And now for my complete statement which was within the context of a conversation:

Do you always read things that aren't there?
Hope you don't shoot at things that aren't there as well.


  

No, it may not be attacking me personally, but if I am a gun owner and posters make sweeping comments about gun owners, well then I am going to call them on it. Either way, I am not upset, just talking about how I view the comments

I carry for several reasons:

I am a woman in a man's world, when some men use the physical disparity between a man and a woman to prey on her. That won't be me (it has been me in the past).
I work in some dangerous areas with some dangerous and mentally unstable people. I have seen terrible violence and attempted murders in the work my husband and I do with the homeless.
We plan on doing more work in even more dangerous parts of the world
My husband leaves for long periods of time and it gives him some peace of mind to know that I can take care of myself if the need arose, but he also has the peace of mind of knowing that I won't abuse the training he has given me.
My husband carries and trains with guns because it is part of his life and it bring him back home to me.

yes, when I quoted it I tried to remove all the stuff from it and I removed too much. I also thought the quote would hyper link back to the original post, but it did not. Either way, I take my training with a gun very seriously and I take human life very seriously and I find it highly offensive that you would call my judgement into question like that in a debate. You are basically calling into question when I would kill someone. I have stated over and over, using my gun would be a VERY last resort and I have stated the times when I absolutely would NOT use my gun, even if I am legally able to do so. Nothing is more important to me than the sanctity of life and I don't appreciate or forget what you said, in a debate, no less. I have called you out on it several times in that thread and another and you still stick you your guns, well, I am sticking to mine. It was highly personal to me and highly offensive and until you rectify it, that is all I see when I read your posts.

Is the health care for kids comment toward me? I just want to know before I answer this highly personal question. I also wonder if I posted about that on open boards or in a more private setting and it is now being brought into a public debate?

Sigh, I see you posted the same thing at CE2, sans my name.

Once again, you're reading things that aren't there and there's no damn way I'll apologize for things I never said.
And I am now done with this conversation.

  

Well, you have been given multiple chances to at least explain what you meant by "I hope you don't shoot at things that aren't there as well". I asked you several times to explain the comment in a way that I could understand it. Please tell me how that was not a personal dig? I mean, you took "I have Oskar's number" as a personal threat and I cleared that up ASAP because it was important to me that you and other posters knew I didn't threaten you.

ALL of that gets thrown on the responsible gun owners door as well.

I do acknowledge it. I say it all the time. And, you are right, I personalize it. The generalizations bother me, a lot. Maybe I should just stop reading them, since I know they are going to be there.

Ok.  I will concede that maybe you're professional life is one that requires gun carriage, as I would concede that for your husband (isn't he a soldier?).  But I'm sorry, you haven't offered me compelling arguments for why you need one in your personal life.  I'm a woman too, and the last time i looked I lived in the same world you do.  (Though arguably Toronto is safer than most american cities, at least partially because of stricter gun control laws.)  Women don't need guns to protect themselves.  They need laws and society that recognize that violence against women in or out of spousal relationships is wrong and serious and punishable and verifiable.

I was raped as a teenager.  i don't know what you mean by being victimized by male power, but it doesn't get much more victimized than that.  But i am not a professional victim because i don't carry a gun.  A gun would not have protected me from date rape from a man that i knew and trusted enough to get into a truck with.  A bit more street smarts would have, and has since then.

And you are right.  my decision to live my life strong and confident without carrying a gun does not affect your decision to carry a gun for your own confidence.  But your decision to advocate for for personal handgun ownership and carriage does affect me and every other law abiding gun fearing citizen.  Gun manufacturers and distributors use your fear and false sense of security to advocate for laxer gun laws all around, for multiple personal gun ownership, and for mass distribution of lethal weapons amongst the general populace, where they are stolen, given, lended, stored improperly, or just sold to the wrong people much more often then they are ever used justifiably in situations that could not have been solved other ways, or in situations that were not caused in part by the gun trade in the first place.  And before you point out that I live in a different country than you with different laws, let me say a big rounding thank you from all Canadians for the large amount of legal and illegal guns that are shipped here from your country every year.  They've made such a difference in our quality of life here in Canadian cities.

So yes.  your gun ownership DOES affect others.  It IS related to the gun trade that routinely puts guns into the hands of the murderous, the criminal, and the unstable.  they're using YOU and people like you as their excuse for their existance and their trade.


  

It isn't my or his job, it is what we do in our spare time to help people in great need. So, that would be personal use.

I never said you were a professional victim. My victimization by men is no less valid than yours, but I guess I won't be delving into it here, needless to say, I am also not a professional victim.

I never said I carry a gun for confidence or said ONE thing about where you gain your confidence.

I am for STRONGER gun laws, even including mandatory training and regulating private sales, which I have stated over and over.

It is hard to talk about subjects when my stance is either being woefully misrepresented woefully misunderstood.

So GAT can see this and answer.

yes it was.  you posted it at ce2 on a long thread about health care, if i recall.  if i'm wrong, i'm sorry.  I probably shouldn't have posted it here, but honestly, that crap about anti americanism pissed me off.  that always gets said about canadians every time we question the great american exceptionalism.  and, i've got to be honest, when you point out the time and money that you sacrifice towards something so inherently useless, especially when you've made it clear over and over again in previous posts that you don't have time or money to waste, it begs the question.

GAT- my situation has change vastly since I made the choice to drop health care coverage. For one, my household income more than DOUBLED with my marriage, for 2, I now get free healthcare with my husband's 2 jobs (Marine Corps and Fire Fighter, it should be noted that part of the reasons he took the new job and is staying with the old is for the insurance). We are actually doing really well right now financially and in about 5 years we will both quit our jobs and buy a huge chunk of land and pay for it in cash. We will then live our dream of traveling the world and helping women in 3rd world countries.

2nd, my choice to drop health care was not entirely monetary, I could have kept it and been fine. A BIG part of my reason to drop it was to stop paying into a system of corporations that I disagree with heavily. I don't do it in any other aspect of my life (Made in China, Walmart, etc, etc) so I wondered why I did here. Mainly it was out of fear of something happening. That was a huge impetus for me, another was monetary, but more because they refused a huge charge of what I considered a necessary medical treatment for my son and left me with a 5K. So, I dropped the insurance to get the treatment for my son.

Your statements about American values and the values you placed on Americans (that don't match anyone I know) ticked me off as well, I was supposed to ignore them, but you can pull this old trick out of your hat in an attempt to shame me? I do not subscribe to American Exceptionalism, so that isn't what got me. It was the generalization that, to me, was so far off the mark. I know some really good people that do really good things to try to change the world. They might be small things and they might only change a person at a time, but I believe that is still something we all should aspire to.

Those posts? 3 years ago? I suppose no one can further their position in life? I have not had a new car in 12 years, the car I drive is 16 years old. I have not had a new TV in 14 years, I watch a tube TV, I have given up things that others aspire to to have other things that I enjoy. Money was not thrown around as any sort of brag, more as an attempt to show the seriousness in which I took the responsibility in carrying, if that was misconstrued, I apologize. I am not a braggart.

IMO, many USians buy guns out of fear; fear generated by hate, bigotry and intolerance. By giving in to that fear I think that they become victims.

Fine.  You are now in a position where you can afford the luxury of owning a handgun.  But it still is only that.  A luxury.  No one NEEDS a handgun in their personal life.  (I would argue that your volunteer work still constitutes professional behaviour, whether or not you're paid for it.  The same way i am still a professional when i run sports teams or reading clubs or the food drive at our school on my own time.  It's still part of my professional life.)   And because handguns are luxuries, the safety of the public, and the government's right to regulate that safety (for itself and for decency to it's neighbours) trumps that luxury.

As for American values--there is such a thing as an american society.  That does not mean that every american holds every one of the values of the public american society--but that society exists.  It's defined by what gets published, by what gets spoken about publicly, by how american institutions behave and promote themselves nationally and abroad.  If you don't like what gets said and done in your name as an american citizen then change it.  Make your voice louder than the ones currently getting the press.  But dont tell me that the united states of america is not a homophobic country while DOMA still sits on the lawbooks.  Don't tell me that the United states doesn't advocate torture when you still have laws on the books that make waterboarding by american citizens legal.  Don't tell me that american instutions aren't afraid of science while textbooks used in public schools discuss creationism as a valid theory, but global climate change isn't mentioned.

i'm not anti american, i'm anti stupid. don't write me off as simply anti american until you can prove that one single thing i posted there isn't true.  Americans don't get to lead the world uncritically, especially if they're leading them off a cliff.

Good rant, GAT!
Besides, you need a gun to go to the supermarket. How else are you gonna bag that rump roast?

The only difference between a responsible gun carrier and an irresponsible one is a split second of misjudgement.

  

It should have read "UK" - but then again, no one ever accused me of being a great typist 

The only difference between a responsible gun carrier and an irresponsible one is a split second of misjudgement.

I have often said that all gun owners are law abiding, up until the moment they are not. And that is why I feel so strongly about reducing the weaponry across the nation until we solve the People + Guns = Danger for the rest of us.

I just wrote this out at another site.  It's the best I've ever done at really articulating my problem with private gun ownership.

I think there's more than one apples and oranges comparisons that gets made in the gun debate. People who have guns and want to keep them bring out individuals who own guns and handle them responsibly as examples of why gun ownership should not be demonized. They come up with examples of responsible gun use that protected people--like the one in the op. And individually, they aren't debatable. This girl handled herself well. She was calm, logical, practical, and protected herself and her baby in a home invasion that could have ended very badly. I don't think there's any way to naysay that--or anyone that would want to.

But the fact that one teenage mom with a gun used it responsibly to protect herself from a dangerous person does not in itself prove that individual gun ownership by the general public for private use makes sense as a public policy.

In order for legal individual gun ownership and especially handgun carrying in public to make sense as PUBLIC POLICY, it needs to be proven that the protection to the individual ON AVERAGE, STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANTLY is larger than the cost to public safety. And any study I've ever read on the subject does not play that out.

The benefits to the individual: A responsible and well trained individual could use a gun in the (STATISTICALLY RARE) occurance that they are challenged by a deadly dangerous (and that distinction is important. deadly dangerous is not the same thing as a pickpocket) individual to protect themselves.

The costs to society:

There are many more guns in use in general in society then their would be if individual ownership was more restricted or ended all together.
Society has to in general cope with these guns when they are --stolen
--bought legally by irresponsible people who were missed by the screening process.
--bought illegally by irresponsible people who just lie during the screening process
--go off accidentally
--are used in violent incidences by THE PERPETRATOR who gains control of the gun from the owner.
--are missused by responsible people who make that one bad or wrong decision
--are stored improperly and accessed by members of the household who are not responsible (or even adult in some cases).

I don't know if there are more responsible gun owners out there than irresponsible gun owners. I fully accept that responsible gun owners exist. In a perfect world where we could xray peoples souls and predict future behaviour, those people should be able to keep their guns. BUT WE CAN'T DO THAT. The american legal system has been demonstrably powerless and inadequate in controling both the legal and illegal distribution of these lethal weapons. And until someone comes up with a control process that actually prohibits handguns from reaching the people who have no business having them, then the only way to control their growing numbers is limit ownership to professionals like soldiers and police, and making the rest illegal.

And until someone comes up with a control process that actually prohibits handguns from reaching the people who have no business having them, then the only way to control their growing numbers is limit ownership to professionals like soldiers and police, and making the rest illegal.

It rather boils down to proving NEED vs WANT; especially with handguns.