Saturday, March 6, 2010

Gun control

I grew up in Alabama, and in Alabama and the south in general; it's not uncommon for a very young boy to go hunting with his uncle, father, grandfather or other male relatives or neighbors. At a very young age we are taught the importance of gun safety and a healthy respect for guns in general. These lessons are important lessons to learn, especially if you're going to be someone that plans to use and be around weapons on a regular basis. I grew up watching my maternal and paternal relatives in Mississippi and Alabama handle weapons daily. It just wasn't uncommon for me to watch my relatives go out with guns and come home with a dead critter for dinner, something with four paws that had been alive just an hour or so before.
Most of the people I knew growing up owned guns. The right to keep and bear arms, often referred as the right to bear arms or the right to have arms; is the assertion that people have a personal right to weapons for individual use, or a collective right to bear arms in a militia, or both. In this context, "arms" refers to a variety of weapons and armor and to "bear arms" meant to wage war.

There are those people out there that will tell you that this reference to the rights of American citizens to bare arms refers to automatic weapons and handguns. But the reality is that the second amendment to the United States Constitution was proposed on September 25th 1789 and enacted on December 15th 1791. If I'm not mistaken the worlds first wannabe automatic weapon was the Gatling gun, I say that because the weapon wasn't actually automatic. The Gatling gun was designed in 1861 during the U.S. Civil War. However, in 1862, the U.S. government did not purchase any, for the Gatling guns lacked triggers and were far too heavy to be set up quickly in combat. Even when Dr. Gatling improved the design, it still lacked the desired trigger and weighed an unwieldy 90 lbs. They were only put into limited service late in the war by the Union army.The first actual automatic machine gun was the recoil-operated Maxim gun, designed in 1884; which used linked (belt) ammunition, as well as a single barrel and offered automatic loading. This concept of using bullet energy would also drive the development all nearly all other semi and fully-automatic firearms of 20th century.

I will also tell you unequivocally that a hunter doesn't need a handgun or an automatic weapon to hunt Bambi; nor does he need that type of firepower to hunt Porky or Bugs Bunny. All he really needs is a rifle and if he wants to hunt a duck or a turkey, all he needs is a shotgun.....that usually does the trick.
I mention all of this to say that when our founding fathers sat down and subscribed to the right to bare arms, there is no way that they could have possibly been talking about automatic weapons; nor could they have known about the deadly potential of citizens toting handguns in the coming centuries. Back in the 18th century a pistol was a gentleman's weapon. A weapon usually designated for duels........between gentlemen.

While I believe in the right of law abiding Americans to carry rifles and shotguns, I believe that the use of automatic weapons and handguns should be restricted to the military and the police. I believe that anyone else that carries a handgun or an automatic weapon should be considered armed and dangerous and subject to arrest and imprisonment.

Guns don't kill people, stupid assed people carrying guns kill people. But if people weren't allowed to carry handguns and automatic weapons, then those guns wouldn't be used to kill people.


  1. Gun don't kill people, stupid assed people carrying guns kills people.

    Cosign. I agree with every word you said in this post Reggie. What part of of 'Bama did you grow up in? Talking 'bout hunting and stuff, I'm going to guess it was western or southwestern Alabama.

    Grew up in Bombingham myself. Holla.

  2. Folk I'm quite familiar with "Bombingham", I lived about 60 miles south of there. I lived in central Alabama actually, a little place called Clanton in Chilton County. I don't know if I've actually told you before or not, but I'm a graduate of Alabama State University.

  3. Good post man.

    I am sorry it has taken me s long to stop by here. I appreciate the luv you show me over at my site and I will return it. Back to your post...

    I agree with everything you said. I have never been hunting. I don't see the point in shooting something that cannot shoot back. If you have to eat, then that is a different story, but to shoot Bambi just to put his head on a wall is wrong ass wrong. Automatic weapons have no place outside of a combat zone and I believe that the fools that cry about the right to bear arms know this. As long as the drive by's stay on the south-side of town, then they don't have any problems. But as soon as Little Charlie shoots up his nice suburban school with the Tommy Gunn that his father gave him for Christmas, then their tones change.

  4. Why is that Dirty Red?!? Why is it that a man or woman can't see the wrong in something until it significantly impacts THEIR life?!?

    How do you change the true nature of a man?!?

  5. I wonder if there were no People Of Color in the U.S. if White folks would still be so crazy about guns?

    I agree with you. And it's not only hard to conceal a rifle but it's also hard to take multiple casualties with one as well. So I'm all for outlawing handguns and automatic weapons.

