The "Gun Culture" is NOT the problem

I'm just aiming for the lower hanging fruit. Gun culture needs to address the perception within their ranks about what they're actually carrying with them on a day to day basis. And this twisted sense of entitlement to that kind of power.

When that happens, I suspect I'll be seeing less cases of people being doofuses with firearms and questionable characters given the capacity to do so much more damage because of another gun owners complacency. Easily preventable accidents should be just that - easily preventable.

Thank you for proving my point. Another citizen just like the rest of you lot goes in to purchase a weapon.
Is a license / permit needed to purchase that weapon?
If yes, how stringent is the application process to make newbies really think long and hard about the power they are going to possess.
If no, what is it going to take for people to start raising eyebrows about why a young lad wants to hold someone's life in his hands.
If it was handed to him, What is it going to take for a sensible gun owner to realize that they are not just handing down a hobby piece or a toy to their son / daughter.

Up until the point he commits a crime, he is part of the 11 million people that you seem to blindly put so much faith in. And the minute he goes off the deep end, you quickly distance yourself and hide behind the 'legally licensed firearm holder' label.
Title of the thread clearly states that we are discussing the whole gun culture phenomenon, not cherry-picking legally licensed firearm holders like yourself as representative of the rest of the group.

And food for thought - media can't sensationalize something that isn't happening. Ponder that while you bury your head in the sand.

There something abnormal about gun incidents in America - and it will take some fundamental perspective changes before it can be addressed. Meanwhile gun culture points the finger at everything else except themselves.

 

People who illegally carry are committing a criminal act and are not part of the gun culture. They are not part of the 11 million legal concealed carriers that have gone through the stringent requirement to carry a firearm concealed in public. They are CRIMINALS. They should spend 5 years minimum behind bars for carrying illegally.
Why won't you admit to yourself there is a distinction between the two.

 

I could ask you to define "enthusiast" but I will not instead I will look at numbers

Concealed carry permits would surely mark "gun enthusiasts?

http://concealedcarrykillers.org/

 

"Most people who get shot survive?" and there were how many firearm homicides in America last year - so if a large proportion of people being shot are surviving and are not part of that statistic then................

But let us look at facts

 

Of course not.

 

If you are going to continue to cite links from the VPC, then I'm going to start using stats from the NRA.
It is well known that the VPC is one of the most rabid anti gun groups that have provided lies and skewed stats continuously. Did they disclose how many years that it took to compile those stats? The truth is there have been only 184 convictions over 20 years. That's fewer than police convictions.

How law-abiding are permit holders?
One extremely easy fact to get information on is how law-abiding permit holders are. Much of the existing public discussion on crimes committed by permit holders in the media involves a report by the Violence Policy Center. Unfortunately, that report contains many inaccuracies as it often double or triple counts cases that shouldn’t even be counted as crimes or problems with guns to begin with.
Consider the two large states at the front of the current debate, Florida and Texas: Both states provide easy web access to detailed records of permit holders. During over two decades, from October 1, 1987 to May 31, 2014, Florida has issued permits to more than 2.64 million people, with the average person holding a permit for more than a decade. Few -- 168 (about 0.006%) -- have had their permits revoked for any type of firearms related violation, the most common being accidentally carrying a concealed handgun into a gun-free zone such as a school or an airport, not threats or acts of violence. It is an annual rate of 0.0002 percent.
The already low revocation rate has been declining over time. Over the last 77 months from January 2008 through May 2014, just 4 permits have been revoked for firearms-related violations. With an average of about 875,000 active permit holders per year during those years, the annual revocation rate for firearms related violations is 0.00007 percent – 7 one hundred thousandths of one percentage point.
For all revocations, the annual rate in Florida is 0.012 percent.
The numbers are similarly low in Texas. In 2012, the latest year that crime data are available, there were 584,850 active license holders.4 Out of these, 120 were convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony, a rate of 0.021 percent.

 

How many legal gun owners are responsible for your costs?
When will you anti gunners start stop holding legal gun owners responsible for the actions of career criminals?

