Stop using guns to kill things!

Page 20 of 21 [ 332 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

08 Aug 2012, 1:05 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:

Why do you keep going on about packing pistols here? It's illegal unless you have an ATC permit which is nearly impossible to obtain.

Well, I hope you guys understand I am partially engaging in a thought experiment here; you may not have noticed but I said that having everyone carry is no more likely to prevent crime than having nobody carry/ban weaponry. There is an underlying issue that has nothing to do with weaponry here and like addiction being treated as a criminal offense instead of as a medical issue, there is a similar trichotomy around gun violence; between poverty, gang violence/organized crime and unsurprisingly, drugs. Then you get the random murders done by someone nobody suspects. Maybe more awareness of mental health issues could help people notice errant family members earlier. Then you have to wonder if that is even a realistic proposition because who has time for that if you work two jobs to support your children or whatever. It is clearly not a simple issue, but I think being blasé about it is also not the right way to look at it. I don't mean "blasé" in a negative way but rather like this definition:

Wiktionary wrote:

Adjective

blasé (comparative more blasé, superlative most blasé)

Unimpressed with something because of over-familiarity.

_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

08 Aug 2012, 1:14 pm

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

My dad couldn't pack a gun to protect his business which made his store real easy to rob.

You mean the gun is only way to protect his shop?

Yes, he has had guns and knives to his face. He can't fight flocks of crackheads by himself and most small businesses if any don't have the money to hire security. The best he could do at the time was offer free coffee to the cops to keep them coming.

John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

08 Aug 2012, 5:45 pm

aSKperger wrote:

Now something from your place

Quote:

Two recent studies from the USA show that:
- several factors affect a woman’s chances of being killed by her husband or boyfriend, but access to a gun increases the risk five-fold;

-having a gun in the home increased the overall risk of someone in the household being murdered by 41 per cent; but for women in particular the risk was nearly tripled (an increase of 272 per cent).

The proportion of domestic homicides involving guns varies across the world. In South Africa and France, one in three women killed by their husbands is shot; in the USA this rises to two in three.

Another study compared female homicide rates with gun ownership levels in 25 high-income countries, and found that where firearms are more available, more women are killed. In the USA, where there are high levels of gun ownership, women were at greater risk of homicide. The USA accounted for 32 per cent of the female population in these 25 countries, but for 70 per cent of all female homicides and 84 percent of all women killed with firearms.
Researchers for the South African Medical Research Council stated that in 1998 the rate of firearms episodes across three South African provinces was 10 times higher than in the USA, and that 150 in every 100,000 women aged between 18 and 49 in these provinces had been the victim of a firearms-related incident.
Thus the data show that the involvement of guns makes it far more likely that an attack will prove lethal. Why are guns so deadly in domestic assaults? One reason is the severity of the wounds caused by gunshot which is highly destructive of human tissue. Another reason is that the presence of a firearm, with its threat of lethality, reduces a woman’s capacity for resistance. The trauma of being threatened by a husband or partner is all the greater when he brandishes a gun and there is a very real danger of being killed. The wife of a US soldier told researchers: “He would say, ‘You will do this, or...’, and he would go to the gun cabinet”.
Guns also reduce the chances of victims escaping or of outsiders intervening to assist them.

http://controlarms.org/wordpress/wp-con ... -Lives.pdf

Nice credible source! :lol:

The underlying problem there is codependency. Codependents are mentally competent to know the situation is dangerous and they need to get out, but in the west they freely stay and try to fix it.

Quote:

So you're going to make my point for me? Rapists don't tend to use guns in the first place, and armed women would be far better at preventing rape than gun control? Thanks

Nice try. No. Attackers use force and surprise. Gun in the purse is weight, nothing else. Or you think women would carry holsters and sabotage their look?

During rape attempt the more struggle - the more serious consequences for woman. Attackers don't walk on the street with sign "going for rape" so she has chance to shoot. They mostly find out laying on the ground something is going on...

You are right, it's slow, and dangerous. That's why there's more creative ways to carry than I can keep track of. One of those ways is special purses with a special breakaway compartment for a holster. There's also a new one that's an attachment to a bra and makes for an even faster draw than a concealed waistband holster.

Quote:

Chances to trick/disgust the attacker are much bigger than overcome him. So vomit, sh** herself or chat him up for blowjob (sickness, menstruation) and then bite of his cock and crush balls...

