People have overthrown their governments (recently) without weapons... Well, without physical weapons (get it?). Until popular opinion changes, no matter what country you're in, guns won't help you one bit. They may prolong a revolution or civil war, but until the populace is behind you, you'll never achieve your goals.
If you want revolution, if you want change, the populace must want change too. Without popular opinion, you're dead and buried.
UH oh... I just heard a journalist talk about how it was Video games or rather 'murder simulators' caused the guy to kill all those people..
And you know how these "video games kill people" stories tend to grow faster then a snowball...
...........
..............
...................
What's your Wu Name? Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader "Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.." <i>ME<i>
Taking guns alway from the public only makes more crime and money going in to the pockets of criminals. It's kinda why drugs should be legal so we can take the money away from the REAL criminals.
Think about who REALLY has the motive to take away normally legal guns from the good law abiding public. Good people or criminals? Very simple logic. Remember you can't ever remove all guns or stop private manufactoring of them.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns?
I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense.
"I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess."
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns?
Potential? Ok so you can't give an example? Strike one. Also I don't really think they exist. Potential doesn't pay the rent. I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense.
You could claim it but criminals claim innocence all the time for numerous reasons. This is why we have something we call "trials". Trust me your one claim won't be all the evidence there is. "I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess."
Wow you know how to lie! You're a MASTERMIND! Where did you come up with this genious idea? Nobody has heard of this before especially not POLICE!
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Originally posted by AlexAmore Originally posted by Coldmeat What about potential criminals that want people to have guns? Potential? Ok so you can't give an example? Strike one. Also I don't really think they exist. Potential doesn't pay the rent. I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense. You could claim it but criminals claim innocence all the time for numerous reasons. This is why we have something we call "trials". Trust me your one claim won't be all the evidence there is. "I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess." Wow you know how to lie! You're a MASTERMIND! Where did you come up with this genious idea? Nobody has heard of this before especially not POLICE!
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns?
Potential? Ok so you can't give an example? Strike one. Also I don't really think they exist. Potential doesn't pay the rent.
I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense.
You could claim it but criminals claim innocence all the time for numerous reasons. This is why we have something we call "trials". Trust me your one claim won't be all the evidence there is.
"I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess."
Wow you know how to lie! You're a MASTERMIND! Where did you come up with this genious idea? Nobody has heard of this before especially not POLICE!
Reasonable doubt.
Yeah there is reasonable doubt that criminals want innocent people to have guns.
This is a really weak argument on your part. You're just thinking up all these random ideas on how criminals can exploit innocent people that have guns. it's no reason to ban guns because:
1. You just up thoughts with nothing to back them with.
2. You think reasonable doubt will save you...just like every other criminal who says their innocent,
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns? Potential? Ok so you can't give an example? Strike one. Also I don't really think they exist. Potential doesn't pay the rent. I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense. You could claim it but criminals claim innocence all the time for numerous reasons. This is why we have something we call "trials". Trust me your one claim won't be all the evidence there is. "I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess." Wow you know how to lie! You're a MASTERMIND! Where did you come up with this genious idea? Nobody has heard of this before especially not POLICE!
Reasonable doubt.
Yeah there is reasonable doubt that criminals want innocent people to have guns.
This is a really weak argument on your part. You're just thinking up all these random ideas on how criminals can exploit innocent people that have guns. it's no reason to ban guns because: 1. You just up thoughts with nothing to back them with. 2. You think reasonable doubt will save you...just like every other criminal who says their innocent,
Since you seem to be a bit slow... I never said I wanted to take your guns away. I don't give two fucks if you get to have guns or not. Hell, you can strap your guns to every square inch of your body for all I care. Hell, if they ok concealed weapons, then I get to carry mine around without another concealed weapons charge.
Nice try at the subtle insult, though, equating me with a criminal.
And if reasonable doubt isn't going to save someone that shot you, whats to save you from going to jail for shooting them? How do you, as an innocent citizen, defend yourself? How do you prove to the police that you didn't just shoot them with no cause? Especially if it turns out that they don't actually have any weapon?
If you see someone walking towards you in a parking lot, or wherever, do you automatically whip your gun out on them? Shoot first, ask questions later?
If the answer is yes, well then this conversation is pointless, because the society you want to live in is not one most rational people want.
If not, then how does having that gun help you? Either they'll have their gun out, and aimed at you first, or they're not carrying at all. And when you get all Dirty Harry, and whip out that gun, will you pull the trigger, or will you just brandish it, hoping to intimidate them into backing down?
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns?
Potential? Ok so you can't give an example? Strike one. Also I don't really think they exist. Potential doesn't pay the rent.
I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense.
You could claim it but criminals claim innocence all the time for numerous reasons. This is why we have something we call "trials". Trust me your one claim won't be all the evidence there is.
"I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess."
Wow you know how to lie! You're a MASTERMIND! Where did you come up with this genious idea? Nobody has heard of this before especially not POLICE!
Reasonable doubt.
Yeah there is reasonable doubt that criminals want innocent people to have guns.
This is a really weak argument on your part. You're just thinking up all these random ideas on how criminals can exploit innocent people that have guns. it's no reason to ban guns because:
1. You just up thoughts with nothing to back them with.
2. You think reasonable doubt will save you...just like every other criminal who says their innocent,
Since you seem to be a bit slow... I never said I wanted to take your guns away. I don't give two fucks if you get to have guns or not. Hell, you can strap your guns to every square inch of your body for all I care. Hell, if they ok concealed weapons, then I get to carry mine around without another concealed weapons charge.
Well it's hard to tell because you were talking about how criminals are better off when other people have guns. An argument i've only heard once before by, I think, a gun control advocate. Criminals really don't want to take the risk that they will be able to shoot you faster than you will shoot them. Police will be able to tell how the body fell and where the gun was positioned at the time. If the criminal tried to tamper with the body and make it look like the gun was out and ready to shoot then the police will probably be able to notice. If the criminal didn't have to tamper with the body then that means the criminal was very close to death because the gun was out most likely pointed right at him.
