insightful commentary from instructor

I received this in a local newsletter from my CHL instructor. I'm not sure I agree with it being over money more than ideology, but the point is well made:



The question is, "Are guns bad, or are guns good?"
The problem is, there is no correct answer to the question.
Guns are inanimate objects and can, therefore, can be neither bad nor good. However, people on both sides of the argument refuse to accept that premise. Both sides are driven by their own ideologies, requiring them to give human qualities to inanimate objects that, without human help, can neither kill nor protect.
Compare the argument to one where those involved are trying to determine whether Steak Knives are good or bad. Wake up! They're like guns, they're neither.
What we wind up with is one side that preaches that all individuals should have unfettered access to Steak Knives. You know them as the folks on the 10:00 o'clock news, carrying signs that read, "When Steak Knives are Outlawed, Only Outlaws ..."
The other side usually takes an incremental approach. They will chip away at the "Right to Keep and Bear Steak Knives," by demanding that we limit access to the utensils to only those individuals who have undergone background checks. Further, they try to convince us they can make our lives safer by limiting access to only dull knives. Other restrictions can include not allowing possession of Steak Knives in excess of 3" in length, and, then, only after an individual has satisfied the State that he has a true need to possess one.
The only thing certain is that both sides are lying to you. Neither side is trying to do anything except line their pockets with membership dues.
The Steak Knives Without Limits gang always (intentionally) overlooks the fact that some folks just shouldn't have access to Steak Knives. Who? My schizophrenic neighbor, for one, and the felon, who lives next door to him, for another.
On the other hand, the Steak Knife Control crowd conveniently fails to bring up that Steak Knives may be used to cut steaks into bite-sized pieces, socially acceptable for consumption in a restaurant. They claim that limiting access is necessary for the safety of the children, and that all Steak Knives have dull edges. Also, in their effort to blame an inanimate object for a bad act, they will intentionally overlook the fact that some real, live people are inherently evil, and that no amount of Steak Knife Control will change that.
It sounds a little silly, doesn't it. That's because it is. So, why do we have the arguments? Follow the money. Whether it's the Brady Campaign or the NRA, folks on both sides of the argument are making tons of money, convincing you send them your dues and contributions, to be used to protect you. They create the illusion of a problem, and then, for a price, they offer to save you from that problem.

Well a legitimate argument can be raised that a crazed killer of fifty people in Orlando didn't use a steak knife.
And that I'm afraid poses a very serious problem for all of us.

It's the "Crazed Killer of Fifty people" that is the problem. Could have just as easily run them down with an automobile outside the club BUT, he chose to use a firearm. People just can't see that. THE "GUN IS THE PROBLEM!!.
Never mind the fact that he had been looked at by the FBI for being a "little strange". He slipped thru the cracks and now it's front page news.
Seems to me like we, as U.S. citizens, have way too many freedoms and if they get clamped down, we get our panties in a bunch. So, you like your freedom (?) , you get exactly what comes with it. It's my right/freedom to do as I please and you can't do anything about it till it causes a problem, then it's too late. The damage has been done.

The country was founded on the basis of freedom. And even though all living here didn't have freedom, there wasent any major uprisings and violence when when it came to them.
So blaming freedom in and of itself isn't the answer and cannot be blamed.
Wether we can continue to have it based on the reality in which we exist is a different matter.

Way I look at it, he could have done what he did with a 12 gauge shotgun and buck shot if he wanted to...

The fact is, we have the right to bear arms (even "MILITARY-LOOKING arms like Ar-15's) so as to be able to defend ourselves against an oppressive GOVERNMENT, as well as home intruders.

Having that right/responsibility has ramifications and a price to pay. I am willing to accept the risk that some BAD people will get their hands on some scary looking weapons that can prove very effective at killing/harming others, but that is a small price to pay for freedom from fundamental oppression.

ARM yourself. Learn to use your weapons and pray every day you never have to make the choice whether or not to use it to defend your loved ones or someone else equally worth of defense.

Added note: I don't mean to say that what he did was anything less than atrocious. Nor do I intend to sound callous about it. Just preaching to the choir that we can't let it become an excuse for restricting gun rights.

Evil men will find ways to do evil deeds regardless of written laws.

Well speaking with just ourselves and not the whole choir, I think most of us would admit that's a lot of carnage for one person to commit within a short period of time.
Certainly he could have strapped explosives on himself and did likewise, but he didn't.
Had he done that, chances are this conversation wouldn't be taking place at least as it is.
We might also admit to ourselves that were the original founders writing our founding documents today, the wording might be somewhat different as it implies to protection from tyranny.
The big picture isn't wether we will lose some of what we view as basic rights, but wether we will lose all rights as weve known them.
We need look no further than Europe to see ourselves in a very short period of time.
You can fight all you want for the right to own a 20 round clip, but give me term limits as a starter.

"Creating the illusion of a problem" or even worse, creating the illusion of a danger...yea....know that quite well. There's a name for that behavior, it's called Malignant Hero Syndrome. The rough definition is to "falsely create a problem only (he) can solve, thereby becoming the savior, the hero".

It's related to Munchausen By Proxy syndrome, and is TEACHABLE! The world is full of these types of people, all in need of therapy, with few getting any. I know, I worked at a company where a VP suffered from this and screwed over everybody he worked with. Heck, I would venture to say that most of us have probably worked under this type of individual at some time or another, and know what a career ending, PITA they are.

Me thinks the news media is a natural attractant to this type of individual, seems to be chock full of them, you can probably guess which network is the worst. Its the one that's been largely responsible for the dramatic increase in firearm sales, especially assault weapons, the past 8 years. I'll give you a hint, not a vixen.

