The author, a doctor, makes the case that in our climate of daily random violence and desperate drug addicts, a doctor would be wise to have a gun in his office. He brings up the example of emergency rooms having metal detectors and bullet proof glass because shootings have actually occurred there. So he asks:
Would you not see a doctor if you knew he had a gun in his office?
To those who would fear ....... I ask you this, why would a doctor having a gun bother you? Do you live in fear that your physician is trying to kill you? I mean if he really wanted you dead, he could stab you with a scalpel or inject you with something lethal. He could do so with the tools of his profession in a much more efficient manner than with a gun.
... Why do you think the founding fathers decided to put in the "right to bear arms" for "We The People"?
Um, probably because they were living in a totally different time? I doubt they were thinking handguns in work situations.
Your founding fathers, not mine. I am not a US citizen. As a result, I don't understand the reliance on firearms. As I already said, "someone" in this thread (I didn't say who) said they have a loaded firearm in their work locker. However you want to slice it, that scares me. I am not advocating a gun ban or anything like it.. I just don't understand the "guns r good" mindset. Perhaps it's a cultural issue.
I'm assuming this was directed at me. Did you actually read my post? I specifically mentioned handguns, not just 'guns' in general.
I myself have been to a firing range many times and done skeet shooting, which I find enjoyable. I rent a shotgun, shoot some clay pidgeons, give it back and go home. I am not afraid of guns themselves, or even most people who carry. That has not once been something I have stated or argued about.
What I said was that handguns have exactly one purpose, and if you disagree...please enlighten us as to what purpose they serve other than to kill human beings.
Then you make my point perfectly.
A shotgun (long gun) makes a horrible mess of a human body. In fact, shotguns are the preferred weapon for home defense in part for that reason and in part because their loads do not go through the perpetrator and then through a wall. They sort of just expend all their energy by cutting the human body pretty much in half depending upon the gauge, the load, and the distance. But as you say, you shoot clay pigeons. Great fun. I'm envious. I am a terrible wing-shot.
But handguns....
You enjoy shooting a shot gun... Why on earth do you assume that I/we can't have a simply marvelous time competing, winning a trophy, going up the ranks from Sharpshooter to Master by scoring well, why we can't be members of leagues where we compete against each other or just against ourselves. Why we read publications about national matches and even follow the rising stars in the sport when they receive national or international recognition. Why do you say that pistols/handguns are intended ONLY to kill people. As I said before, there are many, many guns (and loads) that are designed specifically for high-scoring target shooting and which would be less than miserable for self-defense. Much, much, much inferior to your shotgun. 12 gauge, or 410, bird shot or buck. Your weapon is far more lethal than anything I handle.
Your statement that pistols are for one thing only (killing human beings) is not only incomprehensible to me, but shows an incredible... I don't know what... elitism? I mean... you're just soooooo wrong, so misinformed and so mistaken. I can only assume that most of what you know about handguns has been learned from those who want them banned. I say that because the one fact of which you are most confident (hand guns are only for man-killing) is exactly the argument they make. You have their talking points down pat.
Um, probably because they were living in a totally different time? I doubt they were thinking handguns in work situations.
Your founding fathers, not mine. I am not a US citizen. As a result, I don't understand the reliance on firearms. As I already said, "someone" in this thread (I didn't say who) said they have a loaded firearm in their work locker. However you want to slice it, that scares me. I am not advocating a gun ban or anything like it.. I just don't understand the "guns r good" mindset. Perhaps it's a cultural issue.
You are right the founding fathers were living in a different time. The Revolutionary War was a much more volatile and violent time than we live in today. Handguns of the 20th and 21st century (which are only meant for killing humans according to ooottafvgvah) would have actually been pretty much useless during this time. When the war started, the United States had no organized army or navy. Initially, our now British friends really beat the sh## out of us. One of the major reasons we won our independence, was our utilization of guerrilla warfare. Our guys organized small militias, used their own firearms and hid in trees to pick off the redcoats (from distances exceeding the effective range of a handgun) as they(the redcoats) continued to line up in the traditional regiments. The British were simply not used to our unconventional war tactics and could not adapt quickly enough to overcome us. Rifles are actually much more effective at killing humans than handguns. They have superior advantages in range, accuracy and deliver a much higher rate of energy upon bullet impact.
After the war, guys such as Alexander Hamiliton, James Madison, Richard Lee, Henry Mason and various others recongized the importance of the right for law abiding citizens to always own and carry arms. Firearms owned by early Americans are what gave us our independence and even today protect our God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
They may not be your founding fathers, but they are my founding fathers and I do believe 'guns r good'. Without them we would not be the great nation that we are today.
Were the founding fathers thinking about handguns in the workplace? No, they were thinking about smoothbore muskets and .45 cal long rifles in the workplace, home, and on person.
Um, probably because they were living in a totally different time? I doubt they were thinking handguns in work situations.
Your founding fathers, not mine. I am not a US citizen. As a result, I don't understand the reliance on firearms. As I already said, "someone" in this thread (I didn't say who) said they have a loaded firearm in their work locker. However you want to slice it, that scares me. I am not advocating a gun ban or anything like it.. I just don't understand the "guns r good" mindset. Perhaps it's a cultural issue.
Yeah, I think it is a cultural thing. I believe we're the only nation that came into being with the understanding that self-defense is not only our right but our responsibility first and foremost. I think many of the posters on this thread don't realize how unusual our nation is in this regard. I can understand why we must seem exotic somehow to outsiders.