Honestly I have no idea how a criminal benefits from this, what the motive was, or anything. The criminals i've heard talk about gun control all support it and for their own evil benefits.
Nice try at the subtle insult, though, equating me with a criminal.
We were both talking hypothetically that you were the criminal in the made up story.
And if reasonable doubt isn't going to save someone that shot you, whats to save you from going to jail for shooting them?
There is generally other evidence that goes into making a decision. It's not as black and white as you seem to think. There will be background checks, and testimony from witnesses, friends, co-workers, family, doctors, forensic specialists...ect After all that we see if there is reasonable doubt. Maybe the bad guy will get away, maybe not. Sometimes bad guys get away but this isn't special for gun shootings, this happens for all types of murders.
How do you, as an innocent citizen, defend yourself? How do you prove to the police that you didn't just shoot them with no cause? Especially if it turns out that they don't actually have any weapon?
If they have no weapon? I thought we were talking about armed criminals. You're going all over the place. If they have no weapon then the innocent guy explains the story and goes to court.
If you see someone walking towards you in a parking lot, or wherever, do you automatically whip your gun out on them? Shoot first, ask questions later?
No, but what does this have to do with anything? I thought we were talking about criminals trying to egg on an innocent person to whip out their gun and let the criminal shoot in defense. I can quote you if you want me too.
If the answer is yes, well then this conversation is pointless, because the society you want to live in is not one most rational people want.
If not, then how does having that gun help you? Either they'll have their gun out, and aimed at you first, or they're not carrying at all. And when you get all Dirty Harry, and whip out that gun, will you pull the trigger, or will you just brandish it, hoping to intimidate them into backing down?
If they have their gun out I do whatever I feel I need/can do to stay alive. If they have no gun out then I give them my wallet or whatever they want...unless they get physically violent.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Madace, learn to not murder a thread by posting size limits on the crap you copy and paste.
Look I'll be savage with you , America has every one of those cultures in it, and pretty much every single one from the south african coast to russias tip. No, it does not. And not by far in such vast concentration and in such vast representations and in such purity. In Europe hundreds of cultures are lived in their original context and in their original enrinoment and in their original language. Which can't be said by the US. And Europe has colonized a large portion of the globe. Hence why it has many, many immigrant populations. Also, the mere fact that Europe has had more wars than the US has states means something, doesn't it? It means that conflicting interests and conflicting counries/cultures are vast enough to form a sizeable combat force. I pointed out with clear figures that the vast majority of the "cultures" in the US is that of the European immigrants, which have long blended into a homogenous group and culture. Who cares about concentrations, the point is it does. I call BS on people living in the same context, war has changed their culture so many times they don't even know if their culture is the true culture. 300k+ time does that. You previously cared about "context" and concentrations... And WTF do you know? Of course people still know what their culture is. Their ancestors dfought and died for it? remember? Besides... Please describe "American" culture...
And how do you know about these immigrants blending in? I can walk my ass down the Russian side of town and it looks very much like russia would look minus the really cool buildings (some are present) and the cold, I can head my ass down to china town and speak mandarin just to get a table over at the best ramen stand there is. Not all of Russia has cool buildings. And not all of Russia is cold. There are over 60 languages spken in China, not just mandarin. Mandarin is just the name fora group of dialects. Official Mandarin is mainly a second language. BTW, Ramen is a JAPANESE dish. It hasn't been in China for more than 15 years at most... Statistics suggest that the main language, despite all the immigration, spoken in the US is still english. This also suggests that those unblending immigrants are a small minority.
You don't know if these people change,quite a few do infact take on the banner of "USA" but so many hold their culture dear. My grandfather is a personal case, old irish bastard, good guy. Same goes for the hundreds of Cultures in Europe. most of which never emmigrated to the US.
Bottomline, our culture is the worlds. America is not some inhabitted by a single people (not now atleast) it's literally the worlds biggest melting pot. Your culture? I'm not going to deny the US doesn't have a very distinct culture. But very few of those elements haven't found their origins in Europe. From democracy over basketball to hamburgers... All European. And I'd say Europe is one of the biggest melting pots in the world. But then we have Africa, or even single countries like China and Kenia that represent hundreds of languages and cultures too. I suggest you read up a bit about... the world. It's really impressive. Or at least read up about the colonial history of Great-Britain and France and Spain and Portugal and Holland and how they sucked up dozens of cultures... I'm not attempting to deny that majority of our culture comes from europe, it'd be moronic to say so, but thats my point. We are what happens when worlds collide, whether it be arabic or european, african or chinese, we have roots everywhere. When worlds collide... The European roots prevale? Is that what you're trying to say?
Regardless if it's a culture we have it. That's simply impossible. Too many cultures, too few people.
You'd have to actually live or spend a decent amount of time to know that america = world's culture rolled up into on big continent. I suggest you travell outside of America for a fair amount of time. Prepare for a shock. I have, and will do so many more times before this year is up, I don't just fester in the states I've travelled mate so don't try and play the card. Now then, learn from your travells... Because you seem to have forgotten that.
Since we're gonna play the "no longer belgium it's europe" lets add all of south america and north america to the table. I still win with vast size of territory. You win what? Size of territory still scales up, context sir, so regardless of how many countries you keep adding to your list , I'll still be able to scale the population, after all it's the same game you play. So how would YOU suggest to compare the crime ratings?
You will deny that European culture shares direct roots with eachother? You'd actually deny that? Wow. I don't deny that, since I believe in the Out OF Africa Theory which states that all of mankind stams from the same tribe. But if you would study the history of Europe then you would know that cultural differences started appearing about 200K years ago... Yet things remain the same in aspects. I too subscribe to the out of africa theory, it makes the most sense to me. If you studied your own you'd find that things are pretty much all the same, from shamanic stuff to the celt stuff (examples) or if we take arts, it's much the same only slightly different. Shamanic stuff and celt stuff are vastly different since shamanism is a whole range of beliefs, grouped by a few criteria, conducted in almost all of the world. Shamans claim they can diagnose and cure human suffering. Jesus did the same. While celt stuff (I love how you name things "stuff") simply refers to a few people who use the same branche of Indo-European languages. Both examples prove you know nothing about cultures. Or nothing about art. Or nothing about evolution or languages.
