather when there is a threat of violence against a person.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AussieOwner @ Aug 19 2007, 09:50 AM) [snapback]498629[/snapback]</div>

Yes, I do fear my own government, especially with the current crew in charge which routinely wipe their asses all over the Constitution. Ever hear of the USA PATRIOT Act? That was the biggest legislative travesty ever foisted upon US citizens. Just give up some of your civil liberties and we will protect you from terrorism. What a gullible bunch of sheep we are, because we bought it hook line and sinker.

The Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State (Reichstag Fire Decree) and subsequent Enabling Act that empowered Adolf Hitler to seize control of Germany are often compared to the USA PATRIOT Act. The similarities are that both were passed after an act of terrorism, both were passed quickly, both limited civil liberties with the expressed purpose of protecting the people, and both were used in excess of their expressed purpose. Although the USA PATRIOT Act differs in some respects, the Reichstag Fire Decree and subsequent Enabling Act are cited as examples of how giving up civil liberties in times of crisis can be used to legally overthrow a government's constitution from within.

So, yes, I do fear my own government.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Aug 19 2007, 10:34 AM) [snapback]498653[/snapback]</div>

Sorry to disagree with you again, but I don't think it is moot. People in the midst of a crime (perpetrator or victim) are not usually thinking about what is legal and what isn't. It's not a big stretch of the imagination to assume that armed victims will use or at least threaten with their firearm even if there is no direct threat to their body. This can escalate the situation.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tyrin @ Aug 19 2007, 01:55 PM) [snapback]498692[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, but that just isn't the case. CCW permit holders know and understand the law, and also know that they can be prosecuted for using deadly force in cases where it is not justified. They also know that ignorance of the law is not a defense.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swanny1172 @ Aug 20 2007, 01:45 AM) [snapback]498659[/snapback]</div>

Swanny,

Now I can see some of the thinking from Hycamguy in his OP. Looks like the two of you have similar views. Maybe I am naive, but I feel sorry for you guys and your fear of the very government that you elect.

I also have to say that one of the other things that this thread has demonstrated to me - most gun owners really do think in blacks and whites - you guys can be most dogmatic in your arguments, whereas those of us who support some form of gun control seem to look at the alternatives. It still does not convince me that some tighter gun controls should be considered - just why does an individual need to purchase semi-automatic weapons? But at least I can now understand why you have taken your stance.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AussieOwner @ Aug 19 2007, 05:36 PM) [snapback]498803[/snapback]</div>

First, please describe for us what constitutes a semi-automatic weapon? Are revolvers semi-automatic weapons? Do you think single-shot weapons are somehow safer?

Sorry, but I study history and have read what Thomas Jefferson and the other Founding Fathers had to say about fearing government. Remember that they all wanted a free country with minimal interference from the government. Most of them would today be called Libertarians. Of them, Jefferson was the most adamant in his belief that all citizens should have a right to keep and bear arms, especially in fear of the tyranny of government.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

"I have sworn upon the alter of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent."

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."

Hell, even Ghandi seemed to get it when he said, "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

And, let's not forget Kennedy, who said, "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

The US government has a fairly lengthy history of doing things, including spying on its own citizens, which none of us should be proud of. Evidently, people forget names like J. Edgar Hoover, COINTELPRO, and Richard Nixon. I mentioned the USA PATRIOT Act, because it is just the latest example.

 

The veneer of civilization in the United States has become alarmingly thin.

I wonder if anyone else has noticed it, or believes it, or even thinks about it.

Gun owners may quite likely be reacting to this (subconsciously perhaps); the non-owners amongst us are also deeply concerned, but believe that the search for a solution to the problem doesn't involve escalation of the personal arms race (in the way that the Cold War arms race really didn't make anyone any safer than they were before).