In article >,
Michel Boucher > wrote:

> Giusi > scripsit in news:466cfe42$0$16262$88260bb3
> @free.teranews.com:
>
> > Any society that
> > lives in and with such a terrible ethic is very sick.
>
> And they commit the worst of blunders which is to get involved in land
> wars in Asia...and the Middle East.

I hope you realize that the vast MAJORITY of americans are opposed to
that war. I'd think the last Congressional election would speak for
itself.

Anyone with any sense would know that "The people" don't really have
much control over what our "leaders" do.

Only in a perfect world. :-(
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>
> > "Peter A" > wrote
> >
> > > says...
> > >
> > >> Those of us who can't be bothered with guns are the ones not blathering
> > >> on about packing for when we are attacked by all the armed criminals
> > >> out there. Don't need a gun. Not scared.
> >
> > > Precisely.
> > >
> > > There was a story in the local paper recently about a couple who lived
> > > in constant fear of being robbed. They both have concealed pistol
> > > permits, and spend a lot of time at the shooting range. When they go to
> > > an ATM to withdraw money, one sits in the car with their gun in their
> > > lap and "covers" the other one.
> > >
> > > Truly pitiful.
> >
> > I shouldn't laugh, because that really is sad. I'm sure it wouldn't help
> > to point out to them that we live in what could be a cashless society,
> > just use credit/debit cards, checks. Go to the bank if the ATM seems
> > scary to you, get your 10 bucks walking around money.
> >
> > They won't listen. Of course. Their fear filled world is comforting
> > to them somehow. I wish them peace, as they don't have it.
> >
> > nancy
>
> I never use ATM machines. Checks, credit and debit cards work for me.
>
> I hope that you all don't really think that wanting to be armed means
> that I live in fear.

No, it's just the typical anti-gunners attempt to hide the fact that
they are the ones who are paranoid. They live in constant fear that
someone they walk by might be armed. Remarkable insecurity, quite sad.

Michel Boucher wrote:
>
> Dee Dee > scripsit in
> ps.com:
>
> > http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html#usa
> > in the late 1990's
> > Canada is not listed as one of the ten safest countries to live in
> > with regard to murder rates.
>
> We are in the latter part of the 2000's so those statistics are a
> decade out of date. Amazing how people think they can pull out old
> stuff to derail a discussion.
>
> http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011218/d011218b.htm
>
> For more recent numbers, consult:
>
> http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060720/d060720b.htm
>
> At any rate, not being armed does not result in more murders per
> capita, nor are those murders committed with firearms as a
> predominant weapon (this was established previously).
>
> "Between 1991 and 2000, rates of property crime fell 34%, driven in
> part by reductions in breaking and entering."
>
> "During the past four decades, years with higher rates of per capita
> alcohol consumption and unemployment tended to be associated with
> higher rates of homicide."
>
> http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050629/d050629b.htm
>
> Higher rates of homicide would include bar brawls and domestic
> disputes that end up in the death of one or the other, or both.
>
> But still, we're talking about small numbers.
>
> "Canadian police services reported 658 homicides in 2005, 34 more
> than in 2004."
>
> "There were 222 victims killed by a firearm in 2005, 49 more than the
> previous year. This is the third consecutive annual
> increase in firearm homicides. Handguns accounted for about 6 in 10
> firearm homicides."
>
> So, of 222 victims killed with a firearm, 133 were killed with a
> handgun. This is for the entire population of the country for a
> whole year.
>

The numbers you quote don't tell the whole picture and indeed aren't
very relevant. Total firearm deaths don't account for which were
defensive actions, don't account for lives saved because someone was
armed and didn't have to kill their attacker, don't account for people
murdered by other means, etc.

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Michel Boucher > wrote:
>
> > Giusi > scripsit in news:466cfe42$0$16262$88260bb3
> > @free.teranews.com:
> >
> > > Any society that
> > > lives in and with such a terrible ethic is very sick.
> >
> > And they commit the worst of blunders which is to get involved in land
> > wars in Asia...and the Middle East.
>
> I hope you realize that the vast MAJORITY of americans are opposed to
> that war. I'd think the last Congressional election would speak for
> itself.

It's not that vast, not even close. A vast majority of Americans are
opposed to the way the war is being (mis)managed, a minority are opposed
to the war at all. Some of us aren't blinded by hatred of a particular
political party to the point of overlooking what's going on in the real
world.

