Spin from today's poll 4-18 - ~*~ No debates please ~*~

BabyOwen427 wrote: I wanted to only address the way cameragirl21 described the second amendment. It has nothing to do with the access to guns but rather the ability to protect yourself in your own home.

This is a link to the bill of rights, where the second amendment is listed.

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-...transcript.html

This is quoted from cameragirl21's poll description.

PrairieMom replied: Okay, so explain to me, is it saying that we have the right to bear arms IF we are in the armed forces, or in the guards? basically for the purpose of protecting ones self alone?

Here is the transcript

Amendment II

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.

cameragirl21 replied: the second ammendment refers to the right to bear arms--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
when a person, like myself, says that i don't support the second ammendment, what it means is that we don't support the ease with which one can walk into a store and buy a gun, which is what my poll stated.
i apologize if it was unclear.
at any rate, as i stated earlier, i do not support this.
that does NOT mean that i don't support our military...arguments over the second ammendment among those of us who are not fans of it refer specifically to the right to bear arms, not to the military institution in the USA.

BabyOwen427 replied: No, it is the right of the citizens. In the days when it was written the army, militia, minutemen were regular citizens who in times of need would take up 'arms' and defend the country. They also needed some protection from the natural preditors that would threaten their livestocks and families.

I am not sure exactly what you are asking about. Are you saying that you read it as only militia should be bearing arms and citizens should not?

There is much debate as to the interpretation of the amendment. Many people think of it as outdated. I think the need to protect our families is still a valid need. I own guns and was raised with them. I pray that I will never need them but should some person/animal ever threaten my family I will not hesitate to protect them. I don't believe the police are always on our side.

I want to say that I am not intending to offend anyone, I am just relaying my opinion and trying to anwser prairiemom's question best I can.

Ellie replied: It doesn't discuss the "ease" of getting guns at all. It only says we have to a right to have them.

cameragirl21 replied: i am asking about exactly what i said in my poll--do you believe people should have the right to have guns, as in, just walking into the store and buying a gun for their own personal ownership for whatever the reason?
i don't believe in this at all as i think there are way too many guns out there.
i know, respect, and in some cases love certain people who own guns so it's not a matter of judgement of those who do own guns (at least not on my part) but rather a simple question of do you or don't you support the right to bear arms and if you do, then it suggests you're ok with someone buying a gun at Wal-Mart (where they do sell guns) or some other place that sells guns.
that is what i was asking.

Ellie replied: I really don't think you know what the second amendment is about.

jcc64 replied: I think the amendment was written at a time when the range of "arms" and the damage one individual could inflict with one of them, was much different than it is today. I agree with it, as I believe it was originally intended, not necessarily the way it is being applied today.
I fully support individual citizens' right to own guns, but I have SERIOUS concerns with the pedantic, stubbornly unyielding lobbying efforts of the NRA to prevent any reasonable limitations whatsoever.
I am certain someone will come back with the tried and true NRA stalwart argument about criminals obtaining weapons illegally, but I maintain that buying a gun should not be as effortless as it now is, legally or otherwise.

HuskerMom replied:
I totally agree. Well said.

cameragirl21 replied:
EXACTLY what i was trying to say...didn't think it would be difficult to understand...thanks, Jeanne, as always, you said it best.
at any rate, i can see why you support the second ammendment but i still don't...my dad owns a gun and i certainly don't hold it against him but i want no part of it. he suggested i take shooting lessons and i told him he could file that one under never.
the question came to mind after reading that article i posted in the original poll. i suppose you could look at it from two different perspectives--a friend of mine pointed out that Israeli settlers all carry weapons and they have zero incidences of their kids getting their hands on the guns and/or accidents and they are well armed and able to protect themselves and she feesl this is how it should be here, so as to lessen the damage when an incident like the one at VTech happens.
i'm on the opposite end of the spectrum--if no citizens had guns then that would have been much less likely to happen, even though i believe (although i'm not sure) that this boy got his gun illegally. either way, the way i see it, there are way too many of them out there and while i totally respect the Israelis i'd not want to live in a society where everyone carries a weapon of some sort.

kit_kats_mom replied: I totally agree with Jeanne...again. LOL

As against guns as I am, and as dense as I am about guns, we are researching getting some sort of weapon for our "disaster kit". I'm leaning towards a pepper spray/non fatal type of gun and DH is leaning towards a rifle. he says the sound of it being cocked would likely drive away anyone after our food or water supplies.

I like the non fatal type mainly because even if it is stolen or used against us, it wouldn't kill us. KWIM?

The ease of gun purchasing is nuts but honestly, anyone who wanted to commit a crime could find a gun somewhere. Online/theft etc. The VT shooter happened to go the legal route but so many more don't.

cameragirl21 replied:
oh, i'm totally fine with pepper spray and have thought about getting some because i hike in the everglades quite a bit in the winter and my friends and i realized (after getting lost on the longest trail in the everglades after dark, and mind you when it gets dark in the forest in the glades you can't see your hand in front of you) that we are totally defenseless when we go there so one of my friends usually brings a knife but i've been wanting some pepper spray.
i can't find where to get some though.

moped replied: I will give you the canadian point of view......or the law shall I say. You can't just walk into a firearm store and buy here......

here is a link

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/GunControlLaws.html

cameragirl21 replied:
ok, in all honesty i only skimmed thru that and didn't read it in its entirety or even close so maybe i am speaking too soon but from what i saw, you Canadians have the right idea when it comes to guns...better than us in the USA anyway, at least IMO. JMO of course.

Crystalina replied: DH and I have many guns. He was raised with them and uses them to hunt. I had professional weapon training at the academy so we both feel comfortable with weapons. I do think that people should be able to buy guns from licensed dealers.

I'm sorry, this is not about gun control. I'm assuming this stems from the recent Va Tech shooting so my thoughts are that no matter what, if you have a deranged, mentally disturbed or depressed, suicidal, homicidal person they will find the weapon somewhere. Stopping regular citizens who meet the criteria for carrying a weapon will not stop anyone from shooting up another school.

moped replied:
Yes, when horrible things like VT happen, I thank god for the gun control. Now that is not to say it still wouldn't happen, would just be more of a detterent is all

PrairieMom replied:
Thats not necessarily my personal beliefs, but yeah, thats how I read the amendment transcript.



Amendment II

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.







To me it says we have the right to bear arms to defend our selves against a invader, foreign or domestic. For "militia".

I was surprised, I thought it was something more along the lines of what Jennifer was saying. It doesn't say anything about hunters, or hobby gun owners.

Again, personal feelings aside, I was just surprised at the wording, and how brief the statement is.

Crystalina replied:
I understand what your saying but drugs have been illegal for quite some time and there are more meth-heads then ever walking around. If the laws make it harder for the people to buy guns believe me there will be thousands of people making it that much easier to get one.

jcc64 replied: As I said previously, I am pro 2nd amendment, so don't mistake my words to follow. There are deranged, homicidal people all over the world. Why is our murder rate soooo much higher than anyone else's, if not for the proliferation and easy availability of guns?
Anyone interested in the answers to this question might find some food for thought in Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine". And fwiw, Moore is a proud member of the NRA.

Crystalina replied:
I love Michael Moore and I did in fact see him pick out a gun after signing up for a bank account (I think that's what it was). At this point in the game our country is so off the charts with weapons and drugs I really don't see where it will ever get fixed. It should never have gotten this bad to begin with. To clean up this country would entail going from house to house and taking away the rights of the citizens. Everyone wants to have rights but at the same time they want the mess cleaned up.

amynicole21 replied:
You'd want a shotgun then, Cary. Much easier to deal with in an emergency. I also have way too much info on tasers/pepper spray if you want to hear it

Kentuckychick replied: My honest personal opinion is that the amendment is outdated.

The reason I believe the amendment is outdated? Well look at the types of guns that were around then and the types of guns that are around today. It would have been difficult back then for a man armed with two guns to kill 33 people without someone stopping him.

Do I think it's perfectly legitimate for any of you to own a gun for the protection of your family? Absolutely.
Do I agree with cameragirl21's post about guns being way to easy to buy?
Absolutely!

