Unwashed Village
General Discussion => Unwashed Village => Topic started by: Brugdor on August 26, 2007, 06:07:13 AM
-
http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2317307.ece
Despite a ban on handguns introduced in 1997 after 16 children and their teacher were shot dead in the Dunblane massacre the previous year, their use in crimes has almost doubled to reach 4,671 in 2005-06. Official figures show that although Britain has some of the toughest anti-gun laws in the world, firearm use in crime has risen steadily. This year eight young people have been killed in gun attacks: six in London and one each in Manchester and Liverpool.
More at link
Anyone surprised by this?
-
As they say.... a lock only keeps the honest man out.. same with gun bans.
-
Yup. They can give me any arguement they want. They day that GOOD people are made helpless, is the day that tyranny reigns.
Only law-abiding people obey laws... like gun bans. Insanity to say otherwise. Are guns dangerous? Yes. Do guns kill people? Semantics aside, yes- but so do millions of other objects. Guns are banned in prisons, and they still find all SORTS of novels ways to kill. Those are the same people who were on the streets before. Just as ingenious then as before.
-
I can't think of a single reason that civilians should be allowed to own a gun (other than hunting and sports) if the police do their jobs right. If you limit the number of firearms, you'll also limit the number of people with access to them. I don't believe the "criminals will get them anyway" argument. Then you might as well allow drugs too - I mean.. criminals will get them too? Bad example, I know ;)
That being said, I think people are a bit too black and white on this. I don't think "anyone" should be able to get a gun, but I don't think "no one" should either. If the Government were to set up some psychological tests and tests of marksmanship before allowing people to obtain a gun, I could live with more people owning a gun.
But I can't live with people owning guns to protect themselves. If that is necessary, the community has a problem. It seems like vigilantist justice to me.
-
Well, here in the states we have an argument over whether the second amendment applies to private citizens or a milita force to protect private citizens from outside forces, which police over-rides.
I'd agree with that if it weren't for the fact that the rest of the bill of rights apply to personal freedoms, so I think old Bear Arms belongs there too.
My brother (hardcore libertarian) makes the point that it is needed to protect you from the government. And I can understand that a lot of personal paranoia is factored into the constitution. But I don't know how much damage a hunting rifle will do against a tank if the government doesn't like you. Guerilla this, militia that. Nukes win.
-
I'd agree with that if it weren't for the fact that the rest of the bill of rights apply to personal freedoms, so I think old Bear Arms belongs there too.
My brother (hardcore libertarian) makes the point that it is needed to protect you from the government.
And that is exactly why it's there. Of course those guys wrote that thing when a pistol or rifle was adequate protection from the government.
-
A gun ban is entirely pointless when it has no power to control illicit sources.
Just a wee nitpick though, guns are banned throughout Britain not just England.
-
Then you might as well allow drugs too
Yup. You said it.
-
I can't think of a single reason that civilians should be allowed to own a gun (other than hunting and sports) if the police do their jobs right.
That's ridiculous. Police don't exist to be an ever-present, all-powerful force of good, smacking down criminals with a golden hammer in mid trigger pull. No matter how good a police force is, they can't be everywhere at once. Not unless you want to pull some Orwellian shit with cameras in the TVs.
When the bad guy is reaching for his weapon, you're going to be reaching for your cell phone. You'll be full of holes when the police get there 5-10 minutes later, which is an optimistic response time even for a competent police force.
And yeah, England is pretty ass-backwards.
-
I agree with Chucara that a more thorough screening of gun owners need to be in place but problem with that is that there are a lot of seemingly normal people out there :anxious:
plus gun crime often fuels and is fueled by other crimes as well so to some extent it does have to be black and white with gun amnesties to try and break the cycle.
on the flip side, at least we'd be nurturing more creative criminals ;D
seriously tho, just taking guns away isnt going to solve the problem since, as its been rightly pointed out, criminals are just going to get more creative. society needs to tackle the main causes of people turning to crime like lack of education or prospects, unless they're just bastards in which case, yeah, get a gun and shoot them.
ultimately its a lack of respect and there are always going to be selfish arseholes who only care for themselves so it's just going to take time until I can get round them all and either educate them or stun gun them.