In article >,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > "Nancy Young" > wrote:
> >
> > > "Peter A" > wrote
> > >
> > > > says...
> > > >
> > > >> Those of us who can't be bothered with guns are the ones not blathering
> > > >> on about packing for when we are attacked by all the armed criminals
> > > >> out there. Don't need a gun. Not scared.
> > >
> > > > Precisely.
> > > >
> > > > There was a story in the local paper recently about a couple who lived
> > > > in constant fear of being robbed. They both have concealed pistol
> > > > permits, and spend a lot of time at the shooting range. When they go to
> > > > an ATM to withdraw money, one sits in the car with their gun in their
> > > > lap and "covers" the other one.
> > > >
> > > > Truly pitiful.
> > >
> > > I shouldn't laugh, because that really is sad. I'm sure it wouldn't help
> > > to point out to them that we live in what could be a cashless society,
> > > just use credit/debit cards, checks. Go to the bank if the ATM seems
> > > scary to you, get your 10 bucks walking around money.
> > >
> > > They won't listen. Of course. Their fear filled world is comforting
> > > to them somehow. I wish them peace, as they don't have it.
> > >
> > > nancy
> >
> > I never use ATM machines. Checks, credit and debit cards work for me.
> >
> > I hope that you all don't really think that wanting to be armed means
> > that I live in fear.
>
> No, it's just the typical anti-gunners attempt to hide the fact that
> they are the ones who are paranoid. They live in constant fear that
> someone they walk by might be armed. Remarkable insecurity, quite sad.

Ah. Reversal.

Got it. ;-)
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >, "Pete C." >
wrote:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
> >
> > Dee Dee > scripsit in
> > ps.com:
> >
> > > http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/murder.html#usa
> > > in the late 1990's
> > > Canada is not listed as one of the ten safest countries to live in
> > > with regard to murder rates.
> >
> > We are in the latter part of the 2000's so those statistics are a
> > decade out of date. Amazing how people think they can pull out old
> > stuff to derail a discussion.
> >
> > http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/011218/d011218b.htm
> >
> > For more recent numbers, consult:
> >
> > http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/060720/d060720b.htm
> >
> > At any rate, not being armed does not result in more murders per
> > capita, nor are those murders committed with firearms as a
> > predominant weapon (this was established previously).
> >
> > "Between 1991 and 2000, rates of property crime fell 34%, driven in
> > part by reductions in breaking and entering."
> >
> > "During the past four decades, years with higher rates of per capita
> > alcohol consumption and unemployment tended to be associated with
> > higher rates of homicide."
> >
> > http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050629/d050629b.htm
> >
> > Higher rates of homicide would include bar brawls and domestic
> > disputes that end up in the death of one or the other, or both.
> >
> > But still, we're talking about small numbers.
> >
> > "Canadian police services reported 658 homicides in 2005, 34 more
> > than in 2004."
> >
> > "There were 222 victims killed by a firearm in 2005, 49 more than the
> > previous year. This is the third consecutive annual
> > increase in firearm homicides. Handguns accounted for about 6 in 10
> > firearm homicides."
> >
> > So, of 222 victims killed with a firearm, 133 were killed with a
> > handgun. This is for the entire population of the country for a
> > whole year.
> >
>
> The numbers you quote don't tell the whole picture and indeed aren't
> very relevant. Total firearm deaths don't account for which were
> defensive actions, don't account for lives saved because someone was
> armed and didn't have to kill their attacker, don't account for people
> murdered by other means, etc.

Firearms are not the only deadly weapon.
People are murdered a number of ways.

Including fists.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> >
> > In article >,
> > Michel Boucher > wrote:
> >
> > > Giusi > scripsit in news:466cfe42$0$16262$88260bb3
> > > @free.teranews.com:
> > >
> > > > Any society that
> > > > lives in and with such a terrible ethic is very sick.
> > >
> > > And they commit the worst of blunders which is to get involved in land
> > > wars in Asia...and the Middle East.
> >
> > I hope you realize that the vast MAJORITY of americans are opposed to
> > that war. I'd think the last Congressional election would speak for
> > itself.
>
> It's not that vast, not even close. A vast majority of Americans are
> opposed to the way the war is being (mis)managed, a minority are opposed
> to the war at all. Some of us aren't blinded by hatred of a particular
> political party to the point of overlooking what's going on in the real
> world.

All I'm asking is that the rest of the world not hate the entire
American people for what is going on in Iraq.