There is NO reason WHATSOEVER that any individual in this country outside of our military and security/police force should have the sort of guns these individuals are using to commit these sort of crimes. A weapon that fires some dozens of rounds in a matter of seconds has no place in our general society... period. In cases where people kill others honestly defending their families they are NOT using those kinds of weapons and they rarely shoot repeatedly.

Do I think our country needs more regulations on gun control.
Oh I absolutely do!!!

amynicole21 replied: The VT killer had only two handguns - a 9mm and a .22 cal. They weren't assault weapons, but he was still able to do that much damage.

Kentuckychick replied:
I put handguns right up there with guns that should be regulated. If a gun can be fired repeatedly (meaning you can shoot six bullets and potentially kill 6 people in a matter of seconds) without reloading in between shots then it shouldn't be able to be placed into the hands of any average citizen.

I am aware that handguns aren't assault weapons (which I deem even worse) which are the weapons used in most mass murders. But I still find them just as dangerous. And handguns are the guns that end up killing more children accidently each year than any other type of gun...

When I say a gun for protection I'm thinking of a shotgun or a rifle that could also be used for hunting.

Again... that's just my opinion.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: I support being able to have protection in your own home.

I do not support that pretty much anyone and everyone can walk into a store, purchase a gun, and walk around with it strapped on them in a holster, any time, anyplace.

Guns should be regulated a heck of a lot better than they seem to be. At the very least, have a better process in place to be able to get a gun. I mean... do a background check on the person for crying out loud. Drug tests, medical tests etc etc... Maybe there wouldn't be so many gun related tragedies.

The right to bear arms, doesn't mean necessarily to have a gun in the house... it could be a knife, a bat, etc.... which in my opinion, are better to have around than something that if my child found, could blow his or her head off if I thought it had been safe.

Because seriously. WHO in their right mind keeps a LOADED gun within REACH to protect themselves, especially if they have a chlid in the house? WHO? I mean... just because you have the right to bear arms, do you sleep with the darn thing under your pillow, just in case a burglar comes in the middle of the night??? If you have a gun in the house, it should be locked up out of reach, unloaded.... which is probably not the quickest and easiset way to protect yourself...hello....

Off my soapbox. Not pointing the finger at anyone. My dad hunts.

jcc64 replied: ITA!!

msoulz replied: Regardless of whether or not a "normal" person as I can walk into a store and buy a gun, the criminals will get them. And despite the recent tragedy ("tragedy" seems like an understatement but I don't have a better word) most folks who own guns don't use them maliciously against others. So you can stop me from buying one but the gang members will still have them, but they will have to pay more and will commit more crimes to get more money to buy more guns, etc.

I say this with the realization that there is no answer here on what should be done. It's like the debate about making drugs legal. In theory, if drugs were legal crime should go down because they would be more readily available and would cost less so the junkies would commit fewer crimes to pay for their drugs. It's marketing 101, supply and demand.

I guess it's not exactly the same, but the point I'm trying to make is I'm fairly sure limiting the acquisition of firearms is not the answer because the ones who use them regularly to harm others will still get them and those of us who may want them for protection or sport will not. If our society was better at dealing with other issues like poverty, for example, many of these other issues would decrease. JMHO.

lisar replied:
That is due to lack of parents watching them. Not the fact that there was a gun. I understand if the gun wasnt there it wouldnt have happened, but if the parents would put a lock on them or put the clip with bullets in a seperate place then it wouldnt have happened either. I blame that on the parents. If they would be more responsible about it, it wouldnt have happened.

HuskerMom replied:
So what about people who collect guns as their hobby and have these in their collection? Or people who use them in shooting tournaments?

Hillbilly Housewife replied:
I think those people would be pro some kind of regulation, such as we have up here in Canada. Some gun registration program. One that's in force, not just a joke.

Mommy2BAK replied:
Great Movie!!!

Mommy2BAK replied: IMO I don't think it would be fair in anyway to deny the common man access to buying a gun, espeically when we all know that those who want to use them for evil will find a way to do so anyway. This is an issue that I've always been on the fence about, I don't know the right answers to any of the speculations about the second amendment but I do know that there would be an uproar if the government were to take our right to own firearms away. And what about Law enforcement? Would they be able to carry a gun?

jcc64 replied:


Not to be flip here, but what about getting a different hobby, or one within the confines of what's safe for the rest of society? Really, please explain to me why someone, anyone, cannot live without assault type weapons in their lives? Is someone's need to have a "complete" gun collection more important than a reasonable limitation intended to safeguard the vast majority of us?

HuskerMom replied:
Why should they have to get a different hobby just because some people don't like them collecting guns? I know several people who collect guns, my husband included, how is the rest of society not safe from them? They collect guns just like other people collect stamps or whatever.

Kentuckychick replied:
I don't think there's any need for me to answer now... Jeanne pretty much perfectly summed that up for me

lisar replied:
Well put keithsmom

Very well put. Owning a gun isnt just a hobby. I have a membership to a gun club I go there and shoot the guns.

I also have a concealed weapons permit. So I have a gun on me 99% of the time. I am also allowed to use it say if I saw someone getting raped. I would be allowed to shoot them even though they werent doing the crime to me.

If it was your 16 year old dd that, that man was raping and beating would you not want me to stop them. Just an example.

Kentuckychick replied:
The only difference is, when someone breaks in my house and steals a piece of my valuable stamp/art/etc... collection, it doesn't then become a threat to society.

I just honestly see no need.

HuskerMom replied:
I guess we have to agree to disagree then.

hopefulmomtobe replied: Just had to say - good thing it said No Debates Please...lol

I believe it should be stricter in purchasing guns. My dad owns guns, family owns guns...I don't but would not have a problem with it. I like going to the gun ranges, but there should be tighter rules in purchasing guns so that someone can't just walk in with bad intentions and get such a powerful tool in there hands to use at their will. JMO though...

PrairieMom replied:
Okay. I'm totally not judging, I just gotta ask, aren't you worried your girls will get a hold of your gun? how do you keep them safe?

I have said before that guns scare the crap out of me, and I am not comfortable with them at all. My child being in the same HOME as a gun makes me nervous, I can't imagine being near someone concealing a weapon. Thats me, and my opinion , again, not judging., just asking.

jcc64 replied: Collecting guns and collecting stamps is really nowhere near the same thing, and we all know it.
No one is refuting the argument that guns provide valuable protection in dangerous situations, such as the commision of a violent crime or a break in. No one is saying you can't have your guns, guys. But there have to be some reasonable limitations. This Va Tech kid obtained his gun legally, despite well documented instances of anti-social behavior. Should he have had such easy access?
Ask the parents of those 32 dead kids....

lisar replied:
Well Lexi knows all about them. She even shoots them. She has her own 22 rifle and her own 410 shotgun. (much smaller for the kids) Ofcourse the guns are in my name, but they are basically hers. When we go the gun club to go shooting she goes with us. And whenever she asks we will go out the watermelon or canteloupe fields and let her shoot them. Shooting something like that shows her exactly what it can do to a person if she was to shoot them. We remind her of that. She never has acess to a gun on her own. They are all locked up very good. ( I have 2 gun safes they take key and combination) I also keep the bullets in a seperate place. Just to be safe. Lexi knows not to touch them. I have tested her on it just to see. And she passed the test. The gun I carry is a walther .22. Its a small little handgun. It is on my leg in an ankle holster. I am at work for 9 hours a day by myself. I have had some really freaky people come here. I have posted about a few of them. Raygen doesnt know what a gun is she is to young to know and understand. Hints: they are locked up. I dont have it on me when I am at home or anything like that. I have to take it off in the truck when I get off work cause legally I cant carry it into the school. Which I dont and I take it off. I would day 9 times out of 10 by the time I get to Raygen the gun isnt even on me. But in those cases that it is she doesnt try messing with my legs or anything. I hope this clarify's it for you. If not please feel free to ask anything.

Hillbilly Housewife replied:
Yeah, uh...my kids would never be allowed to go anywhere near your house. That would scare me to death.

