• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Do you own firearms?

Do you own any firearms?

  • Yes, I do.

    Votes: 13 29.5%
  • No, I don't.

    Votes: 26 59.1%
  • I would like to buy one in the future.

    Votes: 1 2.3%
  • Firearms should be outlawed.

    Votes: 4 9.1%

  • Total voters
    44

SlaveToTheGrind

Cyburbian
Messages
1,443
Points
27
I own 6 firearms: two shotguns (one older than the hills), two pistols, and two rifles. I am a law abiding citizen, never committed a crime with the guns, and belive it or not, am not a member of the NRA. I think they are too far to the right for me. I use them to hunt as well as shoot at targets. I do not wantonly shoot animals because I only shoot what I will eat and will be able to retrieve. I also do not believe in making 400 yard shots to show how big of a d**k I think I have.

I do belive in the right to own firearms and have no problem with background checks prior to purchasing a firearm. I have nothing to hide so the check does not bother me. I think the gov't was right in restricting magazine capacities for "assualt weapons" (a term I hate) even though they can still legally be bought, just not manfactured. I plan on getting a concealed weapons permit and keep a loaded gun (locked up) in my house.

What are the thoughts of other Cyburbians and do you own any firearms?

Boy, this sounds like a rant. It's not. Just stating how I feel.:D

I have:
JC Higgins 12 gauge
Colt .38
Browning .22 pistol
Marlin .22 rifle
Marlin Model 1893 30-30 (made in 1901)
Custom double barrel that was my great uncles

Would like:
Browning A-5 Heavy 12 gauge
Remington 700 BDL DM .30-06 or .270 WSM
Taurus .357
 
Last edited:

SkeLeton

Cyburbian
Messages
4,853
Points
26
None.. besides that in order to have a firearm legally here you just have to deal with a huge bunch of paperwork...
At least we don't have blind guys with legal firearms...
 

Richmond Jake

You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!
Messages
18,313
Points
44
I don't own any and don't feel the need to own one. My two sons own a shotgun and two rifles each and hunt regularly (or so I hear). I'm against banning rifles...but handguns, I'm on the side of very strict control.
 

Repo Man

Cyburbian
Messages
2,549
Points
25
Unless you count my bb/pellet gun, I don't have any firearms. Its my choice to not have them, but not a political statement. I have no problems with people owning guns. Usually the people that use guns for criminal activity have them illegally, so gun control is a stupid idea, in my opinion.

I also don't have a huge problem with conceled carry laws (Wisconsin is debating one) however, I think that it could lead to problems in situations where people are drinking. I think that any concealed carry law should have some very stiff penalties for people who use that firearm inappropriately (ie in an instance when it is not a life-threatening matter or while drunk). For example, if someone cuts you off in traffic and you chase them down and aim you gun at them just to scare them, you should have your right to carry that gun revoked because you have demonstrated that you are not responsible enough to carry a firearm. I also believe that busineses must have the right to deny service/entry for any one carrying a gun.
 

moose

Member
Messages
109
Points
6
No, and I don't plan on it. I used to, and I am a fairly good target shot. I grew up with guns in the home -- never EVER loaded in the house -- the guns and the ammo were ALWAYS kept separately and locked up. I had intended to buy a gun when I was "old enough" (say, 35), but then I met my now-husband, who told me that when he was a teenager, he was severely depressed, and that, he believes, if his parents had owned a gun, he would not have survived his 18th birthday. I immedately swore off gun ownership for myself, though I have been known to take the .22 out for some plinking when I visit my parents.

Interestingly, our roles have now reversed. I dislike guns more and more each year, but my husband has actually grown to "like" them -- he has tried shooting clay pigeons, and he quite likes it. Even so, he's not interested in owning a gun.
 

Jeff

Cyburbian
Messages
4,161
Points
27
.40, .357, .380, 9mm, .30-06, .50 flintlock, 12 ga

NRA Life Member, firm believer in the motto "More Guns, Less Crime."
 

Mastiff

Gunfighter
Messages
7,181
Points
30
.30-.30 (Pre 64/94) - My pride and joy.

.303 British - The "mankiller"

(2) .22 - To start out the kids...

12 ga. - Birdhunting

9mm S&W - Just in case I find someone in my house that doesn't belong.
 

