Unlicensed Handguns

[Twilight Hue]

Sure... by someone who hates liberty.


... who would also be likely to be armed, based on the same principle.

Or someone who wants to take away liberty. ;0]

Also, good thing to have a gun to deal with an armed psychopath.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Or someone who wants to take away liberty.

Yes: putting holes in a person until they die of blood loss is a pretty effective way to take away their liberty.

Also good thing to have a gun to deal with an armed psychopath.

If guns aren't readily available, why would you expect this imaginary psychopath to be armed?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Yes: putting holes in a person until they die of blood loss is a pretty effective way to take away their liberty.


If guns aren't readily available, why would you expect this imaginary psychopath to be armed?

Yep violent freedom stealing tyrants bleed like anyone else.
And...
Because you gave my imaginary psychopath a weapon.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yep violent freedom stealing tyrants bleed like anyone else.

You seem to have missed my point.

Is it really that hard for you to acknowledge that having people with less-than-perfect judgment running around in public with deadly weapons is a threat to the liberty of everyone around them?

 

[Twilight Hue]

You seem to have missed my point.

Is it really that hard for you to acknowledge that having people with less-than-perfect judgment running around in public with deadly weapons is a threat to the liberty of everyone around them?

Oh not at all.

The only problem is some with less than perfect judgment might have power and authority while running around with deadly weapons.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Oh not at all.

The only problem is some with less than perfect judgment might have power and authority while running around with deadly weapons.

That's why a reasonable country that values liberty puts restrictions and checks and balances in place as a bulwark against threats to liberty, whether that threat might come from an elected official or an average citizen carrying a loaded firearm.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think everyone should be allowed to have a concealed weapons license after a mandatory 2-year service in the military. I believe every citizen should be required to serve, National service.

Any government that needs military (or other)
conscription is a country not worth serving.

 

[McBell]

Why are you carrying a gun, then?

Self defense.
Habit.

The obvious assumption is that someone carrying a loaded gun is carrying it in order to be ready to put bullets into something or soneone if they feel the situation dictates. Do you have some other reason?

You do know that being shot is not an "instant kill", right?
It is not like in hollywood or video games.

I have as yet to shoot someone.
Not that I plan to or hope to.
That is ok right?
I mean, I did not completely destroy your world view or anything for not wanting to shoot people even though I carry a gun, right?

Or is it just that you have the gun for wolves or bears, and you can't be bothered to take it off when you come to town?

I carry a Taurus Judge loaded with .410 ga rabbit shot.
I have shot more snakes, rabbits, and groundhogs with it than people.
Even when I was carrying large amounts of other peoples money.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Self defense.
Habit.

Self defense... by putting bullets into someone or something.

Seems like you're agreeing with me, but just using a euphemism.

You do know that being shot is not an "instant kill", right?
It is not like in hollywood or video games.

If you think I said anything about killing someone instantly, then I invite you to re-read my post.

I have as yet to shoot someone.
Not that I plan to or hope to.
That is ok right?
I mean, I did not completely destroy your world view or anything for not wanting to shoot people even though I carry a gun, right?

If you carry a gun, then it stands to reason that you have it in case you see the need to use it.

It would be nice if I never have to use a fire extinguisher ever again, but I still keep a fire extinguisher in order to spray dry chem on the things I think need dry chem sprayed on.

Likewise, one would assume that you carry your gun in order to put bullet holes in things (or people) that you think need bullet holes put in them.

If this isn't the case, why would you be carrying the gun?

I carry a Taurus Judge loaded with .410 ga rabbit shot.
I have shot more snakes, rabbits, and groundhogs with it than people.
Even when I was carrying large amounts of other peoples money.

The gun that you carry: do you carry it so you can shoot snakes, rabbits and groundhogs (as opposed to people)?

 

[Revoltingest]

Likewise, one would assume that you carry your gun in order to put bullet holes in things (or people) that you think need bullet holes put in them.

It seems you believe that the act of shooting
someone is the goal. You misunderstand.
The goal is self defense. Shooting an assailant
is the act which achieves the goal. The same
would be said for pepper spray in their eyes.

 

[McBell]

Self defense... by putting bullets into someone or something.

Seems like you're agreeing with me, but just using a euphemism.


If you think I said anything about killing someone instantly, then I invite you to re-read my post.


If you carry a gun, then it stands to reason that you have it in case you see the need to use it.

It would be nice if I never have to use a fire extinguisher ever again, but I still keep a fire extinguisher in order to spray dry chem on the things I think need dry chem sprayed on.

