great 2nd amendment video

Change it or lose it?

I've been aware of the following situation for some time. Gun rights are the least of your worries.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28080381/?gt1=43001

Interesting hypothetical situation I pondered this weekend since no one needed my highly refined skills in sloth, incompetency and gravitation for their regattas...

If the terrorist act in Mumbai was to occur here, would you be able to increase your survival odds if you were carrying a weapon?

How about if it was something a bit lesser in terms of coordination? What about a bank robbery? Or your in a convenience store that's held up?

I think if you are someone with the makeup of the Dr in the video that started this thread then the answer would be YES, you would increase your survival odds or at least cut back on some of their survival odds. I would guess less so with the situations with the bank or convenience store. Hard to tell, really. I don't think anyone knows what they would do until it happens.
Still, for me, the BIGGEST advantage of having a partially armed society is the difficulty a would-be assailant(s) would have planning such an occurance with the concern or uncertainty that they might just run into an armed adversary. Who would ever be able to tell you how many situations have been stopped at the drawing board because the risk was too great? It's unproveable. Isn't it?

9mm Handguns for the Physically Impaired at your local Retirement Facility! This is a real breakthrough! What a fantastic opportunity for those with physical problems to assert their wishes in the Home, such as to repel unwanted attention from nosy suitemates, or from unwelcome medical personnel, or even relatives. Are these automatic or just semiautomatic weapons? Now---Automatic would be a bit much...
Note the 8 year old boy that recently couldn't quite handle a machinegun on full auto which recoiled up and shot his own head into pieces. And this was under direct parental supervision. Progress is wonderful. And if these weapons are made of plastic- which it looks like in the pic- metal detectors and X-ray wont find them, so they could be sold to school children to take to class!
What a wonderful opportunity for a financial wizard! Thank you 2nd Amendment.

On a side note. I was at my local range last weekend and the place was PACKED! They had 3 counters with 3 employees at each counter and it was almost a take-a-number situation.

I dropped off an application. <img src="<>/wink.gif" alt="wink" title="wink" height="15" width="15" />

J

Well, the statistics show that you are 3x more likely to sustain a gun shot injury when you own a gun than if you don't... <img src="<>/confused.gif" alt="confused" title="confused" height="15" width="15" />

Let's say you own a car ... how many times are you more likely to be involved in a car accident??? Since there is a problem w/ auto theft and injuries from accidents because there are cars everywhere ... let's solve the problem by outlawing the private ownership of automoblies. That's basically the same principles you wish to apple to firearm ownership by private citizens to solve the gun violence problem.

I've been watching and reading this thread .... I would like to ask how many of you anti-gun liberals have actually owned a firearm in your lifetime ... how many of you have actually taken a Gun Safety Course or even handled and fired a firearm????

I am 51 yrs old and have been hunting and shooting since I was 12yrs old ... I was a participent in the very first pilot Gun Safety Course here in Pennsylvania offered by the Pennsylvania Game Commision in 1968 ...

Do you realize that you owe your personal freedom to make your statements to a group of New Englanders and Colonists of the origonal 13 Colonies who took their firearms down from their walls and out of their closets .... then went out to battle the strongest army in the world at the time because of the injustices that they suffered. Their guns made it possible.

So you are free because of private gun ownership ... you have the right to elect/select your own political leaders because of private gun ownership ....

So while you do not like it ... you are in-depted to private gun ownership ... it's what made you and keeps you

free

....

Think about it ....

Harry Murphey

Before we start regulating law abiding citizens, I would like to see tougher law enforcement.

It is my belief that much of the

gun craze

stems from a lack of confidence in the courts.

Again, I'm not an anti-gun activist but I am really tired of hearing the

car

argument. It's silly.

Cars are important to our advancement - they're important to our economy. They're important to us obtaining the work, food, and clothing that we need while allowing us enough time to work and get our kids to school. They're important for the deliveries that keep our businesses running. Cars were invented for this purpose. The fact that accidents happen from cars and deaths occur is a side affect and a penalty we pay that is easily offset by their usefulness and benefit to society.

Apply any of those statements to gun ownership today and it just sounds silly. Yes, in the frontier days, guns were important for food, clothing, and work...but not anymore.

think about where you are going with this...

Sure enough, it sounds like Iraq! Overthrow the evil King George (W)!!!

You have to wonder...would any of you hate an army of occupation enough to shoot police or BLOW YOURSEF UP in a market? Citizens of Iraq have been killing themselves over hatred of the USA for years now, HUNDREDS of suicides, a seemingly endless supply! These can't all be

virgin-hungry

religoius nut jobs. Why aren't the news channels interviewing some of these Iraqi

patriots

(before they do the deed, of course)? The US immortalizes the quote,

I regret that I have but one life to give for my country

. Should we feel the pain of the armed but downtroden citizens of Iraq? Remember the movie

Red Dawn

? Those kids were armed and we rooted for them. Why aren't we rooting for the Iraqis?

Shouldn't those of you defending

gun rights

be defending the actions of the Iraqi insurgency (patriots)?

I'm as loyal an American as any of you. I'm only posing the question. However, I feel that a flame suit will not protect me here. And my personal page is wrong...If your looking for me I live in an igloo in Barrow AK.

Does one have to be a liberal to be anti-gun? Does one have to be anti-gun to be a liberal?

Speaking for myself I'm pretty much middle of the road. I think I took a gun safety course in Boy Scouts but that was a looooong time ago.

Does the Army count? I qualified expert with the .45, .38, M-1, M-14, M-16, M-60, M-79 (those are fun to fire), and M-203, and instructed others on the M-16, M-60 and M-203.

The M1 is one of the best rifles ever made in my opinion.

What's wrong with public transportation? Take the bus. You don't need your car. It's greener, Isn't that something your all about? Why do you feel the need to state your not anti-gun at the beginning of your anti-gun arguments?
Todd
p.s.call Jon Britt back about shirts.

I just think the car argument is crap. I have a car. I don't need to take public transportation. The risk of accidental injury or death is easily offset by the benefit it provides me.

To continue this line of car comparison to the

other side

- why do you go to the grocery store if you have a gun? Go get your own food if the gun is so necessary that the side affect deaths that result from gun ownership or the irresponsibility surrounding them is not a big deal.

Again, I'm frustrated at the silly points and arguments made by either side. I pointed out the glaring holes in some of the statistics presented for anti-gun. I also feel that a car is in no way comparable to gun ownership but I don't care if you want to own a gun or not. There's nothing contradictory in my stance.

I've got Jon's demo shirt done - will call him tonight.

J

I'd be very much interested in the viewpoints of all of you on this column by Thomas Sowell. For those of you that don't read him regularly, (I DO!) he is 78 years old but the brainpan is still chugging on all cylinders....

Soul Survivors
The meaning of Mumbai.

By Thomas Sowell

Will the horrors unleashed by Islamic terrorists in Mumbai cause any second thoughts by those who are so anxious to start weakening the American security systems currently in place, including government interceptions of international phone calls and the holding of terrorists at Guantanamo?

Maybe. But never underestimate partisan blindness in Washington or in the mainstream media where, if the Bush administration did it, then it must be wrong.

Contrary to some of the more mawkish notions of what a government is supposed to be, its top job is the protection of the people. Nobody on 9/11 would have thought that we would see nothing comparable again in this country for seven long years.

Many people seem to have forgotten how, in the wake of 9/11, every great national event — the World Series, Christmas, New Year’s, the Super Bowl — was under the shadow of a fear that this was when the terrorists would strike again.

They didn’t strike again here, even though they have struck in Spain, Indonesia, England, and India, among other places. Does anyone imagine that this was because they didn’t want to hit America again?

Could this have had anything to do with all the security precautions that liberals have been complaining about so bitterly, from the interception of international phone calls to forcing information out of captured terrorists?

Too many people refuse to acknowledge that benefits have costs, even if that cost means only having no more secrecy when making international phone calls than you have when sending e-mails, in a world where computer hackers abound. There are people who refuse to give up anything, even to save their own lives.

A very shrewd observer of the deterioration of Western societies, British writer Theodore Dalrymple, said: “This mental flabbiness is decadence, and at the same time a manifestation of the arrogant assumption that nothing can destroy us.”

There are growing numbers of things that can destroy us. The Roman Empire lasted a lot longer than the United States has lasted, and yet it too was destroyed.

Millions of lives were blighted for centuries thereafter, because the barbarians who destroyed Rome were incapable of replacing it with anything at all comparable. Neither are those who threaten to destroy the United States today.

The destruction of the United States will not require enough nuclear bombs to annihilate cities and towns across America. After all, the nuclear destruction of just two cities was enough to force Japan to surrender — and the Japanese had far more willingness to fight and die than most Americans have today.

How many Americans are willing to see New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles all disappear in nuclear mushroom clouds, rather than surrender to whatever outrageous demands the terrorists make?

Neither Barack Obama nor those with whom he will be surrounded in Washington show any signs of being serious about forestalling such a terrible choice by taking any action with any realistic chance of preventing a nuclear Iran.

Once suicidal fanatics have nuclear bombs, that is the point of no return. We, our children, and our grandchildren will live at the mercy of the merciless, who have a track record of sadism.

There are no concessions we can make that will buy off hate-filled terrorists. What they want — what they must have for their own self-respect, in a world where they suffer the humiliation of being visibly centuries behind the West in so many ways — is our being brought down in humiliation, including self-humiliation.

Even killing us will not be enough, just as killing Jews was not enough for the Nazis, who first had to subject them to soul-scarring humiliations and dehumanization in their death camps.

This kind of hatred may not be familiar to most Americans but what happened on 9/11 should give us a clue — and a warning.

The people who flew those planes into the World Trade Center buildings could not have been bought off by any concessions, not even the hundreds of billions of dollars we are spending in bailout money today.

They want our soul — and if they are willing to die and we are not, they will get it.

© 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

He misses the core of the terrorism problem; the reason this whole dilemma exists in the first place:

Why do the terrorist wish so badly to target the United States? It's not because we're just great and peachy in every way. Our aggressiveness and capital greed has fueled a lot of hatred. I think fortunately for us living in the states, this hatred is focused against us in other areas of the world right now. Yes, our homeland security is doing a decent job though I'm not entirely comfortable with the price we're paying for it.

I think it's ironic that the typical folks arguing valiantly for protection of their constitutional right for gun ownership are the same who argue in favor of the loss of other civil liberties as long as it's shrouded under the pretense of protection of the state. It's like policy derived from fear.

It is sad that firearm safety competency is not a requirement for purchase or use of a firearm. Knowledge is power....

And to comment on that earlier post, nuclear materials are far too difficult to manufacture, transport, and smuggle.

Consider something infinitely more concealable, cheaper to construct, and potentially more fatal. Bio-weaponry.

A 2 oz shampoo bottle can contain enough virus or bacteria to wipe out 10% of the population. I think there was an old movie

Outbreak

that demonstrates how quickly something like this could blossom out to a national disaster.

Also, look up

operation dark night

. Simulated war game involving a few janitors spraying a virus on plants in a shopping mall. To summarize: we failed miserably and the heath care system collapsed. 84% infection rate nationwide within 15 days, with a 60% mortality rate.

I could see someone doing this almost as much as I can see someone blowing themselves up. They don't care what happens to us after they pull the trigger. Their

cause

is chaos.

Tried reloading under fire? That dang stripper clip will get you in trouble vs. the

new

bottom mag developed for the M/AR platforms.

There are many features on the M1 Garande that set the bar for all to follow. The top feeding magazine is not one of them. At that time in history, I would agree with your statement (or Gen. Patton). Not so sure compared to some of today's offerings.

And wait until you see the composite-cased and caseless ammo variants. All the bang and 20% less weight.

I thought the M1 had a removable box clip. Wasn't it the old M1 Garand that was the top feed? I've had quite a few different military type riffles. Since most of my shooting is hunting, my favorite is the SKS. It's more accurate than the AK47 with the same ammo. Also, it's never jammed on me. The stripper clips work pretty well but I also have a removable box clip for it. Great pig/coyote/mt lion shooter.

I meant the Garand, I've got a Korean War vintage one made by International Harvest, and a new Springfield when they did a run of them a few years ago.

I've managed to get my thumb caught in the action a couple of times over the years. The trick is to hold the action partially open with the side of your hand when pushing in the clip. Then the action doesn't close fully and you have to give it a bump to close it all the way. When I was in my early teens I was pretty good with one, now probably not so much. I don't think I've even shot mine in almost a year.

I like it a heck of alot more than my AR. I wouldn't mind one of the newer variations of the M14.

you are correct with regard to M1 Garande.

It's hard for me to pick a favorite. I am most attached to my first

bargain basement

savage 110FP, but probably only because it was my first reasonably accurate long rifle, and by far the cheapest. I may eventually try that new F class Savage. Definitely the best overall value for the intermediate enthusiast.

Robar SR90 is nice, but a bit much to drag around all day. I like bolt action... but I just put together an RRA 6.8mm SPC on an AR platform. Nice and easy...

<img src="<>/cool.gif" alt="cool" title="cool" height="15" width="15" /> Checked out a M-1 Carbine at Joe's today. Regular $1,200 on sale for $800. Tempting, but I do not need one now. Had, M-2 Carbine, semi auto/full auto version in the Army. Was my favorite side arm.
Caleb

I agree with you on the accuracy of the bolt actions. I have a Ruger M77 Mark II in a 300 Winchester. I bedded the action and free floated the barrel and the accuracy is awesome with good handloads. I have taken 2 Antelope in Wyoming at just over 1000 yards. I normaly wouldn't have tried a shot that far but I was trying to impress some buddies (plus a little lazy to try to get closer). I have a few friends who have the Savage 110s and can't believe the accuracy! Their on par with the Weatherby's as far as I'm concerned.
I've grown fond of the SKS due mostly to versatility and cheap ammo. I have a synthetic sporter stock on it allong with a lazer/hollogram sight. It does get a little underpowered for big hogs but a few extra shots evens things out in the end.

On the other end of the spectrum, a Marlin 30/30 lever action with wide angle scope is great for deer in Florida scrub. Ranges are rarely over 100 yards.

You're right Pete. Although those deer are so stinkin' small down south, it's easier to just throw a golf club at them.

This must be the redneck thread... <img src="<>/wink.gif" alt="wink" title="wink" height="15" width="15" /> My mother has a 357 (no foolin). <img src="<>/eek.gif" alt="eek" title="eek" height="15" width="15" />

The citizens of England have something to say about loosing their rights to own firearms...watch this Video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE

Regards,
Bob