[avira_tk]

I'll go ahead and post something in favor of fun ownership, practically every country that has a tyrannical dictatorship that committed mass murder, started out with confiscating private guns. I'm sure you'll say "but that won't happen in the USA", that's exactly what the victims thought before they were killed.

The second amendment is part of the bill of rights, a foundational document for the country. They also have free speech, something that Europeans don't. The reason you're allowed to own guns is to protect your first amendment rights.

People who emigrate there can learn to handle firearms, instead of asking them to change, to prevent your feelings from being hurt.

PS : Europeans also have free speech as long they don't violate "hate speech" laws aka thought crime legislation.

Here's a video explaining why guns must be banned, because current thing and all.

https://youtu.be/XbkNIoJ-9jY

[amitoj]

Originally Posted by nitinsharma1000

That is not entirely accurate. Most states have carry permit reciprocity laws. For example, a PA carry permit is honored in some other states for example WV, NH, OH. I can travel to bordering states with what the carry permit allows (A concealed and loaded handgun).

I was responding to another poster saying people can always move to a state with more prohibitive gun laws.

Originally Posted by avira_tk

The second amendment is part of the bill of rights, a foundational document for the country. They also have free speech, something that Europeans don't. The reason you're allowed to own guns is to protect your first amendment rights.

The Second Amendment leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Here is the text of it:
"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."

It can be interpreted as a collective right of a State to bear arms in order to protect itself from Federal overreach, known as "collective right", or it can be interpreted to mean an individual's right to self defense. Right into the 1980s, it was the collective right that was upheld by Supreme Court, until the efforts of Republican party to pack the courts with the judges it favored started to pay off and the individual right started to gain majority among the judges. The first case that favored individual rights was with a 5-4 majority.
Fun fact: the second amendment was based on the British bill of rights, where it was created to arm the citizenry so that a tyrannical ruler could not overcome the Parliament.

[V.Narayan]

If the NRA were to have been an Iranian or Russian or Chinese or Turkish organization could it have possibly been labelled a terrorist organization. Any thoughts.

[DigitalOne]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

If the NRA were to have been an Iranian or Russian or Chinese or Turkish organization could it have possibly been labelled a terrorist organization. Any thoughts.

Most likely, yes.

But also if the BLM or any other minority groups make a pro-gun ownership argument stating that they don't trust or feel safe with only government authorities' having guns, most of the media/liberal/Democratic party would change tune. Any thoughts ?

Most of the issues in our society, unfortunately, are judged based on who is making the argument.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

Most likely, yes.

But also if the BLM or any other minority groups make a pro-gun ownership argument stating that they don't trust or feel safe with only government authorities' having guns, most of the media/liberal/Democratic party would change tune. Any thoughts ?

Most of the issues in our society, unfortunately, are judged based on who is making the argument.

My prejudice would say there would be a hiss of protest from white America. But I don't have enough knowledge to say so with any surety. But blacks I expect can procure guns as easily as whites.

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

... minority groups make a pro-gun ownership argument stating that they don't trust or feel safe with only government authorities' having guns, most of the media/liberal/Democratic party would change tune. Any thoughts ?

Needs no wondering, there's precedent.

I'm referring, of course, to the Black Panther Party being formed in 1966, the subsequent passing of the Mulford Act gun control legislation in 1967 by then California governor Reagan, and all the COINTELPRO shenanigans that followed at then FBI Director Hoover's behest.

[Fuldagap]

Originally Posted by avira_tk

People who emigrate there can learn to handle firearms, instead of asking them to change, to prevent your feelings from being hurt.

That is a lot to ask.

People travelling to UP (1/3rd ownership of licensed civilian weapons), from say a southern state, would be in shock when they see a gun shop selling guns like any other commodity being sold by an adjacent shop. Eyebrows would be raised and first internal feeling would be 'is it legal?' Second feeling would probably be of fear.

I remember one of my Hyderabad friends freaking out of shock when he saw a gun shop in Aundh many years back. I jokingly told him to go and give a visit to Meerut or Muzaffarnagar to see proper gun shops and markets. It took him many hours to fathom what he saw and what it would be like in Meerut or Muzaffarnagar gun markets/shops.

Several members have quoted incidents where it was not very famous an idea among NCC cadets who were called for firing practice due to firing a weapon being cumbersome to them. Same members go on and say that firing a weapon releases dopamine and gives that certain person a 'kick'. Isn't it a contradiction? IMHO firing a gun is pleasurable to some while not to others like reading a book is pleasurable to some while not to others.

The fear of the unknown is very hard to overcome. It is but natural to be fearfully shocked of a person holstering a gun in a public space or pointing a rifle at your vehicle from his house, when one has had no such related prior experience(s) or no knowledge of the culture of that foreign land.

In India, 'shastra pooja' (weapon worship) has been a tradition in pujas for time immemorial. But I guess it is geographically limited to certain areas only. Or maybe I'm wrong. Children from such homes might not have fired any weapon in life (just tied kalavas, the red sacred thread, to the weapons) but would not get overwhelmed when they see a weapon in the outside world. Even the person heading the country has on ocassions portrayed on TV worshipping weapons.

Many years back in a foreign country I was shocked where I saw for the first time a usual police personnel with the magazine and his sidearm separate and on opposite sides of his holster. In India, never saw any normal uniformed personnel whose magazine was separate from his sidearm. Needless to say, the personnel in that foreign country was far better trained than any normal uniformed personnel in our country.

Weapons, especially guns, and our country have little in common after the British took the reins. Maybe that is why we feel so awkward when we see people with guns in other places. Britishers no doubt are the best administrators.

Learning to handle a gun and shoot properly teaches a person a lot about responsibility and improves his focus, concentration and confidence. For obvious reasons that is.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Fuldagap

Several members have quoted incidents where it was not very famous an idea among NCC cadets who were called for firing practice due to firing a weapon being cumbersome to them.

Oh, me, me, me. If you read the original post from 2007, I have explained the circumstances. Of the 78 cadets who showed up for the first firing day, majority of them never attended the bi-weekly training where they would have regularly handled the DP version of .303 rifle for marching and bayonet drills. So their first handling of the rifle was in the firing range. They didn't know any theory either, knew nothing about recoil. It is them who were who were shocked out of their mind, by the sound and the recoil. Next day only 22 showed up asking for more, these were the regulars, who never skipped bi-weekly training.

Originally Posted by Fuldagap

Same members go on and say that firing a weapon releases dopamine and gives that certain person a 'kick'. Isn't it a contradiction?

This applies to the second group from above. So it is not a contradiction.

Originally Posted by Fuldagap

IMHO firing a gun is pleasurable to some while not to others like reading a book is pleasurable to some while not to others.

Well, true.

[moralfibre]

No one says it like Trevor Noah!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVyvOgNoXdM

[Exilus13]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

I cannot wrap my head around this pic and its absurdness. How can such a country continue to be called a world leader?

PS: Photo freely available in the internet and hence not blurring the faces.

Originally Posted by am1m

Just wondering if that is a real, unedited photograph.

This image was captured by a National Geographic photographer Gabriele Galimberti for his "THE AMERIGUNS" projects. The owners are from Austin, Texas and call themselves to be collectors.

Although i came across this post couple of months ago, it's gaining attention recently due to the unfortunate school-shooting.

From the original post:

From my project THE AMERIGUNS - Of the all the firearms owned by private citizens for non-military purposes in the world, more than 40% are in the United States of America. Their number exceed that of the country’s population: about 400 to 328 million. In proportion, that’s more than one hundred twenty for each hundred; more than one per person. I have traveled in every corner of the United States to meet proud gun owners, and I has asked them to show all the firearms they keep at home. I shot portraits of
people and guns in their homes and neighborhoods....

[AROO7]

Originally Posted by Fuldagap

That is a lot to ask.

People travelling to UP (1/3rd ownership of licensed civilian weapons), from say a southern state, would be in shock when they see a gun shop selling guns like any other commodity being sold by an adjacent shop.

Several members have quoted incidents where it was not very famous an idea among NCC cadets who were called for firing practice due to firing a weapon being cumbersome to them. Same members go on and say that firing a weapon releases dopamine and gives that certain person a 'kick'. Isn't it a contradiction? IMHO firing a gun is pleasurable to some while not to others like reading a book is pleasurable to some while not to others.

As for the first part, Sir let me give you another perspective. In Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) firearm possession legal and illegal is a must-have (more as a deterrent and not as a means of flexing your clout) if you are involved in trades or a profession that involves a lot of rubbing shoulders with people in power or involves a lot of money.

As per your stating that guns are sold as commodities, I don't think that's true. I will quote for my place (Lucknow) of course you can spot gun shops but it is limited to a particular market and a particular area.

