I think it would be nice to talk about the victims and survivors. This was linked a few pages back, I thought I would post it.
Slain Israeli Professor Saved Others in Va. Tech Massacre
by Gil Ronen
(IsraelNN.com) As Israel observed Holocaust Day, thousands of miles away, A Rumanian-born Holocaust survivor gave his life in another senseless murder - and apparently in an act of heroism.
Among the 32 people killed by a lone gunman at Virginia Tech Monday is 77-year-old engineering professor, Liviu Librescu, a citizen of Israel. According to eyewitness accounts, Librescu ran to the door of his classroom and blocked it with his body ??? preventing the gunman from entering but getting shot to death himself as a result.
Alec Calhoun, a 20-year-old student who had been in Librescu's class in room 204, told a reporter that at 9:05 a.m. the heard screams and a loud banging sound from the next-door classroom. When the students realized it was gunfire, he said, some hid behind tables, and others leapt from the classroom's windows. Calhoun himself was among the last to jump. "Before I jumped from the window, I turned around and looked at the professor, who stayed behind, maybe to block the door. He had been killed."
Librescu is survived by his wife of 42 years, Marlena, who was with him in Virginia, and sons Aryeh and Joe who are in Israel. They intend to bury him in Israel.
Asael Arad, an Israeli student who visited the widow after the tragedy, told Army Radio Tuesday that Marlena had been receiving e-mails from students who credited Prof. Librescu with saving their lives. "I lost my best friend," the widow told a reporter for NRG at her home near the Blacksburg campus. "He was a great person, who loved teaching more than anything." Marlena said someone had initially informed her that her husband was injured in the shooting. "I looked for him in the hospitals all day but I didn't find him," she said.
The Librescus are Rumanian Jews who came on aliyah (immigrated to Israel) in 1978 ??? after then-Prime Minister Begin interceded on their behalf with the Rumanian government, according to Marlena. The couple went on a sabbatical to the United States since 1986 and has been living there ever since.
To my knowledge, most legal[/b]AKs are semi-automatic. They are more accurate than a shotgun. They have a faster firing rate than a shotgun. Just a few reasons...
Aks are not known for accuracy. On the other hand shotguns are known for not missing. If you want an automatic, or legal semi-automatic an American made M-16 would be far more accurate than the AK-47 which is not made for accuracy.
Shotguns are for ducks and quails. You have friends hunting birds with AKs? The only reason for this is to be a big yahoo.
I once asked a friend who owns many guns why he felt he needed them.
He said "If and when the day ever comes that our country is in total chaos due to attack or natural disaster you're either gonna be dead or begging me for one."
Yes, and the British army was the most powerful in the world at the time of the American revolution, yet a bunch of farmers with rifles managed to pull off a revolution (with a little help from the French).
Rifles had not yet been invented. They had muskets. The same technology the British had.
To my knowledge, most AKs are semi-automatic. They are more accurate than a shotgun. They have a faster firing rate than a shotgun. Just a few reasons...
What you hunt with shotguns you wouldn't hunt with a rifle. Generally, shot guns are for birds and small game, rifles for larger game like deer, bear, and so on. Based on my limited experience, I don't think much about hunting is 'sporting', but I do know deer hunters are pretty sensitive about the clean shot in the right place. You don't want to spray the buck with slugs from your assault rifle; you want to keep the meat intact for good eating. Also, any rifle is more accurate than a shotgun. You shoot little pellets and hope one hits your birdy (and not your hunting partner a la Cheney). Firing rate is not hugely important, either, unless you're really stoned and drunk or so bad a shot that you shouldn't be hunting in the first place (like me). I've never seen anyone around here with a semi but they can still squeeze two or three shots in 15 seconds or so).
My guess is that hunters with assault rifles have watched Platoon too many times and wish they were trying to ambush Charlie instead of bamby.
Explain to me how you arming the people is going to be a constructive opposition to some hypothetical despotic regime. Seriously, what do you see going down? I can't fathom how whatever you envision, even if feasible, is a better option than changing the system from within.
Explain "changing the system from within".
Seriously Danno, the fact that a great majority of Americans are already armed is a good a deterrent to any prospective totalitarian regime that I can think of. No matter how unlikely. And no, I'm not shaking in my militia boots, hiding in the hills of Montana waiting for the New World Order to appear on the horizon. But not for nothing, the Third Reich was not that long ago either. And history does have a funny way of repeating itself every few generations. Call me a reactionary, but let me put it to you like this... Do you think Cambodia would've lost a third of their population under Pol Pot if the citizenry had equal access to arms with the Khmer Rouge? Would Castro's regime still be hanging on to life if the populous of Cuba was allowed to carry arms? Serious questions.
I see your point, but I'm not convinced. Didn't the Nazis impose themselves on Weimar Germany? I believe normative history holds that a good portion of Germany was comfortable with Nazism.
I don't see armed rebellion as especially constructive. Yes, Castro brought down a brutal regime, but he simply replaced it with his own. What makes you think another armed rebellion would be different? I don't trust an armed mob to represent the best interests of my country (or me). Armed mobs are not known for restraint, common sense, and commitment to good governance. Do you want Charlton Heston and the NRA shooting their way to power? I'll take an Orange Revolution over the Cuban Revolution any day.
I'll fight for the rule of law to keep proverbial Nazis out of power rather than head to the bar, tell the boys to get their guns, and start shooting for change.
I would have thought that many Germans would have been armed at the time anyway.
The threats always there, but governments using brute force as a form of control, is very much a last resort these days. Maybe even antiquated, in some ways. Take China for instance. Ok the government crushed a rebellion violently, but what really brought about social change, was the introduction of capitalistic ideals, and the resulting apathy of the people.
The theory, that being armed = being free, is one that America has exported to many places throughout the world, and look how its turn out for most of them.
Yes, and the British army was the most powerful in the world at the time of the American revolution, yet a bunch of farmers with rifles managed to pull off a revolution (with a little help from the French).
Rifles had not yet been invented. They had muskets. The same technology the British had. Yes, I misspoke. Actually rifling had been invented, though, it was simply too expensive to manufacture rifled barrels en masse at that time.
The theory, that being armed = being free, is one that America has exported to many place throughout the world, and look how its turn out for most of them.
You really seem to have a tendency to over-simplify things.
Being armed does not equal being free. And we're not talking about one guy with a gun when discussing whether guns should be legal. And we're not talking about some hypothetical army fighting some other hypothetical army when we're talking about revolution.
And as for exporting the idea of armed revolution, which you seem to think America invented? It's a means, not an end. What people do with it depends entirely on their own goals.
To my knowledge, most AKs are semi-automatic. They are more accurate than a shotgun. They have a faster firing rate than a shotgun. Just a few reasons...
What you hunt with shotguns you wouldn't hunt with a rifle. Generally, shot guns are for birds and small game, rifles for larger game like deer, bear, and so on. Based on my limited experience, I don't think much about hunting is 'sporting', but I do know deer hunters are pretty sensitive about the clean shot in the right place. You don't want to spray the buck with slugs from your assault rifle; you want to keep the meat intact for good eating. Also, any rifle is more accurate than a shotgun. You shoot little pellets and hope one hits your birdy (and not your hunting partner a la Cheney). Firing rate is not hugely important, either, unless you're really stoned and drunk or so bad a shot that you shouldn't be hunting in the first place (like me). I've never seen anyone around here with a semi but they can still squeeze two or three shots in 15 seconds or so).
My guess is that hunters with assault rifles have watched Platoon too many times and wish they were trying to ambush Charlie instead of bamby.
My cousin uses a 30 aught 6 for deer hunting. I know people who use shotguns, too.
When you're in a tree stand, the accuracy of an AK is not a problem. Also, if you're shooting for the heart -- behind the front leg -- putting a few bullet holes in that area isn't necessarily a bad thing since since your steaks and roasts are in the rear.
Again, just a few reasons. These hunters have a preference for AKs for some reason. Truth be told, I woulnd't use one (not like I have a desire to kill deer), but they're law-abiding, responsible people, so I see no problem with them using it for hunting.
To my knowledge, most AKs are semi-automatic. They are more accurate than a shotgun. They have a faster firing rate than a shotgun. Just a few reasons...
