the way things are going,,,is it time to buy personal firearms?

[MnFats]

Personally I don't think so.
But I had lunch with an old friend I hadn't seen in years the other day and she has acquired three handguns and a permit to carry a concealed weapon. Claims she did it for personal protection -- has an abusive ex and so on - but she is convinced all of us on the left are nuts if we don't begin acquiring guns and the knowledge to use them....

[NNN0LHI]

1. No n/t

[file83]

7. Does "n/t" mean "nice topic" or "nice try"? Don't know, so I'm asking.

[Katherine Brengle]

9. "n/t" = no text in body of response (makes it easier so you don't bother

opening an empty box--just saves time--courtesy and all. :)

[file83]

10. LOL, thanks. I've always wondered. n/t. ;-P

[soothsayer]

13. some put n/t down in the message body. kinda' defeats the purpose

n/t

[madeline_con]

2. I think people who are afraid of firearms should

stay far away from them, to prevent personal injury.

As for the rest of us, long live freedom!

[seriousstan]

3. You should have begun years ago to get the cash savings.

Your loss, my gain.

[converted_democrat]

16. What are you talking about??n/t

[Mythsaje]

4. I think allowing the right to arm itself

without reciprocating is a BIG mistake of the left.

Personally.

[MatrixEscape]

5. I think ...

The original intent of citizens having firearms, (and it is historically proven) was to be able to repel a tyrannical government-at-large.

Well, we already have one. We have even, as a whole, bought and payed for it. It has now far surpassed and outstripped our capacity to counteract and deal with it in anything than a paltry, disruptive, futile, guerrilla attempt. These are not the old days that your Forefathers coped with in any way, shape, or form.

We have comfortably funded, by our hard-earned dollars, the very machine that now rises up to turn against everything we believe and asks us to accept their idea of the bottom-line for the belief systems that we embraced and they told us were right via our acculturation into the common aspects of our mental survival. We were given the distilled comforts of religion, philosophy, and even science, as a means to placate our disassociation from the very powerful, supra-intelligent, primordial bio-machine and multi-million-year-old bio-computer that is, in all actuality, the brain that we all possess. Have you ever stopped to think about how much that bio-system does on its very own, divorced from your brain-washed, abstract genuflections to the systems that you were born into? Can you beat your heart, adjust your ductless glands, clot your wounds, take total control of your breathing? And yet, you have been convinced to de-emphasize that complex and seemingly intelligent Gestalt for the religions and politics that have stood, throughout time, to replace it. Did you really have much of a choice about that as a child, entering into the established norms?

Did anybody ask you what you thought at that point? Did you accept it as best as you could in order to avoid some form of punishment? Did your teenage rebellion only prove to be a well-established, and accounted for aspect of your re-entry into the totality of the prescribed system that enveloped you, as you were, in the first place? Was critical thinking the first tool at your disposal as your organism made its first adaptations in order to survive within that system?

I don't want to challenge or make fun of, or even diminish what you are or believe in. We are all subject to the problem of an encompassing paradigm that we emerge into. I just want to ask you if you are bold and brave enough for a litmus test where you question even the questions and ask yourself if your idea of being an open-minded, free thinker, is not a product of the machine you oppose, in a sense.

Are we open enough to open the Pandora's Box that we need yet? It is going to be about reconsidering our own fears and what we protect in direct relation to those who control and govern us and have NO RESPECT OR CONCERN whatsoever for those important issues.

Is a place like DU ready for that, or should we respond, until our demise, like Pavlov's dogs to what stimuli we are thrown from day to day by the media that seems to own our territory and debates?

[clitzpah queen]

14. I generally have to read your posts several times. You're deep.

I often feel there should be a study group offshoot of these boards sometimes...Have any favorite texts of late to recommend?

[jody]

6. Your old friend knows that SCOTUS has ruled self-defense is a personal

problem unless she is in custody.

What tools she chooses to defend herself is a personal choice but handguns are the choice of law enforcement officers and most people who decide to defend them self against criminals.

If someone decides to rely upon others or 911 for help, that's their choice but don't complain if help doesn't arrive in time to prevent injury.

On edit add: That's why the Democratic Party Platform says "We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms".

[Katherine Brengle]

11. I support the 2nd amendment, BUT I don't think that we have the right

to any weapon we choose. Automatic, semi-automatic, and assault weapons are not necessary. Other forms of firearm that are less "dangerous" per se are more negotiable in my opinion. (My husband is a police officer and a Marine, so he has a police issue handgun that he has to keep in the house, and so far so good lol.)

I wouldn't hesitate to carry a badass knife in a bad neighborhood though--you are your own last line of defense.

[benEzra]

15. Thoughts...

Automatic weapons are pretty much restricted to military and law enforcement only by Federal law. A civilian may own one if she/he passes what amounts to a Secret-level government security clearance (6 to 8 MONTH background check, including interviews with your neighbors, and your local chief law enforcement officer has to sign off on your application), if the civilian in question has $15,000 to $75,000 to spend on one. Sound-suppressed firearms, short-barreled rifles and shotguns, smoothbore handguns, firearms over .50 caliber (except shotguns and some hunting weapons), disguised firearms, etc. etc. etc. are similarly restricted.

Your husband's handgun is very likely a semiautomatic. And full-size pistols like those police use were the guns most affected by the 1994 "assault weapon" bait-and-switch.

Statistically, the most dangerous handguns as far as criminal violence goes are .38/.357 caliber revolvers, which account for the most murders and police officer deaths. The #1 long gun used in crime is the lethal 12-gauge shotgun, which can shoot as many 9mm projectiles with one pull of the trigger as a long burst from a submachinegun.

Among the least dangerous are "assault weapons"...rifles of all types account for only a small percentage of homicides. Which is why the party needs to can that particular bait-and-switch and move on to more important things...

[jody]

19. OK, you choose a "badass knife" but please don't deny other law-abiding

citizens their right to use other tools such as revolvers or pistols for self-defense. That's why the Democratic Party Platform says "We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms".

[Katherine Brengle]

8. I don't think this revolution will be by force of arms...

but I can understand how people could begin to feel a need, what with the beginnings of a quick and decisive slide into a fascist-totalitarian state brewing.

[insanity]

12. Hell yes

As Thomas Paine said, "The true patriot protects his country from its government." Or as he also said, "If there be trouble, let it be in my time, so my children may know peace."

[KyuzoGator]

17. Already got mine.

I think nothing scares neocon idiots more than armed liberals.

[cyclezealot]

18. Violence, Nut cases, crime.

Yeah. ONe probably needs hand guns. I despise them. Will never have one. Never. So, we now live in Pyreenees Orientals department, south of France. How sweet it is to go out at night on a walk and not think twice. Maybe once a week, the Paper, "The Independent " from Perpignan, population 300,000 makes a reference to some petty crime. NO CRIME report. Can you believe it.!