A Firearm in Every Home.

[blue]

Part of my sig was questioned not to long ago.

There are over five hundred and fifty million firearms in worldwide circulation. Thats one firearm for every twelve people on the planet. The only question is, how do we arm the other eleven.

The USA cant arm the entire world population, but we can arm, train and make USA citizens more comfortable with firearm ownership.

Starting in the 1st grade, students get firearm safety training. Not firearms training, just safety, the hands on stuff would come in the higher grades. Safe handling and markmanship would be part of the overall GPA from 1st to high school graduation.

If you want a private business lisence you must pass a basic firearms safety and marksmanship course. If you want a home mortgage, you must pass a basic firearms safety and marksmanship course. Property management companies can require or not require the firearms safety and marksmanship training for those who rent from them. I wouldnt tie this onto a drivers lisence.

While I would like firearms to be cheaper for the general public to own, I cant see a constitutional way to make that happen, but by relaxing certain laws and regulations prices can drop. We could even add a free handgun to the purchase of every home, and a handgun included with every rented appartment, condo, and house.

Concealed carry wouldnt be madatory but it wouldnt require a lisence for any home owner, business owner, renter, college student, or anybody over the age of 18. CCW would be legal on all school grounds, unless privately owned.

[blue]

Concerning USA charitable groups overseas, if they give food, funds or housing in any way, they would be obligated to provide firearms training and firearms along with the goods, training, and services they currently provide. Ammunition would also be required with all other humanitarian goods provided.

[blue]

All current restrictions for firearm ownership would still apply in the USA. If you cant vote, you cant own a firearm. If you have been convicted of a sex crime or domestic abuse, you cant own a firearm.

[Cinder & Smoke]

Quote:
There are over five hundred and fifty million firearms in worldwide circulation.
Thats one firearm for every twelve people on the planet.
The only question is, how do we arm the other eleven.

.... we can arm, train and make USA citizens more comfortable with firearm ownership.

If you want a private business lisence ...
If you want a home mortgage ...
you must pass a basic firearms safety and marksmanship course.

We could even add a free handgun to the purchase of every home,
and a handgun included with every rented appartment, condo, and house.

Concealed carry wouldn't be mandatory,
but it wouldn't require a lisence
for any home owner, business owner, renter, college student, or anybody over the age of 18.
CCW would be legal on all school grounds, unless privately owned.

And this new program to require folks to Pack Heat will do what for
the average citizen?

What size canon are you suggesting - .22, .357, .45 cal? Full Auto?

Hey - canon - good idea ...
How about a 5" gun mounted on my front steps ... In case I feel 'threatened'.

Will I get a free Body Armor Vest with my government issued peace-keeper?

Can I just *pass* on this New Deal?







Quote:
Originally Credited to one John Adams:
Remember, democracy never lasts long.
It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.
There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

[Randi]

We could even add a free handgun to the purchase of every home, and a handgun included with every rented appartment, condo, and house.

Concealed carry wouldnt be madatory but it wouldnt require a lisence for any home owner, business owner, renter, college student, or anybody over the age of 18. CCW would be legal on all school grounds, unless privately owned.

You must be joking!!! Or is this how you'd plan to bring down the population of the world?

[Edwina's Secretary]

Please guys...don't feed the trolls. It only encourages them.

[Whisk_Luva]

So you think we should teach everyone in the world to use a gun? And everyone should have a gun? How about those with mental disorders? They may not of done anything yet, but if someone is developing some form of mental health issue and they get a gun....?

And we do not need any more kids thinking guns and violence is cool thank you very much. Yes you are teaching them saftey but how much are 1st graders really going to take in? The main message you are teaching them is guns are ok.

As if people don't feel vunerable enough in this day and age out in the city! Yes they would have there own gun but thats no help when you are dead. A few seconds is all it takes, how the hell is someone meant to defend themselves in that time?

It's awful even thinking of getting charities to hand out guns! Charities are meant to protect and help people, not turn them into killers, or allow more people to be hurt by these nasty guns.

I say tax on owning a gun should be increased everytime someone is shot. Enough people are killed as it is, do you really think giving more people guns is going to help that?!? End of.

[blue]

And this new program to require folks to Pack Heat will do what for
the average citizen?

No, citizens would not be required to "Pack Heat". Simply be trained in firearm safety and usage.

What size canon are you suggesting - .22, .357, .45 cal? Full Auto?

There is no one size fits all. I can handle a .45 and even the .50 BMG rifles, they arent for everybody.

Hey - canon - good idea ...
How about a 5" gun mounted on my front steps ... In case I feel 'threatened'.

Why a 5"? Why not build a bowling ball cannon and call it good?

"Threatened".

Also depending on the ordinance used your "cannon" could be classified as a destructive device and not legal.

Will I get a free Body Armor Vest with my government issued peace-keeper?

No. You will not be issued any firearms, only trained to safely use them. To my knowledge Body Armour currently used by Police and military are not legal for civilians to own.

Can I just *pass* on this New Deal?

You could certainly "pass" on owning a fire arm, but you would still be trained to safely handle and operate a variety of firearms.

You must be joking!!! Or is this how you'd plan to bring down the population of the world?

How would this bring down the population of the world? And no Im not joking.

Please guys...don't feed the trolls. It only encourages them.

I was asked a question and I responded. You on the other hand never miss a chance to be insulting and added nothing of value to this thread.

So you think we should teach everyone in the world to use a gun? And everyone should have a gun? How about those with mental disorders? They may not of done anything yet, but if someone is developing some form of mental health issue and they get a gun....?

Yes everybody should know how to safely use a firearm, even those with mental disorders. Obviously if you have a mental disorder you should not be allowed to own or be in unsupervised posession of a firearm.

And we do not need any more kids thinking guns and violence is cool thank you very much. Yes you are teaching them saftey but how much are 1st graders really going to take in? The main message you are teaching them is guns are ok.

Part of the problem is people are teaching kids that firearms equal violence, and that firearms cause violence. We need to be teaching kids younger then 1rst graders that firearms are not toys and to respect the damage they can do. Kids are taught not to play with knives, matches, lighters, etc, etc, before the first grade and most kids take it in quite readily. The main message everybody needs to learn is guns are OK and they need to be respected and handled accordingly.

As if people don't feel vunerable enough in this day and age out in the city! Yes they would have there own gun but thats no help when you are dead. A few seconds is all it takes, how the hell is someone meant to defend themselves in that time?

So people are better off defenseless is your argument?

It's awful even thinking of getting charities to hand out guns! Charities are meant to protect and help people, not turn them into killers, or allow more people to be hurt by these nasty guns.

Yes, its better to let the people recieving aid, food, and medical supplies be able to defend it. Arming them dosent turn them into killers it lets them defend themselves against those who will kill them for the goods they recieved. Giving them food and medical supplies only to turn them around and let others kill them is not charity.

I say tax on owning a gun should be increased everytime someone is shot. Enough people are killed as it is, do you really think giving more people guns is going to help that?!? End of.

Yes I do. Legal gun owners do a small minority of unjustified killings. Making it harder for people to legaly own firearms only makes for more victims and increases crime in general.

Come on people, you know that Blue KNOWS this topic is going to, well lets just say, "Hit the fan." Don't give him the satisfaction of sitting back and reading how everyone is going to get riled up over this. No matter how wrong this thread is to us all, it is his opinion and as far as I'm concerned, the only one with this opinion. As hard as it is to some, lets just leave him to his opinion and don't act on it.

Couldn't have said it better myself.....
Thanks!

Again, I was asked a question this is my response. I was hoping for a calm, rational discussion but that may have been wishfull thinking on my part.

What are we going to do with those who refuse to arm themselves?
Do we get to shoot them?

Nothing, this isnt Switzerland, or Israel. Thank you for taking this seriously, .

I think we should arm people with grumpy little dogs instead. You can carry them around in little holsters and everything (just in case). Start training people early on how to raise and train their own family protection. I can see it now...."you'll get your own chihuahua when you're old enough little Timmy. In the meantime, we're gonna teach you how to use it properly. First off.... never tell your yappy little dog to attack anyone unless you are sure they're a bad guy".
[/sarcasm]

Maybe issue an Adam West cat launcher?

honestly if eveyone had a gun, it would just come down to whoever could shoot first. Bad guy wouldn't have any reason not to shoot you on sight if they knew you were willing and able shoot back if you saw them first.

Bad example. The bad guy would in turn be detained by a legal gun owner trained for such situations.

Ooooh, I love it! Let's force everyone to own and use an item, whether they like it or not! That's true democracy at work, there.

While we're at it, let's force everyone to own and ride a motorcycle. Or own a green iguana. I personally think requiring ownership and skills in use of hand grenades and Arabian horses would be a great pre-requisite to buying prom tickets.

Brilliant!! I'm sure it's just what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the constitution.

Nowhere did I say citizens would be forced to own or use a firearm, only that they would be trained to safely handle firearms. And I believe the Founders had this very thing in mind, an armed populace.

(Caveat: I own and know how to use firearms.)

So your point is what, exactly? To take what I wrote out of context for the amusment of those who are scared of firearms?

HHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAa! Love your post!

Not saying your afraid of firearms but just maybe.

I was the person (or perhaps there were others) that PM'd blue a while back and asked how such a thing could be practical. Not everyone could carry arms - training is needed, and not all people have the aptitude or the ability. Some could not hit the broad side of a barn, and there would be others with physical, emotional or mental limitations.

It was a post from you that I am responding to.

Nowhere in blue's posts here did I see the word "EVERYONE". Other posters added that.

Whether I agree with the proposal or not is irrelevant - blue has plainly given this some thought and has proposed under what conditions arming citizens might be accomplished.

Okay, maybe some of this, or even all, would not work. The type of arms carried would have to be regulated - and law-abiding citizens would abide by that. (Yes, it's still the crooks that cause the trouble).

If, as blue suggests, you had been educated in firearm SAFETY (not USE) since the first grade, would you feel more at ease with this?

Is there anything here that anyone sees as workable, or has suggestions for improvement aside from calling blue a troll, and the stuff hitting the fan?

Firearm ownership is a contentious issue in Canada also - and is far too serious a subject to be derided and dismissed as I see being done here.

JMHO

Thank you.

[sparks19]

To be honest... I think this all boils down to people reading this incorrectly. He did not say people HAD to be armed or be shot.

We own guns.... we havent SHOT anyone. and we don't plan to either.

Gun ownership does NOT equal violence. I am not a violent person. my husband is not a violent person. we aren't going to hand hannah a gun and tell her to have at it

but EDUCATION doesn't hurt ANYONE. It seems that what is being proposed here is simply EDUCATION

are you against sex ed since so many people go out and fool around and end up with STD's? likely not. do you think they should teach only abstinence? probably not for the most part.

We raise our children teaching them how to handle things properly and how to stay safe... why is it that it's only guns that we want to make totally taboo? why not teach them HOW to use one correctly?

Too many people have no problem giving their kids a water gun or some sort of toy gun to play with... but then we expect them to not learn about what REAL guns do or are capable of?

Hmmmm

Hey I know my opinion isn't popular. but it's my opinion and it isn't going to change anytime soon.