 

Well I’m new to this discussion, but I have a few thoughts nonetheless….

I am no one’s press spokesman but my own. But I for one am proud of the stubborn hold I keep on my rights. I cling just as stubbornly to my other rights, like the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. I realize that in the 21st century this may make me seem out of date or old fashioned, but I take some comfort that I am at least in the company of greater men than myself:

“But I am fearful I have lived long enough to become an old-fashioned fellow. Perhaps an invincible attachment to the dearest rights of man may, in these refined, enlightened days, be deemed old-fashioned; if so, I am contented to be so.” Patrick Henry, speaking Against the Federal Constitution (without a Bill of rights), June 5, 1788

I “cling” (for want of a better word) to the obligation that my government must respect my rights in a charter that transcends the current whim of my leaders because I see how a refusal to do so leads to ruin. As my old-fashioned friend said:

“Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty! I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed, with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt.” Id.

I proudly refuse to allow my liberty to be subject to the ebb and flow of the times, and the whims of irritated governmental ministers. Sure they may talk a good game, but assuming you believe in evolution then surely you do not believe man has evolved beyond his weakness to fall victim to anger, hatred, revenge, envy, and spite. I believe that my only sure security of avoiding one day becoming the target and victim of these vices that lurk in the hearts of those who govern me is a recognized limit on their power to oppress me.

It’s not a novel concept, or one that is restricted to 18th century thought. Here is perhaps an even better statement of this principle:

“The great ideals of liberty and equality are preserved against the assaults of opportunism, the expediency of the passing hour, the erosion of small encroachments, the scorn and derision of those who have no patience with general principles, by enshrining them in constitutions, and consecrating to the task of their protection a body of defenders.” Justice Benjamin Cardozo, The Nature of the Judicial Process, Lecture II, 1921.

Now of course I recognize there are many people who do not believe the RKBA is a great ideal of liberty. They do not like the right, they do not exercise it, and they consider it not one of “their” rights. If it ever existed, then it is past its due date, is dangerous, and is held onto by “those” people. I’m not so foolish as to believe these thoughts don’t exist. I’m also not so foolish as to turn my back on those who have them—history has taught me how remarkably easy on the conscience it is for people to vote to give away what they believe are someone else’s rights.

And so, perhaps, you will just have to forgive me if I still feel the need to insist that my rights (all of them) be acknowledged and respected, even at the risk of being considered old-fashioned.

Now in the history of gun control initiatives which I have observed over the years I have seen areas of common ground. For example, the instant check system we have today was created by the NRA and gun control groups working together. But, as you have noted, there are areas of wide disagreement. What I dispute is the suggestion that where there is disagreement then the amorphous and ill-defined “gun culture” is the stumbling block.

Listen, there is a saying about Washington: It is a town full of special interest solutions in search of a crisis to justify them. I know Senators who have expressed their true motive is the elimination of any private gun ownership. Now when they come calling whenever there is a shooting and demand their legislation needs passing because of a crisis, I naturally look at what they are doing, and I don’t always agree with what they are selling.

Not from me you don’t. If you want a debate then all you have to do is ask.

I will say this, though. I ask that we avoid simple platitudes and catch phrases. I refuse to engage politicians whose depth of debate is to argue “we need laws to keep guns out of the hands of (either) the bad guys (or) those who should not have them.” The “bad guys” is comical at best. “Those who should not have them” is rather frightening when you consider that it is the politician who wants to decide who should be allowed to have them. Either way, there is nothing to debate because nothing of substance has been offered for debate. It’s like a gun control advocate saying I support “common sense” gun laws. Okay fine, so do I—tell me the specifics of what you want. These comments and airy proposals are nothing more than the “I have no idea what to do but see how much I really care, so vote for me” statements we see all too often from our politicians. Tell me what your laws really are—give me some language we can look at and consider—and then we will debate them. Let me take a look at what you say as an example:

What do you mean by strong? In any event I think you need to look at the laws we already have before you suggest we need changes to have a “strong” border control for firearms.

See now to me this sounds like a political sound bite. Tell me what you actually propose. The word “rigorous” has no context on its own, and will mean different things to different people. What particular legislation do you propose that is rigorous? And while we are at it, what do you define as “due process?” How exactly do you define a “wannabee criminal?” Tell me your plan to “weed him out.”

Let me suggest that accurate and very detailed information on gun safety and respecting the gun for the potential danger it poses as a killing tool can be found—for free—by contacting the world’s largest, most comprehensive, and most successful gun safety organization—the National Rifle Association. Go just about anywhere in my nation where guns are used on a gun range—be it a private club, a boy scout reservation, a 4H camp, a law enforcement training center, an organization that teaches concealed carry, etc.—anywhere gun safety is taught to the public, and you will find an NRA trained safety instructor. You may see in the media only the gun rights lobby side of the organization. But by far the largest impact the NRA has in America is on gun safety education. If you want to make a difference, then join the NRA and contribute to its educational initiatives. You will be surprised at how seriously firearm safety is taken.

How exactly do you suggest we restructure the American economy? For example, look at the cover of every new movie Hollywood has released in the last few years, and see what percentage of the cover jackets on the DVDs have the hero boldly brandishing a firearm. Should we also restrict the freedom of Hollywood to market us movies that sell us the message that gun violence is the manly way to deal with your problems?

Well I don’t. What I oppose are laws for the sake of passing a law. You have to offer something of substance first. There are questions that have to be answered in a serious debate. Some examples are: 1. Does Congress have the authority to consider the law? (A Congressman thinking it’s a good idea does not grant him the authority to enact his good idea, Congress has to have the enumerated power to do it) 2. If Congress has the authority, then does the law violate an individual right? (Like the RKBA) 3. If Congress has the regulatory authority, and if the law does not violate an individual right, then will the law work?

A statement of a broad and undefined desire for a law to keep “wannabee criminals” away from guns has no substance whatsoever. If you want to have a debate, then give me something to debate. Show me what your proposed law really is as opposed to some political soundbite. Only then can I consider your proposals and debate them with you. We may agree. We may disagree. But we cannot find out whether or not we agree about a law until you give me the law you want to pass.

 

Most often they are the mark of someone that wants to protect themselves and the reason Tracey Grissom got one.

Interesting, I looked that up one of the VPC cases mentioned and the woman had been physically and sexually abused by her husband for years, had permanent anal damage and was was not able to bring that as evidence in trial but only to the sentencing hearing.

Of course what does VPC prove? That background checks are not going to stop crime. So far about 1% of gun crime involves carry holders according to the VPC. BTW: The is about 1/5th of police shootings which means you will be safer with a carry holder than the police.

 

Is there a link to your information from your image, cause every time go through your sources it seems you don't quite get it right.

 

Even easier than that, you could demonstrate the requisite decency of reading the thread before you jump in with your naive rambling. I have defined "enthusiast" in this thread. It would make an excellent new thread though: "Define "the gun culture".

 

Why not?

 

You guyz begin to breach another of my pet questions: Why do people insist on labeling American Firearms owners as "the gun culture"? Does that really have a meaning?
My other hobby is photography, but I've never seen mention of a "photo culture".
We have all of the other amendments to our Constitution, but there is no mention anywhere of a "freedom of the press culture". or any other, based on our freedoms.
I have bath towels scattered all over the place. They're on this chair, and on that one over there, and in my car. Does that make me a member of the American bath towel culture?
To me, there is no "gun culture". Owing to the intentions of those who started this Nation, and brought our Constitution to bear, I believe that it is not only the right but the responsibility of every American to keep and bear arms, and to be proficient in their use. There is no "gun culture". There is only American culture.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that everyone who owns a gun is like-minded and goes around high-fiving each other? People who own guns are no more alike than people who own cars.

There is a distinction between responsible human beings and irresponsible human beings, which of course is an all encompassing category of human behavior.

Then of course you have the illegal gun owners who are the ones out committing additional crimes with said guns. See the difference?

