Well that makes 3 of us that werktwohard
Don't jump me for this because I am very sincere and mean no disrespect.
My take (and I believe the take of many gun owners) is as follows: (and I may be very broad on some of this because I have to prepare for work tommarow and need to get)
It's not a matter of "I don't need this gun so no one should have it".
1. I have a lot of government background. I put aside any feelings and look at how the law and rights actually are (not to say you don't). But the problem with the second amendment is that it's only a right because we say it is. Laws are interpreted (especially one that is worded as questionable as this one) by the courts. The courts can overrule this and every single judge has been approved by the magority of the voters either directly or indirectly through other branches of goverment that we voted for.
2. The principle of logic and winning an arguement has to be applied. "Because we can" never trumps a more detailed answer even if that other answer is wrong or questionable. When asked why we need guns, I always reply "to use for recreational sport, relaxation, target shooting, etc". And many other gun owners say that too and I believe that is the best answer we can give.
But all to often, other answers come first
"Because I can"
"Because the second amendment says I can"
"Because of self defence"
"So when the government that the majority elect legally trys to take my guns away I can have a shootout and a civil war to the death"
Now I may have stretched the last one out a little bit (just returning the favor done to me
)
But do you see how radical this sounds if you are a moderate on the issue of guns?
There is evidence (and also counter-evidence I know
) that suggests the lifestyle that people lead determines whether or not they experience crime in that you know the person who commited a crime against you or you put yourself in a situation where you are vunrable. The opposition will say - bringing a gun grocery shopping is totally unnecisary. And I do understand your point about the fact that you do legally and safely carry that gun.
Something I firmly believe is that the NRA and gun owners MUST bend or else get all our guns taken away. Now I definatly understand the NRA is a lobby and its their job to take a very tough stand. But you also have anti-gun and animal lobbies as well. It's a fact in 2005 that people feel afriad of guns and are attracted to children and furry creatures. Now I'm not saying lots of children die because of guns (because I've already seen the stats you will throw at me), but I am saying that society feels safe when children are safe. A woman was raped or a child was raped - which is going to make the news? That's just how people feel about it plain and simple.
The same can be said about my statement regarding "the government taking guns away. Do you honestly know how it looks to the general public to hear "out of my cold dead fingers" or Ted Nugent playing an m-16 as a guitar? People think they are absolutly out of their mind
It scares the hell out of them.
We have to cut our loses and lick our wounds before it's too late. If gun owners continue the road they are on about large caliber guns, ak/sks style high cap rifles, and even full auto, then yes all guns will be taken away. If we continue the way we are, there will very soon be enough people in the U.S. that could LEGALLY make gun ownership against the law. And then your battle, and my battle, is lost.
We have already established the fact that 99.9% of gun owners have absoltly no use for a 50BMG. There may be some target shooters and the one member who wants to lug that heavy 20 pound SOB up a mountain
If it comes down to screwing over 5% by taking away a 50cal or even the ak/sks type gun compared screwing over 50% of gunowners that have semi-auto shotguns or pistols, you cut your loses and move on.
What we need is a moderate organization that presents itself as a respectful and practical group. This organization needs to promote recreation and not radical beliefs. They need to promote a practical use of weapons. (and this does include self defence and military style semi-autos).
I believe an organization like this would stand a great chance at succeeding in politics, promoting the sport, and making the sport grow.
One final comment regarding andy's post.
Anyone that has talked to me on the internet (whether posting or instant messenger) knows I love hunting and shooting. I do take a different approach than many that go on sites like this because the people here are more devoted than most gun owners and hunters. I try to speak my mind as well as throw out the other side's point of view. So some times it is hard to tell when I'm talking about my beliefs or what I percieve is society's belief. And I have probably once again made that unclear in this post.
One thing that is very clear in my mind - while I do like arguements, my mood is never one of disgust, anger, or singling out one person. And by my post count and membership date, it looks like I'm new here. I'm not new here. I've had over 5000 posts on this board dispite a 2 year dry spell. Some of the older members can probably think back and remember the very civil, educational, imformationall but still going nowhere conversations we have had in the politics and gun realm
OMG, it's 6:30
ttyl