What you hunt with shotguns you wouldn't hunt with a rifle. Generally, shot guns are for birds and small game, rifles for larger game like deer, bear, and so on. Based on my limited experience, I don't think much about hunting is 'sporting', but I do know deer hunters are pretty sensitive about the clean shot in the right place. You don't want to spray the buck with slugs from your assault rifle; you want to keep the meat intact for good eating. Also, any rifle is more accurate than a shotgun. You shoot little pellets and hope one hits your birdy (and not your hunting partner a la Cheney). Firing rate is not hugely important, either, unless you're really stoned and drunk or so bad a shot that you shouldn't be hunting in the first place (like me). I've never seen anyone around here with a semi but they can still squeeze two or three shots in 15 seconds or so).
My guess is that hunters with assault rifles have watched Platoon too many times and wish they were trying to ambush Charlie instead of bamby.
My cousin uses a 30 aught 6 for deer hunting. I know people who use shotguns, too.
When you're in a tree stand, the accuracy of an AK is not a problem. Also, if you're shooting for the heart -- behind the front leg -- putting a few bullet holes in that area isn't necessarily a bad thing since since your steaks and roasts are in the rear.
Again, just a few reasons. These hunters have a preference for AKs for some reason. Truth be told, I woulnd't use one (not like I have a desire to kill deer), but they're law-abiding, responsible people, so I see no problem with them using it for hunting.
I find it hard to believe that they are law-abiding or reponsible or people, but their friends so what can I say.
I did a quick web search on hunting with AK-47s. All the hunting sites and fourms agree that it would be stupid and meaningless.
I did find the reason why someone would want to hunt with one. John Kerry famously said that he likes to hunt but he would never hunt with an AK-47. I think your law-abiding, responsible people are using one just because Kerry said he wouldn't.
I find it hard to believe that they are law-abiding or reponsible or people, but their friends so what can I say.
I did a quick web search on hunting with AK-47s. All the hunting sites and fourms agree that it would be stupid and meaningless.
I did find the reason why someone would want to hunt with one. John Kerry famously said that he likes to hunt but he would never hunt with an AK-47. I think your law-abiding, responsible people are using one just because Kerry said he wouldn't.
unreal, i guess law-abiding & responsible people are above owning ak's
He ain't talking about owning them. He's talking about hunting with them.
AKs were designed for a specific purpose. It werent shooting deer.
Frankly I think he made up the part about knowing people who hunt with them. Got called on it, but wont back down. I looked to try to find someone on the web upping AKs as hunting rifles and couldn't find them.
I find it hard to believe that they are law-abiding or reponsible or people, but their friends so what can I say.
I did a quick web search on hunting with AK-47s. All the hunting sites and fourms agree that it would be stupid and meaningless.
I did find the reason why someone would want to hunt with one. John Kerry famously said that he likes to hunt but he would never hunt with an AK-47. I think your law-abiding, responsible people are using one just because Kerry said he wouldn't.
unreal, i guess law-abiding & responsible people are above owning ak's
He ain't talking about owning them. He's talking about hunting with them.
AKs were designed for a specific purpose. It werent shooting deer.
Frankly I think he made up the part about knowing people who hunt with them. Got called on it, but wont back down. I looked to try to find someone on the web upping AKs as hunting rifles and couldn't find them.
Just because some people on your various message boards aren't upping AKs for hunting doesn't mean people don't use them. This should be common sense.
The theory, that being armed = being free, is one that America has exported to many place throughout the world, and look how its turn out for most of them.
You really seem to have a tendency to over-simplify things.
Being armed does not equal being free. And we're not talking about one guy with a gun when discussing whether guns should be legal. And we're not talking about some hypothetical army fighting some other hypothetical army when we're talking about revolution.
And as for exporting the idea of armed revolution, which you seem to think America invented? It's a means, not an end. What people do with it depends entirely on their own goals.
You really need to chill. I don't even know where to begin with the the nonsense you wrote. One thing's for sure, you were never going to agree with anything I write in response. Go back to baiting the Canadians for paying lips sevice to the Queen..
I don't even know where to begin with the the nonsense you wrote. One thing's for sure, you were never going to agree with anything I write in response. Go back to baiting the Canadians for paying lips sevice to the Queen..
You're probably right. We seem to be coming at this from opposite sides. Let's dead this then.
As many have already brought up I think this more of a cultural issue rather than a guns vs no guns, black and white issue.
Coming from Australia I just don???t understand the American fascination with guns. Most people in this country would have never seen a gun in the flesh (other than the ones some police carry), let alone held one, let alone actually shot one. In my city of four million people, if someone gets shot it leads the news ??? even if they shot themselves in the foot by accident. There would be less than 5 people a year purposely shot here in any given year, and most of them are underworld gangsters shooting each other. If someone gets shot dead it is BIG news.
We have had a massacre here before, 35 killed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre) and a few years back there was a shooting at my university where two people were killed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting). On both occasions this lead to a tightening of the gun laws. On the first occasion automatic and semi-automatic weapons were outlawed, and there was a buy back of these weapons; and on the second occasion the banning of certain types of handguns and again a buy back. Both sides of politics and a vast majority of the population support these moves.
While my understanding of the gun laws in this country isn???t comprehensive ??? as I???ve never had a need for a gun ??? I do know that the process for procuring a firearm is quite rigorous. For starters everyone has to have a licence. In order to get that license you have to do a training course on firearm safely and laws, they do a comprehensive character check on you and there is an extended ???cooling off??? period before you can buy a gun. If you have a criminal record you can???t get a firearm. In most circumstances (some farmers are excluded I believe) you have to be a member of a shooting club, and actually go shooting at the club on a regular basis in order to retain your licence (because why do you have a gun if your not hunting/target shooting with it?). Gun storage is also a big part of the law, you have to ensure you gun is securely locked away when you???re not using it. If someone breaks into your house and steals your gun because it wasn???t locked up properly you are really really in the shit. You can???t get a licence to conceal a weapon (unless you are some law enforcement type), and if you got caught with a concealed weapon you would probably do some time in the klink. Above anything else it costs you a fucking packet to get the licence.
Given this, I don???t feel threatened by the fact the government is armed, and the people aren???t. Should the rule of the government become unacceptable to the people, they people will take action; be it democratic or revolutionary. The fact is that if the people have the will they shall prevail ??? violently or non-violently, armed or poorly armed. History has shown this on plenty of occasions. Nor do I feel like I need a gun to protect myself, the chances of anyone pulling a gun on you ??? be it a burglary or a bar room fight ??? are almost zero. I couldn???t think of anything worse than having to carry a gun to protect me from everyone else who is carrying a gun, what kind of way to live is that?
While I agree that you can never eliminate every gun from the streets, and if you wanted to here you could probably acquire one illegally (although you would have to have some serious criminal connections to get anything high-powered). But in my opinion the value of legislation like this isn???t in the restrictions is places on guns, it is the influence it has on a ???gun culture???. Because it is going to take 6 months and cost $700+ before you are even allowed to buy a gun, most people don???t even consider it; and given that most people are law abiding citizens they don???t consider acquiring a gun illegally. Therefore you don???t have many households with guns in them, which means you don???t have many kids growing up around guns. Hence you have no gun culture. In fact if you own a gun in urban Australia, you are seen to some extent as a bit of a weirdo.
While obviously there are so many guns in the US at the moment and that the culture is so far entrenched into the American psyche it is going to be difficult and very slow to change. Add to that the fact the gun laws aren???t the only contributing factor to the gun culture and you have a very difficult situation. But what I do think is that tightly legislated and rigorously enforced gun control laws would ??? in the longer term ??? be very effective in combating this culture for the reasons I have stated above as to why it works here.
Wow, that ended up much longer than I though. I should probably get back to doing some work???
further to what DrBorisQ wrote, the absence of guns from society at large in this part of the world is a blessing beyond comprehension .. there are probably more than 5 shootings a year in Melbourne but not that many more .. I think its safe to say that the general populace here is totally bewildered by the proliferation of guns in America and the seemingly very pro-gun culture there
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
Part of the problem is that the more guns in society only justifies the accumulation of more guns in society. If you're scared that there's thousands of folks around you with guns, you're more likely to think you need a gun to stay safe.
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
The irony of this is plain astounding, but lets not get into it - with my post I wasn't telling you or your country what to do, merely conveying the sentiment which prevails in this part of the world in relation to guns
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
I'm not having a go at the U.S, I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. Just observing how it works here, and hypothesizing as to what might apply in the (somewhat culturally similar) United States.
I think the death spiral point is spot on. That is something that is very difficult to combat - see nuclear proliferation as an example...
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
No other nation can tell the USA what to do, and you're right situations are always different and each nation needs to consider a variety of factors that another nation might not.
But history is littered with cultures and peoples learning from and adapting or adopting ideas developed by other nations and other peoples. So to just ignore the opinions of others on the basis that things are just "different" and they always will be appears pretty closed minded.
No one is saying they are right and you are wrong.
I for one, enjoy reading all of your opinions because they give me an insight into the culture and politics of a nation that isn't my own.
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
No other nation can tell the USA what to do, and you're right situations are always different and each nation needs to consider a variety of factors that another nation might not.
But history is littered with cultures and peoples learning from and adapting or adopting ideas developed by other nations and other peoples. So to just ignore the opinions of others on the basis that things are just "different" and they always will be appears pretty closed minded.
No one is saying they are right and you are wrong.
I for one, enjoy reading all of your opinions because they give me an insight into the culture and politics of a nation that isn't my own.
In retrospect, I overreacted, and learning from others new methodology and culture is a part of me. I just get irritated when people play the "we're so much more civilized than you" card (not pointing at any of you guys in this thread) because it is a bullshit move and a bunk play for the opinions I expressed previously. Peace and love T.N.
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues.
I'm amazed at the number of people who are comfortable doing that, not particularly on this issue, but on many issues.
Guns are just a small part of what goes on in a place like Philly and other U.S. cities.
You don't JUST not have guns "down under", but you also don't have the drug problem, poverty problem, gang problem and all the history that would allow these things to exist..
Telling us how safe 4 million people in Australia are because they don't have guns doesn't, and can't, relate in any way to life in the U.S.
I could tell you about the town I live in, where there hasn't been a murder in 10 years, and it would mean about as much as gun control in Australia.
As nations, we should help and respect other countries, but I am growing tired of citizens of other nations telling us how to run things in the U.S. You do it your way, we'll do it ours. If we're "wrong," we'll figure it out in the end. Different countries, different mores, different customs and different populations can't run their countries the same, thangs just don't work the same way around the world. Peace T.N.
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment (properly fix)[/b] the state of other countries politics or social issues. Word[/b]
I'm amazed at the number of people who are comfortable doing that, not particularly on this issue, but on many issues.
Guns are just a small part of what goes on in a place like Philly and other U.S. cities.
You don't JUST only not have guns down under, but you also don't have the drug problem, poverty problem, gang problem and all the history that would allow these things to exist.. Not to the extent that the US, but it's there. [/b]
Telling us how safe 4 million people in Australia are because they don't have guns doesn't, and can't, relate in any way to life in the U.S.---> Double True[/b]
I could tell you about the town I live in, where there hasn't been a murder in 10 years, and it would mean about as much as gun control in Australia.
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues.
I'm amazed at the number of people who are comfortable doing that, not particularly on this issue, but on many issues.
and yet
You don't JUST only not have guns down under, but you also don't have the drug problem, poverty problem, gang problem and all the history that would allow these things to exist..
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues. hey its not about being rude or intrusive, what do you think happens on the news everyday in every country across the world?
A. people making comments on the state of other countries poltics and or social issues.
I could tell you about the town I live in, where there hasn't been a murder in 10 years, and it would mean about as much as gun control in Australia.
you can say what ever you want, as you have been doing because this is a public message board on the world wide web where a variety of peoples opinions on a variety of different issues should be welcome and encouraged.
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues.
I'm amazed at the number of people who are comfortable doing that, not particularly on this issue, but on many issues.
and yet
You don't JUST only not have guns down under, but you also don't have the drug problem, poverty problem, gang problem and all the history that would allow these things to exist..
