Lee, if I have understood the discussion :
( 1 ) Fear is an argument for gun ownership, and KC says that it is
good enough, particularly since the law so permits.
( 2 ) In addition, KC and others are saying, the " perceived " ( may
not be actual ) danger of harm ( not necessarily of life ) is enough
to kill an intruder, especially since it is impossible to determine
precisely if the danger is actual or not, if the danger is to life or
not.
It is all then fear, as I read it.
( 3 ) The third fact in the argument is that my life, the life of my
near ones, is more precious ( valuable ) than that of the intruder
( even if he is only perceived as a killer, and may not indeed be
so ).
This survival instinct is natural to each one of us. It too
reduces us to being in a state of constant fear and insecurity, such
as is common among animals.
In the face of above, I see that the discussion must address the
issue : Is striving for a state of being without fear worthwhile
enough to risk one's life, the life of one's near and dear ones or
loss of property ? Is an attempt to rise beyond the ( natural,
animalistic ) state of fear and insecurity, to a state of trust of
others and freedom from fear, a worthwhile human value to pursue, even
at the risk of one's life, pain, loss and discomfort ?
You've answered, Lee ! You clearly seem to be saying : Yes, Yes. The
only limitation I sense in your affirmation is that you are ambiguous
about the global value of the pursuit. You seem to be saying that the
value may not be relevant to Americans, who have their own history in
which the answer to fear is gun - ownership.
However, I find Ian unequivocal on the value ! He seems to be saying
even Americans, their history and law notwithstanding, must strive for
the state of freedom from fear, without resort to gun - ownership !
Sorry, if I erred in summarising as above.
On Feb 5, 2:52 pm, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey KC,
>
> I hope that you do not mean me? I don't see the need for the general
> populous to own guns, and of course I can only realte to my own
> experiances due to my own upbringing and the country that I live in.
>
> I have always said that I feel it would be better if the USA did not
> have the history of gun culture and ownership that it has, but
> obviously that means nowt. Over there, your arguments may hold more
> sway, over here though I do not belive so.
>
> In essance all I'm really asking is, is fear a good enough argument
> for pro gun ownership?
>
> On 5 Feb, 04:25, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Vam,
> > No the discussion isn't over. I'm only drawing what I see as the
> > intricacies of the discussion. As in, those who are defending gun
> > rights are arguing for the status quo. Those who are arguing against
> > gun rights are calling for affirmative action, for a change. They are
> > asking that those of us in our houses who wish to defend ourselves by
> > force ought not be able to. Where as, we as the defenders of self
> > defense are not saying that you must defend yourself with a weapon.
> > In other words, those taking an anti-gun stance are forcing something
> > on those who take a pro gun stance. They are threatening to take away
> > a freedom that we have historically enjoyed (and by enjoy I don't mean
> > get a kick out of). So personal feelings about self defense, and what
> > you would or wouldn't do in a situation are really irrelevant to this
> > discussion. That's why I brought up the "to each his own" argument.
> > But by all means. Let us continue the discussion.
>
> > On Feb 4, 9:11 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > So, KC, is the discussion at an end ? After all, you are saying :
> > > You do yours, I'll do mine. Which ends the matter.
>
> > > In truth, we seem to be refusing to see the moral issue, as distinct
> > > from the legal ( or even, the pragmatic one ) : freedom from fear.
>
> > > But, perhaps, that is not the issue being discussed in this
> > > thread ! ? However, I could appreciate Lee's position only in the
> > > light of that moral.
>
> > > On Feb 4, 10:00 pm, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Lee,
> > > > Again, all well and good. You keep doing what you do. Not telling
> > > > you to stop. Seems like its served you well. I'm not telling you we
> > > > should make it a law that you should have a gun in your home and that
> > > > you should kill intruders. I'm glad the burglars that came into your
> > > > home, without your permission, didn't hurt you, and didn't get hurt in
> > > > return. Doesn't sound like you have been so lucky every time, but
> > > > thats the risk you take. I for one will not take that risk with my
> > > > family, nor with my own life. Your ideals are your ideals, and mine
> > > > are mine. I do presume that someone who breaks into my house is there
> > > > to do harm. If I have the opportunity of course I will do everything
> > > > in my power to avoid shooting them, but not at the risk of my family
> > > > being hurt.
>
> > > > On Feb 4, 9:54 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hey KC,
>
> > > > > Yes I realise this, what I'm really saying is that this presumption
> > > > > that you speak of is that, a presumtion, and a wrong one I belive.
>
> > > > > And that this fear thing is not a great reason for gun advocates.
>
> > > > > I have lived 40 years now and I have been burgurld twice during this
> > > > > time, in both cases the intruders took stuff out of the house and left
> > > > > me and mine alone.
>
> > > > > Who's to say what may have happend had my father woke up and disturbed
> > > > > them, but I'll not assume that me and my family would then have been
> > > > > murdered.
>
> > > > > Also during my 40 years I have had to protect myself and my family and
> > > > > often times this involved violence,(I was in fact the boy that carried
> > > > > his stabbed dad back home) yet I have never owned a gun and I manage
> > > > > to protect my self and my family fine without one.
>
> > > > > Is fear really the best argument for pro guns?
