Gunman shoots 4 officers inside Detroit precinct

[james&olya 1,121]

this oratory wasn't presented by the founding fathers ... it was presented later at a different sort of dedication

So you disagree with it? I quote it because it summarizes nicely the core of what our government was meant to be.

[daboyz 36]

Makes it too hard to cook the fries?

[mawilson 2,133]

Without a doubt, absolutely yes, the guns saved the officers from further injuries and loss of life. I want the police armed and able to neutralize any threat to public security!! I worry when I hear rhetoric from some quarters suggesting that fringe citizen groups have some noble duty and right to arm themselves against our government so that they can take by force what they cannot achieve by democratic means! This is basically what just happened today in the airport in Moscow where I am scheduled to meet my fiancee and her children this Friday!! They used a bomb rather than guns but a loose definition of 'arms' might include bombs! Some militia types such as Timothy McVeigh certainly seemed to see the merit in using bombs as a weapon against a supposedly tyrannical government. Society has an inherent right to take whatever steps necessary to provide for the collective security of all. Times have changed! Laws and 'rights' may need to change to keep up with new realities.

I agree with everything you said, except the last part

("times have changed - we must change our laws....").

Times have not changed - there's nothing special about today's problems

that people 100 or 200 years ago didn't have to deal with.

I hope your fiancee and her family are safe.

[mawilson 2,133]

I didn't have a carry gun and neither did the Police.

Precisely. It's fair if the police are not allowed to carry either. If the police

are armed, people should be allowed to arm themselves too.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Precisely. It's fair if the police are not allowed to carry either. If the police

are armed, people should be allowed to arm themselves too.

Because every incident, should end in a shootout.

[Captain Oates 911]

Precisely. It's fair if the police are not allowed to carry either. If the police

are armed, people should be allowed to arm themselves too.

The police hated the idea of being armed as that would give criminals a reason to carry weapons

I was burgled 5 times and three times I was in bed. I just chased em off with a rolling pin out of the kitchen. I attacked 3 Pakistanis with my rolling pin and they turned drip white and jumped in their car and hared off. One time I walked toward two burglars naked and smiling. Beats a pump action shotgun any time - they broke the Olympic 100 metre sprint record.

It's rolling pins and rolled up newspapers in the UK. An all together more relaxed way to live. The criminals like it that way too.

Dear old Blighty

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

One time I walked toward two burglars naked and smiling. Beats a pump action shotgun any time - they broke the Olympic 100 metre sprint record.

they musta thought you meant business!

[Captain Oates 911]

they musta thought you meant business!

A naked Yorkshireman has been known to scare a grizzly dead in it's tracks !

...and battalions of soft southern pooftahs !

When Eric Cantona played for us it was like this ! >>

http://blogs.timeslive.co.za/thefrockreport/files/2009/10/cantona.jpg

[slim 1,525]

Imagine a society like that - wouldnt it be just awful ? No excuse to strut one's 'manhood'.

We have a lot of posters here on VJ who claim they've never seen a gun whilst out and about either - and they've spent all their years in the good 'ol US of A. How do you explain that one?

It sounds to me like you've had a lot of guns pulled on you since being here. Is that the case? Do you often walk alone (or not alone) home down dark alleys at 3:00 AM and see guns?

Or are you just talking about the society you see on TV and/or hear about on the news?

I live in an urban area that averages a few homicides a week. I see it on the news every night, see it in the newspaper, and constantly have to deal with folks who tell me how unsafe guns are because of it. Care to take a guess how many times I've seen a gun while out and about?

Makes it too hard to cook the fries?

Retains too much heat. I can make fries in my sleep!

Government. Of the people, by the people, and for the people! Or maybe you don't believe in this. I know some on the right seem to have a problem when these 'people' are not like them. And some of us on the left have a problem when 'people' include these artificial constructs called corporations. Nonetheless, our government is supposed to function as the voice of society.

I have no problem with WHO is in the government, I have a problem with government, period. Our government was never meant to be the biggest company in the world. It was meant to be, almost exactly as you said, a representative of the people.

Somewhere along the way we decided we needed government for everything from telling us how to remodel our house to how to save for retirement and everything in between. Some folks are actually asking the government to start taking care of our physical health. Have we lost the ability to do that ourselves? Are we not responsible enough for our own well-being?

There was a time in this country where government said "you can't do this." Now, it seems, doofus americanus has to check with his uncle to see if he has permission to do anything. He's not at liberty to do anything on his own accord he's only "allowed" to do whatever big brother says is OK.

It's fair if the police are not allowed to carry either. If the police

are armed, people should be allowed to arm themselves too.

I can almost agree with this. I like it more than "police should outgun citizens" but I don't like the fact that the military is still armed and citizenry is not. Plus that whole foreign invaders thing since someone in the world still has guns too.

Because every incident, should end in a shootout.

Every incident where someone shoots at you should!

By your logic it would be better to hide under a desk and call 9-1-1? Who do the cops call when they call 9-1-1? "Dunh, duh duuuuuh, dunh, duh, duuuuuuh....." STOP SINGING THAT SONG!!!!

I also must've missed the part about them turning on each other and continuing to fire. Did I miss that? I usually here something like, "well, if everyone was armed then they'd all shoot each other." Strange that didn't happen here, isn't it?

I was burgled 5 times

Guess how many times I've been burgled?

[james&olya 1,121]

I agree with everything you said, except the last part

("times have changed - we must change our laws....").

Times have not changed - there's nothing special about today's problems

that people 100 or 200 years ago didn't have to deal with.

I hope your fiancee and her family are safe.

Thank you for your concern.

I don't have the answers. Notice I said laws..MAY have to change. I don't think our ancestors worried about terrorists with suitcase nukes or chemical weapons. At the time our constitution was written having ordinary firearms was quite sufficient to deal with any threat from an armed aggressor. Now we deal with entirely new problems. I don't want to see our freedoms and civil rights eroded any more than anyone else, but I am not certain we can deal with these new challenges without at least some small changes. One in particular would seem to be the idea of a national ID. How do you easily determine who is here lawfully without some easily verifiable ID? Like I say, I don't have the answers, but, like our budget deficit, I think we need to look at a lot of options to solve some very real problems.

[slim 1,525]

I don't think our ancestors worried about terrorists with suitcase nukes or chemical weapons.

Do you worry about that stuff? I sure as hell don't.

At the time our constitution was written having ordinary firearms was quite sufficient to deal with any threat from an armed aggressor.

What's an ordinary firearm?

Also, when you say they had ordinary firearms are you aware they had the exact same firearms their army was armed with? At that time, they were carrying, "military-grade assault flintlocks" and so was their army.

Keep in mind too, many colonists actually outgunned their army counterparts because they had RIFLING in their barrels and the king's troops did not. Can you even imagine if we were to be privately armed with weapons that allowed us to engage the military at over three times the distance they could engage us?

I don't want to see our freedoms and civil rights eroded any more than anyone else, but I am not certain we can deal with these new challenges without at least some small changes. One in particular would seem to be the idea of a national ID. How do you easily determine who is here lawfully without some easily verifiable ID? Like I say, I don't have the answers, but, like our budget deficit, I think we need to look at a lot of options to solve some very real problems.

It's quite humorous you talk about budget problems and a new national government program in the same breath. HA!

"Little" changes are what lead to our revolution. That little old Stamp Act was the nail in the coffin. "But it's just a small tax."

[james&olya 1,121]

What's an ordinary firearm?

Also, when you say they had ordinary firearms are you aware they had the exact same firearms their army was armed with? At that time, they were carrying, "military-grade assault flintlocks" and so was their army.

Keep in mind too, many colonists actually outgunned their army counterparts because they had RIFLING in their barrels and the king's troops did not. Can you even imagine if we were to be privately armed with weapons that allowed us to engage the military at over three times the distance they could engage us?

My point exactly. Do you propose private citizen possession of A-10 attack aircraft with full loads of live armaments? Maybe just RPG launchers? Landmines? Anti-aircraft guns? Stinger missiles? Where do you draw the line? And if you draw any line you acknowledge we live under very different circumstances now!

[mawilson 2,133]

My point exactly. Do you propose private citizen possession of A-10 attack aircraft with full loads of live armaments? Maybe just RPG launchers? Landmines? Anti-aircraft guns? Stinger missiles? Where do you draw the line?

I don't. As a private citizen, I should be able to buy whatever the hell I want,

including an F-117 stealth jet, if I can afford it.

[james&olya 1,121]

I don't. As a private citizen, I should be able to buy whatever the hell I want,

including an F-117 stealth jet, if I can afford it.

I respect your consistency, though I disagree with the overall position. Do Muslims who have not broken any laws (yet) also get to own anything they want that their petrodollar wealth can buy for them?

[slim 1,525]

I don't. As a private citizen, I should be able to buy whatever the hell I want,

including an F-117 stealth jet, if I can afford it.

Bingo!

This is the way it was when our founders wrote the constitution.

My point exactly. Do you propose private citizen possession of A-10 attack aircraft with full loads of live armaments? Maybe just RPG launchers? Landmines? Anti-aircraft guns? Stinger missiles? Where do you draw the line? And if you draw any line you acknowledge we live under very different circumstances now!

At the time of the constitution, the citizen was armed with the same weapon as the soldier and as I pointed out above, often a better weapon.

Where are you drawing the conclusion that the military should outgun it's own citizenry? Is that your opinion or are you simply siding with all the other doofus americani out there who think we need Uncle Sam to have a large, standing army that can invade Anywhere, USA, at any time?