Maybe because people can buy guns anywhere else and bring them into the city.Are you not forgettinn something, like good old Chi-town? You can not legelly buy a gun within city limits, but it has one of the highest crime rates (including gun murders) in the nation. If the city outlaws guns within city limits, why does it have so many crimes, including gun murders???
Good Evening Boatswain: Let me be the one to elevate the tone of this discourse if I may. Actually I was in the military, but the killing I’ve seen was when I was a police officer in what was at the time the murder capitol of the US. My job included killing people (only as needed), and I have seen a good deal of death. I have also been alongside people dying from sucking chest wounds, open stomach wounds and the like. It’s not fast like headshots often are. They suffer a good bit, but as you might be aware, head shots are hard to make when you’re in a real gunfight and someone is shooting back at you. It’s not like the shooting range. There’s a lot of back and forth. It’s a bit more surreal. I was ranked as a distinguished shooter by the NRA, which is where we received our certifications at the time. And at the time, that was the highest level of marksmanship the NRA conveyed on policemen. I have no idea how they do it now.
Also, all I had was a revolver and a shotgun. The people I was up against sometimes had much better weapons than I did. I once had my ribs busted by a blast to the vest. Could have been worse I suppose. I did a lot of hand to hand combat in that job as well, and was stabbed once in the side as well as having my jaw dislocated, nose broken a number of times, and an assortment of other injuries. In spite of all that, I’m pretty fit nowadays. I run everyday, lift weights, and something I know you’ll especially like - I do yoga for an hour every morning. Aummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
That’s true. When it is a national policy, criminals have to navigate international lines to get guns into a place which is a lot harder than crossing State borders. It has to be an all or nothing restrictions to make a dent, but good on Chicago for taking a principled stand to move things in a new direction.
Oh good…Gary is here to “elevate the tone of this discourse.” Sounds like more REMF attitude to me. Poor silly “regular” people don’t know how to discuss things at the “elevation” that the REMF’s do. Maybe Gary can “elevate the tone of this discourse” by saying (again) that retired military people “suck at the teat” of government.
Wow Gary! Your internet persona has really impressed me!! I’ll bet you have a whole chest full of awards don’t you. Purple heart, legion of merit, keys to the city. Probably have a Medal of Honor too, don’t you!Also, all I had was a revolver and a shotgun. The people I was up against sometimes had much better weapons than I did. I once had my ribs busted by a blast to the vest. Could have been worse I suppose. I did a lot of hand to hand combat in that job as well, and was stabbed once in the side as well as having my jaw dislocated, nose broken a number of times, and an assortment of other injuries. In spite of all that, I’m pretty fit nowadays. I run everyday, lift weights, and something I know you’ll especially like - I do yoga for an hour every morning. Aummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
Good Evening Boatswain: I think if you read back through the thread and hit **“control f” **then enter the word “teat”, your computer will direct you to the first instance of the use of the word. If my memory is working right, I think you’ll find that you were the first to use the term, and I in turn replied. If you’d like to stop using it, then we can start here. I’m okay either way.
Well, you didn’t ask about awards, so I didn’t address any of that.
You asked me a question and I simply answered it. I can’t understand why you asked a question and now seem to be indicating that you didn’t want an answer. I also fail to see the glory in my having seen a lot of violence and getting injured a lot. I wasn’t aware that would seem desirable to anyone when I gave the account, especially anyone who has experienced it. It’s not very glamorous, I think. But then we don’t seem to think much alike.
Not so good on Chicago. 40 people shot there over Easter weekend. Maybe they need to try a different approach!
How about gang bangers who do not give a hoot about about the law and just buy the guns inside the city from other gang bangers? :bounce::banghead:
First of all, the term ‘legitimate’ has a specific canonical meaning. There is a legio, or law that grants ‘legtimatcy’, that is by definition of the word ‘legitimate’.
Note that the Pope specifies WHO has the right and the duty of defense. It is not just the good of the State represented by the police, but anyone who is responsible for a family, or for the life of another.
Maybe you think it is a principled stand that Chicago is taking by disarming the law abiding people that have to face the gun toting punks and gangbangers without the choice of having a gun, or not. I do not think it is a princpled stand.
As for moving things in a new direction, tell that to a parent/spouse/child that has lost a childspouse/parent to a gang banger wantabe that got their gun illegelly within the city limits. I have NEVER met an operator - military, PD, FD, or EMS - who had the disrespectful attitude you displayed…and I have met thousands of them, from every branch of service
I am not aware that not buying onto the same ideals as you is necessarily disrespectful. As I recall, you had shown disrespect for people on pubic assistance. I simply pointed out that in my opinion everyone is in one way or another on pubic assistance - including you. You found it hard to imagine that I didn’t see you or your benefits as any more noble or you as more worthy than a street person or a person on food stamps. I feel that way because neither of us are in fact more worthy than anyone else, and I don’t begrudge helping them or you.
I 86’d him from further dialogue because of his consistent condescension toward others and his consistent presentation of himself as more “evolved” than those of us who believe in gun rights who he paints as being more like “primates” than humans. The saccharine perfunctory greetings did not ameliorate these recurrent themes.
Good Morning Deus Tecum: I hope that I don’t upset you again, as yourself and Boatswain tend to get a bit sensitive during discussions with people who don’t think within the same paradigm as yourselves. I am trying to be mindful of that when I reply to you as best I can, but you keep taking offense. That said, I couldn’t have painted gun owners as being more like primates than humans, because humans are in fact primates. I simply have suggested that we try to evolve, which is something we’ve been doing as a species for a very long time. It’s just time for some more, that’s all. Violence and weapons and fear of other people with weapons is a rather tragic part of our story that is getting a bit tiresome. Back when people lived to be forty or so, there was an excuse for not figuring such things out. I am failing to see the excuse these days, but it seems that we are still too soon old and too late smart. It seems to be something of an intelligence test, and we are quickly running out of reasons to keep failing it. And when you talk of “86ing” me I think it’s a sign that you’re afraid to look. And it’s causing you to overreact when you pit your views against mine. You’re getting angry instead of thinking, and this is another reason why I don’t like the idea of people carrying weapons.
I just dropped in on this thread and noticed the exchange. A quick parsing of his language and word choices fails the smell test. (I’d also point out that there’s no mental health screening before someone is allowed to use a computer)
It is funny how liberal elitists think they are “evolved” to the point of not needing firearms…yet the liberal elitists in America often have armed guards protecting them from the bad guys.
And when humankind spends a lot of time manufacturing and distributing ways in which do to evil, we are in fact creating a mindset of pervasive violence rather than directing the thoughts and energy of ourselves, our children and our communities in the area of positive and constructive endeavors. Weapons are just enablers in societies with a proclivity to violence. If violence is the mindset you create, and it’s attending tools are the industry of societies, it is unrealistic to expect an outcome that is non-violent.
If what you are seeing on the internet is people with a diminished ability to reason, and taking into account your view on violence, perhaps a monitor with a less reflective surface is in order.
I didn’t really intend to respond to you in this thread, because you seem disingenuous about your background and experiences, but this sort of thinking is emblematic of many gun-banners in general and should be addressed.