Thread: JohnBoy and others---about guns

Originally Posted by Bananas

I know you have mentioned the NRA, JohnBoy, so I address this to you specifically, and to others who can share some enlightening information. I post not to start a controversial thread, but to learn more from your perspective.

I was once an avid hunter and once got a deer that was a real trophy. After that, knowing that I would probably never see another one like that, I go with friends occationally and "shoot" them with my digital camera. I did not enjoy seeing the deer suffer for the few minutes until he died and don't want to ever see that again.


I am not a fan of hunting. I probably should be a vegetarian loving animals, but I love my meat that I get from the store. Never had any interest in hunting or fishing, and could not bring myself to pull a trigger in the name of sport. Self-preservation would be another matter, probably. Our traditions in hunting are limited to hubby's car keys, wallet, cell phone, and checkbook. :lol:

Many claim that a gun is evil and only used to do bad things. Let's face it. A gun is a machine for throwing balls. 1000 times more people are killed every year by drunk drivers than guns, but ... well there's tax money in the former sooooo......


I have no qualms about others hunting. I know that they do a favor to us in decreasing an over sized population with disease as a health concern. There are checks in place in having hunting seasons, getting licenses or permits, and proper training for safety issues. I can see the excitement and interest sparked in some of my students as they share their adventures in outings with their dads, step-dads, or uncles. Several guys showed terrific writing skills in describing their detailed accounts!

Mayor Daley in Chicago has tried to place lawsuits on the gun firms for deaths to get money to cover costs of police, etc. He is adamantly opposed to firearms.

I'd like to ask him what reaction he would take if he woke up in the night with a punk standing in his room with a knife - sing "Coom bye ya"? There is a strange fact not talked about a lot in Texas. 150 years ago, 95 percent of the men on the streets of Houston had a gun on their sides. The crime rate was 0.7 percent of what it is today. The only real danger was getting caught in a crossfire. Robery of a store, purse snatching, robery of someone on the street was unheard of. But the rare case of a bad guy doing something occurred sooooooo, they outlawed it - mistake.


My questions lie around what guns are reasonable to be legally owned when going through the proper channels? Does the NRA espouse the right to bear arms as owning all guns that are out there? Are semi-automatics used at all when hunting? Does the NRA feel that any guns are out-of-bounds to the general public as they are of no need to law-abiding citizens?

The only place a citizen would use one would be in a riot. In today's paper in Memphis, (commercialappeal.com) the lead article is about how busy the ranges are doing the required training to carry one as the crime rate is rampant there.

Thanks for your thoughts!!

I know you have mentioned the NRA, JohnBoy, so I address this to you specifically, and to others who can share some enlightening information. I post not to start a controversial thread, but to learn more from your perspective.

I'm a target shooter and a gun collector. I joined the NRA when I was around 25. You can check out their official positions at [url="http://www.nra.org"]www.nra.org[/url] although most of their positions on gun-related issues can be found at [url="http://www.nraila.org/issues/"]http://www.nraila.org/issues/[/url]
In general, I think you will find they generally support being tough on criminals and enforcement of current laws on the books regarding guns, with no further restrictions and some fewer.

My questions lie around what guns are reasonable to be legally owned when going through the proper channels?

Fact- you can legally own machine guns in the US- IF you are willing to put up with extra taxes, signing away your 4th amendment rights, harassment by BATFE, and you have truckloads of money, as a legally owned machine gun or fully automatic rifle will not be cheap. (The supply was limited to guns made before 1986). I personally don't have a problem with that. If some guy has the $$ and can afford to blast away 600 shots in a minute, more power to him. Our gun laws make legal fully automatic weapons pretty much the toys of the rich. As far as artillery and missiles- I could see somebody owning a cannon (a lot of the same rules apply, and the ammunition comes under the same laws as dynamite and other explosives- again, toys for those with the money who are willing to put up with the government). I doubt anyone has the money for a Minuteman III ballistic missile, so thats a non-issue. Most people are woefully not up to speed on our gun laws- and think there aren't any. Most of them haven't bought one in awhile, or bought any handguns (more red tape).

Are semi-automatics used at all when hunting?

What little hunting I do is mostly for pests such as groundhogs. I have used a semi-automatic rifle- US Carbine M1, caliber .30 for that task. The second shot is indispensible if you have sighted multiple pests, or if you missed the first one. A bolt-action or lever-action firearm will leave you working the gun while the groundhog bolts into his hole.

Mayor Daley in Chicago has tried to place lawsuits on the gun firms for deaths to get money to cover costs of police, etc. He is adamantly opposed to firearms.

Mayor Daley and his ilk are one of the reasons I got involved with the NRA in the first place. Being a historian, I cannot find any logic in allowing any government a monopoly on force, as that monopoly will only exist for the law abiding. Daley and those like him would leave the rest of us prey for criminals (who will have the best weapons they can buy, and they make guns in other countries- and any machine shop can become a gun factory easily enough, so they'll never be short of weapons regardless of what the government will do). I would rather depend on my own weapons in a crisis than those of a policeman who isn't around- or worse, might be part of the crisis and IS around. (I believe the 2nd amendment is more important than the 1st- without the former, the latter is Bismarck's "rage of dreaming sheep.")

As far as guns in the hands of criminals- I believe in harsh punishments for those foolish enough to break the law.