You've made some really strange statements in your last posts. This method of defense is unproven. Perhaps visit San Francisco sometime and hang out in dark alleys to develop a doctrine for this defensive technique! :wink:

Quote:

Pretty hard to mug someone while backing away from them, wouldn't you think?

You are implicating he has to use it. Shoot you first and then mug. No, there is no need to pull the trigger most of the times.

What???

Quote:

And you still haven't explained why criminals would want to use pepper spray in the first place, remember that it's readily available over the counter in the US, and you don't hear about much crime involving it.

Because you have firearms, no need to use spray.

Criminals that don't use guns either do it strong-arm style or use another weapon even if it's improvised. Many criminals' drug habits make a gun financially out of reach, yet they rarely use pepper spray.

Quote:

the credible threat of violence is usually enough to end the encounter.

So gas pistol would be enough in this cases too. :wink:

Gas pistol? If it's not a real firearm you better make sure that front sight is rounded off and lubed so it won't hurt as bad if a tweaker sticks it where the sun don't shine! Showing the ability to put up resistance often ends the situation, but bluffing in such circumstances is banking on random chance.

Quote:

With a gun you don't have to spend years molding your body into a weapon in preparation for an unlikely event, you can simply devote a small amount of time and effort to practicing and carrying, and you don't have to worry about things like physically larger and stronger attackers.

Yup. You have to worry about the wiser, faster and better prepared only.
Who is not (psychically and physically too) prepared to cut an attacker wide open with his pocket knife should look at gun stricktly in movies only! Or it would cause more harm than benefit one day for sure. Compare criminality in US and developed world for evidence.

What??? You cannot reliably equalize the physical disparities for everyone that way! A whole lot of people will never be physically capable of the level of martial arts you champion to replace guns for self-defence.
If you can teach people the touch of death or develop the hadouken in real life, you might have a following! :ninja:

_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown

"A fear of weapons is a sign of ret*d sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud

John_Browning
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range

08 Aug 2012, 5:57 pm

ruveyn wrote:

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

My dad couldn't pack a gun to protect his business which made his store real easy to rob.

You mean the gun is only way to protect his shop?

In some neighborhoods, that is the case, unfortunately.

ruveyn

Shopowners with guns do make robberies a lot riskier to do! A few store owners are aces now, and despite word being out on the street they still keep coming. Perpetrators without guns are not any less dangerous and often overcompensate. People that get robbed that much have a angerous job, but would be living on borrowed time if they couldn't defend themselves.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Aug 2012, 1:23 am

Vigilans wrote:

You compare a first aid kit and a gun fallaciously, one is designed to help the other is designed to harm. The primary purpose of weaponry is not to suture wounds but to open them. Why is it that a place like Montreal where people do not feel the need to carry has lower crime than so-called "safe, polite" places that have this mentality? Firearms don't prevent crime any more than banning them does, otherwise crime statistics would be a different story for your nation.

Not fallaciously, I've listed exactly why the two are comparable, and you're using your own fallacy, assigning intent and morals to inanimate objects, to erroneously dispute my characterization. WHO CARES what the item is designed for, it's the use to which it is put that matters. A first aid kit can save my life by allowing me to stop bleeding or clean a wound to prevent infection, a gun can save my life by preventing a person or animal from doing me harm; is a saved life any less saved because of how it was accomplished?

Vigilans wrote:

I refer to my own nations gun culture, examples from my city, and that somehow leads you to conclude I know nothing about your nation's? wtf you are you talking about Dox. This is weak

You seem to have forgotten the parts where you made judgmental and ill informed comments on the state of affairs and culture of my country, matters in which you admit ignorance. Do I need to quote your own words back at you? Save me the trouble and read the bold parts of my last quote of you.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Aug 2012, 1:27 am

aSKperger wrote:

During rape attempt the more struggle - the more serious consequences for woman.

I was going to rip into your bogus studies and hackneyed "arguments", but then I found this little gem buried in the midst of the whole steaming pile. So, your advice to a woman being attacked sexually is "lay back and take it, it will end better for you"? Seriously?

What kind of "security" are you in again, the mall kind?

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Aug 2012, 1:30 am

I found this excellent and well researched rebuttal of gun control generally, written by a high-school sophomore, on another site, and figured it was appropriate to the discussion at hand. Enjoy!

