The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 15 of 16 FirstFirst ... 513141516 LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 302
  1. #281
    Join Date
    Sep. 4, 2012
    Location
    Southeast US
    Posts
    1,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    I asked this on another thread. So far no one has answered me. This is a serious question.

    The second amendment says: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

    Who decides what "arms" are? A nuclear weapon is considered to be arms (we've had several nuclear arms treaties), a missile launcher is considered to be arms. Who has decided that any gun and any size ammunition clip will be classified as arms under the second amendment but that nuclear weapons and missile launcher (as an example) are not?

    I actually curious and serious.
    OK. Here is a serious answer (aside from the cynical cracks about our elected officials).

    Under the Constitution, ultimately, the Supreme Court gets to decide. In the immediate sense, state legislatures or Congress get to decide since they are the ones that pass the laws that sometimes lead to court cases that sometimes end up at the Supreme Court.

    Or, sometimes, a state, or more likely, a Federal regulatory agency gets to decide if they pass a rule, which in turn sometimes 1. leads to a court case that sometimes ends up at the Supreme Court or 2. prompts a state legislature or Congress to pass a law that clarifies their intent and thus eliminates the rule.

    So, if you (John Q. Public, not you specifically) want to have the right to own a particular type(s) of weapon declared not protected under the Second Amendment, your best bet is to get a bunch of like-minded individuals together and pressure your elected officials to pass a law that bans individual possession of that type(s) of weapon. If the weight of public opinion is on your side and you can raise enough lobbying money to buy yourself a couple dozen congressmen, then you will be successful.

    And if I may digress slightly for a moment...

    As I see it, this country is currently at the tipping point of a huge cultural shift. Our population has been shifting from rural to urban for decades and we have reached the point where a culture that was based largely on rural attitudes is about to be overtaken and replaced by a culture that is based largely on urban attitudes. The debate on gun control and the second amendment is just another illustration of the divide between these two cultures and I believe that if the current trend continues, we will see an increasingly narrowing interpretation of the second amendment.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  2. #282
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2000
    Location
    Ellijay, GA
    Posts
    6,038

    Default

    All of those are alternatives and I would say some would work better than others. You have to know what you are comfortable with and what the options are if you use, say a taser or just have a big dog...

    If someone wants in your house, a good set of locks will probably not deter them all that much...a dog, well, the sound of a barking dog may scare some, or even the site of a large dog could deter someone. If they are hell bent on getting in or doing harm they could always kill the dog. A taser and pepperspray are good alternatives I think, but that puts you up close and personal with the attacker and you still have to be prepared for that and to use the taser, etc...and then get away...so, you still need a plan of action.

    In my case, I would need to be able to get out of the house with my child and in the truck to leave...I live in the woods, so running to a neighbors house is not an alernative nor is just running into the night. For us, in our home and for our family we have the best choice for us...not saying its the best choice for everyone or every home, but you have to make that choice on your own. If I have to pull my weapon I am going to do my best to get a kill shot because the last thing I want to do is just wound the attacker and piss him off more.

    Does anyone know how close you have to be in order to effectivly taze someone?
    Busy Bee Farm, Ellijay, GA
    Never Ride Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly
    Way Back Texas~04/20/90-09/17/08
    Green Alligator "Captain"


    3 members found this post helpful.

  3. #283
    Join Date
    Mar. 30, 2007
    Location
    Hollowed out volcano in the South Pacific.
    Posts
    11,125

    Default

    I would say that the rule of thumb is 15 feet or less for accuracy though there are options that go up to around 40 feet believe it or not. I wouldn't trust anything that far but they have them nonetheless.
    Thus do we growl that our big toes have,
    at this moment, been thrown up from below!


    1 members found this post helpful.

  4. #284
    Join Date
    Nov. 8, 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,231

    Default

    This outrageous piece of crap just showed up in my e-mail from some outfit named Credo Action:

    "After the shooter Adam Lanza, no one is more to blame for the massacre of 20 first graders and six adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School than the National Rifle Association. In order to stop the senseless killing we must first stop the NRA."


    I don't have any problem with people and organizations voicing their views, but in particular since the murder of these innocent people was accomplished with weapons stolen from the first victim that day, murdered gun owner and mother of the wacko son, who had acquired them lawfully, it is beyond a stretch or any sense of reasonability to blame any 2nd Amendment defense organization, of all things, for the killings.

    (For many years I belonged to the NRA but grew tired of their hyped-up fundraising; I prefer to support the Second Amendment Foundation and Gun Owners of America.)

    What next, will they blame Thomas Jefferson? Or James Madison, who actually wrote the 2nd Amendment? Or that poor dead woman whose lunatic son stole her guns and shot her to death?

    No additional gun regulation short of confiscation could have had any possible impact on what happened here or other nut-case shootings.

