Comments on: On The Second Amendment…

By: Erica

Erica — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:00:00 +0000

Mr. Reynolds - I do have to apologize here, as I see you're a medical professional who sees the aftermath of violence and does get in physical altercations in the course of your work. Obviously you very much know what you're talking about. Please accept my prior statement as directed at those who don't have your experience.

By: Erica

Erica — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:00:00 +0000

Mr. Reynolds – I do have to apologize here, as I see you’re a medical professional who sees the aftermath of violence and does get in physical altercations in the course of your work. Obviously you very much know what you’re talking about. Please accept my prior statement as directed at those who don’t have your experience.

By: Erica

Erica — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 18:55:00 +0000

Hi there AD commenters. I'm a member of a rare breed - the female California gun owner who recognizes the original intent of the 2A. I think both posts by AD and Mule Breath are excellent. My bottom line is that my guns are only secondarily for self defense. Their primary purpose is to be a constant reminder to the elected officials in this country of who, exactly, they work for.On another point, I believe Mr. Reynolds is showing an example of a misunderstanding that most people have of violent events:"Personally I like the idea of not having guns around the place, partly because if someone wants to kill me I'd rather have them come up and fight me hand to hand..."Criminals are stupid like foxes. They are stupid, which is why they are criminals instead of investment bankers (or do I repeat myself?), but they are smart in that most of them, no matter how crazed, will not enter into a situation where they perceive the outcome to clearly not be in their favor. They will use whatever leverage they have. A criminal is very unlikely to come up and fight you hand to hand. They will have a knife, they will have a crowbar, they will have a gun, or some other implement that puts them at a tactical advantage over you that lowers the risk to them. They already do not care about the law, they don't care about your rights, they don't care about you you feel or what you think, there's no reason to believe they'd let anything that could tip the field in their favor pass. You're not going to have a gentlemanly duel here. I see this kind of thinking a lot with women of my age group, who simply cannot process the fact that someone would use more force or more brutal force on them than they'd be willing to imagine using on someone else. The problem is that we end up with people being simply afraid to bring a gun to a knife fight, because they think the other fighter will have the decency to forgo their knife.

By: Erica

Erica — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 18:55:00 +0000

Hi there AD commenters. I’m a member of a rare breed – the female California gun owner who recognizes the original intent of the 2A. I think both posts by AD and Mule Breath are excellent. My bottom line is that my guns are only secondarily for self defense. Their primary purpose is to be a constant reminder to the elected officials in this country of who, exactly, they work for.On another point, I believe Mr. Reynolds is showing an example of a misunderstanding that most people have of violent events:”Personally I like the idea of not having guns around the place, partly because if someone wants to kill me I’d rather have them come up and fight me hand to hand…”Criminals are stupid like foxes. They are stupid, which is why they are criminals instead of investment bankers (or do I repeat myself?), but they are smart in that most of them, no matter how crazed, will not enter into a situation where they perceive the outcome to clearly not be in their favor. They will use whatever leverage they have. A criminal is very unlikely to come up and fight you hand to hand. They will have a knife, they will have a crowbar, they will have a gun, or some other implement that puts them at a tactical advantage over you that lowers the risk to them. They already do not care about the law, they don’t care about your rights, they don’t care about you you feel or what you think, there’s no reason to believe they’d let anything that could tip the field in their favor pass. You’re not going to have a gentlemanly duel here. I see this kind of thinking a lot with women of my age group, who simply cannot process the fact that someone would use more force or more brutal force on them than they’d be willing to imagine using on someone else. The problem is that we end up with people being simply afraid to bring a gun to a knife fight, because they think the other fighter will have the decency to forgo their knife.

By: Tom Reynolds

Tom Reynolds — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 13:19:00 +0000

Cheers for all the replies, definitely some food for thought there. I think I will stick to the idea that having everyone in the UK armed wouldn't work because of the different culture here. After all, all our young criminals are immortal and invulnerable - at least that's what they tell me when I pick them up after being stabbed.And, to be honest, if I lived alone in America I'd probably own a gun myself. If I had children, probably not.(And that's only because I know how sneaky I was as a child, and some of that has got to be genetic...)

By: Tom Reynolds

Tom Reynolds — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 13:19:00 +0000

Cheers for all the replies, definitely some food for thought there. I think I will stick to the idea that having everyone in the UK armed wouldn’t work because of the different culture here. After all, all our young criminals are immortal and invulnerable – at least that’s what they tell me when I pick them up after being stabbed.And, to be honest, if I lived alone in America I’d probably own a gun myself. If I had children, probably not.(And that’s only because I know how sneaky I was as a child, and some of that has got to be genetic…)

By: Rogue Medic

Rogue Medic — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 03:32:00 +0000

Just say <>No!<> to prohibitions.

By: Rogue Medic

Rogue Medic — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 03:32:00 +0000

to prohibitions.

By: Mule Breath

Mule Breath — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:26:00 +0000

Robert C. said…<>This has led to speculation by some that legalizing drugs could significantly reduce the violent crime experienced in this country.<>Yes, indeed. This is fodder for a different thread, but that is exactly one of the reasons the <>War on Drugs<> is such a bad idea. I posted some on this over on my blog, if anyone is interested.http://muledungandash.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-prohibition-doesnt-work.html

By: Mule Breath

Mule Breath — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:26:00 +0000

is such a bad idea. I posted some on this over on my blog, if anyone is interested.http://muledungandash.blogspot.com/2008/12/why-prohibition-doesnt-work.html