That's not fair.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

On 11 juin, 09:39, "Pete C." > wrote:

> The numbers you quote don't tell the whole picture and indeed aren't
> very relevant. Total firearm deaths don't account for which were
> defensive actions, don't account for lives saved because someone was
> armed and didn't have to kill their attacker, don't account for people
> murdered by other means, etc.- Masquer le texte des messages précédents -

They are relevant to this conversation. Obviously if there were 658
homicides and 133 were committed with handguns, then the rest were
not. The discussion centers on the benefits and disadvantages of
owning and carrying handguns because, and I quote here the consie
nostrum, "the criminals have handguns". This specific point was on
handguns used in the commission of murders. I think it was fairly
accurate. If you have better statistics, feel free to share.

On 10 juin, 14:06, "Pete C." > wrote:

> Last I heard that was a thing of the past and the police were now armed
> because the criminals were still armed despite the absurd anti gun laws.
> Just further proof that anti gun laws accomplish nothing but increasing
> the pool of victims.

Except that as I pointed out earlier, the number of crimes in Britain
has dropped over the last decade. Perhaps you weren't paying
attention.

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Omelet wrote:
> > >
> > > In article >,
> > > Michel Boucher > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Giusi > scripsit in news:466cfe42$0$16262$88260bb3
> > > > @free.teranews.com:
> > > >
> > > > > Any society that
> > > > > lives in and with such a terrible ethic is very sick.
> > > >
> > > > And they commit the worst of blunders which is to get involved in land
> > > > wars in Asia...and the Middle East.
> > >
> > > I hope you realize that the vast MAJORITY of americans are opposed to
> > > that war. I'd think the last Congressional election would speak for
> > > itself.
> >
> > It's not that vast, not even close. A vast majority of Americans are
> > opposed to the way the war is being (mis)managed, a minority are opposed
> > to the war at all. Some of us aren't blinded by hatred of a particular
> > political party to the point of overlooking what's going on in the real
> > world.
>
> All I'm asking is that the rest of the world not hate the entire
> American people for what is going on in Iraq.
>
> That's not fair.

No, but they primarily hate us out of jealousy for our greater freedoms
and higher standard of living. They just grab onto other issues as a
justification for their jealousy.

" wrote:
>
> On 10 juin, 14:06, "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Last I heard that was a thing of the past and the police were now armed
> > because the criminals were still armed despite the absurd anti gun laws.
> > Just further proof that anti gun laws accomplish nothing but increasing
> > the pool of victims.
>
> Except that as I pointed out earlier, the number of crimes in Britain
> has dropped over the last decade. Perhaps you weren't paying
> attention.

US too. The media sensationalizes more, but overall drops. Increases in
some cities, but overall drops.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:39:30 -0700, Dee Dee >
wrote:


>Somewhere I've read (is it in the consitution?) that it is not the
>duty of the police to protect its citizens. Someone who knows could
>clarify where this is written; but I'm sure there are too many
>opinions that this is not the case.
>
>
>Dee Dee

The supremes wrote that police have a duty to protect society , not an
individual citizen.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:48:38 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:


>
>Okay, but I don't work in law enforcement. ;-)
>I just want to get certified to teach basic gun handling and safety for
>women. Pistol, rifle and maybe shotgun.
>
>I've done quite a bit of googling and I've found the local NRA
>instructors for certification.

Look in the American Riflemen mag. They have a list of instructor
school. And I believe that they are still looking for a number of
female instructors.

In article >,
Omelet > wrote:


> That applies to guns, fire extinguishers and smoke detectors.


And life insurance. Nobody plans to, or wants to, use their life
insurance.

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:51:56 -0400, "Nancy Young" >
wrote:


>
>In your world, people are waiting to drive you off cliffs.
>
>We live in different worlds. The fact that you can't understand
>that should tell you something, but it doesn't. Can't help you with
>that.
>
>nancy
>
Nancy if you are living in society, you in some danger.
I think it is about one in ten, females are sexually molested in
their life time. That is not counting other assaults.
An armed society is a polite society

On Jun 11, 11:03 am, Pan Ohco > wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:39:30 -0700, Dee Dee >
> wrote:
>
> >Somewhere I've read (is it in the consitution?) that it is not the
> >duty of the police to protect its citizens. Someone who knows could
> >clarify where this is written; but I'm sure there are too many
> >opinions that this is not the case.
>
> >Dee Dee
>
> The supremes wrote that police have a duty to protect society , not an
> individual citizen.

