January 23rd, 2007 05:41 PM
Editorial from a misguided teen
Outlawing handguns is the best (self)-defense
Tue, Jan 23, 2007
In 1999, 337 homicides committed with firearms occurred in Detroit. In that same time frame, in Windsor, Ontario, a city located a half-mile from the American metropolis, only one person suffered died from a gunshot wound. While Windsor's population accounts for merely one-fifth of that of Detroit, the difference remains staggering. Why the astounding discrepancy?
The second amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The noble effort to ensure the sanctity of inherent rights included this item given the need for defending one's self, and now extends to recreational pursuits such as hunting. However, as Oliver Wendell Holmes wisely commented, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." Social contract requires the relinquishing of certain freedoms in exchange for a safer society. Gun-control, a concept proven to increase the level of security, involves the surrendering of certain firearms, and presents the opportunity to live in a less dangerous environment.
America's closest sovereign ally chose protection over freedom. The United Kingdom's gun-control policies, considered to be among the strictest of any country, necessitate a rigid registration of allotted weapons, and ban handguns. In order to obtain an approved firearm, an individual must supply the police with a valid reason for acquiring the item; "self-defense" does not qualify as satisfactory explanation for gun ownership. Additionally, a character examination, inspection of the premise in which the firearm will be contained and a personal interview must be completed. Persons that have served prison sentences of three years or more may not apply for a firearm certificate. The violation of these guidelines warrants a minimum of five years in prison and an unlimited fine.
Gun-control policies in the United Kingdom became exceptionally stringent only recently. In both 1988 and 1997, shocking "massacres," in which legal gun-owners slaughtered defenseless civilians, prompted the passage of Firearm Amendment Acts one and two.
The regulations appear effective. In the United Kingdom, all but a few select branches of the police force do not carry guns. Contrastingly, in the United States, all members of the squad usually bear firearms, and the government requires many to possess a handgun even when off-duty. Shockingly, the United Kingdom experienced 62 murders with firearms from 1998 to 2000, while the United States suffered 8,259 gun-related fatalities.
In recent polls, only half of Americans favored stricter gun-control guidelines. The opposition, led by the unifying voice of the NRA, presents a hefty obstacle. In all probability, more moderate restrictions may be in order.
The primary objective should be the outlawing of handguns. While hunters use firearms for recreation, handguns are not the weapon of choice for such pursuits. Instead, humans seem to provide excellent targets for handgun-wielders. According to the FBI Crime Report for 2001, 78 percent of all firearm homicides were committed with handguns.
The right to bear arms, an important freedom, should not conflict with the right to life. When these two intentions conflict, perhaps the premier form of self-defense is not the purchasing of weapons, but the relinquishing of guns.
Julia Kallmes is a senior at Mayo High School. To respond to an opinion column, send an e-mail to email@example.com.
"The Army and the Navy are run like traditional military services. The Air Force is run like a corporation. But the Marine Corps is a religion." — Navy Admiral
niversity of S
usic and C
January 23rd, 2007 06:12 PM
<The right to bear arms, an important freedom, should not conflict with the right to life. When these two intentions conflict, perhaps the premier form of self-defense is not the purchasing of weapons, but the relinquishing of guns. >
Hint, junior...my life comes first when confronted by a BG...aaaarrghhh...can't type anymore when dealing with altruistic teens. When you grow up, come talk to me.
January 23rd, 2007 06:34 PM
I just sent her an Email refuting her liberal BS.
I was polite, tactful and all the good stuff that I feel we need to be to get our point across. It's really sad that this drivel comes from our next generation.
I foresee an America without guns and it scares me.
January 23rd, 2007 06:43 PM
Sadly the teen nievity extends to full grown and even old adults.
They just do not seem to think outside of the (sheep) box and consider the logic, which if explored with an open mind makes sense to so many.
Gut emotion is however so much easier
Chris - P95
NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.
"To own a gun and assume that you are armed
is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."
- a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.
January 23rd, 2007 07:03 PM
I sent her a note too. I just told her that, by her own logic, we should also ban teenage drivers. I cited the following:
Teen driving statistics from http://www.TeenDrivingInfo.com/ :
• Annually, 7,887 (14% of all drivers) 15-20 year-old drivers were involved in fatal crashes.1 - about 22 fatalities each day. Each year 2,008 16-17 year-olds die in automobile crashes.2 In addition, crash rates are the highest for teens during the 1st six months & 1,000 miles after licensure.3
1 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic Safety Facts 2003: Young Drivers. (2004).
2 National Center for Injury Prevention & Control. (2003).
3 McCartt, Shabanova, & Leaf. Driving experience, crashes & traffic citations of teenage beginning drivers (2003).
Whatever doesn't kill you postpones the inevitable.
January 23rd, 2007 07:07 PM
that includes suicides... people who would've killed themselves with some other tool...
According to the FBI Crime Report for 2001, 78 percent of all firearm homicides were committed with handguns.
