Some people have an irrational fear of firearms ...

[spin]

The right to bear arms is wrong in my book

Apr 10, 2011 4:40 AM | By Lihle Z Mtshali

Lihle Z Mtshali: I am not a fan of guns. In fact, I hate them and I am scared of them. I have been known to hastily cross the street when I see someone with a gun on their hip.

Don't even mention those cash-in-transit guys standing in front of their armoured trucks with machine-guns. If they so much as looked in my direction, I wanted to pee in my pants.

***snip***

I know that gun freaks say guns don't kill people, people kill people, but my thing is that if there were no guns, nobody would be getting shot.

***snip***

But at least I would sleep better at night knowing that I wouldn't die from a gunshot wound, which, no matter how dumb it sounds, is my greatest fear.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/article1010807.ece/The-right-to-bear-arms-is-wrong-in-my-book

I found the article to be a fascinating look into the mind of a person who actually fears firearms almost as though they were animate objects capable of killing on their own. In reality this writer may have good reason to fear the misuse of firearms as she may have personally experienced a tragedy caused by a person with a gun. In such cases the fear is understandable.

She mentions how difficult it is for the average person to legally obtain a firearm in New York City and approves of future requirements that will make gun ownership even more difficult in the Big Apple. (Of course, she doesn't seem to realize that the rich, famous and well connected can obtain permits to own and even carry firearms in New York City. Only the "little people" find the obstacles and hurdles placed in the path of gun ownership extremely difficult or impossible to overcome.)

I definitely agree with her statement that illegal guns are a major problem in New York City and her hope that Mayor Bloomberg should focus future efforts on this issue.

[patrice]

1. If that is possible, it is also possible, therefore, to have an irrational love of firearms. nt

[villager]

2. +1

n/t

[dmallind]

4. Certainly - it's possible to have an irrational love of anything.

People with dozens of cats in a small home, or entire rooms set up as shrines to celebrities they have never met, etc. Guns are no exception, and I can't recall anyone saying they were.

But merely owning or even collecting them is not irrational. Just like a farmer or owner of a large estate can rationally have dozens of cats, and a celebrity's mother can rationally plaster photos and awards etc over an entire room, so can those who have the interest, money, and capability to safely store and handle a collection of guns do so rationally. When cats, celebrities, or heck yes guns, crowd out essential spending, space or attention to the necessities of life, only then do we have an irrational obsession.

FWIW if anyone is curious I am personally in little realistic danger of any of the above. I have one dog, no celebrity knickknacks of any kind, and all the guns I have ever owned fit inside one small. portable shelf-top safe.

[patrice]

9. True. I did not mean to imply that all relationships to guns are irrational, only that this IS

possible, so it is incumbent upon the responsible individual in our political milieu to make our best assessment of the degree of possible irrationality that each of us is dealing with and react FUNCTIONALLY to that, not just pretend that it does not matter as long as it supports whichever position one takes (on either side).

[Cheap_Trick]

6. +2

And you don't even need to go to freeperville to see evidence of that.

[ZombieHorde]

93. Is there such a thing as rational love? nt

[WatsonT]

102. No one ever denied that some folks go too far in that direction

but point out that some go too far in the other direction and you'll see heads explode.

[spin]

108. Probably a very small percentage of gun owners have an irrational love ...

of firearms.

I have a small collection of revolvers, pistols, rifles and one shotgun. Some here would call me a gun lover but I rarely handle any of my firearms except for the one I use as my concealed carry weapon. I clean them if I shoot them and put them back in the safe. Perhaps once or twice a year, I will removed them from the safe and run an oily patch down the barrels and wipe them down with a silicone rag.

I enjoy shooting them, but cleaning them afterward is like washing the dishes. Merely a task that has to be done.

In reality most gun owners are like me. We don't sit around foundling a firearm while we watch a brutal "shoot em up" movie on TV.

It always fascinates me just how much imagination those who oppose firearms put into their fantasies about gun owners. It probably shows the power of the media to influence the opinions of people who lack knowledge about a subject. Movies rarely portray gun owners in a positive light and even the actors who portray good guys with firearms, like cops, act like total idiots when they are shown handling their weapons. I probably would have a very negative opinion about gun owners if my only exposure to them was through the media.

[ileus]

109. No love is for humans, being overly fond of guns...maybe.

[Me.]

3. Their Sole Purpose Is To Kill

.

[dmallind]

5. Mine must be defective then - they just put holes in paper and bounce off steel backstops

The bullets that is - my guns have not bounced off steel. Or put holes in paper come to think of it.

[Common Sense Party]

12. Mine, too. I want my money back.

No, actually, I don't.

I enjoy killing paper plates.

[right2bfree]

38. Yeah, up until the day a gun owner punches a hole in a human being, they are a L-A-G-O..

....after that they are killer using a gun to make killing easy.

[friendly_iconoclast]

42. I presume you are a law abiding computer owner, and will remain one...

...up until the day you start trafficking in child pornography, running a phishing scam, or organizing a botnet.


Better you should destroy your computer right now for the good of society, amirite?

[right2bfree]

47. My computer is used for multiple reasons. Your gun only has one: to Kill. nt

[spin]

50. How do you explain the fact that I have fired well over 200,000 rounds and never ...

injured or killed a living creature with my firearms?

Competitive target shooters shoot far more than that and usually also never end up killing another person or even any living creatures.

Why don't we see advertisements for firearms that only discuss how effective they are at killing?

To any person with knowledge about firearms your statement shows a total lack of knowledge. Only reading propaganda from those who oppose firearm ownership hardly prepares you for a good discussion on the subject of gun control. I suggest you spend a little time researching the subject and develop some really good arguments for your position.

Let me assure you, if I wanted to I could present many good points for truly draconian gun control and even banning firearms. I choose not to because I have already considered these arguments and found that in my personal opinion I still support gun ownership. Still I come here for an intelligent debate on a variety of subjects and I have learned a lot on DU. Sadly, here in the Gungeon, I usually end up replying to posts that say the only purpose of a gun is to kill.

[rl6214]

52. She can't get over that

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[burrfoot]

90. Guns can be used for multiple purposes. It's impossible to

deny that.

However, even if we were to grant your premise that a gun has only one purpose: to Kill; well....you say that as if it's a negative thing?

[rl6214]

43. Blah blah blah blah blah

You are all just killers waiting to happen :sarcasm:

[spin]

51. How often does that happen? ...

I agree that it does rarely happen but there are 40 million firearm owners in the United States. The percentage of honest gun owners who "snap" is extremely low and in many cases they were waving red flags that someone should have noticed.

Criminals and criminal gang members do shoot and kill a lot of people but they will continue to do so until our gun control laws stop concentrating on restricting or banning firearms owned by honest responsible people and instead focus on the criminal element.

Also, many time in this country, honest citizens use firearms for self defense. Often no shots are fired.

[one-eyed fat man]

99. So does your calumny

include those of us you have paid to do your killing for you?

In fact, every month when my Army retirement check shows up, you are still paying me.

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell

[rl6214]

7. No, their sole purpose is not to kil

They can also be used for shooting clay pigeons, paper targets, steel targets, balloons, golf balls, bowling pins, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, pumpkins, eggs and a number of other things I have used for targets. They eye/hand coordination combined with the control of your breathing and muscle control can be very relaxing.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rrneck]

13. Kill who?

[Remmah2]

27. Are Scottish guns designed to kilt? nt

nt

[spin]

15. Your opinion is similar to that held by the lady who wrote the article in the OP ...

and if you look at it carefully, you should realize that it's an irrational argument based largely on fear and emotion.

There could easily be as many as 300 million firearms in our nation and if only one percent were used each year for the purpose you state, 3 million people would be killed.

Hunters do use firearms to kill and a responsible hunter wants to use his weapon to kill effectively in a manner that causes as little pain and suffering to his target as possible. Hunting is very common in the low income area of Florida where I live, mainly to put food on the table rather than a trophy on the wall.

Firearms are also used for self defense, the object is not to kill but to stop an attack. Criminals often misuse firearms to murder.

So yes, often firearms kill but that is not their sole purpose. I own a small collection of firearms which I have gathered over 40 years of shooting and yet none of my weapons has ever been used by me to kill any living creature. They have punched a lot of holes in paper targets.

A better and far more accurate way of phrasing your statement might be, "Guns can be misused to kill in a criminal manner". The misuse of firearms is the problem not the fact that people own them. If we focus on the misuse we can make some headway in addressing firearm violence but if we only focus on banning firearms we will not solve anything.

[virginia mountainman]

16. Not to mention...

Investment!! Every time some idiot starts banging the "ban guns" or "common sense" restriction talk on TV or in the halls of goverment, my collection dramatically goes UP in value!!!

My gun collection has dramatically out preformed the DOW, NASDAQ, and the S&P 500 by ANY measure!

I have rifles that where purchased for $50, and are now worth about $900!!

Talk about a sound investment!!!

So in a way, I am making a KILLING!!! "bad pun"...

[elocs]

20. Their primary purpose is destruction: of a human, an animal, a target.

Some people collect them without firing, but, no matter how you spin it, the primary purpose of a gun is to destroy something.

[spin]

23. Destroying the center of a paper target is not the same as killing. (n/t) .

[elocs]

28. Never said it was, but it is destruction. Guns, when used, are used to destroy something. n/t

[spin]

33. The comment that started this discussion was " Their Sole Purpose Is To Kill" ...

there's a big difference between your statement and that one.

Your comment is true.

[petronius]

111. By that logic, fireplaces are solely used to destroy something too (nt)

[mmerong4u]

84. But the primary pupose of gun is not destorying the center of a paper target.

Eloc said that a gun's "primary purpose is destruction: of a human, an animal, a target."
and it is true.
People certainly do not buy guns in order to make holes on a paper target.
Whether people use guns only for the purpose of self-defence or not, when they do, the use of gun will injure or even kill someone.
I do not disagree with the idea of owning guns however, and I just think that people should know that the primary purpose of gun is to destruct.
Also, I do not believe that people should not be able to possess firearms. I think it should be hard for them to obtain guns, so that people who do not deserve guns can get a hold of them.

[rl6214]

29. I wouldn't call punching a hole in the center of a target, destruction

As I stated up-thread, I shoot targets, balloons, pumpkins, eggs, golf balls, clay pigeons and many other things and I wouldn't say many of them are destroyed.

[elocs]

31. Right, holes are shot into them to make them more whole, more constructed.

:rofl:

[rl6214]

32. No holes in my steel targets, the bullets just bounce off

I shoot old pumpkins that end up a pile of pulp and the rabbits in the area eat them.
I've got one of these too:
:rofl:

[GreenStormCloud]

26. Mine have killed, lots.

Over the past 50+ years mine have killed: rabbits, squirrels, deer, dove, quail, racoons, rats, and other animals. But no people.

[right2bfree]

37. Fear of guns? No fear of nutters with guns? Yes. Guns are for killing, period.

[spin]

45. Unfortuantely that is a simplistic view that is false.

If guns were designed only for killing then why does the Olympic completions include shooting events?

Shooting at the Summer Olympics

Shooting sports have been contested at every Summer Olympic Games since the birth of the modern Olympic movement at the 1896 Summer Olympics except at the 1904 & 1928 editions.

Men's

Men's shooting was one of the nine events at the first modern Olympic Games in Athens, in 1896. In the Paris Games in 1900, live pigeons were used as moving targets. After the 1900 games, the pigeons were replaced with clay targets. In 1907, the International Shooting Sport Federation came into existence bought some standardizations in the sport.

When shooting was reintroduced in 1932, it consisted of only two events. From this, the number of events have increased steadily until reaching the 2000-2004 maximum of seventeen events. The 2008 games had only fifteen. Events marked as "Men's" were actually open events before the inclusion of separate women's events in that discipline. Two women won medals in such mixed events: Margaret Murdock, silver in 50 m Rifle Three positions (1976) and Zhan Shan, gold in Skeet (1992).


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

[Atypical Liberal]

40. So what?

Their Sole Purpose Is To Kill

So what? If I shoot and kill someone who would otherwise beat me to death, didn't good overcome bad?

[cleanhippie]

95. Is ignorance bliss?

Judging by your post, I would say you are a very blissful person.

[ileus]

110. Wrong....guns are made for shooting and collecting.

[Logical]

10. I diasgree about the word "irrational".....

Guns are scary. They are designed to kill things. Destroy things. Accidents can be easily fatal. With no exposure to them there is no reason not to fear them. And most people never need to be exposed to them unless they hunt, CCW, etc. And don't want to be exposed to them.

I know guys who work with 100,000 volt power lines. I would be scared of them. I don't think that is irrational.

CCW is the perfect solution where people do not need to see them. Makes both sides happy. I am not a fan of Open Carry but have done it at times on a farm.

[spin]

17. We differ in that I don't view firearms as "scary" ...

Firearms are inanimate objects that require knowledge, care and responsibility when handling. The same applies to 100,000 volt power lines.

I have had no training or experience in handling 100,000 volt power lines so I just stay away from them. At one time I worked on radio transmitters so I am familiar with working near high voltage. You learn to follow basic safety procedures and if you follow them carefully, you will be O.K. The same applies to firearms. If you are unfamiliar with them and you may have to handle them, it's a damn good idea to take a firearms safety course. If you are familiar with firearms, it's wise not to let your experience allow you to overlook the basic safety rules. Familiarity can breed contempt.

I agree that legal CCW is a good solution if you wish to carry a firearm in public and not disturb people.

[Logical]

34. Of course you don't because you like guns. Guns do scare people and if we stop...

making fun of people who are scared I think it makes us look better.

[spin]

49. I don't wish to make fun of those who have a phobia about firearms ...

in many cases they have personal reasons for their fears such as a tragedy in their past.

I had a neighbor who mentioned she had an intense dislike of firearms. When I asked why she replied, "My bother committed suicide and I had to clean his brains off his bedroom wall." Technically, she might not have had a fear of firearms but simply an intense dislike.

I have also talked to people who have had friends or relatives killed by armed criminals. I can understand how seeing someone shot down in the street can cause fear, but in reality it would make more sense to fear criminals rather than firearms. A co-worker of mine was shot in the leg with a 9mm by a man who was attempting to rob him. The bullet damaged the femoral artery and he almost bled out before the EMTs arrived. After his recovery he questioned me about the procedure to obtain a concealed weapons permit. He didn't FEAR handguns but realistically appraised the incident and decided to have a better method of self defense than his physical ability if he ever found himself in a similar situation. He was an engineer and approached problems with an attitude that utilized logic and commonsense rather than emotion. I did point out to him that it might have been better just to pass over his money if he were caught totally off guard again and only to use a weapon if he were sure that his attacker intended to harm him. He agreed.

But many who oppose firearms have no such personal experiences and very little knowledge of firearms except for what they see on the news and TV and the movies. They tend to believe propaganda pushed by the organizations that oppose firearm ownership such as "the only purpose of a handgun is to kill."

Often such people don't seem to realize that firearms can be used for good as well as evil. My life experiences include a mother who stopped a rapist intent on attacking her while she was walking home from work. She fired two shots over his head from a S&W Lady Smith .22 caliber revolver and he ran (this incident occurred in the 1920s). My daughter stopped an intruder who was breaking into our Tampa home by forcing the sliding glass door open. She pointed a large caliber S&W revolver at him and he also ran. I might not exist or I might not have two grandsons today if my mother and daughter had not had access to firearms. Obviously my background will cause me to favor firearm ownership.

At one time I had an irrational fear or phobia of bees, wasps and other stinging insects. I had never been stung and felt that I might have a reaction. I studied the subject and learned that such a reaction was highly unlikely. Eventually I was stung by both bees and wasps and had no major problems. My daughter, however, IS high allergic to a bee sting.

In the OP, I did say:

I found the article to be a fascinating look into the mind of a person who actually fears firearms almost as though they were animate objects capable of killing on their own. In reality this writer may have good reason to fear the misuse of firearms as she may have personally experienced a tragedy caused by a person with a gun. In such cases the fear is understandable.

So I agree that making fun of those who have a gun phobia is counterproductive. Those who make fun of gun owners by saying that they suffer from irrational fear also contribute little to the discussion.

