Reset Password
Reset Link Sent
| Blogs > one_hung_low > My Blog |
why did cowboys give up their guns?
|
why did cowboys give up their guns? With gun control being a response to the mass shootings and active shooter defense by allegedly having more gun carry options on the street, let's see if history can teach us which is more likely to succeed. At one time nearly every old west inhabitant was familiar with guns to defend their property and lives from indians, robbers, and gunslingers sent to kill them. Clearly they had an open carry mentality and more gun<b> philosophy. </font></b>In the 1920s and 30s, outlaws outgunned police with automatic weapons. In some ways, today's SWAT is a response to the drug trade and turf wars a few decades back, as was the creation of the FBI to deal with illegal alcohol distribution during prohibition. Clearly better training and weapons was an historical response. Today's nsa would be following in those footsteps. I'm not sure better armed citizens would be a logical extension of that thinking. I also grew up hearing that more people are injured by guns meant to defend themselves than kill home invaders and robbers. Part of it is rationalizing killing by the average citizen versus a criminal facing many years behind bars and essentially ending his life. Clearly the robber has more incentive to escape prosecution by killing witnesses and hoping to escape without penalty. The 10 commandments say not to kill, but that hasn't prevented wars or crime. Is some jewelry worth a man's life? Money? The TV set? Where does one draw the line? Men and now women are being trained for war and killing. How long is their training period in boot camp before specializing? Six months? a year? Clearly one day to teach gun handling and shooting to arm mass quantities of citizens to protect against a few thousand terrorists worldwide willing to become suicide bombers and mass shootist doesn't seem a likely win (They can't get big numbers, they keep killing themselves!). Willing to die is not quite the same as suicide bombers and shooters. Hot tempers and easy access to guns would probably kill more people than lowering the body count of active shooters and ease how difficult it would be for criminals to obtain guns when they could become easy and valuable home theft items. I'm not sure why cowboys stopped carrying their guns. It likely was several things coming together, or in today's vernacular, a perfect storm of events. This would include the forced migration of indians to reservation as the conclusion of the indian wars. More private and public law enforcement. Think armed guards in banks, stage coaches, and trains, making them harder targets to hit and more likely for ending criminal lives adjusting the balance of easy Money for little risk. Last was likely marshals and other lawmen becoming part of the frontier towns as they developed permanence and names instead of fading to ghost towns as populations rose. I'm pretty sure I would not want to defend myself, and would take the approach of many establishments. That is, property is not worth dying over. Call the police and report the crime, don't try to stop them by yourself. Guns also are a bit more permanent of a solution. I think people have ramped up fights to gunfights to ensure they do not bring a knife to a gunfight. I also suspect that as each incident hardens a target, others will become targets to get the most notoriety with each attack. Plane hijackings are almost unheard of now that each passenger is in a life threatening situation and not merely inconvenienced or held for ransom. I'm not sure what blowing up planes accomplishes, but we are too entrenched in travels to realistically stop flying unless it becomes unsafe and more dangerous than driving. It also gets expensive to replace planes and airports. Those helping terrorists cold be eliminating their own jobs and they will need to find new work. Cruises would be the same, but is a limited market already. How many people would be terrorized if a cruise ship blows up and sinks? They have life boats don't they, or they would need a big bomb. even the Cole didn't sink with a boatload of explosives. I have a feeling I would not be prepared to squeeze the trigger unless it was self defense. I wonder how many of us could kill living animals with guns and gut, clean and eat it as a way of preparing to defend yourself against home invaders? Cage free food would take on new meanings. I think most of us are happy not to do this and are thankful for domestication as we get more removed with food production and throw Money at it instead. It will take government to fund the fight against terrorists and not the average citizen. This is not the British, Mexicans, Spanish or other country that we are fighting their army with minutemen and militia with clearly defined lines of us and them for governance. I don't think the terrorists will win the war. I also don't know why Germany supported one side of the Spanish civil war except to test weapons and methods before launching into ww2 and weapon production. I also don't know why people from other countries went to fight there as well. The glory of war has faded considerably, yet it still seems like everybody is still looking for scapegoats to demonize and seek to eradicate so a greater society can be made without them, and yet businesses wants to embrace diversity! Now, can anybody answer why cowboys gave up carrying and displaying the guns they had and hid them in gun safes instead of mounted on the wall for easy access? We probably need to learn from history and not repeat and relearn lessons again since we have the internet and instant answers. While not perfect or able to stop all terrorists, the nsa and increased focus on them from other organizations will help. They too can learn from their mistakes and make it harder for terrorist to be successful. Eventually popular opinion will govern what happens as outrage will demand action and like Saddam and weapons of mass destruction be either right or wrong when that happens. |
|||
|
Cause all the fucking Liberals tried to take them away. Good enough answer ??
| ||
|
Unfortunately not a single civilian with a gun has killed a terrorist. Innocent people yes,.....terrorists no.
| ||
|
"Back in cowboy times, not many would have owned a Gatling gun, but today in US you can own the far deadlier modern morph, a high powered, auto, large-magazine assault weapon. Yet my childhood tells me that a society with single or double shot only weapons could be sane and safe (even cowboys only had SIX shooters). So I get that. I think prolific pistols, modern handguns are another issue, but US has always been a handgun culture, so that's your issue to own." You was doing pretty good there in your rant but you are dead ... no pun intended .... wrong on one thing. You used the term "auto". Fully automatic weapons are strictly controlled in this country. Background checks .... fees .... long waiting periods. And they aren't cheap. The average law abiding Joe can not .... repeat .... CAN NOT ... just walk into a gun shop and walk out with a fully automatic weapon. If you're a criminal ... well .... they don't obey laws much anyway. Might want to do just a tad bit more research before you start posting stuff about what goes on in places not your own. AB No Bozos
| ||
1/1/2016 12:26 am |
Once the government starts grabbing guns, where will it stop? The people of Australia are lucky, they live on an island. We have a border that is porous at best, non-existent at worst. Do you actually think a "coyote" bringing people across the border are going to check their fully auto, 30 rd capacity assault weapons in at a check point? I live by the border and bad things happen down here all the time that never makes the news. It would fly in the face of the people who have their own agendas to fulfill. Most places here, help can be anywhere from 15 mins to 2 hours away. So, the cowboys still have their guns and now we can carry them. We dodge trouble as best we can but I will protect my loved ones to the utmost of my ability.
|
Become a member to create a blog