Mitchell Sheppard wrote:

In 2010 there were nearly 13,000 murders in the United States. When a statistic like this is stated, it is frequently followed by a demand that “something must be done” to stop violent crime in the United States. Often, these statements claim the obvious answer to our violent crime rate is gun control . . .

The argument claims that if you take away the guns to commit crimes with, there would be less violent crime, especially murders. Or perhaps not. What if gun control does not reduce violent crime? In fact, guns have no effect on our country’s violent crime rate and are actually beneficial to a citizens safety.

Neither gun control nor the availability of guns in United States affect the amount of violent crime in our country. Despite what gun control advocates claim, the availability of guns does not increase violent crime. In the years since the Second World War, between three and four million guns have been sold to civilians of the United States per year. Though the supply of guns went up every year, the trend was for the murder rate to stay the same or go down (Kates NP).

If guns being available to the populace caused more violent crime, then the violent crime rate and especially the murder rate would have gone up during this time. Since violent crime has not become more common since WWII, we can deduce that the availability of guns does not increase violent crime. The question now is, does gun control further reduce violent crime, or aggravate it?

To answer that question, we turn to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s records of violent crime. Since 1991, the number of violent crime cases has been steadily dropping. Over the twenty years between 1991 and 2010, the national murder rate has gone from almost 10 murders per hundred thousand people to just under five murders per hundred thousand people (FBI Table 1). This same trend is followed by the states as well, with violent crime going down across the board (FBI Table 4).

Over this time the political climate has changed from pro-gun control to the United States having “Forty-one states [that] currently have right-to-carry laws” (Lott NP). Despite the changes in gun control laws of many states, violent crime has continued to go down across the board (FBI Table 1). This evidence seems to point to gun control having no effect on the amount of violent crime experienced by a nation.

To further look into this conundrum, The Task Force on Community Preventive Services (a.k.a. The Task Force), sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, did a study on the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence. They found “insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence” in part due to inconsistencies in many of the studies from which they acquired data. When looking at laws banning certain types of firearms and ammunition, the task force found that “certain studies indicated decreases in violence associated with bans, and others indicated increases” (Task Force NP).

According to the Task Force, gun control does not always have either a beneficial or negative outcome. The Task Force’s outcomes are consistent with the evidence of the lack of an increase in crime despite the guns that are flooding into American hands every year (Kates NP). These studies point out a serious problem in the gun control argument: if gun control does not decrease crime as gun control advocates claim it does, then what is the point of controlling guns?

Despite the mounting evidence, many gun control advocates claim that there is no need for the average American to have a gun even though guns have proven to save the lives of innocent bystanders. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence claims that “Allowing more people to carry concealed handguns in densely populated cities, on crowded subways, on buses and in sports stadiums, is a recipe for disaster” (Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence NP). Although this claim may seem sound, the idea that concealed carry permit holders are a danger to society is a tragic misunderstanding.

The first major flaw in this argument is that permit holders are going to commit more crime than the average person simply because they have a gun. In fact, the facts seem to point the other way, towards permit holders being incredibly law abiding and only losing their permits at “hundredths or thousandths of 1 percentage point” (Lott NP). The lack of permit losses by concealed carry permit holders refutes the new trend in gun control advocacy claiming that concealed carry permit holders are just “armed vigilantes,” by showing how incredibly law abiding concealed carry permit holders are.

During a series of studies by criminologists and economists, only one claimed that concealed carry permit holders increase a specific type of crime slightly over a short period of time. In comparison, eighteen criminologists and economists claim a reduction in violent crime while ten do not see any effect, positive or negative (Lott NP). The studies done by these experts shows the overwhelming evidence stacking against the effectiveness of gun control. Although this evidence points towards there being no negative effect of Americans being armed, the question of why you need a firearm still remains.

To answer this question, we turn to Israel, where in 2002 a terrorist tried to bomb a supermarket by killing customers with one bomb, and then killing the police that would inevitably surround him with a second bomb. Unfortunately for him, a shopper ended his scheme before he could set the first bomb with a fatal gunshot wound. Occurrences such as this are plentiful in Israel, where the government issues as many concealed carry permits as possible (Kates NP).