I personally feel that those who have a phobia about firearms need to face it and overcome it through education. They may still dislike firearms and favor strong regulation for gun ownership, but they will at least be able to argue for their position in an intelligent and well thought out manner.

[Logical]

62. I did not think you did, I was talking about in general. But that was a great post! Also.....

I also hate people calling us gun-nuts or saying we are scared.

Just as bad.

[spin]

105. People who say we carry because of fear are using the psychological defense mechanism ...

known as projection. They unconsciously deny their own irrational fear and they convince themselves that those who carry firearms suffer from fear instead. In a way its sad.

[rl6214]

30. I don't find too many things 'scary'.

My grandmother inlaw (is there such a thing) was afraid of escalators. She would walk up to one but refuse to get on, we would have to find her an elevator. I would call that an irrational fear. My mother didn't get her drivers license until she was 35 or so because she was afraid to learn. I know people that are afraid of water for no reason. I would call that an irrational fear. To see a gun, whether on a hip in a holster or in a case is, in my opinion and irrational fear. It's not doing anything, just sitting there.

[Logical]

35. Well, I disagree. I know my wifes will not shoot them and hates them.

[rl6214]

36. And that is her/their right.

I am assuming you have only one wife but I am covering my bases just to make sure.

My wife on the other hand goes shooting with us guys. Different strokes for different folks.

[Logical]

46. Glad your wife feels comfortable with them! n-t

[oneshooter]

48. My Loving Wife not only asked me to build her a AR-15...

but helped me to build it for her! She has a CHL and "stole" my 1954 Colt LW Commander for her carry gun!

I do dearly love my Loving Wife!

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Logical]

59. Nice! n-t

[right2bfree]

41. Just sitting there waiting for a child to pick it up and play with it? Yeah, right!! nt

[rl6214]

44. That child is going to take it off my hip

out of my holster or out of my locked case? That's be a trick seeing that happen.

[GKirk]

11. The most over the top irrational fear

I ever heard of I might have heard on this forum many years ago.

A person posted that his mother in law wouldn't sleep in his guest room because
he had a gun safe in that room.

I could just imagine her there laying in bed with one eye open, making sure none of those evil guns snuck out and got her in the middle of the night.

[Hangingon]

14. Where does the TimesLive originate?

I found a Johanesburg address. A commenter syays the author is from New Zealand. Her views are amazingly confused.

[spin]

19. The writer is a South African journalist based in NYC.

New York State of Mind
Sep 15, 2010 8:23 AM | By Lihle Z Mtshali

Lihle Z Mtshali is a South African journalist and former business editor based in the United States. New York State of Mind is about life in New York through a Zulu woman's eyes. It is also about Lihle's continuous struggle to raise a South African child with strong African values in the middle of a concrete jungle.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/article659899.ece#

[Glassunion]

18. I'm not sold 100% on the "irrational" part.

It was stated by another poster that it is hardly "irrational" to fear something that is by design quite deadly. I tend to agree.

I fear them to the point of greatly respecting what a firearm can do, but I have a full understanding of them. With that understanding I would not fear one just sitting on a table, but I would make damn sure it was not pointed at anyone while sitting there. I treat them with a due level of respect.

I think it is our level of understanding that determines our level of fear or respect that we give to firearms or anything for that matter.

Phobia is a whole different ball of wax. From reading this author, I would say that they are borderline phobic of firearms, which leans towards unhealthy.

I have the same problem with dentists. My dentist is there to help me. Yet for some stupid reason I reach a level of fear that can paralyze me. I know nothing bad is going to happen, I know that he will not hurt me. Yet my mind plays the "make shit up game" whenever it is time to go. This is unhealthy. BTW... I have an appointment tomorrow... I'm freaking out a bit.

[spin]

21. I really feel you have a healthy respect for firearms, not a fear ...

the writer in this article has an irrational fear.

She says,

"Don't even mention those cash-in-transit guys standing in front of their armoured trucks with machine-guns. If they so much as looked in my direction, I wanted to pee in my pants. "

To me that is an irrational fear.

[Glassunion]

22. That's why I stated her fear leans towrds phobia. Quite unhealthy.

[spin]

24. You do make a good point . Phobia is a better term. (n/t)

[Glassunion]

25. Yup... Same as me and dentists.

Unhealthy.

Here is the funny shit. I pay for the best dental coverage my company offers, yet I never take advantage of it.

[Atypical Liberal]

39. "nobody would be getting shot."

I know that gun freaks say guns don't kill people, people kill people, but my thing is that if there were no guns, nobody would be getting shot.

She's right. If there were no guns, then nobody would be getting shot.

Instead, every time someone was assaulted they would be at the mercy of anyone stronger than they were. They could run away, if they were faster than their attacker, they could submit, if they were physically able to endure the submission, or they could fight, if they were stronger than their attacker.

A world with no guns means that in any act of violence the weaker would always be at the mercy of the stronger.

But it's worse than that. We all know that firearms are not going away. Governments, corporations, and other who wield massive wealth and power will always make sure they have firearms to protect their interests.

So the weak and poor will be at the mercy of the strong.

Being anti-firearm is about as anti-progressive as you can get.

[Hoyt]

53. I respect her "fear" more than those who fear walking out of the house without their gun.

And, as far as the "rich" getting permits, let's make that impossible rather than opening gun carrying to anyone who can pass an easy background check.

[oneshooter]

55. Describe for us a " easy background check". n/t

[Hoyt]

58. Are you kidding? Have you read some of the rationalizations from carriers here? If they passed. . .

BG checks ain't tough enough.

[oneshooter]

60. The Texas background check is acceptable to the BATFE, so much so

that there is no need to call in. Just put my CHL license number on the 4473 form. It's the same in several other states.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[spin]

56. Lets just have "shall issue" concealed carry all over this nation ...

and stop treating some citizens as second class.

You can make a decision on whether you wish to carry or not and if you can meet the requirements, it wouldn't matter if you were wealthy, poor or well connected or famous as opposed to just being an average honest citizen. You meet the qualifications, you get the license.

"Shall issue" concealed carry has proven to be a very successful program in all the states that passed it. Can you list even one who decided to revoke the law?

As far as being afraid to leave my house without a firearm, all I can say is that you have a good imagination. On my way out the door I grab my snub nosed S&W Model 642 .38 revolver and its holster and drop both into my pants pocket. It's a habit and I really don't think much about it. The weapon is extremely light and no problem to carry and it does give me a better chance to survive a situation in which I am attacked by someone who intends to harm or kill me. If I was truly afraid I would carry one of my 1911 style .45 autos.

Of course, I realize that the chances of an attack happening are extremely slim but I have personally known people who have faced muggers. In thrre cases the fact that the person I knew was carrying concealed stopped a nasty situation from occurring. In one situation an unarmed co-worker attempted to fight a mugger armed with a gun and was shot in the leg. The bullet damaged the femoral artery and he almost bled out before the EMTs arrived. (Fortunately they happened to only be a few blocks away.) This individual was a young guy in excellent physical condition and he fought the mugger because he was with a girl who he felt might be accosted. After the incident he asked me about how to get a carry permit as he never wanted to be unarmed in a similar situation. He wasn't afraid of being attacked, he just wanted to be better prepared.

I carry because I am very familiar with handguns and have forty years experience shooting them. I am almost 65 with a hip that needs replaced and I realize that a street predator might view me as I limp down the street as easy prey. I know that I am at a significant disadvantage if I am attacked by a younger person in far better physical condition than I am, especially if he is armed. I realize my limitations and have never been a fool.

I don't want to be caught in a situation facing an attacker and saying to myself, "You damn fool, you left your best means of self defense behind." Hopefully I will never have to use my weapon and chances are I won't. But if I do get caught off guard and I am attacked by someone who wishes to harm me, I want to make damn sure that even if I lose the battle, the attacker leaves with a couple of bullets in him. That's a better way of facing a predator than dropping to my knees and begging him to not harm me while he laughs.

[Hoyt]

57. So, when a younger person walks toward you, does adrenaline fuel your fear?

With that vivid a description of that which you fear, surely you tense up a bit. Now, if I were a young person walking down the street, I gotta carry too just in case some old guy (we are about the same age)tenses up and misinterprets things.

I don't want to be reading about some young person who happened to walk toward you when you were having one of those moments seniors have.

I started this off in jest, but I'm serious the more I think about it.

[rl6214]

63. WOW

Is english not your first language or do you just have a comprehension problem?

"does adrenaline fuel your fear"

"With that vivid a description of that which you fear"

After he carefully explained to you how he does NOT carry out of fear, you pull this out of your ass.

[Hoyt]

65. Then he goes on to describe what he fears and why he carries. Read it yourself.

He's afraid a young guy might rob him or attack him. Well, what the heck is he going to do, tense up every time some young guy approaches. If he waits until some guy has a gun at his head -- so that he knows for sure they were walking toward him with bad intentions -- it's too late for him to draw his weapon.

You need to learn to think. That's another thing that attribute to include in pre-purchase and pre-licensure checks.

[rl6214]

70. Just read it again, you are wrong

Nowhere does it say he fears anything. In fact he specifically says he does none of it out of fear. He says he realizes his limitations but does not fear a younger man. I'm not going to repost the entire thing for you, read it again yourself and if you can find where he says he fears anything, post it. Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, it about matches your writing skills from what I've seen.

[Hoyt]

87. No, he specifically describes what he is afraid of in clear terms.

If you prefer, we can substitute "he is concerned about" if the word "fear" is difficult to swallow.

[rl6214]

88. I was going to say now you are just making stuff up BUT

You've been making stuff up all along. Quote for me anywhere, where he has said he was in fear or concerned about anything. You can't do it. Be honest for once.

[spin]

75. Of course not, why would it?

I practice something called "situational awareness". That basically means that I am aware of my environment and I don't have a cell phone glued to my ear. If anyone is approaching me I look at them and make eye contact in a polite manner. If there is truly something suspicious about the person, my alert level might increase. That's extremely rare, in fact I can't remember the last time it happened but it was years ago.

Most people are lost in their thoughts or are talking on the ubiquitous cell phone. Watching people has become somewhat of a game for me that I enjoy. People are very interesting. It's rare that I ever notice another alert person and often I suspect that they are playing the same game that I am.

Merely being alert and acting confident can stop most muggings. Muggers don't want to attack an individual unless they can catch him by surprise.

Seriously, you have some major misunderstandings about people who legally carry and their motives. Stop and think for a moment. If people who carry were as afraid as you suggest, we would have far more incidents in which some innocent person was shot down by some frightened individual for no reason.

Relax, don't let your imagination overwhelm your reasoning ability. First people don't carry in public because of irrational fear nor do they shoot at the drop of a hat.

edited to add:

I've been practicing situational awareness for at least twenty five years which is before I ever applied for a concealed weapons permit. I learned the technique while taking a jujutsu class. The instructor always told us how important it is to avoid a fight unless absolutely necessary and he always emphasized how important being alert to your environment is.

[rl6214]

61. How do you prove this statement:

"those who fear walking out of the house without their gun"

How do you prove that those who walk out of their house with a gun do it out of fear?

[LibertyFox]

64. Only germophobes need health insurance.

I'm not sick. I never get sick.

I'm never going to need health insurance, and people who get it have some kind of irrational fear of germs.

Same with life insurance.

What.. are you really that scared of death?

[Hoyt]

67. Wow, is that why you purchase life insurance? Most people do it "insure" family . . . . .

doesn't starve if a "breadwinner" dies (also, they will have a home, college education if desired, health insurance, etc.).

[rl6214]

72. What are you talking about?

[Hoyt]

66. Well if it is "love" of cold steel, that's sad too. If it to "intimidate people," that's worse.

What do you think it is?

The Constitution does not require you to pack in public. So what's the reason for doing so for the 3% of society that chooses to carry in public places? Or if you think the list is really long, just give me the top 5 reasons for carrying a gun into a nursery school, a family restaurant, a crowded public park, a church, a bar, and the like.

[MicaelS]

68. One good reason is as a gesture of defiance ...

Toward people with attitudes like yours.

[Hoyt]

76. Yea, "gesture of defiance" is what we need in public.

That's not a good reason to carry.

[PavePusher]

79. You're right. Citizens advocating for Civil Rights should never commit "gestures of defiance".

Busses, lunch counters, picket lines, marches, speeches, voting, the whole lot. AmIright?

[Hoyt]

85. Sorry, your penchant for guns is not the same as denying someone a job, or place at the counter.

[PavePusher]

91. All Civil Rights are of equal weight.

And you have a lot of nerve, since you have advocated shutting carriers out of both public and private venues.

Pound sand.

[Hoyt]

94. Who says they are equal? Your right to carry guns in public can -- and should -- be restricted.

An employer should have the right to tell a gun toter to "go pound sand" as you put it. But, an employer shouldn't have the right to use ethnicity in any employment decision.

[PavePusher]

97. Irrelevent dodge.

Perhaps you can list Civil Rights in rank-order of importance?

[Glassunion]

98. .

Civil Rights in order of importance...
1. Feelings
2. Perception
3. Hyperbole
4. Fear
5. Anger
6. Hatred
7. Shame
8. Hysteria
9. Despair
10. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fox news can run the full gambit in about 48 seconds.

[rl6214]

73. You didn't answer my question.

How do you prove it's done out of fear?

[Hoyt]

77. So far, you have not offered one alternative.

[rl6214]

81. I don't have to offer you an alternative

YOU made the statement, back it up.

[RSillsbee]

100. Starter reason number 1

Because I can

But pissing people like you off is a close second

[Glassunion]

106. This 3% you keep throwing around may not be so accurate.

I'll use my state as an example.

PA Total Population estimate: 12,604,767
Total Population of individuals of age to apply for a permit(21 or older): 8,842,276

Total number of individuals with a PA criminal record making them ineligible for a permit or a firearm: 2,402,013
Total number of individuals with a PA mental health record making them ineligible for a permit or a firearm: 542,725(some of these numbers may overlap with the criminal histories so I will not include them.)
Total number of wanted persons in PA: 121,112(some of these numbers may overlap with the criminal histories so I will not include them.)
Total number of Federal records of ineligibility: about 56 million(not included).

So you are basically left with 6,440,263 individuals over the age of 21 who are free from a criminal or mental history.

Our state police does not have any reports on the active number of licenses, however they do have reports that show how many new ones were issued in any given year. Each license is valid for 5 years. 10.8% of our eligible citizens have been issued a new license to carry a firearm in public in the past 5 years. To that you would have to add renewals, but that number is unavailable so I will not speculate on it. It would be safe to say that in PA, there are about 1 in 10 adults who have a license to carry in public.

[Common Sense Party]

83. Do you wear a seat belt? Do you "fear" driving without a seat belt fastened?

[jpak]

69. No - some people have a fear of open carry Teabaggin' GOP morans that use guns to intimidate

yup

[PavePusher]

71. I mostly O.C., and I think I'm fairly Liberal.

YMMV....

[rl6214]

74. Ah, there he is, the shtickmeister

Bringing his own brand of illogic to the debate.
:rofl:

[Hoyt]

78. +1. Those few "liberals" that sport weapons merely enable the ones you describe.

[PavePusher]

80. "Enable" Civil Rights?

Good. And I don't care who it's for.

[jpak]

82. The SCOTUS has pronounced that the Holy 2A has limitations and is not absolute

"Civil Rights" do not allow political intimidation

yup

[one-eyed fat man]

104. Willing "victims"

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." -- Eleanor Roosevelt

[Hoyt]

86. Not a civil right to carry a gun to promote TBag philosophies. Guns ain't like freedom of speech

[rl6214]

89. "Guns ain't like freedom of speech"

A writer!
:rofl:

[Abq_Sarah]

92. And

A constitutional scholar, no doubt.

[oneshooter]

96. No, probably not a scholar of any type. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

107. A lot of liberals carry, concealed and openly.

I teach firearms classes to them about once a month now that the weather is better. To a person they are liberal, most are GLBT.

[WatsonT]

103. Weird, this fear predates the teaparty movement

[WatsonT]

101. Is it fair to label this irrational fear a mental disorder?

I think at some point yes, if you think the guns are going to come grab you in your sleep.

But what treatment is there for such poor souls?