30 March, 2007

Way off topic


Key Quote

“If liberals interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the rest of the Bill of Rights, there would be law professors arguing that gun ownership is mandatory.”


Anonymous said...

What I want to know is why so many control rooms are off limits to firearms? I am working at a plant this week with a sign prominently discouraging transport onto site. Am I supposed to depend on the rent-a-cops to defend me if one of the plant workers goes nuts and starts shooting up the place?

Anonymous said...

Never mind those occasional employees going postal. What about the public?

We have a similar policy where we work. Utility workers are not allowed to carry firearms of any sort --regardless of where they are working. I know of several instances where we were asked to fix problems in very dangerous neighborhoods after dark on a Friday night. To say that we were nervous was an understatement.

In one case, the duty engineer flatly refused to go on site without armed escort. When asked, even the security guards were nervous about going there. The location was next to one of those public housing complexes overrun by illegal drug trade, and gang violence. We were not happy about taking trucks full of expensive tools and spare parts to a place filled with drugged out and desperate people who would kill just to prove how awful they were.

Now, if these folks knew that we might be packing heat of our own, they would think twice. However, most knew that we not supposed to carry any weapons. It seems to me, if they were going to ask us to go to such places, they ought to allow us to carry appropriate protection as well. Many of these places had very sparse policing because the cops had given up. They were constantly getting sued for brutality. I guess it's better when your neighbor is brutal instead...

Anonymous said...

I am sad to see that the prospect of going to repair a job makes you feel the need to bear arms for protection. I know it is one of the constitutional rights in the USA but surly this should not be the case at a workplace in either instance?

Having worked in the industry where it was necessary to carry firearms to protect oneself I was always quite happy that there was some other fool that carried the gun and provided protection as more often than not they were the one that the bad guys were more interested in when things went out of shape.

I would have thought that the local police would be open to assisting utility representatives to be safe to restore services even in these high risk areas but perhaps this is no the case anymore. I am certain that there are places in every big city that are not to be frequented at night maybe this should not be tolerated or is the practice of zero tolerance not a viable solution in these areas as it certainly seems to have cleaned up New York from what it was like or are there still areas there the same rules apply ?

Health and safety laws don't appear to be as protective in your part of the world as it would not be reasonable for an employer to knowingly place an employee in harms way in this country? Maybe there are a few things that need to be sorted out before the need to carry a gun is necessary. for my mind if you carry a gun it's purpose is either for killing food or people so if you carry one in the city it is for killing people are things that bad maybe you should move to somewhere that you don't need to lock your doors even when you go away on vacation!

Anonymous said...

Actually, that's a major reason why so many cities in the US are uninhabitable. Productive and Educated people get disgusted with the commonplace crime and awful behavior of the lower class. So they move out because they can.

You're then left with the upper class who can afford protection and who live in enclaves where the criminals have to make an effort to get to. The lower class can't afford anything better. They stay, unable to improve their lot much, and they try make do with what they have. Welcome to most cities in the US. Now you know why the middle class is in such short supply in major cities.

It's not about the guns. Guns are the symptom, not the cause. The cause is drugs, mental disease, and desperation.

It used to be that we threw such people out of the cities and told them to work on the wide open rural lands. If they survived and thrived, great. If they didn't, we didn't know about it and didn't care.

Today, cities are required to take in the indigent. Mental disease is no longer dealt with in large Santarium complexes. This leads to a tendency toward lawlessness.

Cities "solve" this problem by making living so expensive that the poor can't afford to be there. The Rich ignore the plight of the homeless and desperate in the hope that they'll move on and go somewhere else.

Self protection is the only option left in many major cities. If I can afford a rent-a-cop, I would ask them to be there. If I can't, I would at least ask for the tools to defend myself.

Those are the options. Until we change the dynamic our cities are built on, self protection is really the only option left.

Jim C said...

Might have been off topic but interesting comments. As a matter of fact they apply to the topic so I suppose it wasn't off.

It has also pointed out a fundamental difference in the view of use of arms. Namely that they can be "used" (passively or preventively) without being "fired" (actively). Though it is quite right that if it is carried you better know how to use it an be prepared to do so in the proper circumstances. There are many oportunities to be trained for that in the USA.

Since I can't tell where the posters are from is it fair to guess that the first two are Americans and the third not?

From my side there are good and bad places in every city and having lived in the bad locations more than once I can say.

1 They are not usually as bad as some would have you beileve and even in the worse it is rare for bad things to happen.

2 During the rare times they are bad you really really want some means to ensure your safety.

3 Often they are bad because they are avoided by the police and vice verse.