Be Honest: There is only one real reason to need to carry a gun.

[Sunni Man]

The OP's contention that the only reason to own a gun is "Fear" is totally idiotic.

I carry a spare tire in the trunk of my car not out of "fear" that I might have a flat.

But it's plain common sense to have a spare tire just in case.

And hopefully, I will never have to use it. But it's there if I need it.

Same with a personal firearm;

I never plan on having to use it; but it's there if I need it to defend myself or my family.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[quot

According to you the last three incidents you are harping about that were perpetrated by 3 mentally ill retards is reason to deny every single person in the US the ability to own a weapon.

So let's do the math. I know you sheep don't like math but too bad

3/350,000,000 is .00000086% of the population that have committed mass shootings and that's enough for you to ban weapons?

If you guys refuse to self police, then YEAH, it's a good enough reason.

The reason these guys were able to get guns is because you law abiding owners are unwilling to submit to background checks and licensing and any responsibility for the industry that is marketting based on fear.

Hey douche bag I had to get fingerprinted and get a background check to get my concealed carry permit.

There is a 3 day wait for any rifle purchase in my state where your name is run through the feds.

So take a fucking pill already and get over it.

You have absolutely no reason to deny me the right to own a weapon.

And you won't until you get the second amendment repealed.

 

[daveman]

FEAR

Seriously. Think about it. If there was no FEAR of being robbed and/or assaulted there is no reason to carry a gun, right?

We buy auto insurance and wear seat belts because we FEAR that at some point in time we may be involved in an accident. (Ok, and in most cases the law requires it and we fear getting a ticket too.)

Hey!! I'm not knocking it. Illinois will soon finally join everyone else in passing a CC law. When we do that I will get one so I can carry it in any areas known for high crime rates. But since I don't FEAR being robbed and/or assaulted in my small hometown I don't feel the need to carry it around.

Now I also realize that there are those who simply want to carry one around like a playtoy. But I suspect that they are simply making up for other "shortcomings".

So if anyone disagrees that FEAR is the primary motivation to carry a gun please explain why it's not.

.

 

[daveman]

FEAR

Seriously. Think about it. If there was no FEAR of being robbed and/or assaulted there is no reason to carry a gun, right?

We buy auto insurance and wear seat belts because we FEAR that at some point in time we may be involved in an accident. (Ok, and in most cases the law requires it and we fear getting a ticket too.)

Hey!! I'm not knocking it. Illinois will soon finally join everyone else in passing a CC law. When we do that I will get one so I can carry it in any areas known for high crime rates. But since I don't FEAR being robbed and/or assaulted in my small hometown I don't feel the need to carry it around.

Now I also realize that there are those who simply want to carry one around like a playtoy. But I suspect that they are simply making up for other "shortcomings".

So if anyone disagrees that FEAR is the primary motivation to carry a gun please explain why it's not.

.

Say you're right....What the fuck is it to you?

I am right. And it's nothing to me as long as you admit that the reason your carry is because you're scared shitless.

And you know this...how, exactly?

 

[Sallow]

Every reason given for wanting to control our liberties is based on fear.

Not really. More like common sense...

So it's common sense to deny law abiding citizens the right to own a weapon?

Tell me what other liberties do you want to infringe upon in the name of "common sense"

The fact is you're just used to living in a place where you have been denied so much liberty that you think it's normal.

Sorry but no one is going to tell me I don't have the right to protect my property and my wife from potential harm.

The simple fact is that 99.999% of law abiding gun owners will never kill anyone with a firearm.

Curtailing the rights of everyone because of the acts of 1 is not the way to govern and any government that does that is unjust.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Yep, I absolutely defend the right of some of you angry sumbitches to own and carry guns.

Talk about fear, I'm literally quaking in my boots just thinking about some of you having weapons on your person.

 

[daveman]

Not really. More like common sense...

So it's common sense to deny law abiding citizens the right to own a weapon?

Tell me what other liberties do you want to infringe upon in the name of "common sense"

The fact is you're just used to living in a place where you have been denied so much liberty that you think it's normal.

Sorry but no one is going to tell me I don't have the right to protect my property and my wife from potential harm.

The simple fact is that 99.999% of law abiding gun owners will never kill anyone with a firearm.

Curtailing the rights of everyone because of the acts of 1 is not the way to govern and any government that does that is unjust.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon, criminals still carry and will rob, rape, and murder you.

But you can lie there dying, knowing you're morally superior to someone who defended himself with a weapon.

