Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Gun control

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    O'ahu
    Posts
    1,309

    Default Gun control

    To clean up the gun store thread, I thought I'd start a gun control thread (I didn't find one via the search function). I'm gonna throw up a bunch of thoughts, in no particular order. I'm no expert, so feel free to chew up any idea you don't agree with.


    1) Hawaii for the most part seems safer than the rest of the country. Perhaps this is because criminals can't flee across state lines. People living in remote areas (such as on the Big Island), might need to worry about self defense more.

    2) The Aloha Spirit will only last as long as there's enough food, water, and resources to go around. If we get smacked by our own Katrina and those weekly Matson ships stop coming in, we're gonna be in a world of hurt. The military will protect their own bases, harbors, airports, and major highways; the rest of us will be on our own.

    3) If a major disaster hits the west coast but doesn't touch Hawaii, we're still screwed. Perhaps some other country like China will come "rescue" us.

    4) In a disaster scenario, even if you have enough firepower to protect your home, if you don't have enough food or water, you'll be forced to leave. If you go to a relief camp, you'll be disarmed.

    5) If you're the only one in your neighborhood who's prepared with supplies, your own neighbors may become your biggest threat. You'll probably be able to share at first, but if things get desperate...

    6) If the economy continues to decline, more and more people will go over the edge. If they have a support network (family, community, church, etc.), they'll keep it together. If not, they may go postal or start using drugs which means they'll commit crimes to feed their habit.

    7) Many people don't realize it takes a lot of practice to use a gun in self defense. It's not a magic amulet that will protect you just because you bought it. If you're not gonna put in the work, you're better off not having a gun.

    8) If you decide to lock up your gun and ammo separately, then you can't expect to access it in an immediate emergency. You'll need to plan your emergency response accordingly.

    9) In a home invasion, the best option is to gather your entire family in one room, barricade yourself, and use your gun to keep the bad guys out, until the police arrive (as opposed to trying to run them off your property).

    10) Putting a gun in a small safe does nothing to keep it from getting stolen. Anchor your little safe or get a real $x,000 safe.

    11) If more citizens are armed, there will be more guns in the hands of criminals, because people are stupid and lazy and will let their guns get stolen.

    12) If more citizens are armed, and there are less easy victims, will criminals start taking on armed citizens? They still need to feed their crack habit, right?

    13) Every government fears its own citizens first and foremost.
    "By concealing your desires, you may trick people into being cruel about the wrong thing." --Steven Aylett, Fain the Sorcerer
    "You gotta get me to the tall corn." --David Mamet, Spartan
    "
    Amateurs talk technology, professionals talk conditions." --(unknown)

  2. #2

    Default Gun control doesn't work...

    Controlling guns only means the bad guys get them. Old story.

    The Aloha spirit is becoming a thing of the past with every day, and indeed, if the poop hit the fan in some form of disaster that took the general pop out of their routines for even a short time we'd see mass freaking and this state would never be the same. Just having TV go out for a week would have many going nuts.
    If it came to it I'd wear a gun all the time in the house, and if it came to the above, everywhere. We just pretend that the odds are in our favor and nothing will happen, until it does. Home invasions aren't that uncommon on Oahu. I've had it happen, with only a cane knife available, and got to use it, eventually...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever I am, I'm there
    Posts
    3,198

    Default Re: Gun control

    Uh-0h! This is going to be a big tub of popcorn thread!

    My only response is, private gun ownership is legal in the USA.......end of story.
    Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

    People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Central Oahu
    Posts
    774

    Default Re: Gun control

    Where I come from, "gun control" requires both correct sight alignment and a proper trigger pull.

    But there are very few things in the Navy more dangerous than a topside sentry carrying a firearm on the midwatch.

    However I thought of a new analogy to torture: You don't need a driver's license to buy a vehicle, and you don't need one to drive it on your own private property. You only need a license when you want to operate a vehicle on public property. And some vehicles require different licenses than others.

    Of course the whole issue of letting any ol' citizen drive a car is fraught with the problems of poor training, lack of safety, too much power with too little control, and maybe even not having enough insurance. Luckily just about anyone can get a license. Why, if driver's licenses were controlled then only criminals would have them!

    So maybe anyone could buy a gun. No license required if you only "operate" it on your own property.

    OTOH when my parents-in-law moved here from Maryland, my FIL took one look at Hawaii's gun-control laws and sold his Beretta. Turns out that his idea of proper firearms storage was keeping it loaded (with a round chambered) in his nightstand drawer. With that kind of "ownership", I think I would've been a bit uncomfortable at him having his granddaughter sleep over.
    Youth may be wasted on the young, but retirement is wasted on the old.
    Live like you're dying, invest like you're immortal.
    We grow old if we stop playing, but it's never too late to have a happy childhood.
    Forget about who you were-- discover who you are.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Post Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by MyopicJoe View Post
    To clean up the gun store thread, I thought I'd start a gun control thread (I didn't find one via the search function).
    Good idea. But I'm not going to respond to your 13 questions, just put my thoughts out.

    1. The second amendment to the US constitution is second only because free speech and freedom of worship is more important. It reads (as ratified by the states):
    "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    Meaning basically that if we want to remain free and secure, the People should be adequately armed to protect themselves against all enemies, foreign or domestic.

    My freedom extends to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness..." which I interpret as staying alive, keeping my family safe and alive and being able to accumulate those things which enhance my happiness, such as my house, my land, and my means of a living.

    I will argue that my right to keep and bear arms has been already substantially infringed by people and government which operates out of a fear of the majority of its own citizens. Gun control, in all of its guises has never reduced crime or increased security, but in my opinion, and the opinions of many other scholars, it has done the opposite.

    Ben Franklin said: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    I would change "deserve" to 'will get.'

    My basic belief is that law-abiding citizens who show a respect for their fellow citizens, have had proper training in the use, handling, safety, and secure storage of firearms, and who have not been adjudged as mentally unstable or deficient should have access to such firearms as would be necessary to protect themselves, their family, their property and even their country.

    Does 'More Guns = More Crime?'
    From the Wall Street Journal:
    "More per capita firepower exists in Switzerland than in any other place in the world, yet it is one of the safest places to be."
    Swiss males are required to keep firearms, ostensibly to protect their country, if needed. Their homicide rate is one of the lowest in the world. Some countries with strict gun bans do have lower homicide rates, but it's not a direct relationship.

    I keep all my firearms in a locked and secured safe, unloaded, except for two which I keep in a 'quick-open' locked and secured mini safe, locked and loaded in case of emergencies.

    If you do not take the time and money to get training and to properly and safely secure your firearms, then you shouldn't keep them.

    In any case, if you eschew firearms ownership and depend on others (like the police) for your protection, you leave your security to luck and planning (alarms, location, etc.).

    As one locally known policeman told me (roughly), 'We can't protect you from criminals. At the best we can try to prevent visible crime, pursue criminals by monitoring their activities and try to solve major crimes after the fact. We don't have the money or manpower to protect everyone.'

    It was years ago, so it may not be an exact quote, but I'm certain I got his intended meaning right.

    That's where I stand.

    I'll give up my firearms after the criminals, police and military turn in theirs first.

    K
    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever I am, I'm there
    Posts
    3,198

    Default Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaonohi View Post
    It reads (as ratified by the states):
    "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
    The Second Amendment is ambiguous. It is not clear what the writers meant by "well regulated militia." And it is not clear what they meant by "State." Some argue that means an "organized army" under the control of the Federal government (US military), not a private army of individuals. In addition, what was appropriate in the 18th century is not necessarily appropriate today.
    Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

    People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Post Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by matapule View Post
    The Second Amendment is ambiguous. It is not clear what the writers meant by "well regulated militia." And it is not clear what they meant by "State." Some argue that means an "organized army" under the control of the Federal government (US military), not a private army of individuals. In addition, what was appropriate in the 18th century is not necessarily appropriate today.
    Excellent points, matapule. Glad you brought them up.

    At some points during the 18th century "well-regulated" meant 'well-armed.' (One 18th century event known by the name 'the regulators' referred to an event where citizens took up arms against corrupt colonial officials.)

    And back then a 'militia' was described as all males over a certain age able to come to the defence of their country. There were few, sometimes no standing armies, even during the revolution.

    The "State" was under development at the time, and at that time referred to whatever governmental authority was ensconced by the Constitution; these days the "state" refers to everything from the Feds down to local government. At the time of the writing of the Constitution, there WAS no "Federal Government," it was "these united states." (i.e., the 13 colonies)

    Certainly, what was appropriate in the 18th century is not necessarily appropriate today.... powdered wigs are out, autos and video games are in. Other things are still appropriate: education, fair wages, etc.

    Naturally the Bill of Rights is under attack from those who wish to undermine the personal freedoms Americans enjoy. The recent misnamed McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Amendment actually infringed upon the first amendment:
    "The proliferation of issue advocacy ads, by defining as "electioneering communications" broadcast ads that name a federal candidate within 30 days of a primary or caucus or 60 days of a general election, and prohibiting any such ad paid for by a corporation (including non-profit issue organizations such as Right to Life or the Environmental Defense Fund) or paid for by an unincorporated entity using any corporate or union funds." In other words, the petitions we sign for 'right to life' or others are worthless!

    Fortunately, for the Second Amendment, the 2008 DC vs. Heller decision asserted that the Second Amendment (like the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights) is an INDIVIDUAL right.

    Hang on to every right you have, for the powers that be would gladly strip them away, and keep them for themselves alone.

    K
    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever I am, I'm there
    Posts
    3,198

    Default Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaonohi View Post
    Fortunately, for the Second Amendment, the 2008 DC vs. Heller decision asserted that the Second Amendment (like the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights) is an INDIVIDUAL right.
    Quote Originally Posted by matapule View Post
    My only response is, private gun ownership is legal in the USA.......end of story.
    That point is not debatable.
    Peace, Love, and Local Grindz

    People who form FIRM opinions with so little knowledge only pretend to be open-minded. They select their facts like food from a buffet. David R. Dow

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Wink Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by matapule View Post
    That point is not debatable.
    Well, perhaps not currently debatable, but there are many who are still debating the legality and the proper implementation of that 'point.'

    Multi-billionaire George Soros, has a personal agenda in ending private firearm ownership in America. I can't understand his motives, but I understand he has influence in the halls of Congress and the seats of the Senate. As well as considerable funds to promote candidates of his choosing.

    Ted Kennedy's anti-gun motivation we can easily understand, or could, may he finally rest in peace. To lose two spectacular and charismatic brothers to handgun violence is enough; I would become anti-gun!

    The Clinton clan I guess I understand: appeal to liberal America. Zzzzz.

    Rosie O'Donnell? Vehemently anti-gun, but who has armed guards 24/7?
    "Let the people eat lead..." She hides behind a shield of lead.

    The Brady Campaign: First created to ban handguns, Now to prevent handgun violence. A change to be more PC (politically correct).
    I can't fault Ms. Brady, or even her advisors.
    She lost her husband to a political nut with a gun.
    Why not ban politics? That's what crippled her husband; the gun was only a tool, like a knife, screwdriver, rock, crowbar, etc.

    Granted: When people consider assassination they consider dramatic weapons: guns, explosives, poison gas... but guns most of all.
    Until we come up with something better (or worse).

    That which is our best chance at self-protection is also our worst enemy when it comes to crime, assassination, murder and worse.

    Guns are tools. Tools can be used or misused. You can murder with a gun, or a car (I came close to being such a victim, once), or a hammer, screwdriver, knife, toaster, or a million other things. Hand weapons require less planning, but also expose the murderers to more investigation.

    Can we control guns? Not completely. Other countries have done a good job, but none are complete.

    Do we want to control guns?

    1. I ask "why?"
    2. I ask "How?"

    If we cannot even control our people, how can we ever expect to control guns?

    Earlier, my cherished friend matapule said:
    "The Second Amendment is ambiguous. It is not clear what the writers meant by "well regulated militia." And it is not clear what they meant by "State." Some argue that means an "organized army" under the control of the Federal government (US military), not a private army of individuals. In addition, what was appropriate in the 18th century is not necessarily appropriate today."

    Some may argue all of that; he just stated his perception, without argument, and individual perceptions vary.

    We would all like to make our world more perfect. In the words of the Beatles: "We all want to change the world."

    We must resist reactionary change. We must carefully consider each change in society we make, especially those with force of law.
    It doesn't take much imagination to see the effects of unconscious or semi-conscious change; we merely need look at history to see the folly of decisions made in haste based on emotions.

    Beatles:
    "But when you talk about destruction...
    Don't you know that you can count me out..."

    I think this is a treasure matapule and Kaonohi share.

    K.
    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    817

    Default Re: Gun control

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaonohi View Post
    Well, perhaps not currently debatable, but there are many who are still debating the legality and the proper implementation of that 'point.'

    Multi-billionaire George Soros, has a personal agenda in ending private firearm ownership in America. I can't understand his motives, but I understand he has influence in the halls of Congress and the seats of the Senate. As well as considerable funds to promote candidates of his choosing.

    Ted Kennedy's anti-gun motivation we can easily understand, or could, may he finally rest in peace. To lose two spectacular and charismatic brothers to handgun violence is enough; I would become anti-gun!

    The Clinton clan I guess I understand: appeal to liberal America. Zzzzz.

    Rosie O'Donnell? Vehemently anti-gun, but who has armed guards 24/7?
    "Let the people eat lead..." She hides behind a shield of lead.

    The Brady Campaign: First created to ban handguns, Now to prevent handgun violence. A change to be more PC (politically correct).
    I can't fault Ms. Brady, or even her advisors.
    She lost her husband to a political nut with a gun.
    Why not ban politics? That's what crippled her husband; the gun was only a tool, like a knife, screwdriver, rock, crowbar, etc.

    Granted: When people consider assassination they consider dramatic weapons: guns, explosives, poison gas... but guns most of all.
    Until we come up with something better (or worse).

    That which is our best chance at self-protection is also our worst enemy when it comes to crime, assassination, murder and worse.

    Guns are tools. Tools can be used or misused. You can murder with a gun, or a car (I came close to being such a victim, once), or a hammer, screwdriver, knife, toaster, or a million other things. Hand weapons require less planning, but also expose the murderers to more investigation.

    Can we control guns? Not completely. Other countries have done a good job, but none are complete.

    Do we want to control guns?

    1. I ask "why?"
    2. I ask "How?"

    If we cannot even control our people, how can we ever expect to control guns?

    Earlier, my cherished friend matapule said:
    "The Second Amendment is ambiguous. It is not clear what the writers meant by "well regulated militia." And it is not clear what they meant by "State." Some argue that means an "organized army" under the control of the Federal government (US military), not a private army of individuals. In addition, what was appropriate in the 18th century is not necessarily appropriate today."

    Some may argue all of that; he just stated his perception, without argument, and individual perceptions vary.

    We would all like to make our world more perfect. In the words of the Beatles: "We all want to change the world."

    We must resist reactionary change. We must carefully consider each change in society we make, especially those with force of law.
    It doesn't take much imagination to see the effects of unconscious or semi-conscious change; we merely need look at history to see the folly of decisions made in haste based on emotions.

    Beatles:
    "But when you talk about destruction...
    Don't you know that you can count me out..."

    I think this is a treasure matapule and Kaonohi share.

    K.
    Can I add ? As a retired officer in the Brit. Royal navy,,,, Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •