HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Simple question. Is there...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 08:56 AM

 

Simple question. Is there such a thing as a "responsible gun owner"?

We all know about the gun nuts out there, but are there responsible gun owners who know that guns are not toys?

71 replies, 3082 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 71 replies Author Time Post
Reply Simple question. Is there such a thing as a "responsible gun owner"? (Original post)
xoom Dec 2012 OP
MrDiaz Dec 2012 #1
Bucky Dec 2012 #2
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #38
MrDiaz Dec 2012 #39
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #40
MrDiaz Dec 2012 #42
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #50
ComplimentarySwine Dec 2012 #57
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #66
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #67
ComplimentarySwine Dec 2012 #55
Savannahmann Dec 2012 #56
CBGLuthier Dec 2012 #3
MrDiaz Dec 2012 #9
riverbendviewgal Dec 2012 #4
NeedleCast Dec 2012 #5
Brickbat Dec 2012 #6
Ganja Ninja Dec 2012 #7
Coyote_Tan Dec 2012 #8
earthside Dec 2012 #10
justanidea Dec 2012 #11
Zoeisright Dec 2012 #12
tk9799 Dec 2012 #18
cali Dec 2012 #21
treestar Dec 2012 #13
hack89 Dec 2012 #14
krawhitham Dec 2012 #17
ohheckyeah Dec 2012 #54
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #29
hack89 Dec 2012 #32
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #34
krawhitham Dec 2012 #15
justanidea Dec 2012 #19
krawhitham Dec 2012 #46
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #65
AlecBGreen Dec 2012 #68
hack89 Dec 2012 #16
Hoyt Dec 2012 #27
hack89 Dec 2012 #28
Hoyt Dec 2012 #30
hack89 Dec 2012 #33
Hoyt Dec 2012 #35
hack89 Dec 2012 #37
Cleita Dec 2012 #20
CRK7376 Dec 2012 #22
riqster Dec 2012 #23
99Forever Dec 2012 #24
LP2K12 Dec 2012 #25
Hoyt Dec 2012 #26
easttexaslefty Dec 2012 #31
onehandle Dec 2012 #36
AlecBGreen Dec 2012 #69
Aristus Dec 2012 #41
Glassunion Dec 2012 #44
Aristus Dec 2012 #45
Glassunion Dec 2012 #48
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #64
Avalux Dec 2012 #43
BigDemVoter Dec 2012 #47
ComplimentarySwine Dec 2012 #59
BigDemVoter Dec 2012 #62
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #49
ohheckyeah Dec 2012 #51
Gin Dec 2012 #52
11 Bravo Dec 2012 #53
SoCalDem Dec 2012 #58
BlueMTexpat Dec 2012 #60
kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #61
baldguy Dec 2012 #63
NCTraveler Dec 2012 #70
cntrfthrs Dec 2012 #71

Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:06 AM

1. um

 

yes the majority of us are responsible, the anti gun nuts here just group us all in to one group and call us crazy murderers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrDiaz (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:08 AM

2. I own a gun. I haven't shot anybody.

But "responsible"? I dunno. I didn't do the dishes last night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrDiaz (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:28 AM

38. Really?

Lanza's mother legally purchased those firearms. She personally did not abuse them. A member of the household instead used them exactly as they were designed. They fired a large number of bullets to slaughter defenseless children. Now I know that the slaughter of defenseless children isn't a marketing point for the guns, but the design of the guns, and the ammunition, is expressly intended to slaughter someone.

It is against the law for anyone under 21 to possess a pistol. This law did not stop Adam Lanza from taking two of them from his Mother, a responsible gun owner who did not use the guns she legally owned to slaughter defenseless people.

It is against the law for anyone to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a school with the exception of law enforcement. This law did not deter Adam Lanza from carrying out the slaughter of defenseless children.

It is against the law to murder someone. But this law also did not protect his Mother, nor the defenseless children at Sandy Hook Elementary.

