MovieChat Forums > Under the Gun (2016) Discussion > As A Gun Owner...

As A Gun Owner...

posted 8 years ago by FModerators
10 replies | jump to latest

I find the ultra gun rights crowd to be loaded with unstable pathetic people. It's sad to see people attempt to disguise the hard on they get from carrying a firearm with the need for self defense. I have a CWP that allows me to carry almost anywhere and in every state and yet I rarely do and one of the biggest reasons I leave my weapon at home is the concern that if I do draw it some other person with a CWP will shoot me without even knowing the situation. I live in a state where a huge percentage of people either have a CWP and/or a gun in their car.

You can't even argue that more guns equals lower crime because the fact is my gun loving state is top ten in all major crime categories per capita. What's the real possibility that carrying a gun will save my life or protect me if I am the victim of a violent crime? If I'm being robbed at gun point it's not like I will be able to surprise the bad guy if I'm looking down the barrel of a gun and if I do find myself in a situation where I can draw I'm going to be concerned that some other CWP comes upon the situation and mistakes me for a bad guy. Having a CWP doesn't make me an easily identifiable uniform officer separating good guy from bad.

There is an often referred to gun study that supposedly proves lawful gun carry is stopping crime and saving lives all the time, but the truth is the method by which the professor used to determine his statistics is a joke. The guy surveyed something like 5,000 random gun owners and asked them if they successfully used their gun to lawfully protect themselves or someone else from a bad guy in the past year and something like 90% lied and said yes. These people did not want to tell the truth and say no because they want the stats to show that guns protect. The professor could call these people every 6 months and ask the same thing and I do not doubt that they will all say yes and will do so every time.

The people in this documentary who like swinging AR-15s over their shoulder and going out in public will probably say they too have needed their weapon in some way or another to protect them self or another even though it's not true. They need the stats to be in their favor. I have had a CWP for a very long time and I know plenty of people who own a firearm and or have a CWP and other than two people who had to shoot a couple of vicious dogs (same incident over a decade ago) no one I know has needed to draw their weapon to stop a crime, but how can that be if good guys with guns are using them all the time. Based upon that BS study I mentioned almost everyone I know should have been involved in an incident where they needed their weapon.

One big problem I have with this documentary is the dismissal of mental health with regard to guns. In one scene you will see a woman say that only 5% of gun violence is associated with mental illness, but then there's a statistic showing that there are 33,000 gun deaths a year and 21,000 (63%) are suicides. Last time I checked suicide is almost entirely a mental health issue and on top of that almost all mass shooting suspects were mentally ill. The reason why the mental health factor is outright ignored by gun control advocates is because it goes against their liberal sensibility to do anything that might infringe on a person's HIPPA. Look at the Virginia Tech shooter. Here was a person deemed mentally unstable by a court, but there is no data base for those deemed mentally unstable and there never will be as far as the left is concerned. Gun control advocates have no problem pushing for any and all gun control legislation with the exception of anything that affects HIPPA and/or might be seen as something that will have some sort of negative impact on people needing mental health help.

As a gun owner with a CWP I fully support background checks, I want the ATF and all their records computerized, I want those on a terrorist watch list to be banned from buying a gun, and I want those who suffer from mental illness and/or been deemed mentally ill by a court to be prevented from buying a firearm. You can still protect health care privacy by not disclosing to gun sellers why the person has failed the background check. You fail a background and you need to know why you call the ATF.

[–] les_aker 8 years ago

"As a gun owner with a CWP I fully support background checks, I want the ATF and all their records computerized, I want those on a terrorist watch list to be banned from buying a gun..."

You keep repeating that you're a gun owner, as if that makes some magical difference when you then say you want to infringe on other people's rights.

In the real world, there is something called "due process". It is the right of everyone to have due process before any of their rights can be denied. Someone that is on some watch list hasn't received any due process.

I would also point out that the purpose of background checks is nothing more than an attempt to create a registry. People that fail a background check are not arrested even though it is a felony.

You obviously don't know much of anything about the background check process or you would also already know that the reason for a proceed, deny or hold given to the dealer does not disclose the reason why in any case. The FBI runs the National Instant Check System (NICS), not the ATF, so your assertion that someone needs to call the ATF if they fail a background check is as irrational as the rest of your assertions.

Please learn something about these topics before you make yourself look quite so ignorant of the process in public again.

[–] FModerators 8 years ago

When I mention that certain information is kept from dealers I am specifically speaking about mental illness information, which as of righ now is protected by HIPPA and it's because of this there is no way of preventing someone suffering from mental illness from buying a gun i.e. Virginia Tech. Gun control advocates won't discuss the mental health issue surrounding mass murders because they don't want anything that might cause someone to avoid seeking help if it might result in a violation of their privacy so because of that let's say I am suicidal and voluntarily seek help I can still go buy a gun because my HIPPA will not be violated. The Virgina Tech shooter was clearly unstable and yet he had no problem walking in and buying a gun because there really is no system in place to stop him. It's a system of passing the buck and hoping for the best.

You talk due process, but even though gun ownership is a right that does not mean it is free of any and all regulation. Just like feee speech is a right it does not allow a person to yell fire in a movie theater when there is none. I can own a brand new Glock 19, but I can't own a Glock 18. No way someone ahould be allowed to buy a firearm if they are on a terrorist watch list and I don't believe for a second that the government would exploit this and put every American on it so they could basically outlaw guns like some parnoid anti-government groups would like us to believe.

Do yourself a favor and add comprehension to your ability to read.

[–] les_aker 8 years ago

"When I mention that certain information is kept from dealers I am specifically speaking about mental illness information, which as of righ now is protected by HIPPA "

And you would be wrong. The only information given to the dealer is Proceed, Deny, or Hold. No reason is provided to the dealer. Period.

You're having a lot of problems with the concept of rights. You don't have the right to yell anything in a theater. Your assertion is a false analogy. Including...

"No way someone ahould be allowed to buy a firearm if they are on a terrorist watch list... "

I see that due process rights are still escaping you. Someone that is a "terrorist" would be someone that has been tried and convicted of the crime of terrorism in a court of law. Not someone that you don't like so you decided to add their name to a list based on something you'd like to believe. In the real world, there's no way that someone should be denied their rights based on conjecture.

Do yourself a favor and add comprehension of these topics to your ability to read.

[–] ajaddiction2004 8 years ago

Some sheep just love to flock to their shepard. No hope for you it seems.....

[–] les_aker 8 years ago

Your inability to refute a single thing I posted is noted.

[–] nickm2 8 years ago

I'm sure the OP is some 'furren dawg' who's just pretending to be an American.

Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?

[–] murad23 8 years ago

the OP is clearly NOT a gun owner. they get all there facts wrong, including those about process.

[–] bingcherries-1 8 years ago

If you're adjudicated mentally defective, you will not pass a background check.

Cho should have been, but the reporting failed.

Build the rules of society from rationality to buttress ourselves against the times we are not.

[–] murad23 8 years ago

which as of righ now is protected by HIPPA and it's because of this there is no way of preventing someone suffering from mental illness from buying a gun i.e. Virginia Tech

That is another complete LIE in your litany of lies (starting with your claim to be a gun owner).

There was a HIPPA glitch issue with Cho (Va TEch), but it was fully investigated, understood and resolved.

Cho would NOT be able to buy a gun today

Just like feee speech is a right it does not allow a person to yell fire in a movie theater when there is none.

Actually you can. You can ONLY be persecuted for that if you actually do create a harmful result.

[–] xMCGRUBERx 8 years ago

I can see where you're coming from on some points. All these lil 'rational' steps pave the way for the next. Thats the thing with these 'sensible' changes. Lil by lil they will go. It used to be ok to have a fully automatic. Now banned. Now they are after AR's completely. The fact of the matter is, AR's are such a small % of gun deaths. Like single digit %. But they still want to take em. They chip away where they can.
Another thing is, whats the criteria for mental illness? Again, sounds pretty darn sensible on the surface. Thats really putting in a clause that potetially could lead to the disarmament of a large part of the population. Not only does it involve cross referencing with medical records, it leaves "mental illness" open for interpretation. within there leaves a lot of vulnerability.

Watch list= is filled with mostly people who shouldnt be on there. It really gets ridiculous some of the names theyve found on it. Even here, it sounds totally reasonable, its supposed to. But theres a lot of room there for it being exploited. Especially in todays current political climate. I think every single never trump protestors are terrorist. Burning us flags and walking up and down our streets with mexican flags. I think its time to rise up. Its a huge threat to this country whats been going on. Others may not see it that way. I think they're crazy. Others would think i am. Its really more complicated then one would think.