    If the country is polarized over a mixture of important and silly stuff now, I hate to imagine how polarized it will become if anyone tries to treat a mental health issue by once again trying to subvert the 2nd Amendment, or squelching 1st Amendment free speech rights of 2nd Amendment advocacy organizations.

    It is mind-boggling to see all the politicians and outfits with political axes to grind who have crawled out from the woodwork and paraphrasing a trechant observation I saw whose source I can't recall, climbed up on the bodies of dead children to become more visible.

    Another outfit yesterday sent out an e-mail blaming Ronald Reagan for a 1974 US Supreme Court decision on standards for involuntary commitment, while Reagan was Governor of California!
    If I knew what I were doing, why would I take lessons?

    "Things should be as simple as possible,
    but no simpler." - Einstein


    3 members found this post helpful.

  5. #285
    Join Date
    Mar. 30, 2007
    Location
    Hollowed out volcano in the South Pacific.
    Posts
    11,125

    Default

    Having been an NRA member, I do sort of agree with that statement. I've been to NRA HQ and attended local shooters meetings and such where they do promote very aggressive posturing in the name of self-defense and I think that is to blame for encouraging many to go along buying large numbers of weapons to use against anyone who opposes them. Are they to blame for the killings? Absolutely not. That's the fault of the mother and her son.
    Thus do we growl that our big toes have,
    at this moment, been thrown up from below!


    3 members found this post helpful.

  6. #286
    Join Date
    Oct. 9, 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blugal View Post
    Exactly. So when you guys are talking about "personal protection" you are talking about killing someone. And many examples just cited in this thread show that "someone" may not be the "bad guy."

    I didn't say "murderous intent" - but if "self-defense" means your only plan is to wield a weapon with intent to kill, it's not far off.

    How are house alarms/locks/gates, dogs, pepper spray, even tasers, not alternative solutions?
    At my home I have 1) a gate; 2) locked doors; 3) house alarm; 4) 2 large dogs who bark loud and look very menacing (all of the delivery and service people who come around are afraid of them).

    If someone gets past all four of those "alternative solutions" then that person means me harm. I will do what I have to do to protect myself - why wouldn't I? And I want to be prepared to protect myself to the best of my ability. I don't want to get close enough to someone to try to cut them with a kitchen knife, or spray something in their face.

    In California I can walk around my property and open carry if I so desire. I need a permit to carry concealed in public. Unlike Nevada, it seems, where open carry is legal . . . once Mr. PoPo and I were there for a stop-over on our drive to Idaho and a guy walks into a Subway with a gun on his hip. It was a bit unnerving even though we have carry permits (so we are used to the concept of people carrying, if not actually seeing it out in the open).

    I don't generally have "murderous intent" as you described. But if my life is in danger, and it is the bad guy or me, I do expect murderous intent to kick into high gear to save myself or Mr. PoPo.

    I have skipped a few pages of this thread so I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say that "someone may not be the bad guy." But if someone comes into my house uninvited and gets through my "alternative solutions" then by default he is the bad guy.
    My Mustang Adventures - Mac, my mustang | Annwylid D'Lite - my Cob filly

    "A horse's face always conveys clearly whether it is loved by its owner or simply used." - Anja Beran


    3 members found this post helpful.

  7. #287
    Join Date
    Mar. 1, 2003
    Location
    Happily in Canada
    Posts
    4,819

    Default

    Pocket Pony,
    I meant, collateral damage - someone who's not the bad guy could be you, your neighbour, anyone shot by a stray bullet, someone who took/stole your weapon and used it.

    But, I digress. I thought about this a bit more on the way to work. Is my philosophy:
    1. I don't have a gun
    2. I am used to a culture of fewer guns and little gun violence
    3. If I were to be robbed or attacked, I would not have a gun for self-defense
    4. I am OK with the "collateral damage" of some people being attacked or robbed, but not having guns for self-defence.
    5. In return, I like the lack of fear that I live with in my society

    And could I frame the other side's philosphy as:
    1. I have a gun
    2. I am used to a culture of guns
    3. If I were to be robbed or attacked, I would have a gun for self-defense
    4. I am OK with the "collateral damage" of some people being shot and killed accidentally or through the use of guns in ways they were not intended for when they were bought
    5. In return, I like the lack of fear that I live with in my home

    I don't have a dog in this fight (pun intended) as I don't live in the US. But I do believe there are influences back and forth with Canada. Also, I visit the States for horse competitions and have been, in the past, a bit horrified by conversations with US citizens on the subject of guns.

    This has certainly been an interesting discussion and has made me think about both sides more.