As for traveling, from South to U.P. part is concerned I request you to just have a trip to Punjab. Or save the trouble and look at the records and the number of firearms possessed by all the civilians in Punjab. I don't take pride in saying that but it has now become a mini Texas. As per third-party data civilians there possess 15 times the number of weapons compared to the police personnel, which by law mandates should not exceed 2.5 times.

As for the second part, I can tell you sir NCC training is more than just firing the gun. And no it's neither a punishment nor a fun activity. It's just a part of training that too under strict observation. It's cumbersome because the training weapon is old-era rifles and as an amateur, it requires a lot of skill and correct posture to use it. Otherwise, you are looking at a dislocated shoulder or an injury.

As for the dopamine rush that comes from firing a gun, I believe firing range and air guns are the best places and means to experience that. Channel the energy in the right direction.

[MaheshY1]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

... this pic ...

It has more to do with training and discipline than just owning lots of guns. In the pic, I can see the kid holding a P90 (I guess) with his finger off the trigger. That's the first sign saying that at least this family knows how to use a gun. Movies, Hollywood and India, almost always show the actors resting their fingers on the trigger. You NEVER touch the trigger unless you're ready to shoot. This is one of the few things I learned before I first touched a real firearm in my school days. It was a relic, a .22 rifle, but a firearm nonetheless.

Even when I visited an indoor range with air guns for some stress-busting, I enquired with the staff about what I should know before I pick up the gun. I found out that the basic rules are the same. Like:
- Never point the muzzle at something you don't intend to shoot
- Always keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction
- Finger off the trigger till you're ready to shoot
- Always cock and fire once in a safe direction without a round before leaving the gun
- Always leave the gun un-cocked and unloaded

Edit: Off-Topic:
I have taught these basic rules to my 7-year-old and remind him from time to time when I see him not following any of these rules with his Nerf gun. The muscle memory doesn't care and the unsafe practices could carry over to a real firearm, should he ever possess one.

In the army, for soldiers posted in a volatile area, at least 90% of them are literally with a gun 24X7. Still, the instances of soldiers shooting one another are incredibly low. It's not like they don't grapple and get into fist-fights. In fact, these are a lot more common than we think. But, the thought of picking up a gun perhaps never even crosses their minds.

Even in the most testosterone-heavy environment like a gym, we never see men fighting. But in a pub, when our decision-making and reflexes are weak, grappling and fistfights are fairly common.

Circling back to the gun issue, the problem is psychological. An unstable person with a baseball bat is more dangerous than a mentally stable person with 10 guns. Unfortunately, we don't know when the person with a thousand firearms is going over the edge. Unlike in the military, a civilian often doesn't have a close-knit community of gun owners with them all the time. So, it's difficult for someone to spot a problem early when a gun owner's mental health is deteriorating and initiate an intervention.

Secondly, it's fairly easy for a gun owner to lose a firearm to theft or make it accessible to someone not trained in firearms. I think no one should have permission to keep an assault rifle at home. Shotguns and sidearms are acceptable for self-defense given their limited range, low mag capacity, and no full-auto mode. If someone wants to use an assault rifle, then they should keep them at the nearest firing range and use it only in a controlled environment with pros available at arm's length to assist.

OR we could impose a 10,000% tax on live rounds. Currently, a 556 round costs under a dollar. The gun lobby can sell guns. Uncle Sam makes money from taxes. People treat rounds like gold and only use rounds when they absolutely have to. Win-win-win.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

If the NRA were to have been an Iranian or Russian or Chinese or Turkish organization could it have possibly been labelled a terrorist organization. Any thoughts.

I notice that even the media calling it out is not ready to label it an "act of terror." It's always a "mass shooting." It's always a mentally ill person - not a terrorist. The media never cares to find out if the middle-eastern terrorists had any mental or other problems.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by MaheshY1

OR we could impose a 10,000% tax on live rounds. Currently, a 556 round costs under a dollar. The gun lobby can sell guns. Uncle Sam makes money from taxes. People treat rounds like gold and only use rounds when they absolutely have to. Win-win-win.

That will lead to a cottage industry of home made and bootlegged rounds, since the bullet materials are not actually expensive. It will result in low quality bullets blowing up in the gun.

[Col.S Virdi]

Mod Note : Please do NOT post messages that add little or no informational value to the thread. We need your co-operation to maintain the quality of this forum.

We advise you to read the Forum Rules before proceeding any further. Request to post ONLY when you have something substantial to add to a discussion.

[smooth indian]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

I cannot wrap my head around this pic and its absurdness. How can such a country continue to be called a world leader?

PS: Photo freely available in the internet and hence not blurring the faces.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIpKfw17-yY