UL with a gun?

"So a trained person with a gun is responsible? Do you want me to refute your statement or do see the irony in what you said?"

there is no irony in that… its simply the way it is.

Take for example – the fine men and woman in the military and police departments that risk their lives everyday to protect your rights and help keep the US safe. It is the people behind the gun that makes it unsafe.

a screw driver can be considered unsafe if you get a ding dong of person using it in a poor manor – and yes it coudl kill someone… as can fists.

Shouldn't this come under the Hike Your Own Hike theory?

David, you seem to be in a bad mood lately. Weather?

a screw driver can be considered unsafe if you get a ding dong of person using it in a poor manor – and yes it could kill someone… as can fists.

Or Chuck Norris' feet.

I'd still like to see a POLL that shows the actual percentages of how the members feel about this. One vote per member, of course not everyone would vote, but aren't you curious? For the record, I'm not anti-gun, might even have a few of them :) , but they're not very interesting to me, I grew up with them, here in the "convservative" midwest.

Is there a way to make the threads of this forum disappear from my screen? I have a problem just ignoring them. This subject has been beat to death like a two-day dead horse.

Ryan: "…and have been known on occasion to listen to NPR."

Awesome me 2! I find no other station as relaxing! =P

@David: Your problem is your own bud. If you dont like the article dont comment. If it doesn't fit into your minds conditioned response to guns(others have different conditioning than you), why let it bother you? AFter all we are all products of our environments. Just go about your own way, you will be much happier, look at you now, all flustered, when you could have just ignored it. What did you gain from coming here and doing all this?

David, I actually laughed out loud when I read this: "With respect to the curiosity element – no guns in the house, no curiosity."

Um, right. 'Cause they never see anything on TV, or hear anything on the radio, or see anything in print, and they never hear anybody talking about anything you might not agree with. There's no drugs or smokes in the house, so they'll obviously never be remotely curious about those things. There's no sex going on in their rooms, so they'll probably never be curious about that. There's no booze in the house, so they'll never be remotely curious about that.

Tell me: Is it more responsible to be ignorant about something, or to be knowledgeable?

>Guns are about killing. Hard to connect with packpacking.

I kill on virtually every backpacking trip I do, including my PCT thru hike this past summer.

Ok, it was with a fishing pole and hook and not a gun. But the animal was just as dead and just as tasty. I processed and ate fish so that I could make a longer stretch with out having to exit the back country for a resupply. Sound familiar?

I've never fired a gun in my life. But I fail to see any moral difference between what I do with a hook and what a hunter does. So I'm having trouble understanding why the article on Tenkara fishing and the sale of those killing devices on this site didn't get the same strong reaction.

Just the opposite, my thru hike where I passed numerous small game got me interested in hunting. A few videos on youtube showed me that field dressing a grouse or a squirrel is just about as quick and easy as gutting a trout. In other words it can be done while still hiking long miles. And I love the idea of having more fresh food available when I'm in the back country.

Do I want another article on BPL about hunting while backpacking? Probably not. It's already been done. But I wouldn't mind seeing an article on collecting edible plants. I wonder if that article would also offend some folks definition of leave no trace ethics and compel them to leave the site.

p.s. I am one of those far left wing left coasters about which a few folks haven chosen to promote unfounded stereotypes. Please show me the broad based movement to ban hunting. And no PETA does not qualify as a broad based movement.

"Taking a child to a range and seeing safe, lawful shooting is smart – it takes the allure of guns away."

I agree with this 100%. Like it or not we live in a society where guns are commonplace and legal. Sticking your head in the sand is no way to live given the very high liklihood of eventually having some encounter with a gun. Kinda like deciding not to educate your kids about sex and being surprised when you end up with teenage pregnancy.

While I grew up in a family of non-hunters and we had no "home protection" weapons, my father did feel very strongly about educating us about guns and taking us to a range with a rangemaster for training. I think I went to a range my first time when I was around 11 and I remember it clearly to this day. Lessons well taught in a VERY HIGHLY CONTROLLED environment that have stuck with me to this day on the dangers and proper handling of weapons. I have not shot a weapon in many years, but I am very thankful for the education that I received early on.

Before I leave this board, I need to say a few things.

The second amendment in the USA is a RIGHT, as is the first amendment RIGHT to speak your support or opposition to the practice of it.

As I've been informed, this does not apply to private venues, no problem, I know were the door is.

Further more, I've watched allot of pro vs anti discussions, here and else where, and disagree with the fringes of BOTH sides.

As for attempts to frame this in the left vs right, superficial, American attitude of the last 30 years in this country, is ridiculous, and only adds to the political disfunction we currently face in this country and the world.

God save the Queen.

@Hartley F: "Guns are about killing.."

Life is about killing. Life lives off life. In order for you to type this message, you had to benefit from the death of a living plant/animal. Going back further, in order for you to be sitting at a computer in "America" ,killing had to take place. Early inhabitants of this new land had to kill to survive, without killing they would have perished, and something else would have happened. If they did'nt kill, they would have died and you would not be here today. Life lives off life, its the nature of things, it will always be that way. Guns are just an object.

The irony is that a trained person with a gun can still be irresponsible. The two are not mutually exclusive.

Toes North – no, feeling fine. Do we not want to discuss things anymore or should we just take things as wrote?

Isaac – this is the point of this forum – discuss opposing opinions. For those of you who don't like the discussion, as has been indicated, stay off the thread. Become a member and financially support this website and I may take you seriously.

Brad – I don't allow my kids to watch violent TV shows so I am not the correct audience for your commentary.

If I ever become a father I will feel a great pride in teaching and showing my children how food gets from the earth onto their plates.

I would just like to enter this volatile thread for a moment to say that I believe plants are sentient beings.

Happy eating everyone!
Give thanks for every bite!

@DAVID

I was a member of this site for over a year, but i have not renewed because i do not use credit cards anymore. What does this have to do with the validity of any argument?

@James

I also believe plants are sentient beings. =)

Because you would not have been able to read the Members Article on the gun in the first place to understand how this discussion got started.

"If I ever become a father I will feel a great pride in teaching and showing my children how food gets from the earth onto their plates."

I take great pride in that already.

@David:

And what exactly from the article are you discussing that i need to reference the article for clarification of?

Seems like you are discussing:
fatherly pride
guns are only for killing, not target practice
raising children/Kids and electrical sockets
violent television shows
membership vs validity of message

peace =P

"I don't allow my kids to watch violent TV shows so I am not the correct audience for your commentary."

seriously man, I mean, OK, we disagree on the guns thing, but do you really believe this? I've seen programs that are rated Y7 that have laser guns and so forth. how long do you expect your kids to stay away from this dangerous knowledge? I grew up with some kids who's parents did that, and the effect was the exact opposite of what was intended.

Kids shows are one thing – lasers, etc. But no one dies or gets seriously hurt. And considering Laser Guns don't actually exist….

No, sorry, I don't let my kids watch really violent shows.

I would also argue that if such shows weren't on TV…..

I have never owned a gun nor felt a need to acquire one but had no strong feelings one way or the other. However, the well-reasoned, objective arguments of those condemning not only the use but even the discussion of firearms here has convinced me…I am now planning to buy a gun and I will smile a smile of secret satsifaction whenever I use it.

Isaac – please quit editing your posts – it is getting confusing to follow.

The original posts that much of this is referring to were initiated by Miguel in relation to the article. Reading the article and the initial disclaimer will help you get an idea of the context of some of these posts.

You will not find Miguel's original posts because they were deleted.

@ Ken. I laughed (finally). Thanks,

I was editing because i was searching for your points to add to the list of topics you discussing, adding them as i found them.

if they were deleted, there is a large chance they were deleted because they were off-topic/inappropriate.