We're no longer comparing belgium to the US, it's Europe to the US, lets toss in all the south american/canadian cities in there too then. Dude, are you braindead? You stated that the US and Belgium aren't comparable, since you dismiss basic statistics and basicdemographic facts. So I throw in Europe...
Is it so hard to accept that the US has vastly higher crime rates than many other developed nations? Even if you group those developed nations in something that's comparable in size and population? The main discussion was very simply that you don't believe in statistis, even if every major governing organisation in the world uses them, inluding the US government and the UN. You said that the US is larger in size, has larger population density and more people in them. So I prove with Europe that that doesn't mean shit if you want to compare crime rates. You didn't even read those links I gave you, did you? How pathetic. It's not that we have a higher crime rate, it's that you prat around like you are some perfect civ when we all know for goddamned thats not the truth, every post you make that has anything to do with america is so blatently "Anti" yet you state you aren't, thats what's pathetic. You take your side then try and smile while saying "it's not that I am anti american" when you clearly are. Why would I bother to read any links you present when you can state the information some way or another? See whats pathetic is deferring a person to a bunch of links. I never said (quote me if I'm mistaken in this point) that Belgium had "the perfect civ". That's not the point, by a long shot. That's an entirely different discussion. I'm not even anti-US, because I think it's pretty much impossible to be anti-300million people. Tell me why I am anti? Because I criticise? Are your parents anti-you when they discipline you? Bad example, allies aren't parents. Are your friends anti you when they suggest ways to improve yourself? That "bunch of links" could operfectly well explain my point. Most of them were written by highly educated AMERICANS. Get it? If you don't find me credible, why not broaden your horizons and read them links...
Well what do you know, it's still a win situation. You want to add africa to your list ? Or the middle east? Because I think I have some room for our colonies and providences , including the one in the artic. Why would I want to do that? WTF does that have to do with the discussion? Because you went from belgium to the whole damned european continent? I figured you were playing Risk or whatever. Wtf does your expansion let alone your crime rate analytics have to do with this conversation? You constantly ramble about "America" for one.
Statistics and demographics are designed simply to make comparisons between countries of different sizes and populations possible. Yet you deny their merit. You said that there are larger population concentrations and there is more room and there are more people. Then I took EUrope, which has roughly the same stats, and compared Europe with the US, simply to show that it you point is invalid and that the statistics still stand.
Hell the cradle of religion? GG for the world, You also fail to mention that europe also is the cradle of Facism, Tyrants, and mass genocide. And isn't it amazing that depsite all those apparent deficiencies in "evil" ideologies there STILL are less homocides, proportional to the population... Right but genocides thats another thing. You aren't going to account the mass graves as homicides. Or the Tyrant's ordering executions on towns. Try and tell me those didn't/don't happen. They don't happen. They did happen. But I'm not going to take those into account. I'm going to have a hard time getting accurate figures about the number of native americans being slaughtered, the Mayan and Incan wars, the number of deaths in the US civil war, the number of slave executions, ... See how ridiculous it is to go BACK in time? What is your point with that anyways?
Don't play off that europe is all enlightened with me. For every crappy thing america does now, chances are it's been a standard in some european country some time or another. What in the name of God does that have to do with the fucking discussion? Did you see a butterfly and are you having a hard time getting back in the conversation? I never said Europe did or didn't, I didn't even mention enlightenment or other crap... Because you brought it up kid. Usually when a person says "Cradle of this and that" You are stating just that. I said that the craddle of 3 important religions was NEAR Europe, not in it. Get it? And WTF does that have to do with enlightenment?
Hey since you are now expanding europe in our Belgium -US crime rate, does that mean that you are taking credit for those death camps in the 40's? Or the kosovo stuff? Again... What in the name of whatever DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH A COMPARISON BETWEEN TODAYS CRIME RATES IN THE US AND THE EU/BELGIUM? I'm doing what you are doing, derailing by adding shit in order to confuse a reader into going "okay". 1: That is extremely, hugely childish, how old are you again? 2: I'm not adding shit, I'm adjusting to your criteria of comparison.
Hey are cradling facist regims? Oh oh! You had russia in there! Yeah they've totally been humanitarian. What are you ON ABOUT? You added a bunch of countries to your list buddy boy, a few countries are quite screwwed up in their systems of killing civilians, those are murders, and therefor homicides. Wow, you're good at clichés aren't you? And this for such a worldy and well-travelled person... Yes, many of those countries fucked up, Belgium did too, BTW. Now... What does that have to do with TODAYS crime ratings?
See you added a bunch of crap to your once "good belgium". It's about crime rates... Today... Not about... ANYTHING ELSE. GROW AND WAKE UP. Meh you derailed this stuff when you went "European" and not Belgium, grow up yourself, I'm just playing your game. Again, very childish of you. You forced me to go European as you said that, despite using globally accepted statistics, Belgium and the US are incomparable.
Heres also a no brainer, in a country like kosovo is killing the enemy considered a homicide? No, but it's still murder. Wait... Should I start counting the death toll in Iraq or something? Why are you dragging this cliché, undereducated bullshit in this discussion? Sure why not? Because those have nothing to do with crime ratings, my little boy.
How about all those other countries with the death parades? Are those homicides? Death parades? I have done some drugs, but other than H2SO4 injected in the brain I can't think of any substance that could have an effect like I see on you now... You sir are oblivious to eastern europe. I can't see where your logic comes from myself, you include ALL of europe in your defense, then when a person mentions the crazy evil stuff THAT STILL GOES ON TODAY, You go into offense mode. Still goes on today? Pleadse point me to some news articles, if you wish. I'd love to know about that "crazy evil (lol) stuff". Those shouldn't be too ahrd to fins since the majority of Eastern Europe is part of the EU which has strict rules concerning human rights and constantly monitors the courts being impartial and following the UDOHR.