  6. Even though I agree 98.99 percent with your post Reggie,it will be a cold day in hell before any law is enacted prohibiting "Billy Bob" from carrying.But I believe the real problems with weapons in the Black community is how in the hell are these weapons being brought into the community?Thats the real question!I think we have to ask why isn't the ATF(Alcohol-Tobacco-Firearms)agency not cracking down on the legally licensed firearm dealers selling guns to straw buyers.

  7. This should be a good debate. I don't have time to go into everything I want to say right now and it would be too wordy.


    First, the Second Amendment makes no distinction about the types of arms that the people are to be able to carry. The muskets that were in use at the time were the top line military weapons of the day-which is not the case today. You cannot legally purchase a modern (post 1986) front line automatic weapon or even select-fire weapon.

    Second, why in the world would I trust the police or military to have handguns and not civilians? Can we not conceive of a situation where a civilian might have reason to defend himself from a criminal...or the police?

    Third, criminals have already shown that they don't give a holy ***** about gun laws. Outlawing handguns is not only unconstitutional (as will be shown in the Chicago case), it won't work. There are over 200 million firearms of all kinds in the US in private hands. Most folks aren't giving those up. The only ones who will be those who trust the police to protect them-leaving themselves open to criminal victimization. Trying to confiscate those guns would require an exponential growth in state power. It would be Prohibition on steroids.

    I say this as someone who does not hunt but if someone tries to hurt me or mine I'm going to defend myself with every tool I have.

    Ok. Longer than I wanted. Sorry. LOL.

  8. "The only ones who will do so will be those who trust the police to protect..."

  9. "Gun don't kill people, stupid assed people carrying guns kill people."

    This is true. Anything can be used for a weapon, but controlling the amount of weaponry one can weild or own will cut down on a lot of the nonsense. There are plenty who will argue the opposite.

    Don't get me wrong, I feel that defending oneself and family is necessary. There should be some kind of weapon to keep you and yours safe. As long as there are free thinking, independent people roaming planet earth, there will always be the need to defend what is important (home & family). If not guns, what else will it be? Will we, as the human race, devise something even more sinister for civilian destruction because guns are not available?

    My official stance is I don't believe we should have automatic weapons because (a) most ppl do not understand that once you draw any weapon, you MUST use it; (b) most ppl are far too emotional to use weaponry in the correct circumstances; (c) most ppl are not prepared for the consequences involved with long-term fallout from using weaponry (death, permanent disability, legal issues arising from said use). Or the other extremity is they don't care enough to realize using a weapon doesn't just effect effects everything else.

  10. It is often much easier to defend oneself with a handgun than with a rifle in a crisis situation. It might be safer for other people as well.

  11. I don't know Val, but I do know that long before they were shooting us, they were shooting each other.

    There is a certain blood thirstiness to the average American, that makes most other places pale to this one. If you stand and think about it too long, it'll drive you absolutely crazy.

  12. You know why BigMac, because money talks and bullshit walks.

  13. Shady Grady it won't work unless we make it work.

    The average American doesn't need a handgun or an automatic weapon to defend themself. We can defend our homes with rifles and shotguns, they kill just as quickly and efficiently. As a matter of fact, a shotgun is more likely to be more efficient because you don't have to be as accurate with it.

    Once again, as long as we have rifles and shotguns, what difference does it make if the police and military are allowed to carry handguns and automatic weapons in order to protect the people?!? We would have our protection and they're supposed to protect us.

    We need to get the guns off the street, anything that would be required to do so would be worth it. I realize there are almost as many handguns as people, but the handguns need to go.

    Brother I say defend yourself, but defend yourself with a rifle or a shotgun.

    There will always be reasons for not outlawing handguns and automatic weapons, but there is no valid reason for an American to carry one....and they're unnecessary as well.

  14. Shady Grady the police are supposed to protect us; and although I've had my share of negative interactions with them, for the most part they do the right thing. I don't trust all cops, some of them are assholes, but there are good cops as well. Despite that, I prefer to keep a weapon of my own.....just in case I'm wrong.

  15. Midwest Chick you make a point that very few people are willing to accept and that is that when you draw a weapon, you should almost always use it. If you're not prepared to shoot it, you shouldn't draw it and attempt to sell wolf tickets; because someone will step up and buy one........and kill you instead.

  16. Shady Grady it's really easy to defend yourself with a shotgun. One doesn't have to be accurate with it to hit someone.

  17. Used to go to ASU for summer band camp when I was in high school. ASU didn't give up any scholarship money so I went down the street to Livingston.

  18. I wasn't going to go to ASU Folk, I planned to go to Huntingdon College. But I went over there to see my sister the day I went on a tour of Huntingdon and hung out with my sister for a while. My sister and some of her friends.......and Folk, her friends were gorgeous and so were so many of the other young women that went to ASU. So I said the hell with Huntingdon and I enrolled at ASU and ended up getting a small scholarship there.......and graduating five years later with a BS degree in Business Administration with a concentration in Marketing.

  19. LOL! I went to the place that gave me the money the fastest.

  20. A few things...

    1) A handgun is a LOT easier to get to and use quickly if someone runs up on you (the rapist in the bushes, the carjacker in the parking lot, etc) Not every state has open carry , which is what would be required to carry a rifle for self-defense-and sawing off a shotgun is illegal...

    2) A handgun can be an equalizer for women or smaller men in a way that a rifle/shotgun might not be. Muzzle velocity is less.

    3) It depends on the weapon, but a handgun would probably be safer for home defense than a rifle or shotgun. If I have to shoot someone in my home I want to ensure that the round hits the bad guy, not spreads out (shotgun) or goes through walls (rifle).

    4) If people don't like handguns, don't buy one. Don't have one in your home. But it's my right to have one and I'm not giving that up.

    5) There is a gun-rights meme which I'm sure everyone has heard already but it's worth repeating here "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away". It's not the police's job to protect you. They are literally reactionary, in both senses of that word. I don't trust them to protect me and I don't trust them to be able to differentiate between me and a threat.

    6) The idea that because one person or one group of people did something wrong, EVERYONE has to give up their rights is the deeper issue here. Crack down on the illegal gun dealers. Put criminals in jail permanently. Make the death penalty run more quickly. Bring back jobs to the inner city. Stop this outsourcing BS. Make marriage more palatable. Etc, etc, etc.. That will help solve the homicide rate. But because someone else doesn't know how to behave in a civilized manner, don't come to me and tell me I must give you my guns because I can't be trusted...

  21. Also let's talk logistics. The Supreme Court is on the verge of incorporating the Second Amendment so that it applies to states and municipalities. Game. Set. Match. It's over.

    Outlawing handguns will itself be against the law.

    Let's say that a militant President or Congress decided to ignore the law. This is the same group that can't stop illegal immigrants or drugs from coming in. Does anyone think they can get rid of hundreds of millions of legal guns? How would that work? Obviously I'm not giving permission to anyone to enter or search my home for guns....

  22. I hear you Folk. The money I got was so miniscule that I almost wouldn't call it a scholarship. I left high school as an idealist and gave into my libido when I went over to Alabama State to see my sister and ended up seeing all those sisters. I enjoyed my time there and I wouldn't change that choice if given a chance to do it all over again. Then again, I've always wondered what would have happened if I didn't have a sister that was a year older and was in the ASU Flag Corps.

  23. Pandora's box has been opened and never to be closed again.

    Sadly, the U.S. loves its guns. Ironically, most other western countries do not have such a proliferation of guns nor do they have more of their citizens in incarcerated as the size of some countries and yet they have much lower crime rates than the U.S. Obviously being armed to the teeth and jailing as many as possible is not working, but I digress.

    However, it does make one wonder if guns are just a symptom of a societal problem and an excessive love of the Wild West Myth...


  24. Shady Grady the fact that the handgun is a lot easier to get to, get and carry are just some of the reasons why so many people are killed with them each year. I think it's a mistake to look at those as positive things. If you own a rifle or shotgun you can defend your home just as well.

    A woman can wield a shotgun almost as easily, personal experience has taught me that they don't kick that much. Any one owning a weapon, really ought to have test fired it and practiced with it before anyway.

    If you're gonna fire a weapon, you need to make sure that you're not gonna hit an innocent anyway.

    I wouldn't necessarily depend upon the police to protect me, which is why I'm in favor of average citizens being able to own guns. In a perfect world, no one would be allowed to have them except police and authorities and the miltary; but it's not a perfect world.

    Your logic about handguns and who carries them would be a lot more sound if so many people (including children) weren't the victims of them each year. Not just the people that die, but what about all the people that are maimed as well? No, I don't believe that the benefits outweigh the possibilities for something bad to happen.......which is what's happening now.

  25. Shady Grady whether that happens or not, it doesn't diminish the point that allowing everyone to own handguns is a bad idea. History has shown that it's just not a good policy. But then again, neither is allowing the use of tobacco and alcohol. Both of which kills thousands upon thousands of people each year. Sometimes I wonder just why marijuana and cocaine are outlawed when they don't do anywhere near the damage that alcohol and tobacco do each year.

    I think you're overthinking the practical way in which this could be effected. No one is going house to house. I think that given the statistics associated with handguns each year, that anything we do to get rid of them is worthwhile.

  26. I agree completely with that Anon_veritas, since Pandora's Box has been opened, it would be hell to close it up and keep it closed.

    It is what it is. Americans are violent by nature and if history is an indicator.....that shit ain't going nowhere.

  27. Brother Reggie, can you explain how it would be practically possible to get rid of handguns?
    I have a few. If tomorrow handguns become illegal then I will become a criminal, along with millions of other Americans. I can assure you that I wouldn't turn in my guns. So absent another crime being committed by me, how is the state going to get my guns...UNLESS they really do start with concealed carry license records and show up at a citizen's house with a list of guns to be confiscated.

  28. I have never fired a weapon in anger in my life and I do not expect that I ever will. If I do need to do so, especially in my home, I want to use something with a lower muzzle velocity with which I am comfortable and practiced on. For me, that's a handgun. That's my choice. Others can make their own choices. I would not tell someone else how to defend themselves and would not accept anyone else's dictate on self-defense.

    A gun is just a tool. My guns have never hurt anyone. I am not responsible for criminal or mistaken use by other people. I can only be responsible for what goes on in my home.

    Again, self-defense may happen anywhere. A handgun is much more accessible than a rifle and the choice for those gun owners who wish to carry concealed.

  29. If the populace doesn't cooperate it'll be damned near impossible Grady. But I think that any effort that we the people can do to get rid of them will be worthwhile. I'm not sure just how complete records are for registered gun owners, but we've gotta do something.

    Yet another way to stimulate growth and increase employment would be to hire people to do this; but I sure as hell wouldn't want the job. Can you imagine just how many of them would get shot trying to go to some of these homes demanding weapons?!?

    Shit, that's almost funny.

  30. I was angry at a snake once Grady.....and I fired at his ass.

    It's not just guns that are tools Grady, some people are complete tools as well.

  31. "If the populace doesn't cooperate it'll be damned near impossible Grady".

    Well that's my point Brother Reggie =) ,the populace will not cooperate and there is no current way to ban or confiscate handguns that is consistent with the US Constitution or the various state constitutions or laws. And the people that are causing the most problems are not registered gun owners for the most part.

    All such a policy would do is guarantee the political removal of whatever party endorsed it. At the margins it would make millions of people outlaws and further reduce respect for the law.

    If a gun won't do then some people will use knives. The folks will want to ban certain knives, as is the case in the UK.

    The only short term solution is to stop the War on drugs and the resultant militarization of the police. Free those non-violent offenders from prison and make sentences longer for violent offenders, expecially for those who use guns.

    Long term I do think that anti-violence initiatives can play a part. I can't find it now but about 5-6 mths back there was a NYT or WSJ article about common project shared among University faculty/community activists/former gang members that were attempting to treat violence as a disease and stop it before it escalated.

  32. "Can you imagine just how many of them would get shot trying to go to some of these homes demanding weapons?!?"

    There is NO WAY I am going to walk up to anyone's home-ESPECIALLY in Michgan - and say "I'm here from the government to take your guns!!!"... no thanks..

  33. Shady Grady the guns need to go period. No matter the cost, they need to go. I honestly don't understand why cigarettes and alcohol are legal ($$$); and I sure as hell don't understand why guns would be legal either.

  34. Its been said often but makes a lot of sense. Look at the past few years and the significant decrease in crime. This is directly linked to removal of handgun restrictions. Handgun restrictions have been removed in a lot of states allowing open carry and expanding castle doctrine to zones of safety and cars etc. It is a fact with stricter gun laws that the only people who have guns are criminals and the average law abiding unarmed citizen become fodder.

    Look at DC. Strict gun control for 30 years. However it is also has one of the highest rates of handgun murders and armed robberies, child shooting etc. Criminals know the citizens are easy pickings. When law abiding citizens can defend themselves legally, most criminals will turn coward and refrain from attacking someone who just might shoot back....legally.

  35. If everyone had nuclear weapons would we all be truly safe then?!?