Absolutely! Which given the radical difference in homicide statistics might suggest the following provocative solution: Ban private handguns south of said border, allow them north of it.

That might not be politically tenable, but it would probably save a lot of lives!

I am of the mindset if my government is armed, then so should the people. I don't want to live in a police state or a military ran nation. The people need to be able to defend them self against anyone who may do them harm, that includes the government.

Yup, that would be provocative.

We really do have a long and storied relationship with guns, and I am not just referring to the old west gun slingers.

Here's an historical review of some 20th century events where big business was taking extreme advantage of the coal miners, essentially enslaving them. The miners took up arms against the companies and a limited war followed.... organized labor forces against the companies. This was not a riot, more like a mini civil war over a period of time. Some believe this is where the term "redneck" came into being.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../coal-mine.htm

This is the classic example of big business power gone crazy and the sure to follow uprising of the masses. But, of course, we need our guns to effectively be able to rise up against our oppressors.

I agree, but I see the government as impotent. It's hands are tied by its own laws. The much greater threat comes from undemocratic dictatorial institutions bent on profit at any cost: your freedom, your health, your life, none of these matter to them.

The government is a big business. I dislike both our parties. I do like to go see who is contributing to who and how much money is being tossed around. It is ridiculous, and so is this damn stimulus thing.

Even the NRA is a business. 200 million dollar a year non profit business. They donate less than 1% of their 200 million dollars a year to politicians. They donate several million dollars here and there to court cases. They spend lots on mass media. The rest goes into their pockets. It is a sad shame that I have to pay money to an organization ran like a big business to defend my fellow citizen's rights to bear arms. So why would the NRA want to abolish gun control? Then they would no longer be needed and maybe lose their 200 million dollar a year business.

I don't want to get too off topic here though, since this is about the castle doctrine.

But the castle doctrine is about business! It's about the gun lobby, attorney's, and probably a few other businesses either making money or increasing their political power. This is not the kind of thing that ordinary people have an interest in making into a big issue. It's like saying that the government is responsible for making mortgages too easy to get: it just doesn't happen that way! There needs to be at least one powerful lobby to make it happen, and that powerful lobby is almost always about money.

Yeah but this is about the ethics and morals of the castle doctrine, not necessarily the driving force behind it. I agree that the pro gun lobby is probably at hand with legislation like this, but I actually tend to agree with it.

Well I agree with being able to defend yourself, but I have a moral problem with being hoodwinked into supporting the NRA's political agenda.

I think the notion of "being armed to defend yourself against the government" is most peculiar -- and, unfortunately, very American.

Well now, let’s see... If there was a showdown between the US government and its citizens, the most likely insurgents would be your various and sundry militias. Very comforting thought! :eek: Is there any one of them that you would care to have running the country?

Isn’t it better to elect politicians that will ensure a well-run government, rather than a collection of politicians that, essentially, purport to be against government?

.

Not that simple, and in the USA we only have one political party. They are a bunch of fat cats that keep their other fat cat friends rich. It truly is more of an oligarchy than anything. Why do you think they control and take such stances. Both of them create more government just in more ways and both of them pick and our rights as individuals.

They use what I call the three pillars of politics and their sub categories, which are: Religion, Pro Life/Choice, and gun control. Each party plays into that demographic in one way or another, and then the opposite party makes money off of it.

One example is the NRA. Do you think the NRA wants to abolish all gun control? Why would they? They make 200 million dollars a year fighting gun control, and spend less than 1% (around a million dollars) in endorsing politicians. So, when people who want their gun rights reserved join the NRA are they really helping the politicians they want in office get elected? Is 1 million dollars enough to lobby in the USA government?

Our founding fathers set us up a Republic (not a democracy, people get those confused), a Republic that allowed us to give ourselves freedoms. Pretty radical at the time actually when it was conceived. They had just got done dealing with a Tyranical government them self. They knew 2 things needed to happen to keep their independence, that there needed to be a standing malitia to guard the republic (our military) and that the people could keep the right to bear arms so the government could not control and oppress them. Many refugees from England came to Americas because of the Glorious revolution where the King disarmed them, then oppressed them. Hitler also took all the guns from citizens, and then marched into town and started taking all the jews and non germans and tossing them in camps. How could the people fight? Hitler had over 15 attempts on his life from his own people during his short reign.

Have we not learned from our past? Our fore fathers had no idea what technology would do to us, and do the military. Do I think that the citizens hold their own against the US military in a situation like I am talking about? Nope, but I do think that many military personnel would never fire at another American on American soil, even if ordered to.

During national disasters, like Katrina, where was the government? The local LEOs (law officers) came and grabbed guns leaving people defenseless and there was plenty of robbing and other crimes going on. The police were not there, they left to protect their own families. The rich who could afford private security had black water guards with machine guns guarding their properties. Their rights were infringed upon, and the government can not always be there to save you, and people are not nice, they are evil. So you may need to defend yourself.

I don't ever seen the USA ever falling into a situation where everyone is for them self unless something ungodly bad happens, and that bad would destroy parts if not most of the earth most likely. However, I do not feel my government can take care of me or protect me in a time of disaster. I know that some people by nature will take opportunities like that to commit crime, possibly try to harm people. I hold a right to protect myself, and I will exercise it.

So why don't I vote someone else in? Well, show me someone who is not a government fat cat, and maybe I will vote for them. Until that day happens I guess I will always just pick the lesser of two evils.

Seems like the last time we got into such a situation, the troops went home and fought for their states.... West Point graduates and all.

The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits using federal troops to enforce civil laws. But that's only a law... just a guideline. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne into Arkansas (not that I disagree with that decision... but hey, a law is a law, right?)

And the natl guard did fire on Kent State students.

I'm with TLarkin... society is a lot more fragile than most are willing to admit.

Military action was taken against the coal miners in West virgina as previously linked here.

We walk a fine line of communism, socialism, fascism, militarism and neoconservatism all the time. It only takes a few steps in one direction for the political system to turn in this country. We are this way because we are pretty much an amalgamation of many forms of government in one republic.

People don't realize and live in their own worlds thinking that the government can and will take care of them in a time of need.

Or even more foolishly, they think that if they give corporations all they ask for, Big Business will take care of them!

I think you nailed this, CWT. Not just as it applies to guns, but across the board. The biggest lobbies in our state are, based on number of dollars spent in the lobbying effort, are..... surprise.... our state universities and their association, hospital association, physicians association. Any surprise that state university tuition as well as appropriations to state universities has gone through the roof?

Even the seemingly "good guys" such as MADD or National "Name your Disease" Foundation are about money. And, like the NRA, they are going to create the appearance of a problem whether one exists or not.

How many years in a row can MADD toughen up the DWI laws? The DWI limit has gone from .15 when I was a kid to .1 to .07. Penalties have gone through the roof with fine increases every year, increased time drivers licenses are lost, to jail time, to felonies for multiple offenses.... and on and on. And, they are back again this year for even tougher laws.

(No, I don't oppose DWI laws and have never received a DWI.... but damn, it's to the point if you spill a drink on your shirt you are DWI.... crazy. It is obvious what they are doing... justifying their existence and raising money. And yes, people are already going to jail for DWIs and DWI accidents. How tough is tough enough?)

They are all (lobby by any other name) about money, and all about business. The "cause" is just the mechanism to get there.

It doesn't bother me that they're (name your group, but in this case we can use the NRA) about money as much as that people miss that fact and its enormous implications: First, they're never going to finish the job they claim to be doing, whether it's gun rights or the cure for some disease, because if they did, they'd be out of business. Second, they become powerful institutions whose goals are not in line with the welfare of the people they claim to represent. And most importantly, their power is a huge threat to all democracies because it eliminates proper representation. It's also terrible for the economy, because it gives corporate interests both the mechanisms and the political cover to manipulate markets.

This is the first time I think I have ever 100% fully agreed with you. Holy crap, the end must be near!:rolleyes::eek::D

I also like to tell people it is funny how research these days is more about fund raising for that research than it is research.

Then do you see that the Castle bill or anything else like it is not about protecting homeowner's/gun owner's or any other individual rights, but instead it's about consolidating and demonstrating the political will/power of the NRA for its benefit, regardless of how that affects its members and the rest of the country?

yeah but I also agree with it. If someone is illegally in my home and I defend myself I don't want them to have an inch to file a lawsuit on me. There are many cases of criminals filing lawsuits in those situations and I find it asinine. I also find almost all gun control laws asinine as well. I find some gun regulations needed and balanced.

I also see criminals using the castle doctrine to their advantage. Invite another person over you want to kill and kill them, then say they were illegally in your home. However, it also protects honest people. A good friend of mine is dating a lawyer and she has worked for both public defenders and DOJ. She tells me that many times a criminal will try to play the victim and say that the criminal and the person involved had a previous relationship, whatever it may be. That can then draw in things like premeditaiton. That is where it gets scary. They claim like, oh I sold him drugs and he owed me money, or he asked me to come hang out and then shot me, or whatever they claim. It does happen. It is a complicated subject there is no right or wrong answer for really because our system is set up in a complex manner that can go many different ways.

I don't have an answer for it either.

Neither do I, but I don't think the NRA does either. I see this as simply another wedge issue that political organizations use to manipulate the public. It's like gay marriage: If they really wanted to solve that, they'd make every wedding in government records a civil union. If you want a Marriage, you could get that at a church, but it shouldn't be recognized legally. Will they do that? No, because it can't be used and abused politically.

My last boss (when I was working) came to us from the Governor's staff... one day in private he explained this all to me. Quote.... "All things are politics."

Politicians believe this. It is a way of life.