First off, I disagree that the best use of a gun is for destruction, and I disagree with the use of the word "destroy." My gun is best used for enjoyment, self betterment, and various other things I would not classify as "destruction" in any capacity. Bullets can put a hole in someone just as knives can. A knife can be used to whittle a statue or prepare food, it can be used to behead someone. Yep.

The thing is this: the person using the gun determines the "best use" of that gun. Destruction? That's not in me, nor nearly any of the 80,000,000 other gun owners in the US. Heck, when used as a hunting device, the opposite is true: not hunting leads to massive destruction of herds of deer (starvation), food crops (cows stepping in groundhog holes and breaking their legs), etc.

Secondly, I grant that automobiles are more "useful" than guns in day to day life for the average person, excluding of course police officers, our soldiers in Iraq, competitive marksmen, and various other groups. So what? As I've repeatedly said, golf clubs are more useless than a gun, yet very few people freak out if you buy a new set of Taylor Mades.

Sorry, the drawbacks of a gun-owning culture (ie, people getting shot) entirely outweigh the benefits to people who like shooting targets.

That statement is so egregiously wrong that I know you haven't looked into any statistics in order to support it. The fact is that the exact opposite is true - crime rates are lower in well-armed areas. Look it up.

And if you want to defend yourself, get a bow and arrow and get yourself trained up.

A bow and arrow? That's laughable. Perhaps you don't realize how ridiculous you sound, but hey, go ahead and keep a bow and arrow bedside. Let someone break in with a gun, and see who makes it out of that encounter. Laughable.

How many gun owners have actually used their guns to defend themselves? Not nearly as many as talk about it, I'd wager.

Not many have used their guns to protect themselves or their family. Sammy "The Bull" Gravano once said "Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. … We'll see who wins."

If you live in the US, do you believe that you have the right to protect yourself and your property as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights? Of course gun owners can talk about the right - the duty and responsibility - to protect their family without having actually had to do it.

Would you step in front of a bus to save your child? How many times have you actually had to do it?

…their whining is supporting an industry that lets instruments of destruction exist.

Actually, the governments of the world are pretty much responsible for every "instrument of destruction" outside of those used for hunting or target practice (and they're responsible for most of those, too). I've got a semiautomatic pistol used by the Russian police, Czech police, and others.

Your tax dollars - regardless of where you live (except perhaps Switzerland, eh?) - are supporting the industry.

Yes, I'm sure most firearms development has been driven by the need to satisfy hunters and target shooters.

Nope - most firearms development has been driven by the need to better protect you liberties. Go read up on the histories of personal firearms. See what developments they've undergone. You're coming at this without a single notecard - just a bunch of wild-assed guesses and hunches and your own opinions. Go read some studies on gun control. Go read up. I have. You've done nothing but dent your own credibility by tossing out unsubstantiated claims.

Erik, on this, you've really got your head up *your* ass.

You're basing this opinion on what fact, what knowledge, what right granted to you by the Bill of Rights, what study, and what on earth?

Nothing.

It's very simple, guys. Criminals kill people, not guns. Outlaw guns and only the criminals will have them. I'm an upstanding, intelligent member of society who enjoys shooting a gun. Criminals should be punished. Law-abiding citizens should not. It's very easy, isn't it?

I'll leave you with a few more quotes. Pay particular attention to those by Gandhi and the Dalai Lama.

"No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."-- Thomas Jefferson"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense."-- John Adams"How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of."-- Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." (in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy p. 20, S. Padover ed., 1939)-- Thomas jefferson"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."-- Alexander Hamilton"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms… disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes… Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."-- Thomas Jefferson"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."-- Tench Coxe"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security"-- Benjamin Franklin"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."-- Senator Hubert H. Humphrey (D-MN)"That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."-- George Orwell"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."-- Mahatma Gandhi (Autobiography, by M.K. Gandhi, p.446)"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."-- The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate"A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie."-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty."-- Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944)

Comments are now closed. Those who oppose guns and respond here persist in placing the blame on the instrument rather than the wielder. That's simply not a point I wish to continually refute.

Yes, I'm sure most firearms development has been driven by the need to satisfy hunters and target shooters.

And battleships are primarily intended as cargo vessels. And tanks are primarily designed for their role as mail-delivery vehicles and school buses. Tanks may have originated as modifications of farm tractors, but their evolution diverged at that point.

Erik, on this, you've really got your head up *your* ass.

Hunting rifles are designed for hunting. Target guns are designed for target shooting. Most everything else is designed for combat, and the motivator for improvements in firearms technology has mostly been combat. The requirements for hunting and target shooting really haven't changed much in the last 300 years.

The automobile comparisons are utterly, utterly spurious because automobiles have a purpose beyond the destruction of things: they transport people around. Yes, they're dangerous but they're useful so we put up with them.

What uses are there for guns, exactly? To give pleasure from sports? Sorry, the drawbacks of a gun-owning culture (ie, people getting shot) entirely outweigh the benefits to people who like shooting targets.

And if you want to defend yourself, get a bow and arrow and get yourself trained up. It's an equally good killer but much harder for casual slaying. How many gun owners have actually used their guns to defend themselves? Not nearly as many as talk about it, I'd wager. But their whining is supporting an industry that lets instruments of destruction exist

I feel much safer living where the cops don't carry guns, thanks all the same

Drazen

Yet there were plenty of guns in Iraq, but that didn't stop the mass graves and rape rooms.

Remember that yesterday, 80 million gun owners in the United States didn't commit a crime.

But last year, over a million people managed to avoid becoming a crime victim, simply by having a gun.

We Americans aren't so stupid.

No concentration camps, killing fields or Auschwitzes here, thank you.

So, if criminals have guns, why shouldn't I have one?

and:

"Nobody needs a gun!"

...unless you're attacked by someone who DOES have a gun -- such as a robber or a member of the KGB or Gestapo. Remember, the Nazis loved disarmed Jews -- it made the extermination process so much tidier, than when they came across armed Jews in Warsaw (1944).

I know, I know: morally it's so much better to be a sniveling victim than a "macho gun owner".

----

Erik,

If that gun store guy kept calling the CZ a "Beretta", you need to consider going to another store: the guy's a moron. The CZ is based on the Browning High Power design, anyway.

I'm not a big fan of the 9mm, but it's a nice "starter" caliber -- gentle recoil (especially in the CZ) and accurate. My own first handgun (purchased as an adult) was a 9mm semi-automatic.

If you want lots of shooting goodness, wait until the stupid Assault Weapons Ban dies in a couple of weeks, and get yourself a few 15-round high-capacity mags.

As for the "killing" thing: statistically, you're twenty-five times more likely to be killed in a car accident than by gunshot, and you're a thousand times less likely to be in a position where you have to shoot AT someone.

The only problem with guns is that you hardly ever need one (unless you're a drug dealer) -- but when you DO need one, you'll need it really badly.