 

[JustTheFacts]

So it's common sense to deny law abiding citizens the right to own a weapon?

Tell me what other liberties do you want to infringe upon in the name of "common sense"

The fact is you're just used to living in a place where you have been denied so much liberty that you think it's normal.

Sorry but no one is going to tell me I don't have the right to protect my property and my wife from potential harm.

The simple fact is that 99.999% of law abiding gun owners will never kill anyone with a firearm.

Curtailing the rights of everyone because of the acts of 1 is not the way to govern and any government that does that is unjust.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon, criminals still carry and will rob, rape, and murder you.

But you can lie there dying, knowing you're morally superior to someone who defended himself with a weapon.

You know, this is in and of itself a dishonest tactic right? Two wrongs don't make a right. So saying "hey criminals are carrying, so I"m going to break the law to" just doesn't cut it.

I am 100% pro gun ownership, but come on , this idea of everyone walking around carrying a gun all the time is ludicrous. I would say it belongs in the Wild Wild West, but the reality is it doesn't, western towns allowed carrying guns in town. Or rather most of them did, the ones that allowed it called for open carry and made concealed carry a crime.

Either way your argument is dumb. "Hey speeders are going to speed either way, so why do we bother enforcing a speed limit? I'm going to speed to, don't want to get run down by speeders" or any other silly argument.

At some point some adults are going to have to sit down and have a real conversation , and put all the cards on the table.

This doesn't mean just gun owners, some of those who want to take all guns, or rather all semi autos, I haven't heard anyone calling for taking revolvers and such yet, need to get a hold of reality as well.

There is a way to protect your right to OWN guns and practice some gun control at the same time. Frankly anyone who objects to either one of those goals is a nut job unworthy of sitting at the discussion table.

 

[daveman]

Yep, I absolutely defend the right of some of you angry sumbitches to own and carry guns.

Talk about fear, I'm literally quaking in my boots just thinking about some of you having weapons on your person.

Why? Are you a criminal?

 

[daveman]

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon, criminals still carry and will rob, rape, and murder you.

But you can lie there dying, knowing you're morally superior to someone who defended himself with a weapon.

You know, this is in and of itself a dishonest tactic right? Two wrongs don't make a right. So saying "hey criminals are carrying, so I"m going to break the law to" just doesn't cut it.

Where have I advocated carrying illegally?

I'll save you some impotent sputtering and tell you: Nowhere.

I am 100% pro gun ownership, but come on , this idea of everyone walking around carrying a gun all the time is ludicrous. I would say it belongs in the Wild Wild West, but the reality is it doesn't, western towns allowed carrying guns in town. Or rather most of them did, the ones that allowed it called for open carry and made concealed carry a crime.

Either way your argument is dumb. "Hey speeders are going to speed either way, so why do we bother enforcing a speed limit? I'm going to speed to, don't want to get run down by speeders" or any other silly argument.

At some point some adults are going to have to sit down and have a real conversation , and put all the cards on the table.

This doesn't mean just gun owners, some of those who want to take all guns, or rather all semi autos, I haven't heard anyone calling for taking revolvers and such yet, need to get a hold of reality as well.

There is a way to protect your right to OWN guns and practice some gun control at the same time. Frankly anyone who objects to either one of those goals is a nut job unworthy of sitting at the discussion table.

Until those who advocate more restrictive gun laws recognize that criminals don't obey gun laws, there can be no rational discussion.

 

[The Rabbi]

[

In my wife's case...thugs. It's that simple. She works late (out until midnight tonight), she finishes her shift carrying cash and sometimes as many as a couple dozen credit card numbers (not to mention the $100,000 truck she drives or the tools in it). So yes, she carries a gun. They have had two drivers robbed (one of them beaten to a pulp) since she started working there.

That might be a valid case where someone should be given a gun permit- after proper training, background checks and bonding.

There's no good reason why THIS GUY should have a gun, though.

Why shouldn't he have had a gun? It was unusual in that the man was completely a law abiding citizen right up until he entered the theater and started shooting people.
So tell me why he should't have had one.

 

[The Rabbi]

Until those who advocate more restrictive gun laws recognize that criminals don't obey gun laws, there can be no rational discussion.

And that's it in a nutshell. That's the whole issue right there.

 

[Katzndogz]

The only reason to carry a gun is for self-protection. It is not a fashion accessory.

 

[The Rabbi]

The only reason to carry a gun is for self-protection. It is not a fashion accessory.