PrairieMom replied:
I am so on the other extreme. Ben isn't even allowed to play with waterguns or other toy guns. My FIL is a big time hunter, and my MIL has mention before that they want to get Ben a BB gun, and not even keep it at our house. It would stay at their house. I said , not under any circumstances.

holley79 replied: I was raised around guns. I have a conceal weapons permit and two hand guns in the house. Just so everyone knows if you purchase a gun in the state of FL there is a 3 day wait period. You also have an FDLE background check done. YOu CAN'T just walk in buy a gun and walk out. Yes, VA does allow that. The State of FL does not. Even my deputies have to wait 3 days to purchase a gun and they are Sworn LEs.

Now on to the next of "Aren't you scared of your girls being around a gun?"

I feel that if you teach gun safety at a very young age you don't have to worry about it. You watch your children very carefully and you teach them to respect guns. My grandfather had guns laying all over the house. They were loaded. We never messed with them. We learned to shoot when we turned the golden age of 5. My handgun at home is locked up if it isn't on me. If I'm downstairs then it's downstairs. If I'm upstairs it's upstairs. It's out of reach of Annika. It is very loaded. An unloaded gun is a worthless gun. JMO.

Kentuckychick replied:
Well said again.

As I stated earlier I 100% agree that families should be able to own guns for the protection of their families, amen for that. And I will also agree to disagree about earlier discussions... opinions are opinions and we all have a right to our own.

But then, as jeanne so wondefully pointed out. How does someone with so much of a mental health history go and legally buy those guns?
That's what makes no sense.

And there was another case very similar that made me think of lisar's post (not saying ANYTHING about you here, just pointing out a general fear of my own!) where a young man, Kip Kinkel murdered both of his parents and then went to his school and killed one student and injured many others.

The thing with this case was that this young man had a LONG history of mental illness, a therapist who warned his parents over and over, and... an obsession with guns. Despite the warnings from SO many people, the father believed that buying him a gun (or a few) might satisfy his obsession. Of course he paid for that mistake with his life... but so did others.

My point here is... that dad was able to just walk into that gun shop and purchase that gun for him because he was his father and his background check was okay. Again despite all the warnings. The family and friends stated over and over that he wanted to teach him to use it the correct way and to make it so that he would be safe with a gun and it backfired. It can always backfire.

There need to be regulations in a lot of ways. I think mental illness and instability coupled with gun obsession seen by a therapist (in the cases of almost EVERY school shooting in the last 20 years) should automatically be put on the record of everyone in the family. Guns should not be allowed to be bought for or by people in these situations.

Parents should take responsibility too! And I think it would definitely make a difference if people paid attention to their children!

Crystalina replied:
This is another issue I think. The problem is not that this man obtained the gun legally and then went and shot up 32+ kids. The problem is not the system IMO because changing the system will not fix the problem. I think we can all agree that no matter what laws are made the people who want the guns will still obtain them. That is fact. The problem is that this boy was disturbed and didn't get help. The problem is that a couple of his proffs. noticed this, reported it and nothing was done. That is the problem. No sane person would do this. The boy had issues and neither himself or anyone who did notice him took action. I've seen so many of the kids involved say, "We never saw him before.", "I have no idea who he is." He was unnoticed as are so many kids today. His parents should have helped him. Other relatives surely saw something. As I'm sure you've heard before guns don't kill people...people kill people. Case in point. A disturbed young man and a gun. A fatal cocktail for many. How can we blame gun control for this. Everyone is looking at the weapon. It wasn't the weapon it was the boy.

**ETA**
It is really no differant then drunk driver who kill innocent people. We never say we need to get rid of some of the vehicles on the road do we?

Miranda1127 replied: from a big city stand point- it is not the legal purchase of guns that is the (our) problem. it is the way they can illegally be obtained. there is a process (here) to buying a gun which includes major paperwork and a waiting period (3days i think). and if you want to carry a hand gun you need more permits to conceal (sp?), which again entails a great deal of paperwork. My point is i am for the 2nd ammendment (in wich i understand it) and agree with the laws in place to insure public safety in the gun buying process. i believe there should be more focus, however, on the containment and punishment for illegally possed guns

cameragirl21 replied:
me too.

Kentuckychick replied:
For your first point, yes everyone knows that people kill people... but often people USE guns to kill people. Don't get me wrong... while I blame gun control in part, I blame the individual more. The main reason I blame gun control is because seriously, background checks of mental health should be done before people can buy weapons and secondly, I stand by my belief that certain weapons should not be available to the public period.

As far as drunk drivers... it's amazing that the regulations on alcohol in this country are stricter than those on gun control. Are you aware that if a restaurant or bar serves you an abundance of alcohol, then you choose yourself, to go out and get in your car, drive away and kill someone drunk driving, that restaurant can be held partially responsible? Or hey, if you have a party and supply alcohol and a friend gets drunk and you allow them to leave intoxicated *even if you don't technically allow them* and they kill someone YOU can be held responsible. They should have that same take on gun shops who sell guns to the criminally insane without doing background checks.

cameragirl21 replied:
Tara, i am SO with you on this--i don't even like toy guns, even squirt guns that even remotely resemble guns. i don't know if i could even handle a gun...like i said before, my dad has one and i won't even touch it, literally, won't handle it, pick it up or anything.

jcc64 replied:

I definitely don't have the same faith in the maturity and decision making processes of young children, gun educated or not. They barely understand what death means, how can they really comprehend the catastrophic damage a gun can cause. I watched a fascinating study aired on one of the news magazine shows a few yrs back- whichever one Diane Sawyer was on at the time. They set up a two way mirror in a room full of children WHO HAD ALL BEEN DRILLED ABOUT GUN SAFETY repeatedly. They planted a gun where it was partially hidden, but able to be discovered by a curious child. Right down the line, every single kid ignored what they were taught to do and picked up the gun (at the very least) pointed at each other, and even pulled the trigger, in some cases. Guns are so fetishized in our culture- it's inevitable that they would be a source of fascination and curiousity for kids.
I'm sure the gun owning parents on this board are scrupuously careful and responsible where the safety of their children is concerned, but I'd keep that study in mind before completely dismissing paranoia about kids and guns.

PrairieMom replied:
I'm glad some one agrees with me. My whole family things I'm an overprotective extremist.

TANNER'S MOM replied: Well I would like to put my two cents in here. I am a southern girl, one of my past times is shooting and hunting with my family. I have had to shoot animals, coyotes, packs of dogs, snakes etc. For the protection of my farm and family. For us it isn't like it isn't like it is in the city. All most every family has a gun. My children are all taught gun safety and all know how to shoot and hunt. When it comes to toy guns and BB guns, they have to follow the same rules as they would with real guns. If my children ever pointed a gun at someone real or toy, they would punished. My children have seen that guns cause death. But my children have never had a thing about guns. They are always there, in the house. But they don't think about them. I personally believe that we don't need to make asssualt type weapons so easy to get. Why would you need one, other than hobby shooting I can't personally think of one reason. I will say that all my guns are the shot gun and hunting rifle type expect for one 22 pistol. I do keep that gun loaded and well hidden. If you asked my children where the loaded gun was at not one person can tell you. In the same token it's hidden in a place where an intruder would not look either. I agree that it would do no good to have a gun for protection if it wasn't loaded. A person who wants to harm you wouldn't give you time to load the gun. But there are safe ways to do this. I keep my gun in the very top of my towel cabinet. In my bedroom. My kids can't reach that high, would never think to look there, but if an intruder came, he wouldn't think to look there either. I can be in the bathroom in a matter of seconds. I was always raised never to even think about showing an intruder the gun unless you were willing to take a human life. In most cases if you aren't prepared mentally to use it, then it will be used against you and your family.

I don't think because some crazy person did what he did, and I am very moved by the incident and have even shed tears about it, but I don't think I would change the way I live or bear arms because of it. I wish the world was a better place and it's sad that it isn't. But it's not guns fault that this happens. It goes back to parenting and morals that people are taught at home these days. It goes back to society and our prioties to make the all mighty dollar and only care about ourselves and not our neighbor anymore.

I am sure everyone will think I am crazy. But being in a small town and from the South, it really is a different world here. Randy's cousin was shot last year with a hunting rifle. He personally loved hunting and was a gun owner all his life. I know for a fact that would never blame the gun. He wouldn't want his son to grow up with out hunting and spending time in the woods like he did for many years. We don't blame guns we blame crazy people. We need a world where people are held accountable for their actions and where family becomes number one again.