Thanks, Pan.
I knew that someone had the answer!
I like that: "The Supremes." Will have to remember that. Funny.
Dee Dee

>> There was a story in the local paper recently about a couple who lived
>> in constant fear of being robbed. They both have concealed pistol
>> permits, and spend a lot of time at the shooting range. When they go to
>> an ATM to withdraw money, one sits in the car with their gun in their
>> lap and "covers" the other one.
>>
>> Truly pitiful.

It all depends on where they live.
They may know their neighborhood.

Pan Ohco wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:51:56 -0400, "Nancy Young" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >In your world, people are waiting to drive you off cliffs.
> >
> >We live in different worlds. The fact that you can't understand
> >that should tell you something, but it doesn't. Can't help you with
> >that.
> >
> >nancy
> >
> Nancy if you are living in society, you in some danger.
> I think it is about one in ten, females are sexually molested in
> their life time. That is not counting other assaults.
> An armed society is a polite society

Thought it was supposed to be 1 in 3.

" wrote:
>
> On 10 juin, 14:06, "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > Last I heard that was a thing of the past and the police were now armed
> > because the criminals were still armed despite the absurd anti gun laws.
> > Just further proof that anti gun laws accomplish nothing but increasing
> > the pool of victims.
>
> Except that as I pointed out earlier, the number of crimes in Britain
> has dropped over the last decade. Perhaps you weren't paying
> attention.

Hmmm, CNN just had a piece that noted very high rates in gun deaths in
parts of Britain. How can that be? Nobody is allowed to have guns. Oh
yea, criminals don't care about gun laws...

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:44:42 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>
>And as far as being happy, well, I'm not on the issue of gun
>ownership or our current gummint's redneck attitude towards gun
>control, that's fersure.
For one "redneck" is a slur.

>
>Otherwise, I don't live in a country plagued by crime (created by the
>"right to bear arms"), and I feel no need to carry a gun...I never
>have. Wouldn't you prefer to live somewhere where you didn't have to
>carry a gun...ever?

So Michel there is no place that you would not go to in your city, at
any time day or night?
Is there no place, perhaps a lower socioeconomic area or enclave, that
you would be in fear of?
If so you truly live in paradise.

In article >,
Pan Ohco > wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 13:39:30 -0700, Dee Dee >
> wrote:
>
>
> >Somewhere I've read (is it in the consitution?) that it is not the
> >duty of the police to protect its citizens. Someone who knows could
> >clarify where this is written; but I'm sure there are too many
> >opinions that this is not the case.
> >
> >
> >Dee Dee
>
> The supremes wrote that police have a duty to protect society , not an
> individual citizen.

Got some input for that from tx.guns:

Warren v. D. C.

"A government and its agents are under no general duty to provide
public services, such as police protection, to any particular
individual citizen."

Bowers v. Devito

"There is a constitutional right not to be murdered by a state
officer, for the state violates the Fourteenth Amendment when its
officer, acting under color of state law, deprives a person of life
without due process of law. Brazier v. Cherry, 293 F.2d 401, 404-05
(5th Cir. 1961). But there is no constitutional right to be protected
by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."

There are lots of others.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

From HeyBub:

Tell 'em to look at "Castle Rock v Gonzales" wherein police are not even
mandated to enforce a court-ordered restraining order!

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache...amaitech.net/7
/257/2422/27jun20051200/www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-278.pdf+
Castle+Rock+vs.+Gonzales&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

"Respondent did not, for Due Process Clause purposes, have a property
interest in police enforcement of the restraining order against her
husband.

"Such entitlements [police protection] are created by existing rules or
understandings stemming from an independent source such as state law.

"A benefit is not a protected entitlement if officials have discretion
to
grant or deny it."

---

Another way to look at the issue is to compare crimes with fires, police
departments with fire departments. No one has a right, and no fire
department has a duty, to have a fire truck parked outside one's house.
If a
fire breaks out, the firemen come and do the best they can - same as
with
the police - but they're not obligated to hang around 24/7 to PREVENT
fires.

If you want such as that, it's up to you to hire your own bodyguard.

But that's okay, there are far more private security guards than cops
(and
far, far more volunteer firefighters than professional ones).
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
Giusi > wrote:

> Closed minds do not hear.

Pot -> Kettle -> Black dear. ;-)
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
Cheryl Perkins > wrote:

> Naturally, once a war starts, lots of people do end up as refugees, but
> that doesn't mean that others in the same ethnic or political group
> aren't armed fighters.