    I wonder if our cultural differences are such that I might be less safe wandering around the States, accidentally walking into situations that I am unfamiliar with, that a citizen would immediately identify as, for instance, "Don't make him angry, he might have a gun" or "Don't go on that property, you might get shot" or "Don't knock on that door, they might think you're an intruder"?
    Blugal

    You never know what kind of obsessive compulsive crazy person you are until another person imitates your behaviour at a three-day. --Gry2Yng


    4 members found this post helpful.

  8. #288
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    17,486

    Default

    Nate Silver has some interesting statistics. No surprises...more gun owners are Republican than Democrat, more are rural than urban, and surprising to me, but I don't know why, more are Protestant and/or Evangelical than Catholic or no religion.

    Guns and bibles. I just don't get it.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant


    2 members found this post helpful.

  9. #289
    Join Date
    Feb. 25, 2012
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,451

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    Nate Silver has some interesting statistics. No surprises...more gun owners are Republican than Democrat, more are rural than urban, and surprising to me, but I don't know why, more are Protestant and/or Evangelical than Catholic or no religion.

    Guns and bibles. I just don't get it.
    you don't get it because...there likely isn't any direct relationship. Just like the (true) stat that the more churches there are, the more crime there is!! So ban those churches right? No, obviously because the mediating variable is population.

    I buy the more guns in rural areas (or at least REPORTEd guns, I'd bet Miami alone would rival our whole state!) but otherwise those statistics (and other common ones) don't say much that is helpful about who gun owners actually are. I am not a republican. I am not a white male (neither is my husband). I do not drink. So we are not sitting around in our wifebeater undershirts swigging beer, cleaning our pistols on our Bible while we watch "Militia News" on TV. He (Blackfeet) and his other tribal members who certainly appreciate their guns, would be highly amused by the whole "Bible" thing. It might be that more Republicans are Protestant or whatever (I have no idea) and THAT explains the relationship. My other gun owning friends also do not meet any (or possibly the rural element) of these yet are very active in gun rights issues. Which is why Obama's comment about "clinging to guns and religion" was so offensive-he clearly had some stereotype in mind and by playing to it, really alienated people who actually do support many of his policies. Montana,with all our "guns and religion", has two dem senators and a dem governor, so I guess our state doesn't really fit either! I do think the urban/rural cultural split is likely to be significant though, by attitude if not actually number of guns.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  10. #290
    Join Date
    Sep. 7, 2009
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Posts
    17,486

    Default

    I don't know what the statistics are...and I'm not sure if there are any, but I do wonder if rural people are more likely to be Protestant/Evangelical and Republican. I believe the statistics didn't count the number of guns, but gun owners. Although crime is rampant in the inner cities and it might seem like everyone has a gun, I strongly suspect it's just a perception, not reality.
    "We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." ~Immanuel Kant



  11. #291
    Join Date
    Feb. 25, 2012
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,451

    Default

    I have NOT checked any stats but I think crime would be higher in the city, as there are more people! As with churches! I think vermont has a lot of "rural people" and its (now, not historically) pretty democratic. Montana is rural and we are pretty split-other than the city of Missoula which is definitely a democrat enclave.

    But in general that might be right.New Mexico was pretty split that way-dems in the ABQ-Santa Fe corrider and the reservations and rep in the other rural parts of the state.



  12. #292
    Join Date
    Oct. 9, 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lilitiger2 View Post

    So we are not sitting around in our wifebeater undershirts swigging beer, cleaning our pistols on our Bible while we watch "Militia News" on TV.
    I had to laugh at this comment because a couple summers ago when it was REALLY HOT here Mr. PoPo was outside on the back porch cleaning guns in his boxer shorts. I came outside in my bra and underwear (just finished riding so stripped down because it was so hot), jar of pickle juice in hand (for drinking - I find it refreshing) and thought, Wow, we must be a sight! Thankfully our property is private so no one would see us. (Double thankfully since Mr. PoPo prefers to pee outside )

    We do live in a semi-rural area so guns are not uncommon around here.

    I was reading a different gun-related thread where concealed carry permits were discussed. In some states (and counties) they are easy to get and in others they are not. In our last CCW renewal class there was a shooting test portion whereby we had to use all of the guns on our permit and shoot at a target at 5, 7, 15, and 25 yards. Having been on a pistol shooting league, Mr. PoPo and I have spent a lot of time practicing at the range. I must say we were quite shocked (and a little unnerved) by the people who clearly hadn't spent much time at the range and were not as adept at handling their weapons. We did our test and skedaddled out of there asap. I do think there should be a higher level of proficiency required for a carry permit, as some of the people we saw were really not good shots at all...let alone under pressure! (Thanks for clarifying, Blugal - I understand your collateral damage comment now.)