Yeah it is. It's also a political statement. It's dozens of things. But the main thing it is is a Constitutional right.

 

[Ringel05]

[

In my wife's case...thugs. It's that simple. She works late (out until midnight tonight), she finishes her shift carrying cash and sometimes as many as a couple dozen credit card numbers (not to mention the $100,000 truck she drives or the tools in it). So yes, she carries a gun. They have had two drivers robbed (one of them beaten to a pulp) since she started working there.

That might be a valid case where someone should be given a gun permit- after proper training, background checks and bonding.

There's no good reason why THIS GUY should have a gun, though.

Why shouldn't he have had a gun? It was unusual in that the man was completely a law abiding citizen right up until he entered the theater and started shooting people.
So tell me why he should't have had one.

Because he had been under psychiatric care. Depending on what the diagnosis was that criteria should have been included in the background check.

 

[The Rabbi]

You dont lose rights by being under psychiatric care.

In the Soviet Union they figured anyone who didnt support the state had to be crazy. So they declared them insane and locked them away. Doubtless the left wouldn't mind seeing the same thing here. Look how often conservatives are characterized as "nuts" nutjobs, crazy, insane, etc etc.

 

[Dr Grump]

You dont lose rights by being under psychiatric care.

In the Soviet Union they figured anyone who didnt support the state had to be crazy. So they declared them insane and locked them away. Doubtless the left wouldn't mind seeing the same thing here. Look how often conservatives are characterized as "nuts" nutjobs, crazy, insane, etc etc.

So now you're comparing the Soviet Union to the American Psychiatric Association??

 

[Skull Pilot]

Not really. More like common sense...

So it's common sense to deny law abiding citizens the right to own a weapon?

Tell me what other liberties do you want to infringe upon in the name of "common sense"

The fact is you're just used to living in a place where you have been denied so much liberty that you think it's normal.

Sorry but no one is going to tell me I don't have the right to protect my property and my wife from potential harm.

The simple fact is that 99.999% of law abiding gun owners will never kill anyone with a firearm.

Curtailing the rights of everyone because of the acts of 1 is not the way to govern and any government that does that is unjust.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

You people aren't talking about carrying a weapon you're talking about banning owning weapons, specifically semiautomatic rifles you just won't come out and say that.

You'd rather whine about so called assault weapons and large capacity magazines

And carry permits are a state issue and have nothing to do with the feds.

 

[The Rabbi]

You dont lose rights by being under psychiatric care.

In the Soviet Union they figured anyone who didnt support the state had to be crazy. So they declared them insane and locked them away. Doubtless the left wouldn't mind seeing the same thing here. Look how often conservatives are characterized as "nuts" nutjobs, crazy, insane, etc etc.

So now you're comparing the Soviet Union to the American Psychiatric Association??

No, dumbshit. I'm comparing the Soviet Union to the progressives in the Democratic Party. At least the Soviets pretended to believe in equality.

 

[Intense]

If it's against the law to carry a weapon. Then that citizen is not law abiding.

If it's against the law to carry a weapon, criminals still carry and will rob, rape, and murder you.

But you can lie there dying, knowing you're morally superior to someone who defended himself with a weapon.

You know, this is in and of itself a dishonest tactic right? Two wrongs don't make a right. So saying "hey criminals are carrying, so I"m going to break the law to" just doesn't cut it.

I am 100% pro gun ownership, but come on , this idea of everyone walking around carrying a gun all the time is ludicrous. I would say it belongs in the Wild Wild West, but the reality is it doesn't, western towns allowed carrying guns in town. Or rather most of them did, the ones that allowed it called for open carry and made concealed carry a crime.

Either way your argument is dumb. "Hey speeders are going to speed either way, so why do we bother enforcing a speed limit? I'm going to speed to, don't want to get run down by speeders" or any other silly argument.

At some point some adults are going to have to sit down and have a real conversation , and put all the cards on the table.

This doesn't mean just gun owners, some of those who want to take all guns, or rather all semi autos, I haven't heard anyone calling for taking revolvers and such yet, need to get a hold of reality as well.

There is a way to protect your right to OWN guns and practice some gun control at the same time. Frankly anyone who objects to either one of those goals is a nut job unworthy of sitting at the discussion table.

Your argument is flawed. Speeding is a crime. Self Defense is a Natural Right. You need to get past the mindset of having to raise your hand for permission, when you have to pee, and man up. Shit happens. There are conditions that deter that. There are circumstances when you might want something firmer than your dick to grab onto. Just a thought.