What are Gun Owners Afraid of?

[TheVictors]

When it comes down to it, what are gun owners so scared of?

No gun means being victimized by criminals?
No gun means being vulnerable to secret government agencies?
No gun means not being able to shoot a bear that climbs over your fence?
No gun means that if forced into a duel, you're at a disadvantage?
No gun means no killing animals?
No gun means no shooting stuff to see it destroyed by shooting it?
No gun means no lethal weapon to show off when people come over?

I don't get it ... I don't get the obsession with guns or the reaction to the thought that guns are in fact made for one thing and one thing only. To shoot people, places and things.

that's it.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Well, honestly, I like mine because they're fun to shoot. For me, it's much like the thrill you get to light off fireworks. Primitive in nature, it's really just that I like the big "boom". But given my overall stature and the fact that I've never been in a fight my entire life - a gun does make me feel safer if a physical threat ever did present itself. So while you're slightly trolling, I'd pick #1.

I'd pose the question back at you - what's wrong with people wanting to protect themselves?

 

[Michchamp]

When it comes down to it, what are gun owners so scared of?

No gun means being victimized by criminals?
No gun means being vulnerable to secret government agencies?
No gun means not being able to shoot a bear that climbs over your fence?
No gun means that if forced into a duel, you're at a disadvantage?
No gun means no killing animals?
No gun means no shooting stuff to see it destroyed by shooting it?
No gun means no lethal weapon to show off when people come over?

I don't get it ... I don't get the obsession with guns or the reaction to the thought that guns are in fact made for one thing and one thing only. To shoot people, places and things.

that's it.

I own a gun an I ain't afraid a nuthin, libral.

 

[Michchamp]

Well, honestly, I like mine because they're fun to shoot. For me, it's much like the thrill you get to light off fireworks. Primitive in nature, it's really just that I like the big "boom". But given my overall stature and the fact that I've never been in a fight my entire life - a gun does make me feel safer if a physical threat ever did present itself. So while you're slightly trolling, I'd pick #1.

I'd pose the question back at you - what's wrong with people wanting to protect themselves?

Private Pyle,

your right to protect yourself is subject to some reasonable restrictions, and limited by other people's rights to be free of gun violence caused by a proliferation of firearms due to the lax regulations you feel are justified.

and I don't care where you are, no law abiding American citizen needs an assault rifle, or a high-capacity magazine to defend themselves. if they really did, gun laws would be the least of their worries.

 

[MaizeNCheese304]

We have more threads about guns, than the Michigan bowl game I think.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Private Pyle,

your right to protect yourself is subject to some reasonable restrictions, and limited by other people's rights to be free of gun violence caused by a proliferation of firearms due to the lax regulations you feel are justified.

and I don't care where you are, no law abiding American citizen needs an assault rifle, or a high-capacity magazine to defend themselves. if they really did, gun laws would be the least of their worries.

Tell that to the shop owners in both LA and New Orleans who defended their shops with them during the LA riots and Katrina....The problem with people with the opinion that "assault rifles have no place in our society" is that they're assuming our society holds up. Even the slightest natural disaster can cause people to go crazy, if just for a couple of weeks. Our society walks on a tight-rope mostly held up by luxuries like electricity and food at the grocery store. Take those away for just a couple of weeks and see what happens. Then tell me that someone shouldn't have the right to protect themselves with an assault rifle.

 

[Michchamp]

Tell that to the shop owners in both LA and New Orleans who defended their shops with them during the LA riots and Katrina....The problem with people with the opinion that "assault rifles have no place in our society" is that they're assuming our society holds up. Even the slightest natural disaster can cause people to go crazy, if just for a couple of weeks. Our society walks on a tight-rope mostly held up by luxuries like electricity and food at the grocery store. Take those away for just a couple of weeks and see what happens. Then tell me that someone shouldn't have the right to protect themselves with an assault rifle.

so... when did you become a prepper nutjob? Or did you just decide the prepper nutjobs weren't represented enough on this board and figured you become their spokesperson?

and is it just me, or does the idea that we should craft the laws of our current functioning civilized society based on the needs of a theoretical post-apocalyptic one sound completely unhinged to anyone else?

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

so... when did you become a prepper nutjob? Or did you just decide the prepper nutjobs weren't represented enough on this board and figured you become their spokesperson?

and is it just me, or does the idea that we should craft the laws of our current functioning civilized society based on the needs of a theoretical post-apocalyptic one sound completely unhinged to anyone else?

I'm more so playing devil's advocate right now. Most people don't own a gun because they think they're going to get robbed, molested or raped most people buy one in the hopes that they can prevent it in the event that someone tries to do so. So, to some extent, people are "preparing" for an event that has not happened yet and probably has a small chance of ever happening. There have been multiple times in the last 50 years where the justification of an assault rifle in a civilian's hands has been justified.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Tell that to the shop owners in both LA and New Orleans who defended their shops with them during the LA riots and Katrina....The problem with people with the opinion that "assault rifles have no place in our society" is that they're assuming our society holds up. Even the slightest natural disaster can cause people to go crazy, if just for a couple of weeks. Our society walks on a tight-rope mostly held up by luxuries like electricity and food at the grocery store. Take those away for just a couple of weeks and see what happens. Then tell me that someone shouldn't have the right to protect themselves with an assault rifle.

It's wingnut mythology that assault rifles significantly detered looters during the LA riots; overwhelmingly the deterrent was the brandishing of shotguns and handguns.

They had a fuckin' lot of them, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzkBGQx3HAc

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

All weren't just hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols....guy with the uzi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRc_FlmW2Jc

Now we could argue if an uzi counts as an assault rifle or not. But surely there were guys out there with more than what you mentioned.

 

[Michchamp]

I'm more so playing devil's advocate right now. Most people don't own a gun because they think they're going to get robbed, molested or raped most people buy one in the hopes that they can prevent it in the event that someone tries to do so. So, to some extent, people are "preparing" for an event that has not happened yet and probably has a small chance of ever happening. There have been multiple times in the last 50 years where the justification of an assault rifle in a civilian's hands has been justified.

here's a picture of the hat I would put on right now if we were talking in person:

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

here's a picture of the hat I would put on right now if we were talking in person:

Hey, I didn't make the thread. I answered honestly. The people on that Nat Geo show "doomsday preppers" are a little insane to me, but I wouldn't consider someone buying an assault rifle, to be prepared for anything, paranoid.

 

[lostleader]

When it comes down to it, what are gun owners so scared of?

No gun means being victimized by criminals?
No gun means being vulnerable to secret government agencies?
No gun means not being able to shoot a bear that climbs over your fence?
No gun means that if forced into a duel, you're at a disadvantage?
No gun means no killing animals?
No gun means no shooting stuff to see it destroyed by shooting it?
No gun means no lethal weapon to show off when people come over?

I don't get it ... I don't get the obsession with guns or the reaction to the thought that guns are in fact made for one thing and one thing only. To shoot people, places and things.

that's it.

I would say all but the last one. Why cant people like to shoot for fun? For me its like going out and throwing around the baseball or shooting hoops. They have shooting events at both olympics, so shooting for competition must exist.

There is a lot of other "shit" for a lack of a better term that scares me about losing the right to bear arms. I don't care what type of gun anyone owns. I fear more that the government is trying to control more and more of our daily lives.
Once they start controlling what type of weapons are running around, the attempt to enforce a "martial law" type of scenario become a reality. As of right now the government is hesitant to attempt anything, because if they fail, they will lose all control. Regulate the guns, use gun violence to isolate those that are on the fence, and create generations of "yes" men, and we are on the path destruction. The "yes" men I refer to are the younger generation that that cannot think or provide for themselves, I see that daily in my job.

Read a few of these new reports and tell me what you think
http://americanactionreport.blogspot.com/2011/12/whats-this-about-fema-camps-primer.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/17/us-russian-soldiers-train-together-in-colorado/
http://theintelhub.com/2012/04/01/will-u-s-troops-fire-on-american-citizens/

So I believe we have plenty to fear. This could all be nonsense, and probably some of it is. I don't like the idea of the government messing with any of my daily actives or trying to mandate any of my purchases.

 

[tinselwolverine]

All weren't just hunting rifles, shotguns and pistols....guy with the uzi:

Now we could argue if an uzi counts as an assault rifle or not. But surely there were guys out there with more than what you mentioned.

They showed one guy with one uzi...the rest of the 30 guys seemed to have shotguns and handguns; they didn't need the guy with the uzi.

Sure, probably a few others had asssault rifles; but overwhelmingly the deterrents were all the guys with shotguns and handguns.

I don't know about Katrina; but I lived through the LA riots and all the footage I saw during that event (I didn't venture out into the "war zone") overwhelmingly showed the Korean guys defending their businesses with shot guns and hand guns, not assault rifles.

My guess is it's the same thing regarding Katrina; the primary defense weapons were the same as the ones during the LA riots, and requirement for shopkeepers to have had assault rifles to defend their businesses is just so much wingnut bullshit, as the video clips here indicates.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I would say all but the last one. Why cant people like to shoot for fun? For me its like going out and throwing around the baseball or shooting hoops. They have shooting events at both olympics, so shooting for competition must exist.

There is a lot of other "shit" for a lack of a better term that scares me about losing the right to bear arms. I don't care what type of gun anyone owns. I fear more that the government is trying to control more and more of our daily lives.
Once they start controlling what type of weapons are running around, the attempt to enforce a "martial law" type of scenario become a reality. As of right now the government is hesitant to attempt anything, because if they fail, they will lose all control. Regulate the guns, use gun violence to isolate those that are on the fence, and create generations of "yes" men, and we are on the path destruction. The "yes" men I refer to are the younger generation that that cannot think or provide for themselves, I see that daily in my job.

Read a few of these new reports and tell me what you think
http://americanactionreport.blogspot.com/2011/12/whats-this-about-fema-camps-primer.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/17/us-russian-soldiers-train-together-in-colorado/
http://theintelhub.com/2012/04/01/will-u-s-troops-fire-on-american-citizens/

So I believe we have plenty to fear. This could all be nonsense, and probably some of it is. I don't like the idea of the government messing with any of my daily actives or trying to mandate any of my purchases.

Along those lines, if I'm not doing anything to harm anyone else or planning anything to harm anyone else - I think the government shouldn't have a say in what I do, or don't do, buy or don't buy. If I want fully automatic uzi, I should be able to get one. I've done nothing illegal.

I should also be able to put a couch on my porch. (thought I'd throw that in).

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

They showed one guy with one uzi...the rest of the 30 guys seemed to have shotguns and handguns; they didn't need the guy with the uzi.

Sure, probably a few others had asssault rifles; but overwhelmingly the deterrents were all the guys with shotguns and handguns.

I don't know about Katrina; but I lived through the LA riots and all the footage I saw during that event (I didn't venture out into the "war zone") overwhelmingly showed the Korean guys defending their businesses with shot guns and hand guns, not assault rifles.

My guess is it's the same thing regarding Katrina; the primary defense weapons were the same as the ones during the LA riots, and requirement for shopkeepers to have had assault rifles to defend their businesses is just so much wingnut bullshit, as the video clips here indicates.

The didn't "need" the shotguns either. They could have defended everything with bean bag guns right? The fact remains that in that situation the assault rifles were the best tool for the situation, even if people used other tools. If there was some sort of mob attack on the building I'd certainly want an assault rifle over a shotgun. Assuming the other side is armed with something as well, you'd want the weapon designed for military action.

 

[tinselwolverine]

I would say all but the last one. Why cant people like to shoot for fun? For me its like going out and throwing around the baseball or shooting hoops. They have shooting events at both olympics, so shooting for competition must exist.

There is a lot of other "shit" for a lack of a better term that scares me about losing the right to bear arms. I don't care what type of gun anyone owns. I fear more that the government is trying to control more and more of our daily lives.
Once they start controlling what type of weapons are running around, the attempt to enforce a "martial law" type of scenario become a reality. As of right now the government is hesitant to attempt anything, because if they fail, they will lose all control. Regulate the guns, use gun violence to isolate those that are on the fence, and create generations of "yes" men, and we are on the path destruction. The "yes" men I refer to are the younger generation that that cannot think or provide for themselves, I see that daily in my job.

Read a few of these new reports and tell me what you think
http://americanactionreport.blogspot.com/2011/12/whats-this-about-fema-camps-primer.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/05/17/us-russian-soldiers-train-together-in-colorado/
http://theintelhub.com/2012/04/01/will-u-s-troops-fire-on-american-citizens/

So I believe we have plenty to fear. This could all be nonsense, and probably some of it is. I don't like the idea of the government messing with any of my daily actives or trying to mandate any of my purchases.

The day after the innauguration, you, and every other law enforcement officer in the country, is going to recieve a secret memo, informing you that the disarmament of and the imposition of tyrrany against the people of the United States will shortly be underway, and you, as a duly deputized law enforcement agent of the government, are going to be expected to do your part.

And nobody should expect the Republican majority in the House of Representatives to do anything to prevent it, because...

They're in on it.

Because they're the government.

Merry Christmas.

 

[tinselwolverine]

The didn't "need" the shotguns either. They could have defended everything with bean bag guns right? The fact remains that in that situation the assault rifles were the best tool for the situation, even if people used other tools. If there was some sort of mob attack on the building I'd certainly want an assault rifle over a shotgun. Assuming the other side is armed with something as well, you'd want the weapon designed for military action.

Boy that's funny stuff right there.

Your claim was that assault rifles were instrumental in Korean shopkeepers having defended their stores during the riots.

Tell that to the shop owners in both LA and New Orleans who defended their shops with them during the LA riots...

...and I just showed your claim to have been bullshit.

You're owned.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Boy that's funny stuff right there.

Your claim was that assault rifles were instrumental in Korean shopkeepers having defended their stores during the riots.



...and it and I just showed your claim to have been bullshit.

You're owned.

They did defend them with assault rifles, so I'm not sure what your point is? I never said they were exclusively defended by people with assault rifles.

 

[lostleader]

The day after the innauguration, you, and every other law enforcement officer in the country, is going to recieve a secret memo, informing you that the disarmament of and the imposition of tyrrany against the people of the United States will shortly be underway, and you, as a duly deputized law enforcement agent of the government, are going to be expected to do your part.

And nobody should expect the Republican majority in the House of Representatives to do anything to prevent it, because...

They're in on it.

Because they're the government.

Merry Christmas.

I am sure you are sarcastic, but this has been talked about inside the agency. Now actually have people enforce this type of thing is going to be extremely difficult. That is why the Russians will be brought in, or they will hire new people.

Glad I work in a rural area where we are all gun nuts. Not many unjustified shootings, for what thats worth.