Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
If you want to have an idea of the typical sociopath or criminal mind you ought to consider the opinion of most LEOs. I used to work as a community primary care physician and now I'm working as a physician for the California Department of Corrections. I have some familiarity with the socioeconomic issues of the underserved community as well as the needs of the middle and upper-middle class.
My experience doesn't trump your opinion - but I would beg of any neutral reader to consider my opinions seriously.
|
I absolutely do. I recognise that you know more about firearms and the firearms industry than I do. I recognise that unfortunate circumstances have made it necessary for you to carry a firearm in order to protect yourself as a last resort. I respect the fact that you would use your gun responsibly. Now that I know that you work with the CDC (not Centers for Disease control, but California Department of Corections, funny that they share an acronym), I would assume that your knowledge of criminals is quite reliable. Just so you know, I have experience in psychology and sociology ( as well as managment, accounting and fatherhood, though those seem less relevent). I am also what most would call an activist. I've been involved in dozens if not hundreds of legal protests.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
Willravel, you should know better than to misrepresent my statement that, "these posts aren't the best source of information." I had written that in response to a comment from Charlatan that he/she has "come to understand the gun-advocate's point of view quite well (mostly from reading posts here)." Are you defending the idea that these forums are sufficient resource from which to understand the gun-proponent argument? While much of what is written on these forums are sourced from the internet - so is much disinformation. Unless you check the facts for yourself there's no way to distinguish the two from just reading the forums. Honestly, how can you possibly argue against conducting independent research through alternative sources? That's like marshalling a defense for perpetuating ignorance. I credit you with more insight than that.
|
I think you misunderstood me. I was simply suggesting that the arguments of most on this forum are only as good as their sources, and I would assume the main source for many people here are other intenet sites. As for the quality of these sites, after doing quite a few searches, I've found that there is a great deal of misinformation and a great deal of flat outwrong information out there. I know that I have to double, triple, even sometimes quadruple check my sources online because I don't want to aid in misinformation. I actually prefer that people get their information from legitimate sources (meaning no websites with guns in thier logog, and likewise no peace signs, sugesting that the information from such sites is almost certianally spun). My sources on gun regulation, gun bans, and other gun facts are limited.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
Unless you believe that "gun shows" and legal gun transactions are the main source of criminal firearms then how will a ban on firearms affect the criminal?
Even so, is it not conceivable, that this will just bring more business to the black market?
Did prohibition work for alcohol?
Does the war on drugs affect marajuana, heroin, cocaine or amphetamine use? I work with substance abuse patients so I can tell you that the problem is as alive and well as it always has been.
|
Again I must ask...where are the criminals getting their guns? If we can limit or even cut off that suply, then gun bans won't be necessary. Where do criminals get theri guns?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
One thing for sure, if I were living in SF proper, I would be affected for sure - that much is certain. While you may not regard me as a danger - a law banning firearms would say otherwise.
|
I can't use illegal drugs. If it were legal to take all currently illegal drugs, I might occasioanlly use one such drug responsibly. Of course, there would be many who abuse that substance and could be hurt or killed by it (much like alcohol). I understand that I am making a sacrafice for the greater good.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
Prevention may be the ultimate solution. I agree. But that isn't an immediate solution for an active problem. The horse is out of the barn - fixing the door now will help in the future but we have things we must do here and now. The ability to defend onesself with deadly force doesn't displace the need for prevention - nor does the focus on prevention address immediate concerns for self defense.
|
I admit that most who voted for this probably know about as much as I do, I don't think there is a big secret in San Francisco about how a gun ban will work. It's possible that this could be a failure, in which case the citizens of San Francisco will apologize and ask for our guns back.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
As I mentioned I work with hardened criminals in the overcrowded California State prisons - I don't envision these people, all at once, becoming "born again" in the near future despite whatever social programs and psychological, occupational and educational resources they might have at hand. Spend a day at work with me and you'll realize that there are many people released into society who are hardened "predators." And as much empathy as I have at my disposal I prefer to retain the ability to defend my loved ones if I have to.
|
I respect that completly and I hope that you and yours are always safe, but the same company that made guns to protect you and your loved ones is making guns that could be used to hurt you and your loved ones. The function of this law at it's core is to prevent the latter. If it cannot do that, then what can>?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
If you have never been assaulted, burlarized, had your life threatened, raped or otherwise brutalized consider yourself lucky and count your blessings. Ignorance is bliss - it happens in the best neighborhoods to the most unsuspecting and compliant people. I'd rather be prepared.
|
I've been assaulted, burglarized, had my life threatened, and a few other things (not rape, though *crosses fingers*). I used to be the kind of person who would stand up and take the guy down. I hold a high ranking in martial arts and boxing, and I've used both to defend myself in the past. After a while, though, I came to the conclusion that the old philosophy is true; violence begets violence. I live by that philosophy now. I've never had my house broken into, true, but I do understand what it is like when someone attacks me or tries to hurt or steal from me.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
My uncle owned a grocery store and was robbed at gunpoint. Being an unassuming, peaceful man he was compliant with the criminal completely handing over all the cash in the till. It just so happen the man decided to shoot my uncle in the face anyway. In the face of uncertainty I'd rather be prepared. And please don't even suggest that a ban would have prevented that from happening.
|
I won't suggest that because no one could know that and it would be disrespectful to both you and your uncles memory. I see myself as being like your uncle in that I look for both the good and the logical in people. I know that there are people out there who would kill me in a blink of the eye. I hope to never meet them. I also seek to take their power to kill, and possibly help them to understand empathy. This law, whether misguided or not, was intended to take the power from bad people, and is asking that good people make the sacrafice of their power in exchange for it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
I've never had my house burn down or destroyed by earthquake - but I carry insurance.
I have never lost a limb - but I do carry disability.
I have never gotten Hepatitis B but I have my vaccinations.
I have never been in a situation that required my need to take someone's life - but I do own a gun and know how to use it - psychologically as well as physically
|
Wouldn't you prefer to activly work to prevent bad things instead of somply preparing for them?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
- Again, I don't expect you to see things my way - you've already made up your minds. But know this. Just because I'm a gun owner doesn't mean it'd be my first resort if I get robbed or that I am quick rely on deadly force as a solution to most adverse encounters. If my car was being stolen I'd let them take my car (that's why I have insurance) or my house were being burglarized I'd stay in my bedroom, lock the door and call 911 with gun in hand.
|
I think you know better than that. I rarely make up my mind 100% on anything. I am willing to open my mind and be open to possibilities.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by longbough
But if that carjacker was thinking of dragging me to the pavement to beat me in a riot or if my neice were screaming in the next room because the invader decided to do harm to her (heaven forbid) I wouldn't (and shouldn't) hesitate to consider the use deadly force.
If the law were to disarm me I would be absolutely powerless in those situations.
|
That is one of those super rare situations where I agree that you are alowed to use whatever force is necessary to defend yourself and those who are defenceless. If, heaven forbid, I was in a similar situation, I am willing to do perminant physical harm to someone in order to prevent him or her from harming or killing the helpless. I personally don't ever see any reason to use deadly force, but I respect your opinion and I would support you in it if it ever came to pass.