How about all those under developed eastern europe countries you think they track their murder ratios? OF COURSE THEY'RE INCLUDED IN THE FUCKING STATISTICS! GG, of course... Of couse mass graves are always marked. Really, what mass graves? What do those have to do with crime rates? Will you please STOP pouring out stupid stereotypes? It makes you look like a 12-year old who never read a book...
In conclusion, I don't think you look at all the angles, not a bad thing really. But it leads to closed mindedness. My god... You're advertisement for post-birth abortion. Truly.
My god, you sir are the exact reason why eurpeans should not drink while pregnate. Also Dieinrlthnx
Originally posted by AlexAmore If they have their gun out I do whatever I feel I need/can do to stay alive. If they have no gun out then I give them my wallet or whatever they want...unless they get physically violent.
If the above is true, then how does having a gun help you?
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face.
As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing.
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed. The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident.
The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms?
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime.
So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks.
I might be way off base here, but I think the arguement is about letting those that have a concealed wepons permit carry thier gun on school grounds. Not arming every tool that walks a campus. If the latter is true then I think it would be a huge mistake.
As far a the comments about criminals goes... Criminals look for victims or easy targets. Look at it this way. If you were a criminal which of the two individuals would you target:
1- a guy walking through a parking garage at night talking on a cell phone oblivious to his surroundings or
2- a guy that has been watching you approach and has a buldge on his hip covered by a loose shirt.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
What if the only armed country in the world was say...North Korea! All the rest of the countries were unarmed including the USA. Would that be good? No. Instead we armed ourselves and pretty much every other country armed themselves. Now if North Korea tried to kill a country with WMDs, the other country can fight back and they would have allies to back them up.
I can't see why you guys can't understand the concept. It's like all you focus on is the one friggen guy who has a gun (legally or illegally) and try to say how bad it would be if he opened fire and then give it as a reason why other people shouldn't have guns. Logic anyone?
Guns can be offensive AND defensive. If a bad guy tried opening fire in an armed populace then HE is the one in trouble NOT the populace and the good people live to see another day! Liberals want to disarm the populace and let them fight and die unarmed. You say they should and can run? Tell that to the students who died today.
Interesting analogy, considering how hard America are working to try to make sure nukes don't fall into the hands of pretty much all other countries. If every country had nukes, I wonder how long it would be before one of them used one.
I'm having a really hard time with all this talk about "criminals" and the difference between them and "law abiding" people. It strikes me as all a bit Hollywood that there are two types of people on the streets: good guys and bad guys. It seems from some of these posts, that as long as they are bad guys, it's ok to shoot them.
Haven't most people at some point in their life broken one law or another? Are we only criminals if we get caught? Aren't most humans capable of the most crimes under certain circumstances? So isn't everyone a potential criminal? How many people could genuinely claim they know themselves well enough to know that they would not pull out a gun in any circumstance except for self defence?
For those saying that us discussing firearm laws is in some way disrespectful or uncaring, I'd say it was only natural in the face of such a horror to look at any possible way of preventing anything like this happening again, whether that be by arming the public, trying to make guns less available, or looking at what social factors might make someone behave like that in the first place.
I don't think I would advocate trying to ban guns in America, mostly because it's too late and would be hugely impractical. I like the theory behind the right to be armed against a government gone bad, but in practice, any attempt to exercise that right would see an end to your life or your freedom pretty quickly.
I can understand how an armed population can reduce violent crime, but I personally would be worried about the other effects that had on a society. You wouldn't just be scared of mugging someone, you'd be scared of upsetting them in any way in case they had a vile temper or were having a bad day. While petty crimes might be reduced, it does mean that anyone planning crimes will probably need to make sure that they are armed and make sure they remove potential threats, thus making a lot of criminal activity potentially dangerous, not just for the criminals, but for anyone they happen across. Justice would often be served by a gun-fight instead of in a court of law.
I think MadAce brings up a good point in comparing murder rates per capita between Europe and the USA. It's hard to say how much of that is down to gun laws and not other factors. It would be interesting comparing all of the crime figures, because I wouldn't be surprised if Europe had far more burglaries and muggings than places with less strict gun control. I wonder if we'd see more school shootings in Europe if guns were more easily available. We can only speculate.
If they have their gun out I do whatever I feel I need/can do to stay alive. If they have no gun out then I give them my wallet or whatever they want...unless they get physically violent.
If the above is true, then how does having a gun help you?
Because this is just one situation out of an infinite amount. This is also a made up situation.
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face.
Where am I? Is it a public area, where there may be an armed populace to save me? In my home? Does the criminal want something (most likely)? Trying to say an armed populace is bad based on made up stories just doesn't work. ANy answer I give you regarding my next move is just going to be twisted by and you're going to say "What if the criminal does this, or this, or this....ect". Nobody can win this argument because you will always think up some other situation and it starts all over again.
As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing.
Revolver in the jacket people always want something like my wallet or car. Generally it's no reason to shoot them.
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed.
How many criminals die from security guards? Maybe it's not very much and so criminals don't have much to be afraid of them.
The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
Columbine and VA Tech had an unarmed populace. If you go in there with a gun then you get to play God. Also do you have evidence that hardened criminals aren't detered from people with guns and either way is it a reason to unarm the populace?
The problem is that the media hates guns and so when something like Colmbine happens then everyone boohoos guns, but you never hear the stories of people who saved their life because of a gun they owned. Trust me it happens a lot more than school shootings.
You can't trust the media. People die WAY more in car accidents every day but when a plane goes down then that's all you hearabout. Now we have people who are actually scared to death of planes yet will drive a car to the airport. The media really does affect people and makes them think illogically about pretty much everything including guns.
Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident.
The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms?
Right now many of our states allow concealed weapons and so far we aren't living in some post-apocalyptic world. The average human can get a gun whether it's legal or not. If it's illegal to own a firearm then people will go get an illegal one. You can't put a law on supply and demand. If there is money to be made selling something, someone will sell it.
The question really should be is, can we allow the average human to own a pool in their backyard. Pools are a 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun in their house.
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime.
So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks.
ok.......
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed. The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
If a criminal *knows* a person has a gun they will do one of two things, find another target or kill the victim rather then threatening them. Neither reduces crime because they will still find a target, however the latter certainly increases the number of murders & violent crime.
In practice, however, a criminal wouldn’t know their intended victim has a gun so it doesn’t really factor into their selection criteria. The best way to avid being targeted is simply to use a little common sense and to present yourself as confident and alert
It’s also important to realize that the vast majority of criminals view violence as a means to an end. With all but a few exceptions if they perceive no threat to themselves they will not act violently. This means the best way to survive an encounter with one is to keep them calm, while pulling a gun gives the highest chance of you being seriously hurt or killed.
Of course it all comes down to risk management. What are you going to loose if you cooperate and keep the person calm? If it’s something you value then it may be worth the extra risk of resisting or pulling a weapon. If it’s the $100 in your wallet you would have to be brain dead to take the risk of pulling out a gun because that is when a simple robbery ends up with you dead.
Originally posted by AlexAmore Originally posted by Coldmeat
Originally posted by AlexAmore If they have their gun out I do whatever I feel I need/can do to stay alive. If they have no gun out then I give them my wallet or whatever they want...unless they get physically violent.
If the above is true, then how does having a gun help you? Because this is just one situation out of an infinite amount. This is also a made up situation.
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face. Where am I? Is it a public area, where there may be an armed populace to save me? In my home? Does the criminal want something (most likely)? Trying to say an armed populace is bad based on made up stories just doesn't work. ANy answer I give you regarding my next move is just going to be twisted by and you're going to say "What if the criminal does this, or this, or this....ect". Nobody can win this argument because you will always think up some other situation and it starts all over again. As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing. Revolver in the jacket people always want something like my wallet or car. Generally it's no reason to shoot them. In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed. How many criminals die from security guards? Maybe it's not very much and so criminals don't have much to be afraid of them. The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope. Columbine and VA Tech had an unarmed populace. If you go in there with a gun then you get to play God. Also do you have evidence that hardened criminals aren't detered from people with guns and either way is it a reason to unarm the populace? The problem is that the media hates guns and so when something like Colmbine happens then everyone boohoos guns, but you never hear the stories of people who saved their life because of a gun they owned. Trust me it happens a lot more than school shootings.
You can't trust the media. People die WAY more in car accidents every day but when a plane goes down then that's all you hearabout. Now we have people who are actually scared to death of planes yet will drive a car to the airport. The media really does affect people and makes them think illogically about pretty much everything including guns. Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident. The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms? Right now many of our states allow concealed weapons and so far we aren't living in some post-apocalyptic world. The average human can get a gun whether it's legal or not. If it's illegal to own a firearm then people will go get an illegal one. You can't put a law on supply and demand. If there is money to be made selling something, someone will sell it.
The question really should be is, can we allow the average human to own a pool in their backyard. Pools are a 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun in their house.
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime. So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks. ok.......
Well, it all sounds great on paper. And while you may be the shining example of responsible gun ownership, others aren't. You seem to have a hell of a lot of faith in your fellow man. I don't. I absolutely do not, under any circumstance, trust any being, particularly when it comes to their capacity to inflict bodily harm, or death on me, simply because they feel I look scary, or make them nervous.
And pools may kill more kids than irresponsible parents that leave loaded guns out where children can reach them, but I don't worry much about being killed by other peoples pools.
But, I suppose on the upside, Social Darwinism would take off in a major way. And it would give me an excuse not to leave the house.
Well, it all sounds great on paper. And while you may be the shining example of responsible gun ownership, others aren't. You seem to have a hell of a lot of faith in your fellow man. I don't. I absolutely do not, under any circumstance, trust any being, particularly when it comes to their capacity to inflict bodily harm, or death on me, simply because they feel I look scary, or make them nervous.
And so we have a dichotomy between thought and action.You trust nobody, and yet you don't want to defend yourself with a gun (the great equalizer). That's fine because maybe you're a big guy who can take care of themself, but small women don't have that luxury. Small women are preyed upon a lot and especially around campuses and when you arm them they do feel protected as they have often said. And pools may kill more kids than irresponsible parents that leave loaded guns out where children can reach them, but I don't worry much about being killed by other peoples pools.
So really you are worried more about an average american with a concealed weapon than a hardened criminal with his inevitable gun? But, I suppose on the upside, Social Darwinism would take off in a major way. And it would give me an excuse not to leave the house.
I guess the difference between you and me is that I want people to be able to defend themselves against armed criminals and you don't. You may deny this and say police should do a better job but that is not an answer, police can't be everywhere.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Quite a fascinating thread. Personally I have no issue with guns. I trust most of my neighbors to use them for hunting or personal home defence. A gun does two things. It intimidates and it eliminates. If your foe doesn't run when you have a gun out you simply kill or maim him if you survive. Effectively diffusing the situation. I'm not against effective gun controls though. Any device which can lead to death which is clearly a weapon for its primary purpose needs certain controls.
Frankly to effectively have solid gun control in America wed need total border control. The elimination of production and mass re-education of the public. I don't personally ever see this as being possible with the scale of the country involved. The Uk is small enough I suppose it was well within there means and good for them they tried.
Well anycase I'm glad I have access to guns. I like the opportunities they offer and I can except the risks.
Well, it all sounds great on paper. And while you may be the shining example of responsible gun ownership, others aren't. You seem to have a hell of a lot of faith in your fellow man. I don't. I absolutely do not, under any circumstance, trust any being, particularly when it comes to their capacity to inflict bodily harm, or death on me, simply because they feel I look scary, or make them nervous. And so we have a dichotomy between thought and action. You trust nobody, and yet you don't want to defend yourself with a gun (the great equalizer). That's fine because maybe you're a big guy who can take care of themself, but small women don't have that luxury. Small women are preyed upon a lot and especially around campuses and when you arm them they do feel protected as they have often said. And pools may kill more kids than irresponsible parents that leave loaded guns out where children can reach them, but I don't worry much about being killed by other peoples pools. So really you are worried more about an average american with a concealed weapon than a hardened criminal with his inevitable gun? But, I suppose on the upside, Social Darwinism would take off in a major way. And it would give me an excuse not to leave the house.
I guess the difference between you and me is that I want people to be able to defend themselves against armed criminals and you don't. You may deny this and say police should do a better job but that is not an answer, police can't be everywhere.
I have a concealed weapons charge, actually. But, just for you Link Enjoy.
Whatever, I guess I don't understand your position. On one and you don't want people having guns but on the other hand you post a video that that talks about gun control fallacies.
Obviously I don't want guns falling into the wrong hands just as you don't, but guess what? It happens ALL the time....more reason for people to own guns to protect themselves.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
I'm against concealed carry laws allowing the general populace to wander about with guns in hand(so to speak), not gun ownership. People wanna own guns, great. So long as they do it legally. Keep a gun in the house? Sure. Keep a gun behind the counter as a business owner? Ok, though I won't be frequenting your store if I catch wind of it. People with guns, out and about on the street? Not so much.
I do, however, question the need for anyone not serving active duty in the military to own a goddamned assault rifle. And I don't buy the hunting excuse, either.
The link to the video was just me trying to be nice. If it's unappreciated, fine, I take it back.
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself . . . they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." -- George Washington
The highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is bearing arms." -- General George S. Patton Jr.
"There are going to be situations where people are going to go without assistance. That's just the facts of life." -- LA Police Chief Gates.
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." -- Sigmund Freud
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759.
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -- Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861.
Just a few thoughts for al the "ban guns" people who obiously havent though it through.......
Critical thinking is a desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture.
The more I learn about this guy, the more I think it's a case of envy.
He covets a girl that wants nothing to do with him and then kills her out of frustration. He then writes a sort of suicidal note that expresses anger at the "rich kids" as reported per CNN/Fox News.
Engineers happen to have some of the highest average paying salaries, so the engineering building seemed like a logical choice for him....
I think that if this guy had gotten laid, then there never would have been a massacre.
GG @ our government for making prostitution illegal.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Comments
If you want revolution, if you want change, the populace must want change too. Without popular opinion, you're dead and buried.
Cartman has a big fat ass!
And you know how these "video games kill people" stories tend to grow faster then a snowball...
...........
..............
...................
What's your Wu Name?
Donovan --> Wu Name = Violent Knight
Methane47 --> Wu Name = Thunderous Leader
"Some people call me the walking plank, 'cuz any where you go... Death is right behind you.."
<i>ME<i>
Think about who REALLY has the motive to take away normally legal guns from the good law abiding public. Good people or criminals? Very simple logic. Remember you can't ever remove all guns or stop private manufactoring of them.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
What about potential criminals that want people to have guns?
I mean, it makes it a lot easier for me to shoot you and get away with it if you have a gun as well, as I can just claim self defense.
"I dunno, officer, I was just walking up to ask if he had any jumper cables, and he whipped out a gun, so I pulled out mine, and shot him in the face 3 or 4 times, before he could get me. Sucks for him that he was out of medkits, I guess."
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt.
Yeah there is reasonable doubt that criminals want innocent people to have guns.
This is a really weak argument on your part. You're just thinking up all these random ideas on how criminals can exploit innocent people that have guns. it's no reason to ban guns because:
1. You just up thoughts with nothing to back them with.
2. You think reasonable doubt will save you...just like every other criminal who says their innocent,
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Since you seem to be a bit slow... I never said I wanted to take your guns away. I don't give two fucks if you get to have guns or not. Hell, you can strap your guns to every square inch of your body for all I care. Hell, if they ok concealed weapons, then I get to carry mine around without another concealed weapons charge.
Nice try at the subtle insult, though, equating me with a criminal.
And if reasonable doubt isn't going to save someone that shot you, whats to save you from going to jail for shooting them? How do you, as an innocent citizen, defend yourself? How do you prove to the police that you didn't just shoot them with no cause? Especially if it turns out that they don't actually have any weapon?
If you see someone walking towards you in a parking lot, or wherever, do you automatically whip your gun out on them? Shoot first, ask questions later?
If the answer is yes, well then this conversation is pointless, because the society you want to live in is not one most rational people want.
If not, then how does having that gun help you? Either they'll have their gun out, and aimed at you first, or they're not carrying at all. And when you get all Dirty Harry, and whip out that gun, will you pull the trigger, or will you just brandish it, hoping to intimidate them into backing down?
Reasonable doubt.
Yeah there is reasonable doubt that criminals want innocent people to have guns.
This is a really weak argument on your part. You're just thinking up all these random ideas on how criminals can exploit innocent people that have guns. it's no reason to ban guns because:
1. You just up thoughts with nothing to back them with.
2. You think reasonable doubt will save you...just like every other criminal who says their innocent,
Since you seem to be a bit slow... I never said I wanted to take your guns away. I don't give two fucks if you get to have guns or not. Hell, you can strap your guns to every square inch of your body for all I care. Hell, if they ok concealed weapons, then I get to carry mine around without another concealed weapons charge.
Well it's hard to tell because you were talking about how criminals are better off when other people have guns. An argument i've only heard once before by, I think, a gun control advocate. Criminals really don't want to take the risk that they will be able to shoot you faster than you will shoot them. Police will be able to tell how the body fell and where the gun was positioned at the time. If the criminal tried to tamper with the body and make it look like the gun was out and ready to shoot then the police will probably be able to notice. If the criminal didn't have to tamper with the body then that means the criminal was very close to death because the gun was out most likely pointed right at him.
Honestly I have no idea how a criminal benefits from this, what the motive was, or anything. The criminals i've heard talk about gun control all support it and for their own evil benefits.
Nice try at the subtle insult, though, equating me with a criminal.
We were both talking hypothetically that you were the criminal in the made up story.
And if reasonable doubt isn't going to save someone that shot you, whats to save you from going to jail for shooting them?
There is generally other evidence that goes into making a decision. It's not as black and white as you seem to think. There will be background checks, and testimony from witnesses, friends, co-workers, family, doctors, forensic specialists...ect After all that we see if there is reasonable doubt. Maybe the bad guy will get away, maybe not. Sometimes bad guys get away but this isn't special for gun shootings, this happens for all types of murders.
How do you, as an innocent citizen, defend yourself? How do you prove to the police that you didn't just shoot them with no cause? Especially if it turns out that they don't actually have any weapon?
If they have no weapon? I thought we were talking about armed criminals. You're going all over the place. If they have no weapon then the innocent guy explains the story and goes to court.
If you see someone walking towards you in a parking lot, or wherever, do you automatically whip your gun out on them? Shoot first, ask questions later?
No, but what does this have to do with anything? I thought we were talking about criminals trying to egg on an innocent person to whip out their gun and let the criminal shoot in defense. I can quote you if you want me too.
If the answer is yes, well then this conversation is pointless, because the society you want to live in is not one most rational people want.
If not, then how does having that gun help you? Either they'll have their gun out, and aimed at you first, or they're not carrying at all. And when you get all Dirty Harry, and whip out that gun, will you pull the trigger, or will you just brandish it, hoping to intimidate them into backing down?
If they have their gun out I do whatever I feel I need/can do to stay alive. If they have no gun out then I give them my wallet or whatever they want...unless they get physically violent.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face.
As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing.
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed. The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident.
The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms?
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime.
So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks.
I might be way off base here, but I think the arguement is about letting those that have a concealed wepons permit carry thier gun on school grounds. Not arming every tool that walks a campus. If the latter is true then I think it would be a huge mistake.
As far a the comments about criminals goes... Criminals look for victims or easy targets. Look at it this way. If you were a criminal which of the two individuals would you target:
1- a guy walking through a parking garage at night talking on a cell phone oblivious to his surroundings or
2- a guy that has been watching you approach and has a buldge on his hip covered by a loose shirt.
I shoot for the curve... anything above that is gravy.
I'm having a really hard time with all this talk about "criminals" and the difference between them and "law abiding" people. It strikes me as all a bit Hollywood that there are two types of people on the streets: good guys and bad guys. It seems from some of these posts, that as long as they are bad guys, it's ok to shoot them.
Haven't most people at some point in their life broken one law or another? Are we only criminals if we get caught? Aren't most humans capable of the most crimes under certain circumstances? So isn't everyone a potential criminal? How many people could genuinely claim they know themselves well enough to know that they would not pull out a gun in any circumstance except for self defence?
For those saying that us discussing firearm laws is in some way disrespectful or uncaring, I'd say it was only natural in the face of such a horror to look at any possible way of preventing anything like this happening again, whether that be by arming the public, trying to make guns less available, or looking at what social factors might make someone behave like that in the first place.
I don't think I would advocate trying to ban guns in America, mostly because it's too late and would be hugely impractical. I like the theory behind the right to be armed against a government gone bad, but in practice, any attempt to exercise that right would see an end to your life or your freedom pretty quickly.
I can understand how an armed population can reduce violent crime, but I personally would be worried about the other effects that had on a society. You wouldn't just be scared of mugging someone, you'd be scared of upsetting them in any way in case they had a vile temper or were having a bad day. While petty crimes might be reduced, it does mean that anyone planning crimes will probably need to make sure that they are armed and make sure they remove potential threats, thus making a lot of criminal activity potentially dangerous, not just for the criminals, but for anyone they happen across. Justice would often be served by a gun-fight instead of in a court of law.
I think MadAce brings up a good point in comparing murder rates per capita between Europe and the USA. It's hard to say how much of that is down to gun laws and not other factors. It would be interesting comparing all of the crime figures, because I wouldn't be surprised if Europe had far more burglaries and muggings than places with less strict gun control. I wonder if we'd see more school shootings in Europe if guns were more easily available. We can only speculate.
I believe Chris Rock pointed out the obvious solution to this some time ago.
Increase the price of ammunition. If a bullet cost $5k, you'd damn well better be sure you really hate someone before you go and shoot them.
Because this is just one situation out of an infinite amount. This is also a made up situation.
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face.
Where am I? Is it a public area, where there may be an armed populace to save me? In my home? Does the criminal want something (most likely)? Trying to say an armed populace is bad based on made up stories just doesn't work. ANy answer I give you regarding my next move is just going to be twisted by and you're going to say "What if the criminal does this, or this, or this....ect". Nobody can win this argument because you will always think up some other situation and it starts all over again.
As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing.
Revolver in the jacket people always want something like my wallet or car. Generally it's no reason to shoot them.
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed.
How many criminals die from security guards? Maybe it's not very much and so criminals don't have much to be afraid of them.
The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
Columbine and VA Tech had an unarmed populace. If you go in there with a gun then you get to play God. Also do you have evidence that hardened criminals aren't detered from people with guns and either way is it a reason to unarm the populace?
The problem is that the media hates guns and so when something like Colmbine happens then everyone boohoos guns, but you never hear the stories of people who saved their life because of a gun they owned. Trust me it happens a lot more than school shootings.
You can't trust the media. People die WAY more in car accidents every day but when a plane goes down then that's all you hearabout. Now we have people who are actually scared to death of planes yet will drive a car to the airport. The media really does affect people and makes them think illogically about pretty much everything including guns.
Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident.
The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms?
Right now many of our states allow concealed weapons and so far we aren't living in some post-apocalyptic world. The average human can get a gun whether it's legal or not. If it's illegal to own a firearm then people will go get an illegal one. You can't put a law on supply and demand. If there is money to be made selling something, someone will sell it.
The question really should be is, can we allow the average human to own a pool in their backyard. Pools are a 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun in their house.
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime.
So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks.
ok.......
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
If a criminal *knows* a person has a gun they will do one of two things, find another target or kill the victim rather then threatening them. Neither reduces crime because they will still find a target, however the latter certainly increases the number of murders & violent crime.
