http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/18/the-rights-of-non-gun-owners Comments On: "Gun advocates want to create a society governed by fear." by Dan Savage en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Tue, 21 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Tue, 21 May 2013 16:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by dwightmoodyforgetsthings]]> Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:42:56 -0800 The Stranger Frightened quivering nutsacks like 5280.
Posted by Bonefish]]> Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:09:43 -0800 The Stranger I wouldn't say the streets are filled with blood but if you're arguing that everything is safe and benign, you're either lying or naive.
Posted by CbytheSea]]> Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:10:17 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Ken Mehlman]]> Sun, 20 Jan 2013 08:35:40 -0800 The Stranger
Relax, BEG, neither you nor I are associating with people who don't know that "alright" is one word.
Posted by Ms. D]]> Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:50:22 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Ms. D]]> Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:39:00 -0800 The Stranger Posted by BEG]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 23:14:04 -0800 The Stranger Posted by gnot]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:31:35 -0800 The Stranger Guns for the purpose of protection against rabid wolves ....ok, . Oh, and against vandalism, and protection against random murder? By the way, you won't get randomly murdered (since most of us don't). Not with a gun. If you defend yourself with a gun, you are a terrorist, in a lot of ways. You support the deadly killing of anyone you see in front of you with no time for contemplation. Just, "I'm number one!! So you? Die!!"" (pow pow). I don't want to see you all kill yourselves, americans, please stop.
Posted by secretchord]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:44:07 -0800 The Stranger
So, will you allow stop and frisks like they had in Dodge City to ensure compliance, especially by gang bangers?
Posted by Frederickson]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:25:37 -0800 The Stranger Posted by milemarker]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:45:47 -0800 The Stranger
I agree that no reasonable owner would object to background checks (the NRA has said they are okay with this), training and proficiency testing, and "lock-up" requirements. My brother is the picture of a sportsman. He braves some pretty awful elements to hunt in the wild multiple times a year. That hunting provides meat for his family for most of the year, though between tags, gas, equipment, time, and other expenses, it's not really cheaper than buying from the store. But he enjoys it, and he's not hurting anyone, so his hobby is perfectly fine with me. Yet, since they've had their first kid, he has been even more conscious about locking up his guns and even sold some of them off. He will probably train his daughter in responsible gun ownership, like we were, and offer her the opportunity to go hunting if she wants to, but he recognizes that guns are dangerous in untrained or immature hands. His daughter can't even *walk* yet, and he felt he had too many guns - even though they were ALL locked up - for her to live safely in their home.

Today's gun right nuts want all their rights with no responsibility over an object designed exclusively to kill. Yes, I believe that assault weapons, TRUE semi-autos (not necessarily dual-action revolvers), and high-capacity magazines should not be generally available. But I *do* think the average, balanced citizen should be able to own a hunting rifle or reasonable handgun. But they should prove they're worthy of that. I wouldn't even flinch if I were asked to pass a background check for a gun, or take a shooting and safety course for a handgun. People who object to that should not own such lethal weapons.
Posted by Ms. D]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:16:23 -0800 The Stranger
I live in the U-district. Have for almost 20 years. The only time I have heard gunshots, on probably 2 occasions is when the club or bar is closing.

There is no violence problem. It has been decreasing for decades. Go light some incense , loosen those retarded skinny jeans allowing blood flow back into your balls and brain. Relax.


Posted by Lew Siffer]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 16:12:32 -0800 The Stranger Posted by thatsnotright]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:29:38 -0800 The Stranger Posted by secretchord]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 15:24:26 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Big Sven]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:52:39 -0800 The Stranger
I do, after some introspection about what risks I might face, carry pepper spray. After over 5 years of doing so, I've only thought I would need to use it ONCE. I was walking my dog, and two Rotties escaped a nearby yard and ran up to me and my dog. I pulled my canister out (my dog is only 20 pounds and friendly, and 2, aggressive, 100+ pound dogs could easily kill him)...only to have the dogs engage my dog playfully. *Big sigh* I then walked them back to the yard and made sure the gate was securely latched behind them and went around front to tell the owner they needed to make sure their back gate was secured.

That's not to say that I've never encountered people who are up to no good. But they're really not that scary. Back when I owned a car, I was sitting in my living room with a friend when she glanced out the window and said "hey, there's a guy who looks like he's checking out your car." I pawed around for my cell phone and realized I had left it in the car. So, being broad daylight, I went out, hit the "unlock" button on the remote as I exited the door (which caused the dude some surprise at the click of the locks opening while he was devising his route into the car), and when he turned to look where it was coming from, looked him in the eyes and said "hi, how are you today?" as I retrieved my phone from the car. He quickly scuttled away. No gun needed, not really a threat. People invading your home while you're home or directly threatening you or shooting up public spaces are pretty rare. Yes, there are a lot of people out there who will take advantage of you if possible, but reducing your risk doesn't hinge on blowing every potential perp away. The perps who need to be blown away before they will stop are pretty uncommon, and being observant and having a good emergency plan will suffice in those situations.
Posted by Ms. D]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:51:06 -0800 The Stranger
Absolutely not. The NRA has worked extremely hard to block exactly those requirements. LaPierre and the rest of his gun nut crew want anybody to be able to carry a gun openly or concealed with no hurdles whatsoever.

This is one of the things that separates the NRA's actions from the wishes of their members. The members don't make the decisions, the corporations do. The goal is to sell more guns, nothing more.

@34

Instead of merely suggesting that people without guns learn more about guns, how about requiring those who carry them to actually learn about guns, and certify they are competent? Most of the problems are caused by a small minority of incompetents and loons, and a minimal amount of screening could take their guns away. The majority of gun owners could keep their guns and we'd all be better off. The problem, as usual, is the NRA.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 14:07:55 -0800 The Stranger
"Instead, the vast majority of the people insisting in an armed populace are the most adamant that no such licensing or registration be required."

The polls say that the majority of gun owners are for registration and closing the gun show loophole. I think that's true here at Slog, too, from the comments I've read. Not a lot of NRA love around here, and it hurts discourse and the chance of finding common ground to pretend there is.
Posted by Big Sven]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 13:51:12 -0800 The Stranger cleaner.

Of course not all, or even most gun owners agree with this, but that population includes a tendency which fears the loss of social controls but cheers it on as the uncovering ('apocálypsis' in Greek) of the true nature of the world, and of manly virtue.

Shorter: there are those who feel that even if our culture could control our violence as well as some others, this would be far less desirable than its being held in check by honest, physical, force.
Posted by Gerald Fnord]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:20:07 -0800 The Stranger Posted by amazonv]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:56:14 -0800 The Stranger Posted by goodjobguy]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:52:05 -0800 The Stranger
@21
No CPL (Concealed Pistol License) is the accepted WA (Washington State) acronym for a license to carry a firearm. It is issued by the DOL (Department Of Licensing) after the application at and approval of you your local PD (Police Department) or SO (Sheriffs Office).

@25
Escalating a potentially violent conflict with gun owners sounds like a genius idea. Maybe you should take a long look in the mirror and figure out who the "asshole" really is.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:44:38 -0800 The Stranger
Its impossible to know the heart of another but the NRA behaves exactly like someone would behave if they were a depraved marketing program for the gun industry, attempting to create the most gun-infested, fearful, pistol-packing society they could.

So, just like you can't vote for a Republican without voting for oppressive, reactionary social policies, you can't support the NRA without supporting depraved firearm deregulation.
Posted by Alden]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:02:44 -0800 The Stranger Posted by treehugger]]> Sat, 19 Jan 2013 09:24:12 -0800 The Stranger