Re: It's not about guns, it's about human rights!

ACOG wrote:
On 2007-08-29, SaPeIsMa wandered around the subject several times:
<br549@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:vr5bd3hm8effg04gdae1qck7s0r6qqsbpi@xxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:22:21 GMT, ACOG <A.Cantankerous@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2007-08-29, SaPeIsMa postulated:

[...]> ACOG <A.Cantankerous@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Seriously though, there is a difference between whacking
someone with the nearest heavy object and actually going
prepared to kill, which is exactly what one does when one
decides to carry a gun.

LOL
Indeed
According to coggy, when I took up Karate, I made the decision to go around
for the rest of my life prepared to kill, since after all Karate would turn
my hands and feet into dangerous weapons.
According to your interpretation you mean.

NOPE
According to YOUR WORDS
In what way is Karate training for the purpose of self-defense or packing a firearm being any less "prepared to kill"
From Merriam-Webster

I'm not Merriam-Webster, and those are not my words.

Plus, I responded to *your* words here. Seemed kinda simple
to work out to me.

But you're not far off. If you use lethal skills, in England
you would be considered to have used a lethal weapon.
The same would be true in the US for either guns or martial arts training
But in the US, you're not considered automatically guilty of "being prepared to kill" in either case
Thank God we are spared such non-sense.

(This, incidentally, makes more sense the the US's
regarding heavy Email encryption as "munitions" ;)

Then that shows how little "sense" the English have left
http://m-w.com/dictionary/munitions
Etymology: Middle French, from Latin munition-, munitio, from munire to fortify, from moenia walls; akin to Latin murus wall and perhaps to Sanskrit minoti he builds, fastens
1 archaic : RAMPART, DEFENSE
2 : ARMAMENT, AMMUNITION

Encryption IS a form of fortification which definitely qualifies it under the above definition

Therefore ALL encryption is munitions. My point was, as you
probably well know, is that only SOME encryption is covered
by munitions legislation, that being that level that the
CIA/NSA/etc. cannot break easily. Point being, that the
powers that be are using legislation designed to control
physical killing items to restrict American's rights to use
encryption at the same level the rest of the world can use
without permission from their governments.

(I'd have thought this would have been something you'd have
found objectionable BTW.)



But, unless you have super powers, you have to actually gain
a "hands on" situation to apply your lethal skills. IOW, the
criminal/victim must be within your reach. A whole range of
situations must be either traversed, or intentionally
breached, before you need to apply your skills.
Most self-defense situatons with a gun easily fall into the 3 threes
Less than 3 yards,
Less than 3 seconds,
Less than 3 shots,
As a matter of fact, tyhe VEY GREAT majority of DGUs (Defensive Gun Uses) do not even have a single shot fired
And that is because most people, criminals included recognize that an armed defender has the upper hand
This is NOT necessarily true for a well-trained and willing Karateka
He may not even looked the part

And feel free to ENUMERATE the "whole range of situations must be either traversed, or intentionally breached"
before you would apply your self-defense skills

I know of ONLY one thing that needs to exist for me to apply LEGALLY my self-defense skills or use my gun
I only need to be in fear (for myself or others) of serious injury or death
That's it

So you can shoot me, just because you have fear of me.

And so if I see you looking as if you are about to pull your gun, I can shoot you because of MY fear.

Then it becomes a lawyer-fest. (Now who would have an investment interest in such a state of affairs I wonder?)


With a gun, its just point and click, and that power is also in the
hands of every nutter in sight. So the two situations are in
many ways radically different and not the best of
comparisons.
Just point and click you say ?
Have you EVER fired a gun ?
Have your ever fired a gun under stress ?
I truly doubt both
If it was as simple as you claim, we would not have the extensive documentation of highly-trained people missing targets at very close range when under stress
It's not as easy as you fantasize


One points the gun at what one wants to shoot at.

One pulls the trigger, and a bullet comes out of the gun and
punches a hole in the target.

Point, and click.

How difficult this might be for certain people, or in certain circumstances, is not relevant to the description. Driving a car is way more complex, but we can describe that in similar terms. Turn the wheel toward where you want to face, and press the accelerator to go, brake to stop.

See? No fantasy involved, just a basic description of
function. However, tooling up in preparedness for a shootout
is either an indication your policing system has failed
dramatically, or you are indulging in an ongoing fear-based
fantasy of your own and actually like it enough to invest in it.

Some points for you, ACOG.

Here in the US, the courts have unanimously decided that the police have no duty whatsoever to protect the citizen. There are 28 such decisions, from local courts all the way up to the federal Supreme Court. Therefore, it is the citizens who are liable for their own self-defense.

Any fool can "point and click" a gun, and most do. Ask the gang-banger, who in firing from the passenger side of a car across the roof during a drive-by shooting, managed to kill his brother who was hanging out from the driver's side of the car. Defending one's self with a firearm takes training, just as any other martial art does.

Guns may be the preferred tool but they are not instantly fatal, even when the bullets strike the victim. This is true even with the larger calibers. For a self-defense purpose guns are a credible defense and not some sort of magical death ray.

Your fantasy about strangers giving each other the eye until they start shooting each other is just that - a fantasy. Literally millions of Americans who have been granted concealed carry permits have proven this.

Martial arts are not an answer, as has been pointed out. Do you really expect the infirm, the aged, or the wheelchair-bound to leap up and defend themselves as vigorously as a healthy twenty year-old?

Do learn something before you argue on the subject.

--
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Its not about guns, its about human rights!
    ... for the rest of my life prepared to kill, ... Encryption IS a form of fortification which definitely qualifies it ... Most self-defense situatons with a gun easily fall into the 3 threes ... tooling up in preparedness for a shootout ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Its not about guns, its about human rights!
    ... for the rest of my life prepared to kill, ... Encryption IS a form of fortification which definitely qualifies it under ... Most self-defense situatons with a gun easily fall into the 3 threes ... tooling up in preparedness for a shootout ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Harold Fish Murder Trial Begins This Week
    ... "If you truly did not want to shoot someone, you would not have a loaded ... My point, Guns kill they do not defend, the device is not designed ... Gun Uses) per year. ... Of those times the weapon is fired, ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: OT: Raccoons
    ... wasn't like I was "itching" to kill something. ... happen to anyone who gets too near a gun. ... for killing tiny things like small pest birds or mice. ... Wild animals are TOUGH! ...
    (rec.music.makers.percussion)
  • Re: OT - Virginia Tech
    ... Freedom to defend yourself should not mean the ability to kill others. ... I haven't been in a fight since school and it wasn't so bad. ... Give two men a gun and one the ability to surprise the other. ...
    (rec.autos.sport.f1)