I'm Pro-gun

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mikeoskbigg751

Banned
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
5
Likes
1
Location
Farmington, NH
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Bought a new book a week ago, "Lethal Logic". It's written by Dennis A. Henigan who works for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, basically the NRA's primary adversary. For all of my life, until buying a gun this past fall, I've been basically neutral on gun rights/gun control feeling that since I didn't own one that it wasn't worth it to me to research anything about the topic and have an opinion on it.

Then I started gearing up to buy one and bought my handgun the week of Thanksgiving—a wonderful Springfield XDm 9mm. I then began to get annoyed with all of the places I wouldn't be able to carry my gun even with a permit; and with rules that I thought were stupid like California's 10-round limit on magazines (mine holds 19). So I was contemplating joining the NRA feeling that they would prevent these irritating laws from getting codified. (Haven't joined.)

After reading almost half of this book—it spends a whole chapter each debunking slogans like "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." and "If you outlaw guns, only the criminals will have guns."—I'm now a pro-gun control person and don't intend on joining the NRA.

The book effectively explains the purpose of the gun control propositions that the Brady Center promotes. I had heard about Virginia's one gun per month law but thought it was stupid. Turns out Virginia used to be one of the top sources for guns used in crimes in the north eastern states. So the one-gun-a-month law precludes criminals from NYC and Boston from going to VA to get guns in large quantities. They go to VA because NY and MA have strong gun laws as compared to VA having had weak ones. Now the criminals go to Georgia and other states with weak gun laws.

I started underlining passages in the book, but there's so many. I recommend the book even if you don't read the whole thing but only a chapter now and then, it's good as a reference.

After reading that gun control book "Lethal Logic" I have realized a couple things.

One, that the recent Dist. of Columbia v. Heller case of the Supreme Court has established the Second Amendment as applicable to protecting the individual gun ownership right. This means that the usual "slippery slope" or "hidden agenda" retort to a gun control proponent no longer holds any water, for the slippery slope cannot eventually lead to a gun ban nor does it really matter (as if it ever did) what the deep-down motives are of the gun control proponent.

Second, I see further gun control legislation as beneficial to gun enthusiasts in that without more gun control there will be even more of a sentiment against the existence of guns. England enacted its ban after a bad public shooting. How many has America had, just in the last few years? If someone wanted to, it wouldn't be hard to argue against the right to have a gun. So taking the necessary steps to protect people from accidental discharges and to disarm criminals now will preclude a future gun ban.

I now understand what gun control proponents mean by "sensible gun control" and how nonsensical is anything said by the NRA. I'd love to start quoting from the book and sharing the arguments made by the author, but the book speaks for itself and the author does a better job than I would.

"Gun control" doesn't equal "anti-gun", just like "pro-choice" doesn't equal "pro-kill". If you favor the background check that prevents felons from owning guns, then you favor gun control. Felons and the mentally unstable not owning guns sounds reasonable to me. Why not enact other reasonable laws?

It's not contradictory to be a gun owner and support gun control.

Open for discussion...
 
mikeoskbigg751 said:
Second, I see further gun control legislation as beneficial to gun enthusiasts in that without more gun control there will be even more of a sentiment against the existence of guns.

I now understand what gun control proponents mean by "sensible gun control" and how nonsensical is anything said by the NRA.

It's not contradictory to be a gun owner and support gun control.
Click to expand...

oh boy, you're either a troll or VERY misguided.

I'm hoping you're a troll.

I predict this thread will have to be closed before 10 more posts are made.
 
Last edited:
All I can say is....wow.

Favoring background checks that prevents felons from owning guns is not gun-control...It is criminal control.

I almost wonder if this post is an early April-Fool's joke. There are so many holes in it, why...you might just be a bad shot!
 
What part of "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
 
mikeoskbigg751 said:
It's not contradictory to be a gun owner and support gun control.
Click to expand...