Sorry it got long.

BabyOwen427 replied: Ok, wow! I leave to go to the doc for a couple hours and this went wild! I started this topic because I donot like people to be misinformed about things and I wanted to clarify that the second amendment wasn't discussing the access to guns as suggested in the poll. But since we've gone on to the gun control debate I will put my two cents in. I am glad that for the most part this has remained a civil debate. When I started the topic I was worried that people might be jumping on soapboxes and bashing others. Thank you for not doing that.

Here's MHO.

I was raised around guns, own guns, my DH has his conceal carry, I have debated on getting my conceal carry, my child has held guns & ammo (seperately), I shoot guns, and we have several long guns hidden around our home.

With that out there I do think that there should be a better background check system out there. I have been to gun shows and have bought guns from complete strangers no questions asked.

I saw a person on tv suggest that only natural-born citizens should be allowed to purchase a gun here. I almost want to agree with him, but there are people, just like me who want them for protection and just because they moved countries should they not be allowed personal protection? I don't know the anwser to that.

For those who are scared-to-death of guns they need to make sure they are educated about them. I don't understand being scared to touch them, they don't bite. Hold one, feel it, take it shooting in a controlled enviroment like an indoor gunrange, get to know it before you hate it.

For me and most people I know guns are a tool. A tool like a hammer or a drill. They are a tool but a very powerful tool. All tools have specific functions and when used properly it is very effective but all tools when used improperly can be destructive even deadly.

I think that when you look at studies such as the one mentioned you need to look at who is conducting the study. News media and those with an agenda will manulipate the study to sway their 'way'. I didn't look it up on the particular study mentioned so I have no idea who did it and their views.

I do agree with whoever said that the possession of illegally obtained guns should be delt with stricter consequences.

I realize that I may have angered some or stepped on toes. I appoligize as I just wanted to state my opion too. No tomatos please

BabyOwen427 replied: ITA with everything that TANNER"S MOM said.

Crystalina replied:

We do the same thing here. Evan has realistic looking shotguns (of course with the orange tip). He is to hold it and put it down and treat it just like a real gun. When he was first starting to play with guns we of course were less stern while he learned the proper ways but now he knows better and there are no exceptions to messing around. He only "pretend hunts" with it. He's never tried to "pretend kill anyone". We never told him not to and I think just us showing him the proper way to use the gun has put everything in it's place in his little brain. He knows not to point at anyone so why would he "pretend kill"? kwim?
We also taught him that the toys have the orange and the real guns that he can't touch do not. Whenever dh takes his gun hunting Evan always says that daddy is taking his real gun because there is no orange on it. I think if you just teach them right they will do right. If you teach them nothing because you are scared yourself then the children will be ignorant to the "rules" when they come in contact with a gun. I want my kids to know what a gun is and what it can do if a person ever has one near them or if they have a "friend" who wants to play with one.

jcc64 replied:

Would that be because only foreigners are capable of violence? Was the guy who mowed down all the Amish kids in their schoolhouse last year foreign? How about the kids in Columbine? How about Timothy Mc Veigh or any number of infamous serial killers? Were they all foreign born? Do I need to list example after example of how this type of logic is completely faulty at best and racist at its worst?

I thank everyone for keeping most of this contentious topic fairly civilized. It's a polarizing issue, but I think everyone did a good job explaining their positions without being overly provocative. However, the guy quoted above from the tv interview gets a big fat tomato from me.

PrairieMom replied:
I think it works the opposite way. If you show that you are scared of guns, your child will know to be scared of guns, and will leave them alone. I guess I don't really know, I haven't read any studies on the subject either way.

PrairieMom replied:
BTDT. I for one can say from personal experience that guns are definitely not for me, and not for my family as long as I can help it. I shot a hand gun in HS, and I hated the feeling of it. I was so scared, and just felt icky after I had fired it. But, just because it isn't for me doesn't mean it isn't for everyone else right? We are all different, and thats what makes us interesting.

cameragirl21 replied:
ITA with this. i've never shot a gun and never want to, they just give me the heebie jeebies, plain and simple. i remember before i became a photographer when i worked for a company we had a team building thing that involved paint balls and i refused to participate because the paint ball guns looked like UZIs and they looked very real to me and i just do not have it in me to point that sort of gun at one of my coworkers and shoot it, no way, no how, not happening. and incidentally, some of my coworkers really got hurt by the paint balls when hit in certain parts of the body at close range and i just found myself turned off by the whole thing.
i've handled scorpions, tarantulas, and anacondas but i won't handle a gun, it's just not my thing.

Cece00 replied: I'm torn about it.

On one hand, I support the right for people to have guns.

I also know that gun control laws DO NOT stop criminals who really want firearms from having them and using them to commit crimes.

On the other hand, some of the firearms available scare the crap out of me, and I personally dont see why anyone would need these weapons and I dont love that people can just go and get one.

So, I guess I'm on the fence.

TANNER'S MOM replied: I support everyones decisions for themselves. I think each of us live in a different community with different needs. I think we each choose to parent a different. Not having a gun in no way means it's wrong for me, it's just wrong for your family. I have no hard feelings against anyone who is opposed to them. To each his own as I would say. But having a gun, doesn't make me bad person either.

Our Lil' Family replied:
This is such a true statement!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So many things would be different!

Nina J replied: Well, I thought I'd add my two cents aswell. I live in Australia, and the gun laws here are very strict. They were changed after the Port Arthur Massacre in 1996. Martin Bryant killed 35 people with a semi-automatic weapon. Following the massacre, semi-automatic weapons were banned, and gun laws were tightened. The government spent hundreds of thousand of dollars buying guns of people and having them destroyed. Buying a gun is extremly difficult in Australia, you have to have a legitimate reason to buy one. Protection is not a legitimate reason.

I do not know anybody who owns a gun. The only time I have seen a gun for many years is on a police officer. Carrying a gun on you when you walk down the street is considered very bizarre in Australia, it just does not happen. Getting a gun in Australia is also very hard because you have to prove that the reasons for owning it are legitimate. Very few people are killed by guns every year in Australia.

But I think everybody is entitled to there own opinion, and the gun laws of America don't affect me at all. I just hope that nothing the this massacre happens again.

lisar replied:
Tara I respect you so please dont take this the wrong way.

My sisters son was and is not being raised around guns. When he is here we have to be cautious with him cause he wants to touch and feel them. My sister has no problem with me teaching him about them. If you hide them from the child and dont teach them and show them what they will do, then they will be more curious if they were to ever come upon one. If they know what they do and how loud they are, then they are more likley not to mess with them.

Example: Lexi has been raised around them. She knows what they do. I have left a 9mm laying on the table in the living room (unloaded)(for the record) just to see what she would do. And this is before Raygen came along. She never once touched it. She looked at it and reconginzed that it was there. But never once messed with it. Anytime she says I want to see my guns then I will get them out and let her look at them. Lexi has 2 BB guns also. She treats those as if they were real guns. Same rules apply with those. She is 6 years old and was shooting a 410 shotgun at the age of 3. At 3 years old she won at the Turkey shoot. The only rule there for letting a child shoot is that the parents have to be RIGHT there with them.

Maddie&EthansMom replied: Scotty and I always talked about getting our license to carry. We went as far as registering for the class and I started having nightmares about it. I've held guns, shot guns of all kinds...I just don't want my own gun. Having a license is a huge responsibility and should not be taken lightly. I actually hold high regards for those who do have their license. The training is so rigorous and thorough. You are checked out high and low by all kinds of agencies...nothing gets by. If you have your license to carry you have a lot of rights and that is something I just wouldn't want to be held responsible for. I don't want to have to shoot another human being. The law enforcement also gives you special treatment and I believe they should after all the training that is recommended and you've been checked out by everyone. They pretty much know you are a safe citizen after completing the course.

I was pretty scared of the things that I would learn in that class. I tend to turn a blind eye/deaf ear to those types of things and I think it would only make me more afraid instead of give me power.

I'm sad however, that the wrong people get ahold of guns and do awful things to innocent people. I suppose it could be that way with anything, though.