And what if the entire population were armed?
They would not have to run.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
"Pete C." > wrote:

> No, but they primarily hate us out of jealousy for our greater freedoms
> and higher standard of living. They just grab onto other issues as a
> justification for their jealousy.

Freedom tends to come with a price, but I, for one, am willing to pay it.

Even if it means learning how to handle a gun. <G>

Besides, guns have entertainment value and it's a personal challenge to
develop my marksmanship.

Just bought 200 rounds of .308 so now I get to practice my 100+ yard
targets with the deer rifle.

I'll keep the shells for reloading.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
Pan Ohco > wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:48:38 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Okay, but I don't work in law enforcement. ;-)
> >I just want to get certified to teach basic gun handling and safety for
> >women. Pistol, rifle and maybe shotgun.
> >
> >I've done quite a bit of googling and I've found the local NRA
> >instructors for certification.
>
> Look in the American Riflemen mag. They have a list of instructor
> school. And I believe that they are still looking for a number of
> female instructors.

Yes, they are.
The websites were not hard to find. :-)

I've still got a ways to go yet on my education but it might not hurt to
contact some instructors at this point for advice.

That is one of the really cool things that I've found out since getting
into this. Gun people have been some of the nicest, most helpful, kind
and decent human beings I've ever met!!!

They go out of their way to help me in any way they can.

Some of them are good cooks too.

I don't understand why anti-gunners hate them so and think they are
"rude". Just the opposite is true.

They seem to be more interested in law and order than any flaming
liberals.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article
>,
Dan Abel > wrote:

> In article >,
> Omelet > wrote:
>
>
> > That applies to guns, fire extinguishers and smoke detectors.
>
>
> And life insurance. Nobody plans to, or wants to, use their life
> insurance.

I consider my guns to BE life insurance! <G>

But I understand what you are saying.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
Pan Ohco > wrote:

> An armed society is a polite society

One of my favorite sayings...

It's kind of a joke about customer service and the gun manufacturers.
They have some of the finest customer service that can be found.

Some say that it's because they know that all of their customers are
armed. ;-D
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
Pan Ohco > wrote:

> For one "redneck" is a slur.

Not in this part of Texas.

It's an honorific.

Hence my report on that "Redneck" party I attended where we ate BBQ and
shot skeet.

Depends on your sense of humor...

The people I know don't take it as a slur because they _have_ a sense of
humor!

They also all drive trucks and own shotguns, and the first day of deer
season is treated as a holiday. ;-D
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >,
says...

> I hope that you all don't really think that wanting to be armed means
> that I live in fear.


Of course it does, although you are apparently are not aware of it.
There is no imaginable reason for someone to be armed unless they think
that they might need to shoot someone, and there's no imaginable reason
to think that you might need to shoot someone unless you fear that
someone will try to harm or rob you. That's fear.

--
Peter Aitken

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Pete C." > wrote:
>
> > No, but they primarily hate us out of jealousy for our greater freedoms
> > and higher standard of living. They just grab onto other issues as a
> > justification for their jealousy.
>
> Freedom tends to come with a price, but I, for one, am willing to pay it.
>
> Even if it means learning how to handle a gun. <G>
>
> Besides, guns have entertainment value and it's a personal challenge to
> develop my marksmanship.
>
> Just bought 200 rounds of .308 so now I get to practice my 100+ yard
> targets with the deer rifle.
>
> I'll keep the shells for reloading.
> --
> Peace, Om
>
> Remove _ to validate e-mails.
>
> "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

A day at the range is cheaper, safer and produces better results than a
day with a shrink and some prozak prescription.

In article >, says...
> No, it's just the typical anti-gunners attempt to hide the fact that
> they are the ones who are paranoid. They live in constant fear that
> someone they walk by might be armed. Remarkable insecurity, quite sad.
>

Can anyone possible believe such hogwash?

--
Peter Aitken

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Cheryl Perkins > wrote:
>
> > Naturally, once a war starts, lots of people do end up as refugees, but
> > that doesn't mean that others in the same ethnic or political group
> > aren't armed fighters.
>
> And what if the entire population were armed?
> They would not have to run.

Not a real good analogy... Look to Iraq where everyone is indeed
armed... Of course they aren't civilized either... They used to be,
hundreds of years ago, but that's long gone.

In article >,
says...
> Not really... I personally knew someone that was murdered at an ATM
> machine. Left behind a wife and 2 toddlers, and no life insurance.
>
> Sam Evans, San Antonio. Don't recall the exact year but they never did
> catch his killers.
>
> He was a co-worker of mine and hit the ATM machine late at night after
> he got off work.
>

And if that poor person had a gun, he would almost surely have still
been murdered and the murderers would have gotten not just the money but
another gun to use in criminal activities.

