I hope the antis in this country don't catch on to this one. http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbc ... 08691/1001
It seems that India has discovered a way to eliminate gun lovers. Keep them from reproducing!
If you want to own a gun you can only shoot blanks!
Regards, OE
NRA
TSRA
JPFO
American Legion
USN (69-77)
What did you expect?
That is by far, the best example I've seen of government "leaders" who just don't get it. The desire for firearms is driven by a need for better tools to defend against gangs and criminal action because the victims actually understand the government can't and won't protect them. Instead, the goverment equates firearm ownership with an expression of masculinity and offers licenses to those who agree to sterilization so they won't feel less manly. Believe it or not, the warped thought processes behind this are already here.
When you take the time out of your day to beat someone, it has a much longer lasting effect on their demeanor than simply shooting or tazing them.
G.C.Montgomery wrote:That is by far, the best example I've seen of government "leaders" who just don't get it. The desire for firearms is driven by a need for better tools to defend against gangs and criminal action because the victims actually understand the government can't and won't protect them. Instead, the goverment equates firearm ownership with an expression of masculinity and offers licenses to those who agree to sterilization so they won't feel less manly. Believe it or not, the warped thought processes behind this are already here.
Sounds like a win-win situation. The government wants to control the population (something India needs) and the people want guns. A fast track for men that get vasectomies sounds like a good idea to me. I don't see a conspiracy to illiminate gun owners.
TxRVer wrote:Sounds like a win-win situation. The government wants to control the population (something India needs) and the people want guns. A fast track for men that get vasectomies sounds like a good idea to me. I don't see a conspiracy to illiminate gun owners.
So then you'd be OK with your CHL being tied you getting a vasectomy? Controlling the country's birthrate and allowing people access to better tools with which to defend themselves are seperate issues in my mind so I'm afraid I don't' see it as a win-win.
When you take the time out of your day to beat someone, it has a much longer lasting effect on their demeanor than simply shooting or tazing them.
I think you've got it backwards. Their problem isn't with guns, their problem is with over-population. I've spent quite a bit of time in India and have seen it first hand. I can also tell you the Indians take very seriously their security, just look at who their neighbors are. So the govt isn't anti-gun for the populace, it's actually the opposite. And they're using the Indian male's interest in guns to entice them to get "fixed."
I'm not familiar with the licensing the story references, but the way I read it it doesn't say a man can't get a license unless they get a vasectomy, it implies a man gets to the front of the line so to speak. Quite a difference.
I can also say with first hand knowledge that just because the Indian govt is slow handing out some kind of firearm license doesn't mean it is anti-gun, it just means it is a big, slow, bureaucratic and quite corrupt machine that doesn't do anything quickly.
Blinking Dog wrote:I think you've got it backwards. Their problem isn't with guns, their problem is with over-population. I've spent quite a bit of time in India and have seen it first hand. I can also tell you the Indians take very seriously their security, just look at who their neighbors are. So the govt isn't anti-gun for the populace, it's actually the opposite. And they're using the Indian male's interest in guns to entice them to get "fixed."
I'm not familiar with the licensing the story references, but the way I read it it doesn't say a man can't get a license unless they get a vasectomy, it implies a man gets to the front of the line so to speak. Quite a difference.
I can also say with first hand knowledge that just because the Indian govt is slow handing out some kind of firearm license doesn't mean it is anti-gun, it just means it is a big, slow, bureaucratic and quite corrupt machine that doesn't do anything quickly.
I don't dispute India's population issues. It has been a well known issue for some time. I just don't agree that the concept that tying the processing of a license to a vasectomy is a win for everyone. As I said before, I consider an armed populace and controlling the country's birthrate to be seperate issues.
When you take the time out of your day to beat someone, it has a much longer lasting effect on their demeanor than simply shooting or tazing them.
It's documented an increase in testosterone is linked to men with guns. So, the pop logic is there on this one. http://www.webmd.com/news/20060728/guns ... aggression
A gun doesn't rally solve a guy's problem that he's been cut, but he's assured nobody's gonna ride him about his condition, or else...
If everybody had had a vasectomy 30 years ago, there would be fewer people driving cars and trucks and therefore the demand would be less and fuel wouldn't cost as much.
If fuel cost less, we could buy more guns and bullets and stuff.
TxRVer wrote:Sounds like a win-win situation. The government wants to control the population (something India needs) and the people want guns. A fast track for men that get vasectomies sounds like a good idea to me. I don't see a conspiracy to illiminate gun owners.
So then you'd be OK with your CHL being tied you getting a vasectomy? Controlling the country's birthrate and allowing people access to better tools with which to defend themselves are seperate issues in my mind so I'm afraid I don't' see it as a win-win.
I've already had it done, but if it meant skipping all the red tape and getting the CHL in a couple of weeks, and I didn't plan to have kids.....sure, why not?
Blinking Dog wrote:...And they're using the Indian male's interest in guns to entice them to get "fixed."
I'm not familiar with the licensing the story references, but the way I read it it doesn't say a man can't get a license unless they get a vasectomy, it implies a man gets to the front of the line so to speak.
I see this as a trifecta of entreprenuership...One stop shopping gets you a handgun, fixed, and a bag of frozen peas. Hmmm, now if I can just get a urologist, Birdseye, and Smith & Wesson to set up shop in Calcutta I'll make a killin'.
This isn't comparable to CHL or 2A issues. RKBA is denied in India, with special permission required to own most firearms (with licensing, caliber restrictions, registration, etc., all in effect).
This is a way for someone who wouldn't otherwise be able to legally own a firearm, to obtain a license to do so. I won't blame someone who takes advantage of it, any more than I'd blame someone who submits to the financial/political prostate exam required to own a handgun in New York.