Second link not working

It worked for me but I read posted it.

Well here for your viewing pleasure is more items foreign to the way of life in your local.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7pGt_O1uM8

This one gives details I had forgotten about the woman and shooting I mentioned.
I had forgotten at that time Texas had no carry law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2YC5cVxTcQ

This one shows why the 2nd Amendment exists.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncdXfUAkMUI

Thanks for that.

So, if Brazil were able to control the criminal gangs, AND you had secure borders, would there still be a need for guns? I take the point that we live in different worlds, so I cant apply my standards to you.

There is a corollary to your position – Russia borders a number of other European countries, and are also well known for criminal gangs. Other countries in the EU do not seem to have the huge issues you describe. Would you accept that there is a degree of paranoia inherent amongst your fellow men?

I am not trying to pick a fight here – I am just trying to understand something that makes no sense to me.

In Russia, to own a hand-gun is very hard, rifles are not hard to legally own. (shotguns are considered in the same category as rifles.)
It is illegal to drive with a fully assembled firearm in one’s vehicle.
Many Russian repeating shotguns have removable magazines, if the magazine is removed the firearm is considered disassembled.
This is from Russians who have seen it first hand, so many drive with a shot gun next to them and with a shell in the chamber and a loaded magazine next to them but not in the gun.

Paranoid, how do you mean paranoid?
Some or all as a whole.
Ask someone who has had some one killed or injured by an intruder, then tell them it is paranoia.

It happened probably over a decade ago now, and I am not going to look up her name but she was interviewed on radio and TV often back then.
She always carrier a pistol in her purse.
She was going to meet her parents at a fast food joint.
This was about the time some places started putting up “No guns allowed” signs.
The fast food joint had such a sign and to avoid all problems she left her purse in her car.
This was one of the first cable news mass shootings.
She has to watch the shooter shoot her Father and Mother to death in front of her.
She was one of the person that started the wave that has eliminated many former gun laws in the U.S.
Was she paranoid?
If she was, she would have taken her purse with her into the fast-food place, she regrets every day she did not.

The much maligned National Rifle Association puts out a magazine every month save one (for financial reasons as lifetime members receive them for life with only one payment).
In the front of each magazine each month are six to eight copies of newpaper briefs in which a person used a firearm to defend one’s self.
There is never an issue without one.
The age of the persons using a firearm for defense have ranged from young children defending their mother, to wheelchair bound men in their eighties who always kept a firearm near by.
Not all the bad guys are shot dead; I would say on average one out of ever four or five ends up worm food, many are arrested in the hospital seek medical attention, and many simply run away.
On rare occasions there is an actual brief gun battle.

Why is it the phrase “trying to justify the unjustifiable ” come to mind?

Because you live in your small world and maybe expect the rest of the world to live by your small standards.

Justify
Show or prove to be right or reasonable:

Our Constitution say it is right and reasonable, your attitude is trying to justify the unjustifiable.
I.e. you do not like it, therefore; it should not be so.

To Bruce:
Live in fear, that could only be if we lived by your standards.
What you are saying is try to imagine a world where there are not bad people.

You, try to imagine that you had a semi-lawless country adjoining your border, not water separating you from cartel flunkies that kill because they can.
Brazil passed a law that was going to stop those criminals because we all know they respect the law.

A gun control movement was born and in 2003 the government passed a law called the Disarmament Statue which, among other restrictions, limited who could buy and sell guns, and prevented civilians from carrying them in public. The new law built on previous regulations that mandated background checks and registration of weapons. Gun sales dropped, and firearm deaths fell from nearly 40,000 in 2003 to a little over 34,000 in 2004.

Therefore:

A report on violence in Brazil says around 42,000 people were shot dead in 2012 – the highest figures for gun crime in 35 years.

Must have been legal gun owners being driven crazy by owning a firearm, as we know criminal respect those laws so well.
Hmm, the underlined part really makes people safe as we know criminals keep their at home in a safe, unloaded, like the laws many liberal U.S. politicians tried to foist on the voting populace.
But WAIT, how can this be the U.S. now has laws that allow more firearms freedom, to own and to carry, than they had twenty years ago?

May 7, 2013
Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak

Maybe that is why the Brazilian law is an asinine feel good bit of dung, passed by people who never go, much less have to live where criminals thrive.

I do not carry a firearm with me when I go out.
If some one tried to break into my abode, to break out of it would be the only method for that one to stay among the living.
Will I carry in the future, maybe and maybe not, not near the top of my priorities right now.

I am glad I can if I choose to?
Absolutely, especially as some states bordering mine are allowing carrying across state lines for those with paper to show it is legally carried. (Not licensed, legal carry has nothing to do with a license.)
This way one can visit others and not have to find the proper place for a firearm when crossing state lines.
There is a growing number of states recognizing legal carrying from other states.

Your reply paints a wonderful picture of a land where you are not safe, where violence awaits you at every turn, where the only condition for living in this land is to be a slave to the gun – you either have one or beholden to those who have.
I have been to America, lived there for a (short) while: what I saw and felt was nothing like that. Are you sure you are not being sold a pup by the arms manufacturers – you gotta have a gun, you have the right to have a gun, you need a gun, you must have a gun because it is unAmerican not to have one?

It is a fact of life, if such a scenario were true in a country as small as yours, it would be a very dangerous place.

You wondered why anyone would want a firearm and I told you one very good reason why but only in your mind is this happening to everyone anywhere all the time.
It happens and to pretend it does not is naive stupidity.
You could come where I am now and probably never run into anyone who would cause you grief, especially if you attention about where to not go if you truly wanted to avoid trouble.
And then you might because you were new and different paint the picture of a mark that a local two-bit criminal would see as an easy mark and get robbed.

Now as you read this, if you were robbed, you might think, damn, the Yank was correct about how nasty it can get, OR, you might react like like so many the local small town soccer moms who often say something like: “I cannot believe this happened in our small peaceful, there are no bad people, community” blah, blah, blah.

It happens because they run around with the heads up their ****, while turning their noses up at those types who are not a perfect as they are. I.e. those who live in the real world, not their bs world where all the whoring around, and rich little kids who shoot drugs and smoke joints does not happen because they will not believe it does, regardless of the truth.

That same narrow mind distortion of reality that these soccer moms and their panti-waste husbands have of reality, is similar to the distortion you felt when you heard some of the facts only at opposite ends of the spectrum.

As the liberals placate the ghetto trash more and more they are spreading like cancer.

That a person was killed in a small town in not common, neither is it rare.
My home town had more murders when it was less than 4,000 people than it has had in the forty years since.
My home county in which my home town, which now has 13,000 some people, is the largest by over one hundred percent, also had more murders pre-sixties than it has had since.

Minneapolis/St.Paul, the largest community in Minnesota, less than half as large as Chicago even if suburbs are included, about a decade ago one year had a murder rate that exceed either New York or Chicago.
Unlike Chicago, the Twin Cities did what Giuliani did in New York to eliminate the problem, Law Officers cracked down extremely hard on criminals.

A special force of officers was created who operated on a very loose set of rules, the problem went away quickly.
Ghetto trash does not stick around places where they are the subject of strict law enforcement.

So they meandered out to smaller communities such as the one I am in right now where the police’s major problems were once petty crime, drunks and civil disputes.
At the same time, Wisconsin, where my sibling lives, cut welfare drastically so the ghetto trash, while hard core are still in Madison, Wisc. (One of the men, very familiar with the criminal types my sibling ended up surrounded by told her NOT to go there, she had no idea what she was dealing with. It was nothing more than a little Chicago. She found out stupidity has just rewards and now has perfect 20/20 hindsight) , many left for Minnesota which has much better welfare and often the women, even though on welfare, are not a real problem but their boyfriends and fathers of their ******* children see they have place to live now where they are not known by their rap sheet and move in with their asininely stupid girl friends until something such as my cousin ran into puts them back where they belong.

The price of freedom is some abuse it.

The cities with the highest murder rates in the U.S. have most liberal governments and strictest gun laws.
The year Minneapolis/St.Paul had horrid murder rate, Minneapolis had well over 90 percent of the murders, it also has far more liberal Democrat set of politician.

After the bad year, a Republican mayor was elected and he formed the special police group that did away with problem caused by not cracking down on the criminals.
After the criminal element had been seriously stepped on, liberals started whining about how these bad policemen were discriminating by performing all those legal raids in minority areas. (during the high murder years, just under one hundred percent of the victims were minorities.)
Typical liberal politicians would not simply shut down the force which the public knew was the only reason the murder rate was under control so they cut their funds to the point the force had to use confiscated drug money to be able to pay its bills.
Some how that fact was leaked to the press and the Democrats quickly shut down this force that was out of control, although actually it was merely out of money, even though the Minneapolis politicians had continued to demand that they continue to do all they had done while they were fully funded without the funds.

After reading a book about the beat being a crime photographer back in the days of Speed Graphics and flash bulbs, I found out that percentage wise it is the way it has always been, there are peaks and and valleys but per one hundred thousand people, it is not really any worse than it was, and as far a violent crime goes per population some what better right now.
The only real difference in perception is caused by the fact that news that used to takes days to weeks to span the country, if it even left its local, now can do it in minutes, and there are far more gossip type news sources out there to gladly willing to do it.

One last note, my home town when it was still less than ten thousand people, had group of Latino tough guy wannabes start to float into town.
The town had always had Latino migrant workers beginning pre-WWII but these were the bad boys.
Well the local Latinos that stayed year round spoke to the police telling them what to look for to tell the bad boys from normal people.
The local police hounded the bad boys till they decided to go some where else where they did not stick out like a sore thumb.

If they would do now what they did then, the ACLU and liberals would be out crying racist discrimination and the liberal press would be out crying how small white communities opposed diversity, even though it was the local Latino community that saw the problem brewing and worked with the police force to eliminate it.

And what is the purpose of this tool?
Can it be used to remove bolts, hammer nails, cut wood, drill precise holes, grip material, bend metal, etc, etc, etc?
Or is it just something that can hang from your hip, make a loud noise and fire a projectile in a straight path towards a target with the potential to kill or maim?

And you say that where power is concerned, a reason for not owning one must be a fear of them. Please, wake up! If you walk down a street wearing a gun in a holster surely you are displaying that fact to all around, telling them that you are not to be messed with because you are armed – but in the 21st century no individual in a modern western first world country has a need to go to the supermarket, visit their dentist, walk the dog or even just admire the view whilst wearing a gun. Are you really that afraid of getting jumped by a squirrel, or that the paperboy might sneak up behind you?
When was the last time you needed to draw your weapon in town – or is it just the fact that you have a gun and wish to justify that by having the option, the power, to draw your weapon in the street?

Yes, a gun is just a lump of metal and cannot fire itself, so must be used by its owner in the same way as a screwdriver or a pair of pliers, but the screwdriver or pliers are useful whereas a gun…? A gun can’t help you change a tyre on your car or unblock a drain, and it certainly has no place in my toolbox, but it sure does feel good knowing that you have the ability to kill anybody who you perceive is a wrong ‘un (which is probably how the American police are regarded throughout the rest of the world), doesn’t it?

Do you see what I’m getting at?

I went to school to study auto-mechanics, I went to school to study firearms, I have a degree in English studies.

Any one, in any of those three fields knows full well it is better to have something you do not need, than to need something and not have it.

The father of my oldest nephews and nieces went to prison for armed robbery, after they were born, so do not even attempt to educated me on criminals and how they function in the U.S.

My oldest sibling ended up in court for not testifying against a pimp; the main reason was not loyalty but he had threatened harm to her family if she did.
Well he went to prison, and the gent who ended up in prison for armed robbery informed the pimp’s associates that if anything happened to her or her family it would be the last thing they ever did.

Even though she could not legally own a firearm she acquired one anyway out of fear.
After the threat was gone, I quietly removed it from her, as she could not hit the broad-side of a barn, so it was best that the pistol disappeared, although I wish I had kept it as it is now a collectors item.

One of my cousins left a house he was visiting and saw a large man pummeling a woman in a car.
He verbally got the man’s attention and the fellow who was much larger, my cousin is only 5 feet 8 inches if I remember correctly, informed my cousin that he just made a bad mistake and came at him swinging.
My cousin ducked the first blow and then drew his legal concealed carry pistol and pointed it at the man’s chest.
Fortunately for the man, he took off running as my cousin said he had taken up all the slack in the trigger when the man ran.

The man was arrested and went to jail but not for beating the **** out of the woman, she would not press charges but for warrant that was out for him.

In the town of sixty thousand I am in right now, there has been a string of armed robberies, knives and firearms.
One fellow was not robbed as one of the items he produced while emptying his pockets for the criminal was a firearm

He did not shoot either but told the police had the man not ran away he would have shot him.

Fortunately most of the murders in this area is Chicago exports killing Chicago exports but one murder was a police man gunned down, execution style, in a town of less than five thousand people that is only thirty some miles away.
They have not caught the murderer.