Protect the Human (but only the nice ones)
-
Make guns legal but increase the fines/penalties for use of a gun illegally.
Allows the law abiding people to have protection and gradually takes the people who will use guns illegally off the street. Also provides a deterrent against illegal gun use.
-
Make guns legal, sure.
But do what most comics say and make bullets insanely expensive.
To the point where you gotta ask yourself... do you shoot this guy, or do you sell the bullet and make a ton of cash?
:P
-
I can't think of a single reason that civilians should be allowed to own a gun (other than hunting and sports) if the police do their jobs right.
........
But I can't live with people owning guns to protect themselves. If that is necessary, the community has a problem. It seems like vigilantist justice to me.
That is just balls to the wall crazy
I mean, even aside from everything else said in the thread, which should be way more than enough reason....
A. *lots* of communities have a problem. Saying "well, if you need a gun to protect yourself, your community has a problem". No shit! That's why you get the gun or move or both. Do you expect the community to rise up as some singular entity and go "wow, that guy is right. Hey, guys, we really gotta stop murdering people for their valuables. Oh, and Lester, you gotta stop raping and stabbing all those women, ok?"
B. Vigilante justice is going out and shooting suspected criminals, or hell, even actual criminals. Actively pursuing them with the intent to kill them. Owning a gun for protection is merely putting your life in the hands of the person you trust most, i.e., yourself.
Limiting gun production now isn't gonna do jack. There's too many out there as it is and too many people who know how to clean, repair, fence and distribute them.
Living in a society where only the government/police own firearms just takes what little power the people have right out from under them.
-
I'm not sure if I get the whole 'I own a gun for protection' thing, could someone explain the mechanics?
-
I'm not sure if I get the whole 'I own a gun for protection' thing, could someone explain the mechanics?
The police cannot be everywhere and we live in dangerous times. A gun will protect me by killing/scaring away the burglar, rapist, etc in my home or wherever I might be and allowed to carry a gun.
-
The police cannot be everywhere
Or anywhere in some cities. :P
A gun will protect me by killing/scaring away the burglar, rapist,
or centipede *nods*
-
The police cannot be everywhere
Or anywhere in some cities. :P
A gun will protect me by killing/scaring away the burglar, rapist,
or centipede *nods*
It's the only way to be sure.
-
I thought that was nuking the site from orbit?
-
I'm not sure if I get the whole 'I own a gun for protection' thing, could someone explain the mechanics?
Certainly. But I'm gonna start low on the totem pole.
If, for instance, you come across a wild but wounded boar, which amounts to 'in rage' what are you going to do? Run? Nope, it's faster than you. Kill in with your bare hands? Good luck. Stab it with a knife? Not much better. You right then and there need a gun, because it is the only tool that will work.
For the record, I've lived in places where this problem exists and has occurred as often as twice a week. One such location with in Columbia MD, a very ritzy and expensive and overcrowded suburb about fifteen minutes north of DC, except it was a buck that had been hit by a car and the driver hadn't killed the poor thing. Once I found out the person simply left it there and called animal control hoping someone would come by to save it.
(For the record, if you hit a dear and it's lying on the side of the road still breathing but bleeding, don't call animal control, get a knife or firearm, and kill it. It's more humane and less dangerous for everyone. And, yes, animal control will do the exact same thing.)
Working up: Humans. Pistols and firearms works to prevent crime, believe it or not. Why? People don't want to get shot! Now, since I'm trying to argue this without resorting to conversational terrorism, I'm not going to site facts or statistics. ALL of them are biased on both sides of the arguement. But I will say that I feel more comfortable where I am now, knowing all my neighbors are armed and trained with firearms, that at any point during my stay in baltimore.
Then what happens if someone should break in? Well then, I have to use the words of Paul Tibbets when someone asked him why he had a shotgun to defend himself instead of a bat: "I'm too old to swing a bat around, but I can still use a shotgun." It's the same point: It's an equalizer. A crook at the very least is probably going to be in much better shape than you. They tend to move a lot of good very quickly for a living. Second, they probably have a gun themselves, as equalizers in case rule one doesn't hold true. (No, they don't carry guns because people carry guns, but because they don't know for sure that Schwarzenegger didn't drop by for the night in the two minutes they weren't looking.).