That is a valid point, there are lots of gun owners in this country who think it is ok to shit on our pre-existing God given rights that are supposed to be protected from Government infringement: for example think of all the gun owners who weren't opposed to the "assault weapon ban" because they only owned bolt action hunting rifles.

It's not contradictory to be a gun owner and support gun control, it's just un-American.
 
After reading almost half of this book—it spends a whole chapter each debunking slogans like "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." and "If you outlaw guns, only the criminals will have guns."—I'm now a pro-gun control person and don't intend on joining the NRA.
Click to expand...

How can you debunk facts? A gun has never killed a single person. Human action, either negligence, malice or justified self defense, with a gun kills people. On the same note though, human action with knives, baseball bats, or even automobiles kills people also. If you actually believe that an inanimate object, no matter what it is, can think for itself, get up and go kill people on it's own then you might want to get your head checked.

The second "debunked" fact there has been proven in every country that has instituted gun control. In England there is still a large criminal element that does have guns - the beat cops don't, but the criminals sure as hell do.

If you favor the background check that prevents felons from owning guns, then you favor gun control.
Click to expand...

You're mixing up gun control and crime control. The difference, gun control seeks to disarm the innocent, whereas crime control seeks to disarm the criminals.

Gun control:
-"Assault Weapon" ban
-One gun a month
-Gun free zones

Crime control
-Background checks to prevent sales to convicted violent criminals
-Locking up or executing (depending on crime) convicted criminals
-Parole, probation, supervised living, etc.

There's a huge difference between the two. Most everyone on this board supports crime control. Trying to say gun control will reduce crime is turning a blind eye to the real issue. The OP cites Brittan enacting a gun ban after a mass shooting event. Have you seen what happened to Brittan's crime rate since then. Keep in mind when looking at it, that in Brittan, it's only a crime if someone's convicted for it. You can be murdered there, and if your killer is never caught, it's not a crime according to their statistics.
 
mikeoskbigg751 said:
"Gun control" doesn't equal "anti-gun", just like "pro-choice" doesn't equal "pro-kill". If you favor the background check that prevents felons from owning guns, then you favor gun control. Felons and the mentally unstable not owning guns sounds reasonable to me. Why not enact other reasonable laws?
Click to expand...

This guy tried to enact reasonable gun laws too:

hitler-target-large.jpg
 
mikeoskbigg751 said:
Bought a new book a week ago, "Lethal Logic". It's written by Dennis A. Henigan who works for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
Click to expand...

Here's an article by Dennis A. Henigan where he calls for a renewed "assault weapon ban" which would also ban your nice 19 round magazines. He also wants to ban any sale of a gun without going through a Federally licensed dealer:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/strong-enforcement-of-wea_b_228145.html

Here's an article where he calls for a registry of gun owners, and calls for anyone on the various "terror" and no-fly lists to be banned from buying guns, despite them not being criminals and despite many people being on the lists due to errors or similar names:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/message-to-rahm-emanuel-o_b_416343.html

Here's an article where he calls for the banning of "high" (i.e. regular/standard) capacity magazines and says that all states should have restrictive gun laws like MA, NY and NJ. He further describes your 19 round magazine as "military style hardware" that should be outlawed:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/04/20/DI2007042001588.html

Are those the "reasonable laws" you support?
 
You guys are just feeding the [troll].

He's just sitting back laughing at the hissy fits he thinks he's going to cause.

I'm closing this so as not to waste anymore bandwidth.

This really belongs on DU.

If other mods disagree, they can reopen it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Finland Goes Pro-Gun
2
Replies
36
Views
962
Picton
Picton
I'm woke....
2
Replies
44
Views
1K
timbo
timbo
Perhaps the pro-gun side is exaggerating....
2
Replies
55
Views
1K
Junior314
Junior314
I'm not sure what to think of this
2
Replies
33
Views
698
chris_1001
chris_1001
what do you all think about plastering your vehicle with pro-gun stickers?
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
2K
Sterg
Sterg
Back
Top Bottom