U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250

Advertisements

When people say "call the police" if you are attacked... WHY?

What do the police bring with them? Do they bring harsh language? Do they bring persuasive arguments about how the criminal should turn his life around and go straight? What do the police bring with them???

The police bring GUNS with them...

See, I don't need the police since my gun is readily available and I know how to use it. Aside from the fact that the police won't be here in time when I need them anyway.

When criminals hear their "look-out" shout "the cops are coming!" why do they run? Are they afraid of being yelled at? Are they afraid of being told they've violated the law?

They're afraid of being shot and either killed or maimed... They fear/respect force, that's all they fear/respect.

If guns are good enough for the police, they're good enough for John Q citizen who is seldom operating with backup and never has an entire SWAT unit ready to rush to his side.

 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by linicx View Post
I certainly like the idea of very expensive bullets sold only in bulk to licensed hunters, and at cost to law enforcement.

I'm not a criminal but I have friends that are police or military. They'll buy things for me if I asked them to...

What will you do about gang members in similar situations? How about the Rampart police officers? Do you want them being able to get special prices?
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by amyalta View Post
The facts speak for themselves - if you have a gun in your home, you are 250 times more likely to shoot either yourself or a loved one, than you are to be able to 'defend yourself!'

For every one householder who has succeeded in using a gun against an intruder, there are 200 who have had their own weapon used against them.

The easy availability of automatic weapons makes school mass shootings almost an annual event.

You are not living on some kind of treacherous frontier!

As for the stuff about 'right to bear arms,' it's fascinating that gun lovers always omit the crucial part about a well regulated militia! You have militia!

I live in the UK where we have strict gun control laws, thank God - sure, some 35 low-lifes a a year or thereabouts die in gun killings, but that's about 00000.3 of the number in the US.


The numbers you cite about "X times more likely to shoot yourself or a family member" are a lie based on a study conducted in a small town with less than 1,000 residents. It was FAR from scientific. They probably only had one accidental shooting, and no self-defense shootings, in the entire history of their town.

As for the UK, the UK beats the USA in everything except murder... You have less gun deaths, but what about deaths overall?

Does it matter if you are shot to death or stabbed to death? Why do you focus on GUN deaths rather than just DEATHS?



Likewise, in our friendly neighbor to the north, Canada, they beat the USA in everything except murder.

They have a rape rate that makes them the 5th highest in the world. About 250,000 rapes per year, which winds up being about twice the number that the USA has... Bear in mind Canada has TEN PERCENT of the population of the USA. This is according to the US Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Canada's rape rate is 2.5 times the US national average. They also have a higher rate of burglary, robbery, larceny, etc. As for the UK, they only report a crime if a conviction results, this way they deflate the numbers. If I walk into the USA with a knife wound and say "I was stabbed" they record it as an assault, in the UK they record it as nothing, unless an arrest is made and a conviction results.


Bureau of Justice Statistics Cross-National Studies in Crime and Justice (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cnscj.htm - broken link)

Crime in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...4/150547.shtml
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
So your in another country wishing to take away my constitutional right?


I don't understand this.....The people that wish to ban guns are more than welcome to put a sign in their front yard that says you support gun control and the banning of guns.

In the early 1970s there were about 200 people in New York City who put signs in their yards proclaiming that they had no firearms and they believed all firearms should be banned. They told reporters that their example would catch-on and inspire a gun-free society, or at least a gun-free NYC...

Within about a week the vast majority wound up victims burglary, robbery, assault, and in a number of instances, rape, and even murder.

The signs came down.
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:33 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
Why would you feel compelled to shoot to kill a teenager who is stealing your television? Would you do so if you, in fact, saw that the person is a teenager?

I would say your reaction isn't fitting the nature of the offense being perpetrated against you, and it would certainly be seen that way in court. Does a conviction for theft of a TV result in the death penalty in any US state? If not, then why would you have the right to kill another person who is trying to steal your TV?

Where do you draw the line?

What if they want to torture you?- "Oh, a conviction for torture doesn't carry the death penalty, so go right on ahead and violate my diginity!"

What if they want to rape your wife?- "Oh a conviction for rape doesn't carry the death penalty, so go on ahead and brutally violate my wife and leave her traumatized for life!"

There's something called natural justice. If somebody wants to wrong you, you stop them, through any means necessary.

The point is not that they are stealing a mere TV set, the point is that they have violated the sanctity of your house, they have invaded your personal space, space that is supposed to be safe. Their presence in your house poses a threat to you and your entire family. If somebody is in my house, I'm not going to take the time to find out if they're just there to steal my computer or my TV, as opposed to wanting to brutally torture and murder me.

"Oh, you just want to take my stuff, here, let me help you load my car up, then I'll give you the keys..."

YAWN...


How about- this- "BANG, BANG, BANG!" two to the chest, one to the head, it's over and done with, now I can go back to bed.

I'm not somebody's prey, I don't intend to get eaten alive by predators. When the wolves circle around, they ought to realize this buffalo has quite a kick...
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
Ask the victims who got shot up in the mall in Missouri by the teenager (already under doctor's care for psychiatric disorders) who took his step-uncle's M-16 to perpetrate both mass murder and "suicide by police." (He succeeded only in the former.) These incidents are reported in the national news practically every month. Do you not notice them?

In that situation, what contributed to the end result (shooting innocent members of the public in a shopping mall):

* There were no metal detectors to prevent entry into the mall by a person carrying a large dangerous firearm.
* The teenager's parents weren't successful at impressing upon the teenager's mind that it is unacceptable to perpetrate mass murder with a powerful firearm.
* The teenager's step-uncle wasn't successful at securing, if he in fact tried, the M-16 rifle and its ammo from the teenager.
* The step-uncle owned and kept an M-16 at his residence.


The M-16 is a fully-automatic weapon, and I know for a fact that since 1934, when fully-automatic weapons were first regulated, only one legally owned fully-automatic weapon has ever been used in a crime, and that was in 1986, in Dayton Ohio, when a police officer used his personally owned MAC-10 submachine-gun to gun down an informant.

Doubtlessly you are referring to the AR-15, a semi-automatic version of the M-16.
 
Old 01-22-2009, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 640,290 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
Courts calling it? No. Juries calling it? Yes.

If your fear of personal injury isn't based on facts and reasonable expectation known at that time, then your behavior in response could also be considered criminal. If an unarmed teenager in your home is holding your TV and you encounter him while brandishing a gun, and then you shoot him without saying a word to him and without listening to what he says to you, I would say you have committed a crime. Of course, that is hypothetical, and practically speaking all the relevant facts might not be ascertainable after the fact by an investigator. So the gun owner in that sitaution would have a great advantage over the thief. What the gun owner chooses to do with that advantage would be a matter of conscience. Whether the justice system would prosecute you for your actions would depend on the facts of the case that could be ascertained after the fact.

If it were my teenaged son who was discovered while committing that crime, I would not congratulate you about your "self-defense" decision. I would remind you that you went beyond the facts at that time because you were not IN FACT in personal danger from that teenager.

What if he says, "I'm taking your stuff and there's nothing you can do about it! None of what I'm doing is a capital crime! If they convict me I just get a little cell for a few years... I'm also going to rape your wife... Again, that's not a capital crime... If you pull the trigger, my next of kin will see you get sent up for murder, on top of being sued in a civil trial..."


I'm sure that whatever a home invader has to say, I doubt he'll be quoting the wisdom of Plato and I sure as heck don't think he'll be reciting scripture. If somebody is invading my house, I'm not really interested in listening to what they have to say. As a matter of fact, unless they can manage to say, "don't shoot, I surrender!" (while simultaneously putting their hands in the air) within two seconds of my confronting them, they're probably going to die.
 
Old 01-22-2009, 05:35 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,064,818 times
Reputation: 3717
Question What's The Use? Trying to teach a monkey to play Mozart is also hopeless!

