Knox Commission OKs guns in parks.

Group votes 13-5 to allow those with permits to have weapons in areas

Knox County Commission on Monday voted 13-5 in favor of allowing handgun permit holders to carry their weapons in county parks.

Before the vote, several residents spoke in favor of allowing guns in parks, arguing the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution grants them the right to do so and that there have been few instances of problems with violence in Knox County Parks.

Jim McEvers, a citizen attending the meeting, said "It would seem more of a concern if someone without a permit can carry a gun into a park knowing he is the only one. Folks with concealed carry permits can carry in grocery stores, shopping centers and supermarkets. Allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves."

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/sep/29/knox-commission-oks-guns-in-parks/

Nice job by the conservative power brokers to find an issue that inflames the masses of gun enthusiasts. Its like they will not orgasm again without their guns.

does not say ANYTHING about age and the right to bear arms. Boy we could be celebrating righteous killings every minute or two. oh, gee Im reading that amendment and it says something about militias. oh well.

Msongs

What does the second amendment say about militias? It says the necessary to the security of a free state. Can you tell us what bearing that has on the right to keep and bear arms?

everywhere, What a doofus bunch.

.....and I accept and respect many here and elsewhere who will disagree with me, but I firmly believe that the Second Amendment encourages murder...and should be abolished.

How would you care to support your assertion as stated above?

Do licenced (where required by law) gun owners have a higher or lower rate of commiting crimes than the public at large?

Does Vermont have a higher murder rate than Chicago?

By your logic, does the First Amendment encourage libel?

Does the Fourth encourage criminal activities?

Does the Twenty-first encourage alcoholism and drunk driving?

Does the Twenty-fourth encourage election fraud?

Does the Twenty-fifth encourage assasination?

Does the Twenty-seventh encourage Congress to vote itself pay raises? (O.K., trick question there...)

Seriously?

I am not a researcher, nor am I a pollster to give you the answers you looking for...but what I know is that we are not better off carrying guns around, and hoping that they will protect us from "bad people". Indeed, when you take a life, its hard to bear of guilt, weather you are the victim or the victor.

Those were all rhetorical questions. Questions you dont need to be a researcher or a pollster to know the answers to. And if you didnt really already know the answers, then you are ignorant of the facts and should not post your opinion on subjects that you are ignorant on.

I salute you, Sir, and wish you best of luck....and your armory.

And I have two guns, hardly an armory.

When on earth will you stop buying these human killing guns?

Next, I'm afraid, you would say that you might need more guns, so that folks like me wouldn't stand a change to deny you the "right to bear arms".

You will do no such thing, of course....I hope!

the majority being handguns with a couple rifles and a shotgun to round out the small collection.

Three revolvers are dedicated carry or home defense weapons as if the short 12 gauge side by side shotgun commonly called a coach gun.

None of these "human killing guns" has ever killed or injured a person or an animal. They have, however, punched a lot of holes in paper targets.

And this may upset you, but I may decide to increase my collection in the near future. "Assault" rifles are becoming reasonably priced again. I plan to move from the city to the country, and one might be nice to practice with on my more remote property.

I'm hoping you'll never make use of it.

Shooting another person is absolutely the last thing that I would ever want to do.

But if I honestly feel that another individual is attacking and threatening my life or the life of someone I love then I will use my weapon for self defense.

Note that this would be the last choice.

Also note that I find your statement, "You can increase your collection of "Mass Murder"" somewhat insulting as it insinuates that I am a possible mass murderer.

I hope you didn't mean it in that manner.

comments like that show you are just a douchebag. Welcome to my ignore button.

I said I have two. TWO. not three or four or more, but TWO. Never said I was buying any more, either. And I'm afraid of the criminals, that ARE criminals because of their disregard for the law, will harm me or my family.

And you can continue to try and put words in my mouth like

"Next, I'm afraid, you would say that you might need more guns, so that folks like me wouldn't stand a change to deny you the "right to bear arms".

even though I failed to even HINT at such a thing. This goes to show you are disingenuous and have no REAL interest in having this conversation with me.

sounds like an emotional response to me.

You do make a valid point when you suggest that using a firearm in self defense is a life changing event and not necessarily a positive one. Many police and civilians who survive shootings are are judged to have acted responsibly, still suffer psychological aftereffects for years.

But I will argue that a weapon gives you the chance and opportunity to survive a violent attack. It doesn't guarantee your survival and a lot of factors enter into play. Situational awareness, training, skill and mindset play a big role.

You find plenty of links to newspaper articles here in the Gungeon which prove that in some circumstances, a firearm can save a person's life.

You may not be better off carrying a gun around and hoping that it will protect you, and I suspect you're right. However, that statement may not apply to me or others like me that have plenty of experience with firearms and have been in stressful situations. Having said that, I might not survive an attack either, but I would like to have the tools to attempt it.

We are not all cut from the same cloth. This is in no way meant as an insult. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. That's what makes the human experience so interesting.

I could say the same about the First Amendment....that it encourages murder...and should be abolished.



See how stupid that sounds?

wailing and marching, whilst pretentious with their Ak-47, we think of them as "fanatics"...but elsewhere, and here in America, that particular, when we see them nearer presidential gathering, and where they keep guns under near belts, and wide open, that seem as a march of "freedom" with it under the "freedom loving" Americans!

The mix of double standard we project here and elsewhere is mind boggling, indeed.

In what way does the second amendment encourage murder? Be specific.

Because it rambles and makes no sense whatsoever.

Besides, you FAILED to even ATTEMPT to answer the question. What a douchebag.

:eyes:

Fortunately we don't live there.

but you will have to agree with me that you and your likes purchase guns...and these guns kill and take away life, period.

That I'm aware of I bought them all used. You don't like guns , fine your option. Why do you feel the need to attempt to persuade me to give up my guns? Please read the article in my thread a world W/ out guns. Is that the world you want to live in?

I simply wanted to point out that your investment on guns is ridiculous, and uncivilized.

There was a time when a gun saved my life. I was approached by five guys carrying baseball bats and lug wrenches they made it crystal clear that they were out to whoop some ass, until they saw my gun. One of them was actually dumb enough to dare me to shoot while he was running away. WITH a gun nobody was hurt with out one I would have been sever ly beaten. When you can engineer things so people like that don't roam the world I'll give up my gun not before

none of my firearms, and I currently own twenty, have ever killed or injured a person or an animal. I usually average at least 6000 rounds a year with some years approaching 20,000 rounds.

Note: many shooters shoot far more than I do, especially the competitive shooters.

I've known many shooters over the years and of those I was friends with only one shooter had ever shot another person and he was in combat in WWII.

Forgive me if I sound bit dumbfounded and shocked about your freedom-gathered-ammunition. But you seem to have gathered more ammunition than we have accused of Saddam Hussein!

not surprising as your profile states you live in Boston. Let me express my sincere condolences. You probably have numerous misconceptions about guns and shooting.

When I lived in the Tampa Bay area of Florida, I would visit a shooting range once a week. I would shoot 50 rounds of .22 caliber ammo through a target pistol as a warm up and then would run 150 rounds (three boxes) of ammo through whatever center-fire pistol or revolver I was shooting that day. Usually after 200 rounds, my shooting would get worse rather than better, so I generally stayed within those limits unless I was testing a new firearm.

So, 50 weeks * 200 rounds per session = 10,000 rounds.

Some of my friends who were regular shooters would visit several times a week and shoot 200 or more rounds each time. Some shooters would show up and shoot a brick of .22 caliber ammo (500 rounds) in one session as well as other calibers.

All in all, until the great ammo shortage, it was an inexpensive sport and many of us reloaded our own ammo.

Once you bought your firearms and joined a range, the average weekly expense could be quite reasonable for a hobby. Firearms, if properly cared for, will last not only your lifetime but can be passed along to your children and their children. It's hard to wear out a quality firearm such as a S&W revolver, and if you do, it's usually inexpensive to fix.

Two hundred rounds of ammo would run me around 20 to 30 dollars depending on the caliber. .38 special and .45 auto ammo are fairly cheap. The expensive stuff is the newest super wazzo .357 and .44 mag ammo produced by the big ammo companies for hunting or self defense. The generic white box ammo sold at Walmart works good for target shooting at a much lower price.

It's hard to find a sport so inexpensive and so enjoyable. The range I shot at had a long table in the lobby where shooters would gather to bullshit. It may surprise you, but usually the conversations were more about computers and politics than guns.

Try not to reinforce that stereotype, mmkay?

Boston really isn't "the Hub of the Universe", and outside 495 =/= "Deliverance" territory

You live in Boston. The only people with handguns there are cops, ex-cops, the politically connected and crooks.

No wonder your views are distorted.

You might be suprised to learn that in exurban and rural areas of New England (yes, Mass included), people both own
guns at a higher rate per capita and shoot each other at a lower rate per capita than people in Boston do.