Keeping my head down and my ammo dry, cause it's a commin'.

Quote:

---

Keeping my head down and my ammo dry, cause it's a commin'.

---

Indeed it is. Over Memorial day weekend there were 69 shootings in Chicago that left 12 dead....did not see 24/7 coverage on news outlets about that fiasco. Wonder why?

I'd like to build a wall or a fence. A tall one. With razor wire. Armed guards. Lots of them. I would put it right along the Mississippi River. Move/put all the conservatives on the east side, the liberals on the west side. Sit back and watch what happens...

In six months the liberals will be digging tunnels to get to the east side!

Oh please Foxx, if we do this can't we conservatives be on the west side. That way less liberals would have to move. Anyway there isn't any good places to shoot on the east side!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sharpshooter

The politicians would forget all about gun control, if they could just master "mind control".

---

Yeah Fred, I think the just about have that down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wbm

Indeed it is. Over Memorial day weekend there were 69 shootings in Chicago that left 12 dead....did not see 24/7 coverage on news outlets about that fiasco. Wonder why?

---

If you took Chicago & Detroit out of the stats, the United States would have one of the lowest crimes rates per capita (gun related) in the world.

The United States also has one of the highest gun ownerships per capita in the world. Example: The Dallas TX area, 95% plus homeowners have/own weapons (guns) in there home. The also have one of the lowest crime rates in the country.

I also wonder why you don't ever hear too much about Chicago and Detroit crime rates in the news. It would be pretty interesting to hear about it.

Dennis

Me thinks you don't REALLY wonder why, Dennis.

Me thinks you KNOW why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxx

Me thinks you don't REALLY wonder why, Dennis.

Me thinks you KNOW why.

---

:behindsofa:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas Solo

I received this in a local newsletter from my CHL instructor. I'm not sure I agree with it being over money more than ideology, but the point is well made:



The question is, "Are guns bad, or are guns good?"
The problem is, there is no correct answer to the question.
Guns are inanimate objects and can, therefore, can be neither bad nor good. However, people on both sides of the argument refuse to accept that premise. Both sides are driven by their own ideologies, requiring them to give human qualities to inanimate objects that, without human help, can neither kill nor protect.
Compare the argument to one where those involved are trying to determine whether Steak Knives are good or bad. Wake up! They're like guns, they're neither.
What we wind up with is one side that preaches that all individuals should have unfettered access to Steak Knives. You know them as the folks on the 10:00 o'clock news, carrying signs that read, "When Steak Knives are Outlawed, Only Outlaws ..."
The other side usually takes an incremental approach. They will chip away at the "Right to Keep and Bear Steak Knives," by demanding that we limit access to the utensils to only those individuals who have undergone background checks. Further, they try to convince us they can make our lives safer by limiting access to only dull knives. Other restrictions can include not allowing possession of Steak Knives in excess of 3" in length, and, then, only after an individual has satisfied the State that he has a true need to possess one.
The only thing certain is that both sides are lying to you. Neither side is trying to do anything except line their pockets with membership dues.
The Steak Knives Without Limits gang always (intentionally) overlooks the fact that some folks just shouldn't have access to Steak Knives. Who? My schizophrenic neighbor, for one, and the felon, who lives next door to him, for another.
On the other hand, the Steak Knife Control crowd conveniently fails to bring up that Steak Knives may be used to cut steaks into bite-sized pieces, socially acceptable for consumption in a restaurant. They claim that limiting access is necessary for the safety of the children, and that all Steak Knives have dull edges. Also, in their effort to blame an inanimate object for a bad act, they will intentionally overlook the fact that some real, live people are inherently evil, and that no amount of Steak Knife Control will change that.
It sounds a little silly, doesn't it. That's because it is. So, why do we have the arguments? Follow the money. Whether it's the Brady Campaign or the NRA, folks on both sides of the argument are making tons of money, convincing you send them your dues and contributions, to be used to protect you. They create the illusion of a problem, and then, for a price, they offer to save you from that problem.

---

Not going to argue the money side of it. But I will say that there are several people that I feel shouldn't have access to motor vehicles. The retiree down the street from me that I have never seen drive over 15 mph. The young girl in the left lane of the freeway checking social media on her cell phone. The kid that borrowed daddy's sports car for the night. I can't do anything about these people. It is their right to drive. I just resign myself to try to put distance between myself and them.

Last night, I went to a baseball game. They had metal detectors all around the stadium. In the past I have forgotten to take my pocket knife out of my pants and been turned away. My niece has a tiny knife on her keychain. The blade is probably an inch and a half long. She has been refused entry until she went back and left it in the car.

I haven't been to many(if any) bars in the last few years. But I remember accidently leaving my pocket knife in my pocket while trying to enter one. I was turned away by the policeman that was moonlighting as security for the bar. He understood that my pocket knife was just a tool, but said that bringing it into the bar was a violation of their rules. I apologized and took it out to my car. This has been the norm for probably several decades. The larger bars hire off duty policemen to work security and do not allow any kind of weapon through the doors.

In a bar that is large enough for a madman to kill or wound over 100 people, how does anyone sneak an AR-15 through the doors?

Well, driving a car is not a right. It is a privilege granted by the state for those who can show the knowledge and skill necessary to do so safely. How well that is accomplished, I don't know. But OWNING a firearm for the purpose of self defense is a national RIGHT. PERIOD. Until you give up that right, among others, by judgement of a legitimate and public court of law, you are entitled to that right.

As for sneaking a long gun into a bar, I had the impression he just walked in with it and shot the only armed guard available to stop him.