I have two firearms under construction at this time that are in the category of being capable of killing a Cape Buffalo.
I no longer will ever able to afford such a trip, but I still am having the revolver and semi-auto built as I will be able to sell them for more than construction cost, slightly over two thousand dollars, which is incredible deal as they are unique and the gunsmith doing them likes firearms that are outside the norm, so I got a tremendous deal.

In the past several years I made a few hundred dollars selling firearms that were either simply unique but I needed money more than a collectors item, or were bought strictly for reselling for profit.
All sold, were sold fully within federal and state firearms rules.

As far as what the tool is used for, that is totally up to the owner at the time and the business of no one else.
If it is for self-defense it is for self-defense, for hunting then it is for hunting, for target sport then it is for target sport, etc, for some very expensive guns are merely tools, meant to be used, not stored for safe keeping.
If they cannot shoot it, then they have no use for it.
Others buy them and never even chamber a round in them much less shoot them.
Revolvers are worth a good deal more if the cylinder is NEVER turned, not even once.
I am speaking of high four to five figure sums.

People like the latter are like stamp and art collectors, some do not understand the prices paid for items that sit put away for safe keeping and rarely see the light of day.
They do not have to understand as it is really none of their business so no one should expect an explanstion.

RpR your persistence is interesting but ultimately you are attempting to justify the unjustifiable.
Widespread gun ownership is simply not required or necessary in most environments.
Nobody living in a city requires a (semi) automatic assault rifle. Not for target shooting, not for sport shooting, not for hunting.
For that matter no civilian living anywhere requires a semi automatic rifle.
As for “open carry” that’s just pathetic willy waving and if you can’t see that there is really no hope for the US as you know it at all.

I do not know why you mention “requirement” or necessity, as that has zero to do with anything.

The only requirement or necessity is that the Federal, State and local governments do not infringe on the right of the U.S. citizens to decide whether or not they wish to own one.

There are no semi-automatic “assault” rifles. Never have been and never will be.

Anyone who can pass a back-ground check can own a fully automatic weapon if the one so chooses but they are not in the same category no matter how the left-wing ignorants over here try to pretend they are.

If some one has mental problems because they see other carrying in the open, they had best either best crawl into their safe-hole and pull the lid shut or go see a psychatrist/psychologist with there phobia.
Some states have open carry laws that no one hears about because it has never caused a problem and should anyone challenge it, it would expose them as an instigator who is challenging the law for sake of inciting conflict where none exists.

Re 44

RpR

I get the impression that there is a streak of irrational behaviour running thru’ the make up of some white Americans. How else does one explain the desire to own personal weapons other than for personal protection in a society allegedly at peace with itself ?

That, might explain the issue. Perhaps white America is not at peace with itself ? I mention white America because the news concerning firearms abuse seems to stem from this grouping.

I’m fairly neutral on this subject, it is after all a problem for America. You’re quite right, I haven’t spent any time in America but, I do know firearms. My knowledge of personal weaponry is yours multiplied by a factor of probably ten.

When your write “take Cape buffalo” I imagine that is a euphemism for “kill Cape buffalo” ? Why would you want to kill such a magnificent creature ? Can’t be for beefburgers, I imagine you’ve enough of your own. Perhaps for some mysterious American ritual yet to cross to our shores.

If you have ever communicated with persons who have hunted non-predator game animals in Africa, the animals taken are a feast for the locals.
One cannot ship meat back to the U.S. without a horrid amount of time and paperwork so prime cuts are consumed on site and the rest is given to the locals.

The person , who is well, and best, known among shooters, that has shot Cape Buffalos with hand-guns was born and raised in South Africa so your invective based on ignorance will be treated as such.
He was also the first person to do so.

[I]” My knowledge of personal weaponry is yours multiplied by a factor of probably ten.” [/I]– If you are an armorer, or former, then your dismissive, and some what paranoid, attitude speaks more of an irrational attitude from you than any one who owns firearms

Your prejudiced use of the term “White” say more for your ignorance of firearm ownership in the U.S. than anything else, (I have met a goodly number of American Indian and Latino firearm owners, although Latinos are actually just as white as Germans), you have written.

This country has never been at peace with itself.
The closest it comes is during and after major wars when foxholes quickly eliminate most ethnic biases.

Most of you probably know nothing more of violence, much less firearms, than is trotted out by the left-wing news medias in the U.S., that can to a degree, excuse your attitudes but in this case ignorance is neither bliss, nor wise.