[Red 46]

I am a totally new user and just ran across this thread started by Blue and was amazed how many people there are who pretty much agree with at least some of what he is saying. I was taught firearms saftey by my dad who brought us home a deer every winter and bought my sister and I a .22 rifle when we were ages 7 (me) and 10. I agree with what you said about teaching children the correct way of handling situations... all except how to handle a real gun.. or at least to show them it is NOT a toy. One way some friends of ours did that was to shoot a shotgun into a watermelon. It makes an impression. It won't make the kid afraid unless that is what your intention is, but it does get their attention.

[Whisk_Luva]

So all schizophrenics want to kill someone?

mor⋅bid⋅i⋅ty [mawr-bid-i-tee] Show IPA
–noun 1. a morbid state or quality.
2. the proportion of sickness or of a specific disease in a geographical locality.

mor·bid·i·ty (môr-bĭd'ĭ-tē)
n. pl. mor·bid·i·ties
The quality of being morbid; morbidness.
The rate of incidence of a disease.

I didnt realize being emo, peruse that link at your risk I didnt fully peruse it, was a disease.

Doctor Leon="A satire including sarcastic mental health definitions, visitors' questions with answers, commentary on therapy, and funny quotations."

Satire or not, schizophrenics DO suffer hallucinations, paranoid or bizarre delusions, or disorganized speech and thinking with significant social or occupational dysfunction. All of these can lead to further actions and problems if untreated. Where did I say all want to kill people? I said in a previous post that a schizophrenic WITH the potential to commit homicides.

As for the whole emo thing? What the...? What have emos got to do with anything?

The parts in bold are reasons why kids should have real world experience with firearms, focusing on safety. I believe you are underestimating children.

I don't think I am underestimating children at all. They are easily influenced- end of. I honestly don't see how real experience with a gun could help them in life, because guns are for one purpose only and that is violence. Give them a gun and you are encouraging violence.

Mean those kids would not do the forbiden? Even if I read it wrong, educating those kids so the mystery as why its forbiden is no longer a mystery for those kids to rebel against.

I mean those kids who want to rebel against what a higher authority says. So someone says one thing, they do the opposite.

By this argument gun crime in AK and other states that allow concealed carry would have a massive increase in murders and other criminal acts. Guess what, that didnt happen. You feeling threatened is a personal issue. Even in states or cities that dont allow concealed carry, odds are good somebody is carrying illegally, even in England.

Like I said I don't know about other places, I don't know the reasons why because I only know enough about the UK. As for my 'own personal issue', I am sure lots of people aren't to happy that everyone is carrying a gun. Guns kill. And yes I am well aware that the odd person will be carrying a gun illegally in the UK, but that is the odd few people, that it.

Martial arts can and do kill. The differense is the martial artist is the weapon, and by your argument weapons should be banned.

Did I say martial arts couldn't kill? What I am trying to get across is that if people learn a DEFENSE martial art they can therefore protect themselves, and they can just knock the person to the floor or whatever. No killing. They kill on purpose, they get locked up.

Firearms protect food, water, aid, and life. If everyone had food, water, and aid, there are still those out there who will want to take it from others. Firearms protect life.

You try telling that to someone who has been shot. So theft justifies murder in your opinion? I can just see the charities going out now, helping orphans in places where there has been a war, and giving them a gun, a gun that they saw kill their parents.

The USA has just as many problems with prisoners being released early or not prosecuted at all due to prison populations, if not more so. Ill have to look into it.

But the USA has harsher punishments, for example some states still have the death sentence, not saying I agree with this, but it is still there threating all the criminals out there.

You might want to reconsider that, Alaska is a beautiful and unique place. When the licence restriction was dropped crime did not increase. See above for martial arts being a weapon and a method of killing.

I am not worried whether crime increased or not- Alaska is a small place. I just don't want to promote places which allows guns to be an everyday object like I stated before. With martial arts you have the control and ability to decide what move you are going to make, and people aren't about to go out and kill people with it willy nilly. Aikido = defense. The moves are based around defense. All the moves are taught to us with one person pretending to attack us and then we get out of it somehow. We do not learn any fancy attack moves. It is defense. Thats it.

