[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by CFrance

When I was in elementary school, in a one-square-mile middle-to-upper class suburb of Pittsburgh, our family doctor, who was obviously intelligent enough to get through medical school, kept a loaded gun in the desk in his home office. His teenage son and younger son were fooling around in the office after school one day, and found the gun. The teenager pointed it at his younger brother. It went off and killed the brother. I was there in school when the principal showed up and pulled their young sister out of the classroom. She was younger than I, but the news somehow traveled fast through the school.

This family was never the same. The son and the father retreated to a place no one could reach. We were a close-knit community, back in the '60s, with elementary through high school all at the same spot, within walking distance for everyone. Everyone knew everyone. Everyone used Dr. Koenig. Everyone experienced the devastation that ensued.

My first point is that it doesn't take a moron to fail to practice safety where guns are concerned. It crosses all socio-economic boundaries, all intelligence levels.

My second point is that many of us formed our views about gun ownership from personal experiences. I know I did. I was only in the sixth grade. I knew these people, played with Steve and Danny Koenig, and I am haunted to this day.

I know some will say anecdotal, blah, blah, blah. But it keeps happening, doesn't it?

Well said, and deeply felt.

[buggyone]

[quote=TexaninVA;838415]

Originally Posted by buggyone

So what would you truly, honestly like to see? The Australian solution where private ownership of firearms is outlawed? What would you recommend?

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

[CFrance]

[quote=buggyone;838471]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

[Cajulian]

[quote=buggyone;838471]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

Just out of curiosity, in your opinion what would be "a legitimate reason for carrying a gun"? Particularly if you consider it b.s. "That it is your Right", per the 2nd Amendment of our a Constitution.

[buggyone]

[quote=Cajulian;838483]

Originally Posted by buggyone

Just out of curiosity, in your opinion what would be "a legitimate reason for carrying a gun"? Particularly if you consider it b.s. "That it is your Right", per the 2nd Amendment of our a Constitution.

Get your quotes right if you are going to quote someone. I said Legitimate NEED. Please play your semantics games with someone else. If you do not think I am right, so be it. 'Nuff said

[2BNTV]

Originally Posted by buggyone

According to a Cincinnati paper, an 8 year old boy was killed Saturday when one of his brothers aimed a BB pistol at him and pulled the trigger. Turns out, it was a real handgun. The boys were playing at an uncle's house when it happened.

I guess the uncle wanted to be prepared for intruders so the pistol was not locked away and was loaded.

Too many children are killed this way.

Big sigh!!!! When will all this madness end?

[Polar Bear]

[QUOTE=buggyone;838489]

Originally Posted by Cajulian

Get your quotes right if you are going to quote someone. I said Legitimate NEED...

Ouch. That IS important. Especially when stating opposing views.

[Bucco]

[quote=buggyone;838471]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

I support what you say here. I also apologize for hi jacking your thread, but I never posted until we leaped to "stand your ground" and condemnation of the NRA as a knee jerk reaction. There are laws governing what you are alarmed about and they should be enforced.

[Taltarzac725]

[quote=buggyone;838471]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

There are legitimate reasons why someone might be carrying a concealed weapon in the Villages. I had a stalker for maybe a school year @ 1989-1990- Gail P-- at the University of Minnesota Law Library while on the reference desk. She was well known to the U of MN police as she had chained herself to her previous fixation's desk. Her rights were emphasized though. She harassed my live- in girlfriend Jennifer V. at the time who was a year behind me in law school. (Class of 1990) My girlfriend complained to the Director of the Law Library M. Kathleen Price about it and to anyone else who would listen including me. This stalking kept on as her rights again were important. The last straw for the administration seemed to be her following me home one day. I, of course, complained about it. She seemed to have something quite off about her especially when judged by her previous behavior around the U of MN. And, I am no George Clooney.

I believe that others on TOTV have had these kind of experiences-- stalkers, angry ex-spouses, jilted lovers, cheating, etc.-- which can get even worse if for some reason bad choices in friendship and/or romances were made. I have also certainly made quite a lot of those especially in law school (U of MN- Class of 1989). You see what you want to see in some person and that person turns out far different from the image that you had of her.

A lot of reasons for carrying a concealed weapon would probably involve bad judgments within relationships.

Personally, I do not think I could ever shoot another human being and shudder at the idea of doing such a thing. But, I suppose if loved ones' lives were threatened then that is another matter.

I would like to see more arguments based on facts like some of these on this thread. I still see no need for many of the weapons on the US streets to be in the hands of law abided citizens. Of course, the criminals will still be able to get weapons because they never follow the laws that apply to citizens.

And, there might be a legitimate need for a loaded gun in a bedroom especially if domestic violence has been in that household and one of the parties is a lot stronger than the other. I do not see any easy answers.

I grew up in Reno, Nevada were guns in preteens hands was a common occurrence especially if you lived in more rural area of Reno. You did learn gun safety however and accidents caused by negligence, stupidity, or ill will still happened.

[TexaninVA]

[quote=buggyone;838471]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them.

Let's focus on where we agree as a means to progress ...

1. I'm glad you don't advocate banning guns. That's a non-starter anyway.

2. The law permits people to carry hence assumes the need. However, I agree that making sure people are trained in the use of firearms is both reasonable and desirable.

