As evidenced in the Holocaust Museum incident yesterday, it's already quite easy. In fact, the NRA is lobbying Congress for a regulation that makes it mandatory. An armed museum patron is a polite museum patron, you know.
Don't you find it odd that the shooting occurred in a museum in DC, where gun laws are the strictest in the nation?
Personally, I'd feel safer in a Jewish museum in Florida, knowing that some of the patrons are armed and prepared to defend against some nut job.
Personally, I choose not to own firearms. But I have friends who own and carry guns, they aren't cops, just normal men and women. When my wife and I go to the movies late at night with one such couple, we always have them walk us to our car if we aren't parked close to the building.
I think your comments stereotype gun owners, the same way the little Limbaughs stereotype Muslims just because one nut job gets violent. Most of my neighbors own guns, they're all good people, family people.
I don't see what the NRA had to do with the museum shooting.
I guess maybe you're referencing the recent push by the NRA to allow guns in National Parks. I'm absolutely fine with that though, for the same reason I'd feel safer in the museum down here.
To me it seems like law or no law, if some nut job is going to shoot people up then laws don't matter to that person. That's why I said it was ironic it happened in DC where the gun laws are really strict.
I can't really explain why I don't want to own one, but I feel safer knowing people around me do. I'm not a big user of the National Parks, but I'd feel safer from bears and psychos knowing that there were hunters and other normal people around with guns who might come and help me if I needed it.
This morning on NPR they interviewed the lone guard at some Florida Holocaust museum..yes, the lone (1) guard. So what if he got killed, then what?
I don't know man, maybe I believe too much in my fellow man, but I think the people I know are responsible and I'm glad they choose to do what they do.
Thinker: the NRA had nothing to do with the museum shooting. The post parodied the NRA's usual kneejerk reaction to these kinds of things by immediately suggesting that we all need guns.
For some reason, this post apparently doesn't connect with you.
Actually, that's exactly what the NRA does. Use criminal shootings to promote the idea that we should all be armed. The NRA has pushed for this cowboy mentality to take place on schools, private business, Disney world, etc.
At the same time, the NRA opposes ANY measure that would make gun ownership more responsible. Mandatory training, tests and education, registration, etc. It is easier and less regulated to obtain a gun than a driver's license. And that is a huge problem because while some gun owners are responsible. Some are not, and love to flash their guns, whip them out and threaten to use them. Makes them feel powerful.
I don't feel comforted one bit knowing other people are armed. In fact, I feel the opposite. I know that any idiotic altercation at a restaurant or a supermarket (just to mention two recent incidents) can end with one or both parties flashing guns or worse. It's why also I have a huge problem with guns in national parks. Many national parks are huge expanses of territory with a limited force of park rangers. In there, you are on your own. It won't be long before some nut shoots another patron over some stupid argument.
Protect from criminals? Judging from what I see at the range, many of my fellow gun owners can't reliably hit a target beyond 7 yards. And those are the ones who go to the range. Imagine the ones who don't. Getting caught in a firestorm between criminals and untrained citizens in a museum will only increase the body count.
9 comments:
As evidenced in the Holocaust Museum incident yesterday, it's already quite easy. In fact, the NRA is lobbying Congress for a regulation that makes it mandatory. An armed museum patron is a polite museum patron, you know.
I may be ignorant on the topic, but:
Don't you find it odd that the shooting occurred in a museum in DC, where gun laws are the strictest in the nation?
Personally, I'd feel safer in a Jewish museum in Florida, knowing that some of the patrons are armed and prepared to defend against some nut job.
Personally, I choose not to own firearms. But I have friends who own and carry guns, they aren't cops, just normal men and women. When my wife and I go to the movies late at night with one such couple, we always have them walk us to our car if we aren't parked close to the building.
I think your comments stereotype gun owners, the same way the little Limbaughs stereotype Muslims just because one nut job gets violent. Most of my neighbors own guns, they're all good people, family people.
I have nothing against responsible gun ownership, Thinker, but I do have a problem with the NRA. The post is meant to reflect that.
.
I don't see what the NRA had to do with the museum shooting.
I guess maybe you're referencing the recent push by the NRA to allow guns in National Parks. I'm absolutely fine with that though, for the same reason I'd feel safer in the museum down here.
To me it seems like law or no law, if some nut job is going to shoot people up then laws don't matter to that person. That's why I said it was ironic it happened in DC where the gun laws are really strict.
I can't really explain why I don't want to own one, but I feel safer knowing people around me do. I'm not a big user of the National Parks, but I'd feel safer from bears and psychos knowing that there were hunters and other normal people around with guns who might come and help me if I needed it.
This morning on NPR they interviewed the lone guard at some Florida Holocaust museum..yes, the lone (1) guard. So what if he got killed, then what?
I don't know man, maybe I believe too much in my fellow man, but I think the people I know are responsible and I'm glad they choose to do what they do.
Cool blog though.
Thinker: the NRA had nothing to do with the museum shooting. The post parodied the NRA's usual kneejerk reaction to these kinds of things by immediately suggesting that we all need guns.
For some reason, this post apparently doesn't connect with you.
.
Ah, I get it now.
It would be like if Amtrak used pictures of plane crashes to scare people and encourage them to ride trains to protect themselves.
Actually, that's exactly what the NRA does. Use criminal shootings to promote the idea that we should all be armed. The NRA has pushed for this cowboy mentality to take place on schools, private business, Disney world, etc.
At the same time, the NRA opposes ANY measure that would make gun ownership more responsible. Mandatory training, tests and education, registration, etc. It is easier and less regulated to obtain a gun than a driver's license. And that is a huge problem because while some gun owners are responsible. Some are not, and love to flash their guns, whip them out and threaten to use them. Makes them feel powerful.
I don't feel comforted one bit knowing other people are armed. In fact, I feel the opposite. I know that any idiotic altercation at a restaurant or a supermarket (just to mention two recent incidents) can end with one or both parties flashing guns or worse. It's why also I have a huge problem with guns in national parks. Many national parks are huge expanses of territory with a limited force of park rangers. In there, you are on your own. It won't be long before some nut shoots another patron over some stupid argument.
Protect from criminals? Judging from what I see at the range, many of my fellow gun owners can't reliably hit a target beyond 7 yards. And those are the ones who go to the range. Imagine the ones who don't. Getting caught in a firestorm between criminals and untrained citizens in a museum will only increase the body count.
Some of those Dutch Masters do look a little menacing. And the soup cans reminded me of Sherman storming Atlanta.
Never again.
Post a Comment
Spam, vulgar language, trolling and off-topic comments are not tolerated at SFDB and your comment will be removed if it meets this criteria.