The point is, that if you have a gun just to protect yourself, you usually will be the second guy to have it ready to use. Or - assuming you just want to protect yourself - you take it out if someone is yelling at you? 2nd would really scare me.

---

Incredible to so many, I'm not a big gun fan.

Many might remember my little brother has owned and run a gun shop / gun range. Actually, THE place the FBI/CIA/ATF etc. hung out in.

In Newington, if we have any cognoscenti, amongst us- Kev is my little bro. He was an 0331, that's why he cannot hear. Earnie an 0311.

I do not know if those two ever said anything about that.

_________________________

Tangent, for practical advice.

That is usually true, German. I always recommend a revolver, for anyone listening. The kids always buy the semi's. Those are in the movies. If I wake up with a situation, the poor-dumb-bastard (aka ptb) is eating my .44 mag. This is what I've always carried when authorized, and the recoil is over - dramatized. I have never woke up having to use it, but I have used it in this business, which is
really all you need to know, comparatively, as far as advice.


I am also a huge fan of a deer barrel shotgun. Perhaps a bigger fan of this.

I guess the first thing is your interpretation of the 2nd amendment. It does not grant us the right to bear arms. It does not grant us the right to bear them to protect ourselves. The 2nd amendment protects our right to bear arms.

Second, the primary purpose, the primary purpose of all guns including assault rifles is what the owner of that gun wants it to be. If a person wants to kill many people that will be the purpose of the gun. If the person doesn't want to kill many, instead wants to hunt, or target shoot, that becomes the purpose of the gun. While you may not feel there is a place for them, others do. Some want them because they like shooting fast, some want them because they are fairly accurate while shooting multiple rounds, others want them because they can load the magizine at home, take the gun to the range to shoot, and not have to carry boxes of bullets and reload at the range.

Personally, I won't buy one, because they are just not my thing, but I am not everybody. The main question comes down to this. Why ban them? The story is, because doing so will stop or prevent shootings like CT, and that is just false. We have proven that by the ban on Fully Auto weapons. Banning them didnt stop people from shooting each other. and neither will banning these. If we limit to 10 rounds, the bad guys carry more magizines and more guns with 10 rounds each. we ban all guns, the bad guys will use knives, bombs or turn fertilizer sprayers into flame throwers.

Another reason not to, is the idea of the militia. While unlikely we are going to face a Red Dawn. It is not impossible. If that unlikely possibility would happen, we need to be armed with personal weapons equivalent to what the enemy would have.

Criminals and whackjobs who are breaking the law killing people, are not going to care if the gun they are killing people with an illegal weapon. Laws like this only impact people who will obey them, the people that would obey a ban like this, are not the people we need to protect ourselves from.

We need to protect our kids and people as much as possible. Those kids in CT could have been saved, had we built the school with security doors that when closed only open from the inside. And that could be done without taking any right or limiting any right. Banning or taking away a right because of a lie is not something we want to do. lets put our efforts to ways that actually can help resolve the problem.

---

I may have about 20 "guns" in my house.

In this day and age, with ALL the history, and taking into account THIS administration?

Am I registering any of my guns that I might possibly own ?

Good luck with that. I'm only kidding, I'm an excellent pavlovian dog, just like you.

I got no problem with gov't taking your guns. You deserve it for re-electing the commie.

He can even take mine, as long as I get to tell all you butt-wipes, "I told you so."

YOU fucked this country, not him.

It's OK not to respond, I never expect much.

It's not Germany.. but many have been citing UK's gun crime rate vs. US's...

---

interesting video ...

after living in london for the past 6 years (having grew up in wisconsin); I can say these things to go along with that clip.

- less guns and less gun deaths here in the UK
- I can walk anywhere I want in london on a saturday nite and Im not really worried about anything (I couldnt do that in chicago)
- the stats about more violent crime in britain ... Ive been complaining about this since I got here ... excuse my french but the british are pussys when it comes to crime and punishment and deterrance. Remember those riots? ... they happened because people could do it. Britain; especially london is a melting pot for europe - many people from other countries come here and commit multiple crimes and often they keep doing it with hardly a sense of justice. I remember reading about a polish guy; age 22, came here and went on a robbery string and killing some old lady (10 mins from where I live) and he'd only been in the country for 2 weeks.

One time I was at the supermarket and they had 8 cops and 2 paddy wagons to arrest 2 teenagers for stealing. Another time it took 2 cops to wake some drunk person on a bus up because you arnt 'allowed' to touch them.

Here the british police have one hand tied behind their back and to be honest most of them feel this is the right thing to do - and they wonder why so much crime happens here. Same with the riots last year ... Its just like the spoilt child; dont punish him and then you wonder why they act up. (btw they 'attempted' to look tough and handed out sentences that were above normal for here to look strong on crime when they are obviously not).

My wife works for the governement and hears about many stats concerning this ...

my point is britain's high violent crime rate isnt because a lack of guns its because of their pussy stance on deterrance and punishment.

I remember seeing a sign at a local fair and it said "please dont carry a knife with you and please put it in the bin because you could hurt someone" - that tells it all.


oh and before I forget - in britain there are tons of south africans living here
- because that place is a scary place to live ... and comparing the US to there is not something to do. (not that I would know but they would and they are all here not wanting to go back)

I'll concede in advance that Germany is leauges ahead of the U.S. when it comes to gun violence. That being said, your statistics don't take into account that many murders in the U.S. take place in locations where guns are banned, and many more by people who are not legally allowed to own a gun. While we can certainly make it more difficult for people to obtain guns, the fact that guns are illegal for some people to own and illegal to posses in some areas do not significantly affect the murder rates. I'm not saying that our gun violence and murder rates wouldn't drop significantly if we ended up banning guns, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be as dramatic as you think.

As far as your final comment goes, any gun owner that doesn't regularly go to ranges to practice his shot is negligent at best. Using that to say that you'll be screwed anyways when someone busts into your house with a gun is weak at best, and even if I'd rather have a fighting chance than to cower in a corner and hope he's in a good mood.

One final thought: I don't "get" Germany's culture and have a high school level knowledge on its history. But America values its guns differently than most of the world, some of that is bad and some of that is good. America's population density is substantially less than basically every European nation and as a result, we have a lot more woodlands. In addition, there are many more people in rural areas which means that if someone is in your house, you can't necessarily count on police showing up within a few hours. Heck, in Milwaukee recently there was even a lot of hooplah over police taking 4 hours to respond to a suspected home invasion as well as other similar incidents.

With that low population density and rural areas, comes deer and other wildlife which causes a hazard for humans as well as overpopulation issues when it comes to deer, while you can hunt with bows it's not as efficient in many cases.

Key point you brought up that I like that you almost never hear people bring up: The bill of rights isn't about what you're allowed to do. It's about what the government isn't allowed to do to you. It's meant to protect the citizen from the government, not the government graciously giving "rights" to the people.

Using one of the worst gun crime cities in the country as a basis of comparison really isn't fair, and even then there's plenty of areas of Chicago that are far from dangerous. I've lived three different places in Milwaukee (two in Milwaukee proper, one in Wauwatosa) and frequently take walks between the hours of 10PM and 2AM and don't need to watch my back or worry. I've also lived in Minneapolis, and two smaller cities with populations around 50,000.

That being said, I do mostly agree with you that the U.K.'s crime rate isn't an issue because of a lack of guns. It's really, really hard to compare different countries simply because the demographics, social values, geography, population disbursement, and countless other factors are simply too different to ignore.

Gun control is one the most irrelevant issues we have right now, I cannot stand the fact that it seems to be the only one getting any media attention though.

---