3. I also agree that carrying concealed within the interior of TV is not needed at present ... however Leesburg and other impoverished places is another story. I would carry there for sure. You can also make a case to carry on the periphery ...ie recent robbery of an elderly woman in broad daylight just off 441.

[graciegirl]

We will never change each other's minds on some things. As CFrance so perfectly explained, our attitudes toward these issues are formed for a variety of reasons. In Ohio where I grew up, people hunted game and my grandfather was a police officer for 37 years and never used his gun.


The only people I ever knew who had guns before moving here were people who hunted.


This is a new issue for many of us.


Many people who I respect here have guns.


I think how we feel about it personally rests a lot on our own history.

[TexaninVA]

[quote=Cajulian;838483][quote=buggyone;838471]



"I do not know about Australian rules. I was on a recent cruise to Australia and several Australians that I spoke with were surprised to find out I could obtain a concealed carry permit with no testing of rules or skill but just by paying about $110.

I do not advocate banning guns. I advocate showing a legitimate need for carrying and not the b.s. about "it is my right" to carry. It is just ridiculous to think carrying a gun in The Villages is necessary.

I advocate "smart" guns so kids could not accidently shoot them"

Just to be clear ... the quote above attributed to me was made by Buggyone ...not me.

And btw I agree with you Cajulian... given the 2nd amendment, the right per se is not at issue. Being licensed, having the proper training, and having some level of smarts about what you do with your right is legitimate to discuss ... as long as those with anti-2nd amendment absolutist views don't drift into attempts to ban them because a few gunowners do stupid things ... and yes, with innocent victims sometimes involved. Like everything, this issue involves tradeoffs and a balancing of rights.

I also agree with several posters that our views are shaped by our experience in life. If you used firearms before, you have a different view than if you always viewed them as dangerous or uncomfortable to be around.

For those who want to learn however, there are two gun clubs in TV which offer training. I know one lady who never touched a weapon in her life two years ago. She later took the NRA courses, which heavily emphasize safety, and she learned she's good at it. She is now an instructor at the expert level, and she carries when she travels outside TV.

[TexaninVA]

[quote=CFrance;838434]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Australia and that no individual may possess them. While it's true that Australia has restrictive firearms laws, rifles and shotguns (including semi-automatic), as well as handguns are all legal within a narrow set of criteria.


the federal government and the states and territories agreed to a uniform approach to firearms regulation, including a ban on certain semiautomatic and self-loading rifles and shotguns, standard licensing and permit criteria, storage requirements and inspections, and greater restrictions on the sale of firearms and ammunition. Firearms license applicants are required to take a safety course and show a “genuine reason” for owning a firearm, which could not include self-defense. The reasons for refusing a license would include “reliable evidence of a mental or physical condition which would render the applicant unsuitable for owning, possessing or using a firearm.” A waiting period of twenty-eight days would apply to the issuing of both firearms licenses and permits to acquire each weapon.

A common-sense approach, IMO.

It's reasonable to say it's a common sense approach and I respect that. However, at least under the law at present, an Australian approach would be unconstitutional and that ...thankfully ... still matters.

I also note that with the "authorities" able to decide who gets to own a firearm and who does not, and given that self-defense is not a legitimate reason per the Aussies, that's completely unacceptable in the US. This is exacerbated by an erosion of trust in "the authorities" in recent years where for examples, statues passed by congress and signed by the president in to law are later changed seemingly on a whim to meet a political need. Why should we trust in that?

[CFrance]

[quote=TexaninVA;838627]

Originally Posted by CFrance

It's reasonable to say it's a common sense approach and I respect that. However, at least under the law at present, an Australian approach would be unconstitutional and that ...thankfully ... still matters.

I also note that with the "authorities" able to decide who gets to own a firearm and who does not, and given that self-defense is not a legitimate reason per the Aussies, that's completely unacceptable in the US. This is exacerbated by an erosion of trust in "the authorities" in recent years where for examples, statues passed by congress and signed by the president in to law are later changed seemingly on a whim to meet a political need. Why should we trust in that?

Frankly, I don't trust anybody on anything having to do with guns in the US. What I like about the Australian law is that it limits the kinds of guns--the kind that enable you to shoot many things/people at one time. And also that anyone with a mental problem cannot own a gun. I also like the 28-day waiting period, and the requirement to take gun safety training. I don't believe any of this would be unconstitutional in the US, except in the eyes of certain groups.

These laws came about after a couple of group massacres in the '90s. The government took action and succeeded.

[TexaninVA]

[quote=CFrance;838693]

Originally Posted by TexaninVA

Frankly, I don't trust anybody on anything having to do with guns in the US. What I like about the Australian law is that it limits the kinds of guns--the kind that enable you to shoot many things/people at one time. And also that anyone with a mental problem cannot own a gun. I also like the 28-day waiting period, and the requirement to take gun safety training. I don't believe any of this would be unconstitutional in the US, except in the eyes of certain groups.

These laws came about after a couple of group massacres in the '90s. The government took action and succeeded.

Safety training, waiting periods etc are fine if done in a reasonable manner and, as mentioned earlier, I have no problem with that in a constitutional sense.

I have a big problem however if "the authorities" say one cannot own a firearm for self-defense. That's kind of like the whole point of owning a firearm isn't it ?