I decided to share my story of how I became a second amendment advocate and you can share yours too. I was born in Italy (military family) and moved to the states when I was five. When I was in Italy, as far as I can remember guns never entered my mind. I was interested in trains and cars. When we moved to Colorado (the first state we moved to) there was something on the news about guns and my first thought was that we should gather all the guns and give it to the military (yes, I know, completely the opposite of what I believe now). That was my belief for awhile. Only the police and military should have them. I didnt parade that view much but that was my thinking whenever I see guns on tv. After three years we moved to Alaska. There I was exposed to the hunting aspect. My views changed to where hunting rifles was ok but pistols weren't. I remember pistols on display at the BX (my dad was in the Air Force) and asking my dad why would anyone want a pistol. He said for protection and that was that. I progressively became more tolorant towards guns. Then I saw AR 15s at a sporting goods store (thinking they were M16s and M4s) and thought "who needs them?" For short while I thought they shouldn't be in the hands of civilians. Then I was introduced to a talk radio show called "point of view". At some point I decided to stop asking "who needs that" and started to do my own research about the subject. One of my first websites was www.thetruthaboutguns.com. Now I think the NFA is a sham and should be dismantled. The second amendment allows for tanks and fighter jets. And I'm leaning towards the idea that the second amendment might also allow nukes but I haven't research that thoroughly. So that's my story. Lets hear yours.
I forgot to add the major turning point in my journey. My biggest turning point was when I was watching a Kent Hovind seminar. That was the first time I realized that guns don't kill people, people kill people and that in actuality the more armed law abiding citizens there are, the less crime we have.
That's it. Rationally, there's no other position to support-- you unquestionably have the right to use force in self-defense; the constitution supports this right by making sure the state does not infringe upon your access to and deployment of the most effective means of generating and applying that force.
******************************************************************* Where in Italy ??? How old were you ?? from ___ y/o to ___ y/o, Did you associate with Italians ? Were any of them hunters, did any of them have guns ? Rifles, shotguns, handguns...... Those are missing salient points to your account. ******************************************************* Aside from television, around age 9, which had very little impact on me wanting guns, my uncles were all avid hunters and I wanted to hunt.... Around age 10, I read a book called "Gun Control" and it helped form My view poles apart from Mom & Dad that both were Anti Gun in spite of Dad's Military service, he agreed with Mom to appease her, her Mom & Dad were not Anti Gun. That summer, at an Upstate NY cottage, Deputies warned us of escaped convicts with a shoot on sight warning, and that convinced me of how foolish being Anti Gun could be. I never argued the point with my parents.
Near Avinano (if I spelled that correctly). I was born there and I was five when we moved. Yes, in fact I spoke pretty good five year old Italian. I forgot most of it now. Not that I'm aware of. It was a rural part though so maybe. Sorry about that. Its the same with my parents. Their not anti gun in the sense they want them banned but they don't allow them in their home for safety reasons. I argued once and didnt get through. So I mostly keep my opinions to myself and sometimes my siblings.
I started as my dad took me hunting when I was 12 years old. I was taught a healthy respect for firearms. That progressed to competitive shooting, then firearms instruction.
I shot guns when I was a kid and hunted as a young adult (didn't like it, don't like killing things if I don't need to) and never thought much about guns until later in life and realized if I did not fight for the right to own them, that right will be taken away by those that both do not understand why it is a right and know nothing of guns. You see that battle now and it is often as sneaky as what the democrats in California did. The marked out parts are red lined. AB 857 passed six committees and the full Assembly as a bill setting priorities for California’s Clean Truck, Bus and Off-Road Vehicle and Equipment Technology Program. http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB857
I found out at age 10, that sometimes, if I wanted to eat, farms and rural areas, I had to be able to kill and dress domestic animals or wild game..... I can't say I had joy in the killing, However, it often took skill. At that young age, my foundation and belief in firearms and Defense Inside the home as well as defense OUTSIDE of the home, was well established. I never did understand the concept of limited "Home Defense" and being a "Panty Waist" outside the home, the remainder of the time.
Mine's a pretty standard rural raising story I think. I started shooting BB Guns when I was around 4/5, moved into .22LR at about 10 and shot my first hunting rifle around age 14/15. So I really never had a "turning point" or ah-ha moment with guns. I didn't get into pistols until I was an adult. No real reason, my dad just never used them so I didn't either. My high school graduation present was my 30-.06 hunting rifle.
That's really the bottom line. People who want to ban guns are either mentally lazy, uneducated on the topic, extremely naive, or are the type of person who think people shouldn't be able to wipe their nose without government approval.
Seems that guns are not your forte, but bullets must have been for sure! I think it is interesting to know how you have survived for so long in the 'fame hall'!
We aren't supposed to have a standing military, we are supposed to have an armed citizenry. People often forget that. Ever since the *correct me if I'm wrong, can't remember exactly which conflict it was" Spanish-American war people have forgotten that. All because the Militias of this country did their job, they declared something unconstitutional as a group and refused to do it. After that the federal government began expanding its forces to a large standing army, something the founders did not agree with.
I wouldn't take advice from Kent Hovind.. Thing is, while people are ultimately responsible for how guns are used, statistically it still happens that more guns lead to more deaths and injuries. We have to be the school shooting capital of the world..
And all those schools were gun free zones. Not to mention that gun sales are skyrocketing while crime is plumeting disproving your point.
I see you've learned your mantras, falling back on the old "gun-free zone" defense. As for crime statistics, I don't know which ones you're looking at, but there are still shootings and deaths daily or almost daily just in Chicago that I'm aware of. There again, gun control is failing to work. But then, that's not really what my point was. I said that, statistically speaking, more guns lead to more deaths and injuries (by gun, of course), and that's quite true. Can't have gun crimes and accidents without guns around.
Where should I start? How about why do you say that? Back in the colonial days there were privately own ships with cannons.
So can you disprove it? I'm not saying they chose it because it was a gun free zone I'm saying that they racked the high numbers because it was a gun free zone. Can't have car accidents without cars. Your point? I'm not denying the risk of owning a gun (which the deaths by guns are four times less than cars) but I accept it as a price of freedom. The price of the freedom to travel is high car deaths. You can solve that by instituting more buses and reinstituting trolleys and cable cars. Do you want that?