The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 36 of 36
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    15,547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fooler View Post
    MVP you are playing voyeur in the worst possible way. The people I know who have had to take a life understand all too clearly the huge impact on all involved. A life was ended, a family lost a parent or child, people on both sides will second guess their actions for the rest of their lives. The family whose child slipped out for a party and entered the wrong and was then killed. They are probably questioning their actions with their child leading up to that night.

    Grow up and stop trolling for pain. You don't care if this triggers PTSD or horrid memories for anyone. You just want to bang your anti-gun drum.
    You have it wrong. I'm not anti-gun. I'm pro-those-who-are-pro-gun making an informed decision about how they use that weapon. And I take that position for all of the reasons you mention: It causes lots of pain for lots of people when someone is killed, even if they were committing a crime.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    3 members found this post helpful.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct. 16, 2008
    Location
    Central Oklahoma
    Posts
    3,264

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    What an odd assumption. Of course I have been a victim. Sooner or later, I think most people will become the victim of some crime in their lifetime. I haven't killed anyone. I'm not sure that all victims naturally decide that killing another is justified.
    If you had been a victim, I mean, a true victim, or were close to a victim, a victim who ever felt utterly helplessly defenseless in front of his/her aggressor, you would not ask the question you ask in this thread. You would not so easily dismiss people's pain and decision to protect themselves and you would not mock them, saying "that's not good enough for my thread".

    You would know that it is not a choice people make lightly, and you would not assume that they will kill without considering the consequence first. You would know that, yes they HAVE considered it, and all about it, and they have decided that yes, they will.


    16 members found this post helpful.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun. 25, 2004
    Location
    Carolinas
    Posts
    5,025

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    You have it wrong. I'm not anti-gun. I'm pro-those-who-are-pro-gun making an informed decision about how they use that weapon. And I take that position for all of the reasons you mention: It causes lots of pain for lots of people when someone is killed, even if they were committing a crime.
    No, you are anti-gun and have repeatedly presented the opinion that people with guns are not responsible.

    Have a different opinion, that is what makes life interesting. However neither yours nor mine opinion defines our respective intelligence or humanity.
    "Never do anything that you have to explain twice to the paramedics."
    Courtesy my cousin Tim


    5 members found this post helpful.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep. 20, 2009
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heinz 57 View Post
    If I have learned anything from being married to a veteran, it's that you do not ask this question or questions like this. It is DISRESPECTFUL.

    I apologize for yelling, but it's necessary. Feel free to ask him yourself - he will explain to you (like a child, inevitably) why this is not an appropriate question to ask of someone and is none of anyone's business.
    This X10000


    2 members found this post helpful.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar. 6, 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    5,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    It sucks that the job of killing or risking your life is part of military service. My hope is that if more people took this seriously, more soldiers would be spared the experience of having to take a life.

    Whatever the circumstances, I would imagine it changes the person profoundly. It is disrespectful to *not* ask a civilian and voting population to consider the military actions their government takes.
    You've clearly not understood what I've said. Head down to your local VFW hall and there are probably a couple dozen old vets that would probably be happy to explain it as well. It is not your cross to bear; you may not fully understand what it means but I wish you the ability to at least grasp the disrespect that such a question shows. Were someone to offer up the kind of information you seek without provocation, I hope you have the good sense to bear it silently.

    You know how it's disrespectful to ask how much money someone makes, or who the father of their child is? It's like that, but exponentially worse.
    What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what
    lies with in us. - Emerson


    9 members found this post helpful.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug. 10, 2009
    Posts
    932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloria View Post
    If you had been a victim, I mean, a true victim, or were close to a victim, a victim who ever felt utterly helplessly defenseless in front of his/her aggressor, you would not ask the question you ask in this thread. You would not so easily dismiss people's pain and decision to protect themselves and you would not mock them, saying "that's not good enough for my thread".

    You would know that it is not a choice people make lightly, and you would not assume that they will kill without considering the consequence first. You would know that, yes they HAVE considered it, and all about it, and they have decided that yes, they will.
    THIS. I "thought" about having a gun for many years but knew that I didn't not have the motivation or experience to use it in an emergency. Until I was a victim. My mentality changed and I committed myself to LEARNING all about guns, safety, shooting, and the law where I live. Only after that did I purchase a gun and become confident in my conviction that when seriously threatened, I will not hesitate to protect myself. Whether I have or have not killed someone is irrelevant. I have considered the consequences, many times, very seriously, and I am prepared if God forbid I ever have to make that choice, which I hope I never do.