Likewise, one would assume that you carry your gun in order to put bullet holes in things (or people) that you think need bullet holes put in them.

If this isn't the case, why would you be carrying the gun?

Fair enough

The gun that you carry: do you carry it so you can shoot snakes, rabbits and groundhogs (as opposed to people)?

I carry that particular firearm because there is a diversity of shell types available for it.
Not nearly as many options as a 12 ga, but then, a 12 ga is quite a bit larger...

 

[McBell]

It seems you believe that the act of shooting
someone is the goal. You misunderstand.
The goal is self defense. Shooting an assailant
is the act which achieves the goal. The same
would be said for pepper spray in their eyes.

My experience has been that the second the assailant finds out I am carrying, their tune changes drastically and things are able to be talked out.
Or, they just walk away...

 

[Twilight Hue]

That's why a reasonable country that values liberty puts restrictions and checks and balances in place as a bulwark against threats to liberty, whether that threat might come from an elected official or an average citizen carrying a loaded firearm.

You might have a reasonable country now, but will it be down the road?

 

[Revoltingest]

My experience has been that the second the assailant finds out I am carrying, their tune changes drastically and things are able to be talked out.
Or, they just walk away...

That happened to me twice.
The most significant was being surrounded by a group
of young toughs in the wee hours of the morning when
I was working in a parking lot of my buildings.
Diffusing a situation with a mere sweeping aside of some
clothing certainly rules. So does selling the property, &
avoiding the need for such a schedule in such an area.

To trigger without even touching a trigger, eh.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You might have a reasonable country now, but will it be down the road?

Missing the point again.

When a country stops protecting liberty - whether the threat to liberty is from the government itself or from armed citizens - it stops being reasonable.

And arming people considering a coup has never been a reliable pathway to achieve a reasonable country. Democracy takes work and citizen involvement, not caching weapons. If the day comes that all that stands between you and tyranny is your gun cabinet full of small arms, you've already lost. Arguing for keeping firearms as a "defense against tyranny" makes no sense at all. It's an excuse for the lazy and fearful who can't be bothered to actually participate in participatory government.

 

[Revoltingest]

Missing the point again.

When a country stops protecting liberty - whether the threat to liberty is from the government itself or from armed citizens - it stops being reasonable.

And arming people considering a coup has never been a reliable pathway to achieve a reasonable country. Democracy takes work and citizen involvement, not caching weapons. If the day comes that all that stands between you and tyranny is your gun cabinet full of small arms, you've already lost. Arguing for keeping firearms as a "defense against tyranny" makes no sense at all. It's an excuse for the lazy and fearful who can't be bothered to actually participate in participatory government.

Of all here, you seem among the most fearful.
I can almost hear (in Judy Garland's voice)....
"Rifles & pistols & bullets, oh my!"
We own guns, and we participate in the democratic process.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Any government that needs military (or other)
conscription is a country not worth serving.

So many people gun toting folks love to talk about shooting guns and owning military grade weapons, why would they not have pride in serving their country and actually understand the meaning of being a patriot?

 

[Revoltingest]

So many people gun toting folks love to talk about shooting guns and owning military grade weapons, why would they not have pride in serving their country and actually understand the meaning of being a patriot?

Service imposed upon the unwilling by the non-serving
holds no appeal for me. It should be a choice, one with
generous compensation for the risks & costs.
Patriotism hasn't ever severely afflicted me.

You're new here, so some background info...
- I've been a Libertarian for many decades.
- I'm a felonious draft dodger.
- I worked in aerospace as an engineer of
various weapon systems.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Service imposed upon the unwilling by the non-serving
holds no appeal for me. It should be a choice, one with
generous compensation for the risks & costs.
Patriotism hasn't ever severely afflicted me.

You're new here, so some background info...
- I've been a Libertarian for many decades.
- I'm a felonious draft dodger.
- I worked in aerospace as an engineer of
various weapon systems.

I totally appreciate and understand your position as to a great extent that is mine as well. That being said, I was trying to offer a compromise concerning the random acts of violence that seem to occur on a regular basis while providing a possible solution to the idea of unlicensed handguns. Not sure that there will ever be a meeting of the minds as the second amendment seems to have been left intentionally ambiguous. Full disclosure, I have served, but believe military grade weapons should be left to military encounters.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not sure that there will ever be a meeting of the minds as the second amendment seems to have been left intentionally ambiguous.

I speculate that the Constitution's authors believed
they were clear. But in law, the best such intentions
are often undone by arguing parties questioning the
meaning of the word "is".