Guns

Post Reply
bpatters
And got the T-shirt

Post   » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:17 pm


I grew up in the country. We had rifles and shotguns (double barrels were the most you could fire at once) for shooting snakes, predators, etc. A few people had old pistols, or ones they'd brought home for the army, but few had any ammunition for them. No one ever thought of needing a gun for protection.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:56 pm


I was in the country but we weren't raised with guns (though my brother reminded me they had some pellet guns and some of their friends did). I don't remember it being an issue either.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:49 pm


That reminds me. I did have a pair of Yancy Derringer cap guns of which I was very proud.

User avatar
JaneDoe

Post   » Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:48 am


Growing up in Northern Virginia, in the DC suburbs, some of the "big boys" (about ten years old) had BB guns. I remember one neighbour going WAY out into the country to shoot deer, which he offered to us and my girlfriend's dad TALKING about shooting deer. As far as I know none of the other adults in our neighbourhood owned guns, even for hunting. The father of one of my elementary school classmates was a Secret Service agent and there was (were?) a fair number of military families--not sure if any of them had guns in their homes.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Tue Oct 27, 2015 10:04 am


My dad was Air Force Reserve, but no guns in the house.

User avatar
lisam

Post   » Tue Oct 27, 2015 5:39 pm


Guns were no big issue for me while growing up. My dad was a Marine Reserve and knew how to shoot and about guns, but we didn't have any. Lots of relatives had hunting rifles, though.

When I was in my 20's I became interested in handguns and carried my own until my first son was born.

I've lived in suburbs around Seattle until the past 22 years we've lived in a rural area.

Erinspigs

Post   » Tue Oct 27, 2015 11:58 pm


Safe bet Jane, a Secret Service Agent had a gun(s) in house. Secret Service have other responsibilities other than providing security for dignitaries (lots of financial investigating, counterfeiting, etc) but I believe, they are required to carry their service weapon at all times , I think, even when off duty if not on their person at least within a number of moves . Often it’s 3 moves. For instance, 1 move could be glove box in car, 2nd could be locked glove box, 3rd could be holstered. I don’t know a lot about that sort of thing (I'm not old enough) but I’m pretty sure they are required to carry, or nearly carry. Most as I understand even carry after retiring and are one of the few law enforcements agencies that it’s just a matter of rubber stamping to be able to do so, as I think it should be. THey are about as hgihly trained as you wil find in firearm training.

There is a video of the presidential motorcade driving down Pennsylvania ave and the SUVs were in front and behind and a stupid kid raised and pointed a water pistol at the presidents car and you see a guy in the back of SUV dressed in jeans polo shirt out of know where pull up a CAR 15 a second away from taking the kid out. Thankfully he was that well trained.

User avatar
JaneDoe

Post   » Wed Oct 28, 2015 1:56 am


You're probably right, Erinspigs. Not sure exactly what the father's title was--this kid was not a friend of mine.

I'm an idiot--one morning on my way to work I almost T-boned a Secret Service car. The guy was very understanding and told me to get some sleep. Another time I nearly drove head-on into a motorcade in front of Vice President Biden’s house. As Monica said on Friends, "I'm that stupid."

User avatar
JaneDoe

Post   » Sun Nov 01, 2015 3:44 pm


In DC they're talking about cooling-off period for tattoos, as for guns or abortions. I have no problem with that, either: https://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2013/09/09/dc-tattoo-cooling-off-period

Erinspigs

Post   » Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:38 pm


Wait you mean you can’t just go get a tattoo if you wish, you have to wait? is that for minors? In the words of Maddy, sounds like rubbish to me.


And there has to be a cooling off period to have an abortions? So the big buffon hairdo people standing on the street corners can tell you how Jesus wants to you to keep the baby you were given having been raped by a schizophrenic, sociopath or phsychotiuc killer/rapist the week before and maybe that’s what you will bring into the world. Can’t have your own choice of finding a partner you love and admire their charcateristics characteristics to have a family with them. Has to be whatever your forced into eh.

SardonicSmile

Post   » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:07 am


A cooling off period for abortions is not a bad thing!

It works both ways. Not everybody is 'forcing' you to keep the baby, people can also 'force' you to get the abortion.

It is such a difficult decision that I think that a cooling off period, no matter how hard that period is, is a good thing.

I highly doubt that the main reason to opt for abortion is having been raped.

User avatar
lisam

Post   » Mon Nov 02, 2015 2:31 pm


A cooling off period for abortions IS a bad thing. It's not like a person who decides to get an abortion hasn't thought long and hard about it. It's not like you're out drinking with friends and say "Hey, let's go get abortions!".

I have plenty to say about this. Maybe it should have it's own thread.

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:49 pm


Not a bad idea. I am with you in feeling people are not cavalier about choosing an abortion. It should be the last choice (prevention the best) but it has to be an option.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:12 pm


That would be an interesting thread. As far as I'm concerned, the cooling off period for having an abortion is just one more obstacle put in the way by anti-abortionists. I think most people agonize over the decision.

Missouri Enacts 72-Hour Wait for Abortion:


"The bill, which will take effect next month, increases to 72 hours, from 24, the amount of time a woman must wait to undergo an abortion after first receiving counseling. It does not make exceptions for rape or incest. "

"Abortion rights supporters have argued that the law hampers women’s access to the procedure because they often have to travel far to have one, and the waiting period could force them to incur extra travel and lodging costs and perhaps take time off work. The only clinic that offers elective abortions in Missouri is in St. Louis.

“I believe that that particular bill is a way to shame and demean women into changing their minds about abortion,” said Representative Judy Morgan, a Democrat from Kansas City."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/us/72-hour-wait-for-abortion-is-enacted-in-missouri.html

User avatar
snowflakey
E's Moriarity

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:48 pm


I'm totally with you lisam and bookfan. It isn't like you get pregnant and immediately say, hey, I'd like an abortion! Any woman who is considering an abortion has thought LONG and HARD about it, and the person who performs the procedure makes sure she's doing it of her free will. It is totally about making it harder and harder to get an abortion (if you're poor). Well-to-do women can have abortions whenever they want without bureaucratic hassles.

piggypie

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 1:37 pm


I see it as another way to keep women down and poor. If you can't afford the time off to travel to get the abortion a(nother) pregnancy is going to keep you more financially restricted. You could lose your job for taking time off for prenatal care etc. It bothers me to the core that in this day and age it's harder for women to access quality health care and make their own decisions about reproduction.

I also get offended that people that support a woman's right to chose are called pro-abortion. There's a huge leap between being pro-choice and pro-abortion.

Bookfan
For the Love of Pigs

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 2:24 pm


I suspect there are women who wouldn't choose to have an abortion themselves but are pro-choice. Don't have any figures to back this up.

I find it ironic that many of the same people who are anti-abortion don't seem to care about what happens to a kid born into a poor household once they get there. The only important thing is that the kid gets born.

bpatters
And got the T-shirt

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 2:29 pm


I find it ironic that many of the same people who are anti-abortion don't seem to care about what happens to a kid born into a poor household once they get there. The only important thing is that the kid gets born.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/30/1407166/-Catholic-N ... n-The-Masses

User avatar
Lynx
RESIST

Post   » Tue Nov 03, 2015 6:07 pm


I read that a while back. She is spot on! It's always bugged me that the majority of people who promotes this kind of thing only care about the child in the womb and skip town once it's born!

User avatar
jacqueline

Post   » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:03 am


Years ago, I had an abortion. Not something I'm proud of by any means. But I can tell you several things about that whole experience.

Yes, the decision was agonizing, and took me days and days to make. But once I made that decision, I needed to have it over as soon as possible. Partly because I didn't want to become attached in any way to the unborn baby. I couldn't think of it any other way - an unborn baby inside of me. I had to wait long enough to get the appointment. I didn't need to wait any longer because some other adult didn't trust my decision.

One of the worst moments in my entire life was when I walked through those clinic doors. It was right on the side of a major interstate highway. There were protesters lining the sidewalk and road. carrying signs, chanting. They kept their distance, and I tried not to look. But it was once I got inside that it got even worse.

The protesters carried signs that said, "Honk if you love babies" "Honk if you're against killing babies". I sat in the waiting room listening to honk after honk after honk.

I have no post-abortion PTSD. No regrets, except being careless enough to have gotten pregnant in the first place. I was lucky enough to have a very smart therapist. He pushed me to name that unborn baby, and afterwards, to grieve for it. I did. I cried and cried. And then moved forward, knowing I made the best decision I could under the circumstances.

I stay out of the politics, mostly because I don't think this decision should be a political one. It was a personal decision for me. I took into account my living situation, the health and well being of my entire family at the time, including the unborn baby. There is no other adult in the world who could know all those factors and take them into account and make a better decision that I did.

I don't think I've ever told anyone that story. I'm sorry if it is disturbing to some of you, but I do appreciate that this is a safe place to share. Thanks for listening.

Post Reply
294 posts