They're fundamentalists about their pet interpretation of Amendment II; they think it's some gross infringement of their "liberty" to consider any regulation of any firearms. Even though some police forces wouldn't mind a reduction in the amount of assault weapons out there, gun nuts say No!; even though "drive-by" has become part of the vocabulary, gun nuts say No!. Grandpa didn't need an AK47 (or an NRA membership) to kill us up some food.

You know, gun nuts, there is one in every crowd.

It's the guy (or girl) who just can't ever seem to get enough projectile throwing weaponry.

Black powder, smokeless powder, hell maybe even caseless ammunition guns if he's a real gun afficionado.

It's a person who will scrounge up all brass in sight after a day at the range, even those he doesn't have guns for. The gun nut also has at the very least one loaded pistol, one loaded rifle, and one loaded shotgun, in arms reach at all times.

He also probably owns a crap load of ammunition he doesn't even have guns for, yet. Or guns which you no longer can find ammunition for.

Most often a kick ass survivalist too and whose thought loop involved when buying more guns and ammo isn't

"What and how much of it do I need?"

but more like

"How much more will I need should I be forced to hold my ground due to an assault or a raid?"

I personally know people who have stockpiles in excess of 10,000 rounds each per caliber of firearm they own.

The gun nut will also have a decent collection of firearms, both working and fubar. Will most definitely have enough to arm his own family or more likely enough to arm his entire block should red dawn come.

When it comes to watching movies, the gun nut can be intolerable to other people who just want to pay their $8 and enjoy whatever absolutely unrealistic crap Hollyweird chooses to screen. They will count and complain that the weapons being used have only X amount of round capacity if the scene shows that the actor has fired more than the gun could possible contain and they will notice all sorts of continuity errors in the script based on the gun the actor's have and their condition in the last scene. They will endlessly argue about what kind, make, and even caliber of the gun used on screen.

Some even go as far as to suggest that the guns used should be given names and put in the credits.

You want to instigate them? Just ask them what pistol was Samuel L. Jackson carrying in Pulp Fiction, then stand back, far back.


So you see, *I* am far from qualifying as a gun nut, even a weenie level gun nut. All I have is a .45 acp pop gun for carry, a .22 lr rifle for rats, a .22 bolt action that is not working at the moment, a 7.7 mm type 92 japanese heavy machine gun that is fubar and a couple of bows and arrows and a speargun. But go ahead call me one, I take it as a compliment.


Pingouin: So the police are now the expert consultants on who can have guns and what kind of guns they can have? Last time that happened, millions were exterminated.

Do you honestly believe that banning guns will result in the vanishing into oblivion of the term drive by shooting?

What's wrong with the AK-47? Is the FAL a better alternative? I bet your answer will be something along the lines of: It's a terrorist weapon.

I think it's interesting that when some think of a gun nut, they think of a redneck cracker in Alabama with an AK-47 in one hand and a selectively highlighted copy of the Second Amendment stapled to an NRA membership card in the other. Then topics are discussed regarding drive-by shootings in California, anarchist nerds in Colorado, cults in Texas, snipers in Maryland, and other subjective violent crimes, in which the perpetrators do not even come close to this stereotype.

I am a self-proclaimed gun nut and I certainly do not fit this stereotype. I am a long hair granola environmentally friendly geek. I am not a violent person. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I have never killed anything with a gun. I have only had to aim at another human being once and thank God I wasn't forced to pull the trigger. However, I like shooting my guns...a lot.


...power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
-- Mao Zedong

A primal need in my being is fulfilled when that tiny piece of lead is flung from chamber of my rifle at 800 miles per hour conveying its reaction forcefully against my shoulder. It is powerful, a power that I am wielding and the only victim, a cardboard box decorated with a boy band poster. This primal desire for power exists, there's no denying it. People have been violent since that monkey touched the monolith and started smashing things with his bone.

There are a wide variety of legal outlets for this urge that range from sports to video games. But when it is suppressed, as with other primal urges, it can come out as violence upon another, as it has in the topics aformentioned. Removing modern day constructive non-violent outlets for this aggressive nature is akin to the proverbial chastity belt.


After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.
-- William S. Burroughs

Taking away the tool does not make anyone less violent. Guns are inanimate objects. Lots of things can be used to kill and guns are only one category. This is an old argument, but cars will kill more people this year than guns will (cars kill about 40,000 and injure more than 3 million people in the United States every year). However, we do not consider cars to be evil per say, only that when people used them irresponsibly people can die. We have lots of laws regarding responsible driving. We have lots of laws regarding responsible gun usage. People disregard those laws and people die. However, just because someone is stupid, reckless, or apathetic doesn't mean someone like myself, well educated in the proper usage of guns, should be oppressed simply because others are idiots. How would you feel if your right to assemble was revoked after a mass riot? Or your right to write was taken because too many people wrote libelous publications?


The Second Amendment ain't about fucking duck hunting.
-- Unknown

Red Dawn is a pretty cheesy movie, however the idea that the United States is safe from invasion is very naive. We are not untouchable. Students of history will tell you, underground resistance movements can have some nice teeth when they are armed. However, disarmed they are very inept. In fact, if you're interested in the drive-by, the French Resistonce invented it, not the Gs in Compton. However, the French took great care not to hit passers-by.

In the event of a totalitarian government, foreign or domestic, ascending upon this realm, those gun nuts that have buried truck trailers of guns, ammo and explosives are going to be essential in overthrowing that government. But I believe this serves a much greater purpose as a deterrent to invasion or oppression. It is thought that the reason the United States have not been invaded since 1812 is because of the extreme number of privately owned guns, it's not really a big secret.


Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
-- Thomas Jefferson

Disarming gun nuts won't solve our crime problems. In fact, allowing people to arm themselves will. For example, compare incidences of armed robbery in New York to those in Texas. In New York, the likelihood of a gun-toting hero is going to walk into a convenience store as it's being robbed is pretty slim. Criminals feel safe pulling a gun because it is very unlikely another with a gun will challenge them. In Texas the opposite is true. In a state where one out of every seven people has a concealed weapon, criminals do not have a monopoly on the power.


If you don't like guns, that's fine. I dig pacifists and am willing to fight for your freedoms and opinions as well as mine if needs be. However, please don't disrespect me simply because I have a different view than you. It's my right and you should respect that.

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.