I don't know if you are writing from another country, or if you are living and working here. If the latter is the case, I'd encourage you to try to interface with some gun owners. Truly, if you went to a pistol range, you'd see some very average and unremarkable Americans who enjoy the sport of shooting. Since it is a benign thing to them, it's not so unusual that they appreciate the self-defense potential of the instruments with which they are very comfortable.
Pistols are not exotic. There is so much safety engineered into them, you have to really work hard to be stupid enough to hurt yourself. You have to be literally criminally negligent AND stupid to hurt someone else. And before you can purchase and carry a gun, you have to have your background checked and be trained and tested. (Wish similar stringency was required to get a driver's license.)
So... I would never say "guns 'r good" because they are neither good nor bad. They are morally neutral. They are inanimate. I would say, however, that gun OWNERS are demonstrably and certifiably "good", because their character and record as citizens is examined by their local law enforcement agencies, using a national data base, and they are educated by licensed instructors, and have to pass a competency test ON THE SPECIFIC GUN FOR WHICH THEY ARE BEING LICENSED before they are legal to carry.
So while I understand it must seem unusual to you, I'd encourage you to try to be dispassionate and objective. A visceral negation of guns and those who own them, coming from a non-American, could be a form of chauvinism.
Specializes in Management, Emergency, Psych, Med Surg.
I work 3-11 and I have a dark parking lot to walk through at night. I carry a .38. I go into the restroom after I clock out, get it out of my purse and put it in my right pocket. I walk out with my finger on the trigger. I have a carry permit and am licensed to carry a concealed weapon.
When you work at a hospital, there is no reason to carry a gun.
People that take them to work may need to check with your HOSPITAL policy on this...I have never worked for an employer in my life that allowed you to take a firearm on company property, in fact, you can be fired for it...regardless of whether the state says you can or not.
If people don't want to walk to their cars alone, and in some cities, it's not safe to, then that is what security is for.
I sometimes question an individual that feels the need that they have to carry a gun on their person all the time. In a car, I can understand...I do this myself, but not on their person.
um, probably because they were living in a totally different time? i doubt they were thinking handguns in work situations.
your founding fathers, not mine. i am not a us citizen. as a result, i don't understand the reliance on firearms. as i already said, "someone" in this thread (i didn't say who) said they have a loaded firearm in their work locker. however you want to slice it, that scares me. i am not advocating a gun ban or anything like it.. i just don't understand the "guns r good" mindset. perhaps it's a cultural issue.
yes- it absolutely is a cultural issue. having guns around scares you. that's ok. not having guns around and in the hands of law abiding citizens scares me.
banning guns in public places and places where the public congregates (such as private hospitals, malls, etc.) amounts to an effective gun ban. unless no one leaves the privacy of their own homes that is...
i didn't understand the 'guns are good' mindset either until faced with one in the hands of a criminal. then my mind changed. quickly. it was then that i started researching the history of firearms and what part they have played in history.... i agree wholeheartedly with the founding fathers of my country when they said-
"i ask, sir, what is the militia? it is the whole people. to disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." george mason co-author of the second amendment during virginia's convention to ratify the constitution, 1788.
"firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. they are the american people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... from the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable ... the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference-they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." george washington first president of the united states"
"the supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. the same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside ... horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." thomas paine"
"are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of congress? if our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" patrick henry american patriot"
"the constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ... " thomas jefferson letter to justice john cartwright, june 5, 1824."
"what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. let them take arms." thomas jefferson to james madison"
"they that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Hospitals have parking lots that aren't always well lit or traficked. One has to get from point A to point B.
As for security and walking to the car- there aren't enough security officers employed by the hospital to cover that- (and what do you do for going in- call and ask for the guard to meet you in the lot and describe your vehicle?) many people also prefer the self reliance, and don't feel confident in a security guard versus an armed thug.
I think anyone who carries into a facility that bans firearms is courting a legal charge- let alone job loss- but I think that such policies are asinine. However, that doesn't mean I don't feel it vital to adhere to them. I would point out, though, that in those cases, guns aren't the only options. Tasers, pepper spray, etc. are all possible alternatives to both comply with policy and offer a degree of safety. (Personally I prefer tasers.)
When you work at a hospital, there is no reason to carry a gun.
People that take them to work may need to check with your HOSPITAL policy on this...I have never worked for an employer in my life that allowed you to take a firearm on company property, in fact, you can be fired for it...regardless of whether the state says you can or not.
If people don't want to walk to their cars alone, and in some cities, it's not safe to, then that is what security is for.
I sometimes question an individual that feels the need that they have to carry a gun on their person all the time. In a car, I can understand...I do this myself, but not on their person.
What I said was that handguns have exactly one purpose, and if you disagree...please enlighten us as to what purpose they serve other than to kill human beings.
Yes- I disagree. Some other purposes are competition and recreational shooting, as well as serving as a collectable item.
I can't BELIEVE that some people here have admitted to putting a loaded gun in their work locker... that is INSANE to me!!
I'd feel safer with no guns at all.
If a loaded gun is in a locker, then unless the threat is elsewhere in the facility AND there is time to get it, it's still no protection. If you have time to retrieve before the threat arrives on your floor, then go for it.
We'd all be safer with no guns at all, but those who are not law-abiding citizens will have guns, do have gun, laws or not.
ghillbert, MSN, NP
3,796 Posts
Um, probably because they were living in a totally different time? I doubt they were thinking handguns in work situations.
Your founding fathers, not mine. I am not a US citizen. As a result, I don't understand the reliance on firearms. As I already said, "someone" in this thread (I didn't say who) said they have a loaded firearm in their work locker. However you want to slice it, that scares me. I am not advocating a gun ban or anything like it.. I just don't understand the "guns r good" mindset. Perhaps it's a cultural issue.