Texas at it again

[kristo]

To our Icelandic brother, I'm glad your country is the way it is. I'm sad we have to be this way but we do. I'm not going to let the criminals win and if I just leave it to law enforcement they will.

So, maybe the problem is that you guys don't trust your law enforcement agencies? Maybe they're not trust-worthy?

Bare with me here, I'm trying to get in to this mindset. 8)

Maybe the reason why so many Americans feel that they have to carry arms in their society is the fact that so many others do, and not all of them do it for defensive purposes. To most other countries, having the general public armed is something we see in old westerns, not in reality.

If people the large cities in Europe can survive without firearms in their homes, so should Americans, right? Or maybe not, for the reasons stated above.

Not everything on this side of the ocean is that great, though. For example, we had an incident in Iceland a few months ago, where police officers were arresting a man whose job was to collect debts for drug dealers. If the one owing the money couldn't pay, he would go after his parents, grandparents, siblings, whatever, using brutal violence if "necessary". Those debts carried interests in the vicinity of 100% per day, so we're talking about a lot of money here.

Anyway, during the arrest, the man threatened one of the officers, he actually threatened to attack the officer's wife and/or small child. He could name the wife, the child and he even knew which kindergarten the child was in.

The response of the judiciary system? A small fine and a probation. That's including several assaults/batteries in his "job". I'm curious as to what that would have gotten him in the US? :roll:

A sidenote; Right now, the government is pushing laws through our parliament that are supposed to increase penalties for assaulting/threatening law enforcement officers, giving them a little more job security. This is largely because of an uproar in the police officer's union.

[Andrewtx]

So, maybe the problem is that you guys don't trust your law enforcement agencies? Maybe they're not trust-worthy?

Bare with me here, I'm trying to get in to this mindset. 8)

It's not a question of trust. It's much simpler. It's the basic realization that in a free society, the police cannot be everywhere at once, and that the individual should accept foremost responsibility for his or her own security.

[Asysin2leads]

Continuing to challenge peoples belief in self-sufficiency and self-preservation is one of the most futile endeavors you can ever attempt. Kudos to you for trying, but not if the end is the further immasculation of America. We are now a country of soft, mindless sheep that are willing to spend more time watching American Idol than educating ourselves in the operation, debate and decision making of our own country. Farenheit 451 is so close to the truth these days that I will not be shocked when they start banning the books. It is the incremental degradation of our rights in the interest of protecting us from ourselves that will ultimately finish off the liberty Americans once enjoyed. Cast your vote on American Idol and enjoy, because that is the society you are creating.

HDFF, I fully agree with you about the American Idol mentality, which is why I am against the masses being armed, at least in principle. A person is generally a rational, sane, level headed individual. People, on the other hand, are a bunch of mindless, reactive, fear addicted cattle who shouldn't be allowed near a sharpened lollipop stick. In the good old days of America, if you wanted to operate a firearm, you had to know proper cleaning, loading, and a good deal about chemistry and physics. Now, with a credit card, anyone with the IQ of a gnat can pretty much buy enough firepower to take out a block. Ending a life now, is as easy as turning the channel on the TV. You also make another point I was hinting at, too many people confuse their firearms with their penises. Most people, I believe, are not for carrying a firearm out of necessity, but because if they don't, it makes them feel less like a man.

[hfdff422]

Asys- Unfortunately, what you say is true as often as not. But rather than continuing to dumb down and destroy the American that once was, it would serve us better to re-establish the idealism and thoughfulness that I believe most Americans are capable of. To further impose the big brother state on our law abiding citizens is what creates the dependance of our common man, and makes each man more common. The gun debate is only a small part of the greater issue of creating a largely less independant society.

There was a recent situation where a shoplifter was confronted by security and the shoplifter went on the offensive with a knife, got an employee on the floor and was about to stab the employee when a woman who was in line stepped out of line, produced a legally possessed gun, held it to the assailants head and in turn subdued the assailant. He was taken into custody and everyone survived. The press interviewed another woman who witnessed the events, and her comment was (paraphrased)"I can't believe they let someone carry a gun around like that". The mentality that we have bred in this country is anecdotally represented in that statement: There was no relief in the saving of a life by a law abiding citizen with a gun, there was simply concern as to why big brother allowed her to carry a gun.

Not everyone should carry a gun, but infringing on the liberties extended by the constitution should not be done on the basis of the unfortunate fact that some people are not instilled with the responsibility to brush their teeth daily much less own a firearm. There is no forced sterilization, yet far more damage is done to society by morons breeding than owning guns.

[CBEMT]

So, maybe the problem is that you guys don't trust your law enforcement agencies? Maybe they're not trust-worthy?

Bare with me here, I'm trying to get in to this mindset.

In many cases no, they are not. Ever see the YouTube video of the police officer accidently shooting himself in the leg in front of a room full of schoolchildren?

If I didn't have a gun and lived in that town, I would've bought one before the end of the day. There's a thousand other examples, including the TV crew that followed two New Orleans PD officers looting a Wal-Mart during Katrina.

Even if your police ARE trustworthy, the very principle they operate under on a daily basis is that they RESPOND to crimes. Sorry, I'd rather defend myself than wait for the cops to show up, especially in the cities.

I don't have time to wait for someone to call 911, the state E-911 operator to determine the location and type of emergency, pass the caller onto the PD calltaker, who has to hear the whole story again, doublecheck the location, pass the info on to a dispatcher, who has to find the closest unit, who then has to come from who knows where.

Meanwhile, I was dead 5 minutes ago. No thanks.

Europeans also tend to have the Eurpean mindset- The Government Will Provide. It isn't like that here, yet. Lord knows the Democrats are trying, though...

[kristo]

A slight correction: WE will provide (emergency assistance). The fact that we have found it convenient to have a common body for certain services and for enforcing the rules doesn't make it a third party. That body, the government, is us. We re-hire or fire OUR employees there every four years.

Our employees have a simple task: day-to-day operations we (the public) feel we should unite on, such as healthcare, maintaining roads, law enforcement, etc. We aren't just a bunch of pigeons waiting for some big guy to throw bread crumbs our way.

The European mindset, since you brought that up, on this issue, is that we do not want the general public settling their disputes with firearms, nor do we feel that our society would benefit from having people shooting at each other in our cities. This is why we have decided to have law enforcement, usually (in most of Europe), armed police. We have, conveniently, entrusted the task of handling that matter to that common body of ours that I mentioned earlier. If our staff doesn't seem to be up to the job, we won't extend their contract in four years, or even demand their resignation immediately, if that suits us better.

[Asysin2leads]

In many cases no, they are not. Ever see the YouTube video of the police officer accidently shooting himself in the leg in front of a room full of schoolchildren?

If I didn't have a gun and lived in that town, I would've bought one before the end of the day. There's a thousand other examples, including the TV crew that followed two New Orleans PD officers looting a Wal-Mart during Katrina.

Even if your police ARE trustworthy, the very principle they operate under on a daily basis is that they RESPOND to crimes. Sorry, I'd rather defend myself than wait for the cops to show up, especially in the cities.

I don't have time to wait for someone to call 911, the state E-911 operator to determine the location and type of emergency, pass the caller onto the PD calltaker, who has to hear the whole story again, doublecheck the location, pass the info on to a dispatcher, who has to find the closest unit, who then has to come from who knows where.

Meanwhile, I was dead 5 minutes ago. No thanks.

Europeans also tend to have the Eurpean mindset- The Government Will Provide. It isn't like that here, yet. Lord knows the Democrats are trying, though...

I said it before, I'll say it again, paranoia and gun proliferation, they just go hand in hand. Anyway, I'll just go ahead and put my trust in trained law enforcement professionals rather than Bob down the block with the sawed off, but that's just me. You know, while were at it, I never responded to I forget who's semi literate attempt at calling me out on a a point. I mentioned that if you whip out a firearm and scare the bejeezus out of somebody, you're guilty of the crime of menacing. To which the reply was something along the lines of "SURE...*SNORT* *SNORT* THEN THE RAPIST SAYS HE'S SCARED...HA HA HA". Now actually what I was really getting at is when Mr. Armed Champion of the 2nd admendment goes off and makes a mistake. Lets say you go and stop that rape in progress with your gun and then, oh crap, it wasn't a rape it was a boyfriend and girlfriend making out and you just pointed a gun at them, which, statistically, is a far more likely scenario than you, Smith, and Wesson saving the day. Now you're guilty of a crime, and you're going to jail. No one cares what your intentions are, once you started pointing a gun at people you open yourself up for a world of s**t. That's why we TRAIN police officers and hold them to STANDARDS, which in my opinion anyone who is armed and out there cleaning up the streets should be held too.

Anyway, CB, if you really have that dim a view of the police and government in general, there's some nice men in a compound in Idaho who will sign you up. Until then, I'll trust you to stop driving on those nicely maintained interstates the government provides for you.

(You see HDFF? This is exactly the type of person I'm talking about. )

[Scaramedic]

A person is generally a rational, sane, level headed individual. People, on the other hand, are a bunch of mindless, reactive, fear addicted cattle who shouldn't be allowed near a sharpened lollipop stick.

Are we down to the level of paraphrasing Agent K from Men in Black....

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it"

Peace,

Marty

[Lone Star]

That's why we TRAIN police officers and hold them to STANDARDS, which in my opinion anyone who is armed and out there cleaning up the streets should be held too.

Here's the 'problem' with that statement. Just because someone has a Concealed Pistol License (CCW [carrying a concealed weapon] is actually a criminal charge), doesn't mean that they're out there 'cleaning up the streets'. We CPL holders have a very narrow window in which we are allowed to be justified in using lethal force. I'm not a police officer, nor would I presume to have the authority and training to do their job.

I pray that I never have to draw my weapon and use it, but when it comes to protecting my family and myself from violent ARMED predators, I have no problem in doing so.

Just because I'm issued a CPL, does not excuse me from showing the same amounts of self control that I would have to use if I weren't armed. In the link I posted earlier in this thread, there's penalties listed for infractions of the rules governing the privilege of being able to carry a concealed weapon!

Another thing that is just sitting the wrong way, is the misnomer of the Castle Doctrine Laws. They are NOT the “Make My Day” Laws! That is a name that the detractors of these laws have given them to inflame the general public to gain support and thereby oppose these laws.

In my opinion, the decision to carry or not to carry is a personal one, and I will not try to persuade someone to rethink their decision, nor try to convince them that my decision is the ONLY way. I expect the same respect for my decision, because it’s MY decision. I will not spout propaganda, ‘statistics’, or any biased ‘reports’ to support my reasoning for my decision.

As I stated in my first post to this thread, the only reason that Texas seems to be singled out (hence the title of this thread) is because of the quick association of Texas, the old west and the old ‘B’ westerns.

[paraloco]

Unless my life or the life of one of my children ( and maybe my wife) is in danger ,I'm unlikely to shoot anyone. BUT. I will stand in plain view of a perp, using my cell phone to desciribe him down to the color of his eyes, and too bad if he doesn't like it.