As one last point, I would point out that even if you don't fire at the crook, a gun still works in your favor. Firing a gun is one way to quickly clear a house. People normally can't tell where it's fired from, and most people won't wait around to see if they are actually being fired at or not. They'll get out alive and try for a different house later on.
Note, I did not use any examples of crazed murderers, random stories, or statistics. I tried to keep in all relevant material to explain my point of view, nothing more. (The animal incidents are things my neighbors left to me for almost a year and a half, so I can stand beside them.)
-
I can completely understand your point about animals, if you're out in the wild where sharp things with big teeth aren't aware that you don't see yourself as part of a food chain having a gun is a necessity. I'm also all for humane killing.
I come from a culture where we don't expect people to carry a gun so using a gun for protection is a fairly exotic concept. My concern is that there's a kill or be killed attitude in America and that there are people who own a gun in the hope of being able to use it some day, I understand the concept of owning a gun as a deterrent.
I suppose my question hinges on a lingering bias of the American populace being the gun happy morons people outside the country are shown in movies, statistics and special reports on gun crime. I realise that the media is a massive spin machine but I do wonder how much of the wild west and civil war mentality still exists in the modern American.
-
Well, as an American, I certainly only want to own a gun so I can round up a posse and go hunt down some cattle rustlers.
Out of curiosity, what culture do you come from exactly? I only ask because I'd like to say a bunch of vaguely insulting things about it, but keep repeating "it's probably just bias and media spin" so nobody can be offended.
To answer your question, I'll just refer you back to the beginning of this very thread, where we learned that ever since guns were outlawed in Britain, more people are getting shot.
I SIMPLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND HOW GUNS COULD PROTECT ME FROM VIOLENCE
-
Hey Bluecross!
Why are you viewing this thread?
*waves*
-
I would probably modify my post to make it less ornery now that I've cooled down a bit, but Bluecross would be disappointed in me for editting.
So.
SCREW YOU BLUECROSS
-
Hey Bluecross!
Why are you viewing this thread?
*waves*
I was gonna post a link I found that said a lot of stuff about Americans and gun control but then I didn't.
*kicks*
-
Wait, who did you kick? Yourself? Doombot? Recently deceased vocal great Luciano Pavarotti? IT IS UNCLEAR AND ALSO I THINK YOU SHOULD SHOW MORE RESPECT TO DEAD TENORS
-
(http://www.arcytech.org/java/money/images/10_bill.jpg)
-
I call mulligan.
That note was never alive. Ergo, it can't be called dead.
Nice try though :P
-
I'm pretty sure Hamilton didn't make it into the 20th Century...
-
I'm pretty sure Hamilton didn't make it into the 20th Century...
Who shot Alexander Hamilton in that famous duel? (http://www.ifilm.com/video/2423866)
-
Well, as an American, I certainly only want to own a gun so I can round up a posse and go hunt down some cattle rustlers.
Out of curiosity, what culture do you come from exactly? I only ask because I'd like to say a bunch of vaguely insulting things about it, but keep repeating "it's probably just bias and media spin" so nobody can be offended.
To answer your question, I'll just refer you back to the beginning of this very thread, where we learned that ever since guns were outlawed in Britain, more people are getting shot.
I SIMPLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND HOW GUNS COULD PROTECT ME FROM VIOLENCE
How far up you're own arse is your head Than? At the beginning of the thread it was pretty much asserted that laws on gun control mean nothing when we're talking about a criminal element gaining access to them. What I was asking about is the prevelent attitude to guns in the US, what I was asking, badly phrased I admit, is whether a gun is strictly valid as a form of defence or whether it's a perceptive thing that dictates if you don't own a gun you're exposed and vunerable.
Instead of trying to participate in any kind of reasoned debate to enlighten the evil man insulting you country you launch into some pissy whine which sadly falls below your usual standards. Pull your head out Than, you might find the world is a slightly different place than your self-important angry little persona paints for you and that other people tend to have a different point of view from you, if you weren't such a dick about pushing your opinion down their throat you may stand a chance at modifying thier opinion.
I do apologise for making it seem like I think Americans are all gun toting freaks looking for an excuse to shoot their neighbours but a nation with such an ingrained heritage of gun ownership is a little alien to somebody who has only had exposure to guns in very tightly controlled environments. It takes a little bit of questioing to understand the American attitude to guns and, unfortunately, ignorance tends to expose itself.