January 23rd, 2007 07:57 PM
I know this is choir preaching, but here's a good example of the twisting of statistics (otherwise known as LIES) used by these types:
Here, they engage in a classic logical fault - they compare firearms MURDERS in the UK with ALL FIREARMS RELATED fatalities in the US. That is, murders, suicides, accidents, et cetera... Standard smoke and mirrors BS crap from the "can't we all just get along" crowd.
Shockingly, the United Kingdom experienced 62 murders with firearms from 1998 to 2000, while the United States suffered 8,259 gun-related fatalities.
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
January 23rd, 2007 08:49 PM
The Lott-Mustard Report
John Lott and David Mustard, in connection with the University of Chicago Law School, examining crime statistics from 1977 to 1992 for all U.S. counties, concluded that the thirty-one states allowing their residents to carry concealed, had significant reductions in violent crime. Lott writes, "Our most conservative estimates show that by adopting shall-issue laws, states reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. If those states that did not permit concealed handguns in 1992 had permitted them back then, citizens might have been spared approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies. To put it even more simply criminals, we found, respond rationally to deterrence threats... While support for strict gun-control laws usually has been strongest in large cities, where crime rates are highest, that's precisely where right-to-carry laws have produced the largest drops in violent crimes."
(Source: "More Guns, Less Violent Crime", Professor John R. Lott, Jr., The Wall Street Journal, August 28, 1996, (The Rule of Law column).
Whether or not one believes a portion of the drop in violent crime is due to "shall-issue" legislation, Lott's study provides strong evidence that allowing
January 23rd, 2007 09:00 PM
Let's just hope those 337 did not breed and screw up the gene pool even more !!!
Originally Posted by devilmutt
January 24th, 2007 01:41 AM
She misspelled "Socialist control"...
requires the relinquishing of certain freedoms in exchange for a safer society.
"I surrounded 'em"- Alvin York
"They're ain't many troubles that a man can't fix with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six"- Jeff Cooper
January 24th, 2007 06:46 AM
The gun-toting criminals in my area don't live in the U.K. They're right here. They're vicious, callous and devoid of the concept of "right to life."
Originally Posted by Julia Kallmes
About those character "tests" to qualify for ownership, in the U.K.? Right, it does come down to character. The attackers in our midst need a character adjustment, and that right quick. But frankly, when having the choice between a politician's business card (dial-a-prayer) and an actual ability to defend against attack by criminals on the instant of an attack ... I'd far rather be able to actually defend myself. The promises of my politicians don't amount to that much.
"Social contract"? Something that a criminal would honor? The same criminal that would take my life for a pack of smokes? That guy? The other 10,000 like him? Or, would that be referring to the 50,000 folks on drugs within spittin' distance of my home? That contract was broken a long time ago ... and not by me.
High school junior, eh? My, what a lot to learn in such a short time. The poor little lamb needs a bit of field time, hunting (being hunted by) some big game. She'd realize how a wild hog, bear or mountain lion doesn't really care that someone has a whole stack o' business cards in the wallet. Though, a stack of quality toothpicks would help clean up after the meal, what with the stringy nature of a high school junior and all. What's needed on the instant of an attack is a viable ability to defend.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
self defense (A.O.J.).
How does disarming
the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
January 24th, 2007 01:34 PM
Some one tell her she deserves neither freedom nor security (Ben Franklin). So many misquotes today and lack of history leads to these editorials. Also what dose
Social contract requires the relinquishing of certain freedoms in exchange for a safer society.
have to do to the right to self defence. Giving up the right to defend your self for the sake of a safer society is an oxymoron. You give up your right to defend your self you become a victim.
However, as Oliver Wendell Holmes wisely commented, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Diplomacy: The art of saying nice dogie until you can find a rock.
-The truth is a three edged sword.
-Your brain is your primary weapon everything else is just a tool.
-When the only tool you have is a hammer then everything starts to look like a nail.
January 24th, 2007 01:45 PM
She will fit right in at most colleges. Sure the UK has a low number of firearms death's, but stabbings and other forms of murder are way up. That 78 percent of homicides with firearms does also include justifyable homicides.
And besides, since when is defending myself not a good enough reason to have a firearm? That arguement basically says that a criminal has more right to live than I do.
Reading that paper reminds me of the sociology class I just walked out of and trying to pound some logic into the brains of those misguided peers of mine.
Fortes Fortuna Juvat
Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor
January 26th, 2007 12:52 AM
Julia may need to study history a little bit more. I'd suggest that she start with the holocaust.
Originally Posted by devilmutt
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
January 26th, 2007 01:03 AM
To me she sounds as if she is just Parroting the lies of her Anti gun elders. No personal research. I would have given her an 'F' for not doing full research.
By randytulsa2 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: January 11th, 2010, 07:09 PM
By Desk Jockey in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: December 10th, 2008, 06:56 AM
By Reborn in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: May 30th, 2008, 11:12 AM
By Janq in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: September 17th, 2007, 02:34 PM
By P95Carry in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: October 27th, 2005, 04:48 PM
Search tags for this page
3 sided sword outlawed
helping misguided teen
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors