Utah Guns Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is what I think gun grabbers don't get. There are plenty of countries around the world where citizens aren't allowed to have guns. In those countries they have bombings instead of shootings.

Ban guns in colleges you'll just see more of this.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5idw2 ... AD8V82ELG0

Make guns hard to find in cities and you'll see more of this.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ia2B ... AD8V7T8CG0

We as a country need to start looking at the social situations in this country that lead people to become heartless killers and stop blaming guns, knives. baseball bat's etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,195 Posts
H e double toothpicks, No!

Not only would it not stop but it would escalate.

Without reasonable fear of others being able to stop them, criminals will get more violent, or perform more crimes against the inocent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,928 Posts
Cinhil said:
H e double toothpicks, No!

Not only would it not stop but it would escalate.

Without reasonable fear of others being able to stop them, criminals will get more violent, or perform more crimes against the inocent.
:agree:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,616 Posts
Actually, I don't quite agree with your conclusion.

In those places where guns are banned, plenty of guns get used to victimize the innocent. Check out the number of violent crimes committed in Washington D.C. where the perps use guns and the Virginia Tech mass killing of more than 30 people by a nut case who used guns. Those are so-called 'gun-free' zones. Where you have total gun bans, the bad guys will still have and use guns.

Regarding the bomb that was thrown at the military recruiting office this morning at Times Square in New York ... I wonder if it was thrown by a 'peace activist'?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Coming from a place where guns were very hard to buy and a CHL was immposible, I can say that the bad guys still had them and in abundance. I am a tattoo artist so i work on alot of thugs and they tell me things that they should'nt. Its alot of gossip like when ladies tell their hairdresser who their screwing around with, but i take it serious.
If you take away our guns the bad guys will still have fire arms and I was told never to bring a knife to a gun fight so to speak
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Jeff Johnson said:
Actually, I don't quite agree with your conclusion.

In those places where guns are banned, plenty of guns get used to victimize the innocent. Check out the number of violent crimes committed in Washington D.C. where the perps use guns and the Virginia Tech mass killing of more than 30 people by a nut case who used guns. Those are so-called 'gun-free' zones. Where you have total gun bans, the bad guys will still have and use guns.

Regarding the bomb that was thrown at the military recruiting office this morning at Times Square in New York ... I wonder if it was thrown by a 'peace activist'?
Yeah I guess I was saying even if anti gun laws worked (ie got guns out of bad guy hands) which they don't. I still don't think that would stop violence because I don't think access to weapons is the root of the problem.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,616 Posts
marksman said:
Yeah I guess I was saying even if anti gun laws worked (ie got guns out of bad guy hands) which they don't. I still don't think that would stop violence because I don't think access to weapons is the root of the problem.
Then I agree with you, in this hypothetical case ... that violence would still happen. Not only that, but it would increase.

The gun is called the Great Equalizer. For example, it gives a 115 lb woman parity of force against a would-be 220 lb rapist. Take away all guns, and the strong would dominate and victimize the weak by brute force.
 
G

·
In my opinion the question is superfluous; although I address it frequently.

I recently read a statement made by someone who prefers using their head as a hat rack and it went something like this: "The Constitution is out of date. Do you really think the founding fathers would want us to have guns when 20k people die of firearms related deaths annually?" I paraphrase but the intent is the same.

The answer to the question is a deafening yes. Many of our founding fathers preferred liberty to security and to some extent considered them mutually exclusive. You can find writings by the truck load to support this position.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.

No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
- Thomas Jefferson

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
- Benjamin Franklin

Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.
- Daniel Webster

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
- John Stuart Mill Not a founding father but an great man.

I have a blog full of my favorite quotes if anyone wants to give them a read or possibly add to them:

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?f...n=F385792D-9E11-4577-9D931648A465EA8525926876
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
181 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I agree here is a really interesting quote that I found when reading about the 2nd amendment. I think it give a really interesting in site into what the founding fathers were thinking when they made the 2nd amendment.

Tyranny is the exercise of some power over a man, which is not warranted by law, or necessary for the public safety. A people can never be deprived of their liberties, while they retain in their own hands, a power sufficient to any other power in the state.[27]
......
Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.[26]

-Noah Webster
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,757 Posts
Jeff Johnson said:
The gun is called the Great Equalizer. For example, it gives a 115 lb woman parity of force against a would-be 220 lb rapist. Take away all guns, and the strong would dominate and victimize the weak by brute force.
Agreed.

Check out this great essay on the topic: http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/20 ... ation.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,614 Posts
Eukatae said:
The answer to the question is a deafening yes. Many of our founding fathers preferred liberty to security and to some extent considered them mutually exclusive. You can find writings by the truck load to support this position.
My personal favorite....

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,323 Posts
Would violence stop if you banned guns?

As I remember there were no guns around when Cain killed Able. :ack:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,203 Posts
Tarzan1888 said:
Would violence stop if you banned guns?

As I remember there were no guns around when Cain killed Able. :ack:
:agree:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
I had to give a presentation today on Autonomous Governments (I had to cover Anarchy and Libertarianism as well as my own view). I prepared a hand-out of good quotes that I hoped would challenge the other student's mind-sets.

Here are a few of the quotes I used in defense of freedom:

"Rights are not gifts from one man to another, nor from one class of men to another... It is impossible to discover any origin of rights [other] than in the origin of man; it consequently follows that rights appertain to man in right of his existence, and must therefore be equal to every man." ~ Thomas Paine; famous Author during the American Revolution and supporter of American Independence, also a major influence in both the French Revolution as well as in the development of the ideas which led to the Enlightenment.

* * * * *

“Suppose pioneer 'A' wants another horse for his wagon, He doesn't have the money to buy one, but since pioneer 'B' has an extra horse, he decides that he is entitled to share in his neighbor's good fortune. Is he entitled to take his neighbor's horse? Obviously not! If his neighbor wishes to give it or lend it, that is another question. But so long as pioneer 'B' wishes to keep his property, pioneer 'A' has no just claim to it. If 'A' has no proper power to take 'B's' property, can he delegate any such power to the sheriff? No. Even if everyone in the community desires that 'B' give his extra horse to 'A', they have no right individually or collectively to force him to do it. They cannot delegate a power they themselves do not have. This important principle was clearly understood and explained by John Locke nearly 300 years ago: "For nobody can transfer to another more power than he has in himself..."
“An important test I use in passing judgment upon an act of government is this: If it were up to me as an individual to punish my neighbor for violating a given law, would it offend my conscience to do so? Since my conscience will never permit me to physically punish my fellow man unless he has done something evil, or unless he has failed to do something which I have a moral right to require of him to do, I will never knowingly authorize my agent, the government, to do this on my behalf. I realize that when I give my consent to the adoption of a law, I specifically instruct the police... that if anyone resists the enforcement of the law, they are to use any means necessary - yes, even putting the lawbreaker to death or putting him in jail - to overcome such resistance... we Americans should use extreme care before lending our support to any proposed government program. We should fully recognize that government is no plaything. As George Washington warned, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence - it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master!" It is an instrument of force and unless our conscience is clear that we would not hesitate to put a man to death, put him in jail or forcibly deprive him of his property for failing to obey a given law, we should oppose it.” ~ Ezra Taft Benson; U.S. Secretary of Agriculture and President of the LDS Church.

* * * * *

“Over one's mind and over one's body the individual is sovereign... the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant... the only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” ~ John Stuart Mill; Respected British Philosopher and Member of Parliament.

* * * * *

“At the bottom of the endless pile of paper work which characterizes all regulation lies a gun.” ~ Ayn Rand; 20th-century Russian-American Novelist and Philosopher.
BTW, Eukatae, I liked your section of quotes and used a couple of them as well. Thanks for the help!
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top