--
Peter Aitken

Omelet wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Pan Ohco > wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:48:38 -0500, Omelet >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >Okay, but I don't work in law enforcement. ;-)
> > >I just want to get certified to teach basic gun handling and safety for
> > >women. Pistol, rifle and maybe shotgun.
> > >
> > >I've done quite a bit of googling and I've found the local NRA
> > >instructors for certification.
> >
> > Look in the American Riflemen mag. They have a list of instructor
> > school. And I believe that they are still looking for a number of
> > female instructors.
>
> Yes, they are.
> The websites were not hard to find. :-)
>
> I've still got a ways to go yet on my education but it might not hurt to
> contact some instructors at this point for advice.
>
> That is one of the really cool things that I've found out since getting
> into this. Gun people have been some of the nicest, most helpful, kind
> and decent human beings I've ever met!!!
>
> They go out of their way to help me in any way they can.
>
> Some of them are good cooks too.
>
> I don't understand why anti-gunners hate them so and think they are
> "rude". Just the opposite is true.
>
> They seem to be more interested in law and order than any flaming
> liberals.
> --
> Peace, Om
>
> Remove _ to validate e-mails.
>
> "My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

It's the anti-gunners who are generally the rude ones. Sad too since the
anti-gunner would generally be sociable until they found out the person
they were talking to was armed. Rather like being nice to someone on the
phone until they find out the person on the other end is a different
race / religion / whatever, then their bigotry comes out.

"Pan Ohco" > wrote

> On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 07:51:56 -0400, "Nancy Young" >
> wrote:

>>In your world, people are waiting to drive you off cliffs.
>>
>>We live in different worlds. The fact that you can't understand
>>that should tell you something, but it doesn't. Can't help you with
>>that.

> Nancy if you are living in society, you in some danger.
> I think it is about one in ten, females are sexually molested in
> their life time. That is not counting other assaults.

I understand that you think I've lived a sheltered life.
Really, you don't know. Trust me on this. I'm well aware
of the dangers in the world.

nancy

Peter A wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>> I hope that you all don't really think that wanting to be armed means
>> that I live in fear.
>
>
> Of course it does, although you are apparently are not aware of it.
> There is no imaginable reason for someone to be armed unless they think
> that they might need to shoot someone, and there's no imaginable reason
> to think that you might need to shoot someone unless you fear that
> someone will try to harm or rob you. That's fear.
>
IMO, some people own guns to mentally enlarge their penises, or
compensate for not having one in the first place.

In article >,
Peter A > wrote:

> In article >,
> says...
>
> > I hope that you all don't really think that wanting to be armed means
> > that I live in fear.
>
>
> Of course it does, although you are apparently are not aware of it.
> There is no imaginable reason for someone to be armed unless they think
> that they might need to shoot someone, and there's no imaginable reason
> to think that you might need to shoot someone unless you fear that
> someone will try to harm or rob you. That's fear.

No, it's not.

It's no different than carrying a fire extinguisher in the truck, or
keeping one in the kitchen.

I suppose you don't have smoke detectors either because you are so
confident that you will never have a fire that you feel you don't need
them.

That's arrogance.

I'm not afraid, I'm cautious and prefer to be prepared for any
contingency. To me, that's SMART.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

In article >, "Pete C." >
wrote:

> A day at the range is cheaper, safer and produces better results than a
> day with a shrink and some prozak prescription.

<lol> It _is_ good for stress relief!
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

Peter A wrote:
>
> In article >, says...
> > No, it's just the typical anti-gunners attempt to hide the fact that
> > they are the ones who are paranoid. They live in constant fear that
> > someone they walk by might be armed. Remarkable insecurity, quite sad.
> >
>
> Can anyone possible believe such hogwash?
>

Why else would they care if I'm armed? What business is it of theirs
what's in my pockets? They are paranoid, plain and simple.

In article >,
Peter A > wrote:

> In article >, says...
> > No, it's just the typical anti-gunners attempt to hide the fact that
> > they are the ones who are paranoid. They live in constant fear that
> > someone they walk by might be armed. Remarkable insecurity, quite sad.
> >
>
> Can anyone possible believe such hogwash?

Peter,

Why are you so afraid of guns?
It's an inanimate object.

That's like being afraid to use a kitchen knife because you might get
cut!
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson