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 01-17-2009, 12:38 AM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,838,645 times
Reputation: 1300

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
You completely misunderstand what I am saying. I'm saying no group of civilians will take over our government, no matter how many "arms" the second amendment provides. We have nut cases like the Davidians periodically who think they can assert independence. They are always crushed.
and you misunderstand the largest point of arming the civilians. it is not with the knowledge that a civilian militia could beat any military. it is a psychological deterrent more than anything. if the civilian populace is armed, the government knows that it can't reasonably enact or enforce any draconian measures. they can't come house to house demanding your first-born child for their ss-style brainwashing camps. they can't execute people because of their race, religion, or political views, they can't 'disappear' anyone that disagrees with them.

having an armed populace serves in much of the same way as was mentioned locks: they keep people honest. if we are armed, and have the ability to combat tyranny, then we will probably never *have to* combat tyranny. if we are not, we've not only left the door unlocked, we've left it open and inviting.

an armed nation would be too costly to assault and maintain control of for any governmental power, even if they had the financial backing of the usa. even if they had the military might to squash every resistance, one by one, it would take forever, casualties would be enormous, it would be more expensive than they could deal with, and they would end up having firebomb entire cities, which would destroy the populace and infrastructure that they were trying to usurp control of.

in short, it wouldn't be feasible; and that was with the might of the military to back them. unfortunately for them, they wouldn't be able to keep the service of the military during a hostile takeover. you might forget that soldiers are american citizens too, and there are few of them that would stand by and allow the country that they volunteered to defend go up in flames. if you don't believe me, look at history. what happened when the civil war started?

to be continued...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-17-2009, 12:39 AM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,838,645 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
I rely on the police, because they are professionals who do their job well. I also rely on door locks, which are also helpful. I don't rely on guns because they are unnecessary and statistically raise the risk of injury.
and

Quote:
If they don't respond when I call they get fired.
are you purposely ignoring the fact that the police won't get there in time to save you from a robber, a rapist, a serial killer, etc? if you wake up in the middle of the night to the sounds of someone kicking your windows in, do you think that the police are going to get there in time to prevent an encounter between you and the criminal?

this idea that the police officers are always going to be able to arrive in time to protect you is dangerously ignorant.

Criminal Victimization in the United States - Police - Response time to victim (http://ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/response_time_to_victim584.htm - broken link)

the department of justice offers stats on overall response time to reported crimes. take a look and see how long it takes for your officers to get to the crime scene. you have a less than 33% chance of having an officer arrive at your location within 5 minutes in response to a violent crime. stats for response to sexual assaults are included in those numbers. property crime? less than a 15% chance of an arrival within 5 minutes, but that one should be a no-brainer.

is that the fault of the officers? not necesarily. they do what they can; i am sure that there are foul-ups, miscommunications, and i am sure that there are lazy, apathetic cops. but for the most part, i'd put my money on travel time and stretched resources as the cause. either way, whether i'm right or wrong in my guess, you're going to be surprised at the wait when you finally suffer an assault or a robbery.

you keep talking about how you've never been victimized where you are. that is wonderful, and honestly, i'm glad you can say that. unfortunately, you then try to use your personal history as justification for why other people should have to live as you and value what you value. you are failing to recognize that other people have not been as fortunate as you. a rape victim has precious few moments with which to gain an escape. calling the police is not a likely possibility anyway, and even if she does, how many times do you think a 10-minute response time is going to save her?

it is great that you can live your life successfully without a gun. great. quit trying to make others live your life choices though. there are a lot of people out there that have been saved an untimely death or years of misery and heartache because they happened to have a firearm on them when it counted. all of the others have to rely on sometimes upwards of an hour-long response time from the overworked and underappreciated police force.

aaron out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 12:50 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,886 posts, read 12,565,008 times
Reputation: 5210
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
If 15 million people decide they don't like the government, they can usually sway an election. There's no need for attempting an armed rebellion.

You're assertion however is pure fantasy. It isn't ever going to happen.
15 million armed citizens can also do other things as well.

need I remind you that it did not take many people at all to start the war against england for our countries independence. after all their fight to them was a just one. this is something that politicians should think about before just discounting the people and the 2nd Amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,094,576 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by stycotl View Post
and



are you purposely ignoring the fact that the police won't get there in time to save you from a robber, a rapist, a serial killer, etc? if you wake up in the middle of the night to the sounds of someone kicking your windows in, do you think that the police are going to get there in time to prevent an encounter between you and the criminal?

this idea that the police officers are always going to be able to arrive in time to protect you is dangerously ignorant.

Criminal Victimization in the United States - Police - Response time to victim (http://ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/cvus/response_time_to_victim584.htm - broken link)

the department of justice offers stats on overall response time to reported crimes. take a look and see how long it takes for your officers to get to the crime scene. you have a less than 33% chance of having an officer arrive at your location within 5 minutes in response to a violent crime. stats for response to sexual assaults are included in those numbers. property crime? less than a 15% chance of an arrival within 5 minutes, but that one should be a no-brainer.

is that the fault of the officers? not necesarily. they do what they can; i am sure that there are foul-ups, miscommunications, and i am sure that there are lazy, apathetic cops. but for the most part, i'd put my money on travel time and stretched resources as the cause. either way, whether i'm right or wrong in my guess, you're going to be surprised at the wait when you finally suffer an assault or a robbery.

you keep talking about how you've never been victimized where you are. that is wonderful, and honestly, i'm glad you can say that. unfortunately, you then try to use your personal history as justification for why other people should have to live as you and value what you value. you are failing to recognize that other people have not been as fortunate as you. a rape victim has precious few moments with which to gain an escape. calling the police is not a likely possibility anyway, and even if she does, how many times do you think a 10-minute response time is going to save her?

it is great that you can live your life successfully without a gun. great. quit trying to make others live your life choices though. there are a lot of people out there that have been saved an untimely death or years of misery and heartache because they happened to have a firearm on them when it counted. all of the others have to rely on sometimes upwards of an hour-long response time from the overworked and underappreciated police force.

aaron out.
Since I haven't been robbed in 25 years and the police response time is a few minutes around here, I don't regard the risk of robbery as at all significant, especially in the house. Home invasions around here are exceedingly rare.

I know someone who was recently robbed on the street in Washington late at night. This is an out of town person who wasn't very street smart -- walking alone late at night in a fringe neighborhood. This is a young woman. Had she had a gun, which is illegal, she would have potentially stood and fought rather than thrown her purse and run. As a result of not standing to fight, she is unharmed and lost nothing. The police had the perp in custody in 10-15 minutes and even recovered her purse. Lesson, retreat first, call for help.

Why do I keep speaking out? Answer the question of why you keep speaking out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,094,576 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
15 million armed citizens can also do other things as well.

need I remind you that it did not take many people at all to start the war against england for our countries independence. after all their fight to them was a just one. this is something that politicians should think about before just discounting the people and the 2nd Amendment.
LOL right. What happened to those who tried that stunt in the 1860s?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,082,760 times
Reputation: 3717
Default "Just give 'em what they want, Martha, and meh-bee they'll go away!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by stycotl View Post
they can't come house to house demanding your first-born child for their ss-style brainwashing camps. they can't execute people because of their race, religion, or political views, they can't 'disappear' anyone that disagrees with them.

to be continued...
Sty, are you saying that such things can actually happen on this nicely liberalized and culturally evolved planet? Nooooo! {cut to that famous video shot from Vietnam of the "government officer" capping some (probably) innocent dissenter right in the streets}.

rl knows only too well that such things can't ever happen. Why, Sty, won't you "BELIEVE!"

(BTS, rl, your example of the young lady stroller's lucky escape is one oddball case in millions. The numbers of situations where 1) the police arrive AFTER the criminal event, not during or certainly not Before, is a staggering stat. 2) If she'd actually been armed, trained and aware, legally or not, the perps would now be in jail, instead of your "vunderland" concept of just quietly acceeding to them.

3) Many assaults are completed very quickly (<5 sec), including rape (well, OK, I'll give those types at least 1-2 minutes, but it's also SO hard to use your cell phone when the 200 lb perp on top of you also has his hand firmly over your mouth...), physical insult and certainly, theft of wallets, purses, store purchases or jewelry. That would include the cell phone you say we should call 911 on.

How interesting, your logic.

BTW, when I lived up in Northern Canada, where you've noted that the per capita crime rate is so very low, alone on the tundra at a research station, you're quite right. I was never attacked by any thugs. A few curious polar bears hung around (was it OK by you that in that sitch I carried a 44 Mag AND a 12ga riot gun, or should I have quietly "dialoged" with the hungry, sniffing, intent pb? Just curious how you'd eloquently handle it, rl. You are an inspiration after all.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 9,265,587 times
Reputation: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Since I haven't been robbed in 25 years and the police response time is a few minutes around here, I don't regard the risk of robbery as at all significant, especially in the house. Home invasions around here are exceedingly rare.

I know someone who was recently robbed on the street in Washington late at night. This is an out of town person who wasn't very street smart -- walking alone late at night in a fringe neighborhood. This is a young woman. Had she had a gun, which is illegal, she would have potentially stood and fought rather than thrown her purse and run. As a result of not standing to fight, she is unharmed and lost nothing. The police had the perp in custody in 10-15 minutes and even recovered her purse. Lesson, retreat first, call for help.

Why do I keep speaking out? Answer the question of why you keep speaking out.

I speak out just as the African-Americans, the Latinos and the homosexuals speak out. My rights are at risk of being taken away because of the mindset that you have. We give you scientific studies, in which you very methodically ignore, we give you testimonials in which you ignore. WE SPEAK BECAUSE WE DO NOT WANT OUR RIGHTS TAKEN FROM US.

those who would give liberty for temporary protection deserve neither.
-Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 03:04 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
32,177 posts, read 39,355,263 times
Reputation: 40698
A link for RI from a recent "rare" home invasion in his 'hood, it was only the lead local story on all DC TV stations when it happened and the other day at the hearing.

washingtonpost.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,410,319 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
A link for RI from a recent "rare" home invasion in his 'hood, it was only the lead local story on all DC TV stations when it happened and the other day at the hearing.

washingtonpost.com
The poster Richurch, lives in a very isolated world. His comments clearly show his lack of knowledge of what really goes on "outside the beltway". He will not acknowledge that home invasions take place. Or, that people are robbed on a regular basis. Or, that women are raped or otherwise assaulted.

He will not acknowledge the fact that firearms are being purchased by Americans at one of the fastest rates in our nations history or that Woman make up the biggest group of new firearm owners and CCW permitees.

Richurch seems to believe that what happens in the District is typical throughout the country - and his own words prove this.

He refuses to acknowledge that there are many, many illustrations of people who have successfully defended themselves with a firearm. Or, that the concept of "self defense" is alive and well as a concept, throughout most of the country.

He refuses to acknowledge that, unlike him or her, most don't have an unfounded fear of firearm ownership.

Then again, it takes all kinds -
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2009, 06:38 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,886 posts, read 12,565,008 times
Reputation: 5210
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
LOL right. What happened to those who tried that stunt in the 1860s?

they got beat down.

but look at it this way, when the war between the states started what happened to all federal military forts in the southern states, they were taken over by southern forces for the most part.


now bring that to the present, say for instance that Montana, Idaho and Wyoming all decide to secede together and take over all federal bases in their states and succeed at doing so, do you truly believe the US goverment is going to want to try and take those states back when they can throw up to 400+ ICBM's towards washington dc and the east coast?

I think not somehow, not until that threat is eliminated, and i dont think that would happen anytime soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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