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles View Post
...unless they can manage to say, "don't shoot, I surrender!" (while simultaneously putting their hands in the air) within two seconds of my confronting them, they're probably going to die.
See, OUA, (great post-points, BTW: I could only rep you once, sorry!), the sheeple don't care about yours or anyone else's logic but their own. If it doesn't fit into their agenda, well, it doesn't belong in the better society they see (via a Changed" new government no doubt). They truly are of the "We Know Best" persuasion as is proven every time they speak.

(Oh, BTW, ParkTwain; to your silly point above: Please have your son wear a luminous notice on the front and back of his hooded sweat shirt, that clearly says, large font size, "I'm ParkTwain's Son and Have Special Privileges as a Criminal!" That oughta cover it for you, right? We'll really try to not shoot him, only have him dragged off to prison, which i'm sure he'll like. OK. let's move on to reality...)

Sadly, being rational and intellectually honest sceptical thinkers, we also naively assume that, through the presentation of endless links to endless credible studies showing, endlessly, that gun registration and egregious new gun laws piled onto the already over-stacked list (20,000+ already in this country so far) has not decreased gun crime. In fact, it has increased crime. And then they toss in their flawed, discredited studies that contradict these FBI, Justice Dept, CIA and accredited University Criminology studies.

Such as the person from UK, posted above I believe, who erroneously talked about guns being used on the owner four times more often that they are used on the aggressor. Apparently it's so much much better in her world to be beaten to a crippled state with no possible means of self defence. The obviously better answer even if this were true? Why, have firearms owners take mandatory courses in self-defence using a firearm while in your own castle, as well as the legal ramifications of course! But not disarmament! "Baaahhhhhh"

The truth is that in several million cases each year in the US, the simple fact that the criminal was aware that his intended victim had a gun prevented any further progression of the assault.

As in: a gun saved lives in millions of cases. Argument over.

But then again, the anti-gunners prefer to see things routinely mis-represented, as in this classic:

FOXNews.com - Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall's Gun-Free-Zone Status - Opinion

Here's the link to John's book if they'd actually care to become educated with the truth (chance of that? pretty much "zero" I'd be willing to bet...):

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding ... - Google Book Search

His credentials?

John Lott - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is he alone in these beliefs? Hardly but I won't bother to post more links because the anti-gunners, as I said above, just don't care. Not their agenda.

So, OUA, again, I've truly enjoyed your logic so far. Theirs, not so much. Actually, I'd love to read a credible study that refutes any of the gun-owner's claims, I being an objective scientist and all. (of course, they don't exist because the premise has, time after time, been proven to be faulty...) But every time they do post something and I look it up (like Tim Lambert's trolling bait-blog, for example) I then go to the next step and Google the author. So far, it's never been pretty. I always approach with a completely open mind.

I also note that when we do ask these people a perfectly valid question to which there is only one answer, they just deflect. They often utilize a sort of "Oh yeah? Well your mother wears camo underwear!" response. Quite entertaining and instructive, all sadly roled into one!

Well, what can you expect, eh? An "agenda" is an "agenda" is an "agenda"!

Also remember: "Beware of Smiling Liberal Democrats. They're After Something!" 2009 rflmn™

Last edited by rifleman; 01-22-2009 at 05:42 PM.. Reason: typos
 
Old 01-22-2009, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
4,708 posts, read 7,561,996 times
Reputation: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles View Post
As a matter of fact, unless they can manage to say, "don't shoot, I surrender!" (while simultaneously putting their hands in the air) within two seconds of my confronting them, they're probably going to die.

OK then, you certainly qualify as what I would call "trigger happy."

Live by the gun, and you'll also die by the gun.
 
Old 01-22-2009, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,366,957 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParkTwain View Post
OK then, you certainly qualify as what I would call "trigger happy."

Live by the gun, and you'll also die by the gun.
If an intruder is pointing a gun at me, I have every right to believe they will use it to try to harm me, or those around me.

If I tell them to lower / drop their weapon, and they do not obey that command immediately, I have every right to fire my weapon - and I will fire at center mass - not to wound the individual - to kill the individual.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top