    7 members found this post helpful.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug. 18, 2012
    Posts
    1,291

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megaladon View Post
    Yeah, that's just wrong.

    ETA: I thought your input/experience was nice to share! That a gun can help help/save you!
    http://www.trfinc.org/Blackburn-Corr...mplex-c11.html

    http://voices.yahoo.com/kentucky-pri...28.html?cat=14

    They get retired OTTB's and give them a retirement home and the inmates get therapy and job skills.

    And...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_prisons



  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    NorthEast
    Posts
    24,660

    Default

    I've stayed off of the firearms threads. But this thread...yeesh.

    mvp, with all due respect, stop trying to put icing on the turd. You started an inane thread hoping for attention and a nice, long snark fest where you can lecture everyone on how wrong they all are. It's your SOP on most threads on this BB. But this takes the cake on being insensitive. Trying to spin some justification into it is not going to work.

    And if you're planning on speaking up for the various armed services...please learn that Soldiers covers only the Army. There are also Sailors, Airmen and Marines. None of the other branches has soldiers.

    I'm sure they're all thrilled with your 'support.'

    It's not up to you to determine how people discuss the subject or to be their moral compass. Most people have not had to take another life. Obviously. None are saying they'd be happy to. Some are saying they feel prepared to make that decision. Whether they really are or not will hopefully never be determined. Nobody ever knows until it's happening.

    And not one bit of your input or opinion is going to sway anyone or help either way. Just go back to chiding everyone on all of the other threads. You have no idea what you're taling about, makes it a tough place to judge others from.
    You jump in the saddle,
    Hold onto the bridle!
    Jump in the line!
    ...Belefonte


    18 members found this post helpful.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec. 31, 2010
    Posts
    154

    Default

    It sucks that the job of killing or risking your life is part of military service. My hope is that if more people took this seriously, more soldiers would be spared the experience of having to take a life.

    Whatever the circumstances, I would imagine it changes the person profoundly. It is disrespectful to *not* ask a civilian and voting population to consider the military actions their government takes.


    How very condescending and disrespectful of you. I have family members that were drafted into the military and served proudly. Yes, they shot and killed the enemy. If they (and their peers) hadn't, all of Europe would likely be speaking German right now. My kids' friends have served in Iraq & Afghanistan, and yes, they've shot and killed the enemy, too. It isn't a game, it isn't a sport, it is serious business.

    We live in a civilized society where we are free to speak our minds. The rest of the world? Not so much.

    It sucks that you can't seem to understand that other people have the CONSTITUTIONAL right to own guns. Period.


    11 members found this post helpful.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb. 21, 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    1,962

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    It sucks that the job of killing or risking your life is part of military service. My hope is that if more people took this seriously, more soldiers would be spared the experience of having to take a life.
    This may well be one of the most illogical, nonsensical statements I have ever read on these forums.
    "We need a pinned ears icon." -MysticOakRanch


    10 members found this post helpful.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Feb. 27, 2004
    Location
    Posts
    1,110

    Default

    I don't think it's something most people want to talk about. It's pretty personal. I say this because I remember asking my mom if my dad had ever killed anyone. He wasn't the sort to invite those sort of questions from anyone let alone his children. He'd been in the war and had been on bombers. She said yes, he'd lost his favorite knife in someone in hand to hand combat. Before he was in the RAF he was in his country's army and they were invaded by the Germans and he fought them however he could. He very much disliked TV shows and movies that glorified the war. He would have hated the History Channel! It was all to personal to him.


    4 members found this post helpful.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Oct. 12, 2001
    Location
    Center of the Universe
    Posts
    7,313

    Default

    another reason you will get few positive answers is that practically NO ONE ever shoots other people in self-defense- the vast majority of gun deaths are homicide, suicide, and accidents. Self-defense shootings by the general public are vanishingly rare, despite all the pro-gun people's rhetoric about it.
    You have to look at the police before you find any number of such shootings.
    You can look up the well-documented adverse impact of shootings by police- even in the line of duty, even if justified, it's psychologically damaging.