In situations such as this, where the police could not have been there fast enough to save the civilians that could have been killed by the first bomb, the armed and aware citizen has shown to be an unobtrusive, efficient way of limiting violence. The old adage “when seconds count, police are minutes away” is often used to describe situations such as these, and is commonly interpreted to mean that you and only you are responsible for your safety. Being that you are responsible for your own safety, “what’s wrong with having the extra protection of a gun” (Kates NP).

Although the gripping idea of violence on the streets of American cities can make many ask what could make our society safer, gun control is not the answer. The reason for this is clear, gun control just does not work. Despite gun control advocates’ claims, more guns does not mean more violence. In the case of concealed carry permits, more law abiding citizens with guns could actually make society safer by killing violent criminals before they can commit atrocious crimes. If the question is whether gun control is useful, effective or necessary, the answer is no.

————————–

Works Cited
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. “Carrying Concealed Weapons Overview.
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, 2012. Web. 7 May 2012. <http://www.bradycampaign.org/stategunlaws/publicplaces/carrying>.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. “Offense Data by Region.” Crime Statistics. U.S. Dept. ofl Justice, n.d. Web. 3 May 2012. <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/standard-links/region>.

- – -. “Table 4 Crime in the United States by Region, Geographic Division, and State, 2009–2010.” Crime in the United States. U.S. Dept. of Justice, n.d. Web. 10 May 2012. <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl04.xls>.

- – -. “Table 1 Crime in the United States by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1991–2010.” Crime Statistics. U.S. Dept. of Justice, n.d. Web. 3 May 2012. <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls>.

- – -. “Table 7 Offense Analysis United States, 2006–2010.” Crime Statistics. U.S. Dept. of Justice, n.d. Web. 2 May 2012. <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl07.xls>.

- – -. “Table 23 Offense Analysis Number and Percent Change, 2009–2010.” Crime Statistics. U.S. Dept. of Justice, n.d. Web. 2 May 2012. <http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl23.xls>.

“Gun, Ammo Sales Up.” Guns Magazine Nov. 2008: 88. General OneFile. Web. 2 May 2012. <http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA185385622&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_carlisle&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w>.

Kates, Don B. “Statistics Show the Benefits of Gun Ownership.” Handguns 20.5 (2006): 18+. General OneFile. Web. 2 May 2012. <http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA150744376&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_carlisle&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w>.

Lott, John R. “Right-To-Carry Lowers Violent Crime.” Baltimore Sun 18 Mar. 2012: n. pag. The Baltimore Sun. Web. 3 May 2012. <http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bs-ed-lott-letter-20120316,0,5424697.story>.

Task Force on Community Preventive Services. “First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws.” Recommendations and Reports.

U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, 23 Oct. 2003. Web. 2 May 2012. <http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm>.
United States Census Bureau. “Table 716. Families Below Poverty Level by Selected Characteristics: 2009.” Income, Expenditures, Poverty, & Wealth. United States Census Bureau, n.d. Web. 3 May 2012. <http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0716.pdf>.
Williamsen, Kart. “Beyond the Gun-Control Debate: This Reflection on the Virginia Tech Massacre Looks Beyond the Gun Debate to the Importance of Cultural Morality in Reducing Senseless Crimes of Violence.” Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Gale Gengage learning, 28 May 2007. Web. 13 Apr. 2012. <http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA164255785&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_carlisle&it=r&p=GPS&sw=w>.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/0 ... ore-150690

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

09 Aug 2012, 7:46 am

AceOfSpades wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

aSKperger wrote:

During rape attempt the more struggle - the more serious consequences for woman.

Jesus f***ing Christ, that's even worse than the "It doesn't matter who started it, two wrongs don't make a right!" crap I used to get from my teachers. I guess it's more politically correct for a woman to lay helplessly while being raped.

And to add to that:
From page 7 of “Why use guns for killing” thread.

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

I don't fear career criminals. I am worried about common Joe, who gets gun because he needs to compensate something.

Says a lot don't it.......... :roll:

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

09 Aug 2012, 7:53 am

To be fair, I deleted my post because I just noticed the part about crushing the dude's balls and thought maybe Dox47 took it out of context. I don't have the time to formulate another response right now so I just wanna let it be known that I take it back. But anyways, if you fear the average Joe and not career criminals then you are seriously delusional. Career criminals have MUCH more to compensate for. Reputation is a life and death matter to them. If they're perceived as soft their own buddies could turn against them so it's actually within their best interests to not let any insult go unanswered.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

09 Aug 2012, 8:34 am

AceOfSpades wrote:

Fair enough and noble of you.
Still though, an anti-gun position in effect favors the criminal over the victim.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

aSKperger
Deinonychus

Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 326

09 Aug 2012, 12:32 pm

Quote:

In some neighborhoods, that is the case, unfortunately.

Don't think so. There are many way to secure the shop. And many ways how to handle risk. To fight it is one of many. To avoid it is the best possible one :wink:

Quote:

Nothing pleasant. But why to hire someone? Entrance control helps a lot (electrical magnet&buzzer). Security smoke machines are very efficient too. The most popular measure banks adapt is... insurance. They feel like to protect health and lives is better than trying to paralyse robbers on the spot. And bulletproof counter helps a lot too.
But yes, showing you are not an easy victim is quite effective. But dangerous too.

Quote:

Codependents are mentally competent to know the situation is dangerous and they need to get out, but in the west they freely stay and try to fix it.

Means you want to get involved in the first place. And then, maybe, save yourself?

Quote:

This method of defense is unproven.

It is proven here. I admit I have no knowledge about San Francisco's attackers behaviour. Sure everyone is different, naturally. But that's something we need to take into account before we act.

Quote:

What??? Confused

You suggested it is hard to attack someone with pepper spray due to need for backing away. I say, if attacker has knife/gun it doesn't mean he have to use it. Most of the time he threatens you only. It is possible with spray to, and even with bouquet as seen on famous bank robber I linked before. No need to actually use the gun in attack.

Quote:

Showing the ability to put up resistance often ends the situation, but bluffing in such circumstances is banking on random chance.

Right. And widespread of real firearms in the civil hands is random chance as hell...

Quote:

No, misunderstanding. There are people psychically incapable of killing mouse in the basement. Yet owning guns. There are people physically incapable of slicing their dinner without selfmutilation - yet owning a gun. Because it is their right... right? Wrong! This is wrong. If you want gun, ok, but prove you are able to handle it. Meaning you know how to shoot, how to act correctly under stress, how to handle extreme situations. Because this is what self defence with gun is about. Not just having gun.
If you fail to prove your quality, then find other, nonlethal tools. Because you are not responsible enough to own gun.

Quote:

So, your advice to a woman being attacked sexually is "lay back and take it, it will end better for you"?

Well, cruel but true. It is not only my opinion. It is very well argumented and covered up, many if not all police forces in europe would suggest the same.
Best defence is precaution. After an average woman lays on the ground under an average attacker, she should just pray. You can try it. Tell your wife/gf to fight you in this situation. Or vice versa, try to be a hero under someone 150 pounds heavier, 3 times stronger and with testosterone level at least 10x higher. Seriously try it and then advice any women to defend with clean conscience. I would not.

Quote:

If guns being available to the populace caused more violent crime, then the violent crime rate and especially the murder rate would have gone up during this time

No. I doesn't work like this. No direct correlation. Didn't read any further, these are very cheap mistakes.

Quote:

But anyways, if you fear the average Joe and not career criminals then you are seriously delusional. Career criminals have MUCH more to compensate for. Reputation is a life and death matter to them. If they're perceived as soft their own buddies could turn against them so it's actually within their best interests to not let any insult go unanswered.

You all missed my point because you didn't ask in detail.
I do not fear career criminals, because you can prepare and resist to them. Sure not to every single case and scenario, but wast majority. So I am prepared and I do not worry.
But it is impossible to prepare for terrorism aka my neighbour Joe decided to slaughter someone. This type of crime is almost impossible to fight when it occurs. And it is one of the most vain ones.
But we know why it happens and one of many preventive acts we can effectively do is not allow every Joe to own guns.
And once for all - I do not live in fear. Its my empathy/felowship with other people speaking out...

Quote:

Still though, an anti-gun position in effect favors the criminal over the victim.

If it means victim looses wallet, but saves own health and life, then be it...

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

09 Aug 2012, 12:58 pm

Quote:

If it means victim looses wallet, but saves own health and life, then be it...

And with all robberies and muggings the goal is always just the wallet. There's no such thing as serial killing, rape, abduction, or just plain brutality. That's just in Hollywood not in real life.
:roll:

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 Aug 2012, 1:38 pm

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

So, your advice to a woman being attacked sexually is "lay back and take it, it will end better for you"?