In practice, however, a criminal wouldn’t know their intended victim has a gun so it doesn’t really factor into their selection criteria. The best way to avid being targeted is simply to use a little common sense and to present yourself as confident and alert
It’s also important to realize that the vast majority of criminals view violence as a means to an end. With all but a few exceptions if they perceive no threat to themselves they will not act violently. This means the best way to survive an encounter with one is to keep them calm, while pulling a gun gives the highest chance of you being seriously hurt or killed.
Of course it all comes down to risk management. What are you going to loose if you cooperate and keep the person calm? If it’s something you value then it may be worth the extra risk of resisting or pulling a weapon. If it’s the $100 in your wallet you would have to be brain dead to take the risk of pulling out a gun because that is when a simple robbery ends up with you dead.
Because this is just one situation out of an infinite amount. This is also a made up situation.
I asked if you just pull your gun out when someone approaches, because most criminals aren't going to be waving a sign around, I would imagine. Meaning they have the advantage over you, and suddenly you're faced with someone with a gun in your face.
Where am I? Is it a public area, where there may be an armed populace to save me? In my home? Does the criminal want something (most likely)? Trying to say an armed populace is bad based on made up stories just doesn't work. ANy answer I give you regarding my next move is just going to be twisted by and you're going to say "What if the criminal does this, or this, or this....ect". Nobody can win this argument because you will always think up some other situation and it starts all over again.
As for the person with no gun, I was referring to someone acting as if they had a gun, the old revolver in the jacket pocket thing.
Revolver in the jacket people always want something like my wallet or car. Generally it's no reason to shoot them.
In the end, though, I think criminals probably really don't care if people have guns or not. Technically, the person they're robbing or whatever could have a gun anyway. Plenty of banks have security guards with guns, and they still get robbed.
How many criminals die from security guards? Maybe it's not very much and so criminals don't have much to be afraid of them.
The idea might deter the random petty thief, but hardened criminals, or people like the Columbine kids, or the guy at VA Tech? Nope.
Columbine and VA Tech had an unarmed populace. If you go in there with a gun then you get to play God. Also do you have evidence that hardened criminals aren't detered from people with guns and either way is it a reason to unarm the populace?
The problem is that the media hates guns and so when something like Colmbine happens then everyone boohoos guns, but you never hear the stories of people who saved their life because of a gun they owned. Trust me it happens a lot more than school shootings.
You can't trust the media. People die WAY more in car accidents every day but when a plane goes down then that's all you hearabout. Now we have people who are actually scared to death of planes yet will drive a car to the airport. The media really does affect people and makes them think illogically about pretty much everything including guns.
Me, I see it like this. I look around while I'm at the market, I look around while I'm driving, and I wonder how we as a race have managed to survive ourselves. I watch the lady driving the wrong way on a one way street, during rush hour, make a left turn from the far right lane across five lanes of traffic, totally oblivious as she yacks her ass off on her cell phone. This is not an isolated incident.
The average human can't even handle the minimal responsibility of owning a cell phone, and/or and automobile. And you want to entrust these mouth breathers with firearms?
Right now many of our states allow concealed weapons and so far we aren't living in some post-apocalyptic world. The average human can get a gun whether it's legal or not. If it's illegal to own a firearm then people will go get an illegal one. You can't put a law on supply and demand. If there is money to be made selling something, someone will sell it.
The question really should be is, can we allow the average human to own a pool in their backyard. Pools are a 100 times more likely to kill a child than the gun in their house.
Oh, and alcohol, and obesity kill far more people in America than violent crime.
So lets legalize guns so we can go kill us some fat ass drunks.
ok.......
Well, it all sounds great on paper. And while you may be the shining example of responsible gun ownership, others aren't. You seem to have a hell of a lot of faith in your fellow man. I don't. I absolutely do not, under any circumstance, trust any being, particularly when it comes to their capacity to inflict bodily harm, or death on me, simply because they feel I look scary, or make them nervous.
And pools may kill more kids than irresponsible parents that leave loaded guns out where children can reach them, but I don't worry much about being killed by other peoples pools.
But, I suppose on the upside, Social Darwinism would take off in a major way. And it would give me an excuse not to leave the house.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Frankly to effectively have solid gun control in America wed need total border control. The elimination of production and mass re-education of the public. I don't personally ever see this as being possible with the scale of the country involved. The Uk is small enough I suppose it was well within there means and good for them they tried.
Well anycase I'm glad I have access to guns. I like the opportunities they offer and I can except the risks.
I have a concealed weapons charge, actually.
Obviously I don't want guns falling into the wrong hands just as you don't, but guess what? It happens ALL the time....more reason for people to own guns to protect themselves.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
I'm against concealed carry laws allowing the general populace to wander about with guns in hand(so to speak), not gun ownership. People wanna own guns, great. So long as they do it legally. Keep a gun in the house? Sure. Keep a gun behind the counter as a business owner? Ok, though I won't be frequenting your store if I catch wind of it. People with guns, out and about on the street? Not so much.
I do, however, question the need for anyone not serving active duty in the military to own a goddamned assault rifle. And I don't buy the hunting excuse, either.
The link to the video was just me trying to be nice. If it's unappreciated, fine, I take it back.
The highest obligation and privilege of citizenship is bearing arms." -- General George S. Patton Jr.
"There are going to be situations where people are going to go without assistance. That's just the facts of life." -- LA Police Chief Gates.
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." -- Sigmund Freud
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759.
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -- Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861.
Just a few thoughts for al the "ban guns" people who obiously havent though it through.......
Critical thinking is a desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture.
The more I learn about this guy, the more I think it's a case of envy.
He covets a girl that wants nothing to do with him and then kills her out of frustration. He then writes a sort of suicidal note that expresses anger at the "rich kids" as reported per CNN/Fox News.
Engineers happen to have some of the highest average paying salaries, so the engineering building seemed like a logical choice for him....
I think that if this guy had gotten laid, then there never would have been a massacre.
GG @ our government for making prostitution illegal.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.