Why many Americans insist on owning weapons

I rarely reblog anything . . . I felt this was worth reblogging.

Please, pretty please with a pink bow on top: even if you do not read the piece, click on the links contained therein regarding Brittain and the Supreme Court ruling (not related).

. . . but, you really should read it.

tacticalprofessor

A friend posted a comment on his Facebook page about police response policies and times today. His post related to the hypocrisy of politicians who are protected by armed guards around the clock but desire to have the populace disarmed and at the mercy of the criminal element.

In the wake of the Umpqua Community College and Northern Arizona University shootings, there have been renewed calls by Mr. Obama for increased gun control, along with other politicians. The implication of these calls is that law enforcement authorities are always available to protect the citizenry at a moment’s notice. If the government will not allow the citizenry to protect itself, as is now the case in Lesser Britain, then that responsibility must fall to the organized government. A frequently validated saying in the Army is

If no one in particular is responsible for something, then no one is responsible…

View original post 341 more words

About disperser

Odd guy with odd views living an odd life during odd times.
This entry was posted in Guns and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Why many Americans insist on owning weapons

  1. Because they’re idiots??????????????????????????? :D

    Like

    • disperser says:

      . . . you should at least read it . . .

      . . . and, you should read the earlier one on violence.

      If you then feel it’s logical or it applies to you, great. But you should at least be informed.

      Like

      • “Most gun owners favor responsible gun ownership” I quote. The same old pro gun lobby’s mantra, I should like to see the results of ALL the surveys taken from ALL the gun owners in the U S of A , including those illiterate gun owners who can barely read or write and please don’t say there are none.
        I’ll bet a penny to a pound there has never been a complete and proper survey and all we get is the gun owners credo “guns don’t kill people kill” what a load o codswallop that is! re there? Do you know of any full surveys?

        But if you can point me to the true surveys that substantiate the “most gun….” I’d be happy to read that too. And by the bye I’ll also take a bet that most of those gun owners who are saying that are laughing at the stupidity of those that believe them!

        I’m sorry Ej but you’ll never convince me of the right to bear arms, and as for the person who wrote that post saying how he has that recording and plays it often he sounds like a sick mind to me. Probably someone of the mentality who hung up the phone on the 911 call!

        Like

        • everglowz says:

          How about a study from Harvard about how more guns leads to less crimes. That literate enough for you?
          http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

          Like

        • But do you really expect such a report to say anything else? I didn’t bother reading it as you told me what it said .As a matter of interest are there any reports/study’s to the contrary that you forgot/neglected to direct me to, or would that defeat the purpose? There are probably as many reports for as against and I think you have been selective because you like guns. Surely that isn’t the American way to just give the one consenting view; is it?

          Like

        • everglowz says:

          Really you’re completely discounting Harvard Law? Who is the idiot now????????

          Like

        • disperser says:

          That has even more words than I use . . . no one will read it.

          Like

        • disperser says:

          OK . . . no name calling. LordBoB initial flippant response was in part humor and in part because of familiarity with me.

          So, I will be closing comments here before it goes too far.

          As far as studies, both sides pick and choose what studies to takes seriously, so it’s not rock someone can throw without having done the research. However, for the record and if anyone ever bothered to read what I post, I have in the past presented competing arguments.

          Also, if someone would bother reading and listening to what I post, I am for gun control. I am not for abolishing guns. What I would propose, as Mr. Harris plainly states, would be more stringent than anything proposed even by people who want to get rid of guns.

          However, I am tired of repeating it.

          Liked by 1 person

      • disperser says:

        Not trying to convince you. I realize you are a lost cause. That said, if you are going to direct question at me as to why I might want a gun when you obviously decided it’s not for you, perhaps you would like to read some of the many links I provide (a good place to start is the recent post on violence). Mr. Harris makes my case quite eloquently.

        If on the other hand, you are just going to keep repeating the same thing (“I just don’t get it, ejd!”) then we have nothing to talk about, and we should probably move on.

        As for surveys, go to any anti-gun site or listen to out esteemed President. He’ll tell you the same numbers.

        You also have an interesting view of gun owners (and probably Americans in general). Mouth-breathers, as it were. That seems a rather superior (nationalistic) view of many, many millions of gun owners in the US.

        As for the person who listens to those recordings, in case you missed it, he is in law enforcement and those recordings were part of the dispatch training. That he has a collection can be subject to debate, but what is not subject to debate is that I have never met a cop that is anti guns. I assume they are out there, but the reason I initially bought a handgun and applied to carry one is on the advice of a police detective.

        Speaking of not understanding, in case you missed clicking on this link:
        https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q589.htm

        Way to make sure no criminals are harmed. You cannot begin to understand how insane that reads to me. Perhaps we should trade arguments neither of us will ever understand, but really, it’s tiring. If you want to “dive” deeper into my thinking, read the stuff from Mr. Harris. If reading is too much, you could listen to the audio version – it should beat the soaps you watch hands down.

        Like

  2. Thank you for sharing this, Emilio!
    HUGS!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Emily Scott says:

    Mr Obama and Lesser Britain… or you could say President Obama and Great Britain. Peculiar turns of phrase.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Peculiar turns of phrase that might be considered disrespectful by some but this is just Emilio’s way. I had/have no time for President Geo W Bush , but when referring to him I believe I always prefixed his name with the word President out of respect for the office (which may seem odd coming from an Englishman); if not the man.

      Like

    • disperser says:

      Those are not my words.

      Like

Comments are closed.