PrairieMom replied:
I don't take it the wrong way. no worries. We just have different lifestyles and different parent methods. No one is right or wrong. just different.

luvmykids replied:
I don't think it's black and white, YES I believe in the right to own guns. NO I don't agree that you should just be able to walk in a store and buy one.

In our state you can walk out with a gun within 30 minutes, I know this because I've done it. Do I think it's too easy? Yep. Does that mean I don't support the principle of the second ammendment? Nope. I think it should be much, much, MUCH harder to obtain one but also think it should, under stricter guidelines, be every persons right with the exception of those who don't meet the guidelines.

Miranda1127 replied:
Wow. i couldn't imagine. Can you tell i'm a city girl . i like the Australian concept, you must have a reason. i understand guns are a way of life for most Americans and do not oppose them. i feel as though they are completely unnessecary in the city though. we don't have turkey hunts, or gameing parks, or fairs (and such) where guns would be used in a "prductive" (lack of better word) manner, so it seems unnecessary here. we are only in April and our death toll (muder, 95% gun related) has past 100 (last i heard we are around about 115). thats 4 mos and already more than 100 murdered. guns just don't make sense in the city.

punkeemunkee'smom replied: I did not read this whole thread through so forgive me if I repeat anyone else's statements. (it has been a very long day and I just jumped on to decompress BUT...) Drugs have been illeagal for better than 60 years and yet the drug pandemic in this country is alive and flourishing. We have entire angencies devoted to the irradication of drugs on the street all to little avail. WHAT then makes anyone think that the futher control of guns is going to do anything but make it harder for the law abiding citizen to protect his/her family? If I am not an obediant proponent of the laws already in place in our nation why or what makes it any more likely that I will follow laws that are put into place in the future? Guns DO NOT kill of their own volition-it takes someone behind the trigger to accomplish that. I do not believe that if you took guns away people would quit killing-it is the bain of human existence, since the dawn of time-first with rocks,knives,and bows and arrows-The sad fact is that murder and bad people have always and will always exist. I for one thank God that I am blessed enough to be in a free nation where I have the right to protect my family and my property. I pray by that same token that I never have the need to use the weapons in my home but I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that IF my child or my family are ever threatened I will do my best to erradicate that threat-by ANY means available...

Kentuckychick replied: Well, after watching the news tonight I'm even more highly annoyed about this whole situation and I feel even more strongly on my point from earlier.

The shooter from virgina was able to walk into a gun store and back out with a gun in TEN MINUTES!!! Now seriously...

Yes they ran the basic background check, but of course that came back clean since he didn't have a criminal record. He did however have an EXTENSIVE mental health record with a court order stating that he was a potential danger to himself and others ordering he seek counseling. Now how in the world does someone like that get a gun? Simple apparently.

No. No one should be allowed to buy a gun in 10 minutes. No one should be allowed to buy a gun without extensive background checks INCLUDING mental health checks.

BabyOwen427 replied:
WOW!!! With that many murders I would probably buy more guns to protect my family. I am sure that some of those murders were committed by people invading innocent homes. If I lived in a city with that much murder I wouldn't want to be one of the innocent victoms and would find myself buying more to prevent it from happening to me. JMO. I am country/rural raised in Oklahoma.

redchief replied: Some of what I've got to say will be seen as perhaps bizarre or out of character for me. Of course I see it as I always have. First, just so there's no confusion about where I stand, I will state that I am Pro Second Amendment. In my opinion human nature, which is the reason for the Amendment in the first place, hasn't changed. There are still those who would impose their beliefs and/or politics on me by force if they felt it necessary. Our founding fathers remembered these faults in their British overlords and built in local level protection from government getting too big for it's collective britches. The Second Amendment was one of those safe-guards. This is also why we have separate military and federal police forces; to constitutionally prevent the central government from imposing restrictions on freedom by the military. This is also why the state guard units are not commanded by the central government. They actually belong to the states and are only permitted to be federalized in times of war and for short periods of time. All guard units in any state are never permitted to be federalized at the same time.

The formers of our government knew that human nature is imperfect, and so built in barriers to central power. The second amendment reinforces these barriers. We have not outgrown it.

My personal gun policies:
I do not own a gun.
I have hunted and had gun safety courses.
I no longer have a gun because I no longer hunt.
I do not cede to the government my right to keep and bear arms even though at this time I don't have a gun.
People with guns kill people. People who have a desire to kill will do so whether they have a weapon that fits into the gun catagory or must resort to other method(s).
Children should be carefully and fully insulated from guns of all types until they are old enough to learn how to safely use them.
Automated or semi-automated weapons are no less protected than muzzle loading flintlocks. Whether people like that or not is irrelevant.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says that gun registration is taking it too far. I'm OK with registration of all firearms.

Michael Moore is not a member of the NRA. Bowling for Columbine was a mockumentary and full of inventions and half-truths. It was political satire. Fortunately Michael Moore has so totally destroyed his own credibility that I need not spend much time on him. The Columbine killers never showed up for bowling class on that fateful day either.

Homicide (of all types) is 14th on the list of ways people die in the USA at less than 1%. It should be of far greater concern that 84% of deaths in the USA are caused by chronic disease. It should also be of greater concern to us as parents that more than 80% of deaths that occur between the ages of 12 and 40 years of age happen as result of unintentional injury (accidents).

The United States typically lands in the mid-twenties for murder rates globally. Countries that typically appear above the US are from all formative stages. One in twenty people in the USA are or will have been a victim of a violent crime before they die. That's pretty scary, but even scarier (sorry Aussies, but I saw a kudos to them for their gun control laws), 1 in 3 Australians will be a victim of a violent crime.

Finally, my theory on murder in the USA, anyway, based upon compiled data from 1995 to 2005... Guns aren't the problem. People are, of course, but not how one might think. Temperature (with one really weird exception and I have a sub-theory on that) seems to play a really big part in people killing one another. The colder climates (with the exception of Hawaii, which is quite safe and not cold at all) seem to have lower overall murder rates than the warmer locales by state. The sub-theory is that since Hawaii is paradise, not too many people can get mad enough to see red. So my theory is that as long as it's too cold for people to interact, they won't kill each other.

ETA: One other thing... In the ten years of compiled data, there has been virtually no change in the murder rates by state. Guess what that means for all of the safety legislation that's been passed since the mid-90's? It means it's all been pretty much a waste of the paper it's been written on.

Nina J replied: Ed, where did you get that information that 1 in 3 Australians will be the victim of a violent crime? I have lived in Australia my entire life and have never heard this.

kimberley replied:
well said, Mel. ITA. i don't feel bothered by those who hunt for food or shoot at a range for safety, but i personally would never own a weapon. no stomach for hunting and i believe our law enforcement having weapons is ample protection. i personally feel no need to own a gun and as much as i fought the boys having toy ones, they have rules to follow as tho they were real or suffer the consequences.

like with anything, there are idiots everywhere who shouldn't be allowed to participate in such freedoms. just look at the people suing cuz mcdonald's coffee is hot or eating it all day made them fat. look at everyday items, like irons, that come with a label that says "do not iron while wearing clothes". ideally, education is the solution imo but i know that isn't very likely. it saddens me.

amynicole21 replied:
Wow - TX has stricter rules than I thought. You just have to take a 1hour class in FL to get your concealed carry. My good friend teaches the class. Not rigorous at all

hoosier momma replied:

You don't have to take a class in Indiana at all. You just have to go to your local law enforcement authority and get fingerprinted, fill out the paperwork for a background check and mail all of this to the Firearms Licensing section of the Indiana State Police. You usually get a response in the mail within a couple of weeks.

jcc64 replied: Lots of good arguments on all sides. Just wanted to add that although the urge to kill or maime is unfortunately an intrinsic part of some people's psyches, and that the availability or lack thereof of firearms would not necessarily deter or prevent such a person from acting on that impulse, it is undeniable that one can unleash far more death and destruction with a gun than without. Yes, a nutjob could go postal with a knife or a cleaver or a chainsaw or whatever, but the chances are good that he wouldn't be able to kill so many people so fast without being brought down eventually. It's the speed and efficiency of guns in the hands of psychopaths that is the dangerous combination.
Look, I'm not trying to talk anyone here out of loving their guns. As I've already stated, I am pro 2nd amendment. But let's at least be honest with ourselves. What happened at Va Tech and Columbine is the price we as a society must pay, are willing to pay, to have our weapons so easily available to us. Yes, this kid was crazy, yes he, not the guns, killed 33 people, but please, at least concede that far fewer people would be dead in Blacksburg had he not had guns in his hands.