Until the esteemed Doctor's post I had no idea that large parts of Australia were gun free and that crime was scarce.
I can't name a politician, a law or a political issue in Australia that I would attempt to speak on, as I have no knowledge and less interest.
If you think that somehow by taking a fellow Aussie at his word, and repeating his attitude in my post, that I've contradicted myself. So be it.
Comments
Slain Israeli Professor Saved Others in Va. Tech Massacre
by Gil Ronen
(IsraelNN.com) As Israel observed Holocaust Day, thousands of miles away, A Rumanian-born Holocaust survivor gave his life in another senseless murder - and apparently in an act of heroism.
Among the 32 people killed by a lone gunman at Virginia Tech Monday is 77-year-old engineering professor, Liviu Librescu, a citizen of Israel. According to eyewitness accounts, Librescu ran to the door of his classroom and blocked it with his body ??? preventing the gunman from entering but getting shot to death himself as a result.
Alec Calhoun, a 20-year-old student who had been in Librescu's class in room 204, told a reporter that at 9:05 a.m. the heard screams and a loud banging sound from the next-door classroom. When the students realized it was gunfire, he said, some hid behind tables, and others leapt from the classroom's windows. Calhoun himself was among the last to jump. "Before I jumped from the window, I turned around and looked at the professor, who stayed behind, maybe to block the door. He had been killed."
Librescu is survived by his wife of 42 years, Marlena, who was with him in Virginia, and sons Aryeh and Joe who are in Israel. They intend to bury him in Israel.
Asael Arad, an Israeli student who visited the widow after the tragedy, told Army Radio Tuesday that Marlena had been receiving e-mails from students who credited Prof. Librescu with saving their lives. "I lost my best friend," the widow told a reporter for NRG at her home near the Blacksburg campus. "He was a great person, who loved teaching more than anything." Marlena said someone had initially informed her that her husband was injured in the shooting. "I looked for him in the hospitals all day but I didn't find him," she said.
The Librescus are Rumanian Jews who came on aliyah (immigrated to Israel) in 1978 ??? after then-Prime Minister Begin interceded on their behalf with the Rumanian government, according to Marlena. The couple went on a sabbatical to the United States since 1986 and has been living there ever since.
Aks are not known for accuracy. On the other hand shotguns are known for not missing. If you want an automatic, or legal semi-automatic an American made M-16 would be far more accurate than the AK-47 which is not made for accuracy.
Shotguns are for ducks and quails. You have friends hunting birds with AKs? The only reason for this is to be a big yahoo.
He said "If and when the day ever comes that our country is in total chaos due to attack or natural disaster you're either gonna be dead or begging me for one."
Yes, and the British army was the most powerful in the world at the time of the American revolution, yet a bunch of farmers with rifles managed to pull off a revolution (with a little help from the French).
Rifles had not yet been invented. They had muskets. The same technology the British had.
What you hunt with shotguns you wouldn't hunt with a rifle. Generally, shot guns are for birds and small game, rifles for larger game like deer, bear, and so on. Based on my limited experience, I don't think much about hunting is 'sporting', but I do know deer hunters are pretty sensitive about the clean shot in the right place. You don't want to spray the buck with slugs from your assault rifle; you want to keep the meat intact for good eating. Also, any rifle is more accurate than a shotgun. You shoot little pellets and hope one hits your birdy (and not your hunting partner a la Cheney). Firing rate is not hugely important, either, unless you're really stoned and drunk or so bad a shot that you shouldn't be hunting in the first place (like me). I've never seen anyone around here with a semi but they can still squeeze two or three shots in 15 seconds or so).
My guess is that hunters with assault rifles have watched Platoon too many times and wish they were trying to ambush Charlie instead of bamby.
I would have thought that many Germans would have been armed at the time anyway.
The threats always there, but governments using brute force as a form of control, is very much a last resort these days. Maybe even antiquated, in some ways.
Take China for instance. Ok the government crushed a rebellion violently, but what really brought about social change, was the introduction of capitalistic ideals, and the resulting apathy of the people.
The theory, that being armed = being free, is one that America has exported to many places throughout the world, and look how its turn out for most of them.
Rifles had not yet been invented. They had muskets. The same technology the British had.
Yes, I misspoke. Actually rifling had been invented, though, it was simply too expensive to manufacture rifled barrels en masse at that time.
But that's neither here nor there.
You really seem to have a tendency to over-simplify things.
Being armed does not equal being free. And we're not talking about one guy with a gun when discussing whether guns should be legal. And we're not talking about some hypothetical army fighting some other hypothetical army when we're talking about revolution.
And as for exporting the idea of armed revolution, which you seem to think America invented? It's a means, not an end. What people do with it depends entirely on their own goals.
My cousin uses a 30 aught 6 for deer hunting. I know people who use shotguns, too.
When you're in a tree stand, the accuracy of an AK is not a problem. Also, if you're shooting for the heart -- behind the front leg -- putting a few bullet holes in that area isn't necessarily a bad thing since since your steaks and roasts are in the rear.
Again, just a few reasons. These hunters have a preference for AKs for some reason. Truth be told, I woulnd't use one (not like I have a desire to kill deer), but they're law-abiding, responsible people, so I see no problem with them using it for hunting.
I find it hard to believe that they are law-abiding or reponsible or people, but their friends so what can I say.
I did a quick web search on hunting with AK-47s. All the hunting sites and fourms agree that it would be stupid and meaningless.
I did find the reason why someone would want to hunt with one. John Kerry famously said that he likes to hunt but he would never hunt with an AK-47. I think your law-abiding, responsible people are using one just because Kerry said he wouldn't.
He ain't talking about owning them. He's talking about hunting with them.
AKs were designed for a specific purpose. It werent shooting deer.
Frankly I think he made up the part about knowing people who hunt with them. Got called on it, but wont back down. I looked to try to find someone on the web upping AKs as hunting rifles and couldn't find them.
Just because some people on your various message boards aren't upping AKs for hunting doesn't mean people don't use them. This should be common sense.
You really need to chill.
I don't even know where to begin with the the nonsense you wrote. One thing's for sure, you were never going to agree with anything I write in response.
Go back to baiting the Canadians for paying lips sevice to the Queen..
You're probably right. We seem to be coming at this from opposite sides. Let's dead this then.
As many have already brought up I think this more of a cultural issue rather than a guns vs no guns, black and white issue.
Coming from Australia I just don???t understand the American fascination with guns. Most people in this country would have never seen a gun in the flesh (other than the ones some police carry), let alone held one, let alone actually shot one. In my city of four million people, if someone gets shot it leads the news ??? even if they shot themselves in the foot by accident. There would be less than 5 people a year purposely shot here in any given year, and most of them are underworld gangsters shooting each other. If someone gets shot dead it is BIG news.
We have had a massacre here before, 35 killed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre) and a few years back there was a shooting at my university where two people were killed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting). On both occasions this lead to a tightening of the gun laws. On the first occasion automatic and semi-automatic weapons were outlawed, and there was a buy back of these weapons; and on the second occasion the banning of certain types of handguns and again a buy back. Both sides of politics and a vast majority of the population support these moves.
While my understanding of the gun laws in this country isn???t comprehensive ??? as I???ve never had a need for a gun ??? I do know that the process for procuring a firearm is quite rigorous. For starters everyone has to have a licence. In order to get that license you have to do a training course on firearm safely and laws, they do a comprehensive character check on you and there is an extended ???cooling off??? period before you can buy a gun. If you have a criminal record you can???t get a firearm. In most circumstances (some farmers are excluded I believe) you have to be a member of a shooting club, and actually go shooting at the club on a regular basis in order to retain your licence (because why do you have a gun if your not hunting/target shooting with it?). Gun storage is also a big part of the law, you have to ensure you gun is securely locked away when you???re not using it. If someone breaks into your house and steals your gun because it wasn???t locked up properly you are really really in the shit. You can???t get a licence to conceal a weapon (unless you are some law enforcement type), and if you got caught with a concealed weapon you would probably do some time in the klink. Above anything else it costs you a fucking packet to get the licence.
Given this, I don???t feel threatened by the fact the government is armed, and the people aren???t. Should the rule of the government become unacceptable to the people, they people will take action; be it democratic or revolutionary. The fact is that if the people have the will they shall prevail ??? violently or non-violently, armed or poorly armed. History has shown this on plenty of occasions. Nor do I feel like I need a gun to protect myself, the chances of anyone pulling a gun on you ??? be it a burglary or a bar room fight ??? are almost zero. I couldn???t think of anything worse than having to carry a gun to protect me from everyone else who is carrying a gun, what kind of way to live is that?
While I agree that you can never eliminate every gun from the streets, and if you wanted to here you could probably acquire one illegally (although you would have to have some serious criminal connections to get anything high-powered). But in my opinion the value of legislation like this isn???t in the restrictions is places on guns, it is the influence it has on a ???gun culture???. Because it is going to take 6 months and cost $700+ before you are even allowed to buy a gun, most people don???t even consider it; and given that most people are law abiding citizens they don???t consider acquiring a gun illegally. Therefore you don???t have many households with guns in them, which means you don???t have many kids growing up around guns. Hence you have no gun culture. In fact if you own a gun in urban Australia, you are seen to some extent as a bit of a weirdo.
While obviously there are so many guns in the US at the moment and that the culture is so far entrenched into the American psyche it is going to be difficult and very slow to change. Add to that the fact the gun laws aren???t the only contributing factor to the gun culture and you have a very difficult situation. But what I do think is that tightly legislated and rigorously enforced gun control laws would ??? in the longer term ??? be very effective in combating this culture for the reasons I have stated above as to why it works here.
Wow, that ended up much longer than I though. I should probably get back to doing some work???
Peace
T.N.
It's a death spiral.
The irony of this is plain astounding, but lets not get into it - with my post I wasn't telling you or your country what to do, merely conveying the sentiment which prevails in this part of the world in relation to guns
I'm not having a go at the U.S, I'm not telling anyone how to do anything. Just observing how it works here, and hypothesizing as to what might apply in the (somewhat culturally similar) United States.
I think the death spiral point is spot on. That is something that is very difficult to combat - see nuclear proliferation as an example...
No other nation can tell the USA what to do, and you're right situations are always different and each nation needs to consider a variety of factors that another nation might not.
But history is littered with cultures and peoples learning from and adapting or adopting ideas developed by other nations and other peoples. So to just ignore the opinions of others on the basis that things are just "different" and they always will be appears pretty closed minded.
No one is saying they are right and you are wrong.
I for one, enjoy reading all of your opinions because they give me an insight into the culture and politics of a nation that isn't my own.
In retrospect, I overreacted, and learning from others new methodology and culture is a part of me. I just get irritated when people play the "we're so much more civilized than you" card (not pointing at any of you guys in this thread) because it is a bullshit move and a bunk play for the opinions I expressed previously.
Peace and love
T.N.
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues.
I'm amazed at the number of people who are comfortable doing that, not particularly on this issue, but on many issues.
Guns are just a small part of what goes on in a place like Philly and other U.S. cities.
You don't JUST not have guns "down under", but you also don't have the drug problem, poverty problem, gang problem and all the history that would allow these things to exist..
Telling us how safe 4 million people in Australia are because they don't have guns doesn't, and can't, relate in any way to life in the U.S.
I could tell you about the town I live in, where there hasn't been a murder in 10 years, and it would mean about as much as gun control in Australia.
and yet
Ah yes, nationalism and a feeling of cultural
superiority are uniquely American traits ... NOT
I wouldn't attempt, or even really understand how to comment on the state of other countries politics or social issues.
hey its not about being rude or intrusive,
what do you think happens on the news everyday in every country across the world?
A. people making comments on the state of other countries poltics and or social issues.
you can say what ever you want, as you have been doing because this is a public message board on the world wide web where a variety of peoples opinions on a variety of different issues should be welcome and encouraged.
Until the esteemed Doctor's post I had no idea that large parts of Australia were gun free and that crime was scarce.
I can't name a politician, a law or a political issue in Australia that I would attempt to speak on, as I have no knowledge and less interest.
If you think that somehow by taking a fellow Aussie at his word, and repeating his attitude in my post, that I've contradicted myself. So be it.