Do you know how people like that get guns and do bad things? Yes the final step in their fall is the acquisition of a gun, and usage of it to do horrible things. Here's the important point though: they do not go through their lives without raising many red flags to many different people. The things they say, the things they do, their personality, their interactions with friends and family. Facebook postings/blogs/etc.

The true problem is that people just don't care enough to intervene with these individuals until it is too late, or like in some school shootings and gun related suicides, actually antagonize and torture other human beings until they snap. THERE is your evil in the world. If you want to fix something, start by helping people who are mentally and spiritually broken, and caring about someone other than yourself and your immediate family.

Why don't you just say "you people". Your perception of all gun owners being the same is no different than the mindset of a racist.

Well now that depends if you're talking about a law-abiding responsible citizen, a sometimes law-abiding irresponsible citizen, or your average criminal who doesn't buy guns in stores in the first place.

Kind of like how the DMV stands behind your privilege to operate a motor vehicle until you get that DUI?

Do you own a computer? Do some people use those computers to break the law? Are you the same kind of computer user as someone who views child pornography?

Do you see how your lumping in everyone who owns a gun as having the same mental outlook and behavior patterns makes your own thinking lump you in with the simpletons?

Now we're a phenomenon. Sounds like fun.

Brian Williams

The abnormal thing is our entire self-serving culture.

We have the right to defend ourselves, our family, our friends, and our neighbors (well, most of them anyway) in a responsible, law-abiding manner. This is all we ask for, and this is something that is the right of every living creature.

Responsible gun owners are not pointing fingers at anyone. The ones pointing fingers are the people that think gun owners are out roaming the streets with 50cals, every gun is automatic and fires heat seeking bullets, and has that dangerous "thing that goes up" on it.

 

Life is too short to spend too much time on deviant belief systems

- - - Updated - - -

All you have to do is hit the quote button and because I do not localise the picture the link is embedded

- - - Updated - - -

All you have to do is hit the quote button and because I do not localise the picture the link is embedded

 

I am aware that the VPC has been attacked for accuracy and small wonder - hoplophiles do not want any form of negative discussion whatsoever. Look at the reactions myself and some of the others get

"How double DARE you say guns are not the bestest thing that ever happened to humanity anywhere anytime!!"

Okay - a little OTT but you have surely seen some of the comments

But you deride me for using VPC and do not bother to link to where you got YOUR information?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...y-permits-is-likely-to-make-gun-owners-smile/ and the AUTHOR of this POS? John Lott - no wonder there was no link

 

Immaterial if it is legal gun owners or illegal gun owners or even little green men with ray guns

The essential question is why is this happening in America when it does not happen anywhere else in the developed world? Why is America causing itself so much injury?

 

Why do you want to hold me responsible for the actions of criminals?
Again, you know the gun violence stats are skyrocketed by gangs in the inner cities killing each other's over drug wars. Exclude these areas and our gun violence stats look much like many other countries.

 

Background checks on other rights? What rights?

 

you have to understand the mindset of the gun haters. its OWNING a gun that is the CRIME to them. Thus, they delineating between LEGAL gun owners and ILLEGAL gun owners is not going to happen. they don't see a difference. and its not about keeping criminals from having guns. Indeed, banning lawful gun ownership is their real goal, not disarming criminals

Once you understand what really motivates the banners and restrictionists, only then does their advocacy make sense. trying to understand how their desired laws would stop crime is a waste of time since that HAS never BEEN their goal. But if Harassing and impeding legal gun ownership is the plan, all their proposals make sense

 

You also have to understand that many of the gun haters are liberals and for liberals there are no criminals, only victims of oppressive upbringings or white priviledge. In this case they are the victims of guns and the 'gun culture'.

 

true but you are understating one thing. How many of the gun haters on this board are NOT lefties. and in politics, how many gun banning graboids in office are not left-wingers

 

Notice how our gun hater extraordinaire wrote that life is too short to be wasted on deviant views when I asked her to have the decency to read the whole thread before interjecting with her drivel?

 

Well, you have to understand that deviant views means anything that does not fit their certain bias and bigotry.

 

I did, there is a link to the image....I want the article...DUH!