'Today Aikido is extremely defense oriented but nevertheless effective. Aikido really isn't designed for a prize fighting environment for pugilists to strut their stuff in front of screaming fans, Aikido is really for self-defense in a back alley at night in the winter against hoodlums.'
'O Sensei, the founder of aikido, believed that martial training is a path to non-violence, a physical method of creating a harmonious world'

[Whisk_Luva]

Nowhere in blue's posts here did I see the word "EVERYONE".

Of course not, and I understand exactly where you are coming from, but at some time in someones life they are going to need a mortgage, a business license, or go through the school system, all of which he is saying should have gun training.

Yes everybody should know how to safely use a firearm, even those with mental disorders. Obviously if you have a mental disorder you should not be allowed to own or be in unsupervised posession of a firearm.

So, someone is schizophrenic, with the potential to commit homicides, and you think we should teach them to use a gun? It doesn't matter if they are ALLOWED to own one, someone who feels that they need to kill people is going to get a gun somehow, whether it's legal or not, and this person is going to know how to use it! Not a very good idea is it?

Part of the problem is people are teaching kids that firearms equal violence, and that firearms cause violence. We need to be teaching kids younger then 1rst graders that firearms are not toys and to respect the damage they can do. Kids are taught not to play with knives, matches, lighters, etc, etc, before the first grade and most kids take it in quite readily. The main message everybody needs to learn is guns are OK and they need to be respected and handled accordingly.

Think about it. What use is a gun besides from the purpose of violence? Whether its defense or intentional, they still kill people. Kids can be taught they are not toys, but what use is that honestly going to do? Kids don't see games with matches in or whatever but they are constantly givent toy guns, games with guns, and despite what they have been taught if they think 'oh this is fun' I doubt its going to stop them wanting to use a real gun.
The reality is most children find it hard to think about anyone but themselves until about the age of 8, so how are you meant to get them to think about how this thing will effect other people?
I honestly don't see the point in teaching such young people about guns.

So people are better off defenseless is your argument?

Well they can hardly defend themselves against a gun attack can they? The other person shoots first and BOOM they're dead. And yes people may attack in other methods, knives or whatever, but if guns are available to everyone, knife crime goes down, gun crime goes up. Also you do not need a gun to defend yourself, for example I do aikido, and there we learn how to defend ourselves against a knife attacks, and at least with martial arts most will not let you use even a wooden knife or learn techniques using it until you are at least 18. If you ask me defense martial arts are the way foward, I mean, at least you can defend yourself without killing anyone.

Yes, its better to let the people recieving aid, food, and medical supplies be able to defend it. Arming them dosent turn them into killers it lets them defend themselves against those who will kill them for the goods they recieved. Giving them food and medical supplies only to turn them around and let others kill them is not charity.

Well if you give them a gun doesn't that meant they could turn round and do the same to others once their aid runs out? And is it fair that someone who is obviously so desperate for this food or whatever is shot? They try to relieve their own suffering, perhaps not in the best way, but still? People should be able to defend whatever they have of course, but I don't think stealing food justifies murder. Maybe if the charities didn't have to train all these people to use firearms, and have to buy all these firearms they could help MORE people, so less people would have to try and steal aid off others.

Yes I do. Legal gun owners do a small minority of unjustified killings. Making it harder for people to legaly own firearms only makes for more victims and increases crime in general.

Knives are available to people and look how much knife crime has gone up! Please explain to me how making guns illegal would make crime go up?

[Puckstop31]

Knives are available to people and look how much knife crime has gone up! Please explain to me how making guns illegal would make crime go up?

According the the BBC, in the three years since the UK's 1997 nearly total ban on personal firearm ownership, gun crime ROSE by 40%.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm

I could go on and on and on with stories like this. Why? Because criminals don't care about laws. Ban whatever you want. Control whatever you want. Only the law abiding will follow it.