    FWIW, I think I would love living in a place like Canada or the UK where guns aren't as prevalent and these types of crimes are unheard of. But I live here, and until Canada has warmer weather, here I shall stay!
    My Mustang Adventures - Mac, my mustang | Annwylid D'Lite - my Cob filly

    "A horse's face always conveys clearly whether it is loved by its owner or simply used." - Anja Beran


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #293
    Join Date
    Mar. 22, 2004
    Location
    Ct
    Posts
    2,644

    Default

    Some interesting reading for those who would like to educate themselves on whether teachers in Israel are in actual fact allowed to carry weapons

    http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsIte...2/Default.aspx

    http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Ar...aspx?id=296480


    1 members found this post helpful.

  14. #294
    Join Date
    Jan. 19, 2000
    Location
    Ellijay, GA
    Posts
    6,038

    Default

    Here in GA all you have to do to get a concealed carry permit is go to the local police station and be finger printed and have an FBI background check done...thats it...no tests or classes. Way to easy.

    And what is it about peeing outside?!?!? My husband does the same thing...good thing we live in a rural area and dont have any neighbors for miles!!!
    Busy Bee Farm, Ellijay, GA
    Never Ride Faster Than Your Guardian Angel Can Fly
    Way Back Texas~04/20/90-09/17/08
    Green Alligator "Captain"



  15. #295
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2001
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    2,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ponymom64 View Post
    Some interesting reading for those who would like to educate themselves on whether teachers in Israel are in actual fact allowed to carry weapons

    http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsIte...2/Default.aspx

    http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Ar...aspx?id=296480
    Thanks for sharing, ponymom. Those were both very interesting, and from my perspective, illustrate a much healthier attitude towards firearms than many in the U.S. do.



  16. #296
    Join Date
    Aug. 20, 2006
    Location
    wyoming
    Posts
    498

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraKY View Post
    but I do wonder if rural people are more likely to be Protestant/Evangelical and Republican.
    I'm pretty rural, fully back the 2nd Amendment, and am an atheist.

    I have no idea what religion my neighbors might be (cuz I don't care about that stuff), but none of them seems to go to church on Sunday. Or even Saturday.

    Liz


    2 members found this post helpful.

  17. #297
    Join Date
    Feb. 15, 2004
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    7,817

    Default

    Blugal, I totally echo your statement .... and I am glad to live north of the border.



  18. #298
    Join Date
    Aug. 30, 2001
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,505

    Default

    I find some of the Canadian posters on this thread the most interesting. I am married to a Canadian, he moved south of the border about a year before we were married. Before he moved he had 21 rifles of various sorts, none of them registered. He slept with a loaded rifle by his bed. He lived on a large acreage (as did everyone around him - farm community). I've been to many of his friends, relatives and neighbors homes and there are always rifles easily seen. They aren't trying to display them nor hide them, they are just there (not in gun safes). My husband had a large farm and was in a somewhat rural area 45 minutes outside of Toronto. None of his friends or relatives have this fear or avoidance of guns that many of the Canadian posters here express. Maybe he and those around him were/are simply bad Canadians?

    I know he hated that when he moved here he had to leave all of his rifles behind. Some had been gifts from his dad and grandfather, others he had purchased. They are in his mom's house now in a closet somewhere. One of his very first purchases after moving here was a rifle, although to this day I won't let him sleep with a loaded rifle in our bedroom. I NEVER owned a gun in my life until I married my Canadian hubby. I see a lot of humor in that.

    By the way the only time he was ever a victim of crime was when his house was robbed on three separate occasions in Canada. My sister's house was robbed twice when she lived in England.


    2 members found this post helpful.

  19. #299
    Join Date
    Nov. 13, 2007
    Location
    Burbank, California
    Posts
    721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stolen virtue View Post
    Fun Size, you are in great shape in Burbank, lot's of planning went into that power plant for Burbank and all suurounding cities.

    I really enjoyed working with the City of Burbank staff I have never seen a group of people so effective, smart and considerate. Everyone was accessable and willing to work through every problem (even the mayor).

    Great City !
    Love that! I hope someday to find a position in the city attorney's office. I'll keep applying until they call me!

    Just to prove your point even more:
    "Thousands of SoCal Edison customers without power. Hardest hit in West Covina, Pasadena/Arcadia/Sierra Madre, Bellflower, Inglewood, Lynwood" - report from ABC7's twitter - and that's just a little wind storm. We're fine here in Burbank!



  20. #300
    Join Date
    Jul. 29, 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by relocatedTXjumpr View Post
    Here in GA all you have to do to get a concealed carry permit is go to the local police station and be finger printed and have an FBI background check done...thats it...no tests or classes. Way to easy.
    Has anyone in GA with a CCP done anything illegal with their gun?


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Colorado Amendment 64
    By dani0303 in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: Nov. 8, 2012, 07:03 PM
  2. Replies: 56
    Last Post: Jun. 26, 2012, 03:24 PM
  3. Replies: 283
    Last Post: Sep. 21, 2005, 01:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •