2nd Amendment Protest

I agree with you on that.I'm just saying I understand why people with a lack of training and a lack of aid handled it the way they did..
Not saying it was the right way. By no means ..
As far as asaulting people who obviosly pose no harm..
Theres no excuse for the people who did that, and they should be prosecuted..Wich we all know there not nor will they be..

These were children fresh into the national guard..
They get somewhere around two weeks of training..
Then a set of weekends or two week terms ever so often
threw out the year..
They have no real training in situations like this..
they should but the fact is they dont..
Like I said I agree with the fact that americans should keep the right to own a gun..
But frankly there are people in this world that should not own a gun or be near one..
Also when the level of violence surges to the piont where you have to declare
Marshall Law..
Then what else do you do???

Who do you blame when theres so many at fault?
Our government failed everyone.
People should pay attention to this.
We always make everything seem so hopeless.When we could do more..
Attacking each other isnt the answer..
As soon as we as a people see that. We will have a chance to fight greater fight..
The government wouldnt have any excuse for taking our rights away..
When they wreck everything attack them..
Piecfully..With our mindes ...

 

OK, maybe you're on to something, maybe the root of our problem is that we are so isolated as individuals in this country that we are incapable of thinking as a community on some issues, and that's why nothing gets done.

Sure, we like to think we're a community. We go to church, rallies, parties, etc., but the American lifestyle is so transient, many of us don't even know our neighbors, let alone look out for one another, and it's a lot easier to commit crimes against strangers, right?

However, personal responsibility is a start. We can't fix the problem if we can't acknowledge that we're part of the problem, and look within ourselves for solutions.

And be careful not to over-generalize the state of American society, and the attitudes of us pro-gunners. The actions of our "leaders", and the opinions of a few of us don't necessarily reflect how we all feel, though you brought up a good point.

 

The problem is that if you take away the right to bear arms, you haven't made the guns disappear. If you outlaw guns the only people who will have guns are the very people misusing this right.


Also, it is a safety measure in case the govenment decides to become tyranical, disallowing the people the right to power. Although I'm sure a gun isn't much competition for a tank or jet.

 

Exactly my piont..

Sorry I tend to ramble...
People have to except responcibilty for there actions ..

Taking our rights away wont fix anything but make it worse..
But going on a rampage in the name of protest well that just makes it harder to
prove your cause..

 

Mellow

I’ve tried as much as possible to explain that these theories of mine are not general rules, they are meant to highlight my concerns but I’ve pointed out they do not cover every American not even every American that is pro-gun, I’ve even explained that even among those seemingly with this attitude there are degrees.

The theory came out of not just posts here over the last 7 years but other conversations in the real as well as cyberspace, along with cultural analysis (US, books, films, tv, etc).

If you start looking at a lot of American popular culture through the prism of this theory and I think you’d be surprised by the amount that seems to fit into it.

**

However, personal responsibility is a start. We can't fix the problem if we can't acknowledge that we're part of the problem, and look within ourselves for solutions.

This is interesting, because look at the opposition to my theory and who is opposing it, and especially on what grounds?

**

 

mait
The problem is that if you take away the right to bear arms, you haven't made the guns disappear. If you outlaw guns the only people who will have guns are the very people misusing this right.

But I’m not taking about banning guns (even in the UK not all guns are banned) what I’ve been suggesting is some regulations aimed at trying to reduce harm by trying to stop guns getting into the hands of people that might do damage with them. Such things as mandatory gun safes, so people’s guns would be less likely to be stolen or get into the hands of children and mandatory psychological testing to try and weed out those with emotional and mental problems.

But at the same time as outlined elsewhere I’d use a holistic approach to try and make peoples lives more attractive, comfortable and worthwhile so people have more to loose from transgressing and are not likely to experience the intensity of stress that might make them act in a destructive manner.

Also, it is a safety measure in case the govenment decides to become tyranical, disallowing the people the right to power. Although I'm sure a gun isn't much competition for a tank or jet.

Again the same arguments without reference to the criticisms already levelled against it.

Try reading – ‘Can guns save you from suppression?’ http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253937

**

 

Agreed. I can't imagine taking away our 2nd amendment rights would have much affect on gun-related violence in this country anyway, but it's interesting that they would take away guns in a serious social crisis like New Orleans when they know the situation is so absurdly unjust (in the sense that the government was blatantly negligent), that they anticipated a revolt. However, they can only take away the guns they know about, which are the ones that are legally registered by non-criminal citizens. Obviously, they're able to take away those people's guns any time they want. And guns don't give us any real power, other than the ability to get ourselves into a lot of trouble if we're stupid.

 

Who's opposing it? Not me, and I'll accept that it's a matter of degree, but you can't blame an American guy for getting a little defensive. I don't look at guns as a means of solving social problems, but I will own up to taking an individualistic approach to problem solving, which, as you point out, is at the root of the problem.

A change for the better, then, could come about as a result of reducing the desperation and alienation, which requires a redistribution of the pie. That shit in New Orleans never would've happened if the victims were predominantly wealthy white people. I'm sure they would've bolstered those levies like they should've to begin with, and it would've ended up costing everyone a lot less on many levels. But look at the message our government sends out time and time again to it's own people: you're not worth a shit if you don't have money, yet you have almost no way to get money without coming from money to begin with, unless you resort to violence.

 

mellow

Who's opposing it? Not me, and I'll accept that it's a matter of degree, but you can't blame an American guy for getting a little defensive.

As I’ve said I talked a lot about this subject and their have been many that seem to fit in with the theory but seem unable to see it and even argue against it.

I don't look at guns as a means of solving social problems, but I will own up to taking an individualistic approach to problem solving, which, as you point out, is at the root of the problem.

As I say it’s a matter of degrees.

But look at the message our government sends out time and time again to it's own people: you're not worth a shit if you don't have money, yet you have almost no way to get money without coming from money to begin with, unless you resort to violence.

Its not solely the fault of the ‘government’ it is the society as a whole. In fact blaming only the government is to me part of the problem and a symptom of the paranoia of a threat attitude. The enemy comes to be seen as ‘government’ but what is the alternative? Would it be individuals fighting it out between themselves or private institutions such as corporations taking over?

**

 

Balbus, I don't want to piss anyone off and I don't want to attack anyone, but your arguments all just seem headed for one place. Impossibility.

And it IS impossible. For ALL the reasons presented on BOTH sides. Add them all up. THAT's the trouble.

Check this out. It makes no sense. They tried to bring guns into the schools here once before a long time ago, but THAT time it was "say no to drugs, say yes to shooting" All under the guise of "gun safety" and the war on drugs. Genius... This time they try to do it because there are not enough hunters spending their money in the state. Under the guise of "survival" skills. I made enough waves SINGLEHANDEDLY the last time to get them to see the error of their ways. (MUST have been me, as I was told by the principal that NOT ONE SINGLE OTHER PARENT COMPLAINED, yet they decided against it for some reason.)

NOW, a month ago it was all over the WV news that hunting is one of the biggest things in the state, one of the ONLY things we are NOT at the bottom of the list for. Now they say it's only out of state hunters, and we can't have THAT... Well, that's because none of us West Virginians have enough money to BUY hunting licenses! DUH. They need not worry, we're not starving. Most hungry WV's poach.

So CURE the problem of lack of money by SPENDING MONEY ON MORE DNR LAW ENFORCEMENT? WTF? Oh yea, and push guns at the school kiddies once again. Looks like I have someone to straighten out again.

I think teaching survival skills in school is a WONDERFUL idea!!!!!! But quit trying to shove guns in their faces! We have plenty of gun safety courses for young hunters already!
--------------------------------------------------

W.Va. May Offer Gun Training in Schools

By TOM BREEN – 1 day ago

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — A significant drop in the number of hunters in West Virginia has left a hole in the state's budget, and one lawmaker thinks he has a solution: allow children to receive hunter training in school.

Seventh- through ninth-graders could opt for instruction in topics ranging from survival skills to gun safety, but the weapons would have dummy ammunition or be disabled. Sen. Billy Wayne Bailey, who introduced the bill this month, doesn't envision students firing real guns during class time.

"It's a way to take this kind of education in the classroom and make it more convenient for young people," said Bailey, a Wyoming County Democrat.

West Virginia, where roughly 320,000 people participated in the recent two-week gun season for bucks, may be the only state contemplating such a bill, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Although it still ranks in the top six nationally for sales of hunting permits to nonresidents, West Virginia sold 154,763 permits to residents in 2006, a 17 percent decrease from 1997, according to the state Division of Natural Resources.

The decline is being felt at the state Capitol. This month, Gov. Joe Manchin proposed spending $1.8 million on DNR's law enforcement efforts to make up for revenue lost because of the decline of hunting and fishing permits.

"West Virginia is probably in better shape than other states, but this is really rather disconcerting from our perspective," said Paul Johansen, DNR assistant chief of wildlife management.