Crystalina replied:
That is so very true. He could not have strangled or knifed 32 people without someone bringing him down. At the same time though people are saying that only certain people should have guns like law enforcement. I can understand their thinking but how many times have we even heard of law enforcement officers flipping their lid and killing their families and themselves? It happens. As a matter of fact only last year there was the case of the cop killing his estranged wife in a barn and then himself. I think they were both officers.
I'm surrounded by State Troopers and they are always shooting at things. When I first moved here I didn't realize that I was in 'Trooperville' and actually called the Sheriff because I heard shooting during a thunderstorm right behind my house. The next day a Trooper (family member) came and informed me of who my neighbors were. Now I know that their shots are controlled and in sequence compared to an individual just popping off shots. .....sorry I went off there but I'm just saying that cops can lose their mind as well. I know the ones I know I always tell them that I can't believe they passed the psych test.

For what it's worth I can't see the harm at all for restrictions to be tighter. I do not, however, think anyone should take our guns. If you are on the up and up then you should be able to have them if you want them. I'm really not arguing about things getting tighter. That would be for the best. At the same time though I don't think it will stop anything

lisar replied:

Mommy2BAK replied:
What if he had made bombs instead, apparently those are quite easy to make/get ahold of as well?!?!

Crystalina replied:
Yes, there are tutorial all over the web.

holley79 replied:

It is very true. We have had officers baker acted then losing their certs over it. There are times when things get way out of hand and they do "lose it". But they don't do it anymore then the average citizen. We go to more non LE homicide suicides then we do LE related. There are people and till the end of time that are going to flip out and cause great harm to others.

coasterqueen replied:
I have a whole host of things I want to say on this subject, but can't due to time constraints here.

I did want to reply to yours Lisa, and say I respectfully disagree. I think you can be a responsible parent, have the key to a locked safe hidden or gun in one place - clip in the other and kids could STILL get a hold of that gun. I would never underestimate a child, especially a teenager. Unless you keep the key on your body at all times, they can find it if they really want to.

I think it's easy to place blame on the parents being irresponsible because yes, it's true a lot of them are, but terrible things with guns happen in families where parents are very responsible. We just tend to not hear those types of things in the media because they don't make for good "stories".

coasterqueen replied: Oh and Jennifer (cameragirl) - you can buy pepper spray at any local hardware store, I believe. A friend of mine just recently bought me two forms of pepper spray to carry on me due to the fact I work near so many bars downtown and leave late at night. I believe they were bought at Ace Hardware store.

lisar replied:
Yes they could but the fact is that if they get the gun AND the clip 9 out of 10 kids dont know how to put the clip in and then pull the chamber to make one active. You cant just slap the clip in and pull the trigger (on any of the guns I have). And its very hard for me to make the slide work on most of my guns. It takes strength to do it. A teenager on the other hand would be able to do it no doubt in my mind. But at that age they DO need to be locked up. All of my guns in my house ARE locked up. All I was saying on that is if a parent is going to have a gun then they do have other options besides leaving them out where anyone can get them. Including kids. Or put a gun lock on them. ALL guns in the state of florida come with a gun lock you cant sell one with out a lock and key with it. So all these parents that say they didnt have a lock are lying. And the police station gives them away for free.

And I still blame the parents when a child gets ahold of a gun and shoots someone. THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A LOCK ON THE GUN!!!
I dont believe that guns kill people, people kill people. And if we didnt have guns we would have bombs, and knifes, and homeade guns (which can be made)

I do believe in some states they do need to make it harder to get a gun. Some states do have it to easy. So I am not debating that at all.

lisar replied: Just wanted to add in here that drunk drivers kill lots of people every year. Should we ban alcohol also? Cause thats what I am getting out of this.

Crystalina replied: I guess I'm not of the mentality (not trying to be mean by saying that) that not teaching a child to respect a weapon is ok. I'm sorry but even if you have abosolutely no real guns in the house I think you should at least have a toy gun. We teach our kids the 3 r's, manners, what's right and wrong from a very young age so they already "know' when they are older. We don't wait until a child is an adult to teach them anything. Why would we teach them gun safety after they are older? I'm not saying to have guns hanging on your wall or even to have one in a locked safe. If you don't feel safe around them then don't have one. I, for one, would not want to be around someone who has a gun but does not feel safe using it. That is a danger for me and you. But teaching your child the proper use for a gun is the right thing to do (IMO) because I really think that people are nieve to think that the first time your child will handle a gun is when they are a responsible adult.

punkeemunkee'smom replied:
I was thinking the same thing lastnight. They did try to ban alcohol once and it ended up creating a black market that became more dangerous and profitable for the ones willing to break those laws than it was before the bans were in place.


I also want to say that alot of the aguement for banning this or that kind of weapon seems to come with the thought that if they are banned they will magically disappear. There will ALWAYS be guns available to people who wish to buy them. I understand the kid from VATech bought his guns legally and HE should NOT have been able to with his history of mental problems BUT it also needs to be recognised that IF he was so willing and ready to commit these crimes he could have just as easily purchased a rapid fire gun on the street and we may be dealing with even more lives lost. And since we are playing the what if game-What IF one of those kids on that campus had a concealed carry permit and was armed....Maybe they could have stopped him.....I am simply trying to point out that hind sight is always 20/20. Guns may be to readily available in the legal setting but IF someone wants to commit a crime they can get a gun (if that is their weapon of chioce) through other means than Walmart with their 3 day waiting period.

jcc64 replied:

yeah, but it's not LEGAL to make a bomb, and you can't walk into a Walmart and buy one.
I really think you're missing my point.....

punkeemunkee'smom replied:
It is NOT legal to shoot people either. (Unless they are in your home-but that is a whole other arguement) The legality of the act(s) does not deter someone willing to commit them at any cost. People who commit murder rarely if ever are concerned about the laws that are there to stop them from doing so in the first place.

lisar replied:
Actually you can. Wal-mart sells everything you need to make a bomb. You just have to put it all together. And know how thats the tricky part. Not to argue your point or anything but techincally you can buy the stuff to make them there.

msoulz replied: Wow, this has been fun . . .

Regarding children - my 8 year old just came home the other day and told me about his 10 year old friend who was lighting matches and it was OK because he knows how to, he uses them to light candles (his family is Jewish and apparently the boy lights the candles at holiday time). Needless to say we had a discussion about the whole thing. So next time will he tell me his friend was playing with a gun but it is OK because his parents taught him how to use it? Now I realize part of the teaching is that guns must be respected and can be dangerous, but to a 10 year old who is showing off to his friends, will that lesson be remembered? I have had the discussion with my son that if he sees a gun he is not to touch it because he doesn't know for certain if it is real or pretend. Hopefully he listens.

lovemy2 replied: I haven't had time to read ALL the posts here but want to add my view - my husband is a sheriff in our local county jail - since he got that job he now has several hand guns and carries at all times - especially when he is with me and the kids. Now at first - this freaked me out - but after several encounters with discharged inmates (example - we were at an outdoor festival - thousands and thousands of people - a gentleman approached my husband and said Hey Dep - he was a legally discharged inmate who was there and came over to say hello to my husband) I have come to the acceptance that for his and our protection it is not a bad idea for him to be carrying - this is not to say that I LIKE it, but I accept it. It took me several arguments with my husband in malls for walking away from me and me losing him and spending 1/2 hour trying to find him to remember that when he does that he has just seen an inmate and he doesn't want that inmate to see him with us if possible.......now mind you this is a different set of circumstances that the average citizen has and maybe my family is at a slightly higher risk than others because of my husband's career but I now do believe in the right of people to bear arms. And believe me, I have been with my husband twice when he has purchased a gun and even as a law enforcement officer with a badge, he has to go through quite a process to be able to walk out with the gun - and the process takes time......now THAT being said - I do recognize there are issues with illegal guns but I don't believe (and I may be naive) that they are NOT happening with law abiding citizens - I honestly don't know where it is happening or how to fix it - but I do know in my world, being married to a responsible gun owner makes me NOT afraid of the guns we have in our house - however, I am afraid of the guns not in my house

lovemy2 replied:
And I do have to add to that that MAYBE and I mean MAYBE if there had been a law abiding gun carrying citizen in that building at the time, maybe someone could have stopped him before it went as far as it did.....again - this is a big fat MAYBE....................................

lisar replied:
I typed up a long reply to this but decided not to post it.




Just for the record I am done with this topic I have learned a few things from this and well hopefully someone seen my side of this and maybe learned a thing or two. But at this point there is nothing to be gained anymore.

Crystalina replied:
My child would not be the boy showing the gun to another child. My children to not think they are "fantastic" like a child who may stumble across a gun that mom and dad have hidden from him. My child would not be sneaking a gun out of the house because I know for them it would be like sneaking a glass of water out...there's no reason to. But my child will be the one who walks away from anyone goofing off with a gun because they know it's not safe.

The parents of the child playing with matches or a gun are responsible. That child should not have access to either.

Crystalina replied:
I know what you mean. I was a CO and in a small town, when your at the fair or at the store and run into a former inmate you get leery of what they may be thinking. Especially the ones who I put in the hole.

punkeemunkee'smom replied:
NO because responsible handgun owners DO NOT just let our children play with handguns That is more than a bit far fetched and that kind of statement is pretty uncalled for.

Maddie&EthansMom replied:
THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT!!!

msoulz replied:

I am sure we have all learned a about the many sides of the issue and about different people's passions. That's what it's all about, at least to me!

lovemykiddies replied: I'm somewhat on the fence with this issue, but mostly am anti-gun. I've read all the replies and both "sides" make good points, so I can see myself being persuaded in any direction. But for now, I do think there should be much, much stricter gun laws. If they are already strict, they should be even stricter.

The fact that it comes down to the parents being responsible is somewhat irrelevant to me, because it is (in my opinion), society's responsibility to protect the most innocent (children, disabled, etc.) I know my opinion is not popular, but when a shooting occurs and people die, who is responsible is less important--the fact is, a life has ended from a gun. We have to protect the children who do NOT have responsible parents. If that comes at the cost of a person enjoying a hobby of collecting guns (for example) it is totally worth it.

I know that criminals can find other means to kill or harm, but the fact is that guns are used mostly to kill. Knives have other purposes. Guns are also, in most cases, an easier way to kill.

I'm not sure what the answer should be, but I definitely think guns are too easy to come by. Just this morning on the radio I heard a clip about a recent local incident. A man ended up throwing a LOADED handgun over the fence into a daycare playground! That only helped reinforce my view.

Oh another thing, if that makes me against the second amendment I am willing to admit that, although I know there have been different interpretations.

Hillbilly Housewife replied:
I don't allow toy guns in my house.

Not because I don't think they shouldn't have to learn... but because having 5 kids in the house (daycare, rembmer) is not the easiest task to undertake every day, having gun play on top of everything else there is to learn just isn't a priority. My kids don't have toy guns. It's just not a learning priority. Not when the oldest is FIVE. Five years old, they're sitll learning how to read and write, they're still learning their manners, etc etc... respect for people and their belongings should be the priority, not how to safely handle a weapon, even if it is just a toy. There are many more games and imaginative play out there than playing to shoot things.

Once manners etc are down... and they are getting a little old for the things that keep preschoolers and kindergardeners amused... then maybe it's not a bad idea to teach how not to point a gun at a person, if having guns in your life is your lifestyle. It's not part of my lifestyle... so we won't get there until they're old enough to have fun with squirting water guns at each other rather than splashing around in a kiddie pool orwith sprinklers.

Am I against guns? No. Am I against the right to have one? No. But let's be serious...like I said before, having a gun in the house for safety reasons is just DUMB - because anyone who has a gun in the house should have it locked up, the bullets out of it and locked up in a seperate place...hardly a quick easy way to protect yourself and your family. By the time you unlock everything and put the bullets in the gun, a few minutes has gone by...and sometimes a few minutes is just too late. If someone's in your house and means to kill you, chances are, you'll be dead before you even get the gun. Murderers don't fool around.

Kentuckychick replied:
I just wanted to add that as someone who holds the view that only military and police forces should be allowed to have certain types of guns (standing by my belief that families should be allowed to own other types of guns to protect their families), I just want to make it clear that in this belief, I do not, in anyway at all believe that these individuals should have the right to use/own/or have those guns outside of that job.

A police officer not on duty should not be allowed to have any sort of assualt weapon. I do understand that as a police officer, you have a risky job and sometimes it even puts the lives of you and your family members in danger. I also understand why police officers carry guns on them at all times. Fine. One gun. One handgun, that's it. And there should be STRICT rules and regulations that the handgun in question not be fired AT ALL unless necessary for protection.

So while I'm saying that they should be the only ones allowed to use the weapons I'm not in anyway saying we should turn them lose with them.

Kentuckychick replied:
Although considering it is 100% illegal to have a gun on ANY college campus in the US... that would not have been a very law abiding citizen.

Crystalina replied:
There are rules and they are strict. Do people listen to the rules? no.
If a lunatic wants to kill a handgun will work just fine. Most killings are done with one handgun.

lovemy2 replied:
REALLY? I honestly did not know that? Hmmm.....so nobody who can legally own and carry a gun can have it on a campus?

lisar replied:
Thats true. Which is why I cant even carry one at the school when I go to pick up my dd. I ollow all of those rules. You cant carry into a goverment owned facility either. There are some other places to.

holley79 replied:
There are very strict rules when it comes to LE's firearms. Their duty weapons (to include assault type weapondry) are not to be used off duty. The only time they are allowed to be used off duty is if it is deemed VERY necessary.

All off duty weapons the deputies/ police officers carry have to be registered through the Sheriff's Office. Deputies/ PO's don't just pull their weapons to be pulling their weapons there is too much dang paperwork that goes with it.

I have a handgun on me at all times. I have been threated by estranged husbands/ wives here at work because I gave their spose the DV abuse hotline number. My deputies have been threatened. My best friend and I went and played Bingo and ended up having to have a "lady" (I use this term loosely) escorted out of the business because she was just arrested and was makign threats while we were sitting there minding out own.

Bamamom replied:
I don't know how if works for state and local law enforcement but NO ONE takes my husbands firearm. He is a federal officer (he's asked me not to share which branch) but he shows his credentials and goes around all security - even at airports. He is never to surrender his firearm to anyone, anywhere, and is strongly encouraged to wear it at all times. This is so he can he can respond quickly to any situation that arises.

Quote:I also understand why police officers carry guns on them at all times. Fine. One gun. One handgun, that's it.

He is also a member of the SWAT team. He has at least 2 automatic weapons that I know of double locked in the trunk of his car (the regular trunk lock and then a special deadbolt type lock). This is so he can respond to emergency situations faster. Should those really be kept somewhere else? If a maniac is holding you hostage do you want him to have to drive the extra 30 minutes to his office to retrieve them before coming to your aid?

We have a gun safe and the first thing he does at night when he comes in is put his pistol in the safe. The safe is also up high - out of reach. I feel completely safe (at least at this point - as Tripp gets older he will be taught gun safety but will NEVER be trusted completely. The weapons will always be locked up and out of reach.) with the measure we are taking to protect our child from his weapons.

Mommy2BAK replied:
My husband is about to start his training to become a police officer, that is the only reason I thought to bring that up. And to point out that I would be furious if the government tried to tell me that law enforcement and a slect few others may have guns, but the rest of us couldn't. Ya know?

Miranda1127 replied:
most (if not all) of the murders have taken place on the street (not hom invasion). and done with illegal guns, and most in the same neighborhoods which are about a 20/25min drive from where i live. there has been a good deal of violence in the poorer neighborhoods which really don't effect us directly but the fear is there. we have never considered a gun and never will. we're just moving (problem solved right )

TANNER'S MOM replied: Well I don't feel Dumb having a gun in my home. I feel it's necessary to have one in my home. I guess everyone has their own opinion, but I don't think they are DUMB for disagreeing.

Let me tell you are story that actually happened to me in my life.

Years ago I worked as a home health nurse. I had a county route and mostly rural patients. I went into to peoples homes where you never knew what would happened. I had an incident where I went down stairs to help an older lady with laundry. It's was in a dark basement, her Grandson was down there and attacked me. After that day, I carried a gun to work. I had a patient that was down a dirt road about 10 miles. It was more of a pig trail then a dirt road. Often when I left at 5 it was dark. I was trying to leave the patients home on this narrow road. When I got to a point away from any houses or drive ways...the road was blocked by a large van. He had his hood up and was acting like he was broke down. Ii had my car windows rolled up and doors locked. I sat there about 5 minutes when suddenly another large truck pulled in behind me. I was blocked in completely. The men then started approaching my vehicle telling me to open my door.. banging on my windows. I used my cell phone to call 911, told them where I was at. I told them I was scared. The men where trying to break out my windows. I told the 911 dispatcher that I had a gun and that I would use it. They informed me that an officer was on his way but I was so rural that it would take him a bit to get there. They did advice me to protect myself. But not to do anything illegal. I told the men to leave me alone. I informed them I had a gun. They were still screaming and yelling and trying to break out my window. Finally I was scared for my life, and I laid the phone down. I took my gun out, and I cocked it. I started to aim, but when they realized I was honest in my intent of protecting myself.. they both started running. I stayed until the deputy made it. My truck was all tore up where they were beating on it. I am sure they knew my routine, I was at the same house, the same days of the week etc. I do believe that if I hadn't had a means to protect myself that I would've been raped or murdered. Later that night a home was broken into and an older person was beat almost to death. They think it was the same people. Would I have killed them? I wouldn't have taken my gun out unless I had the intent to protect myself. I would never harm someone who wasn't threating me like that. But I would protect my life. I am not sure how I would've lived with the knowledge that I had to harm someone, I am sure it would weigh on my heart for the rest of my life. But I have kids and a family. I think their are cases and instances where we need to protect ourselves.

I felt lucky that day that I had a way to protect myself and my family. That I had a father who taught me has a child about gun safety and taught me rules that would follow me the rest of my life.

I know guns aren't right for any everyone. But I do believe in my right as a law abiding citizen to protect myself and my home. It's a right that I as an American don't take for granted. It's one of the many rights that our fore fathers fought to give us.


We can debate this for ever. But I don't think the sitiuation is the same for everyone. I think the area and the way you were bought up like everythings in else in life has a huge bearing on what you think and belief. I think that we all have a right to decide what is right for us and our families, with out being made to feel bad, or stupid. I don't agree with the way some people parent but I support them wholey in the effort. I don't agree with some religion but I support everyones right to worship or not anyway they choose. I feel this is an issue along those lines. I know here in the South that Gun Rights and control is like a religion to most.

coasterqueen replied: I agree how you were brought up does play a huge part in things. Some go the same way and some don't. I, for one, grew up with guns in the house - guns that were not locked up at all. My family hunted for a lot of our food because my father was out of work every winter. I was around when they were shot, cleaned, etc. I grew up comfortable around them. It wasn't until I was in my teens when I realized I wasn't comfortable around them. I knew then I didn't want them in my house so they aren't to this day. We have a bb gun outside in the garage and a baseball bat near the bed to fend off intruders. Not that we really get any intruders this far out in the country . We are more likely to need one to fend off an angry dog than a human.

Ok, I'm rambling. Everyone has their feeling on guns and it's to each their own. Some just don't feel comfortable around them and some do.

redchief replied:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_...e-total-victims

redchief replied:
Thirty-one states have right to carry laws. These laws do not allow publicly funded higher education institutions to ban concealed weapons except at sporting events and other high security events as defined by the offices of homeland security.

Most other states may issue concealed weapons permits, but the process is much more difficult. My state of NJ is a "may issue" state, so it's harder to get a carry permit here.

I responded merely to clarify and correct.

Kentuckychick replied:
I apologize and stand corrected if this is indeed the case.

However, Virginia isn't one of those states and Virginia Tech is a gun-free school... so it still stands that the individual would have been breaking the law.

I however, couldn't find any campuses where it was legal for the students or professors to have weapons on their person or in the buildings during classtime. The only campuses that I could find that said anything about not being a gun free school were in Utah and Oregon

And edited to say that I now know for sure that this isn't the case because not only is Virginia a "right to carry" state with gun-free school zones, Kentucky is one of those 31 states that allows individuals with licenses the right to carry concealed weapons and yet, every private and public university in the state of Kentucky is a gun-free zone... that I am POSITIVE of!

Nina J replied:
Thanks Ed Does population make a difference? Australia is a country of around 20 million people, the US has alot more people. So does that affect the statistic? I'm not very good at mathamatical stuff, lol.

Although, when you don't just look at the chart and read the rape statistics, etc:

Australia:
Murders: 302
Murders (per capita): 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
Murders with firearms: 59
Murders with firearms (per capita): 0.00293678 per 1,000 people
Rape victims: 1%
Rapes: 15,630
Rapes (per capita): 0.777999 per 1,000 people

US
Murders: 12,658
Murders (per capita): 0.042802 per 1,000 people
Murders with firearms: 8,259
Murders with firearms (per capita): 0.0279271 per 1,000 people
Rapes: 89,110
Total crimes: 23,677,800

But, I think population affects thats too. I don't really know. The US is portrayed as a very violent country here, but if you changed there population would the crime rates be like it is here? Also, the media has a habit of exageratting things. I don't think the US is as scary as it is made out to be in the media...unless America really "is a country of gun-lovers", which was what a newspaper article said a few days ago.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: Wanted to add Canada's here.

Murders: 489
Murders (per capita): 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
Murders with firearms: 165
Murders with firearms (per capita): 0.00502972 per 1,000 people
Rapes: 24,049
Total crimes: 2,476,520

Twelve Volt Man replied:
I'm glad that you do not make policy for law enforcement agencies. I don't say this disrespectfully, but because this concept is inherently dangerous. There are countless times where an officer's handgun is just plain insufficient for the task at hand. Personally, I carry my issued handgun and a backup handgun (in case my primary handgun is taken away or malfunctions). I also have immediate access to a shotgun and submachine gun. Each weapon has a specific capability. There is no way that I'm going into a heavily fortified drug stash-house, where dealers are known to be armed with rifles or automatic weapons, carrying just my handgun. To do so, would be foolish and needlessly and excessively dangerous.

Kentuckychick replied:
I understand... but do you typically go to the drug houses outside of your working hours? Surely you don't need all of those guns when you're off duty?

I justed wanted that to be clear... my main overall concern is that no one should be able to just own an assault weapon... that's what I'm getting at.

Twelve Volt Man replied:
OK... I see the point you were trying to convey. And, for the record, I only visit drug houses occasionally, when I'm off.

Kentuckychick replied:
That was pretty good

msoulz replied: Are police officers every truly off duty? My brother is a state trooper and he is required to carry his firearm at all times while within the state. To me, he is never off duty. If he is grocery shopping and finds himself in the middle of something he is expected to act as a police officer - at least the others in the store would expect him to, KWIM?

Miranda1127 replied:
i totally agree. law enforcement should not be required to surrender their firearms when off duty, after all they are always on

Kentuckychick replied:
Yes... he's technically "off duty"... even if he's not ever allowed to let down his guard. I have an uncle who's a sheriff's deputy... I do know what you mean and yes, he has had to use his "off duty weapon" once before.

The thing is, you say he's required to carry his firearm with him everywhere... that firearm is the one I'm talking about... the one they SHOULD be allowed to carry. And if they are driving a police car then I'm sure they have firearms locked in the trunk.

What I'm saying... that people seem to be misunderstanding... is there's no need for them to be walking around with assault weapons dangling from their belt loops. No need for them to take them home with them on their off days.

That's all I'm saying. There's no need for major assault weapons to be sold and/or owned by citizens or "off duty" police officers/military personel in this country.

I'm really not at all refering to the one gun most police officers carry around with them everyday "just in case"