    5 members found this post helpful.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    NorthEast
    Posts
    24,660

    Default

    Learn your facts before citing them.
    The government has listed as the last year counted:
    A little over 31,000 gun deaths annually. Just under 20,000 as suicides, around 10,000 as homicides and a little under 700 as accidental.
    The most conservative government number given for GDU (gun defense use) for the same year is a tad under 100,000. The highest account given, by the government, is estimated around 375,000. The actual number is most likely somewhere between the two.
    So even the lowest amount of GDUs, 100,000 which is also used by universities that are all for gun control or abolition, is three times the amount of firearm use in violent deaths.

    The amount of firearms in this country means we do have the highest rate of deaths by firearm. Including criminal deaths. But there are 94 countries that have higher violent death rates than the USA does. With less guns.

    So are people saying that they want all guns abolished? Or just control methods made more strict? And if the latter, how?

    And FWIW, stop listening the media as your source of data. You can look up government information online. Make your own decisions *after* gathering all the correct information instead of relying on the media to spoon feed you your opinions.
    You jump in the saddle,
    Hold onto the bridle!
    Jump in the line!
    ...Belefonte


    4 members found this post helpful.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    May. 6, 2006
    Location
    rapidan,virginia
    Posts
    1,637

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MistyBlue View Post
    The government has listed as the last year counted:
    A little over 31,000 gun deaths annually. Just under 20,000 as suicides, around 10,000 as homicides and a little under 700 as accidental.
    The most conservative government number given for GDU (gun defense use) for the same year is a tad under 100,000. The highest account given, by the government, is estimated around 375,000. The actual number is most likely somewhere between the two.
    Do your sources describe what action is entailed in "gun defense use"? Does that include just displaying a weapon? Firing a weapon? Striking the target?

    No snark intended at all, I am genuinely curious.
    "Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?" Sun Tzu, The Art of War
    Rainy: http://tinyurl.com/kj7x53c
    Stash: http://tinyurl.com/mmm3p4e


    2 members found this post helpful.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    NorthEast
    Posts
    24,660

    Default

    Not snarky at all. It's a good question.
    GDU is any defense tactic that stops a crime from being committed and/or protects someone from harm. So it can and does include times where the firearm was not fired. Actually in most cases of firearms used in defense, the firearm is not fired. Which is a good thing, it's good to deter instead of harm.

    An amazing amount of seniors carry/keep and have a high rate of deterring crimes against themselves and others with their firearms. Seniors are the most often targeted group of people for crimes, being seen as easy, frail targets. Less chance of effectively fighting back or of being able to get away quickly.

    One of the reasons why I sincerely hope those citing false media information and/or insulting those who do own firearms are only hoping for tighter control as opposed to making all firearm or all pistol ownership illegal. Just because many people have either very little firearm knowledge or are obtaining incorrect information via media and internet does not mean they get to determine what the rest of the country can and can't do. Especially when firearms keep an amazing amount of people safe as opposed to the ridiculous accounts given via media of skewed and old statistics.
    You jump in the saddle,
    Hold onto the bridle!
    Jump in the line!
    ...Belefonte


    3 members found this post helpful.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Aug. 18, 2002
    Posts
    442

    Default Moral Injury

    I sit with quite a few folks who have taken other peoples lives in war and in other circumstances.

    I will speculate that for all but a few folks who take another persons life there is a deep, deep moarl injury.

    http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013...m-warfare?lite

    In the '90's I took a course on Global Theology and Prostitution from the Rev, Dr Rita Nakashima Brock. She is now helping addressing the problem of Moral Injury.: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/12/us...gion.html?_r=0

    Perhaps these will answer some questions and lead to a more helpful discussion of the mvp's origional inquiry.
    hound


    1 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Spin Off - "correct" lead change - hunters v. dressage
    By FineAlready in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: Nov. 6, 2014, 07:47 PM
  2. Replies: 14
    Last Post: Sep. 16, 2013, 06:46 PM
  3. Horse killed with "meat processing" bolt gun
    By Whinny83 in forum Off Course
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jun. 6, 2012, 03:51 PM
  4. Retirement = "they all get nail guns to the head"??
    By Lynnwood in forum Off Course
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: Dec. 1, 2011, 09:15 AM
  5. "Moms With Guns"
    By Jingo-ace in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Jul. 3, 2010, 01:29 AM

Posting Permissions

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