NRA: Put a Gun in every school, Media to blame for shootings

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

GunsmithKitten:

Shaoken:

Down here in Oz (and I'm guessing up there in the UK) if the police aren't required to do a thing to help the common man, we'd rage the fuck out. Vote out politicions who abide by that, protest in the streets, basically demand better and don't stop untill we get it.

We should have. Oh by the GODS we should have.

I do not kid in saying that my stance on firearms would not be nearly as sure if this weren't the case. But it is, folks. You. Are. On. Your. Own.

Which infuriates me even more than people like Blahab and TechNo are okay with not just making sure I have no firearms to defend myself with, but are okay with the cops being legally allowed to ignore any calls for help.

I do think that is at the core of the issue. I mean, at my Grandmas house, the police will not even show up until after the shooting stops and it is daylight to collect bodies. It is seriously that bad. Since the police do not " protect and serve" the people are forced to defend themselves. It also boils down to the police force itself in many places, The people I know who became cops here were the " thugs" in highschool themselves. Look at this:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/rockwall-tx/TQKJFDJ6761VQ2VFC

Seriously, people should realize this is what we deal with here. One of our school officers slept with the teen girl who lived above him like the month before he was appointed to the school. THESE are the people who are supposed to protect people. Think about it. What are the people supposed to do if they want to live? A big problem here is no one wants to be a cop, and the ones that do are not who you want to protect you.

farson135:
And you are not familiar enough to figure it out. What, do you think we walk around with a perfect gun imprint on our pants? Here is a CHL, can you tell me where she is carrying without cheating-

image

In the bra, it wouldn't be easily accessible under the armpit in those clothes.

Smagmuck_:
Why is it every thread about Gun Control that pops up here, a complete shit storm ensues.

Anyway, the whole proposition of having armed guards in schools is already a reality here. They're called School Resource Officers (SRO), they're basically Police Officers on loan to a school. One was present at my middle school, two at my high school, and a whole dedicated PD at my college.

And there hasn't been a single issue at my schools. The only threat of a school shooting was at my high school my senior year. And it turned out to be just an empty threat.

And to me, there isn't a whole lot of difference between an LEO, and a civilian. It's just a badge.

I havent heard of threats to any school in my entire country. And in the rare cases they do come up it makes national news.

'guns are banned here'

Welp. I guess that makes for a pretty good argument.

Aur0ra145:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/man-attempts-to-open-fire-on-crowd-at-movie-theater-armed-off-duty-sheriffs-deputy-drops-him-with-one-bullet/
http://www.kcra.com/news/3-wounded-one-intruder-dead-in-Sacramento-home-invasion/-/11797728/17875642/-/2o7y1hz/-/index.html
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8927858

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8926517

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/home-invasion-suspect-killed-in-gunfight-at-dekalb/nTZnJ/

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=23445000&nid=148&title=pastor-pulls-gun-on-unsuspecting-burglar-

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/police-cmpd-officer-fires-shot-would-be-intruder/nTY3J/

http://www2.wnct.com/news/2012/dec/04/9/internet-cafe-robberies-continue-pitt-county-ar-2831692/

http://www.wral.com/intruder-killed-in-henderson-home-invasion/11885004/

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2012/dec/14/teen-suspected-burglar-shot-homeowner-identified-ar-1277434/

Totally never happens.

A whole bunch of those were murders, perpetrated upon someone who wasn't a threat. Only a single case of mortal danger.

Now you just need to come up with 30.539 more examples, before you can offset the number of unnecessary deaths due to firearms possession in the US of just a single year.

I'd think my argument wins if the score is 30.540 - 1

Or wait, this just in, more gun violence. An upstanding gun owner who thinks the government is threat, shot at four firemen and murdered two of them in Webster in New York.

I'm sure the gun lobby is very please at how their fellow patriot defended himself against those evil librul guvernment people. I'm not sure the relatives of the firemen will be though.

So correction, I win 30.542 - 1

By the way, the NRA and their cronies have made a new move. This time it's an all-out attack on the First Amendment.

There's a petition going around to have someone deported from the US, because he spoke out in favour of gun control:
http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-sign-us-petition-deport-piers-morgan-141037563.html

Kind of funny that people who pretend to defend rights, are actually opposed to freedom of speech.

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

So escalating a situation from a mugging to murder is okay with you?

A law abiding citizen protecting themselves from an assailant is okay.

That's not what I asked.

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

Blablahb:

2012 Wont Happen:
Not only are guns frequently used in self defense, their mere existence deters crimes that would have otherwise been committed.

Then how come gun-loving countries have soaring crime rates, while countries with gun bans do not?

Don't make the mistake of bringing up Switserland. It's getting tiresome by now.

