What's new
By:
Filters

Why are gun owners afraid to admit they own guns?

JustTheTip said:
Perhaps if people had more of an understanding about guns, they wouldn't be so scared of them. I don't think anything of seeing somebody open carry, it's not a big deal. Most of the time, they forget they're even carrying, but it's nice to have when you need it. 20 years ago we were all driving around with rifles in a gun rack in our pickups. Somehow, nobody got shot.

But hey, keep on thinking people just wanna open carry to show off or be intimidating. Some of them? Sure, but they are the minority. Meanwhile, lets stick to the facts. Has it caused a problem anywhere? Can't say it has. Great assumption that some guy carrying is just gonna whip his gun out if somebody disagrees with him though. Talk about fear mongering.
Click to expand...

Perhaps if you had more of an understanding about things from the perspective of people who are not 2nd Amendment fanatics, and a bit more common sense to boot, you'd comphrehend better why an armed and open carrying citizenry creates an intimdating, threatening social culture/environment. More, I'm not scared of guns, I'm wary of the people who wield them. You'll note from my other posts that I fully support gun ownership rights, so that's a box you'll need to take me out of.

I've not suggested that the ONLY reason people want to carry is to show of or be intimidating. I recongize there may be a number of reasons, but it's naive to dismiss the ego/social statement factor here, as ego, and the desire to make social statements about ourselves (including, for example, what clothes we wear, what car we drive, what house we buy, etc.) drives so much of what we do. I'm very hard pressed to believe that those openly packing are immune from such a fundamental human need.

As for the dangers of an armed and openly packing citizenry, I belive the many, many, many examples of accidental shootings, escalting disputes, rash decisions, ill-perceived threats, etc. in which guns are used to violent or deadly means (which far drawf the times guns are used by law-abiding citizens for legitimate self defense purposes, or to defend others) more than adequately attests to why we should be concerned about an openly gun packing citizenry.
 
So basically this comes down to "if the other side only understood..."
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
Because slippery slope reasoning is a recognized logical fallacy, which leads to poor conclusions based on poor reasoning and unsound evidence, and in areas of important public policy, I'd prefer decisions to be made on good reasoning and sound evidence.

For example, arguing that implementing prudent regulations on gun owner registration and background checks inevitably leads to the eventual confistication of guns and/or suppression of gun ownership rights is classic slippery slope reasoning. It's unsound, lacks any evidence base, and is thus unsuitable as a basis for public policy decisions.
Click to expand...

yet, it is a real thing.

because all the proposed laws and regulations wont stop gunviolence(gang violence, and suicides which are majority of cases)
so it will lead to oooh noos government must do more. which leads to more laws and regulations!

take a look at socialist venezuela as a recent example of national socialist germany for a historic example
 
jimmy eat jazz is hitting homers in here.

I think a lot of this boils down to too many people buying the fear and hype the NRA is pushing. You go through this thread and we all are really, really close to being on the same page:

Gun ownership is ok.
Guns can be very dangerous.
Licensing gun owners is ok.
Required safety classes are ok.

Open Carry is the only real sticking point, and even that is largely irrelevant.

Yet, if you took this to the NRA, they'd freak, start screaming about socialism and nazi's and communism.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
Perhaps if you had more of an understanding about things from the perspective of people who are not 2nd Amendment fanatics, and a bit more common sense to boot, you'd comphrehend better why an armed and open carrying citizenry creates an intimdating, threatening social culture/environment. More, I'm not scared of guns, I'm wary of the people who wield them. You'll note from my other posts that I fully support gun ownership rights, so that's a box you'll need to take me out of.

I've not suggested that the ONLY reason people want to carry is to show of or be intimidating. I recongize there may be a number of reasons, but it's naive to dismiss the ego/social statement factor here, as ego, and the desire to make social statements about ourselves (including, for example, what clothes we wear, what car we drive, what house we buy, etc.) drives so much of what we do. I'm very hard pressed to believe that those openly packing are immune from such a fundamental human need.

As for the dangers of an armed and openly packing citizenry, I belive the many, many, many examples of accidental shootings, escalting disputes, rash decisions, ill-perceived threats, etc. in which guns are used to violent or deadly means (which far drawf the times guns are used by law-abiding citizens for legitimate self defense purposes, or to defend others) more than adequately attests to why we should be concerned about an openly gun packing citizenry.
Click to expand...

Since those who carry openly are so much more prone to accidental shootings, escalating disputes, etc etc, I'm sure you could pull up some statistics proving such. Until then, sounds like a good bit of poor rhetoric and fear mongering. Oh and btw, people open carrying are law-abiding citizens. Let's not assume otherwise.
 
Fwiw, I think the idea that those who open carry are more prone to accidental shootings is pretty poor logic.

The majority of those who open carry are people who are very familiar with their weapons. They are aware of the dangers that come with it. I would wager that the majority of accidental shootings come from those who aren't familiar with their guns, and don't treat it safely. But hey, guns are scary because we don't understand them.
 
JustTheTip said:
Fwiw, I think the idea that those who open carry are more prone to accidental shootings is pretty poor logic.

The majority of those who open carry are people who are very familiar with their weapons. They are aware of the dangers that come with it. I would wager that the majority of accidental shootings come from those who aren't familiar with their guns, and don't treat it safely. But hey, guns are scary because we don't understand them.
Click to expand...

I agree as I have seen nothing to support it.
[MENTION=228]green[/MENTION], yeah the NRA sucks.

On the whole people are pretty uninformed when it comes to guns. Both sides use fear mongering, biased stats and often unfounded/untrue statements to push a narrative. It will never change.
 
The biggest reason I would never open carry is that if you are ever in a situation where you would actually need the gun, you are now a prime target for law enforcement who cannot take the time to determine who the bad guys with a gun are from the good guys with a gun. In a shooting situation, anyone with a gun except law enforcement is going to be dealt with as a bad guy.

The second biggest reason is that I don't get off on scaring and intimidating people, and many people are scared of guns in the hands of people they do not know. That doesn't mean that no one should open carry, but that person can obviously expect people to react differently to them.
 
thanks to a shadowgovernment judge who had a meeting with shadowpresident OBUMMER before making a ruling.

the 1st amendment applies to everybody in the world. by that extension don't all amendments including 2nd amendment are for the WHOLE world!

gee I was in jail, for freedom of speech violatoin, wish i knew the constitution of the USA is WORLD WIDE.


anywhpoo i am gonna get my hands on a gun in foreign countries :D
 
DutchJazzer said:
thanks to a shadowgovernment judge who had a meeting with shadowpresident OBUMMER before making a ruling.

the 1st amendment applies to everybody in the world. by that extension don't all amendments including 2nd amendment are for the WHOLE world!

gee I was in jail, for freedom of speech violatoin, wish i knew the constitution of the USA is WORLD WIDE.


anywhpoo i am gonna get my hands on a gun in foreign countries :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, that judge is setting a dangerous precedent. Not sure I like it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...awaii-judge-set-a-dangerous-precedent/519828/
 
JazzGal said:
The biggest reason I would never open carry is that if you are ever in a situation where you would actually need the gun, you are now a prime target for law enforcement who cannot take the time to determine who the bad guys with a gun are from the good guys with a gun. In a shooting situation, anyone with a gun except law enforcement is going to be dealt with as a bad guy.

The second biggest reason is that I don't get off on scaring and intimidating people, and many people are scared of guns in the hands of people they do not know. That doesn't mean that no one should open carry, but that person can obviously expect people to react differently to them.
Click to expand...

Shoot the bad guy, drop the gun, lay down on the ground.
 
jimmy eat jazz said:
Perhaps if you had more of an understanding about things from the perspective of people who are not 2nd Amendment fanatics, and a bit more common sense to boot, you'd comphrehend better why an armed and open carrying citizenry creates an intimdating, threatening social culture/environment. More, I'm not scared of guns, I'm wary of the people who wield them. You'll note from my other posts that I fully support gun ownership rights, so that's a box you'll need to take me out of.

I've not suggested that the ONLY reason people want to carry is to show of or be intimidating. I recongize there may be a number of reasons, but it's naive to dismiss the ego/social statement factor here, as ego, and the desire to make social statements about ourselves (including, for example, what clothes we wear, what car we drive, what house we buy, etc.) drives so much of what we do. I'm very hard pressed to believe that those openly packing are immune from such a fundamental human need.

As for the dangers of an armed and openly packing citizenry, I belive the many, many, many examples of accidental shootings, escalting disputes, rash decisions, ill-perceived threats, etc. in which guns are used to violent or deadly means (which far drawf the times guns are used by law-abiding citizens for legitimate self defense purposes, or to defend others) more than adequately attests to why we should be concerned about an openly gun packing citizenry.
Click to expand...

We should be afraid of people like you who sincerely believe they understand others and can offer free advice, if not pass actual legislation, requiring others to intellectually conform your exalted but arrogant notions of superiority.

I think, if you were an American, we should establish houses or camps of re-education until you can break free of your cult convictions. Interventions work on many forms of delusion. . . . j/k

On one occasion, a clan of local yokels predominant in my area was asserting their ancestral "right" to hunt on my property. I went out, unarmed, to apprise them of the error of their ways. One of their number, a known extreme pot user and alcoholic, came up to my truck and pointed his deer rifle between my eyes, sneering some sort of insult to the effect that my point of view was irrelevant. I knew he was a coward, and I knew his mother-in-law looking on could be counted on to do nothing, but I talked him down to the fact that he was on my land, and he, and they, decided to just leave.

Maybe I am not smart enough to be afraid, but I'd rather have these people to deal with than people like you, whom I consider vastly more dangerous.
 
oh, no, Green didn't like my post. Look, I've been reading UN agenda publications since the sixties, where it is openly declared that privately-held guns must be abolished and that national armies must be apportioned to keep the peace, no winners no losers allowed but whoever the UN chiefs choose.

When you follow the money, the anti-gun rhetoric always goes back to ideologues of that super-clan. They are fascists, world-class fascists. You don't get to elect UN leaders. You don't get a direct public vote on UN agendas or policies. Human beings are considered property to be managed, like cattle.

I stand on the statement that "idealists" who support the UN agendas and policies are more dangerous than my gun-toting neighbors. These neighbors have their own agendas and policies for sure, but mostly they respect people who have the guts to take a stand for their rights.

Since my little discussion with the deer hunters, I've provided small stacks of hay in the fields where they can come and sit camouflaged while reducing the tons of alfalfa the deer eat off my fields.
 
babe said:
Maybe I am not smart enough to be afraid, but I'd rather have these people to deal with than people like you, whom I consider vastly more dangerous.
Click to expand...

Since you mocked me, this is what I don't like.

I'm much more afraid of a person/institution/government that is afraid of ideas and promotes weapons instead. Show me a government/society/church/etc that valued weapons over ideas and how that turned out better for everyone.
 
green said:
Since you mocked me, this is what I don't like.

I'm much more afraid of a person/institution/government that is afraid of ideas and promotes weapons instead. Show me a government/society/church/etc that valued weapons over ideas and how that turned out better for everyone.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately history is rife with examples of both sides of that equation falling. Rampant ideology with strict gun control has actually been shown to be far worse than the opposite.
 
green said:
Since you mocked me, this is what I don't like.

I'm much more afraid of a person/institution/government that is afraid of ideas and promotes weapons instead. Show me a government/society/church/etc that valued weapons over ideas and how that turned out better for everyone.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately history is rife with examples of both sides of that equation falling. Rampant ideology with strict gun control has actually been shown to be far worse than the opposite.
 
JustTheTip said:
Since those who carry openly are so much more prone to accidental shootings, escalating disputes, etc etc, I'm sure you could pull up some statistics proving such. Until then, sounds like a good bit of poor rhetoric and fear mongering. Oh and btw, people open carrying are law-abiding citizens. Let's not assume otherwise.
Click to expand...

Stop responding to Dalamon's trolls.
 
green said:
Since you mocked me, this is what I don't like.

I'm much more afraid of a person/institution/government that is afraid of ideas and promotes weapons instead. Show me a government/society/church/etc that valued weapons over ideas and how that turned out better for everyone.
Click to expand...

I'm all about discussing ideas and organizations that can serve human needs. Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep meeting to discuss the dinner menu. At a minimum, the right of self-defense is off the table. Nobody has a right to deny anyone that right.

That is where the anti-gun dreamers are effectively denying basic human rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top