Nationally, the number of hunters 16 and older was about 12.5 million in 1996, a 10 percent decline from 2006, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Part of West Virginia's problem is it doesn't require senior citizens to buy a hunting license. The state has one of the oldest populations per capita in the nation, and the ranks of hunters aren't being replenished by young people.

To secure a license, residents have to complete at least 10 hours of training and be at least 10 years old when they take the test, which includes demonstrating proper gun safety. Would-be hunters have to show they can load and unload a gun, carry it across obstacles, and keep the muzzle pointed in the right direction.

 

Government, individuals, and corporations fighting it out amongst themselves, it's all the same thing. The alternative is blaming ourselves, again, same thing. I'm not blaming the government, I'm just pointing out the source of the violence, which is disparity, and the actions of the government in New Orleans are a good example of that. It's social cleansing, but some people don't wanna be "cleansed", so they fight back. It's isolation, segregation, hell, it might be even be a byproduct of consumerism, I dunno...do you? Now we've got this catch-22 where everyone's got their finger on the trigger. And yet we needn't go there on a personal basis, just do the zen thing and chill, right?, but it's hard not to react to the tension when the world around you is. And just 'cause I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me...

 

duh. A truely enlightening comment...

There are several youth gun safety courses offered AND REQUIRED in this county already for kids who actually HAVE an interest in hunting.

And I find it interesting that the "cure" for residents not spending enough money on hunting licenses is to hire more law enforcement AS WELL AS push gun safety in public school to kids who may NOT be from families that even keep or agree with having guns.

In case you missed it, I'm using this as an example of a very common mentality that we are trying to combat in order to "control" guns. Thus the impossibility of the situation. A person is doing well just to keep stuff like this at bay.

 

BALBUS!! i owe you an apoligie! i dont know what ive been doing but its happend againg in outher threads apparrently im screwing up on this box!!! please accept my apoligies(is that the proper spelling?) i still dissagree ! i cant seem to send the articals witch suprises me cause they dont seem as big as outher things that ive seen here! it was all about what do i do RIGHT NOW! but also my commpassion for a man that tryied to kill me and my freind that was in my care! so as to counter your argument that we dont think of WHY! WE DO! peace!

 

There are several youth gun safety courses offered AND REQUIRED in this county already for kids who actually HAVE an interest in hunting


remember this verey rarely happens in in any outher but a rurel community! yrs ago it was common in suburbia, but i expect not any more!

 

Lemme guess, they probably have military recruiters in that school too, right? They might even have a pre-military high school track. After reading that, I sure can't blame you for your stance on public "education" you expressed in the other thread. Maybe they should focus on something more productive, like teaching the kids how to make pipes in wood shop, LOL. Hell, at least the kids would be less likely to be violent, and less likely to develop a culture of violence as adults.

 

who were you quoting there mellow? in rural areas hunting and gun ownership is a culyteral thing if you lived in a rural area its a givin you have some kind of gun wether to put down a sick animal or aqiure meat for the winter! if you get yrs frm the store then your seperating yre self frome that witch sustains you! now if your a vegan ill capitulate to some degree, but ill eat beans and rice and all i get out of my garden, but I NEED FAT! and realy i dont get what i need from wild game! i dont have children! if i did i would want them to know how to deal if it becomes neccasary! its not teaching to be an ass its teaching that witch might become (i got to try and spell this again)? neccasary! not to kill pepole but to know how to handle a gun responsibly!!!! im not talking about military im talking about teaching yes! kids! to respect the tools that we have developed!!! peace!

 

ohh and by the way i know that sounded 7i76,up id just rather my child be a well rounded individual with the knowlag to make his own way than to be told he doesnt have the right to do so!

 

I'm not knocking teaching kids hunting, or gun safety, I just think there's a time and place, that's all. I showed my kid how to handle a gun, but I wouldn't expect him to learn that at school.

I agree.

 

No, if a parent wishes to turn their kid into a hunter, the parent should be responsible for their education regarding same. If a parent wants their kids to learn to handle guns, the last place in the world should be at school. There are actually parents out there who are not interested in having their kids around guns at all. Imagine that. But with these courses being implemented at school as opposed to the old way of regular extracurricular gun safety courses, it puts the gun thing right in people's faces and creates that common old situation where your kids are coming home from school and saying they WANT TO BECAUSE THEIR FRIENDS ARE... That makes it an awful lot harder to say no.

 

Exactly. Say no to drugs, but yes to guns?! I don't think so.

Like anything else, I expose my kids to my world, which includes guns, but they're not that interested, and guns are not the focus of the day, which is fine by me.