Rebel,

he's a 20 year old kid from NY that thinks he can out-ninja a gun-toting hardened criminal with jiu-jitsu and a wooden katana. He was probably taught at PS#whatever that the Revolutionary War was fought because rich land-owning white men didn't want to pay their taxes.

He's thinks the government's purpose is to provide for his safety and welfare all his living days.

He's probably never killed a living thing in order to eat. He doesn't understand that the right to self preservation depends heavily on the means to self preservation.

...uhh, so you're telling me that making crack and meth illegal to sell has no effect on how much is sold? If tomorrow, we made selling crack and meth legal, wouldn't the sale of these drugs increase?

It's really not complicated to think that if selling guns became illegal, the sale of guns would go down. I have also admitted several times that guns would *still be sold on the black market* (really, I think you guys just aren't reading my posts very well). However, getting guns on the black market when selling guns can get you thrown in jail would be a little more expensive. This higher price acts as a natural deterrent...I mean, this isn't exactly a complex or fanciful idea, guys, and I've explained it several times...I mean, banning the sale of hard drugs has the same effect.

All this fantasy and vivid imagination business...really? lols

So you admit that owning a gun for protection could be necessary in certain circumstances.

Uhh...if this is how you're going to talk, I suppose this is no longer a discussion and...well, just you being immature and throwing insults. I've explained myself several times, and I'm just met with ridicule. Lol, you do realize that you've been carrying on a one-way verbal battle on the Internet, right? Grow up, lol.

Nice talking with you guys.

You speak of the "average gun owner" as if you know any.. you're basing your judgement on what you consider to be the 'typical' southerner, which in your mind, unless I'm totally off my mark, includes pickup truck, a barefoot wife, a pair of overalls, a sprig of grass between his lips and a banjo.

You have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to gun ownership.

All I said is most gun owners don't walk around their houses *constantly armed* like you said you do. I think I should have stuck a "probably" in there (you see what happens when I don't?).

Finally, all I'm assuming about the average gun owner is that he is not constantly armed with a live gun ("live gun" means a gun with bullets inside, right? lol). In that case, he is not ready-at-a-moment's-notice like you are.

And in response to TheRebelSun, I would agree that in some circumstances a gun is very useful, but probably not necessary. Most people in the world make do without a gun. If you were some farmer in the mountains of Afghanistan perhaps, you'd probably need a gun for something...

In America, these days, I don't think it's necessary, at least not for sedentary people. If you're so tough up that you need to hunt for your food, you still have the option of food stamps, whether you're willing to take that option or not. And then, even if you're some sort of outdoorsman, it's arguable that you still don't need a gun to survive. How did the Natives survive, anyways? Still, a gun would be helpful against a bear or wolf maybe, so I'd have no problem with it.

We can always think of extreme cases, though, and nothing is absolute.

Hell i think marijuana should be made legal. At least it would keep criminals a little less funded and it would save us tax dollars.

Guns are dangerous. You know what's 8 times as likely to kill someone? Cigaretts. Unhealhty diet and lack of exercise is 4 times as likely to kill. Car accidents are more than twice as likely to kill. The list goes on.

Another thing social engineers are discovering is the fact that violence has a tendency to grow a bit when gun onership is banned. This is because ciminals can make more money (just like with marijuana and prostitution). It is also because laws only work for those that are willing to obey them, making these people more powerless to those who choose not to.

More importantly, civil liberties are much more important than safety my friend. Our forefathers believed this. Anyone who doesn't needs a reality check....badly. The 2nd amendment is part of our bill of rights, weight barely second against the freedom of speech. It's weighed more important than our right to trial by jury, or the prohibition of illegal searches and seizures.

You SHOULD be wondering WHY our forefathers viewed this right as being so important. The answer is simple. Every consitutional right given to us was to protect us from tyranny. When we start letting these rights be overridden we are allowing ourselves to be controlled. The 2nd amendment was to protect us from a government that wants to forceably control its citizens. Its so when a group of corrupt cops want to rape your wife you can defend her with your arms. Or when a dictator like Hitler takes over, and tries to round people up and put them in concetration camps "we the people" can fight back.