For the record I'm Scottish, we have a very proud tradition of playing up to outdated/utterly bollocks sterotypes.
I'm interested in how much of the spiritual essence America had growing up still exists in the US or if there's been a shift to gun ownership because of fear rather than the notion of protecting yourself.
-
Launch into some pissy whine? All I did was call you out on the fact that you said a bunch of insulting things surrounded by caveats and apologies. Sorry to disappoint you, but nothing irritates me more than serious dick statements surrounded by smiley faces.
I suppose my question hinges on a lingering bias of the American populace being the gun happy morons people outside the country are shown in movies, statistics and special reports on gun crime.
That's a pretty fucking offensive thing to say. You can't just include "I might be biased!" and pretend it makes any statement okay. To prove that, I'm going to go find a bunch of black guys and say, "Hey, can you try to explain away this lingering bias I have that black people are gun happy morons that white people are shown in movies, statistics, and special reports on gun crime?" How do you think that would go for me, hmmm?
I recognize that you already apologized, and I'm not still attacking you over that statement; I'm just pointing out that I didn't burst into tears and call you a bunch of names as you seem to be trying to imply. I thought you said something insulting crouched in flowery language, so I said so. But hey, what do I know, apparently I have a self-important angry little persona and my head is up my ass.
Hmmm, reviewing my post, yeah, all I said was "I PLAY INTO STEREOTYPES, AND YOU SAID SOME DICK THINGS, AND GUNS CAN STOP CRIME." Admittedly I said it like an asshole, but I say everything like an asshole. Since your response is about three hundred times more insulting, HELLO POT MY NAME IS KETTLE YOU RAISED SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT MY COLOR
To answer your question, I don't really believe in the spiritual essence of America in the sense that you mean it; America is just too big and diverse. The reasons that Americans would own a gun are totally different depending on where you are; in some major cities (particularly in some neighborhoods, particularly after dark), I definitely would feel exposed and vulnerable without some means of defending myself, and IMO a gun is the best means of defending yourself. However in areas in the south (even major cities like Charleston, SC) the attitude is much more colonial and people own guns so they can hunt and, yes, protect themselves from aggressors in the event that the government goes crazy, and just because they've always owned guns. I can't really speak for anyone else, but when William Morva shot those two guys last fall (with a gun he took from a police officer) and then Cho Seung-Hui shot all those people six months ago, I was pretty damn happy we had a couple guns in the house.
I definitely don't think there's an attitude in America of owning a gun in the hopes of being able to use it. I'm sure some people have that attitude, but there are crazies everywhere. I've got a burglar alarm on my house too; I didn't buy that in the hopes that someone would break in and set it off.
-
I keep seeing the main character from SLC Punk when Than is ... well when he says anything in the debate forum. And that makes me smile.
Here's my take:
I don't know how ideologically diverse Scotland is, but I can say for sure that America is about as homogenous as a million gallons of oil and water.
I'd say right now we're close to an even split of people who think guns are the savior of western civilization and people who believe that melting all guns into pony statues is the only solution to war. Personally I'm in the middle (Guns don't kill people: they just make it a lot easier to kill people).
As far as the wild west gun culture, you have to remember that a large percentage of Americans came to this country before then and settled in the east, and an even larger amount settled here afterwards. Using myself as an example, my mom's side of the family has been here since at least 1840, because one of my ancestors is Ambrose B. White, the founder of Whitesboro, Texas. On my dad's side, his father is first generation American from France (via canada, which was the style at the time) and his mother is first generation American from Germany. So if anything my in-born ideology should be split right in half from frontier people to highly educated immigrants (engineers and pilots).
Personally, I think guns are awesome. I own a shotgun, but I keep a trigger lock on it. I don't own any handguns, and though I think they look neat I really see no need to purchase one. Someday I might get a CHL (concealed handgun license) but not because I intend to carry, because it makes gun ownership laws a lot simpler (in the state of Texas as long as you have a CHL all your gun registration stuff is simple and easy as you've already passed certification that you're not a wack job, so if it happens that someone wants to kill me I can buy a gun without having to live in fear for days).
That's just my opinion. I was always told that in Scotland it's downlight polite to throw a friend through a plate glass window. I don't know if that's a fair stereotype but I think violence is just an aspect of life, and modern life has new tools for violence. Would we be better with no guns? Maybe. But making them illegal will never stop them from existing: and as I think the point of the OP was here, these laws create a black market (or extend an already existing one).
-
Now I have to go see that movie to find out whether or not TO FLY INTO A MURDEROUS YET PETULANT RAGE
-
Offensive? fuck Than I didn't actually say the bias was mine, the wording in 'a lingering bias of' was deliberately chosen to be impersonally generic. If I'd said 'my lingering bias of' I'd get your point, I'm perfectly aware that a very small percentage of Americans go around with a gun in their wasteband hoping to shoot people. I'm trying to figure out whether I should be offended by the bias I was talking about or whether there's any truth in the lingering conceptual bias the rest of the world is expected to have about Americans. I know that a lot of you guys see value in owning guns so I'm trying to explore the motivations for this value, your opinion has broadened that understanding; thank you.
I'm not implying that you burts into tears and started calling me names, I'm probably saying that I'm in a bad mood and I took your reply with less of a customary pinch of salt that I ought to have and that your attempt at splitting hairs looked a lot like you taking offense for the sake of it and just spitting the dummy out. Since I'd already admitted the validity of using a gun as a deterent your post read like it was a thinly veiled whine. The first line was just bad sarcasm so it pissed me off, in all I gave it poor marks as a Thanatos responsetm.
If you were anybody else I'd apologise for calling you a dick and being a dick to you but since you revel in being a dick, no hard feelings?
-
I was always told that in Scotland it's downlight polite to throw a friend through a plate glass window. I don't know if that's a fair stereotype but I think violence is just an aspect of life, and modern life has new tools for violence. Would we be better with no guns? Maybe. But making them illegal will never stop them from existing: and as I think the point of the OP was here, these laws create a black market (or extend an already existing one).
Pretty much, Scotland can be a prime example of homogination through willful adherence to sterotype.
For the record I think that making gun ownership illegal is an insanely stupid idea, a black market will exist in any model of gun ownership but proper checks, records and training for people who would be responsible gun owners are undermined by bans. I'd own a gun myself I wouldn't keep it near me in bed or carry it with me because I feel safe enough in my community not to. If I lived in a place where it was culturally acceptable or necessary to own guns I can see that my opinion would be markedly different but for now I don't see that me or my neighbours have any use for a gun.
I'm all for owning a gun if you can prove you aren't a psycho and wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment that guns really only make it easier to kill people, it's the psycology of the gun owner that makes them dangerous. My main issue with gun ownership would be in giving guns to those who might crack and use them or people using a gun when it's not nessesary. There's a huge amount of implied trust in allowing someone to carry a gun and a vast amount of room for error when giving that gun to people so I can see why the British government took the monumentally stupid task of burying thier heads in the sand instead of trying to detangle the issue.
-
I guess the best way to explain my opinion on gun-control is that it should exist but be limited. I think every gun should be registered, hunting or not. I don't think there should be a waiting period.
A lot of people argue that you shouldn't have to register, because now the government knows you have a gun. Seriously? If you're worried about the government having too much power, them knowing you own a weapon should be something that makes them fear you, especially in the case of some manner of reprisal. The waiting period I'm against because I think that if you need to purchase one to protect yourself the waiting period is completely counter-intuitive and makes the person trying to legally purchase a gun a target for gun crime.
Here's my idea: anyone who wants to own a gun has to go through a certification test, like the CHL here in Texas. You have to prove you know the basics of gun maintenance, laws, firing, practice, and above all: safety. You should be required to know how to use gun locks and safe places to store ammo, especially if you have kids. All that being said, I don't think you should be required to purchase any of those safety measures, but be aware of the availability of them so if something bad happens you're legally liable and can't claim ignorance.
During this certification you'd also have to have a background check, maybe a limited psychological evaluation. Then if you pass all that, you are a lifetime member of the gun club. You'll only have to verify your membership to purchase anything. That way if you do snap or something happens long after you've proven your stability, the authorities know where to find you and track the use of your weapon. With that being said I think you should be able to have a tiered certification, for weapons all the way from bolt-action hunting rifles to automatic weapons for self-defense, provided you can prove that you're capable of responsibly handling those weapons.
