Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ahtman wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
On the flip-side,it can be argued that the strict gun and self-defense laws in the U.K. are a sign that the British pawn off all responsibility of personal safety from criminals to government. Which is both a sign of complacency and laziness.

It could be argued, sure, but it would sound like a flying rodent gak insane.

With all due respect, that's your opinion.


And considering that governments (and their representatives) are made up of flawed Human beings, they are no more qualified to handle small arms responsibly than a responsible and knowledgeable private citizen.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Nobody likes a pedantic grammar nazi.

Being liked was not my intention. If someone is going to talk about other people being lazy idiots, while presenting themselves as a model of care and correctness, then I might expect that person to show the same care in their writing, and not make the same obvious error three times in a row. It's kind of a case in point: illusory superiority. A study found that 93% of a Americans, when asked about their driving ability, considered themselves in the top 50% for driving safety, which would suggest that some people aren't as careful as they think they are.

I object to the term "grammar nazi". A nazi is rather overbearing, and might pull people over and execute them for small mistakes, like punctuation and typos. Three they'res in row, is a much more serious crime against the English language, I view myself as more of a pedantic grammar "concerned citizen".

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
On the flip-side,it can be argued that the strict gun and self-defense laws in the U.K. are a sign that the British pawn off all responsibility of personal safety from criminals to government. Which is both a sign of complacency and laziness.

There are lots of ways to keep yourself safe that don't involve conflict, which people are expected to explore first (securing property, for example), but yes, attempting to injure criminals is not something that is actively encouraged (it's a last resort).

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Frozocrone wrote:
Why are guns so easily accessible? I'm not talking about purchasing guns, I imagine there are checks done that are very thorough to ensure they don't fall into the wrong hands. I'm talking about how parents basically show the gun on display for children to use. I only recently heard about a pre-teen girl shot to death because the neighbour's son got a little mad.

Only in some states. In others, buying a gun is like buying a knife here... and the bad people who want guns can just go to a less well regulated state, buy whatever the heck they want, then take it home without being checked at the border, because there are no real restrictions on gun ownership, only on gun purchase.

Incorrect. One cannot go to another state and legally buy a firearm.

You do realize that most people have autocorrect functions on their browsers right? Autocorrect is notorious for mixing up words, especially their, they're, etc...

A little grammar mistake doesn't give you leave to disrespect his argument. Its not an equivalent offense.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You do realize that most people have autocorrect functions on their browsers right? Autocorrect is notorious for mixing up words, especially their, they're, etc...

A little grammar mistake doesn't give you leave to disrespect his argument. Its not an equivalent offense.

If the argument is that laziness breeds complacency, fething up grammar three times in a row and blaming autocorrect seems to back the argument up perfectly.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You do realize that most people have autocorrect functions on their browsers right? Autocorrect is notorious for mixing up words, especially their, they're, etc...

A little grammar mistake doesn't give you leave to disrespect his argument. Its not an equivalent offense.

Talking to me?

My opinions of guns have changed overtime. But I do feel that america has a dangerous gun culture that leaves guns as sometime mystical objects tht cant be interfered with. People treat guns as if they are things that they worship.

[quote=Smacks 682109 8494034 eead23876371f3c33a0274927569ec6c.jpg

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
On the flip-side,it can be argued that the strict gun and self-defense laws in the U.K. are a sign that the British pawn off all responsibility of personal safety from criminals to government. Which is both a sign of complacency and laziness.

There are lots of ways to keep yourself safe that don't involve conflict, which people are expected to explore first (securing property, for example), but yes, attempting to injure criminals is not something that is actively encouraged (it's a last resort).

As a CCW holder, former LEO and Corrections Officer, I'm well aware of this. However, that "last resort", is what I'm getting at. Even if you choose to keep a firearm for self-defense, you still need to take additional security precautions and exercise situational awareness of your surroundings. But even that will not deter some among the criminally minded.


A gun is like a fire extinguisher. You hope you never need it, but it's there if you do. And it's wise to have both, situation permitting.

 Grey Templar wrote:
You do realize that most people have autocorrect functions on their browsers right? Autocorrect is notorious for mixing up words, especially their, they're, etc...

A little grammar mistake doesn't give you leave to disrespect his argument. Its not an equivalent offense.

I didn't disrespect his argument. His argument had some merit, but there was a certain irony at work calling other people careless while doing something careless. Perhaps the people who leave their guns unsecured go around calling other people "safety nazis", or perhaps they consider themselves very knowledgeable and safe, when really they aren't. That's not uncommon, many medical professionals, when tested, aren't good at things like hand washing and infection control. I have worked at the NHS, producing material to try and teach people this stuff. Not all of it is just common sense; it can be surprising the ways that infections can be spread, so it's easy for someone to think they are being safe when actually they are a walking disaster.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
My opinions of guns have changed overtime. But I do feel that america has a dangerous gun culture that leaves guns as sometime mystical objects tht cant be interfered with. People treat guns as if they are things that they worship.

We haven't had a true "gun culture" for a very long time. If we did, people wouldn't be as quick to act in a stupid manner with one, because they would have more respect for the gun and what it can do.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:
As a CCW holder, former LEO and Corrections Officer, I'm well aware of this. However, that "last resort", is what I'm getting at. Even if you choose to keep a firearm for self-defense, you still need to take additional security precautions and exercise situational awareness of your surroundings. But even that will not deter some among the criminally minded.

Which is fine, but my point was really about the message the law sends out, and how that translates into the public's attitude towards guns and security.

Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

To my knowledge, those guys haven't caused any harm in doing so. Other than offending liberal sensitivities of course.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

That's not a "gun culture". That's the "stupidity" I mentioned earlier. A kind of stupidity from idiots who were never taught to respect weapons or other people. Or idiots who don't bother to really understand the facts and issues. As it is in many issues, they tend to be a vocal minority that gets the most attention from the opposition.


Gun owners who are throwbacks to the REAL gun culture that once existed, make it a point to not go out of their way to "advertise" in public, because of the wrong kind of attention it attracts. These same people also understand that a gun isn't a magical wand that will automatically repel bad guys. They understand, as I pointed out earlier, that it's akin to a fire extinguisher.

While CCW laws have helped deter crime, they are more for people to have a fighting chance in an age where a simple mugging can quickly turn into murder or sexual assault, even if the victim doesn't resist.


Myself, and many I know who own firearms, were raised in, or under the principles of, the REAL gun culture. And we tend to be a responsible and law-abiding bunch. Not like the idiots you mention in your post.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

I think he's arguing we have a violence culture instead. I agree. I'd proffer a "gun violence" culture is a subset of that.

No gun culture? Really?




*edit* Hit send before finishing my thought.

If we don't have a gun culture, why is it so important for certain politicians to identify themselves as gun enthusiasts (to the point of frying fething bacon on their gun barrel)?

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

That's not a "gun culture". That's the "stupidity" I mentioned earlier. A kind of stupidity from idiots who were never taught to respect weapons or other people. Or idiots who don't bother to really understand the facts and issues. As it is in many issues, they tend to be a vocal minority that gets the most attention from the opposition.


Gun owners who are throwbacks to the REAL gun culture that once existed, make it a point to not go out of their way to "advertise" in public, because of the wrong kind of attention it attracts. These same people also understand that a gun isn't a magical wand that will automatically repel bad guys. They understand, as I pointed out earlier, that it's akin to a fire extinguisher.

While CCW laws have helped deter crime, they are more for people to have a fighting chance in an age where a simple mugging can quickly turn into murder or sexual assault, even if the victim doesn't resist.


Myself, and many I know who own firearms, were raised in, or under the principles of, the REAL gun culture. And we tend to be a responsible and law-abiding bunch. Not like the idiots you mention in your post.

Yeah, just because that is how you define a gun cultre doesnt mean that is how it is meant to be or really is. Like it or not, people like those a mentioned are the dominant forces within gun culture today and represent it.

@smacks. I'll endeavor to use the correct they're, there, or their In my future posts so you don't get upset.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:
No gun culture? Really?




*edit* Hit send before finishing my thought.

If we don't have a gun culture, why is it so important for certain politicians to identify themselves as gun enthusiasts (to the point of frying fething bacon on their gun barrel)?

Because politcos are trying to get their vote. GUN OWNERS make for a powerful voting and lobbying block on the American political landscape. However, ownership, and ownership numbers alone, does not define a "gun culture".

I was wondering if this would get posted while the workplace shooter in Kansas is ignored.

Odd.

 Frazzled wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

I think he's arguing we have a violence culture instead. I agree. I'd proffer a "gun violence" culture is a subset of that.

Our movies celebrate violence. Our television programs feature violence. Our news chases violence. Our music, rap especially, embraces violence. Our video games are violent.

Yea, I have to agree we have a culture of violence. We also have a tradition of gun ownership. The two often get conflated.

 cincydooley wrote:
I was wondering if this would get posted while the workplace shooter in Kansas is ignored.

Odd.

A guy going nuts on his co-workers is less sensational than kids killing kids.

Its all gross, but hell, after Sandy Hook I am really not shocked by any of our countries shootings anymore.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
I was wondering if this would get posted while the workplace shooter in Kansas is ignored.

Odd.

A guy going nuts on his co-workers is less sensational than kids killing kids.

Its all gross, but hell, after Sandy Hook I am really not shocked by any of our countries shootings anymore.

I'd contend there are a few other factors keeping it out of the "narrative" other than his age.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Except we do. I have seen it, I have been around it. I have met and read about numerous people who believe that guns solve EVERYTHING and tht if everyone had a gun, nothing where happen. Or take look t the jackasses that run around with their guns in chipoltes because "they can" because they want people to know they own guns

That's not a "gun culture". That's the "stupidity" I mentioned earlier. A kind of stupidity from idiots who were never taught to respect weapons or other people. Or idiots who don't bother to really understand the facts and issues. As it is in many issues, they tend to be a vocal minority that gets the most attention from the opposition.


Gun owners who are throwbacks to the REAL gun culture that once existed, make it a point to not go out of their way to "advertise" in public, because of the wrong kind of attention it attracts. These same people also understand that a gun isn't a magical wand that will automatically repel bad guys. They understand, as I pointed out earlier, that it's akin to a fire extinguisher.

While CCW laws have helped deter crime, they are more for people to have a fighting chance in an age where a simple mugging can quickly turn into murder or sexual assault, even if the victim doesn't resist.


Myself, and many I know who own firearms, were raised in, or under the principles of, the REAL gun culture. And we tend to be a responsible and law-abiding bunch. Not like the idiots you mention in your post.

Yeah, just because that is how you define a gun cultre doesnt mean that is how it is meant to be or really is. Like it or not, people like those a mentioned are the dominant forces within gun culture today and represent it.

It has nothing to do with how I see it. It's all about how it really is.


We (gun owners) are not robots that march lock-step as a hive-mind, despite what the Brady Campaign or MSNBC might like to claim. And just because you own a gun, and like to make a big deal about it, doesn't make you part of a "gun culture". The Big Media editorial organs like to paint loudmouths and assclowns (like Nugent, to name an example) as representative of an American "gun culture". But that's patently false and, unfortunately, something the hoplophobes, and those who know little to nothing about guns, tend to swallow hook, line, and sinker.


But I will never convince you otherwise. So, it's best to just "agree to disagree" and let sleeping dogs lie.

In my personal experience people who love guns will (usually) always love guns. People who hate guns will (usually) always hate guns. I don't try to convince people to like guns or whatever. I just don't like people trying to take mine away because they don't like them. I don't force my beliefs on anyone. I don't want anybody else's beliefs forced on me.

@smacks. Is my spelling ok for you this time.

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Yup- cause " It's unconstitutional if we don't have the right to bear arms"

Yeah, it is right there in the Second Amendment.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Yup- cause " It's unconstitutional if we don't have the right to bear arms"

Yeah, it is right there in the Second Amendment.

Which was written to help put down slave revolts, then again pesky abe got rid of our free labor.

 Ustrello wrote:
Which was written to help put down slave revolts, then again pesky abe got rid of our free labor.

False, but interesting revisionist history.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
Which was written to help put down slave revolts, then again pesky abe got rid of our free labor.

False, but interesting revisionist history.

Ah the dwight schrute argument, I guess mason running around yelling about slave revolts forcing madison to add the 2nd amendment had anything to do with it.

 Ustrello wrote:
Ah the dwight schrute argument...

Huh?