Budgie

Cyburbian
Messages
5,270
Points
30
Mike D. said:
"More Guns, Less Crime."
What kind of FXXXed up logic is that? I suppose, "More Beer, Less DUI's" makes sense as well. Guns give people more balls than they would usually have and they lust after the power of intimidation a gun can give. El Guapo and I sparred on this awhile back and Dan had to cut us off. I've starred down the barrel of a loaded handgun in the hands of a 17 year old punk, who later told a cop that he just likes the thrill of seeing fear in peoples eyes. Odds are if I owned a gun, one of my children would turn into a accident statistic.

I have never had an occassion where a gun would have changed the course of events. If anything, they can only make the course of events worse. You play with fire, you get burnt.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
.22 rifle
.22 handgun
.357 handgun
.45 handgun

While I don't hunt, I used to shoot competitively. About the only time I use the guns now is when a cat makes the mistake of wandering into my yard. I don't keep the guns loaded, but I do have a full magazine or speedloader in the case.
 

SGB

Cyburbian
Messages
3,388
Points
26
I don't own a gun, although I did enjoy target shooting and NRA riflery instruction ages ago.

I'd be more interested in getting back into target archery than riflery again.
 

biscuit

Cyburbian
Messages
3,904
Points
25
I have an antique .22 singleshot locked away somewhere in my parents house that I used for target practice and shooting mistletoe out of trees during the holidays, but that doen't really count. I don't hunt so I have no need to keep a gun in my house. The Louisville Slugger should work quite well for home protection.

Kind-of related:
In 7th grade my class took what was called a "Hunters Safety" class that taught the proper way to handle firearms. We even learned how to shot and took field trips to shoot clay pigeons - imagine arming a bunch of 12 year old with rifles and shotguns for a class trip.
 

SkeLeton

Cyburbian
Messages
4,853
Points
26
I'm not against people having firearms in their houses... but I have to say that a 9 mm(up to a Magnum .357) gun is for self protection, but a Mac-10, Tech 9 or M-16 are definetly not for self protection... Those are for the only purpose of killing and leaving the victim like swiss cheese...
 

H

Cyburbian
Messages
2,850
Points
24
I used to have a 12-gage single barrel shotgun and a .22 riffle. Both were for hunting. But when I was a broke college student I sold them to my brother. Now I am in Miami, and hunting does not seem to be that often. When (if) I go, I (will) borrow a gun.
 

martini

Cyburbian
Messages
678
Points
19
Nope. don't have them. I'm all in favor of hunting rifles and shotguns though. They seem to serve an actual purpose, where as handguns only serve to be a nusiance. I don't think that they hold a legitimate place in society. Think about it, they're designed to be conceled, letting every wacko out there carry and not have it known. This then feeds the fear that the media lives off of. "That creep down the street" syndrome. You better have gun in the house, 'cause you never know when Crazy Carl will come-a knockin' wanting to rob you or steal your kid! PROTECT YOURSELF!

whew, sorry, got ranty there. I rather like rifles, but don't think I'll ever get one. I just don't see the prupose for me. Handguns just don't belong. More guns DOES NOT equal less crime. More guns equals more paranoia.
 

Tom R

Cyburbian
Messages
2,274
Points
25
guns

Winchester Model 94 .32 Winchester Special (Looks just like a 30-30)
It was my father's deer rifle. Probably from the '50s. Hasn't been fired in 20+ years.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Budgie said:
... I've starred down the barrel of a loaded handgun in the hands of a 17 year old punk, who later told a cop that he just likes the thrill of seeing fear in peoples eyes.

-Imagine what fun it would have been if you had a shotgun and blew out the 17 yr old punks kneecaps, and later told the cop that you liked to watch people fall and gravlel in pain. Priceless.-
Just joking around there. I've had a few friends robbed at gun point. Now they have guns.
A few weeks ago a repeat offender just released from a prior robbery, tried to rob a deli and then shot at the store owner. Of course he missed and the owner shot him and killed him. The gun (store owner's) was licensed and registered. Now the parents of the repeat offender are wondering how this could happen and why he was released early. Only in America.
As for guns, reporting one pump action mossberg shotgun with adjustable spread for those hard to reach spots when inside your house and one .38 pistol. I figure if the government has all the guns, how the hell are we going to overthrow it when the time comes.
lock and load.
 

Zoning Goddess

Cyburbian
Messages
13,852
Points
39
I have a handgun that my dad bought for me when I was driving from home in FL to college in Massachusetts. My brother cleans it periodically for me, but I don't carry it around (in the car or anyplace).