Just my 2 pieces of copper.
-
One of my Hunters own a gun, but the other uses a bow.
Haven't decided about my Warriors yet...
-
It's all about the stats with non-ranged characters. Just go with what has the best.
-
Yeah, it's all good TK. I flew off the handle like a jackass too; for the record, I'm not some kind of psychotic provincialist. It wasn't the perceived insult to America that made me all pissy; I hate it when people are dismissive or insulting while acting like they're not being a dick, and I erroneously interpreted your statements to that effect. I feel very strongly that people should be straightforward about their dickitude. So, yeah, my bad, peace and love, etc.
-
Yeah, it's all good TK. I flew off the handle like a jackass too; for the record, I'm not some kind of psychotic provincialist. It wasn't the perceived insult to America that made me all pissy; I hate it when people are dismissive or insulting while acting like they're not being a dick, and I erroneously interpreted your statements to that effect. I feel very strongly that people should be straightforward about their dickitude. So, yeah, my bad, peace and love, etc.
Your entire argument absolutely sucks but that's because you are a moron. Luckily, I have the moral high ground here.
-
One of my Hunters own a gun, but the other uses a bow.
Haven't decided about my Warriors yet...
Warriors come out to play (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgZCjcFBBJU) Come out to plaaaaa aayyy ayyyy ayyy
-
I leave the debate forum and yet my legacy lives on
*chuckle*
;D
-
I can't really speak for anyone else, but when William Morva shot those two guys last fall (with a gun he took from a police officer) and then Cho Seung-Hui shot all those people six months ago, I was pretty damn happy we had a couple guns in the house.
I have a .44 rifle, a shotgun, and a .38 handgun (concealed carry permit for the handgun. However, I prettymuch never carry it.)
I hope to never have to use them against another human. But you know, if the time comes where they might be necessary, I'm sure I'll be happy that I had the foresight to purchase them. You never know what's going to happen in a disaster, long-term power outage, etc.
I'll put it to you this way - I'm a law abiding citizen, but even more important, I am *not* an easy mark for someone who isn't.
-
To answer your question, I don't really believe in the spiritual essence of America in the sense that you mean it; America is just too big and diverse.
I try to tell people this all the time when they try to pinpoint "Americans". It's almost impossible. This country is so big and diverse, it just boggles the mind. It's like saying "Europeans".
-
I try to tell people this all the time when they try to pinpoint "Americans". It's almost impossible. This country is so big and diverse, it just boggles the mind. It's like saying "Europeans".
Considering we're "colonial" and that we're about equidistant from two large landmasses of immigrants, I'd say it's more like saying "Eurasians."
The only thing all Americans agree on is that they want to live here. People bitch about it, but to be honest if they really didn't want to live here it's fairly easy to move, so they're just bitching.
-
This is always a touchy subject. I've come to the conclusion that a person's decision on this subject are inherent to the individual and based on their environment. I simply cannot understand those who wish to ban citizens from arming themselves legally.
I live in a state where more people have CCW (concealed carry permits) then any other state aside from Texas and Pennsylvania. I feel completely safe based on that figure alone. If I am not armed at the time, chances are good someone else is.
We can't expect police to be everywhere at once.
Even when they are there, whose to say they are superheros?
Here's a link to a quicktime audio clip describing an armed citizen aiding a fallen officer who was gunned down during a traffic stop.
http://www.legallyarmed.com/AssistingAnOfficer%20mix1.mp3 (http://www.legallyarmed.com/AssistingAnOfficer%20mix1.mp3)
Everyone else just drove by or dialed 911...
I'm not selfish enough to only carry for my own protection, I feel like it's my right and responsibility to defend my countrymen from criminals.
Google it, there's literally 10s of thousands of stories regarding armed citizen arrests and crime prevention.
You just only hear the bad stories on T.V.
"Tar agus tóg íad"
(http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c173/Shadowboxin1/2ndamends006-1.jpg)
;D ;D ;D
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)
I do value a person's choice to NOT own a firearm, but disagree with dismembering a valuable fundamental exercise of rights which has been instilled in American citizens since our insurrection from the tyranny which birthed us as a nation.