EAA bans guns at OSH

Any object can be used to severely injure or kill a human being, whether intentionally or not. That's why "shovel" can replace "gun." A rock would work, or a car, or a car key, a foot, or even gravity (fall down the stairs). Again, it is the idiot using the tool or method available WHO is to blame.
The truth of the 11k+ unfortunates (who were killed in incidents involving firearms) will not be proven one way or the other without reading every incident report. Some of those folks could have been bystanders to a completely unrelated (to the victims) incident in which they were caught in a crossfire or hit by a stray bullet. Some may had died in direct contact, armed or unarmed, with their armed perpetrator(s). Anyone want to be a statistic? All numbers really do is blur things, which can be manipulated to the benefit of either side of the argument. We live in a relatively safe country, but just like everywhere else, we have people among us who wish harm upon others. We have the freedom to choose whether or not to be prepared to a significant degree to defend ourselves and our loved ones for the off, albeit real, chance of lethal action. Any intelligent person who chooses to be armed will also exercise a significant degree of precaution in their chosen method of carry and storage.
As for comparing use to those in a profession versus those not in a profession which requires carrying a firearm, again numbers blur reality. Cops are inherently more likely to fire their weapon in personal defense or the course of their duties than the average citizen. Soldiers in war zones are more likely than those cops are, however, and not every soldier fires their weapon. On the same coin, not everyone who fires their weapon actually hits their target.
Victims of homicide are likely to know or associate in some way with their aggressors. Suicidal men are more likely to choose a gun as their tool, and suicidal women are more likely to choose the medicine cabinet as theirs.
As for the EAA Museum's policy, they have every right to implement it, and we law abiding folks will recognize and honor it, because we obey the law. If some nut were to prey upon museum visitors, any injuries or deaths resulting from it would be on the museum. That doesn't help very much after the incident, especially if life is taken. It's a pretty safe place from what I understand, and surely there are enough good people there that would react accordingly to a bad situation.
 
airbornejohnny said:
Any object can be used to severely injure or kill a human being, whether intentionally or not. That's why "shovel" can replace "gun."
Click to expand...
Then why aren't people satisfied with arming themselves with shovels?
 
Everskyward said:
Then why aren't people satisfied with arming themselves with shovels?
Click to expand...
The average three-year old finds a gun more lethal than a shovel?

I'll note that my wife spent her childhood with a firearm in the house and she and her four sisters managed to keep from killing one another (and managed to resist the temptation), so the mere presence of a firearm isn't sufficient to lead to death. Not all children (or their playmates) are so disciplined!
 
I'll note that my wife spent her childhood with a firearm in the house and she and her four sisters managed to keep from killing one another (and managed to resist the temptation), so the mere presence of a firearm isn't sufficient to lead to death
Click to expand...

+1 or at least +12 or more

I grew up on a farm and my dad's gun collection was an arsenal. Bullets, gun, no locks, no safe's, no safety cable crap, no blah blah stuff. Just bullets in the readily accessible guns or laying right next to them for anyone who happens along to pick them up and do whatever they wanted without supervision. We had over a dozen kids running in and out all the time and there was never a single incident of any kind. If there was ever a call for gun=dangerous, we were it... Yet unlike next door to my parents city house, the safety conscience parents next door where the rule was no guns of any kind even toy guns were allowed, WE didn't shoot our friend because of the cool gun THEY unlocked and loaded with a key they found in some other friends house. But we were the dangerous kids and they were not allowed to even acknowledge our presence much less talk to us or play, and yet the protected never touched or seen a real gun in their lives kids ended up shooting themselves. Reason: They were fooking stupid and uneducated and doing something that was clearly not right. I distinctly remember asking how that could possibly happen because I didn't know how to accidentally shoot someone based on the fact that if you don't touch a gun, you can't shoot someone with it and just why the heck were they playing with a gun. At that point we didn't change how we did things however the shooting kids parents were ready to have the whole lot of us taken out and shot because we were dangerous. Ish.

Even a 3 year old can be taught to not touch a gun for any reason. I know because I was one of those 3 year olds. After 46+ years I still haven't shot anyone...and if I do sometime in the future, (extremely doubtful however it's possible in some extreme hallucinated scenario) it would be extremely intentional and clearly self defense. It's all about education and what you're taught to do. Guns don't kill people, people kill people, the people just tend to use a tool to impart the damage whether it is a supersonic bullet or a slow or tree branch.
 
Frank, just remember, "there, but for the grace of G*d, go I." Her friends didn't go playing with her Dad's guns, and neither did your siblings. Your neighbor's locks were insufficient to keep his/her inquisitive kids away. It ain't hard to see the circumstances changed, and kids presented with licks are more likely to be stymied than those without the locks. But there sure as shooting aren't any absolutes!

In general, I thnk that kids who are exposed to firearms at a young age, taught the dangers, and allowed to experiment with them under supervision are going to be more responsible with them. There are and will be exceptions! Sorry, but we're dealing with human beings! And don't forget, your kids have friends, and those friends may be in your house! You're relying on your having taught your kids well enough to teach other kids! How difficult is that? The only way to eliminate that risk is to eliminate firearms from the home, and that entails other risks. If you have firearms in the house and you have children in the house (your own or others), you are taking a risk. Period. As you pointed out, locks aren't foolproof. You need to weigh that against the other risks.
 
airbornejohnny said:
Bad guys have guns, not shovels. Ya don't bring a knife (shovel) to a gunfight.
Shovels require being fairly close to the aggressor.
Click to expand...

Shovels are requiered out here..... It is part of the three S's

1- Shoot
2- Shovel
3- Shut up

;)

Just to clarify.... The ranchers shoot wolves and coyotes that eat their livestock... We don't target humans.:no::no::no:.

I don't need the swat team kicking in my nice front door.:nonod:
 
Last edited:
airbornejohnny said:
Bad guys have guns, not shovels. Ya don't bring a knife (shovel) to a gunfight.
Shovels require being fairly close to the aggressor.
Click to expand...
That's right. And it's also the reason that guns are inherently more dangerous than shovels. I understand why people want to be armed but you can't really have it both ways.
 
Everskyward said:
That's right. And it's also the reason that guns are inherently more dangerous than shovels. I understand why people want to be armed but you can't really have it both ways.
Click to expand...
However unlikely it is for you to ever become the target of a bad guy, if it were to happen to you, would you prefer to have a handy shovel or a handy pistol?
Which do you think is more dangerous, a loaded gun or an unloaded gun?
 
Everskyward said:
That's right. And it's also the reason that guns are inherently more dangerous than shovels. I understand why people want to be armed but you can't really have it both ways.
Click to expand...


I don't understand what you mean. It takes INTENT, carelessness, or negligence to produce harm with cars, airplanes, shovels, pools, tubs, etc. Can you legislate away all of them?
 
airbornejohnny said:
However unlikely it is for you to ever become the target of a bad guy, if it were to happen to you, would you prefer to have a handy shovel or a handy pistol?
Which do you think is more dangerous, a loaded gun or an unloaded gun?
Click to expand...
I don't think you're understanding what I'm trying to say. A loaded gun is more useful for self-defense but that characteristic which makes it useful for self-defense also makes it more prone to be a factor in some mishap, either intentional or unintentional. It's contradictory to say you want this object for self-defense but also to say that it's a benign as any other object. I would leave a shovel propped up against my wall while I went to do other things. I would not do that with a loaded shotgun.
 
Last edited:
Baseball bats work for most home defense situations, UNLESS the bad guy/gal has a firearm.
 
airbornejohnny said:
However unlikely it is for you to ever become the target of a bad guy, if it were to happen to you, would you prefer to have a handy shovel or a handy pistol?
Which do you think is more dangerous, a loaded gun or an unloaded gun?
Click to expand...
Strange as it might sound, I'd prefer that my brother was able to purchase a shovel instead of a shotgun the day that he killed himself. I would also prefer that my husband had a trowel instead of my handgun the day he pointed it at me as I drove up to the house. Later, after the police removed him from a local business to the local hospital for a "rest" in their lockup I asked a police officer that I trusted to take all my guns and his guns and our amunition from the house and put them somewhere safe. He did that until the "rest" was over and he was released from the hospital, when the trusted friend gave it all back to him without warning me. His explanation sounded like all that is being said here. "Guns don't kill people..." Well, that loony-tunes now has an uncounted number of weapons and plenty of amunition. He has a concealed carry permit and is a licensed gun dealer. And it isn't safe to get him angry.

You won't be there to gun him down if he becomes angry. I wouldn't want you to compound the tragedy anyway.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Strange as it might sound, I'd prefer that my brother was able to purchase a shovel instead of a shotgun the day that he killed himself. I would also prefer that my husband had a trowel instead of my handgun the day he pointed it at me as I drove up to the house. Later, after the police removed him from a local business to the local hospital for a "rest" in their lockup I asked a police officer that I trusted to take all my guns and his guns and our amunition from the house and put them somewhere safe. He did that until the "rest" was over and he was released from the hospital, when the trusted friend gave it all back to him without warning me. His explanation sounded like all that is being said here. "Guns don't kill people..." Well, that loony-tunes now has an uncounted number of weapons and plenty of amunition. He has a concealed carry permit and is a licensed gun dealer. And it isn't safe to get him angry.

You won't be there to gun him down if he becomes angry. I wouldn't want you to compound the tragedy anyway.
Click to expand...

I am assuming he is your EX husband now :dunno:
 
Everskyward said:
I don't think you're understanding what I'm trying to say. A loaded gun is more useful for self-defense but that characteristic which makes it useful for self-defense also makes it more prone to be a factor in some mishap, either intentional or unintentional. It's contradictory to say you want this object for self-defense but also to say that it's a benign as any other object. I would leave a shovel propped up against my wall while I went to do other things. I would not do that with a loaded shotgun.
Click to expand...


So do the very small amount of mishaps outweigh the large amount of using guns in self defense to save one's life, often without firing a shot, and often not reported?
 
AuntPeggy said:
Strange as it might sound, I'd prefer that my brother was able to purchase a shovel instead of a shotgun the day that he killed himself. I would also prefer that my husband had a trowel instead of my handgun the day he pointed it at me as I drove up to the house. Later, after the police removed him from a local business to the local hospital for a "rest" in their lockup I asked a police officer that I trusted to take all my guns and his guns and our amunition from the house and put them somewhere safe. He did that until the "rest" was over and he was released from the hospital, when the trusted friend gave it all back to him without warning me. His explanation sounded like all that is being said here. "Guns don't kill people..." Well, that loony-tunes now has an uncounted number of weapons and plenty of amunition. He has a concealed carry permit and is a licensed gun dealer. And it isn't safe to get him angry.

You won't be there to gun him down if he becomes angry. I wouldn't want you to compound the tragedy anyway.
Click to expand...
Your brothers ability to purchase a shotgun isn't what killed him. Once someone makes that decision there are countless methods. I own more firearms then I do shovels or forks. If I ever decided to checkout a firearm wouldn't be my method. Too messy.
 
Anthony said:
So do the very small amount of mishaps outweigh the large amount of using guns in self defense to save one's life, often without firing a shot, and often not reported?
Click to expand...
That's for the individual to decide. But it's illogical to go around there is no risk, or very little, in having a loaded gun around. That's like the people who delude themselves into thinking there is no risk in flying.
 
Everskyward said:
That's for the individual to decide. But it's illogical to go around there is no risk, or very little, in having a loaded gun around. That's like the people who delude themselves into thinking there is no risk in flying.
Click to expand...
It's all relative. I'd argue the risk is pretty damn small if you know what you're doing. It's certainly not a substantial risk. My loaded firearms aren't what will get me. My motorcycle or my flight instruction is way more likely.
 
jesse said:
Your brothers ability to purchase a shotgun isn't what killed him. Once someone makes that decision there are countless methods. I own more firearms then I do shovels or forks. If I ever decided to checkout a firearm wouldn't be my method. Too messy.
Click to expand...
Please understand that if I see you armed, I must assume you are dangerous and crazy. Although I've seen armed people who are neither, those who are, have brought untold grief.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Please understand that if I see you armed, I must assume you are dangerous and crazy. Although I've seen armed people who are neither, those who are, have brought untold grief.
Click to expand...

why are you making that assumption?
 
AuntPeggy said:
Please understand that if I see you armed, I must assume you are dangerous and crazy. Although I've seen armed people who are neither, those who are, have brought untold grief.
Click to expand...
I see armed people all the time. You must not be looking very closely. I don't assume any of them are dangerous or crazy.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Please understand that if I see you armed, I must assume you are dangerous and crazy. Although I've seen armed people who are neither, those who are, have brought untold grief.
Click to expand...

When you demonstrate to me you are dangerous and crazy, you are in danger.

Act sane,,,, no problems.
 
I'll point out again, that if someone is carrying concealed properly -- you'll never know that they are armed. Maybe if you're looking very carefully and know what to look for... but in a normal encounter, you won't see anything or know anything.
 
Bob Noel said:
why are you making that assumption?
Click to expand...

jesse said:
I see armed people all the time. You must not be looking very closely. I don't assume any of them are dangerous or crazy.
Click to expand...

denverpilot said:
I'll point out again, that if someone is carrying concealed properly -- you'll never know that they are armed. Maybe if you're looking very carefully and know what to look for... but in a normal encounter, you won't see anything or know anything.
Click to expand...
Because people I loved and trusted around guns turned out to be both dangerous and crazy without warning. It only takes one poisonous apple to turn me against the tree.
 
jesse said:
It's all relative. I'd argue the risk is pretty damn small if you know what you're doing. It's certainly not a substantial risk. My loaded firearms aren't what will get me. My motorcycle or my flight instruction is way more likely.
Click to expand...
That's a big if, and I know that you know what you are doing, but there are others...

Personally I'd rather not deal with the bother and the responsibility of keeping it secure. I would not worry as much about shooting myself in an accident as much I would worry about it being stolen from my house, car, etc. and then being used in a crime. If I had children around I would be concerned about that too because of my experience as a child being tempted. As I mentioned before, I'm not a stranger to guns nor do they make me uncomfortable. It seems like a large number of people I know have them around. Actually I do too but I don't think black powder guns would be great for self-defense except as a club...
 
jesse said:
I see armed people all the time. You must not be looking very closely. I don't assume any of them are dangerous or crazy.
Click to expand...


Open Carry is legal in most states, and I see people doing it, and it doesn't scare me. I often see people aiming a two ton vehicle at me just inches away, and THAT scares me. A gun on someone's hip does not.

Again, some people due to a different upbringing, or life experiences, have an irrational and purely emotional fear of guns. As you know, a gun can not shoot anyone by itself, just like a car can not cause death by itself, but yet we blame the gun when a person does something evil with it. :confused:
 
Everskyward said:
Actually I do too but I don't think black powder guns would be great for self-defense except as a club...
Click to expand...


All the guns used in the Civil War, and previously were black powder. A black powder firearm is just as dangerous as a smokeless powder one.

Famed western gunslinger, Wild Bill Hickock (and many others) used a pair of Colt 1851 Navy revolvers which were black powder, to successfully "settle" most of his disputes. When the technology changed, and his eyesight was failing, in order to simplify reloading, he had them converted to accept the new smokeless cartridges, so he didn't have to measure out the powder. :)
 
AuntPeggy said:
Because people I loved and trusted around guns turned out to be both dangerous and crazy without warning. It only takes one poisonous apple to turn me against the tree.
Click to expand...

So, by that line of thinking, it's perfectly legitimate to see some people with a hysterical fear of guns and conclude that anyone without a gun is an anti-gun nut.

:rolleyes:
 
Anthony said:
All the guns used in the Civil War, and previously were black powder. A black powder firearm is just as dangerous as a smokeless powder one.
Click to expand...
Not if you don't have any powder or balls.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Because people I loved and trusted around guns turned out to be both dangerous and crazy without warning. It only takes one poisonous apple to turn me against the tree.
Click to expand...

So..... While training for your instrument ticket you have a flight with mod to severe turb and light ice, will that keep you out of planes for the rest of your life :dunno::dunno:.

**** happens to the best of us,, pilots, maybe better then others can adapt, adjust and make the best of a bad situation... Are you a pilot :dunno::confused::confused::wink2:
 
Last edited:
Bob Noel said:
So, by that line of thinking, it's perfectly legitimate to see some people with a hysterical fear of guns and conclude that anyone without a gun is an anti-gun nut.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

This thread is a good illustration of the fact that that attitude is very common among firearms enthusiasts.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Please understand that if I see you armed, I must assume you are dangerous and crazy. Although I've seen armed people who are neither, those who are, have brought untold grief.
Click to expand...

How do deal with seeing a policeman? They are armed and by your logic must be dangerous and crazy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top