It is against the law to plan to carry out such an attack, that is Conspiracy. But again, it didn't do a damn thing to protect the defenseless.

So all those laws, and the involvement of a "responsible" gun owner who did NONE of those things, didn't do a damn thing to protect the children.

Nissan builds a very fast car called the GTR. It is capable of going nearly 200 miles per hour. That is obviously far too fast for the city streets. So Nissan limits the speed and connects the limiter to a GPS system. If the car goes to a known race track, the computer enables the full speed and power of the car. I would say the builder of that car, and the owners of that car, are far more responsible than any gun owner.

Even if you store your guns in a safe, that is fully alarmed. They are not secure. Just look at the Military. They lock their guns in a rack, which is chained to a wall, and locked in a room. That room is secured with an alarm, and checked often by personnel who are on duty.

Ammunition is guarded by armed people. That is for stuff that is basically the same as the rifle used by Adam Lanza. So how Responsible are you? Are your guns secured to a rack, which is chained to a wall, which is locked in a room, which is alarmed and guarded by trained people who are determined to make sure nothing goes missing? If they aren't, and I'll assume they aren't, how responsible can you be?

Even with all those precautions, the Military told us that some 200,000 weapons went missing in Iraq. That is enough to arm a fair sized town. Would you say that the Military is responsible when it comes to dealing with guns?

Just because you personally haven't slaughtered defenseless people YET, doesn't make you responsible. I bet money if your guns came up missing, and then were used to slaughter those same defenseless people, you would swear it wasn't your fault.

It takes more than not pulling a trigger to be responsible. It means making sure that nobody can pull the trigger either, and you can't do that. You can't guarantee that the guns you claim you own so responsibly won't ever be used to slaughter someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:32 AM

39. i did say the

 

majority right? Compare the amount of gun owners in this country to the amount of incidents. Like I said, the majority of gun owners are responsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrDiaz (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:42 AM

40. Oh so now statistics matter?

Your mythical 99% of gun owners who haven't slaughtered innocents yet? Here is the kicker. Either had Adam Lanza. Before taking the guns, and starting with his Mother, other than perhaps day dreaming of it, he hadn't committed a crime YET.

I say the same thing about YOU and all the gun owners. Those guns haven't slaughtered anyone, YET, that I know of. But what are they designed for? Nobody would pay a thousand dollars for a rifle to punch holes in paper. The ammunition industry wouldn't make hollow points and every other bullet designed to destroy flesh for that. No, those guns are designed to kill. The ammunition is designed to kill. Because you haven't used the guns for their stated purpose yet, doesn't mean we're safe. Far from it, it much as the existence of nuclear weapons, means we aren't dead right now, but one day, we almost certainly will become victims of one of your responsible gun owners.

We are a violent species. That is evident by the money we and many other nations spend on Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines. Those are second strike, or gotcha last devices. The idea is when the "enemy" sticks his head up, the second wave of bombs comes in to finish turning the world into a smoking hole.

Military style guns are meant to mimic the military. If the Military chooses their guns for the express purpose of killing the enemy, what makes me doubt the argument that these are sporting arms?

I want to see all guns banned. I doubt I'll see that in this lifetime. For now, I desperately want to see an end to these military styled guns that the dolts and dunces dream of using for the slaughter of innocents.

I again say, you are "responsible" unless one of your guns goes missing and kills someone. Then I bet money you and your lawyer will be swearing it wasn't YOUR fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:01 AM

42. when

 

did I say statistics don't matter? I like it when people put words in others mouth, it means you have to have added reason to try and make a point but that's cool. You would like to see all guns banned huh? How exactly would you get the guns out of the criminals hands...they aren't known for doing what they are told, only the law-abiding citizens are known for that. We are a violent species which is why we should be able to protect ourselves from a violent attacker. And actually people do use guns just for target practice, the reason for this is so if someone ever was going to be attacked they are more likely to hit the target and yes the "target" would be someone threatening someone else's life violently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrDiaz (Reply #42)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:57 PM

50. Fair point. The criminals have guns. So all hope is lost

Yet, this same situation existed in other nations. Where the criminal element had guns when they were banned. Governments work hard to get the guns out of their hands. It would be easier in Mexico if the Bush clan hadn't sent thousands more to the drug gangs, but the point is the same. Criminals in England had guns, but the Police rounded them up over time until now, there are very very few. In Europe, many people had guns prior to World War I. Hunting rifles for the most part, and they aren't there NOW.

You start from zero, and you work your way to ten. Because you can't get them all on day one, don't bother is your point. PFUI. Another asinine argument, and another lame common excuse as to why we can't do it. It's just too hard.

Kennedy challenged us to go to the moon, because it was hard. You'd have us give up, because it's just too hard for you. Face it. Your excuses are lame, your arguments are tired and threadbare, and you've lost this argument.

I'm glad you've given up the sporting argument by admitting that even those "Target" shooters are doing so planning on shooting someone.

This violent species settles down when the tools of their violence are limited. Again, look to the world for proof. The body count we have in the United States is unknown around the world with one type of exception. In nations where there is a civil war, they have thousands, and even tens of thousands of dead from gun violence. The last time we saw that on the news, there were calls for international action to prevent the genocide. In the United States, we have to bow down to your rights to slaughter defenseless innocents. After all, it's just too hard to ban them.

The NRA has folded, and promised to do anything necessary to make sure nothing like this happens again. So far that is their line, we'll see how long it takes to start repeating the talking points you're parroting. At the minimum, we're going to see a banning of assault rifles, and I'd like to see psychological evaluations of gun owners to determine the risk to the population. Of course, to my way of thinking, if you want to own a device that is so damned dangerous, designed to murder your fellow beings, you must be crazy, and therefor incapable of being trusted with a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #50)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:23 PM

57. You may be overlooking something

 

What do the innocent people do for protection between the time that the gun ban is initially passed, and the time when, perhaps several years later, the government finally has rounded up all the guns from the criminals? I imagine that they just sit there and die. Some people have that happen to them now. I imagine for those "in between" years, more people will have it happen to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ComplimentarySwine (Reply #57)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:17 PM

66. So again, all hope is lost

Every year we can look forward to tens of thousands dying, because change can't come overnight. We don't dare start on the path, because it will take too long to reach the dream. I wonder, was that your opinion when the ACA was passed? Everyone knows Single Payer would be the best outcome, and most of us believe we'll get there eventually. Should we have scrapped the ACA right away because it would take too long to reach single payer?

Again, a vast majority of guns aren't used to protect, or defend. They're used to slaughter defenseless innocents. So the only answer is to ban them and start working like hell to get rid of them. Instead, we see folks who don't want to surrender their special edition Rambo rifle for the common good, because they like dreaming of the day when they get to be the big hero, then everyone will like them. PFUI.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrDiaz (Reply #39)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:40 PM

67. So we should not campaign to eliminate Nuclear Weapons.

After all, a majority of those who possess them are responsible, and really have no intention of using them to eliminate a whole bunch of people right? They're just exercising their rights to keep devices that are wholly innocent unless they're abused.

Do you realize how asinine the arguments you are using are? These things are designed to kill. They are designed to slaughter defenseless people. The ammunition industry makes billions selling better and better bullets. Not just more accurate, like that matters with the magazine capacity of modern guns, but with enhanced flesh destroying characteristics. Hollow points were bad enough, but now we have ones that are designed to open in a specific manner, with razor shaped edges, to further slash the flesh of the poor child you're shooting.

During the Viet-Nam war, it was almost unimaginable that someone could shoot another person at a thousand yards. A handful of expert shots were about the only ones who could pull the trick off. Today, there are literally dozens of rifles off the shelf that do it. Average shooters can now have a rifle that is that accurate. The number one hunting rifle sold is the Remington 700. It has had a design flaw since it was first made in the 1940's, but nothing is done to correct it. Because Guns are blameless. It is the person who foolishly made some mistake or another.

Guns kill, people who own guns, who possess them, are killers. Perhaps they haven't killed yet, but the reason they have them is to kill. Pretend otherwise for the general population. But you aren't fooling us anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Savannahmann (Reply #38)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:14 PM

55. Concerning the GTR

 

From what I've seen, the GPS trick only works in Japan. When not a track, the car is limited to "only" 111 mph. Here in the states it apparently has a full-time limited at around 155mph or so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ComplimentarySwine (Reply #55)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:20 PM

56. Thanks for the update

My information was from an episode of Top Gear I had seen on it. Being of modest means, the GTR is a car I'll never own, or even bother looking at close. Perhaps my example was ill chosen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:09 AM

3. state trooper in Oklahoma last week let his 3 year-old nephew find his unsecured gun

3 year-old is dead and no charges will be fired. If fucking LEO can not be responsible who the fuck can?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBGLuthier (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:13 AM

9. I can

 

i own a few guns, i believe i am very responsible. The ONLY times my guns are out of my sight, is because they are in my safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:10 AM

4. yes

Millions own only one shotgun for hunting and or protection. Living in a rural area would likely have owners having one for these reasons. It the semi automatic guns that should only be banned for personal use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:10 AM

5. Yes

This is an easy question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:11 AM

6. I know many.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:12 AM

7. Yes I lock my guns in a safe and lock my ammo too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:12 AM

8. It's the majority by most standards...

 

... and then then what you personally define as a responsible owner changes the percentile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:25 AM

10. The vast, vast majority are 'responsible'.

By my own description I am about as radically independent-minded, progressive and non-violent as you can get.

I possess two guns ... locked away, safe.
(Why I have them is a long story, but has mostly do to with inheriting them as family heirlooms.)

I absolutely support greater restrictions on who can buy weapons, what kind are available, and constricting the manufacture of ammunition.

Though the OP does not necessarily imply more than it asks, let me warn progressives and pro-gun control folks that broad brushing all gun owners as 'irresponsible' would be a tremendous political miscalculation.

If you want to scare away the politicians who are willing right now to support more gun restrictions, well, start calling all gun owners 'irresponsible' or using other perforative descriptors, and you'll lose it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:33 AM

11. Define responsible.

 

In the traditional sense, i.e., keeping guns secure from children and practicing the basic rules of firearms safety?

Or in the more extreme sense I've seen tossed around DU, i.e. "If you own more than one gun and get any kind of enjoyment out of owning them, you're irresponsible"?

I own 4 guns. A Stag Arms AR. A Remington 572 feildmaster, a Glock 19, and a Ruger LCP.

I have a little brother so all of them are kept locked in a safe which only I know the combination to. I also practice the basic rules of firearms safety as they were drilled into my head by my firearms instructor during the firearms class I took at college.

I would consider myself responsible. Most gun owners I have met are responsible like me. However I am sure some would say the mere fact I own a gun (or certain guns) makes me irresponsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:42 AM

18. Ignorant much?

Please call the authorities now, then....because I am mentally ill for wanting to protect myself in my own home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zoeisright (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:48 AM

21. what a heap of shit.

so you're ignorant about mental illness. Many here are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:35 AM

13. There may be some, but they are the only people who should have them

And have to prove they are responsible on a regular basis - that they haven't lost it somehow.

There should be strict licensing and training requirements. It is done for less dangerous things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:35 AM

14. Is there such a thing as a "responsible drinker"?

or is more important to use as few labels as possible when talking about complex issues?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:38 AM

17. Yes

I could consider myself a responsible drinker, I have about two shots a month. At home

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krawhitham (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:01 PM

54. That's two more shots a month

than I take with my gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:04 AM

29. I'm a very responsible drinker, I don't drink n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:08 AM

32. Do you recognize any middle ground? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #32)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:12 AM

34. I imagine there might be a drinker out there who has never driven impaired

Not sure I've ever met one.

