TheFeniX

A loaded gun in any capacity is dangerous. You can minimize that danger, but as long as there is gunpowder in the equation there's always a chance. It's akin to saying a hand grenade isn't dangerous because the pin is still in it.

If you are trying to completely remove the human element from the situation by saying something like: "A holstered safetied gun in a closet with no people around is not dangerous" you might have a point. But then again, you could always say "A bomb isn't dangerous because we detonated it on the moon where no one was around."

Without the human element there is no danger, but we need the human element to even have an arguement.

Plus, revolvers don't have safeties.

CingularDuality

I gotta agree with IceCold on this one. It's a valid analogy. Sex with no plans to have a kid is still dangerous. Just like all the people that have shot people when they didn't intend to...

Training is necessary in both situations in order to not endanger society (in obviously different ways...).

Normal social interaction may fulfill this need for training, but whose definition of "normal" are we going to use? Britney Spears'? Charlton Heston's? The Pope's? Sarah Brady's?

The fact is that there are lots of things in the world that are dangerous, but it is still our right to do/possess/think them.
The right to defend yourself is a natural/god given right as well, and in many situations, a gun is the only way to do that.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

TheFeniX

So we still agree that education is the way to go? My idea calls for a short 30 minute training lesson on do's and don't for the family, or you just don't get the gun until you do. The "analogy" calls for a class on a much more complicated issue else invasive surgery and the destruction of your ability to reproduce is in order.

I take offense at the notion that it is analgous.

People were raising kids long before anyone thought of classes for child rearing. I would also like to see variety in the way kids are raised, not some PC BS that some pencil pusher came up with as the "right" way to raise a kid.

Guns: Set ways in order to keep them as safe as possible.
Kids: numerous ways to raise a kid and still have an almost random outcome to the childs life.

Ex:
Guns: Pull the trigger, gun goes off, whatever you point at get's hit with a bullet.
Kids: Hit your kid, he may recognize your authority and "keep himself inline" or begin to resent authority.

There is no "right" way to raise a kid, hence while I may support some basic training, most of child rearing in common sense.

"The right to swing your fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

The 2nd ammendment talks about a "militia." A militia has at least basic training. I just want to make sure someone walking out the door to Carter's Country knows how his gun works. I'm not going to cut his trigger finger off if he doesn't take the class.

People were doing a remarkable job of killing each other before the invention of the handgun.

And I don't know about you, but I've never needed a gun to defend myself and I've been in a few fights. Now that I'm older, I plan on gaining the ability to carry a gun, but most people don't. Therefore, the main place to defend yourself would be your home. You've got $200-$500 for a gun, you can't afford 30 minutes with your kids to give them the info that may keeps themselves from doing something stupid?

CingularDuality

Sorry, I must've misread IceCold's post or just expanded it in my mind without posting my thoughts.

Here's what I was thinking the analogy was:

Class to own gun=class to have sex
Use gun improperly (shoot someone)=bringing an unwanted child into this world (cause pregnancy when unprepared for consequences)
Punishment: prohibition on owning guns=vasectomy/tubal ligation

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

TheFeniX

Shooting someone already entails a penalty (murder/manslaughter).

And now we make people need a license to perform and act that:
A. Can be done with only the tools the God/Nature gave you.
B. Can be done about anywhere.

So, the police find out how? Maybe a girl goes to the doctor when she gets pregnant? Oops, now she won't because she'll get busted along with her boyfriend. So, she either finds a way to get the baby aborted (Mexico, backalley, clothes hanging utility) or she carries it to term hidden from everyone and possibly dies from complications.

I've already alluded to the flaws in this line of thinking in the Sex and Kids thread. This kind of Big Brother crap doesn't work.

Meanwhile: The guy with the gun shoots someone, and since he didn't take the class: they take his gun?

I still don't get the analogy. I put it on the level of: Well, there should be a license to buy pizza because it makes you fat and it's dangerous. If you don't attend the class, we take all your pepperoni.

CingularDuality

Sigh.... No. Shooting someone and causing their death may entail such a penalty. This would be a very, very small portion of the shootings in our country.

I know where I can get a .22 handgun for $5 and a 9mm automatic for $110. That's the problem with laws like these: enforcement is difficult and the criminal fringe will always exist. Why give this fringe a reason to exist? We can put them out of business by "legalizing" these issues.
I'm glad that you're finally seeing the ridiculousness of these gun laws... Banning guns is like banning pepperonis. It's just plain wrong...

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

DudeMan

well now there is something i can relate to. not for gun crime tho but for wacky backy.

IceCold

They're causing problems in the same way, though! If drugs and guns were completely unrestricted, and we put all of our law enforcement efforts towards arresting the criminals instead of the people that are using these things in a responsible manner, just think about how much more effective our police would be!

DudeMan

ok maybe our police would be but actually i have found a mental link between the two, i have seen first hand that drugs can make you violent and confused, now stick a legally owned gun in the equation. im sorry i do see where your comming from but i have idaels too far incripted into the British Values, i dont think you will make a Gun supporter out of me.

the thing is if i lived in the USA i bet i would own every big **** off gun i could get my mits on. but i do not want people shooting guns leagally in my streets apart from the cops.

Wolfie

I thought some of you might find this interesting....

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/19/gu....ap/index.html

I replaced the tires on my mustang last fall, does it mean that I now own a new car?