It happens that SeaNymph formulated :
On 5/25/2016 7:42 PM, Diesel wrote:
SeaNymph
Wed, 25 May 2016 20:41:28 GMT in alt.politics.scorched-earth, wrote:

On 5/25/2016 10:13 AM, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per SeaNymph:
And yet again, they ignore the criminal element.

I have no use for guns personally (although I recognize that
others do) and an extremely-low regard for the NRA.

Having said that....

A looooong time ago I lived in Hawaii for almost 10 years.

As a matter of fact - at that time - somebody could get beaten
half to death just walking down the street in *any* part of town
or country.

Most places in the USA, you have an idea where to go and where
not to go for personal safety. .... Not so in the Hawaii of that
time - the worst could happen anytime anywhere without somebody
even knowing what they had done/not done to provoke it.

One phenomenon was theft from cars. You stop at a tourist spot,
get out of the car, look around, come back to the car, and
there's Bla James going through your glove compartment. No
cops, nobody else around... just 375# of Bla James.... so you
keep your mouth shut and don't bother the guy until he's finished
with his business.

In that context of might-makes-right, the conventional wisdom was
"Don't mess with Filipinos because those guys carry *knives*"....
So I have to, however grudgingly, buy into the "Equalizer" aspect
of the NRA's PR efforts.

OTOH whether the "Equalizer" aspect of an armed public would
outweigh the inevitable gun battles and the probable emergence of
relative firepower as a determinant (as opposed to being armed vs
unarmed) is another issue that I do not claim to know enough to
opine on.

i.e. If most people in Hawaii of that time carried handguns,
maybe Bla James would have a buddy and be packing a
fully-automatic AR-15.... creating an even worse situation than
unarmed vs armed....

I'm a gun owner. We don't do anything other than target shoot, but
we both enjoy it.

There are studies that say that states with carry laws have lower
incidents of violent crimes. That makes sense to me. While I don't
have a carry permit yet, I'm planning on getting one. I don't plan
to carry a gun often, but that permit will serve as a permit to
purchase for 5 years, and I do plan to buy more guns

This is an interesting article.
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...ol-myths-reali
ties




Nice article...You'll probably catch some flak for providing it.


Possibly, but that's life. I'm sick of the left trying to convince people
that law abiding gun owners are the problem. They continue to ignore the
criminal element and frankly, they're all idiots, imo.

And the real problems are just starting. I had a family member take a child
to the doctor. During the visit the family member was asked if there were
guns in the house. After confirming that there were, the family member was
asked if the ammo was kept separately. Really?

How is that any of their business? I suppose they did that in response
to mental or emotional issues with the child, which in this
administration makes it their business. That's what happens when the
pro-gun camp insists that crazy people are the real problem, not a
proliferation of guns. You just can't win I guess.