Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

[Slap Shot]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

I agree they are more problematic, but again, that goes back to the owners/users. It's my belief that it's the American mentality. That's the problem. We're too quick to pull a gun to settle a difference or slight. Do the loopholes/etc help contribute to that? Yes. I am not stubborn enough to deny that (and I'm rather stubborn, as most of you can attest to ).

Imagine someone with an agenda driving a service vehicle of some sort at the MN State Fair down the middle of the road. Imagine if s/he decided to floor it? Nice Part 2. Scary thought, but it can happen.....

What's stopped them? Of course it can happen - and the fact guns are available doesn't mean they couldn't still choose the Nice method to do their deed but yet that's not the ahem vehicle of choice.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

What's stopped them? Of course it can happen - and the fact guns are available doesn't mean they couldn't still choose the Nice method to do their deed but yet that's not the ahem vehicle of choice.

We, as a society (speaking to the American mindset), are obsessed with guns. Simple as that.

 

[joecct]

We, as a society (speaking to the American mindset), are obsessed with guns. Simple as that.

Because we used guns to conquer this continent. It wasn't lawyers, it was naked violence. The lawyers came later.

That's who we are. Underneath our sophisticated exterior is a violent beast.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Because we used guns to conquer this continent. It wasn't lawyers, it was naked violence. The lawyers came later.

That's who we are. Underneath our sophisticated exterior is a violent beast.

Agreed. Might makes right. In some cases, that is the correct approach. In MOST cases, that is NOT the right approach.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

He, on the other hand, has steadfastly stuck by his stance that guns and gun owners are evil.

Obviously, you don't understand why those supporting gun control are doing so.

I have a hard time respecting your position on this, 5mn, simply because you openly seem to treat anyone who applies to buy a gun, or owns guns, as a potential extremist.

We are all similarly behind increased gun control or closing their loopholes. The sticking point seems to carry laws; so let's discuss that.

When looking at gun carriage...there's the gun carrier and then there are all the people (bystanders) in their vicinity on the street or in the mall. You could focus your brain strictly on all the benefits that the carrier gets...but what about the 95% of the people in a busy vicinity that aren't carrying a gun? If math holds, that's 19 of 20 people that have rights also.

Now I'm not claiming that all carriers are bad (if that was the case we would need to find a way to ban gun purchases)...but we also know that not all carriers are good guys either. So from a bystanders standpoint, how do I know which you are? I don't. So I'm forced to deal with somebody with a gun that may be good or may be bad. A good guy with a gun is likely irrelevant but a bad guy puts your life in serious danger.And even if the gun holder is a good guy, there are accidents and misunderstandings that add to the danger that negate the potential of any potential positive vigilantism. Mistakes happen, see all the gun accidents. So the net gain/loss of bystanders in the presence of a gun is a big net loss.

Again, gun carriers force that scenario on others without their choice or knowledge in the case of conceal (with the only government safe guard being that the carrier will go to jail if you as a bystander get killed in the process).

As I said, I favor more control, but I in no way favor a total ban. I know for a fact that you will have a hard time legislating "carry" rules, nor do I think they will help much. Just to be hypothetical, would I be violating your "carry" laws if I'm carrying an unloaded gun from my deer blind, across a major US highway (US 31, FWIW), to my residence?

Frankly, the problem is in major US metro areas. But there has to be uniform laws somehow. If it got us to a point of negotiation, we could move to a county level approach (7 county twin cities area in the case of MN). The complaints have been...well, how would you know what the laws are in the county? I would answer if you can't be bothered to know such things you don't deserve to be carrying anyways. One always much know local laws.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Without transportation, we'd be India.

Sorry dx but this is the right answer.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Without the firearm we'd still be speaking kings English.

Which is why it was in the Constitution in the 18th century. So while ancient history is at best an interesting philosophical question, it holds little relevance today. Guns (in stark contrast to cars) have about zero impact on the US functioning economy and American livelihoods.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

I really have no problem with more requirements for conceal carry permit holders. I was amazed to hear that minnesotans don't need to take anything close to a hunter's safety course in order to get a conceal carry permit. The thought though that concealed carry should be outlawed completely is just plain silly. We already ban guns from tons of places, which I also find silly.

I will agree that calling out the gun violence in Chicago/DC strickly compared to their gun laws is tenuous at best because there are easier places to get guns in such near proximity. I do agree that there probably needs to be more continuity between areas, which probably means more similarity throughout the country. That is a hard pill to swallow for most gun owners.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

This is pretty much how I feel. I've offered plenty of proposals that 5mm has either forgotten or ignored. They move the needle and are generally accepted by gun owners.

He, on the other hand, has steadfastly stuck by his stance that guns and gun owners are evil.

Agreed. He is one of the main reasons I don't even enter the conversation anymore. No point in discussing anything with someone like that.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

We conquered the continent with microbes. The Indians didn't have immunity against our diseases.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

I really have no problem with more requirements for conceal carry permit holders. I was amazed to hear that minnesotans don't need to take anything close to a hunter's safety course in order to get a conceal carry permit. The thought though that concealed carry should be outlawed completely is just plain silly. We already ban guns from tons of places, which I also find silly.

I will agree that calling out the gun violence in Chicago/DC strickly compared to their gun laws is tenuous at best because there are easier places to get guns in such near proximity. I do agree that there probably needs to be more continuity between areas, which probably means more similarity throughout the country. That is a hard pill to swallow for most gun owners.

And the places that "ban guns" doesn't mean you can't have one there, until you're "caught," in general. They can ask you to leave, and if you don't, THEN it's a problem.

Safety courses (common sense) SHOULD be required. Running at the mouth here, but half the time incidents are happening because of the owner's stupidity (gun was on counter, dresser, not in safe, in closet, etc).

 

[joecct]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Watch and if there's a dry eye.....

https://youtu.be/Mp03eKouOiY

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Which is why it was in the Constitution in the 18th century. So while ancient history is at best an interesting philosophical question, it holds little relevance today. Guns (in stark contrast to cars) have about zero impact on the US functioning economy and American livelihoods.

Incorrect. The second amendment is the only thing that is preventing a complete police state. It is what keeps foreign enemies from attacking us, as there could be a gun behind every blade of grass, as the Japanese put it in World War II. Of course, if you want some nanny telling you how to live your life...

 

[johnnypohlfan]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

I don't think much...

You could/should have just stopped there.

 

[aparch]

Without the firearm we'd still be speaking kings English.

Me thinks doth protestith too much...

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Incorrect. The second amendment is the only thing that is preventing a complete police state. It is what keeps foreign enemies from attacking us, as there could be a gun behind every blade of grass, as the Japanese put it in World War II. Of course, if you want some nanny telling you how to live your life...

We haven't needed guns 'to defend ourselves' from the government for almost 250 years...unless you would have fought for the confederacy. Populism is and has always been much more powerful...which counteracts any tendencies of going against the will of the people. Guns are in the Constitution. Hunt if you really want. But think of others and minimize the risk to other Americans.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

We haven't needed guns 'to defend ourselves' from the government for almost 250 years...unless you would have fought for the confederacy. Populism is and has always been much more powerful...which counteracts any tendencies of going against the will of the people. Guns are in the Constitution. Hunt if you really want. But think of others and minimize the risk to other Americans.

With the way the government is overreaching these days, along with buying billions of rounds of ammunition despite "not needing it", we need to be able to defend ourselves, lest we become slaves. Julius Caesar is soon to bring down the republic.

 

[Jimjamesak]

With the way the government is overreaching these days, along with buying billions of rounds of ammunition despite "not needing it", we need to be able to defend ourselves, lest we become slaves. Julius Caesar is soon to bring down the republic.

Oh Flaggy, you're adorable.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

The ubiquity of guns has done much to turn our police forces into militarized occupation forces. Cops justify battering down doors and acting like special forces because everybody has guns. The constant ratcheting up of violence employed during arrests and searches derives from the normalization of paramilitary tactics in the context of a world where American cities and towns have as many guns as Baghdad battlefields.

The first step towards shrinking the arsenals of police is shrinking the arsenals of civilians.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Cops 3: Shoot low boys -- they're ridin' Shetland ponies!

Oh Flaggy, you're adorable.

Laugh all you want, make whatever equine reference you want... The fact of the matter is that the Constitution was written by people who overthrew a government. They understood that at some point, even this country was vulnerable to overreach and may need to be overthrown. They afforded us the tools to be able to do so. By shutting them down, you commit us to tyranny.