Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
BUDDHIST Packing Pistol Shows America's Warm Embrace of Guns
compassionate_warrior
Veteran
Bad news: polls show handgun ownership is becoming much more accepted in the US, even by groups once staunchly anti-gun: "women, liberals, gays, college kids".
Robin Natanel, a Buddhist and a Tai Chi instructor, got a James-Bond-style pistol to protect herself after an ex-boyfriend broke into her home when she was away. Reports say she is indicative of a trend toward mainstream acceptance of handgun ownership, and a feeling that life isn't safe anymore, "even as violent US crime rates fall". "Twenty years ago, 76% of women felt [as Natanel used to: no one should have handguns], and 68% of all people in the country were wary enough of firearms of any kind to tell Gallup pollsters that they backed laws more strictly limiting their sale. In October, a Gallup poll found a record low support for a handgun ban--at 26% among all, and 31% among women.
The surge [in approval of gun ownership]has been propelled by shifting politics and demographics that have made it easier and more acceptable than at any time in 75 years for Americans to buy and carry pistols. Post 9/11 fears seem to be a factor, as has been the relentless pro-gun politicking of the National Rifle Association and marketing, particularly to women, by handgun manufacturers. Events like last Thursday's shooting at Virginia Tech contribute to a feeling the world is not a safe place..."
full article at:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-09/buddhist-packing-bond-pistol-shows-american-warm-embrace-of-guns.html
Could any Buddhists here see themselves owning a handgun, or any gun?
Robin Natanel, a Buddhist and a Tai Chi instructor, got a James-Bond-style pistol to protect herself after an ex-boyfriend broke into her home when she was away. Reports say she is indicative of a trend toward mainstream acceptance of handgun ownership, and a feeling that life isn't safe anymore, "even as violent US crime rates fall". "Twenty years ago, 76% of women felt [as Natanel used to: no one should have handguns], and 68% of all people in the country were wary enough of firearms of any kind to tell Gallup pollsters that they backed laws more strictly limiting their sale. In October, a Gallup poll found a record low support for a handgun ban--at 26% among all, and 31% among women.
The surge [in approval of gun ownership]has been propelled by shifting politics and demographics that have made it easier and more acceptable than at any time in 75 years for Americans to buy and carry pistols. Post 9/11 fears seem to be a factor, as has been the relentless pro-gun politicking of the National Rifle Association and marketing, particularly to women, by handgun manufacturers. Events like last Thursday's shooting at Virginia Tech contribute to a feeling the world is not a safe place..."
full article at:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-09/buddhist-packing-bond-pistol-shows-american-warm-embrace-of-guns.html
Could any Buddhists here see themselves owning a handgun, or any gun?
0
Comments
Why good marketing? Because there are many other risks in life, so the need of most people to own a gun is not as great as gun makers would like. Over on another forum, where gun ownership is considered good sense, and not owning one is considered foolish i found that people get guns to avoid troublesome situations: getting robbed, raped, shot etc. Thing is, the possibility for this to happen is not as great as e.g. getting a heart attack. How many people do you know that own defibrillators? I'm guessing very few. So gun ownership is mostly a matter of fashion, and as such is really of no consequence.
In Buddhism there is also no place for an eternal, unchanging self - is a Buddhist a gun owner, are Buddhists not gun owners? This is a matter of forming an identity, while suggesting ownership of a gun in some way defines a person / defines the "self". Which is irrelevant. I'm a person owning a gun, i'm a person not owning a gun. Buddhism is not a path that leads to an perfect "I". Do not expect it to define you, or give you instructions on an "I" that would be more permanent or perfect or whatever...
I have no desire to shoot animals either... I personally don't see the sport in that
I wouldn't pass judgement on someone possesing one in a responsible manner to protect their children i dont care if they're labeled bodhisattva
it seems like there's an imbalance in the US.
just an observation
I don't see the public in other countries demanding to have guns so that the outlaws won't be the only ones with guns. The US may be "out of balance" because it's dominated by corporate interests, and apparently the gun manufacturers are part of that.
I'm just throwing this out there for discussion. Just some thoughts.
However I am opposed to hunting for sport, with a gun, or any weapon.
I recently read the autobiography of the Dalai Lama's oldest brother. He was declared to be a reincarnate lama, and was sent to live in the local monastery where they family came from in eastern Tibet (actually on the Chinese side of the border. None of the family spoke Tibetan until they moved to Lhasa.) When the family moved to Lhasa, the oldest brother decided to leave his monastery to be with his family. He never got over missing his family when in the monastery. So he organized a caravan to Lhasa, and brought rifles along, so his assistants could hunt for food along the way. I imagine that if they'd encountered bandits, the guns would have been used against the bandits. But I'd guess that they might shoot in the air first, to scare them away, and not shoot to kill unless absolutely necessary.
Well, with the exception of my rifle, if someone was going to go on a sniping spree. Whereas handguns can be kept in a pocket or waistband and quickly drawn and fired, weapons like mine are practically impossible to sneak in somewhere or use in close quarters.
While I support the removal of handguns from the population, I honestly do not see how it could be done practically. You could check through the gun registry and go door to door I suppose, but that is assuming that everyone that owns them would want to turn them in in the first place. Not to mention I am sure there are many more unregistered handguns in the states than registered ones. And again, even if you somehow managed to round them all up, our proximity and rather large and unregulated borders with Canada and Mexico will ensure a steady flow of illegal and unregistered handguns into the states. Suddenly many more people are armed, and not on the radar. Gun control of this nature has to start at the borders. You can remove as many as you want, but you will never get rid of all of them until the borders are firmly secured.
last night, one street down there was a home invasion. they pepper sprayed a 70 year old lady and when the maintenance man came to check on her they pistol whipped him and then shot him in the face. these things happen ALL the time where i live... and where i live is NOT that bad compared to many many places.
It's generally the atmosphere that prompts most people who wouldn't otherwise think of getting a gun, to get one.
Guns suck, but they're only an extension of what a human is willing to do to survive.
We can definitely argue that the best thing to do is avoid it as far as absolutely possible, so as to contribute to an atmosphere of de-arming. However, anyone here who has kids, and young, provenly-violent drug dealers living down the road (as I do), at some point thinks, "Do I have a right to opt out of this protection?"
We could also then argue whether the gun actually affords protection, given the stats.
Of course, the other solution would be either a) put bars on the windows, as some neighbors already have, or b) get central air conditioning, like I have, so there's no need to open windows.
Guns aren't the only solution. But if the majority of the population has guns, guess what? Then ALL the outlaws will have guns, and those few without them will be sitting ducks. It means even teen punks, poor people looking at the nicer homes in the next neighborhood over, juvenile delinquents, everyone will have guns. This is not headed in a good direction...
And notice that our non-US members aren't thinking this way. They're not saying "I need a gun to protect my family", or "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns". They don't fear for their lives because guns are outlawed in their country. They feel safe.
Excellent point. Totally agree. I think like any mediation, then, one would have to get through the scary interim period here in the States, where we have to at some point lay down our arms knowing that not everyone has yet.
The thing is, to be really certain the new law was complied with, the government would have to get pretty invasive. Searching everyone's homes and all.
As Dakini points out, the abolition of slavery, in the US, was used as an excuse for a civil war - although that was not the case elsewhere in the world.
Just pray that nobody suggests a "War on Guns". Now that could get messy.
I grew up with the lore that every Swiss boy, at the age of 14, was required to have a clean, oiled, loaded rifle, kept in an unlocked, accessible case and know how to use it; and that overall crime in Switzerland was low. I think I read it in National Geographic, lol.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland
---
Prof. Marshall Clinard writes in Cities With Little Crime: "Even in the largest Swiss cities crime is not a major problem. The incidence of criminal homicide and robbery is low, despite the fact that firearms are readily available in most households." The low crime rate is even more remarkable in that the criminal justice system is relatively lenient.
In American society, firearms take on a sinister reputation from the nightly news and excessively-violent movies. In Switzerland, firearms symbolize a wholesome, community activity. The typical weekend shooting festival brings out the entire family. By the range will be a huge tent where scores or even hundreds of people are eating, drinking, and socializing. With colorful banners of the Cantons and of the rifle clubs fluttering in the wind, the melody of rifle fire blends with Alpine music and cow bells. Event sponsors may include banks, supermarkets, watch makers, and Die Post--the telephone and postal system.
The bottom line is one of attitude. Populations with training in civic virtue, though armed, generally do not experience sensational massacres or high crime rates. Switzerland fits this mold. But the United States does not. As H. Rap Brown declared in the 1960s, "Violence is as American as apple pie."
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership
I carry a 9mm sidearm everywhere I go in public (concealed at my side) and keep a shotgun by my bed. I'm not a paranoid person; I'm just not a sap, especially given how home invasions are not uncommon. I've never used my guns on anyone. I feel much safer in fact since I work in a rough neighborhood.
At the risk of sounding argumentative, factually, statistically speaking, you most assuredly are paranoid. For one thing, there is no accepted legal definition of "home invasion". Such a thing is not a crime in any jurisdiction that I'm aware of in the US. Statistics, given the lack of a clear definition, are at best highly unreliable. Even using the most all-encompassing definition, such things are extremely uncommon in the vast majority of places in the US.
As long as you feel safe, that's fine. Just so long as you know that statistically you and your family stand a MUCH greater chance of dying of a gunshot wound than I do.
Well yes, actually breaking and entering (I'm not lawyerly inclined, so perhaps there's a difference) is common where I live. I'm more knowledgeable of the Castle Doctrine, which basically states in Ohio that you may shoot intruders into your household providing that you feel in great danger of physical harm or life.
And to play the statistics game, if you own a swimming pool and have children, I believe they are about 100 times as likely to die from drowning than to die from my guns and no pool.
I
Yet another concept of what a Buddhist is.
I guess we have to define Buddhism properly.
Buddhism is a way of living to me.
The 4NT's, 8Fold, the three marks and karma here an now.
Where in any of this is protecting my family prohibited?
We have and cling to our concepts, our likes and dislikes.
Clinging, even it's to one's ideas about Buddhism is still clinging, it's still Samsara.
Also, we have established that switzerland has a lot of guns, but very few shooting among people. There are very few shootings among people in the EU in general, so what is the problem? If the swiss can have guns and not go around blowing people away so often, it must be the population in general. Yes brian, you have never shot anybody, but you are one person among many millions in your country who could easily do such a thing.
Also, as I have stated previously, comparing the murder rate of America to undeveolped countries is not really sufficent for a discussion of this nature, compare it to the other deveolped countries and sure, there are your stats and figures you should be looking at.