My son has a BB gun. He had tons of lessons in Cub Scouts about how to handle BB guns and is very safety-conscious. My brother has taken him up to his hunt camp to teach him to shoot, and to safely handle, real firearms. I read too many stories about kids finding guns, playing with them, and shooting themselves or friends. I want my son to understand the damage guns can do, and what to do if he ever encounters a friend "playing" with a gun.
 

SW MI Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
3,194
Points
26
I grew up with my dad having a few guns, shotguns and rifles. Chad has a couple shotguns, no rifles. Branch County (where I'm at now) doesn't allow rifle hunting. I have no clue as to the numbers - .22, etc. etc. etc. I never shot a gun, but would like to learn how.

I know that a local municipality in MI tried to pass an ordinance not allowing firearms into City Hall but someone fought it. It ended up going to the MI courts and they decided that they had to allow them in City Hall.

On this topic, I have a legitimate question, so no flames. I can see the need for a concealed weapons permit for certain things, but why would anyone need to bring a gun into McDonalds or grocery shopping or something?
 

Jen

Cyburbian
Messages
1,704
Points
26
We have marshmallow guns!

And slingshots too, for those damn illbred hounds down the street who used to charge at us and bark their fool heads off! ;)

Though as far as weapons of choice I would have to say knives and swords are far sexier than guns!
 

SlaveToTheGrind

Cyburbian
Messages
1,443
Points
27
SW MI Planner said:
...but why would anyone need to bring a gun into McDonalds or grocery shopping or something?
The reason for concealed carry is to protect oneself. Walking down a dark street in _________ (fill in the city of your choice), is more hazardous than McDonalds or grocery shopping, true. I think the intent of most people with concealed carry is for those times when there is higher risk. If I had one, I would not carry to the gorcery store. Other places would be more appropriate, however.
 

otterpop

Cyburbian
Messages
6,655
Points
28
Yes. I come from a long line of gun owners. I have several handguns (.357 S&W, .22 Taurus revolver, .380 Mauser, .45 LC Navy Arms revolver, and a .44 Navy Arms cap and ball revolver), also a .22 Remington Nylon rifle and a .50 Lyman Plains rifle. Used to owns a few others, but sold them during periods of low cash.

I don't hunt. I just like to shoot. I don't shoot much anymore because of the cost of ammunition. The blackpowder guns are a blast to shoot, but a pain to clean afterwards.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,485
Points
41
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The "well-regulated militia" has always left me wondering whether the founding fathers had a more narrow scope in mind than what they actually wrote and adopted.

The .45 caliber pistol was designed to kill tribesmen in the Phillipines during the American occupation after the Spanish-American War. The then-standard issue army pistol didn't seem to have any discernable effect during charges by these tribesmen, so the .45 was designed to deliver a massive lethal blow from a short distance. Why a short distance, you ask? Because the weapons were issued to officers, who were supposed to be in close-in combat. If the weapon had the same lethality from a greater distance, the army reasoned, officers would not lead.

Why does Joe Sixpack need a weapon designed to kill people?

I support the right to arm bears.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
I guess I get to be the most evil person here.

I own an AR-15 H-Bar. I have had it since I baught it after advanced training when in the Army Reserve when I was 18. I have enough high capacity mags to shock you sensless. Bipod included.

As far as hunting with it goes, you can use it, and if you know anything about using a firearm in the first place, you are not going to turn an animal into swiss cheese with one no matter how large your magazine. But then again, when you watch too many movies and don't criticaly think about your point of view....

I grew up around firearms. ammunition and multiple deadly firearms were stored unlocked and together in my room. My father taught me how to use and fire them. I had deep respect for them after that. I saw what they could do.

I havn't done much hunting since getting out of the service. Its cheaper to buy hamburger at the store and faster. I know I can do it, so what is the point. I already have a god complex to nurse.

Does anyone know how to mount a cammera on a rifle? The mounting fixture on the carrying handle seems like it would mount a set up really nice if it existed.
 

Budgie

Cyburbian
Messages
5,270
Points
30
Exactly !!!

Gedunker said:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The "well-regulated militia" has always left me wondering whether the founding fathers had a more narrow scope in mind than what they actually wrote and adopted.
Precisely, the "well-regulated militia" is called the military and police. It's not hard to figure out what the hell they meant. Any person should have the right to be trained for military and police service. Not tote guns around asking for trouble. Not that people who have guns intentionally pick fights, but when a fight does come the trouble grows exponentially when a gun is drawn either for "protection" or aggression.

Do I hear a faint collective "DUH" from the far right of the room?
 

Wannaplan?

Bounty Hunter
Messages
3,212
Points
29
SlaveToTheGrind said:
Walking down a dark street in _________ (fill in the city of your choice), is more hazardous than...
How about a village or township, too?
 

SlaveToTheGrind

Cyburbian
Messages
1,443
Points
27
Duke Of Dystopia said:
...My father taught me how to use and fire them. I had deep respect for them after that. I saw what they could do.
That is the key. Knowledge and a respect for a firearm would reduce a lot of "accidents".
 

Wulf9

Member
Messages
923
Points
22
I would like to see gun manufacturers responsible under reasonable product safety laws (providing reasonable levels of safety interlocks and subject to lawsuit if they fail).

I would like to see gun owners fully responsible for their guns. If their gun causes death or injury or is used in a crime, they are as liable as the person who used the gun. "Ownership" should be traced back to the manufacturer and gun salesmen and any former owners. If they don't have a bill of sale with a positive ID of the buyer, they are responsible.

With that, I would support the right to bear arms.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Wulf9 said:
I would like to see gun manufacturers responsible under reasonable product safety laws (providing reasonable levels of safety interlocks and subject to lawsuit if they fail).

I would like to see gun owners fully responsible for their guns. If their gun causes death or injury or is used in a crime, they are as liable as the person who used the gun. "Ownership" should be traced back to the manufacturer and gun salesmen and any former owners. If they don't have a bill of sale with a positive ID of the buyer, they are responsible.

With that, I would support the right to bear arms.
-Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Take away the guns and they'll just either stab each other or use some other means.
As for holding the manufacturer responsable, it should be the person who killed the other person who is made responsible.
How come nobody is holding Ginzo Knifes accountable? Or how come no car manufacturer gets sued when a drunk or even a sober person kills a person with their car?
 

Budgie

Cyburbian
Messages
5,270
Points
30
Rumpy Tuna said:
-Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
I suspect it's easier to pull a trigger from 30 feet away than it is to stand next to someone and kill them with a knife. At least the person being stabbed can get a chance to hurt the perp. Muggings might still happen. Columbines won't.

People kill people accidentally too. It's alot easier to accidentally kill someone with a gun than a knife, IMO.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,485
Points
41
Re: Exactly !!!

Budgie said:
Not that people who have guns intentionally pick fights, but when a fight does come the trouble grows exponentially when a gun is drawn either for "protection" or aggression.
I keep seeing the video-tape in my mind of those two freaks that tried to rob the Bank of America in LA a few years ago, loaded down with AR-15s and body armor and just blasting the hell out of everyone and everything in their way. This is not what I call "responsible gun ownership".
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Re: Exactly !!!

Budgie said:
Any person should have the right to be trained for military and police service.
There is the flaw in your argument.

If your openly gay you don't have the right to military service. If you have flat feet you do not have the right to military service. If you are too old, ever took anti depressent medication for any length in any way, and some I am sure I am missing. The police forces are the same way.

Additionaly, one breif look at history and you trust the government never to abuse its power? The laughter over that one is deafening.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
Wulf9 said:
I would like to see gun manufacturers responsible under reasonable product safety laws (providing reasonable levels of safety interlocks and subject to lawsuit if they fail).
An unloaded gun cannot be fired. Most guns have safety locks on them to prevent them from firing. Trigger or cable locks will render a gun unoperable. A gun in a locked case cannot be fired. What more do you want?

Only irresponsible use of a gun, either accidently or intentionally, can result in somebody being shot. How is that different from people injuring themselves with power tools or causing an accident with a car? A safe and responsible operator is the most important feature of any of these. It is no defect of the car when an elderly person kills several people by crashing through a marketplace, so should its manufacturer be held liable? It is no defect of a saw if a person mishandles a board and cuts off a finger, so should the manufacturer be held liable? It is not defect of a gun when a bullet fired from it hits somebody, so should the manufacturer be held liable?

Cars are made to move, saws are made to cut, and guns are made to fire. If they fail to perform their function, then the manufacturer can be held liable. If they are misused by the operator, it is the operator that should be held liable.
 

Rumpy Tunanator

Cyburbian
Messages
4,473
Points
25
Budgie said:
I suspect it's easier to pull a trigger from 30 feet away than it is to stand next to someone and kill them with a knife. At least the person being stabbed can get a chance to hurt the perp. Muggings might still happen. Columbines won't.

People kill people accidentally too. It's alot easier to accidentally kill someone with a gun than a knife, IMO.
Columbines would still happen because now only the criminals would have and be able to sell the guns, if your implying to guns being outlawed.
-Its also alot easier to kill a person with a car than a knife.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Budgie said:
Columbines won't.
Columbine did not happen because of the guns. Columbine happened because the damnable popular kids with thier shit they throw at each other managed to destabalize thier less than well socialized peers.

If those two had committed suicide like they were suposed too, nobody would have cared if they had been driven there by thier piers, business as usual. Instead, they took some of the rat bastards with them. Some deserving some not. But blame it on guns? No, those two were motivated, they would have taken a few of the worst offenders to thier miserable lives with them regardless.
 

Duke Of Dystopia

Cyburbian
Messages
2,713
Points
24
Re: Re: Exactly !!!

Gedunker said:
I keep seeing the video-tape in my mind of those two freaks that tried to rob the Bank of America in LA a few years ago.
I believe they had prior records and possesed them illegaly. Also, they were not AR-15's as they are not full auto models. That would be an M-16 and they would have needed a government license to posses. Your statement is not rational from a legal right to own issue.
 

BKM

Cyburbian
Messages
6,463
Points
29
honest answer-and troll alert!

Late to the debate, but here's my two cents.

Don't own one and hope to never have to.

Still, I support the right to self defense-within reason.

I would fear to live in a place where everyone walks around armed ("Why, if all the other students had guns, they could have shot down the Columbine killers within seconds, by golly!")

A rifle, a hunting shotgun, even a pistol-sure. Regulate them reasonably (a little paperwork never hurt anyone, and when do you really need a gun RIGHT NOW THIS SECOND))

Not sure Iike the idea of automatic weapons, though. Does the Second Amendment imply that you have the right to own and operate a howitzer? A battle tank?

Finally, do you think your shotgun is what stands between you and government tyranny? I am skeptical. (Sorry to start a flame war with this last sentence, but I really think there are better things you can do about that than gun ownership. Like maybe not working for government agencies that impose too many excessive and petty regulations on everyone. I am now channelling jordanb, since he didn't chime in on this one! :) )
 

Budgie

Cyburbian
Messages
5,270
Points
30
Re: Re: Exactly !!!

Duke Of Dystopia said:
There is the flaw in your argument.

If your openly gay you don't have the right to military service. If you have flat feet you do not have the right to military service. If you are too old, ever took anti depressent medication for any length in any way, and some I am sure I am missing. The police forces are the same way.

Additionaly, one breif look at history and you trust the government never to abuse its power? The laughter over that one is deafening.
I said military service and police service - NOT COMBAT !!! Believe me there are plenty of military jobs, especially in the Air Force that can be done perfectly well. Nor did I say that all existing rules and regulations would remain as is, ie the openly gay clause. Openly or otherwise you are still gay and can pull a trigger just as well as the next swinging dXXk.

Also, obviously not everyone can serve at the same time or for the same amount of time. The job market will take care of this theoretical flaw to my argument.

Let's keep in mind that this is a internet form, not a thesis.
 

Jeff

Cyburbian
Messages
4,161
Points
27
Zoning Goddess said:
I have a handgun that my dad bought for me when I was driving from home in FL to college in Massachusetts. My brother cleans it periodically for me, but I don't carry it around (in the car or anyplace).

Was it loaded and in the front seat with you when you were travelling up the east coast?
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,485
Points
41
Re: Re: Re: Exactly !!!

Duke Of Dystopia said:
I believe they had prior records and possesed them illegaly. Also, they were not AR-15's as they are not full auto models. That would be an M-16 and they would have needed a government license to posses. Your statement is not rational from a legal right to own issue.
I can't verify that they had priors, although I will take your word on it. I also apologize for mis-naming the weapons used by these cretins.

The point I was making is that it is possible for others of like mind to purchase semi- or illegally modified fully-automatic weapons and reign holy hell down on unarmed innocents. The argument that an armed populace is going to stop such things is specious at best.
 
Top