Also, self-defense with guns never happens. It's a myth. You can't defend yourself by murdering others, and a scenario where you would've died unless you killed someone never happens.

"Don't bring up an example that supports your side of the debate, I don't like attending to opposing evidence".

You can defend yourself by killing though, and you can certainly defend yourself with the threat of killing. Also, murder is defined as the "unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human." Defending yourself isn't unlawful, its a human right.

Another human right is the right to revolt, which is impossible without weapons. Power is held by whoever controls force. In the United States, economic powerhouses control the government to the point where it would be laughable to call it representative of the people in general. If we give our government a monopoly on force we will become a fully developed bourgeois dictatorship. Our government kills civilians daily in the third world - you think they wouldn't do the same to us if we weren't armed and it served their purposes?

Also, I've known people who would have died if they hadn't used guns. Your last statement is simply fucking laughable. Come spend some time along the Mexican border, the poor parts of big cities, or anywhere in Detroit and tell me that life or death situations calling for guns are impossible. Hell, go anywhere that isn't completely homogenized suburbs and tell me there is never a time in your day that you would feel safer with a weapon.

Maybe the Netherlands is some hippy peaceland where you can leave your doors unlocked at night, but this is the United States. We may be developed, but we don't do shit for our poor. There's a lot of crazy desperate people here, and our prison system only makes them worse. Maybe after all the crime-causing problems in our society are fixed taking away our guns would be safe in the criminal regard, but now it would be suicidal in a lot of parts of the country. Did you ever stop and think that maybe there are so many guns in circulation here because we need them to sleep safe at night in our own fucking houses?

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

A law abiding citizen protecting themselves from an assailant is okay.

That's not what I asked.

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

That's not what I asked.

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

You realize that in the US we can't just shoot someone dead the second they demand our money right? If somebody accosts you to rob you, first the citizen is usually required to attempt a retreat. If after some effort retreat does not seem possible, a licensed citizen can draw a firearm and demand the mugger stand down. If the mugger attacks the individual to try to rob them, the citizen can kill them, as should be the case. If the mugger leaves, he cannot be killed. Even if he has injured you by shooting, stabbing, ect, it is not legal for you to kill him if he is retreating from the confrontation.

I swear one day I will write a book set in an alternate universe where the United States actually is how you Europeans seem to view us and show everyone how ridiculous it all is.

Also, it was found in 1995 that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times each year, but in most cases the gun was merely used as a threat of force to end a confrontation rather than actual force to end a life. That was a bit of a while back, but considering only around 11,000 die a year here from guns I doubt you can honestly argue its dropped enough where guns now kill more than they save in this country.

2012 Wont Happen:
You realize that in the US we can't just shoot someone dead the second they demand our money right? If somebody accosts you to rob you, first the citizen is usually required to attempt a retreat. If after some effort retreat does not seem possible, a licensed citizen can draw a firearm and demand the mugger stand down. If the mugger attacks the individual to try to rob them, the citizen can kill them, as should be the case.

Unfortunately gun owners thought that was unfair, so some states have created legislation that allows you to murder someone as soon as you think they said something. I remember several instances where paranoid gun owners even carried firearms while jogging, and shot supposed 'muggers' on sight, one 16 years old, the other 18.

By the way, attacks do not justify murder with firearms either. Why would a mugger want to kill someone? They don't, it makes no sense. It adds to their sentence if caught and they're human beings like all of us, who wants to least amount of fuss. Pretty much all violence involved is for intimidation purposes, and not really dangerous. Once had a guy threaten me a knife. I told him to sod off, or show that knife, because otherwise chances were I'd make him hate his life if he insisted. He muttered some insult and walked away. Behold the terrible threat of muggers, lol.... Then to think some people walk around with firearms in a constant state of fear because of idiots like those.


I know I might as well be talking to a brick wall when it comes to some gun nuts who seriously think that they'll die if someone ever punches them, or that someone slapping them over the head deserves to be murdered for that, but hey, it's still how it is.

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

That's not what I asked.

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

So I shoudl allow myself to be beat instead of attempting to end it with a firearm.

Yea, no.

Also, anyone else find it amusing that Blahblab, the man who says anecdotes are worthless just used one to prove his point?

Also, murder is a legal term. You have to be convicted of it before you're a murderer.

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

You realize that in the US we can't just shoot someone dead the second they demand our money right? If somebody accosts you to rob you, first the citizen is usually required to attempt a retreat. If after some effort retreat does not seem possible, a licensed citizen can draw a firearm and demand the mugger stand down. If the mugger attacks the individual to try to rob them, the citizen can kill them, as should be the case. If the mugger leaves, he cannot be killed. Even if he has injured you by shooting, stabbing, ect, it is not legal for you to kill him if he is retreating from the confrontation.

