Most gun-loving: Americans vs Thais

[QualityTouristNumberOne]

I'd put my Cambodian friends above the Thai gun owners I know in this comparison,

I have a "friend"(more of an acquaintance really) in Phnom Pehn who bought a Para Ordnance .45 after he heard me recommend it,

he knocked on my door(rented apartment) with his new gun and was so excited about it that fired it into the air,all 14 shots in the mag to "celebrate" with me that he's bought it...that's 14 HEAVY .45 calibre rounds fired in the air centre of a busy city in the afternoon...

what goes up must come down!,

even amongst my more safety conscious and classier Cambodian friends there is a genuine love for firearms that leads them to display and decorate them in a similar way to some Mexican and American friends(expensive scrolling,Pearl inlaying etc),some really awful gaudy examples,but also some truly remarkable works of art,in comparison I find the general Thai view of weapons especially Firearms to be more that they are a tool than anything else,although there are some exceptions.

I realise this topic is more than likely Troll bait,but decided to answer it seriously,and am not in getting into the "Amurkans Lurve Guns Mkay" debate as it's a transparent ploy to start trouble.

[smotherb]

Nothing like centuries old Constitutions combined with 21st century technology.

The rationale behind the 2nd amendment was to deter foreign occupation. The Brit colonizers wanted to control the American colonists, so they ordered troops to be billeted in American homes and guns be taken away from the colonists.

Giving the people the right to keep and bear arms, as our Constitution does, is a deterrent to military occupation--foreign or domestic.

How many German soldiers would have died in the Warsaw Ghetto, if the Jews were armed? Oh, wait a minute, that just brought us up to the 20th century.

Let's see, can we possibly find an example in the 21st century where if the locals had weapons, the armed militants would not have had it so easy? Hmmm . . . Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, the Ukraine.

Please note, I said foreign or domestic military intervention.

Although I'm on the supposed anti-gun side (in actuality I'm for gun law reform), to be fair I concede you make a good point with the Warsaw Ghetto analogy.

I guess you would support all Gazan and West Bank Arabs being armed.

Certainly, if I were an Arab from Gaza or the West Bank.

[Rimmer]

One inflammatory post has been removed

[papa al]

Most gun loving: Americans.

Most likely to go completely bat-sh!t mental and shoot you in the head point blank because of something completely trivial: Thais. Ten fold.

Most likely to make an asinine generalization completely devoid of truth: Khun Som wat.

No generalization in my comment, nong berkshire.

Statistical comparison based on observations and statistical evidence, yes.

A generalization, yes.

Asinine, no.

Accurate, I'd say yes.

[willyumiii]

Americans are required to own firearms by law--its actually in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or something.

Can our Thai "brothers-in-arms" make that claim?

BTW, only 25 posts and you are already fishing the big waters with a topic like this.

I see a bright future ahead ;-)

Your statement is false.

Americans are not required to own firearms!

Since you do not know what document you are quoting, it's obvious you have nothing to base this statement on.

Could you possibly be a troll????

The Bill of Rights states that:

Americans have the right to bear firearms, but only certain firearms and only certain Americans....

ie, no automatic weapons are permitted and no convicted felons can own any firearms.

Not all Americans like, own, or want firearms either!

Why do people like you make replies like this one...unless you are a troll or uninformed with a twisted imagination!

Get a grip Clutcher!

[papa al]

I'm American and it saddens me to say it, but I'll bet Americans have Thais beat by a long short. Way too many Americans are way too obsessed about guns.

I am far from a gun enthusiast, but even I own a rifle I inherited from my dad. It is a very beautiful .22 Winchester Rifle about 60 years old. I haven't shot it in more than 30 years. The only reason I keep it is because of it's quality, beauty and feel, though I did try to sell it before coming here, but you just can't sell an unregistered gun that easy.

Huh?

I've bought & sold guns in USA since 1961.

None have been 'registered.'

Not even sure what it means.

[papa al]

American "exceptionalism" at its best:

Fortunately the one's doing the best job of eliminating themselves seem to be mainly in the "red states."

Hmmmm....there's something not right about that chart. There's no way you could convince me that Australia has a lower gun homicide rate than NZ.. Brisbane alone probably beats NZ!

PER CAPITA !!!

[papa al]

Double post

CC I understand that you wanted to attract all the gun nuts out of the woodwork and I agree that a lot of people should never be let near a gun. One of the problems is there is no firearms proficiency testing or examination. People should be taught how guns work, how to strip them down and repair them if necessary, besides proper handling and marksmanship techniques. Unfortunately if you qualify for a license you get a gun.

Of course there are idiots that pray for the day when someone enters their property so they can take them out, but I would call the Police first before engaging an intruder. Trouble is if you shoot someone on your property their family knows where you live and then you could be the next target.

Psychos have access to bombs, poisons and a host of other weapons of mass destruction. They don't need guns.

I have always liked guns but never liked killing things for sport, except wild boar which is great eating. I don't shoot Bambi or Polar Bears. Only reasons I could imagine Eskimos use a .22 on Polar Bear is not to damage the hide and .22 cartridges and rifles are cheap and legal in most countries. Including Thailand.

There are responsible gun lovers out there.

When every second counts, police are only minutes away.

Plus the police might show up and shoot you or your dog.

It happens a lot.

See YouTube.

Edited May 20, 2014 by papa al

[papa al]

I'm glad you found it so humorous.

How did I find myself in so many situations? The folly of youth I suppose. I apologize for answering your rhetorical question, but I suppose that is my lack of communication and social skills kicking in.

Ensnared! You got me! You asked a question and I answered it. Very clever trap you set there. I suppose you are ensnaring me again, and I guess I'll fall right into it, answering again.

How would I approach the situation? Well, first, since I am not, nor ever have been, afraid of a gun any more than a knife, pipe, or any other weapon, I would have remained calm. I would have told the guy he isn't going to shoot me, since there is no way in hell he would. I would have said the following: "You can shoot me right now and go to jail, you can drive away and I call the police with your plate number and report you assaulted me with a firearm, or you can let the girl out of the car and everybody calms down. You don't want to do anything irrational, and nobody wants to make a decision here that is going to end their lives." I can't say that I would even have had a firearm on me, since (as I said before) the only firearm I've ever owned was a rifle (Remington 10/22) which never left my house. I haven't lived in the States since I got out of the military, so I haven't had a chance to own a pistol and obtain a CCP. If/when I move back to the States, I will go out and get a Concealed Carry Permit, which would make a situation like this much safer for me. Either way, I wouldn't have drawn it while I was trying to de-escalate a situation.

In many ways, a gun is a very safe weapon. It only fires in one direction, and has a limited amount of ammunition. Get close to someone with a knife, try to take it away from them, you will get cut. Get close to someone with a gun, it is pretty easy to disarm them if you know what you're doing. In your situation, stand slightly behind the B-pillar of the car so he can't get a clear shot at you, if he gets out knock it out of his hand. Call 911 on your phone before you even get out of your car, but in your case and at your age this incident may easily have happened before cell phones.

I'm guessing this wasn't the answer you were looking for. This is basic, basic stuff that, while I learned in the military, could easily be taught in school. Is there some reason volleyball and badminton are more important to teach to students than self-defense?

As far as your other statement goes, regarding the 2nd Amendment crowd always itching for a fight, I'd fight just as passionately if you tried to take away the rights in any of the other amendments. It just so happens more people attack the 2nd than the 3rd, nobody seems to think its acceptable to quarter troops in personal residences during peacetime, but its fine to say Americans no longer deserve the right to defend themselves.

Dissect my post again, as you seem to be so fond of doing. Pick out whichever parts seem to prove your point. The fact is, a armed, educated citizen in the vicinity of any of these massacres you are so afraid of could end it before it ran its course. On that subject, in a world where there are no guns, what would stop these individuals from making things like pipe bombs or simple chemical weapons? Those are indiscriminate weapons, capable of killing many people at once, while a gun can only fire one bullet at a time. No guns, the bombing at the Boston Marathon would still have happened.

I am not a vigilante, nor are the overwhelming majority of gun owners. We are responsible citizens who find preparedness to be important. Whether it be hunting, sport-shooting, self-defense, we are educated and know how to use a simple machine. We don't cower in fear from it. Spiders, yeah I might cower in fear from those from time to time.

Mister, if you aren't afraid of looking at the business end of a gun then I would say you are either a bit slow or you have never actually been in the situation. Your details continue to be lacking.

I hoped you might provide some details because "follies of youth" doesn't really mean much. Are you saying you used to go looking for trouble? Or was such a generic response necessary because you really didn't have those things happen to you? I am just saying I have never heard of anyone having the problems you appear to have had and they all occurred in your "youth"? So, you ran with a wild crowd but they seem to have not really been very tough if everytime they point a gun or knife at you, they failed to follow through. Not to say I am doubting you.

That was a decent response to the guy in the vehicle. You are correct in your assumption it was before cellphones. Did you ever live in the deep south in the late 1960's? If you ever spent time down there then you will know that they were not partial to Yankees and that is an understatement. Your description of your actions is a very nice textbook description and it took you longer to type it than the entire situation lasted but you may factor in that cops in New Orleans would have laughed at your complaint. The driver was in a nice vehicle with local tags which meant he likely had some influence and I was a yankee. Back then, yankees did best not involving themselves with NOPD. You also fail to recognize his window was rolled up so all your yelling would have been wasted. You also assume the woman wanted to leave the car, which it didn't appear she did. But go ahead and twist the circumstances however you need to so it fits with your textbook. The guy did not want to shoot me. He was just letting me know this was not something I wanted to stick my nose in. But lets say he did shoot me. All he had to tell the police is what the evidence would have supported. "Officer, I was stopped here minding my own business and some angry stranger approached my car and started pounding on my car in a threatening manner. I was blocked by traffic and fearing for my life I shot and killed him. You can see he was the one who had exited his vehicle and approached mine."

As for pipebomb and chemical weapon attacks. Well, I haven't heard of too many of those and even a guy who finds trouble as easily as you do never came up against such things so they must be pretty rare. It seems like a gun would be of limited value as you describe since such devices are typically placed in locations without anyone knowing who left them. How exactly are you going to stop them with a gun? How could you "have ended it before it ran its course"? Your words.

It is said the only way to win an internet argument is to not get involved in one in the first place but some of you guys just give me such a chuckle with how worked up you get. I don't know about your military career but if you were even half a tough a soldier as you are a keyboard warrior then you were one tough hombre.

Timothy McVeigh/ Oklahoma city.

Tokyo subway/Surin gas.

Boston Marathon bombing.

Iraq, Mombai, &c.

[ATF]

Americans are required to own firearms by law--its actually in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or something.

Can our Thai "brothers-in-arms" make that claim?

BTW, only 25 posts and you are already fishing the big waters with a topic like this.

I see a bright future ahead ;-)

Your statement is false.

Americans are not required to own firearms!

Since you do not know what document you are quoting, it's obvious you have nothing to base this statement on.

Could you possibly be a troll????

The Bill of Rights states that:

Americans have the right to bear firearms, but only certain firearms and only certain Americans....

ie, no automatic weapons are permitted and no convicted felons can own any firearms.

Not all Americans like, own, or want firearms either!

Why do people like you make replies like this one...unless you are a troll or uninformed with a twisted imagination!

Get a grip Clutcher!

There are some inaccuracies above. Fully automatic weapons are allowed and completely legal provided they were manufactured and registered before 1986. The ban is on the new production and importation of fully automatic weapons. Most semi-automatic weapons can be made into full auto very easily for less than 50 bucks and this is actually more dangerous than selling switchable full auto weapons because the full auto is always on.

So the Anti-Gun Lobby had it their way again and shot themselves in the foot, literally. A modified full-auto is impossible to tell from a semi-auto without firing it.

Good Night Sleep Tight!

[sgtsabai]

ATF, true, and some semi-auto military type weapons can still have the selector switch installed by the owner or competent gunsmith. No people, just because they are military doesn't make them assault rifles, the installation of a selector switch would qualify. Makes them pretty easy to spot though. M-1 carbine to M-2 comes to mind quickly, there are others and plenty of parts still floating around, or at least there was when I was involved in the gun business.

[ATF]

ATF, true, and some semi-auto military type weapons can still have the selector switch installed by the owner or competent gunsmith. No people, just because they are military doesn't make them assault rifles, the installation of a selector switch would qualify. Makes them pretty easy to spot though. M-1 carbine to M-2 comes to mind quickly, there are others and plenty of parts still floating around, or at least there was when I was involved in the gun business.

A Glock or any striker fired semi-auto handgun can be turned full-auto in 20 mins. LOL! If the Anti-Gun Mob actually knew anything about guns...........

[sgtsabai]

All they they know is they are scared of them.

[papa al]

Americans are required to own firearms by law--its actually in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or something.

Can our Thai "brothers-in-arms" make that claim?

BTW, only 25 posts and you are already fishing the big waters with a topic like this.

I see a bright future ahead ;-)

Your statement is false.

Americans are not required to own firearms!

Since you do not know what document you are quoting, it's obvious you have nothing to base this statement on.

Could you possibly be a troll????

The Bill of Rights states that:

Americans have the right to bear firearms, but only certain firearms and only certain Americans....

ie, no automatic weapons are permitted and no convicted felons can own any firearms.

Not all Americans like, own, or want firearms either!

Why do people like you make replies like this one...unless you are a troll or uninformed with a twisted imagination!

Get a grip Clutcher!

Nah, YOUR statement is false.

The 2nd amendment mentions neither felons nor automatic weapons.

Under the law individuals may own fully automatic weapons, with the proper (expensive) permit.

Get a grip Willy.