+1
----- Original Message -----From: r burnette <r.burnette@xxxxxxx>To: Olympus
Camera Discussion <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Cc: Tina Manley
<images@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 08:45:39 -0000 (UTC)Subject: Re:
[OM] Too close to home
Tina:
You know your family best, but your extrapolation to the larger population is
faulty. Numerous studies have shown that communities where gun ownership is
legal are actually safer than those where they are banned. Ever compare the
crime rates of Detroit and New York City with the crime rate in Birmingham or
Tallahassee? Gun ownership over the past ten years is higher than any time
since the wild west era, yet FBI statistics show the crime rate actually
dropping over that period.
Most of the Concealed Weapons Permit carriers are not gun "nuts." (A few are!)
As a rule, law-Abiding people don't commit crimes. Many CCW or CDW holders are
people who recognize the inability of police officers to prevent most crimes.
As a former military policeman and police officer, I am all too aware that in
the majority of the cases, law enforcement personnel usually arrive on the
scene after a crime has been committed, as in the case of all the recent mass
shootings. FYI--the Supreme Court has ruled that police have no legal
obligation to protect any given individual or group. They have a
"responsibility to the community" in general. The responsibility for personal
and family protection is up to the individual.
Are the armed citizen's that trouble you making something out of nothing, or do
they have reason to be alarmed? Anyone who does not recognize that the moral
underpinnings and subsequent moral behaviors of our citizens have taken a
drastic turn for the worse in the past 25 years or so has been living under a
rock somewhere. Even the rural communities are no longer totally safe from
violent crimes (often drug-related). Any society that could murder 53,000,000+
unborn children since Roe V. Wade has lost both reverence and respect for life.
Self-centered, immoral attitudes are the real root of the gun violence, and all
other forms of violence, in our nation. We just don't want to acknowledge it.
We need to stop blaming the weapons used to harm people and start concentrating
more on the morals and the motives that create and propagate misuse of them. It
is true that guns don't kill people. but people with guns kill people. As do
people with clubs, knives, stones, automobiles, etc. More people are killed
with automobiles every year than with guns. Why don't we ban automobiles? We
need to stop focussing on the means and shift our focus to the people
committing the violence and the reasons why they do so. (Morals and motives.)
What fosters such behaviors? Is it our moral climate? The media? Our world
views? What?
You know the pro-gun arguments. Gun bans effect only law-abiding citizens, the
ones who would not misuse them anyway. (Most revocations of concealed weapons
permits are due to domestic disputes and DUIs. Less than 2% nationwide commit
crimes involving guns.) Every reasonable person knows that criminals are not
going to comply with a gun ban. They do not obey laws. That's why we call them
criminals. And gun bans do not eliminate or curb criminal behaviors. Look at
Australia, Canada, and England for example. Their crime rates, including gun
violence, increased after their gun bans.
My advice to those who don't like or are afraid of gun: Don't buy one or own
one. Don't attempt to force your biases upon law-abiding citizens who hold
different opinions.
As for assault-type weapons. We have taught our citizens to use them in our
military forces. They are familiar with them. In many cases their lives have
depended upon them. In my day, anyone who wanted a rifle for hunting or defense
would have bought a bolt-action or an semi-automatic rifle. Today many are
purchasing what they trained with--an AR-15. Does that mean that they have
secret plans or ambitions to shoot up their neighborhoods, or that they want a
weapon that they know and can trust?
Does anyone really need a high capacity magazine for a weapon. Not
really--until you really need the extra ammunition. Then you need all the
firepower you can get. That's why so many law enforcement agents now have
assault-type weapons with high capacity magazines. They are just being prepared
for a worse case scenario. So are those civilians who purchase such--with the
fervent hope that they will never have to use them.
As for your bow and arrow--before guns were invented, people killed each other
with arrows (or hatchets, or knives). As for me, I would never take a bow and
arrow to a gun fight. ;o)
Just my two cents tossed into the jar.
Robert
---- Tina Manley <images@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > As a resident of the southern
USA, I can say that, as much as I would like> for that to happen, it will never
be. There are too many gun nuts here who> think that any infringement on the
right to bear any arms is violating> their rights. Automatic machine guns,
multi-shot clips, hand-guns,> anything should be allowed and we should all have
them to defend ourselves.> It's too depressing. Every time we visit our
relatives in Alabama, I say> it will be the last time. This is a typical family
scene as they pass> around loaded guns at the dinner table:> >
http://www.pbase.com/tinamanley/image/152934358> > I don't know what the answer
is, but I would just as soon not have any guns> at all for any reason. If we
need to shoot deer, we could use bows and> arrows. Do away with guns totally.>
> Tina> > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:28 PM, John Hudson <OM4T@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:> > > This will be an everlasting problem until such time as the 2
nd Amendment is> > completely done away with !> >> > jh> >> >> >> > -----
Original Message -----> > From: "Ken Norton" <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx>> > To: "Olympus
Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> > Sent: Friday, December 13,
2013 8:32 PM> > Subject: [OM] Too close to home> >> >> > > Today's school
shooting was at the high school that my daughters would> > > have gone to if I
didn't come back to Iowa.> > >> > > Just sayin...> > >--> > > Ken Norton> > >
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > http://www.zone-10.com> > > --> > >
_________________________________________________________________> > > Options:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus> > > Archives:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/> > > Themed Olympus
Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/> > >> >> > --> >
_________________________________________________________________> > Options:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus> > Archives:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/pri
vate/olympus/> > Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/> >> >>
>> > > -- > Tina Manley> http://
<http://tina-manley.artistwebsites.com/>www.tinamanley.com> -- >
_________________________________________________________________> Options:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus> Archives:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/> Themed Olympus Photo
Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/>
-- _________________________________________________________________Options:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympusArchives:
http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/Themed Olympus Photo
Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|