Guns ruling likely means few changes for Kentucky

bob wrote:

<quoted text>What a pitiful peice of bastard you are! I would love to meet you on your chosen ground, and teach you about guns! I expect you would be the sissie you seem to be.Meanwhile, you had better keep your sorry ass in Norway.

It'll probably surprize you that I'm an active shooter - I own or keep at home some 8 to 10 different firearms at any given time. I've been a shooting instructor for some 30 years, won many national competitions throughout the years. I am an eager hunter. Officer in the Air Force (reserve)and served for almost 3 years. I am in the chair of our local Army rifle Club.
It will be very sad if the day comes when I say that I have nothing more to learn. So you are welcome across any time. I can provide you with an audience of at least 250 interested and listening shooters - at any time if you want to address the audience.
Just give me yr email address - and we'll find out
what your contribution should be.
Cheers!

I am sorry that this discussion has degenerated. I believe everyone who has posted here has let anger runaway. Which I know first hand is easy to do when one is taking up for one's own country. To those of us who live in America and to all the millions who relocate here, we believe America is the best nation on earth to live (which I believe is a well founded truth). But to you in Norway I am sure you believe your country is best, which is as it should be.

I am not very eloquent at sharing my beliefs on the 2nd Amendment, but I knew a man who was, I ask that you go to this site and read. These are my beliefs also:

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articl...

Patch wrote:

I am sorry that this discussion has degenerated. I believe everyone who has posted here has let anger runaway. Which I know first hand is easy to do when one is taking up for one's own country. To those of us who live in America and to all the millions who relocate here, we believe America is the best nation on earth to live (which I believe is a well founded truth). But to you in Norway I am sure you believe your country is best, which is as it should be.
I am not very eloquent at sharing my beliefs on the 2nd Amendment, but I knew a man who was, I ask that you go to this site and read. These are my beliefs also:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articl...

I agree.
And I contrubuted to the "degenerating" of the discussion. Partly on purpose. That way I know i can smoke out the "gunnuts". I know their arguments. have been under fire before.
Charlton Heston - NRA has delivered what I am sure is a very honest "speech" here. My view is that today the 2nd Amendment and the almost religious embracing many Americans, headed by the NRA boss - is one of the most tragic burdens riding your society today. You fight for the 2nd Amendment's eternal life on legal grounds, and even more on emotional grounds.
It is very difficult to penetrate those forces intellectually. But still it is my view that the sooner you Americans leave the "right" to own fire arms and get them under control the better your lives will be.
A fire arm can only be used efficiently used against an enemy that is maximum 300 yards away (practically spoken). That means against human beings - your country (which is not a country but a continent) cannot be invaded over night without signs it is coming.
Therefore the need for fortifying every home is simply
unneccessary. The moment arms will be needed they'll be there in ample supply to be had on short notice.
30,000 lives a year - men, women, children is and enormous tragedy and price to pay for a "principle" - call it "freedom" as much as you want. I call it madness. And I say that knowing we are having (per capitae) almost the same number ow weapons here in private ownership. Our annual tragedies attributable to firearms are so small it can hardly be called a "fraction" of your figures.
WHY IS THAT? Do you think Charlton Heston is interested in finding out?
Your High Court decision is not that convincing. If the matter had been treated by the High Court in 3 yrs - the result could have been the opposite. Simply because the members of the court are politically chosen.

Patch wrote:

......... To those of us who live in America and to all the millions who relocate here, we believe America is the best nation on earth to live (which I believe is a well founded truth). But to you in Norway I am sure you believe your country is best, which is as it should be......htm

Just for record: Learned this afternoon that Iceland was nominated the best country to live in last year (after Norway had been nominated #1 for 7 yrs in a row).
Norway 2nd and America fell from #8 to #12.
(A UN study comparing more than 100 countries)
According to this the people in Iceland and in Norway
are the "happiest" people in the world.
(Not to take away any of your beliefs or illusions - rather for info - and the record)

SNJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Just for record: Learned this afternoon that Iceland was nominated the best country to live in last year (after Norway had been nominated #1 for 7 yrs in a row).
Norway 2nd and America fell from #8 to #12.
(A UN study comparing more than 100 countries)
According to this the people in Iceland and in Norway
are the "happiest" people in the world.
(Not to take away any of your beliefs or illusions - rather for info - and the record)

I would love to visit Norway some day....in the summer of course :). I would love to visit Oslo and Hardanger Plateau. My ggg-grandfather came to the Us in the 1700's from Norway.

Rationale behind the ranking



New York, London and Paris are internationally renowned cities but consultants at Mercer Consulting have picked Zurich, Switzerland, as the best place to live in the company's annual survey.



Consultants rated each city on a variety of factors including the level of traffic congestion, air quality and personal safety reported by expatriates living in more than 600 cities worldwide. In the top 25, U.S. cities such as San Francisco, Boston and Chicago were all edged out by Geneva, Switzerland, Vancouver, Canada, and Auckland, New Zealand. The highest-scoring U.S. city is Honolulu, which came in at No. 28.



Still, Mercer acknowledges that cities with a high quality of life are not necessarily the most exciting. "There are a lot of 'sleepy' towns that got high ratings," said Rebecca Powers, a principal consultant in human capital for the company. "But if you were to judge them on something like nightlife, there are some that probably wouldn't have rated as high."



The rankings are based on a point scoring index, with Zurich scoring 108 and Baghdad scoring 13.5. Cities are compared to New York as the base city, with an index score of 100. The quality-of-living survey covers 215 cities and is conducted to help governments and major companies place employees on international assignments. The survey also identifies those cities with the highest personal safety ranking based on internal stability, crime, effectiveness of law enforcement and relationships with other countries.



By Carl Winfield, BusinessWeek

This is not how I would rate best place to live. Most countries have their good points and bad. In my country I can worship God without goverment interferance, I can chose my career. I can even witness to other people about Jesus Christ without fear. Should someone or myself be attacked by another person I can use my gun to protect.
You are free to call us gunnuts if you choose, but 99.9% of law abiding gun owners in the USA are responsible people. Yea, we have our crazies but so do all countries. My belief in the 2nd amendment stands.

boogs wrote:

<quoted text>I would love to visit Norway some day....in the summer of course :). I would love to visit Oslo and Hardanger Plateau. My ggg-grandfather came to the Us in the 1700's from Norway.

Yes, do that boogs! I have been hunting reindeer (caribou) many times on the Hardanger Plataeu (Hardangervidda")
But not that keen any longer to carry a hundred pounds of meat on my back for 8-10 hrs. It is a very nice trip by car (and also by train) on a nice summer day from Oslo over the hardangervidda to the west coast.
Whatever you do if/when you come: Don't be short of time with tight schedules !!
Ever done any research on your ancestors from N????

SNJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, do that boogs! I have been hunting reindeer (caribou) many times on the Hardanger Plataeu (Hardangervidda")
But not that keen any longer to carry a hundred pounds of meat on my back for 8-10 hrs. It is a very nice trip by car (and also by train) on a nice summer day from Oslo over the hardangervidda to the west coast.
Whatever you do if/when you come: Don't be short of time with tight schedules !!
Ever done any research on your ancestors from N????

I know he was born Wm. James Swanson around 1690, he and family came across the pond around 1720. Legend has he left Norway with a rather large sum of money...with the intend of making his own fortune in the New World..My mothers eldest brother had a copy of his will, as well as his eldest son's will, the Family Bible and a few written documents from Norway. I would love to get my hand on them, to at least copy them. The last time my mom saw them was shortly after her mother passed away in 1961.....

boogs wrote:

<quoted text> I know he was born Wm. James Swanson around 1690, he and family came across the pond around 1720. Legend has he left Norway with a rather large sum of money...with the intend of making his own fortune in the New World..My mothers eldest brother had a copy of his will, as well as his eldest son's will, the Family Bible and a few written documents from Norway. I would love to get my hand on them, to at least copy them. The last time my mom saw them was shortly after her mother passed away in 1961.....

If you know the year he was born AND the approximate place of birth chances are "church books" may contain vital info .(many old churches burnt down though during some hundred years with books lost, but other local documents can help trace). A lot of these old documents are now in electronic files and the goal is to get it all filed electronic within short time.
I am almost certain his given name in 1690 was not "James Swanson" . More likely that names like "Jens" and "Svendsson" was made more "English" in daily use - thus "James Swanson"(???)

It's France!! You don't live in French, you speek French and live in France! Ypu don't even know English!!

It's France! You don't even know English!!

Patch wrote:

Rationale behind the ranking
New York, London and Paris are internationally renowned cities but consultants at Mercer Consulting have picked Zurich, Switzerland, as the best place to live in the company's annual survey.
Consultants rated each city on a variety of factors including the level of traffic congestion, air quality and personal safety reported by expatriates living in more than 600 cities worldwide. In the top 25, U.S. cities such as San Francisco, Boston and Chicago were all edged out by Geneva, Switzerland, Vancouver, Canada, and Auckland, New Zealand. The highest-scoring U.S. city is Honolulu, which came in at No. 28.
Still, Mercer acknowledges that cities with a high quality of life are not necessarily the most exciting. "There are a lot of 'sleepy' towns that got high ratings," said Rebecca Powers, a principal consultant in human capital for the company. "But if you were to judge them on something like nightlife, there are some that probably wouldn't have rated as high."
The rankings are based on a point scoring index, with Zurich scoring 108 and Baghdad scoring 13.5. Cities are compared to New York as the base city, with an index score of 100. The quality-of-living survey covers 215 cities and is conducted to help governments and major companies place employees on international assignments. The survey also identifies those cities with the highest personal safety ranking based on internal stability, crime, effectiveness of law enforcement and relationships with other countries.
By Carl Winfield, BusinessWeek
This is not how I would rate best place to live. Most countries have their good points and bad. In my country I can worship God without goverment interferance, I can chose my career. I can even witness to other people about Jesus Christ without fear. Should someone or myself be attacked by another person I can use my gun to protect.
You are free to call us gunnuts if you choose, but 99.9% of law abiding gun owners in the USA are responsible people. Yea, we have our crazies but so do all countries. My belief in the 2nd amendment stands.

This is fair enough - emerges as honest and then
you have my support. But you say that 99,9% of your "law-abiding" people are responsible people.
You cannot possibly know 99,9% of your law abiding people. You cannot either say that 99,9% of your gun owners are law abiding people. And you didn't say that 99,9% of your law abiding people have guns or that 99,9% of your law abiding
gun owners are experienced gun handlers immune to accidents or thefts of their weapons, or being suicidal.
So where does your post take us when the question is whether your America would be a better place to live without the 2nd Amendment?????

You can worship your God without gevernments interference - that is not unique - we can too
without even the slightest of problems. But what on this green earth has that got to do with gun control??

Civilian gun ownership in Norway:

The ownership of a firearm is considered an enormous responsibility in Norway. Thus, the norms for storage of firearms are strict.

For shotguns and rifles, the qualification given in the weapons act is to have the firearm, or a vital part of the firearm, securely locked away. For handguns, this means an approved gun safe, securely bolted to a non-removable part of the house. A vital part is considered to be any part with a serial number, since these require police approval to be purchased.

The police are allowed to make a home inspection of the safe, since the ownership is a privilege,'not a right'. An inspection must be announced more than 48 hours in advance and the police are only allowed to see the safe and make sure it is legally installed.

Ammunition, only sold to persons able to show a valid firearm license, must be locked away but can be stored with the firearms. Older rules stated that the ammunition must me locked away separately, but these rules are abandoned in the latest revision of the weapons act

In my country gun ownership by law abiding citizens is a 'right'. I choose America over Norway any day. I am sure it is a beautiful country to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.

Patch wrote:

Civilian gun ownership in Norway:
The ownership of a firearm is considered an enormous responsibility in Norway. Thus, the norms for storage of firearms are strict.
For shotguns and rifles, the qualification given in the weapons act is to have the firearm, or a vital part of the firearm, securely locked away. For handguns, this means an approved gun safe, securely bolted to a non-removable part of the house. A vital part is considered to be any part with a serial number, since these require police approval to be purchased.
The police are allowed to make a home inspection of the safe, since the ownership is a privilege,'not a right'. An inspection must be announced more than 48 hours in advance and the police are only allowed to see the safe and make sure it is legally installed.
Ammunition, only sold to persons able to show a valid firearm license, must be locked away but can be stored with the firearms. Older rules stated that the ammunition must me locked away separately, but these rules are abandoned in the latest revision of the weapons act
In my country gun ownership by law abiding citizens is a 'right'. I choose America over Norway any day. I am sure it is a beautiful country to visit, but I wouldn't want to live there.

Your knowledge about our rules is very good.
What you say above I find correct.
A small remark though: "A vital part" is normally
the breech of a rifle or the "underwood" of a shotgun (pumps/autom. shotguns a bit problematic in this connection). However: when you store the guns in a safe you do not have to separate a "vital part".
The gun safe must be bolted only if the weight of the safe (empty)is less than 150 kgs.
The idea behind the safe and the details is that if someone breaks in and go for the firearms they shall be delayed minimum 10 minutes before they get to the guns. For the same reason the ammunition should be stored away from the guns
locked in - but no specific requirements as to the lock then.
We do not have any real problems living with these rules the way our society is today.
As to police inspecting: They know very well that that is a very delicate issue - and was subject to a lot of opposition at the time the law passed.
Police deal with it discretely : When there are no suspicion about crime or illegal conditions they will simply not show up.
I told the local police at the time that I kept my weapons in a safe. They wrote that down and I will never see them coming to inspect - unless I get their attention due to criminal activity, or breaking any relevant law.
If you are sceptical to governments and authorities in general of course you will not feel at ease with our rules and laws.
Our gun owning is on a fundament of mutual trust between the citizen and the authorities. It works very well actually.
I hope for your sake that there are many, and more important, factors than gun owning alone that decides whether you are happy where you live.

Yes there are many other reasons I love the USA. There is an underlying spirit here that cannot be explained to anyone from another country properly, maybe it is because we had to fight so hard for our independence. We get knocked down but we don't stay there we are up quickly...as the old saying goes 'only in America'.

I am not putting down your country.........but for me it is America.

Patch wrote:

Yes there are many other reasons I love the USA. There is an underlying spirit here that cannot be explained to anyone from another country properly, maybe it is because we had to fight so hard for our independence. We get knocked down but we don't stay there we are up quickly...as the old saying goes 'only in America'.
I am not putting down your country.........but for me it is America.

Many Americans - and Morwegians - could learn something from you!

SNJ wrote:

<quoted text>
Many Americans - and Morwegians - could learn something from you!

Thank you. I enjoy conversations with intelligent people even when we disagree, it can be amicable.

Patch wrote:

<quoted text>
Thank you. I enjoy conversations with intelligent people even when we disagree, it can be amicable.

Of course - disagreement can definitely be dynamic in itself. I have listened to what you have said and I do realize there is a big difference in thinking. I am also sure that you would look for a way to avoid 30,000 Americans getting killed by firearms annually if you could.

I know the "recipe" here - I have got no-one for you that can similtaneously satisfy your Constitution and the rights given through the 2nd Amendment. I am not an "enemy" of USA (to the contrary!!)and I do personally feel some hopelessness seeing your many tragedies attributable to the spread of guns in your society.
But it is first and foremost your tragedy and the solution must be yours. I can just tell you that in my opinion (as a shooter and hunter and owner of as many guns as I like)you should really consider giving up your "rights" as such and get a more rigid control, simply as an improvement of your daily life as Americans and a life saving measure. Just imagine all those left behind of victims of firearms. They are not all relatives of criminals either!! Just remember the many mass shootings in recent months/year in the U.S.

The problem is not guns. Guns don't kill people, people do. when someone wishes to kill someone they don't need a gun to do it. I would never be for changing the 2nd amendment for law abiding citizens.
God once blessed America. Our nation was founded by christian leaders , establishing a nation where they could worship God freely without goverment control or sanctions. Most in our goverment and a large portion of society has decided they don't need God anymore. Well He won't stay where he isn't welcome. That is our downfall. That is why crime is rampant, not because of our gun rights. Our laws support killing unborn babies ......if I could change anything in America that is what I would change.
My prayer is for God to bless America again.

Patch wrote:

The problem is not guns. Guns don't kill people, people do. when someone wishes to kill someone they don't need a gun to do it. I would never be for changing the 2nd amendment for law abiding citizens.
God once blessed America. Our nation was founded by christian leaders , establishing a nation where they could worship God freely without goverment control or sanctions. Most in our goverment and a large portion of society has decided they don't need God anymore. Well He won't stay where he isn't welcome. That is our downfall. That is why crime is rampant, not because of our gun rights. Our laws support killing unborn babies ......if I could change anything in America that is what I would change.
My prayer is for God to bless America again.

There are actually 3 main elements forming your views:
The Bible
The gun
The patriotism
No rhetoric can be more American than a one based on the above.
Nothing more indicative of a Republican than the combination of the three ??!

I cannot see the need for patriotism or the Bible
when judging the positive and the negative sides of the 2nd Amendment.
Thus I can only say that you are more religious than I am. And you are more conservative than I am. You are more focused on the individual and it's rights than the society and the life of others. We are quite different and it may be due to the fact that I grew up in a different society than yours all together - with different values and priorities than yours.
But interesting to learn your views, although I think it is sad so many Americans (1,5 million most likely)will die over the next two generations because of the attitude you have- and sharing it with so many fellow countrymen.
Do you really think that price is a fair price to pay - when most likely all others than yourself are paying it all??