But then not everyone drives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:36 AM

15. Yes, (But if you have more Guns than Cars you might be a Gun Nut)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krawhitham (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:43 AM

19. So owning more than one gun now makes someone a nut?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to justanidea (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:27 PM

46. How many different guns do you need to shoot someone with for self defense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krawhitham (Reply #46)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:16 PM

65. depends how far away they are, I suppose. Pistols up close, Shotguns @ 20-75yds, Rifles far away.

 

I kid... I kid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krawhitham (Reply #46)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:46 PM

68. I consider myself a "responsible" gun owner with more than 1 firearm

I have a pistol for home defense, a shotgun for dove & turkey hunting, a rifle for deer, and a .22 for target shooting, starlings in the chimney, livestock, etc. Dont tell my wife, but Im getting her her own deer rifle for Christmas. That will make a total of 5 firearms for our household. They are always unloaded unless being taken outside to use. The safety is always on (even when unloaded) until the shot is lined up & ready. We have no children in our home. While I cant say I will never buy another gun, I have no plans to. I have what I need and thats it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:36 AM

16. Most are

judging by the relatively few accidents there are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:01 AM

27. But enough aren't. And those who promote more guns in more places, darn sure aren't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:04 AM

28. A tiny fraction.

you are always willing to overlook the fact that there are nearly 60 million legal gun owners. 99.99% of them will never shoot or hurt someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:07 AM

30. And most of them do not use the weaons AND most importantly don't promote more and more guns in more


places, public carrying at will, stand your ground laws, and worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:09 AM

33. So we agree that there are plenty of responsible gun owners. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:13 AM

35. You aren't very perceptive. Another reason for you to leave your guns at home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #35)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:27 AM

37. I have a good grasp on the reality of the situation.

hope you are having a good holiday season. My eldest is home from college soon - live is good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:45 AM

20. My son-in-law for one. He is a collector of antique guns as well.

I'm sure there are many others out there. But for those who are responsible and keep their guns locked away securely, there are a majority who if not irresponsible in their use of guns are careless about where they store them. It seems very frequently that you find stories of kids who managed to get dad's gun and either shot themselves, a sibling or playmate with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:49 AM

22. I am a responsible gun owner!

I own two rifles, my kids have been taught safe handling and ownership of guns. My wife doesn't approve, but it's not worth fighting over. My rifles are locked and secured. Ammunition is locked and secured in a seperate are. Bolts have been removed from the chamber. Basically three layers of seperation to make my firearms operable. I have spent my entire adult life, 35 years of service, as a member of the US Army, Army Reserves or National Guard. I know what firearms can do to human beings. I take ownership serioursly. I am not a gun nut. I don't feel that the government is trying to take away my gun ownership or that their are crazies about to invade my home so I need protection. I am not a member of the NRA and I never will be. I am a lifelong Democrat, never once voting Republican. I don't go to gun shows or troll gun websites/chat groups. I am a responsible gun owner!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:52 AM

23. Well, duh.

That'a like asking if there are any responsible parents, drivers or voters. The answer is "yes".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:53 AM

24. They are all "responsible gun owners".....

... until they aren't.

Then people have to bury their loved ones for no damn good reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 09:54 AM

25. Yes.

I count myself as one of them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:00 AM

26. They all think they are responsible, right up until they aren't.


Of course, few of them take responsibility for the indirect impact of their gun lust. Was nice to see some previous gun nuts saying it is now time to do something, but they'll be back to their old ways shortly (assuming they weren't purposely trying to calm the storm in the first place so that things would blow over).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:07 AM

31. Yes.

My husband hunted in his younger days.
His guns are in a secured location under lock and key. His ammo is secured in another location under lock and key. Both safes are "hidden". The keys are on his person during the day. We also do not have any children in the home.
I'd say he is a responsible gun owner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:15 AM

36. Yes, for a limited time. It could be their entire lives. It could be up until next week.

If there is a gun, you have introduced danger into you and your family's lives.

Gun ownership is an aberration in a civilized society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onehandle (Reply #36)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:54 PM

69. "Gun ownership is an aberration in a civilized society."

Tell that to my students who rely on game to keep their belly full.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 10:43 AM

41. No. The most responsible thing you can do with a gun is not own one.

First gun-crazed idiot calls me 'un-American' is going to get my Gulf War medals jammed up his ass; sideways!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:26 AM

44. Army?

Just asking, cause I think the CIB would hurt the most.

Marines?
Expert Rifle badge looks pretty painful as well.

Navy and Airforce have some damn painful looking ones as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:23 PM

45. Army. M1A1 tanker.

I think nowadays they have a combat tanker badge. We didn't have that back then. But have you seen the Liberation of Kuwait Medal, struck and awarded by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? Lots of pointy spines on it. Nasty...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 01:02 PM

48. Co-Worker was also an M1A1 tanker in the Gulf War

He used to tell tales of his commander having the nasty habit of trying to spit his chewing tobacco while riding up top with the hatch open. He was constantly getting spit on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:13 PM

64. You're un-American.

 

Now... you're going to have to catch a Mil-Air flight to my FOB in western Afghanistan if you want to follow through on your comments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 11:06 AM

43. Is this a serious question, or do you have another motive for this post?

Of course there are responsible gun owners, I was raised by one. We had guns for hunting, and from a very early age my father taught me how dangerous guns are, how to properly handle them, and that they were for hunting and target practice. He kept them out of sight and locked up at all times, still does. Many of them are antique muzzle loaders and he did hunt with those. He has taught hunter safety courses for years for the PA game commission because safety is so important to him.

If you ask my Dad, he'll tell you there's no reason in hell why a person should own an assault rifle. And carrying a pistol around isn't his thing either.

I don't own a gun because I don't hunt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 12:43 PM

47. As much as I don't like guns, I guess there ARE responsible owners.

However, I'm 100% anti assault weapon, and the responsible owners I'm referring to are the occasional hunters who keep their rifles & shotguns locked up.

And I do NOT hunt! I couldn't kill anything. . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigDemVoter (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:29 PM

59. It seems to me that those occasional hunters could very well be some of the most dangerous.

 

I think quite a few of them simply don't use their gun enough to know what they're doing with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ComplimentarySwine (Reply #59)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:59 PM

62. You're probably right. . .

But I'm not as frightened of hunting rifles as I am of the high capacity, rapid-fire assault rifles!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 05:59 PM

51. Seriously?

Could you possibly be any more insulting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:00 PM

52. When I was married.....we had a pistol

BUT.....no bullets......!!!!


Does that make me responsible????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:00 PM

53. Yeah, me. I have two hand guns and three long guns. Each has a trigger lock ...

and is secured inside a gun safe. The ammunition for the weapons is secured in a second safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:24 PM

58. police & military come to mind

others "play guns"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:47 PM

60. Yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 06:57 PM

61. My dad was extremely responsible with his 2 hunting rifles and single handgun.

That said, he did keep the rifles (unloaded of course) displayed on a set of deer antlers above the family room sofa. I have no idea where he stored his handgun or ammo. Never wanted or cared to know, either.

These days that isn't good enough, but 40 years ago it worked fine for us. Come to think of it, after my mom was diagnosed with schizophrenia I have no recollection of ever seeing them again. I think he just quietly sold them. I know he never hunted after that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2012, 07:09 PM

63. No. Owning a gun is irresponsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 04:56 PM

70. yes. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xoom (Original post)

Wed Dec 19, 2012, 05:16 PM

71. Yes I am...

been familiar with guns since my old dad took i and my brothers hunting starting around 10 years of age...My Mandan/Arikara Mother would say to us that 'guns are Holy' and by that, she meant guns should be handled with care and always respectfully because of what they can do...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread