[geeks] CCW for Ohio!

[Francisco Javier Mesa-Martinez]

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003, Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:

> > 1) If you use a bad 80s movie as an argument, well you need to re think
> > your position to begin with. And yeah putting quotes w/o any sort of
> > context goes that way too.
>
> I didn't use it as an argument, I pointed out a scene which just
> happened to illustrate a reality that has repeated itself several times
> over historically.

I assumed that if the recent ban or confiscation of personal weapons in
England was what you were refering to, which I sort of assumed that is
the sort of thing you were aimed at.

> Wether the movie was good or not is irrelevant.

Oh, but it is :)... I usually tend to not take seriously arguments with
"just like the movie..." as I partial to take works of fiction for what
they are and nothing more. I was just making a pun about how terribly bad
Red Dawn really was.

> There are a lot of people with driver's licenses and MCSEs who cannot
> drive or do much with a computer.

The problem, is that certification... in some areas in this country has
bowed down to the minimum common denominator. So we have the failure of
two systems: public and private. But that also denotes a needed change in
this society. Meaning is it more important to not hurt the feelings of a
complete dumbass by telling him, sorry Johny you can not drive... well
because you are an idiot, than the actual standards that society wants to
establish for its citizens. When I saw what little car driving knowledge
was required to get a license in this country, well my driving style changed
from making a set of assumptions in which you knew most of the drivers
around you were on the same page as you, to a "holy shit they are comming
to get me" approach.

There is a point in which people need to say: WTF! And at least demand
some standards, that may start with the educational system I believe.

> I don't have high hopes that a gun cerification will mean much either.
>
> It might be nice to have a truly good certification program, even if it
> is only basic safety training (which is available locally).  However,
> I'm not sure the potential abuse makes it worthwhile.
>
> Right now, our government does not do a good enough job to make sure
> that information is not abused, and doesn't have a stellar track record
> on its own abuses.

That is not just a problem of gun control, but an overall problem with the
government.

> > 3) If you see bad guys every where, then I assume that two things have
> > happened: You ended up at the wrong part of town, or you forgot to take
> > your meds.
>
> I don't recall anyone suggesting there are bad guys everywhere, though
> it is certainly true in some areas.

It was a bit of a comment on the "when bad guy" sort of approach to
pro-gun arguments.

> Also, civic duty is another reason to own and train with firearms.
> It need not be soley out of a need for self defense.

My question is, would Americans be willing to serve any sort of civic
duty? Or do they take their citizenship for granted? It is a genuine
quetion.

>
> Why would you trust me with any of the other dozens of things I could
> kill you with?

I should refine it, as more than trust you... at least reduce the number
of unknowns in the equation.

> Again, there is more to being armed than defense from crimes against
> persons.

I understand that.