A armed person is a citizen. A disarmed person is a subject.

[blue]

So, someone is schizophrenic, with the potential to commit homicides, and you think we should teach them to use a gun? It doesn't matter if they are ALLOWED to own one, someone who feels that they need to kill people is going to get a gun somehow, whether it's legal or not, and this person is going to know how to use it! Not a very good idea is it?

A schizophrenic should know what to do, what steps to take if they come across a firearm, so nothing bad happens. Yes it is a good idea for everybody to know firearm safety.

Think about it. What use is a gun besides from the purpose of violence? Whether its defense or intentional, they still kill people. Kids can be taught they are not toys, but what use is that honestly going to do? Kids don't see games with matches in or whatever but they are constantly givent toy guns, games with guns, and despite what they have been taught if they think 'oh this is fun' I doubt its going to stop them wanting to use a real gun.
The reality is most children find it hard to think about anyone but themselves until about the age of 8, so how are you meant to get them to think about how this thing will effect other people?
I honestly don't see the point in teaching such young people about guns.

So your argument is people are better off deffensless? Tell that to a woman being raped. Kids are taught matches arent toys, what is your point? The games, toys and videos that feture firearms and violence are exactly why kids need to learn firearm safety, so they wont want to do the forbiden and actually handle a firearm unsupervised.

Well they can hardly defend themselves against a gun attack can they? The other person shoots first and BOOM they're dead. And yes people may attack in other methods, knives or whatever, but if guns are available to everyone, knife crime goes down, gun crime goes up. Also you do not need a gun to defend yourself, for example I do aikido, and there we learn how to defend ourselves against a knife attacks, and at least with martial arts most will not let you use even a wooden knife or learn techniques using it until you are at least 18. If you ask me defense martial arts are the way foward, I mean, at least you can defend yourself without killing anyone.

Do you realy think that your average person is going to buy a gun and turn into a serial killer or mass murderer? Martial arts can kill just as easy as a firearm, so what is your point? That martial artists are going to snap and start killing willy nilly?

Well if you give them a gun doesn't that meant they could turn round and do the same to others once their aid runs out? And is it fair that someone who is obviously so desperate for this food or whatever is shot? They try to relieve their own suffering, perhaps not in the best way, but still? People should be able to defend whatever they have of course, but I don't think stealing food justifies murder. Maybe if the charities didn't have to train all these people to use firearms, and have to buy all these firearms they could help MORE people, so less people would have to try and steal aid off others.

If everybody is armed they arent very likely to pull off the scenario you just described. Keeping them unarmed and defensless against government armed militias in Siera Leon and other parts of Africa, it only makes them targets.

Knives are available to people and look how much knife crime has gone up! Please explain to me how making guns illegal would make crime go up?

DC, untill recently handguns where illegal and severe restraints on long arms, high crime rate. Chicago, severe gun laws, high crime rate. What is your reason for the high crime rates in Chicago and DC?

After firearm bans in the UK and increased firearm restrictions in Canada, crime increased. Maybe you can explain to me why?

If you come to the city I live in or my hometown, remember there is no lisence to carry concealed here, everybody could be armed. So try not to act as paranoid about firearms as you type.

Obviously not. I said nothing at all that was "frightening". If I would have wanted to do that, I could have.

My point is that I do not agree with your idea, that I think it is silly, in fact. You are entitled to your opinion, certainly, but when you post it on a public board, you will indeed receive others' opinions, in spades. The reason I added the fact that I am a firearms owner, I thought, would be obvious. I am not afraid of firearms, I do not think they are inherently dangerous or immoral. I have been shooting for three decades. And, still, I do not agree with your idea.

So with your 3 decades of experience, firearms training is a bad idea for the general public?

[blue]

Seriously, what are the downsides to this idea? People wont be forced to own or possess firearms but they will be trained in the safe handling of them. I fail to see the downside here.