I swear one day I will write a book set in an alternate universe where the United States actually is how you Europeans seem to view us and show everyone how ridiculous it all is.

Also, it was found in 1995 that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times each year, but in most cases the gun was merely used as a threat of force to end a confrontation rather than actual force to end a life. That was a bit of a while back, but considering only around 11,000 die a year here from guns I doubt you can honestly argue its dropped enough where guns now kill more than they save in this country.

None of that is relevant to my point. I said nothing about what the law is on defending yourself in the US, or about how often guns are used defensively.

GunsmithKitten:

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

So I shoudl allow myself to be beat instead of attempting to end it with a firearm.

Yea, no.

Also, anyone else find it amusing that Blahblab, the man who says anecdotes are worthless just used one to prove his point?

Also, murder is a legal term. You have to be convicted of it before you're a murderer.

I assume you have legs? Run away.

If that is absolutely impossible, then yes, I would rather you get beaten up[1] than someone get killed.

[1] Although obviously I don't want that to happen

2012 Wont Happen:

DJjaffacake:

2012 Wont Happen:

What you asked is irrelevant to a debate on guns. Shooting a thug dead if he is attacking you isn't a murder, its a service to society.

It's entirely relevant. If people who think murder is a reasonable response to any crime have guns, then there is a reason for gun control. And no, killing someone is never a service to society. It is occasionally necessary in defence, but it is certainly not justified just to stop a mugging.

You realize that in the US we can't just shoot someone dead the second they demand our money right? If somebody accosts you to rob you, first the citizen is usually required to attempt a retreat. If after some effort retreat does not seem possible, a licensed citizen can draw a firearm and demand the mugger stand down. If the mugger attacks the individual to try to rob them, the citizen can kill them, as should be the case. If the mugger leaves, he cannot be killed. Even if he has injured you by shooting, stabbing, ect, it is not legal for you to kill him if he is retreating from the confrontation.

I swear one day I will write a book set in an alternate universe where the United States actually is how you Europeans seem to view us and show everyone how ridiculous it all is.

*cough*stand your ground*cough*Trayvon Martin*cough*

I'm sorry you were saying?

Seriously speaking at least it's good that you are required to retreat first. Although the problem is that I doubt it's the same in every state.

You know reading your sentences I can see alot of problems in the United States, but I think it's also telltale of a mentality. Paranoia of the government (or everyone really).

I've seen this repeated over and over. Everyone agrees that too many people are poor, but then they're paranoid that the poor are living some imaginary good life on welfare, so they refuse to have welfare increased, creating the problem of people turning to crime. Everyone agrees there's a problem with guns, but more and more guns are added in a feedback loop because no one can trust their neighbor. Everyone agrees there's a problem with money in politics, but many people actively serve the needs of the rich by campaigning for lower taxes on the rich and saying that the use of money in politics is a right (I'm not making this shit up. If you want I can try to send a PM with the quote and user).

People complain about the work conditions, but they've been trained to fear and reject unions. They live with dangerous drinking water and a degraded environment, but refuse to have regulations because they've been told that it will makes jobs or cost too many jobs (the whole obsession with "jobs" is a topic for another day).

Most are uneducated, but you also have people like Santorum who prove that there's still a lot of anti-intellectualism. Most of the infrastructure was deliberately designed with the assumption that oil would be cheap, so there's now a crumbling infrastructure that most people refuse to change.

Most of all a lot have absolutely no idea what's going on, so they recognize a problem, but what they blame is all over the place. Each person is too paranoid that they'll lose a piece of their pie to do anything and why shouldn't they? The society is predatory.

This reminds me of the old joke where both heaven and hell is a room with a circle of people roped into chairs with a spoon strapped to their arm which is far too large for them to feed themselves. In hell they all starve and in heaven they all eat because they learned to feed each other.

Americans are some of the nicest people I've met, but quite frankly the society has problems.

DJjaffacake:

I assume you have legs? Run away.

Good idea. I tell my CC applicants the same thing. Not always an option though.

If that is absolutely impossible, then yes, I would rather you get beaten up[1] than someone get killed.

Well, there's where we differ I guess. If someone assaults me with intent to harm, their life is forfeit to me. I will produce a firearm, and if they do not cease the assault, I will use it. If that sounds harsh, again, keep in mind that you just told me to stand there and take a beating and FalseName flat out said I should be helpless with neither firearms nor police help legally required.

Besides, I've already one limb near crippled already thanks to an assault. I don't need another one.

[1] Although obviously I don't want that to happen

GunsmithKitten:
Well, there's where we differ I guess. If someone assaults me with intent to harm, their life is forfeit to me.

How can you justify that a bruise on you, is more valuable than someone's life? Doesn't that bankrupt your own claims for self-defense? After all, you believe human lives are worthless, that's what you effectively wrote, so why would you be entitled to defending your own?

GunsmithKitten:

DJjaffacake:

I assume you have legs? Run away.

Good idea. I tell my CC applicants the same thing. Not always an option though.

If that is absolutely impossible, then yes, I would rather you get beaten up[1] than someone get killed.

Well, there's where we differ I guess. If someone assaults me with intent to harm, their life is forfeit to me. I will produce a firearm, and if they do not cease the assault, I will use it. If that sounds harsh, again, keep in mind that you just told me to stand there and take a beating and FalseName flat out said I should be helpless with neither firearms nor police help legally required.

Besides, I've already one limb near crippled already thanks to an assault. I don't need another one.

I didn't tell you to stand there and take a beating, I'm fine with people defending themselves with proportional force. If you can't get the fuck out of there, but you can put your assailant on his or her arse (then get the fuck out of there), then you should probably do it. But if you can't do that either, then yes, you should take the beating, because at the end of the day, you'll walk away. Dead people aren't known to do that.

[1] Although obviously I don't want that to happen

GunsmithKitten:

DJjaffacake:

I assume you have legs? Run away.

Good idea. I tell my CC applicants the same thing. Not always an option though.

If that is absolutely impossible, then yes, I would rather you get beaten up[1] than someone get killed.

Well, there's where we differ I guess. If someone assaults me with intent to harm, their life is forfeit to me. I will produce a firearm, and if they do not cease the assault, I will use it. If that sounds harsh, again, keep in mind that you just told me to stand there and take a beating and FalseName flat out said I should be helpless with neither firearms nor police help legally required.

Besides, I've already one limb near crippled already thanks to an assault. I don't need another one.

I think the idea is that, in Australia and the UK, we have the concept of Self-Defense in porportion to the threat faced. If someone is just trying to rob you, you don't have the right to take their life. The same reason why courts give punishments in porportion to the crimes. You know, that whole law and order thing that seperates society from anarchy?

Hey if someone is threatening your life and you have to kill them, by all means do. If someone's trying to mug you and you can secure your safety without having to kill him, then killing him is completely unnessicary and morally wrong.

[1] Although obviously I don't want that to happen

Lil devils x:

GunsmithKitten:

Shaoken:

Down here in Oz (and I'm guessing up there in the UK) if the police aren't required to do a thing to help the common man, we'd rage the fuck out. Vote out politicions who abide by that, protest in the streets, basically demand better and don't stop untill we get it.

We should have. Oh by the GODS we should have.

I do not kid in saying that my stance on firearms would not be nearly as sure if this weren't the case. But it is, folks. You. Are. On. Your. Own.

Which infuriates me even more than people like Blahab and TechNo are okay with not just making sure I have no firearms to defend myself with, but are okay with the cops being legally allowed to ignore any calls for help.

I do think that is at the core of the issue. I mean, at my Grandmas house, the police will not even show up until after the shooting stops and it is daylight to collect bodies. It is seriously that bad. Since the police do not " protect and serve" the people are forced to defend themselves. It also boils down to the police force itself in many places, The people I know who became cops here were the " thugs" in highschool themselves. Look at this:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/rockwall-tx/TQKJFDJ6761VQ2VFC

Seriously, people should realize this is what we deal with here. One of our school officers slept with the teen girl who lived above him like the month before he was appointed to the school. THESE are the people who are supposed to protect people. Think about it. What are the people supposed to do if they want to live? A big problem here is no one wants to be a cop, and the ones that do are not who you want to protect you.

That would be the core of the issue; the only people who want to be cops are people who want to abuse the power that comes with the badge. That's what happens when you demonize 'snitches' and people who try to do the right thing.

I mean, I'm currently training to be an LEO and will be applying for the FBI soon enough (And will probably get in, since I have connections within the agency), but I'm not doing it out of the good of my heart. I want to see people who break the laws punished. Doesn't matter what the law is or whether or not I personally agree with it, I just want to make those that would disregard the laws suffer.

Blablahb:
By the way, the NRA and their cronies have made a new move. This time it's an all-out attack on the First Amendment.

There's a petition going around to have someone deported from the US, because he spoke out in favour of gun control:
http://news.yahoo.com/thousands-sign-us-petition-deport-piers-morgan-141037563.html

Kind of funny that people who pretend to defend rights, are actually opposed to freedom of speech.

No, no, no! We are not taking that twat back, you've got him, he's your problem now. No backsies!

GunsmithKitten:

Well, there's where we differ I guess. If someone assaults me with intent to harm, their life is forfeit to me. I will produce a firearm, and if they do not cease the assault, I will use it. If that sounds harsh, again, keep in mind that you just told me to stand there and take a beating and FalseName flat out said I should be helpless with neither firearms nor police help legally required.

So if I walk up and say "give me your purse or you'll get punched" and you have, say, $20 in your purse, my life is worth less than that? You'll walk away with $20 less and a black eye, in what way is that a fair comparison to ending another human beings life???

You don't have to be helpless, guy tried to 'happy slap' (a random assault that is recorded) me years ago, the idea is hit hard and laugh at the shock on the persons face, I slammed his head into a bus shelter and they ran off. They were just like muggers, they want a quick, easy attack that gets them what they want with no risk to them, if you fight back in any way they'll give up and find someone easier.

DJjaffacake:

I didn't tell you to stand there and take a beating, I'm fine with people defending themselves with proportional force.

I'm 110 pounds soaking wet and have a useless leg. How good are my chances in fisticuffs again?

If you can't get the fuck out of there, but you can put your assailant on his or her arse (then get the fuck out of there), then you should probably do it.

But if you can't do that either, then yes, you should take the beating, because at the end of the day, you'll walk away. Dead people aren't known to do that.

Love that logic; because I'm small and not very good at hand to hand, I should be obligated to take the beating instead of producing a weapon that gives ME the advantage.

No sir. I'm not doing that. This is not a contact sport, this is life and death.

By the way, the last beating I took, I didn't walk away. For several months, i didn't even walk at all.

Shaoken:

Hey if someone is threatening your life and you have to kill them, by all means do. If someone's trying to mug you and you can secure your safety without having to kill him, then killing him is completely unnessicary and morally wrong.

Sir, I don't live in a world where criminals have ID indicators that say "I'm not going to kill you, just rob you."

But why should I be forbidden from using a firearm to defend myself if I'm being assaulted? Are you like DJ and the sort that says I should succumb to the beating which will invariably damage me big time given my size?

I will not. If I'm assaulted, I will produce a firearm. If the presence of the gun is not enough, I will use it.

And I thank all the good gods that I live in a state where that stance is respected.

Karma168:

So if I walk up and say "give me your purse or you'll get punched" and you have, say, $20 in your purse, my life is worth less than that?

Since you're trying to mug me, yes, it is. Your life isn't worth spit if you're attacking me.

You get a gun in the face and told to kiss the ground until I can get the police to pick you up. If you persist, you get shot.

You'll walk away with $20 less and a black eye, in what way is that a fair comparison to [i]ending another human beings life???

Fair has nothing to do with it when you physically assault people. This isn't a damned olympic sport.

You don't have to be helpless, guy tried to 'happy slap' (a random assault that is recorded) me years ago, the idea is hit hard and laugh at the shock on the persons face, I slammed his head into a bus shelter and they ran off. They were just like muggers, they want a quick, easy attack that gets them what they want with no risk to them, if you fight back in any way they'll give up and find someone easier.

That means that facing a firearm will be even more poignant, now won't it?

GunsmithKitten:

Karma168:
[quote]You'll walk away with $20 less and a black eye, in what way is that a fair comparison to [i]ending another human beings life???

Fair has nothing to do with it when you physically assault people. This isn't a damned olympic sport.

It is life and death, though, as you've said. It's $20 dollars and a black eye, if you'd kill someone over that, you shouldn't be allowed to carry a firearm.

Reginald:

GunsmithKitten:

Karma168:
[quote]You'll walk away with $20 less and a black eye, in what way is that a fair comparison to [i]ending another human beings life???

Fair has nothing to do with it when you physically assault people. This isn't a damned olympic sport.

It is life and death, though, as you've said. It's $20 dollars and a black eye, if you'd kill someone over that, you shouldn't be allowed to carry a firearm.

So you missed where I would tell them to stand down after producing the firearm? Yes, if I just pulled and fired you'd be correct, something is wrong with me. But if after telling someone to stand down after drawing a firearm, they still insist on assaulting me, THEN I shoot.

Also, how do I know they just want 20 bucks?

Being a criminal in Europe's gotta be a gas if your attitude is that prevalent. All you have to do is threaten for money, and you get it without anyone doing a damn thing about it.

GunsmithKitten:

Reginald:

GunsmithKitten:

It is life and death, though, as you've said. It's $20 dollars and a black eye, if you'd kill someone over that, you shouldn't be allowed to carry a firearm.

So you missed where I would tell them to stand down after producing the firearm? Yes, if I just pulled and fired you'd be correct, something is wrong with me. But if after telling someone to stand down after drawing a firearm, they still insist on assaulting me, THEN I shoot.

So, you would kill a guy because he wanted to give you a black eye and $20. Right-o, then.

GunsmithKitten:
Also, how do I know they just want 20 bucks?

Because that's all you've got in this hypothetical situation.

GunsmithKitten:
Being a criminal in Europe's gotta be a gas if your attitude is that prevalent. All you have to do is threaten for money, and you get it without anyone doing a damn thing about it.

I'm not European. Also, I believe that Europe, like Australia, has an organisation devoted to law and order, who actively seek to do damn things about robbery.

Just out of curiosity, what would you do if the person robbing you had a gun? Or if he approached from behind, and had a knife to your jugular? Do you think you'd be able to walk the walk like you talk the talk if a hard-arse thug did assail you in real life?

Reginald:

So, you would kill a guy because he wanted to give you a black eye and $20. Right-o, then.

I would kill someone who is assaulting me and does not stand down when I produce my firearm. Problem with that?

And I repeat; how do I know that he wants more than 20 bucks? How do I know he's not interested in raping and murdering me, and not necessarily in that order?

I'm not European. Also, I believe that Europe, like Australia, has an organisation devoted to law and order, who actively seek to do damn things about robbery.

This I'll grant. I hope that their systems do not let their police personnel legally stand by when people are being victimized or not respond to emergency calls.

Just out of curiosity, what would you do if the person robbing you had a gun?

Fucked up situation. You give them the money, you distract them long enough to escape, or if that's not even an option, you then go for your firearm. If they've already got the drop on you, your odds are shitty to begin with.

Or if he approached from behind, and had a knife to your jugular? Do you think you'd be able to walk the walk like you talk the talk if a hard-arse thug did assail you in real life?

Firstly, I have walked the walk before. An armed robbery almost became a kidnapping and murder, with me as the corpse, and only stayed an attempted robbery because I produced a firearm.

Knife to the throat? Approached from behind? Again, as I said, fucked up situation, odds aren't good gun or not. You buy for time, you give the money, pray that's all he's after, and get away or if that's not an option, you make a move.

GunsmithKitten:

Reginald:

So, you would kill a guy because he wanted to give you a black eye and $20. Right-o, then.

I would kill someone who is assaulting me and does not stand down when I produce my firearm. Problem with that?

Yes. I'd have thought that was apparent.

GunsmithKitten:
And I repeat; how do I know that he wants more than 20 bucks? How do I know he's not interested in raping and murdering me, and not necessarily in that order?

He says "give me $20, and nothing more!" And he looks trustworthy for a robber. Seriously, if you're on the streets of a city, you don't have to worry about getting raped right there. There's a chance anyone might rape and murder you, you don't kill people at random, just to make sure. That, and if he was going to kill you, why is he bothering to rob you first? That's, like, a really specific and unlikely MO.

GunsmithKitten:

Just out of curiosity, what would you do if the person robbing you had a gun?

Fucked up situation. You give them the money, you distract them long enough to escape, or if that's not even an option, you then go for your firearm. If they've already got the drop on you, your odds are shitty to begin with.

Seriously, please don't draw a gun on someone if they've got one on you. That a very good way to get shot.

GunsmithKitten:

Or if he approached from behind, and had a knife to your jugular? Do you think you'd be able to walk the walk like you talk the talk if a hard-arse thug did assail you in real life?

Firstly, I have walked the walk before. An armed robbery almost became a kidnapping and murder, with me as the corpse, and only stayed an attempted robbery because I produced a firearm.

Good to know that anecdote had an all right ending. I'd probably be dead if I tried drawing a gun in any truly dangerous situation I've been in.

apparently some guy has set a fire and ambushed the firefighters who arrived illing two of them. im half expecting the NRA to say they need to arm all firefighters now

Reginald:

Yes. I'd have thought that was apparent.

Again, this is where me and some people here differ. I dont' tolerate people assaulting me. You assault me, you risk your life.

He says "give me $20, and nothing more!" And he looks trustworthy for a robber. Seriously, if you're on the streets of a city, you don't have to worry about getting raped right there.

Go look up the "Kitty Genovese" effect.

There's a chance anyone might rape and murder you, you don't kill people at random, just to make sure.

Correct, you don't. People however who not only clearly intend to assault you, but also are not deterred by you pulling a gun, it's safe to assume at that point that they intend very, very bad things for you.

That, and if he was going to kill you, why is he bothering to rob you first?

Because he might assume people think like you; they'll submissively give over their money and comply with what they say, making them an easy target. Which you sir, are.

Seriously, please don't draw a gun on someone if they've got one on you. That a very good way to get shot.

Why else do you think it was last on the list of options?

Good to know that anecdote had an all right ending. I'd probably be dead if I tried drawing a gun in any truly dangerous situation I've been in.

I'll take you at your word about it since you were courteous enough to take me at mine, but why do you say that?

GunsmithKitten:
I'm 110 pounds soaking wet and have a useless leg. How good are my chances in fisticuffs again?

I'm not suggesting you obey Queensbury Rules, kick him in the balls. In fact I'm sure I remeber you saying you do self defence classes, surely you learn where a person's weak points are.

Love that logic; because I'm small and not very good at hand to hand, I should be obligated to take the beating instead of producing a weapon that gives ME the advantage.

No sir. I'm not doing that. This is not a contact sport, this is life and death.

By the way, the last beating I took, I didn't walk away. For several months, i didn't even walk at all.

No, again, you should run away. But again, though neither is desirable, someone being beaten up is preferable to someone being dead.

And I'm sorry to hear about what happened to you, but the very fact that you are having this discussion now demonstrates that you came out of it in a better state than a dead person would.

GunsmithKitten:

He says "give me $20, and nothing more!" And he looks trustworthy for a robber. Seriously, if you're on the streets of a city, you don't have to worry about getting raped right there.

Go look up the "Kitty Genovese" effect.

The bystander effect isn't something that happens every single time there's an issue in a public place, though. It rarely ever occurs in small groups, for example, and it doesn't happen %100 of the time in large groups. I'd not rape someone in the middle of a crowd of 500 people. I'd not rape anyone under any circumstances at all, come to think of it. But still, it might only take one person to step out from the crowd and help you.

GunsmithKitten:

There's a chance anyone might rape and murder you, you don't kill people at random, just to make sure.

Correct, you don't. People however who not only clearly intend to assault you, but also are not deterred by you pulling a gun, it's safe to assume at that point that they intend very, very bad things for you.

That's not at all a safe assumption. If I thought someone intended to shoot me, and I couldn't talk my way out of it, I'd try to disarm them. I know I can't outrun a bullet. I wouldn't try to kill them after I had their gun. If I'm robbing a guy, and he draws, I'd pounce instinctively.

GunsmithKitten:

That, and if he was going to kill you, why is he bothering to rob you first?

Because he might assume people think like you; they'll submissively give over their money and comply with what they say, making them an easy target. Which you sir, are.

I'll give a guy a twenty dollar bill to avoid violence, if that's the best solution, sure. I'm a man of peace. I've been around a lot of violence. I can box competently, I know how to take a punch, and I'm no stranger to choking people out. I'm not Cassius Clay at his peak, but I do know how to handle myself. I just prefer non-violence for a number of reasons.

That still doesn't explain why they're robbing me before they kill me. Do they have a vendetta against the meek? Did the meek kill their parents and disband their ninja clan? Most people who've tried to take my money didn't have any desire to get serious enough to attack me. That's just my experience from my part of the world, though. The murder rate in America is way higher than in Australia, so it's not impossible that robbery + murder is in fashion in some places.

GunsmithKitten:

Seriously, please don't draw a gun on someone if they've got one on you. That a very good way to get shot.

Why else do you think it was last on the list of options?

It's not an option at all. If a crazy, desperate, violent criminal has his gun drawn and aimed at you, you're not going to be able to draw, aim, and shoot in the time it'll take him to shoot. Your life is worth more than your money or your dignity. Seriously, I'd prefer it if you didn't die, you'd upset a lot of people.

GunsmithKitten:

Good to know that anecdote had an all right ending. I'd probably be dead if I tried drawing a gun in any truly dangerous situation I've been in.

I'll take you at your word about it since you were courteous enough to take me at mine, but why do you say that?

If I talk about the last time I might get into legal trouble. Suffice to say it involved some unfriendly police. Before that, just some poor guy. Had two mates with him, both behind me. Didn't know they were there until I ran off, when the guy ahead of me went in to fish my pockets. If I drew anything, one of them probably would've hit me in the back of the head with the iron bar he was carrying, then left me for dead, without a wallet or phone. Instead, I darted to the nearest pub. I could tell those guys were poor as dirt when I saw them all, and very desperate. For meth, probably. Before that, it was some skinhead who was jacked up on some insane shit. Probably could've messed me up with his hands if he wanted to. Drawing a gun would've been a coin flip. I wouldn't be able to bring myself to shoot him, that's for sure, and this guy was crazy enough that he'd just as likely take my gun and shoot me with it than run away. He lost interest in me, probably because I wasn't up for conflict. That was lucky.

Reginald:

The bystander effect isn't something that happens every single time there's an issue in a public place, though. It rarely ever occurs in small groups, for example, and it doesn't happen %100 of the time in large groups. I'd not rape someone in the middle of a crowd of 500 people. I'd not rape anyone under any circumstances at all, come to think of it. But still, it might only take one person to step out from the crowd and help you.

Happens too often for me, and it's happening more and more with the Youtube generation. If someone raped me with a crowd, it'd get filmed, not stopped.

That's not at all a safe assumption. If I thought someone intended to shoot me, and I couldn't talk my way out of it, I'd try to disarm them. I know I can't outrun a bullet. I wouldn't try to kill them after I had their gun. If I'm robbing a guy, and he draws, I'd pounce instinctively.

If you did try to pounce, you'd take a bullet, you'd deserve it, and most courts in US states would agree with me. If you're assaulting someone and don't stand down when confronted with a firearm, the force becomes much more legal.

That still doesn't explain why they're robbing me before they kill me. Do they have a vendetta against the meek? Did the meek kill their parents and disband their ninja clan? Most people who've tried to take my money didn't have any desire to get serious enough to attack me. That's just my experience from my part of the world, though. The murder rate in America is way higher than in Australia, so it's not impossible that robbery + murder is in fashion in some places.

Now you're starting to understand....

It's not an option at all. If a crazy, desperate, violent criminal has his gun drawn and aimed at you, you're not going to be able to draw, aim, and shoot in the time it'll take him to shoot.

Repeat; that's why it's last on the list. Meekly hoping for the best, however, is not an option for me.

Your life is worth more than your money or your dignity. Seriously, I'd prefer it if you didn't die, you'd upset a lot of people.

That's why I'm armed.

As for self defense, what I teach is a concealed carry permit application class. It's a course where I take people intending to apply for a CC and teach them state law regarding the carrying of their weapon, what they can and can't carry, when lethal force is legal by the state, and what to expect legally should they either draw their weapon or draw and use it on another human being.

DJjaffacake:

I'm not suggesting you obey Queensbury Rules, kick him in the balls. In fact I'm sure I remeber you saying you do self defence classes, surely you learn where a person's weak points are.

I teach concealed carry classes.

Kicking in the balls? Yea, sure. Besides my lack of any real momentum, one of my legs can't kick period.

And I'm sorry to hear about what happened to you, but the very fact that you are having this discussion now demonstrates that you came out of it in a better state than a dead person would.

And the presence of a loaded firearm is precisely why I'm not a corpse.

GunsmithKitten:
If someone raped me with a crowd, it'd get filmed, not stopped.

If you can prove beyond a measure of a doubt that that's what'll happen, I'll dig it. Until then, that's just what you think. I can say if I tried to do a backflip, I'd land on my feat, and that claim is just as valid.

GunsmithKitten:

That's not at all a safe assumption. If I thought someone intended to shoot me, and I couldn't talk my way out of it, I'd try to disarm them. I know I can't outrun a bullet. I wouldn't try to kill them after I had their gun. If I'm robbing a guy, and he draws, I'd pounce instinctively.

If you're as weak as you're always claiming you are, and I'm already attacking you, whose to say you'll in any state to draw? If you can, do you think you'll be fast enough, or failing that, strong enough to stop me from disarming you? I'd never rob or attack you in the first place, I'm very against violence, but if I wanted to your gun isn't necessarily going to stop me.

GunsmithKitten:

It's not an option at all. If a crazy, desperate, violent criminal has his gun drawn and aimed at you, you're not going to be able to draw, aim, and shoot in the time it'll take him to shoot.

Repeat; that's why it's last on the list. Meekly hoping for the best, however, is not an option for me.

Hoping for the best is actually better than actively getting yourself killed, and I'll tell you why. Because actively trying to get yourself killed is more likely to get you killed than attempting to not get killed.

I'm worried you're letting your fear and paranoia rule you, that's really not healthy.

DJjaffacake:

If that is absolutely impossible, then yes, I would rather you get beaten up[1] than someone get killed.

As I posted in another thread, I keep seeing examples of how anti gun people prefer victimhood. Not only do they have trouble imagining successful self defense with a gun, they think it's unjustified and assume that the criminal has the mildest of bad intentions. If they have any empathy, they certainly aren't giving it to the victims of violent crime.

If a criminal confronts you with a deadly weapon, it is HIM, that raised the stakes to the point that someone could die. If said criminal is shot by his intended victim, it is morally and legally right. I've even seen cases like that where the anti gun person goes to extremes to lionize the dead criminal and demonize the person who defended himself. If the anti gunners had their way here in America, gun ownership would be a privilege of criminals and the very rich. Criminals would be emboldened to hurt more people knowing that armed self defense is prohibited.

[1] Although obviously I don't want that to happen

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked