George wrote:
>
> On 7/17/2011 9:36 PM, Nad R wrote:
> > "Pete > wrote:
> >> "gloria.p" wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 7/17/2011 4:25 PM, Pete C. wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>>> When the second amendment
> >>>> was written it wasn't about "sporting" guns, or antique guns, it was
> >>>> about guns that were the then state of the art and defensive use was
> >>>> very much what was being considered.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> No, it was about being able to arm a MILITIA after the Revolution, but
> >>> you gun folk always leave that part out. It was never about a citizen
> >>> being able to walk down the street and blow someone's head off because
> >>> he felt vulnerable (or being given a bad deal by his drug dealer.)
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sorry, the Supreme Court doesn't agree with your interpretation of the
> >> second amendment. As for your wild west fantasy, that has never been
> >> reality. Concealed carry has been law in a great many states, including
> >> ones you probably don't expect, for literally decades and your fantasy
> >> of law abiding citizens having gunfights on the street have never
> >> materialized anywhere. Criminals and gangs have been known to have
> >> gunfights, but guess what, they can't legally have guns. Armed law
> >> abiding citizens have however successfully defended themselves against
> >> criminals many millions of times.
> >
> > In a democratic society do believe the majority should rule?
> >
> > If the two thirds majority of the people votes to put limits on the second
> > amendment. Would you still be a law abiding citizen?
> >
> > Crime is getting so high in this country, it would not surprise me to such
> > limits put in place. I will also be voting for the politicians that put in
> > those gun law restrictions.
> >
> Don't hold your breath. I was just over an old friends house the other
> day. Guy is left leaning and anti gun. We were watching the moon rise on
> their deck and he said "what kind of gun should I buy for personal
> defense in the house?" and "can I go shooting with you?" He is a well
> educated very sensible person

Yes, I know several folks who are quite left leaning and *used* to be
anti gun who now own guns. Similarly I helped introduce most of them to
guns once they expressed interest.

> who finally realized the usual police
> involvement in a home invasion is to use that fancy chalk to outline the
> body(s).

No chalk outlines, never have been either, they would contaminate the
crime scene. They just take pictures, measurements, notes, samples, etc.

It is correct of course that the police do not protect the population
from such crimes, they only investigate the crimes after the fact and
try to track down the criminals. The victims are still
dead/raped/whatever.

> It is NOT the usual idea that some folks seem to have that
> there is an invisible police helicopter over their house that will
> immediately respond when there is a problem.

It's strange how some people will have smoke detectors and fire
extinguishers in their homes because they realize that the fire
department won't be there instantly in the event of an emergency, but
are blind to the fact that the police won't be there instantly either.

There was a case a couple years back just over the line in the next
state that made the local news here, a home invasion by a criminal armed
with a dreaded AK47 assault rifle. The criminal was shot and killed by
the homeowners, with one homeowner sustaining a minor wound to their arm
(treated by EMTs at the scene I believe, no hospital required).