Our declaration of independence states that we the people have the right to "life, liberty and the persuit of hapiness. And if the government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to ALTER OR ABOLISH IT." People are powerless against an armed foe if they themselves are unarmed. Look at history.

I was a soldier. I am a veteran of combat. I am no stranger to the devistation caused by weapons. I have nearly been shot more than a handful of times. I never want to witness what would happen if the most powerful nation in the world surrendered itself to corrupt leaders. Although my tour is over, and my contract is fulfilled, I would gladly die before i let that happen. I, and every other soldier has taken an oath, to defend the consitution of the United States against all enemies, both foriegn AND DOMESTIC. This comes before the part of obeying the president and officers appointed over me.

I take this oath seriously. Anyone attemping to disarm me, or the population, providing they are citizens of this nation, is an official enemy of the constitution. (Much like anyone who exercises the "patriot act" against citizens.

Pride has some to do with it,, but its a determination not to have to live off the back of the taxpayer and hope like hell the government thinks i am sorry enough to get the money. I have worked all my life,, from the time i was 5 and on a tobacco farm. Call me Old Fashioned,, but i prefer to earn what i get.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.

- Benjamin Franklin

Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.

-Thomas Paine

Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.

-George Washington

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188

"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... "
-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
--James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
--John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]

"The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ..."
-- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

" ... to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

" ... but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights ..."
-- Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29

Wow, I didn't think it was possible, but you convinced me. And so quickly too. I'll have to think long and hard about how to store the gun, though...to keep it safe from my kids, should I ever have any. I think I would educate them as hard as I could (haha).

And it may strike you as a bit ironic, but what you said struck a Marxist/Socialist chord in me. Let me just point out that the Socialism of Russia or North Korea is very different from what us ultra-Liberal university students have in mind! And it ain't a bunch of hippy free-love either.

P.S. You're right about the marijuana thing. It was a weak example anyway. ;-(

Let me point out that those were ideas for a different time. Still, I feel they do carry some weight, if not just a thread of hope for armed defiance. When you have a huge conscripted army, intelligence, an air force, and a navy, armed rebellion or revolt is totally uphill...or perhaps just plain massacre, especially for today's American people. Although, rebellion and revolt should always be uphill by definition.

However, I would say that there is hope, and we've seen how people can evade an army in the Middle East. Who knows how it'd go in the US though...

In training exercises my unit would play the "enemy". We recieve some prety unique training as a result. (Especially since our unit was pretty much the most funded in the U.S. Army.) Granted it was an exercise, but i have literally seen a unit of 100 soldiers out-play a unit of 2,000. It's all about advantages and disadvantages. A unit of 2,000 carries fire superiority, but is slow. The trick is to keep moving. The smaller, local unit could also win the hearts and minds of locals much easier than the "intruders".

There is also a factor that in this unique possible senario, many soldiers would leave their fight because of the oath and their belief in it.

Either way, it would be nice to have a fighting chance if anything went down wouldn't it?

That's why I pray to God but buy ammo in bulk.

blaming guns for this is like
blaming spoons for rosie odonnell for being fat

I agree. I think I'll start looking for a firing range in NYC. ;-P

Mind messaging me about that drill a bit more? I'd like to hear stories, tactics, and your opinions about what happened. I'd especially like to hear about the 100 v 2000 scenario you mentioned.

its always . blame it on the gun. never put the blame on the poor excuse for leaving their guns laying around,guns dont kill people. morons with no class do.

Well, I'm sure when they arrest the negligent adult, they're doing exactly what you're saying. O_o

For those of you who own guns, what kind of training/how much was required when you bought one?

To buy one? None. You do have to undergo a background screening that checks for things like arrest warrants, felony convictions, restraining orders, mental health dignoses and things like that. You have to be a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State in which you are buying.