Guns!
Essay60 total reviews
Comment from Gypsy Blue Rose
Hello, Brother Mike,
Well said! This piece is very well written and presented. I like the statistics you used to strengthen your argument.
I don't believe one law to everyone equally. I think it's okay to protect yourself and your family from harm. If someone hurt my chidlren or grand-daughters I would not hesitate to shoot them. If the zombie apocolapsy broke tomorrow, I would want to a gun to defend my family and myself. If someone came into my apartment to rape me or kill me, I would shoot them in the knee or any other nonlethal place. I would not keep a gun unless I knew how to use it well.
I don't own a gun and I never had. It has never crossed my mind.
I am afraid that guns will end up in the hands of innocent children who don't know how to use it or what it is.
I am afraid of crazy people having guns and going on a killing rampage in a school yard. It happened to my son. It was the most horrifying time of my life.
A friend heard it on the radio, at work. She told me and then there was a crazy man in my son's school shooting at the kids. I rushed to the school but the area was blockaded. I had to park and I ran the three or four blocks. There were 5 Vietnamese children dead and until the parents were notified, all the children were inside the cafeteria and nobody was allowed to get to them. I had to wait 2 hours outside the school waiting to find out if my son was one of the victims.
Good job, Brother Mike. I am proud of you.
Gypsy hugs and kisses mwah!
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
  |
Hello, Brother Mike,
Well said! This piece is very well written and presented. I like the statistics you used to strengthen your argument.
I don't believe one law to everyone equally. I think it's okay to protect yourself and your family from harm. If someone hurt my chidlren or grand-daughters I would not hesitate to shoot them. If the zombie apocolapsy broke tomorrow, I would want to a gun to defend my family and myself. If someone came into my apartment to rape me or kill me, I would shoot them in the knee or any other nonlethal place. I would not keep a gun unless I knew how to use it well.
I don't own a gun and I never had. It has never crossed my mind.
I am afraid that guns will end up in the hands of innocent children who don't know how to use it or what it is.
I am afraid of crazy people having guns and going on a killing rampage in a school yard. It happened to my son. It was the most horrifying time of my life.
A friend heard it on the radio, at work. She told me and then there was a crazy man in my son's school shooting at the kids. I rushed to the school but the area was blockaded. I had to park and I ran the three or four blocks. There were 5 Vietnamese children dead and until the parents were notified, all the children were inside the cafeteria and nobody was allowed to get to them. I had to wait 2 hours outside the school waiting to find out if my son was one of the victims.
Good job, Brother Mike. I am proud of you.
Gypsy hugs and kisses mwah!
Comment Written 11-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from Bill Schott
The debate on machine guns is, of course, ludicrous. No one but soldiers need them, and they don't get the ones that are sold. As for the rest, that's life in the big city. People will always be either smart or stupid, sane or nuts, or get in a gun fight with a knife. The fear that the government could control a society that is unarmed is a matter of simply turning on the television.
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
The debate on machine guns is, of course, ludicrous. No one but soldiers need them, and they don't get the ones that are sold. As for the rest, that's life in the big city. People will always be either smart or stupid, sane or nuts, or get in a gun fight with a knife. The fear that the government could control a society that is unarmed is a matter of simply turning on the television.
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from flylikeaneagle
Mikey: great article about guns. Why does the Republicans want the guns being sold when people need a back ground check first? The guys that got shot at close range surely had major explosions in their bodies and quick death. Great stats. Maybe, now people will see the truth about guns. Great article of interest.
I also condemn the use of drugs, alcohol and guns at schools. Awareness needs to be known. flylikeaneagle
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
Mikey: great article about guns. Why does the Republicans want the guns being sold when people need a back ground check first? The guys that got shot at close range surely had major explosions in their bodies and quick death. Great stats. Maybe, now people will see the truth about guns. Great article of interest.
I also condemn the use of drugs, alcohol and guns at schools. Awareness needs to be known. flylikeaneagle
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from Barb Hensongispsaca
I think you stated your argument very well and using machine gun to kill ducks is perfect as everyone knows what a machine gun is and does as to what every was used in Dallas, we may not recognize the type.
I say leave it as is...is is dramatic and profound.
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
I think you stated your argument very well and using machine gun to kill ducks is perfect as everyone knows what a machine gun is and does as to what every was used in Dallas, we may not recognize the type.
I say leave it as is...is is dramatic and profound.
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from Margaret Ford
Michael, I'm with you on this, so I won't be one of the people wanting to shoot you at sunrise. Thank you for using the brain that nature gave you, and having the courage to write this, as well. Although you hit most of the high spots, there are other facts that could be mentioned in support of your statements. You probably know that, but just in case, here are a couple of them:
1) The 2nd Amendment was created as a compromise between the north and the slave-holding south, to get the southern states to ratify the constitution. The original militias were southern slave patrol militias, controlled by each state. That's why the amendment says "State" instead of "Country." These slave patrol militias were in charge of putting down slave revolts, and literally went plantation to plantation, to see if any slaves were missing. If so, they were hunted, captured, and returned to their so-called 'masters'.
2) The 2nd Amendment is not and never was in the US Constitution to protect individual gun owners from their own government. Thats's a legal fiction given to us courtesy of the gun industry, which managed to capture the minds of certain TV and radio personalities and a few wackos on the Supreme Court. There was no right for an individual person to own a gun until 2008, when the Supreme Court decided that there was (District of Columbia v. Heller).
3) And there's more. Lots more...
Personally, if I'd lived in the 1700s, I would have insisted on owning as many muskets as I wished. Like the framers of our constitution, I couldn't have conceived of today's assault rifles and other machines of mass murder.
Thanks, again, Michael, for writing this important message. I'm so grateful. Margaret
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
 |
Michael, I'm with you on this, so I won't be one of the people wanting to shoot you at sunrise. Thank you for using the brain that nature gave you, and having the courage to write this, as well. Although you hit most of the high spots, there are other facts that could be mentioned in support of your statements. You probably know that, but just in case, here are a couple of them:
1) The 2nd Amendment was created as a compromise between the north and the slave-holding south, to get the southern states to ratify the constitution. The original militias were southern slave patrol militias, controlled by each state. That's why the amendment says "State" instead of "Country." These slave patrol militias were in charge of putting down slave revolts, and literally went plantation to plantation, to see if any slaves were missing. If so, they were hunted, captured, and returned to their so-called 'masters'.
2) The 2nd Amendment is not and never was in the US Constitution to protect individual gun owners from their own government. Thats's a legal fiction given to us courtesy of the gun industry, which managed to capture the minds of certain TV and radio personalities and a few wackos on the Supreme Court. There was no right for an individual person to own a gun until 2008, when the Supreme Court decided that there was (District of Columbia v. Heller).
3) And there's more. Lots more...
Personally, if I'd lived in the 1700s, I would have insisted on owning as many muskets as I wished. Like the framers of our constitution, I couldn't have conceived of today's assault rifles and other machines of mass murder.
Thanks, again, Michael, for writing this important message. I'm so grateful. Margaret
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from Ric Myworld
You and I seem to share many of the same thoughts on everything so far. However, this is one of those cases where I don't think it's quite so simple as to save the children. I hate machine guns, or any weapons designed to strictly kill large numbers. But should a government be able to dictate who has them or have them all for themselves? Now, that's really scary, especially with a government that dictates to us poor innocents completely under their control. I don't claim to know the answers. But I do know that "Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE DO." Criminals and the government will always have those weapons. So should we be left to their mercy without the rights to own them ourselves? Not me! I would never intentionally hurt anyone, but I have every right to protect myself and others in anyway that the criminals and government can. I don't hate you for caring, or even thinking differently about these guns than I do. I don't want to kill you, and you don't want to kill me for my different thoughts and feelings, I hope. So it isn't the guns that are the problem. It's the sick, twisted, and selfish, YES SELFISH, who are totally intolerant of anyone who sees things in life differently. I wish there was a simple answer, or even an answer, but there isn't, and keeping law abiding citizens from owning a way to protect themselves from the crazies is definitely the wrong answer. What good would my pistol or shotgun do me against a machine gun? None! It may not sound like it to you, but I appreciate your caring enough to write this piece, and I'm always open to learning and understanding new or different ideologies that can make me be a better and more understanding person. But my thoughts are similar to those once said, "They will have to pull my gun from my cold dead hand." Thanks for sharing another great post. :-)
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
You and I seem to share many of the same thoughts on everything so far. However, this is one of those cases where I don't think it's quite so simple as to save the children. I hate machine guns, or any weapons designed to strictly kill large numbers. But should a government be able to dictate who has them or have them all for themselves? Now, that's really scary, especially with a government that dictates to us poor innocents completely under their control. I don't claim to know the answers. But I do know that "Guns don't kill people, PEOPLE DO." Criminals and the government will always have those weapons. So should we be left to their mercy without the rights to own them ourselves? Not me! I would never intentionally hurt anyone, but I have every right to protect myself and others in anyway that the criminals and government can. I don't hate you for caring, or even thinking differently about these guns than I do. I don't want to kill you, and you don't want to kill me for my different thoughts and feelings, I hope. So it isn't the guns that are the problem. It's the sick, twisted, and selfish, YES SELFISH, who are totally intolerant of anyone who sees things in life differently. I wish there was a simple answer, or even an answer, but there isn't, and keeping law abiding citizens from owning a way to protect themselves from the crazies is definitely the wrong answer. What good would my pistol or shotgun do me against a machine gun? None! It may not sound like it to you, but I appreciate your caring enough to write this piece, and I'm always open to learning and understanding new or different ideologies that can make me be a better and more understanding person. But my thoughts are similar to those once said, "They will have to pull my gun from my cold dead hand." Thanks for sharing another great post. :-)
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
I'm not for taking away legal gun ownership. Just for some kind of control over whose hands they fall in to. Some kind of steps anyway to attempt prevention of some of the mass shootings we've seen of late. How? I don't really know to be honest. But, whatever it takes, I'm for. I'm totally in favor of responsible gun ownership and I'd have them on speed dial no doubt.Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from barkingdog
Hi, Mikey.
This opinion is out there but the media would rather squelch it with NRA bullshit about how we want to take away ALL guns which gets every hunter riled up. We don't want ALL guns. We just want weapons of war to be regulated. AK47s and such like them.
It's not rocket science.
Thank you for speaking out and using stats.
:) e
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
Hi, Mikey.
This opinion is out there but the media would rather squelch it with NRA bullshit about how we want to take away ALL guns which gets every hunter riled up. We don't want ALL guns. We just want weapons of war to be regulated. AK47s and such like them.
It's not rocket science.
Thank you for speaking out and using stats.
:) e
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from ciliverde
I'm with you on this one, Mikey. I'm not against gun ownership, if someone wants a rifle or shotgun for hunting, or even a pistol for home defense. But for Gods sake, why not a waiting period? Is it really that critical to get the F-ing thing immediately? No. Why not require training and testing in order to get a license to own said gun? We do that for driver's licenses,no? Guns are deadly weapons, it should NOT be so easy to get them. the NRA is at the bottom of the reason why we can't get COMMON SENSE legislation passed. It's way past the time for change. WAY PAST. This bullshit has got to stop.
Carol
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
I'm with you on this one, Mikey. I'm not against gun ownership, if someone wants a rifle or shotgun for hunting, or even a pistol for home defense. But for Gods sake, why not a waiting period? Is it really that critical to get the F-ing thing immediately? No. Why not require training and testing in order to get a license to own said gun? We do that for driver's licenses,no? Guns are deadly weapons, it should NOT be so easy to get them. the NRA is at the bottom of the reason why we can't get COMMON SENSE legislation passed. It's way past the time for change. WAY PAST. This bullshit has got to stop.
Carol
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from Ulla
Hi Mikey, hear hear. That law should be abolished, then start again. Why does people need to have the right to a gun in order to defend themselves? Well, the question answers itself. If there's no guns around you don't need one to defend yourself, do you? It all stems from the wild west mentality. Very dangerous. Good for you to speak up. But will anybody listen in your country? I think not. All the best. Ulla:))
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
Hi Mikey, hear hear. That law should be abolished, then start again. Why does people need to have the right to a gun in order to defend themselves? Well, the question answers itself. If there's no guns around you don't need one to defend yourself, do you? It all stems from the wild west mentality. Very dangerous. Good for you to speak up. But will anybody listen in your country? I think not. All the best. Ulla:))
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
Comment from fionageorge
Michael, well said, my friend. I am in total agreement with everything you have said here, word for word. I have never understood the argument about your second amendment. All we ever hear and read about are shootings and massacres in the USA. For a nation that considers itself a world leader, it seems to me it is unable to lead itself internally. Racial profiling and hatred, revenge killings, and those terrible massacres... so many. Here in Australia, actually here in our beautiful state of Tasmania, we had our worst massacre by an unhinged young man some 20 years ago this year. Immediately after that, OUR government put legislation in place banning high performance fire-arms, such as machine guns and pump-action firearms, which can kill so many in such a short time. We have not had a single massacre (thank goodness, and keep our fingers crossed) since then. Also, the government had an amnesty (and have every so often) where people could hand in their high-powered, or illegal firearms for a period of time. They also reimbursed for these (if they had been legally obtained). I don't understand why there cannot be amendments to the second amendment... it is a living document, I believe. Well done for writing and sharing, and good luck in the fight against this terrible scourge on your society, and on the lives of so many innocents.
Warmest regards, Marijke :o)
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
|
Michael, well said, my friend. I am in total agreement with everything you have said here, word for word. I have never understood the argument about your second amendment. All we ever hear and read about are shootings and massacres in the USA. For a nation that considers itself a world leader, it seems to me it is unable to lead itself internally. Racial profiling and hatred, revenge killings, and those terrible massacres... so many. Here in Australia, actually here in our beautiful state of Tasmania, we had our worst massacre by an unhinged young man some 20 years ago this year. Immediately after that, OUR government put legislation in place banning high performance fire-arms, such as machine guns and pump-action firearms, which can kill so many in such a short time. We have not had a single massacre (thank goodness, and keep our fingers crossed) since then. Also, the government had an amnesty (and have every so often) where people could hand in their high-powered, or illegal firearms for a period of time. They also reimbursed for these (if they had been legally obtained). I don't understand why there cannot be amendments to the second amendment... it is a living document, I believe. Well done for writing and sharing, and good luck in the fight against this terrible scourge on your society, and on the lives of so many innocents.
Warmest regards, Marijke :o)
Comment Written 10-Jul-2016
reply by the author on 15-Aug-2016
-
Thanks so much. Sorry for the late reply, mikey
