News Reporter Buys First Gun

[The Heretic]

You don't see terror attacks in this country on areas where there's lots of armed men and women. Instead, it's those soft targets that get hit. Maybe it's time we made sure our enemies, both foreign and domestic, understand that we shoot back.

Garland Texas

Bear in mind that many of these terrorists, whether they are domestic or foreign, are suicidal.

I am not saying it isn't a good thing to be armed, just that terrorists don't hit soft targets only.

Also, terrorist attacks are rare - it is domestic homegrown violent crime that kills an injures a lot more people, and even violent crime is down significantly.

 

[etrain16]

We need so much more resistance then we have. And we have zero leadership to do it.

That is a HUGE part of the problem. The best we have for a strong voice is the NRA, and they do well for who they are, but I'd love to have a big name/face, on both the national and state levels, that speak on behalf of gun owners, can express their anger and outrage on the public stage, someone who has real influence and has the ability to gather the forces together - raise money, get the word out to every gun owner, including the hunters, recreational shooters and even the "my daddy gave me a .22 when I was 12, I still have it, but no other guns, so I'm a 'gun owner' just like you" types. Get them all to realize that attacking one group is the same as attacking us all. We need that kind of leadership for gun owners, and I just don't see it out there. Why can't we have a Michael Bloomberg or a Bill Gates on our side for once? Someone willing to put their face, time, energy, money and reputation on the line for our 2A rights??

 

[waglockfan]

We have a gun problem ?

No, we have a politician problem and a criminal out of jail problem.

.......some people would say that is one in the same issue though.

 

[PaulB47]

I just hope these educated idiots (reporters) who decide to arm themselves get professional training and take CC very seriously.

Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth!

Come on guys, stop sniping at a person who has made the right decision and better yet, published it in a national newspaper.

There is no pleasing some people!

 

[Provincial]

Why can't we have a Michael Bloomberg or a Bill Gates on our side for once? Someone willing to put their face, time, energy, money and reputation on the line for our 2A rights??

Because the rich and powerful want to disarm the masses, in order to make the masses powerless.

 

[PaulB47]

Yes. If you were in the ruling class, would you like to see armed peons? No, you would not.

 

[Mark W.]

You might like this article: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/guns/2011/oct/5/miller-emily-gets-her-gun/

Flopsweat I want to thank you for the adventure of trying to read like 8-10 pages at the Washington Time web site I think it took only slightly less time then it did the young woman to buy and take possession of her handgun.

That said I learned a number of things:

1. If you all elected me president of the united states I wouldn't live in Washington, DC
2. Anyone that doesn't have to live in Washington DC and still does is NUTS.
3. Washington DC is F'ed up
4. I wish that young woman in that article would find a way to marry my son. Any one with that much determination would make a great daughter inlaw (as long as she agreed to at least one grandson)

5. The Washington Times website has got to be run by government empolyees to be that messed up.

6. Oregon doesn't look so bad right now.

 

[Provincial]

Yes. If you were in the ruling class, would you like to see armed peons? No, you would not.

How is that working out for most of the countries with a distinct ruling class? Other than China, Iran, and other ruthless totalitarian regimes that haven't yet encountered armed resistance.

The United States is that experiment where everyone is entitled (by inalienable right) to keep and bear arms. The rich and powerful have tried since the Constitution was adopted to limit that right, and not without some success. Those successes are pointed out by gun control advocates to prove that the 2nd Amendment is not absolute, even though many have been reversed (supporting the individual right to keep and bear arms) after further (or later) review.

The 2nd Amendment was intended by our nation's founders to be a sort of "Circuit Breaker" to hold in check those who would abuse power. The powerful chafe at that limitation.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

The only real issue I have with the article (assuming that he means politicians should do something about gun violence by actually addressing the broken social and political systems) is that he implies he will be at great risk of committing suicide with his gun if he buys one. Does he think the act of buying a gun makes you suicidal? If he was not suicidal before he bought the gun the purchase will not change that.

 

[SPU]

I live in Roseburg, Oregon area as most know about the most conservative place in Oregon or top 5. Anyways the conversation has come up as CHL( conceals) renewals are backed up about 1-2 months for a 15 min appointment due to large budget cuts in October. I was talking with my Father in Law who owns guns and is a Vet. I told him I booked mine well in advance of my renewal this year. He said you dont want all the attention if you open carry and was glad was getting done early. Why I never OC, just not my thing. I found it odd his go to was for me to worry what others thought about me exercising my rights. There is allot of open carry here, not something we think about only on occasion a call on the scanner " man walking down the street with a rifle on his back " then they got waste the cops time to make sure its not John Rambo out there due to a paranoid liberal.. The level of worry and ignorance surprises me. I grew up where they taught guns safety and use in schools not paranoia and victimizing yourself. The brainwashing in America by the media is nothing short of treason to erode our rights.
I lost my rights slowly in California and moved up here a few decades ago and even by then seeing open carry the first time in Oregon threw me back unknown even to a lifer gun owner like me the brainwashing had even hit me a little as I was throw back seeing and open carry on a civilian where as only 30 years earlier no one paid much attention at all.

We need so much more resistance then we have. And we have zero leadership to do it.

I live in Roseburg as well, since 1995. I came from CT, and the culture shock (and enlightenment) was intense. I got used to seeing guns, then after being threatened I bought my first one and received professional training and my CHL. After a while I reflected on gun attitudes, perceptions and my rights. Now a couple times a year I make it a point to open carry just to quietly and non-flamboyantly make my point -- and perhaps make someone else think about the issues. I have not gotten one negative reaction, but I also have not open carried while the emotional scars of the UCC shooting are fresh.

I see the author of the USA TODAY article as on the same journey I have had, and will wait o see if he continues to the logical conclusion the 2A is necessary and unwavering.

 

[etrain16]

The only real issue I have with the article (assuming that he means politicians should do something about gun violence by actually addressing the broken social and political systems) is that he implies he will be at great risk of committing suicide with his gun if he buys one. Does he think the act of buying a gun makes you suicidal? If he was not suicidal before he bought the gun the purchase will not change that.

He also said he hopes he never fires it in anger. Hopes?? If he can't be certain of that before he buys the gun, he really shouldn't own one. Just like your point about the gun not making someone who wasn't already suicidal, suicidal, it likewise won't turn a normal, well adjusted person into a gun wielding madman. Assuming he doesn't go out and get in bar fights, or goes around beating up his wife, I think it's fairly safe to say that having a gun won't turn him into those things. What's scary is that he doesn't already grasp that concept, so, maybe he shouldn't own that gun after all.

 

[308]

From the original article

"What else should I do? Our politicians have demonstrated they aren't actually serious about reducing gun violence in America. I mean, while we accept that car crashes kill about 30,000 people annually, at least there's a serious effort underway to reduce that number. And at the same time, there does appear to be an actual belief around the world and in our own country that Americans are a soft target."

That's a twist. "We have a gun problem, since we keep asking someone else to fix it and they don't / can't, I'm going to get a gun to hopefully fix it for me"

I wish more people came to that conclusion.

The reason there is no answer to the problem is the fact that we are not dealing with a gun issue, we are dealing with a heart condition in the human being, and no human can control or change the heart of another. We can make rules and apply penalties, but that does not change things. God in heaven can even give 10 divine rules and while they are good, history has shown that man cannot even obey 10 simple rules. There is only one answer, but forum rules prevent discussion on that topic.

 

[NWGlockgal]

The only real issue I have with the article (assuming that he means politicians should do something about gun violence by actually addressing the broken social and political systems) is that he implies he will be at great risk of committing suicide with his gun if he buys one. Does he think the act of buying a gun makes you suicidal? If he was not suicidal before he bought the gun the purchase will not change that.

Exactly, I noticed that too. And not having a gun is not going to stop someone who is suicidal.

 

[etrain16]

There is only one answer, but forum rules prevent discussion on that topic.

Not here, perhaps, but per Joe, it is an acceptable topic in the optional, opt-in only "Tavern" area.

 

[DuneHopper]

I live in Roseburg as well, since 1995. I came from CT, and the culture shock (and enlightenment) was intense. I got used to seeing guns, then after being threatened I bought my first one and received professional training and my CHL. After a while I reflected on gun attitudes, perceptions and my rights. Now a couple times a year I make it a point to open carry just to quietly and non-flamboyantly make my point -- and perhaps make someone else think about the issues. I have not gotten one negative reaction, but I also have not open carried while the emotional scars of the UCC shooting are fresh.

I see the author of the USA TODAY article as on the same journey I have had, and will wait o see if he continues to the logical conclusion the 2A is necessary and unwavering.

Wow both moved here very close time to each other, I agree with your points

 

[Member 3687]

We all come to form our beliefs based on our upbringing, life experiences and training and some things will change as we move through life and get older.

For me the Second Amendment has been a part of my life for over 36 years as that is when I got my first Concealed Pistol permit in Washington State on my 21st birthday.

For others like the person in the article who has been surrounded by Anti gun folks all his life with anti gun views I can understand his thought process because buying and owning a gun is against everything he has learned from his upbringing, to his life experiences and training.

I agree what he does from this point will make the difference as to whether it is a good thing or not.

Many of us have taken folks that where at least on the fence if not leaning to the anti gun side and over time we have shown them that guns are not bad. Then maybe we taken them shooting and in some cases because of this they have became proud gun owners and gun supporters.

So maybe because of all the reports that he has done over time it has finally sank in that being unarmed just makes you a victim as you are your own first line of defense.

So for now I will give him a pass but time will tell.

 

[erudne]

I believe nothing coming from these yellow rags

 

[PaulB47]

"For others like the person in the article who has been surrounded by Anti gun folks all his life with anti gun views I can understand his thought process because buying and owning a gun is against everything he has learned from his upbringing, to his life experiences and training."

No kidding. How many people have the courage to question an item of faith in their cultures, despite real backlash? To admit they were not only wrong, but seriously wrong?

It doesn't seem wise to me, to sniff at the newbies, especially one like this.

 

[Flopsweat]

He also said he hopes he never fires it in anger. Hopes?? If he can't be certain of that before he buys the gun, he really shouldn't own one. Just like your point about the gun not making someone who wasn't already suicidal, suicidal, it likewise won't turn a normal, well adjusted person into a gun wielding madman. Assuming he doesn't go out and get in bar fights, or goes around beating up his wife, I think it's fairly safe to say that having a gun won't turn him into those things. What's scary is that he doesn't already grasp that concept, so, maybe he shouldn't own that gun after all.

I think there is a big difference between hoping you don't have to do something and doubting that you can. While I'm at it, I may as well point out that people often accomplish things they didn't think they could. I agree with you more often than not, but I have no problem with this fellow owning or even carrying a gun.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

He also said he hopes he never fires it in anger. Hopes?? If he can't be certain of that before he buys the gun, he really shouldn't own one. Just like your point about the gun not making someone who wasn't already suicidal, suicidal, it likewise won't turn a normal, well adjusted person into a gun wielding madman. Assuming he doesn't go out and get in bar fights, or goes around beating up his wife, I think it's fairly safe to say that having a gun won't turn him into those things. What's scary is that he doesn't already grasp that concept, so, maybe he shouldn't own that gun after all.

The term "in anger" as used here is a colloquialism not to be taken literally. It means in this context something more like "of necessity". In other words, he hopes he's never in a situation where he is required to use it to protect himself. I hope all of us who carry have the same hope.