'
Hey Ace, you can put your quote back with a clear conscience, I don't see any ambiguity here.

_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

09 Aug 2012, 2:10 pm

Dox47 wrote:

You know, I find many arguments put forth from gun advocates fairly convincing, but this one is not among them to me. It is really, really going to rhetorical lengths to pretend that a gun is not a weapon first. But it is... I have absolute respect for this fact. I am certain you do to in the care you take to handle and maintain them.

Dox47 wrote:

I don't remember admitting to be ignorant about anything. I was talking about my own country and people from it. I have American family who are weapon (handgun) owners and proud of it, if I wanted to go in that direction, but I was not. I referred to the "wild-west" attitude because I don't know how else to put it. It doesn't really have purely negative connotations in my mind. It is just a conceptual situation where people are taking things into their own hands literally. I'm not going to call it anarchy because that is not what it is. This discussion began because apparently its a problem to some people that I like living in a place where carrying isn't needed to feel safe.

AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

09 Aug 2012, 8:31 pm

Dox47 wrote:

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

So, your advice to a woman being attacked sexually is "lay back and take it, it will end better for you"?

'
Hey Ace, you can put your quote back with a clear conscience, I don't see any ambiguity here.

Yes sir.

AceOfSpades wrote:

I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt but I should've never put it past him. Hey, you ever heard of targeting the eyes, throat, and groin? What kind of security guy are you if you can't even identify the most obvious holes in the attacker's security?

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

In some neighborhoods, that is the case, unfortunately.

Don't think so. There are many way to secure the shop. And many ways how to handle risk. To fight it is one of many. To avoid it is the best possible one :wink:

Nobody suggested force should be used in any circumstance other than self-defense or that you should provoke a fight so cut your smug little crap out.

aSKperger wrote:

You mentioned that rapists don't walk around with a "going for rape" sign. Well neither do career criminals walk around with a "going for robbery" sign :roll:

aSKperger wrote:

40% of all robberies are strong armed, so do you really expect anyone to feel safe being at the mercy of them? With all your guilt tripping BS about us being "happy" with gun deaths, you seem to be perfectly happy with leaving robbery victims defenseless and betting their safety on being part of the 60% so don't f*****g tell us how we're supposed to feel.

Showing you're not an easy victim? What the f**k? Small business owners are INHERENTLY easy targets. Pulling some tough guy s**t will only get you killed or crippled. Once again, reputation is a life and death issue in the criminal underworld. You insult his manhood, you're backing him into a corner where he has no choice but to attack you, especially if you do so in front of people. He has nothing to lose since he'll be fair game for all the sharks in the ocean if he leaves your insult unanswered.

I'm not even going to bother addressing the rest of your post. WOW, just WOW. I know the arrogance all too well but I've never seen anything this ridiculous in a gun debate EVER.

AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

10 Aug 2012, 10:47 am

AceOfSpades wrote:

Dox47 wrote:

aSKperger wrote:

Quote:

So, your advice to a woman being attacked sexually is "lay back and take it, it will end better for you"?

'
Hey Ace, you can put your quote back with a clear conscience, I don't see any ambiguity here.

Yes sir.

AceOfSpades wrote:

This may reflect poorly on my parenting skills, but this is EXACTLY the same mentality I have when my two oldest children get into a fight. My USUAL response is to stay out of it. They're siblings. Let THEM sort it out. They'll have an even deeper appreciation of each other when they're adults and will be more adept at sorting things out with others because of all the pressure they put on each other.

Besides, it's just flat-out funny. I just want to lay back in a recliner with a bag of microwave popcorn to see who wins. It's better than truTV, Smoking Gun's "World's Dumbest..." I only get involved if it appears someone is about to lose an eye or get a limb severed. I don't want them to end up like my dad and his sister.

True story: My father and aunt were playing out in my grandfather's tool shed once when my dad cut her finger off with a hatchet. That kind of thing with my own kids would be my worst nightmare. It's frightening just watching my daughter wield a butter knife. No sharp objects for her...

Last edited by AngelRho on 10 Aug 2012, 11:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Page 20 of 21 [ 332 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 Next

Jump to:

Stop using guns to kill things! Post Reply New Topic

Stop using guns to kill things!