>
> > > > > On 4 Feb, 15:22, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Lee,
> > > > > > I can understand your personal feelings on the matter. Its very
> > > > > > understandable that you could never imagine yourself killing another
> > > > > > human being. That is a very good thing, by all means. And most gun
> > > > > > owners can never imagine it either. They aren't sitting in their
> > > > > > house, watching the clock, just hoping someone breaks in tonight so
> > > > > > that they can "bust a cap in their ass". If you think the risk of
> > > > > > shooting an "innocent" intruder isn't worth the benefit of
> > > > > > protecting
> > > > > > yourself from truly malicious intruders, then thats perfectly your
> > > > > > decision to make. Someone who is a pro gun advocate is not telling
> > > > > > you that he wants to force you to keep a gun in your home and to
> > > > > > shoot
> > > > > > intruders. He is only saying, leave me alone, let me do what I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > > is right, which is protecting my life, and my families life. There
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > a presumption, at least in the state in which I live, that if
> > > > > > someone
> > > > > > is wrongfully in your home, especially at night, that they are there
> > > > > > to harm you. Everyone knows this. Everyone knocks on the door
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > they go into your home. Burglars who are sneaking around at night
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > someone's home are assuming the risk that they may be shot. They
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > know this, and yet they think the benefit of what they will get in
> > > > > > that house, is worth the risk of getting shot. So no one is saying
> > > > > > you have to keep a gun Lee. We aren't going to try to convince you
> > > > > > that its a good idea. We are only saying, leave us alone, let us do
> > > > > > what we believe is the right thing to do.
>
> > > > > > On Feb 4, 5:14 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > And this nicely sums up my stance.
>
> > > > > > > There are those that will tell you they fell safe carrying a gun,
> > > > > > > safe
> > > > > > > from intruders to their homes, and safe from muggers on the the
> > > > > > > street
> > > > > > > and safe from the tiny percentage of other gus owneres that may go
> > > > > > > mental.
>
> > > > > > > These same people will often tell you that they would kill an
> > > > > > > intruder
> > > > > > > to their house. Now this is the one tha t always gets me.
>
> > > > > > > Partly I dislike the thought of gun ownership, because I know
> > > > > > > that I
> > > > > > > just could not point one at another human and pull the trigger, to
> > > > > > > imagine the mental anguish that I would go through being
> > > > > > > responsible
> > > > > > > for the death of another human, nope, just not for me. Added to
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > the reasons quoted for doing so.
>
> > > > > > > To stop an intruder in your house, you have no idea what they are
> > > > > > > there for, whether they are armed or not, but because they have
> > > > > > > broken
> > > > > > > into your house you are allowed to kill them.
>
> > > > > > > That seems like madness to me, and it worries me greatly that
> > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > cannot see it.
>
> > > > > > > The very idea of guns to protect from guns, is a ludicrus circle
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > will not be broken with that argument.
>
> > > > > > > On 2 Feb, 16:36, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Ian,
> > > > > > > > Its hard to tell who is more scared, it all depends on who is
> > > > > > > > making
> > > > > > > > the argument. A couple years ago we had a controversy on our
> > > > > > > > campus
> > > > > > > > at the University of Idaho about the right to carry on campus.
> > > > > > > > In
> > > > > > > > Idaho you can carry anywhere you want, other than a courthouse.
> > > > > > > > However, the Universities have "policies" that say no carrying
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > campus. Universities are state run institutions, and Idaho has
> > > > > > > > preemption laws that say the state legislature is the only one
> > > > > > > > allowed
> > > > > > > > to legislate gun laws. Anyway, we had a public forum at the
> > > > > > > > University where we all got together to discuss the issue. I
> > > > > > > > found it
> > > > > > > > interesting that both sides appealed to fear in their
> > > > > > > > arguments. The
> > > > > > > > students against conceal carry on campus said that they
> > > > > > > > wouldn't feel
> > > > > > > > safe knowing that people were packing guns, the students for
> > > > > > > > conceal
> > > > > > > > carry were saying, they didn't feel safe being disarmed on a
> > > > > > > > campus
> > > > > > > > where the closest law enforcement is at least ten minutes away,
> > > > > > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > of people could get messed up before any law enforcement showed
> > > > > > > > up.
> > > > > > > > One girl who was against concealed carry was from the UK, and
> > > > > > > > she
> > > > > > > > swore that if we were allowed to carry on campus that she would
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > to drop out of school. It turned into a pissing match over who
> > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > more scared. Your experience is probably derived from the fact
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > many people own guns because they are scared. They would be
> > > > > > > > scared
> > > > > > > > with or without guns, but it is the fear that drives them to
> > > > > > > > purchase. So it isn't the gun that causes the fear, the gun is
> > > > > > > > just a
> > > > > > > > result.
>
> > > > > > > > On Feb 2, 9:16 am, Ian Pollard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > 2009/2/2 Slip Disc <[email protected]>
>
> > > > > > > > > > I was staggered to see how many people actually gave away
> > > > > > > > > > the only
> > > > > > > > > > real protection they have.
>
> > > > > > > > > You demonstrate perfectly the great irony at play here.
> > > > > > > > > People who own guns,
> > > > > > > > > in my experience, overwhelmingly feel less safe that those
> > > > > > > > > who do not own
> > > > > > > > > guns.
>
> > > > > > > > > Single gun theory, my friend.
>
> > > > > > > > > Ian- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
