[bootlegga]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Wouldn't really want to live in a society or a country that seems to require that everybody be heavily armed all of the time either. Not needing to be armed seems to me to be the hallmark of a civilized society.

[ShepherdsDog]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

raydan raydan:

All they need now is for an armed teacher to go a bit crazy and then the headline will be, "South Dakota to allow students to have guns".

Up until the 1970's it was perfectly fine for kids to have guns at school. Many high schools in the USA had their own firing ranges and the Boy Scouts had a marksmanship merit badge. It was also not unusual for high school kids to have shotguns and rifles in their trucks so they could go hunting before or after school.

My father-in-law recalled that in Woodland in the 1930's there were a number of kids who brought firearms to elementary school for shooting classes.

With all of that hardware at the schools there were no massacres, no kids killing each other, and no one wet themselves at the thought of kids with guns at school.

It's somewhat hypocritical, then, that some people do not want kids to be taught firearms safety like they used to be but then they'll insist that five year olds need to be taught sex education because ignorance is dangerous.

We have firearms in the world. Deal with it. Teaching the kids about these things and showing them examples of responsible people, such as teachers, who are trained to use their firearms properly is not irresponsible.

There was no sense of threat(real or imagined) then like there is today. People used firearms for hunting and sport not because they felt like they needed to be armed against everybody else. It's the paranoia that has changed everything.

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Wouldn't really want to live in a society or a country that seems to require that everybody be heavily armed all of the time either. Not needing to be armed seems to me to be the hallmark of a civilized society.

No one needed to be armed in the Soviet Union. It was very civilized.

[raydan]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

There was no sense of threat(real or imagined) then like there is today. People used firearms for hunting and sport not because they felt like they needed to be armed against everybody else. It's the paranoia that has changed everything.

There's a sense of threat and paranoia today because there are less guns... come on Shep, try to keep up.

[ShepherdsDog]

Guns didn't bring down the Soviet Empire or the Berlin Wall either

[Thanos]

I'm pretty sure that all these issues now are 100% political and have nothing to do anymore with public safety, legitimate, or responsible firearms ownership. It's not the firearms that are the problem, it's the reasons that people are buying them for and the psychological environment that they're buying them in that are the problems.

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

There was no sense of threat(real or imagined) then like there is today. People used firearms for hunting and sport not because they felt like they needed to be armed against everybody else. It's the paranoia that has changed everything.

Then educating people to assuage their 'paranoia' would make sense, wouldn't it?

[raydan]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

No one needed to be armed in the Soviet Union. It was very civilized.

You saying that Canada is less civilized than the USA because we have less guns?

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Guns didn't bring down the Soviet Empire or the Berlin Wall either

That's really ignorant and really insulting to every Cold War era veteran who knows better.

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

You saying that Canada is less civilized than the USA because we have less guns?

No, but apparently you are.

[ShepherdsDog]

I own several including a 'few' old Chinese SKS which I bought for $200 each. I bought them because I collect older firearms..target shoot..hunt..and they were on sale not because I was worried about my neighbours or the perceived threat of home invasion. For those contingencies big dogs with big teeth sufficed.

[raydan]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

raydan raydan:

You saying that Canada is less civilized than the USA because we have less guns?

No, but apparently you are.

How very civilized of you.

[raydan]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

I own several including a 'few' old Chinese SKS which I bought for $200 each. I bought the because I collect older firearms..target shoot..hunt..and they were on sale not because I was worried about my neighbours or the perceived threat of home invasion. For those contingencies big dogs with big teeth sufficed.

I have one of these...

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

I own several including a 'few' old Chinese SKS which I bought for $200 each. I bought the because I collect older firearms..target shoot..hunt..and they were on sale not because I was worried about my neighbours or the perceived threat of home invasion. For those contingencies big dogs with big teeth sufficed.

So you own AK-47 variants but have issues with gun rights?

[bootlegga]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

bootlegga bootlegga:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Wouldn't really want to live in a society or a country that seems to require that everybody be heavily armed all of the time either. Not needing to be armed seems to me to be the hallmark of a civilized society.

No one needed to be armed in the Soviet Union. It was very civilized.

The key word in Shep's point was heavily armed. When citizens start to feel the need to keep assault rifles and pistols with 30 round mags handy, there is something wrong with your society, whether or not you want to admit it.

However, if Americans want to live in their own domestic version of Baghdad, Bogota or Kabul, that is their prerogative.

Just don't expect large numbers of Canadians to support such paranoid delusions.