Live and learn.

They are an excellent tool to use to defend against violent human predators. Usually, the bad guy will run away when he see that his intended victim is armed.

And second, I can tell with some certainty that no gun has ever killed and taken away life, "period."

Oh sure, people have used guns to "kill and take away life, period" but the guns used--being inanimate objects--are merely the means, they are not the actor. I can say with certainty that none of the guns in my possession have ever left the gun safe of their own accord and gone around the neighborhood killing people. They haven't been used to kill either, though I'll be perfectly frank and state that if protecting my wife and child from harm requires me to inflict injury or even kill, I am prepared to do so, without remorse and without apology. Though, given the choice, I'd much prefer to not to ever have to.

To provide some background, I worked for the Prosecutor of the UN war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (more formally, the "International Criminal Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991," or International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia--ICTY--for short) for over three years, and if there's one thing I learned, it's that this "society is to blame" shtick only goes so far. The fact is that there are some people who inflict harm on their fellow human beings simply because they have the opportunity to do so and think they can get away with it. While it may be socially desirable to capture and attempt to rehabilitate such individuals, there is no persuasive argument why any of their prospective victims should be expected to submit to their crimes rather than stopping them with lethal force. If they die as a result of attempting to commit crimes, fuck 'em.

So spare me the bliss-ninny bullshit about guns "taking away life, period."

After all, if the right to keep and bear arms equates to encouraging murder, then obviously "freedom of speech" must also be encouraging people to publish child pornography, and freedom of religion is clearly an exhortation to Aztec style human sacrifice.

See how stupid it sounds when you completely make things up that have nothing to do with the subject?

Maybe you have something to say about child born, but your comparison of gun control is way off the mark.

The fact that you don't see the ludicrous nature of your statement reflected back at you doesn't speak well to your perceptivity.

Explain how the second amendment encourages murder.

You live in America....surely you know guns kill...and you seem to get upset about my opposition...so maybe you need to explain why you need to carry a gun to protect yourself!

I did explain that I even cited an example of a time in which a gun saved me from , at the very least, a severe beating. You ignored it.

Surely he was merciful chap not to have grepped the gun from you and used it against you, hence "he" averted disaster?

Or are you calling me a liar? 5 on one they all had bats and tire irons ( all quite capable of killing) and I had a gun. no one was shot no one was injured. Would have turned out much worse had I not been armed.

PS I boxed when I was younger even took 2nd place at the state TKD tournament waaaaaaaay back in 95 a fist fight is not somethong I'm afraid of.

I think it's interesting that you come here talking about civility and respect but take every chance you get to knife the gun owners.

I believe guns make much easier for people to take the step to kill....and I've heard the mantra that "guns don't kill, people kill people", but when someone points a gun at someone and pulls the trigger, that someone, is the killer, imo.

Are you aware that your interest is unobtainable? There are more guns in this nation than people. We manufacture something like a million a day. Any reasonably competent machinist can manufacture a working firearm (I know one that did just to see if he could.).

Your interest sounds nice but it’s unrealistic. As long as it remains so I reserve the right to self-defense ,as well as, the right to own the proper tools for that defense.

and I've heard the mantra that "guns don't kill, people kill people", but when someone points a gun at someone and pulls the trigger, that someone, is the killer, imo.

You do realize you just proved 'the mantra" true right?


Also please note that I made it all the way through that post W/ out insulting any body. Surely a reasonable, civilized member of the opposition such as you can do the same.

...Except those in the hands of government employees.

Given your apparent refusal to acknowledge the circumstances of the shooting, I can't take seriously the notion that there is any moral value attached to your estimation of what constitutes a "killer."

When a mother points her gun at someone who is trying to abduct her child, and pulls the trigger, inflicting a mortal wound on the would-be kidnapper, is she a killer? In the most literal sense, absolutely. But there's no way you can tell me she deserves moral censure for her action.

This is why I have so little patience with the "guns are only good for killing" so-called argument. Yes, that is what they're designed to do, but whether that quality is used for good or ill depends on the person wielding the firearm. And it's useless to pretend that it can't be used for good, or why would we tolerate our police carrying guns?

I carry when I hike. Now I don't have to sweat whether I have passed from National Forest, to National Park land, and accidentally committed a felony by taking a STEP.

I carry for two reasons. Animals, and two-legged animals that grow pot and run meth labs in the national forests and national parks.

Meaning, I carry a gun for the same reason a Park Ranger does.