Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
As I look up and down the board, I'm amazed at the number of threads on *** control, the Second Amendment and shootings in the U.S. So here we sit, discussing the issue that is currently dominating the American media, and (IMO) we aren't any better than the politicians that we all so enjoy throwing darts at. And while some arguments are much better than others (on both sides), so very few people seem willing to find areas of common ground - just like the politicians and special interest groups.
As most of you know, I am a *** owner and I am a Life Member of the NRA. But that doesn't mean that I subscribe to or agree with every single position that the NRA holds dear. In fact, there are several things where we are in distinct disagreement. But for the most part, I am a *** enthusiast... who no longer hunts very often and I seldom find the time to even go target shooting. Most of the firearms I have just collect dust and rust these days. I'm a rather large & healthy feller, who is fortunate enough to live in a relatively safe and tranquil area, so other than an occasional bear or coyote who walks across my land, I'm not really concerned about needing a firearm for self-preservation. And I don't have any irrational fears about needing to join a militia brigade and taking on the government or U.N. ******, or shooting down any black helicopters anytime soon either. So I'm not one of these *** owners who is going to engage in a debate about whether or not I need a firearm... whether it's a collectible firearm, a hunting firearm, a sport shooting/target firearm, a self-defense firearm, a military style firearm or any other type of firearm. In the 30+ years that I've had discussions with people about firearms, I have never once said that I needed a firearm. As for the *** control advocates who bring up the social acceptability of hunting, target shooting and collecting... I also don't need to hunt. I don't need to target shoot. I don't need to collect. Does anyone truly need to do any of these things??? If I do any of these things, I do them because I want to, not because I need to. In looking around my house a few minutes before beginning this thread, I found that the overwhelming majority of things that I own are not things that I (truly) need - most are things that, at some point, I just wanted. Same with my cars. I love cars more than I like guns. But no, I don't need a car (or three) that will exceed 150 mph. I just wanted them. Maybe I'm overly materialistic or something? :dunno:
So with all that said, let me go back to why I'm writing this novel of a post: if the issue that has gotten us all wound up is firearms related ********, why don't we all (along with the politicians) look at data and focus in on the specific root causes of that ******** and who/what commit these violent acts??? Why is that so incredibly hard for us? I have looked at data about firearms related ******** in the U.S. I've posted links here and at other places and it's always largely ignored by both sides of the debate. And the only reason I can think of for that is, if we actually looked at the data, we'd all start talking about this in a way where we might find areas of compromise or maybe even agreement.
Let me ask this one question: Is there a single person on this board who believes that it should be legal for a previously convicted, violent felon to have a firearm or ammo of any type?
Anyone, anyone... Bueller? No? Oh fuck! Surely to goodness we haven't found an area of agreement, that will dismiss the need for name calling, silly pictures and ancient quotes from men long dead?! Say it ain't so! If we can't have arguments that do nothing but go in circles, then how can we go on? Surely we don't want to agree that it's a very bad idea for violent criminals to have firearms (who are the primary contributors to firearms related ******** in most major cities and in general, across the U.S.) and then have a civil, reasonable chat about finding rational, practical ways of disarming them. Hell no, let's not do that! What was I thinking?! Just put my silly ass on Ignore and forget that I posted this crazy thought. This post alone probably confirms that I'm too goofy in the head to own firearms. :yesyes:
As most of you know, I am a *** owner and I am a Life Member of the NRA. But that doesn't mean that I subscribe to or agree with every single position that the NRA holds dear. In fact, there are several things where we are in distinct disagreement. But for the most part, I am a *** enthusiast... who no longer hunts very often and I seldom find the time to even go target shooting. Most of the firearms I have just collect dust and rust these days. I'm a rather large & healthy feller, who is fortunate enough to live in a relatively safe and tranquil area, so other than an occasional bear or coyote who walks across my land, I'm not really concerned about needing a firearm for self-preservation. And I don't have any irrational fears about needing to join a militia brigade and taking on the government or U.N. ******, or shooting down any black helicopters anytime soon either. So I'm not one of these *** owners who is going to engage in a debate about whether or not I need a firearm... whether it's a collectible firearm, a hunting firearm, a sport shooting/target firearm, a self-defense firearm, a military style firearm or any other type of firearm. In the 30+ years that I've had discussions with people about firearms, I have never once said that I needed a firearm. As for the *** control advocates who bring up the social acceptability of hunting, target shooting and collecting... I also don't need to hunt. I don't need to target shoot. I don't need to collect. Does anyone truly need to do any of these things??? If I do any of these things, I do them because I want to, not because I need to. In looking around my house a few minutes before beginning this thread, I found that the overwhelming majority of things that I own are not things that I (truly) need - most are things that, at some point, I just wanted. Same with my cars. I love cars more than I like guns. But no, I don't need a car (or three) that will exceed 150 mph. I just wanted them. Maybe I'm overly materialistic or something? :dunno:
So with all that said, let me go back to why I'm writing this novel of a post: if the issue that has gotten us all wound up is firearms related ********, why don't we all (along with the politicians) look at data and focus in on the specific root causes of that ******** and who/what commit these violent acts??? Why is that so incredibly hard for us? I have looked at data about firearms related ******** in the U.S. I've posted links here and at other places and it's always largely ignored by both sides of the debate. And the only reason I can think of for that is, if we actually looked at the data, we'd all start talking about this in a way where we might find areas of compromise or maybe even agreement.
Let me ask this one question: Is there a single person on this board who believes that it should be legal for a previously convicted, violent felon to have a firearm or ammo of any type?
Anyone, anyone... Bueller? No? Oh fuck! Surely to goodness we haven't found an area of agreement, that will dismiss the need for name calling, silly pictures and ancient quotes from men long dead?! Say it ain't so! If we can't have arguments that do nothing but go in circles, then how can we go on? Surely we don't want to agree that it's a very bad idea for violent criminals to have firearms (who are the primary contributors to firearms related ******** in most major cities and in general, across the U.S.) and then have a civil, reasonable chat about finding rational, practical ways of disarming them. Hell no, let's not do that! What was I thinking?! Just put my silly ass on Ignore and forget that I posted this crazy thought. This post alone probably confirms that I'm too goofy in the head to own firearms. :yesyes:
