johndoe

iTrader: (5)

that has nothing to do with its factual accuracy

l_bader

One of the most polite societies on record was feudal Japan during the Tokugawa Period. A significant portion of the populace was perpetually armed and an even greater portion trained in combative methods.

Transgressions against individuals or, worse yet, society were immediately and effectively dealt with. - The Samurai were empowered by a law that roughly translated to, "killing and walking away."

If, by some strange means, you removed not only the wakasashi, but also his katana, bow and tanto, even an errant Ronin would be able to kill you with his hashi. (Chopsticks)

A firearm, regardless of caliber, portability, rate of fire, cartridge type or other characteristic is nothing more than a tool. As such, it is no more useful or dangerous than a stick, wrench, automobile, cell phone or any other item used by man or beast to extend his (her) physical capabilities.

However, it is a tool that requires not only an understanding of its use, but also how it functions, appropriate employment and proper upkeep and operation. At a minimum, basic training/education, to include safety and targeting, should be obtained prior to using a firearm.

I do not know of a single State that does not mandate both classroom and range training and testing prior to issuing a concealed carry license. Additionally, the applicants go through deeper background checks for topics ranging from (demonstrated) mental illnesses to prior criminal issues.

One of the primary points covered is: know your target and the situation. - Translation: if in doubt, don't pull the trigger.

Yet in an overwhelming majority of cases in which concealed license carrier not only unholstered a weapon but also discharged a round (even IF they were cited and brought before a court) they were found to have acted within the letter of the law.

Do I live or work in a neighborhood in which I perpetually need to carry a firearm? No.

Have I routinely been in areas in which I was not aware of the current crime-rate or there were "unsavory types" on the prowl? You betcha.

Do I attempt to remain situationally aware and minimize the risk to not only myself but those around me? Of course.

Can I control every event and the mindset of everyone I come in contact with? Not hardly.

Hence, a firearm is a logical, viable solution that can intelligently be used from an informed position to reduce some of the potential risks I may find in this less than polite society.

So, am I armed? What do you think?

- L

johndoe

iTrader: (5)

this isn't the most detailed but still unbiased:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ory?id=3051123

l_bader

First, I'm pleased to know you would not only identify but also assess the threat prior to firing on an intruder.

Second, I agree that *drunk* frat boys shouldn't operate firearms; nor should they operate a Taurus or the Audi daddy bought them.

Finally, in the more than two decades I served in the US Military, I never ran across a uniformed member that was "brainwashed". Instead I generally found motivated, organized, patriotic volunteers who were trained to act as a team, following the direction of superiors who had greater training and experience in the mission areas in which they were assigned. - Sitting in a classroom on a college campus you have the luxury of asking, "Why". Doing so in an environment where lives are on the line will undoubtable cost some of those lives. However, even in the structured and disciplined enviroment of the Military, troops are not only allowed to think for themselves, they are encouraged to do so to find innovative means to meet their mission requirements. The biggest risk most of your students have is the phone call home when they get a "D" in Writing and Research.

- L

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

This is a good point, and something I hope never having to face.

It isn't a matter of allowing something to happen, I just personally don't think that carrying a gun in most circumstances will stop something from happening. In fact I think it can be the catalyst for the violence.

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

You make my point for me. Arming University students isn't even remotely like arming the military. The training (brainwashing) makes a significant difference.

Jay

Markp

Ummm, yes, people get killed in war. Further illustrating the amount of restraint these young men exercise in the military. These soldiers do not intentionally engage civilian targets, I think you know better though.

Mark

Markp

Right, I am currently in the military, as such do you feel that I am brainwashed?

I seriously doubt that they would brainwash me only to have me begin a Ph.D. program designed to make me exercise critical thinking skills. That being said, have you ever been in the military or really understand the indoctrination process? You were obviously indoctrinated to believe that guns are unnecessary and that military types are brain washed, I wonder where your education went wrong.

Enlisted and Officer alike are expected to follow orders, that's true. We are also expected to think and take responsibility for our actions. That is hardly brain washing, it's little different than the training you get in martial arts as a civilian.

Mark

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

Maybe my experience is only from watching movies. Is there really no conditioning that happens during basic training? This is the definition that is behind my use of "brainwashing"

"any method of controlled systematic indoctrination, esp. one based on repetition or confusion"

My education did not go wrong. My point of view is just different than yours, do you really belong in a world where to opposing points of view can't co-exist. I could just as easily say that your education went wrong, since you seem to believe that guns in the hands of the general population are necessary. Come on you can do better than that.

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

Mark,

I don't know very much about Military service, but are you being trained as a combat soldier?

magnamx-5

iTrader: (7)

Jay I highly doubt this would be effective of much more than turning us into a murderous society, and getting alot of people killed. Everyone on here needs to remember Guns don't kill people. People kill people!!!! I have though several times about getting a gun, i really enjoy shooting etc. But the cost, and possible legal implications to it if stolen or used without my knowledge coupled with the fact that I am just crazy enough not to need a gun in most of the situations where it would come in handy stay my hand. Accidents happen, but the moron with a gun who kills 30 people is no different than the one who poisons a bunch of tylenol with arsenic, or the home invader with a knive or bat etc. Both are very dangerous both can do alot of damage, but in the end the means they used to inflict damage is not to blame for there actions. Just becouse say turbo housings where being used in the ghettos in mass genecide between the Folks and Cryps doesn't mean that we should outlaw them, it means we need to deal with the people perpetuating these crimes. IDK I don't realy spend that much time in the city, but it can't be as stupid bad as you guys make it out. And if it is then some revitalization of testosterone and the end of the 90 lbs weakling is in order for the populace. And Jay drunk or not if that guy would have crashed through my window i would have atleast knocked him out, and if that was to hard i would have broken something etc or ripped whatever i could off. I figure if a grizzly bear can get by without a Sigsaur or 1911 i can to.
Yes Jay military training is an indoctrination into thinking in terms of unit and group you want to maximize survival of both and success of all aspects of it. Through the rigors and excercise in basic a trust and understanding of the group is formed by the individuals therefore enhanceing there effectiveness in everything. Inovation and leadership + respect are stressed. The theory is fighting beside a stranger is less effective than fighting beside someone who knows your weakness's and can help you counter balance them and vice versa.

Markp

LOL, that all depends on your point of view. Everyone is trained to some extent as a combatant. Some more than others. In my case, I have what would be considered a minimal amount of training. I've been qualified to shoot various rifles and pistols. I have some hand to hand combat training that was not from the military.

Is a pilot a combat soldier? Is an aircraft maintenance technician a combat soldier??? Yes, in the line of duty some aircraft maintenance techs were required to carry a handgun, I was! (requirement when in possession of classified devices for installing communication codes)

As a naval officer, that's a good question? As a Navy psychologist working with in Gitmo? Deployed to Iraq or Afganistan? If I'm carrying a rifle does that count? On ship I'm required to go through the same disaster control and fire fighting drills as any one else, I am expected to pull my weight if we're in a combat situation and our ship is hit. Yes, Navy psychologists go to sea, deploy to combat zones, and go in harms way.

Does it compare to what other people do? Not even close. I won't pretend to be something I'm not. I'm not an Army Ranger, Marine, Infantry Man, Pilot, Tanker, Air Crew... I'm studying to be a psychologist!

Mark

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

I guess what I'm asking is if you are going to be expected to kill people.

jayc72

iTrader: (14)

Magna,

He met with the business end of a marble upright paper towel holder, broke it in two over the back of his head. Knocked him out cold, he was under observation while in the holding cell that night, the cop I talked to was concerned. I'm guessing that he had a head ache the next morning. At his hearing he said he didn't remember anything, most of the night was a black out. His lawyer even suggested that he was the one assaulted (resulting in a concussion) and I didn't suffer any loss. We ended up moving to the second floor of that apartment building. He ended up getting a year of probation and had to attend AA. Kind of wished I had a gun after that all played out

Niklas

I liked the whole "or me with a sword" idea.. cant everyone just have swords?

johndoe

iTrader: (5)

Come on man. I'm not making this stuff up. You and I and everyone know about the massacres that went on in Vietnam, and there is plenty of evidence of civilians being killed intentionally or otherwise in Iraq as well. In most cases I don't think those soldiers were "bad people". The behavior is a product of fighting in wars where your enemy is not necessarily uniformed and you are "brainwashed" into someone who is capable of looking at a human being and killing them without question.

And l_Bader it's interesting you bring up Japan in your post. If we are going to romanticize the Japanese lets do it right. You do know that Japan had the gun for a while while they had closed their borders to Europe and then gave it up (in 18th or 19th century, I don't remember off the top of my head) to go back to the sword because they found killing with a gun had no honor. Instead of samurai traditionally pairing off in battle against another samurai and engaging in sword fighting for which both were well trained you had a situation where peasants with little training were killing samurai from across the field without even knowing his name.

magnamx-5

iTrader: (7)

I think those killings are more the result of neccesity than some bloodlust man. The japanese Jingoism is more about the control they wanted to maintain on there citizens.

l_bader

The point I was attempting to drive home was, "an armed society is a polite society."

Any system designed and enacted by mankind is flawed. The Japanese society I cited was elitist, egotistical and quite brutal. However they also were highly focused on structured society, esoteric beauty and having a functional, high-density population.

The use (and therefore discussion of) firearms in Japan after the 1700s were generally on the battlefield vice home-invasion/robbery senarios, thus not relavant to my point.

- L

Markp

First Vietnam was 30-40 years ago! Drop it, it's not relevant.

Iraq is relevant, and I feel pretty safe in saying that US soldiers are far better behaved than their insurgent counterparts that are strapping explosives to retarded children. In fact the difference is night and day. While the insurgents simply don't care where the collateral damage goes, in most cases US soldiers are quite careful and the number of civilians who have been killed in the Iraq conflict by US soldiers is probably lower than any other conflict in the past 100 years.

I am not saying that the military is perfect, but once again, you see an EXTREMELY low rate of unprovoked gun violence given the large number of fully automatic weapons in the hands of extremely young men in a hugely stressful environment. You are making the argument for me. Don't get me wrong, I understand that thousands of Iraqi civilians have died, but most have died from causes not directly attributable to US soldiers acting irresponsibly or outside of their rules of engagement.

Mark

Markp

If you aren't willing to pull a trigger in combat, e.g. you are a conscientious objector, they don't want you. It's one of the first questions they ask.

Mark