DISQUS

stanislaus · 1 year ago

Ms. Robinson, with all due respect, are you familiar with the term "jihad"?

You, being a reporter, must know that war has been declared against the U.S., externally and internally. There is a time on the near horizon when Marshall Dillon's gun will not be enough to keep you from having your throat cut or your car blown to bits. Fantasy, you think? Ask your local FBI agent. (You may wish to be selective, as I have read where agents are now being trained by members of CAIR.)

Your article tells of firearm violations, but how are honest citizens going to protect themselves against the violators, especially if the violators have the weapons? I have proven to be an honest citizen and I certainly have no intention or desire to shoot you, Ms. Robinson, without lawful reason, in which case, I would trust Matt Dillon and the courts would likely find me "not guilty". The truth is, Leslie, I would be one who, when you call for help, would try to protect you.

If you are so afraid for those who live in high crime housing conditions, or even "gun toters" in parks for that matter, has it occurred to you the firearms are probably not legally owned and being carried by honest citizens, but by those who will kill you, I, and the other innocent beings? If we can't arm ourselves, how do you suggest we resist? If your loved one is being assaulted, how will you defend them, let alone, yourself -- call the police and hope they arrive in time? If a drug dealer threatens your life, are you going to just sit there and use your cell phone?

Do you not see that guns are a known element and risk of society, the same as criminals? Illegal firearms are available to criminals if the legal ones aren't, so good luck using your bread knife! Maybe you can order an Australian boomerang.

Just for the record, crime happens everywhere -- even in our national forests, where today, such places can be havens for criminals and terrorist elements. It's for sure the arsonists are there! Even the bears are still willing to occasionally steal campers' lunches. In some cases, they unfortunately have to be stopped before injury or death occurs. (Trust me, I'm a former resident of Alaska. In Alaska, you're considered a fool if you don't carry a .44 or .357 Magnum. My neighbor's husband was killed by a bear while fishing.)

By your own admission, you are certainly correct about having "to protect ourselves from us", and how do you suggest we effectively do that?

siskiyouskyline · 1 year ago

Ms. Robinson, I presume from your comments that you aren't really a gun fan. Stanilaus is right- Jihad: coming to your neighborhood soon. Look at Europe and tell me I'm wrong.

Yes a number of idiots misuse and abuse guns. Far more people misuse and abuse both alcohol and cars, but I don't see very many people pushing outlawing booze and cars. Do you? I personally know quite a few responsible gun owners. You would be surprised who they could be. Might be a neighbor, maybe your boss (of ever his/her boss), it could be your mail delivery person, or even your state representative.

I won't delve into a gun v. anti-gun argument. It's not worth the effort. Instead, wait until you are beaten and raped, THEN tell us how much you wished you had a gun, knowing that IF you owned a gun and knew how to use it would have kept you safe while giving the perp with a new eye socket.

I urge anyone and everyone to learn about guns, learn how to use them, BEFORE judging them.
SS

feathertail · 10 months ago

Yes, the Supreme Court made a "Decision". That's their job. Unfortunately, it was wrong. Was it biased? Of course. All human opinions and decisions are to some degree biased, politically left or right.
What is more telling about the issue is the psychology deeply embedded in all of us, to varying degrees, which tends to transfer a hated part of ourselves unto others. The vast majority of people are not aware of this fundamental dynamic of personality evolved to protect the ego. For many, then, the need to have a gun becomes the justification to protect us from "ourselves". Ironically, the criminal, who uses a gun to commit a crime also has his own justification.

Secondly, to the point of needing to carry a gun in the parks or forests: I opt on the side of safety. I would venture to guess that the odds of being assaulted in the backcountry are less than being hit by lightning. I would also assume that those who see the need to be armed, as a matter of practice, would have their weapons loaded. It is one thing to fantasize about having some person or thing to come along and "make their day" and the reality of waking up in your tent to the sound of a gunshot only to find your precious 4 year old daughter bleeding from the mouth and looking at you with horror stricken eyes as she slowly dies from from a painful stomach wound caused by the accidental discovery of the "toy" you left in a backpack to protect yourself from Jihad.

By coincidence, I have been a national park ranger and involved with law enforcement at both federal and local levels. I have spent years in our parks and forests, both professionally and recreationally.
Should we be armed in the course of our duties? Absolutely. Why? Simply because we are required to approach someone suspected of or actually in the act of commiting a crime. And there lies the difference. And when I recreate with my family, do I carry a weapon? Not on your life, or more importantly, on the life of someone I love.