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 06-25-2009, 11:05 AM
 
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 33,329,150 times
Reputation: 7038

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
See, here is the thing that kills me about people that jump up and down about how gun ownership cures rape and how this is all about self defense. Because, your going to need a healthy dose of martial arts to go with that. You need to be able to take any weapon away from your opponent. What I have not figured out is why nobody brings this up especially in discussing violent crimes. It is also recognized, from my end, that there are times when this type of self defense is not an option. By the same token, there are times where using a weapon as self defense is not an option.
This doesn't really make much sense. Besides, Bruce Lee carried a sidearm everywhere he went. If you take statements from combat veterans, whether military, law-enforcement, civilian or otherwise, I postulate that very, very few of them, if any, would be able to honestly tell you that disarming the adversary was ever considered as a viable option. Neutralize the threat to your person is the name of that game.

Never bring a karate chop to a gun fight. Actually, I wouldn't care if the fattest, sloppiest, most immobile criminal in the world was assaulting me, if he has a knife I'm either running or shooting. I'm sure as hell not trying to take his knife.

 
Old 06-25-2009, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,361,805 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
The old lady would not have meant much until you claimed an affiliation with the old lady. Some one that you personally knew.
Personally, I saw no one making such representations.
 
Old 06-25-2009, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,361,805 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
It is also recognized, from my end, that there are times when this type of self defense is not an option. By the same token, there are times where using a weapon as self defense is not an option.
If someone is doing "something" to cause a "reasonable person" to believe that their life, or physical well being - or the life of another, is in jeapordy, use of deadly force is authorized and justified. As many know, I have personal experience with this -
 
Old 06-25-2009, 07:37 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,319,821 times
Reputation: 2558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
She. I am a she. Not a he.
My apologies.

Quote:
The old lady would not have meant much until you claimed an affiliation with the old lady. Some one that you personally knew. That blew chow.
Be that as it may,
Where did he say that Ma'am?

Quote:
I am not anti-gun, therefore, it is obvious that they were defending themselves. Had I been anti-gun it would be worth arguing. You have no way of knowing precisely how many guns have been stolen and used in crime. You wonít find stats and do you know why?
Why?



Quote:
See, here is the thing that kills me about people that jump up and down about how gun ownership cures rape and how this is all about self defense.
Nobody said anything about guns cureing anything. They can make a difference is all, just as martial arts or any other proactive defense can.
A gun is simply a tool, no tool works 100%.

Quote:
Because, your going to need a healthy dose of martial arts to go with that. You need to be able to take any weapon away from your opponent. What I have not figured out is why nobody brings this up especially in discussing violent crimes.
Why do you need to take anything away from your opponent? If I have to ever draw a gun on someone it wont be to disarm them, It would be wise if the dropped any weapons of their own accord.

Quote:
It is also recognized, from my end, that there are times when this type of self defense is not an option. By the same token, there are times where using a weapon as self defense is not an option.

We all know that.
 
Old 06-25-2009, 11:38 PM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,831,584 times
Reputation: 1300
i actually started this response thursday morning, but real life butts in sometimes, so it is up late.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
She. I am a she. Not a he.

The old lady would not have meant much until you claimed an affiliation with the old lady. Some one that you personally knew. That blew chow.
Be that as it may,

I am not anti-gun, therefore, it is obvious that they were defending themselves. Had I been anti-gun it would be worth arguing.
i'm gonna leave this whole deal alone. i've already said my piece, asked my questions (which haven't been answered yet, by the way), and can walk away from what i see as a simple miscommunication.

Quote:
You have no way of knowing precisely how many guns have been stolen and used in crime. You won’t find stats and do you know why?
enlighten me. i'm curious to see what you think to be the cause. note that i am not being sarcastic here; i genuinely want to see your pov.

Quote:
I have never heard the following items said:
i'll second what swagger said, and point out that you've not been reading any of trickyd's posts, have you? nothing wrong with that–i have him on ignore, so i don't hear much of what he says either.

Quote:
This is not to say that I have not met my share of Kumbaya folks.
i know what you mean.

Quote:
See, here is the thing that kills me about people that jump up and down about how gun ownership cures rape and how this is all about self defense.
let's clarify that then. there are certainly people that misguidedly think that gun ownership cures those problems, just as there are people that misguidedly think that guns bans cure those problems.

that is not what those of us on this thread are arguing though. over and over tricky, or rlchurch, or one of the others deflects to some straw man argument about how the gun owners think that carrying a weapon solves all of their problems. but we have never once said anything like that.

it is *part* of the solution. i carry a cell phone despite how much i hate phones, because i know that they are handy in an emergency, and because my wife likes to be able to instantly communicate with me from across the city/state/wherever else i happen to be. a cell phone doesn't solve all of my problems, but it can certainly help in a pinch.

as we have also mentioned time and again, we all buy into insurance policies, despite the ridiculous systems in place, because they can come in handy in case of fire, flood, home invasion, etc.

then you have security systems, dogs, first aid kits, fire alarms, smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, vitamins, medical checkups, etc.

those are all individual tools that do some good by themselves (some more than others). but when you add them all up, they help keep you healthy, safe, and happy. they don't *guarantee* anything, but they do help.

Quote:
Because, your going to need a healthy dose of martial arts to go with that.
martial arts are certainly good for exercise, self defense, discipline, and general recreation, but they are not needed in order to effectively operate a firearm. another tool in the closet though, and certainly one that can help.

Quote:
You need to be able to take any weapon away from your opponent. What I have not figured out is why nobody brings this up especially in discussing violent crimes.
whoa. now this is where you start heading south in northbound traffic. attempting to disarm someone is not only extremely dangerous and liable to get the average person killed, it is extremely difficult for even trained individuals. in fact, in law enforcement and military training, they will show you some methods to disarm someone, but they generally tell you to avoid that scenario unless there is no other option.

Quote:
It is also recognized, from my end, that there are times when this type of self defense is not an option.
you are talking about martial arts in general, i presume. yes, that is true. their application, despite what some of the gun control fetishists believe (like that, tricky?) is limited, just as every other defensive or safety measure is limited.

now, if you were talking specifically about disarming hostiles, no, that is almost never even remotely a reasonable option.

Quote:
By the same token, there are times where using a weapon as self defense is not an option.
exactly. now you know what we are trying to say here. firearms are the last resort. they are not the first or even second resort. the use of deadly force is not something that we end arguments or card games with. it is what we end rapes, murders, robberies, and other deadly confrontations with.

the facts don't support the gun control crowd, that like to claim that gun owners are trigger-happy lunatics salivating over their chance to kill someone. if that were even remotely true, then we'd have a lot more–a lot more–acts of gun violence, and there would be a huge percentage of that type of offense being committed by legal, "salivating" gun owners.

but there isn't. gun crimes are committed almost entirely by career criminals, not by law-abiding (goes without saying), legal gun owners. most of us have never had a violent encounter during which we have needed to draw a weapon. most of us have never drawn a weapon on someone.

most of us have never had to collect on our fire insurance either. i'm hoping to keep it that way, but i sure am not planning on getting rid of the insurance just because i haven't had it happen yet.

aaron out.
 
Old 06-27-2009, 09:37 AM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
First, let me get this out of the way. All the rest, I'll come back for because
of the real life factor.

Greatday,

I apologize. I must have read it wrong and it went down hill from there.
I really don't know what to say. I have been ticked off for over a week. Only to find out that I have been ticked off for over a week for nothing-just ticks me off. At any rate, I truly am sorry for the oversight (undersight)...fudgenuggit.
 
Old 06-27-2009, 10:00 AM
 
Location: St Louis County, MO
711 posts, read 1,821,708 times
Reputation: 339
When shootings decline to 0, stabbings, strangling, and beating deaths will go up.
 
Old 06-27-2009, 10:33 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 34,361,805 times
Reputation: 4893
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandamonium View Post
First, let me get this out of the way. All the rest, I'll come back for because
of the real life factor.

Greatday,

I apologize. I must have read it wrong and it went down hill from there.
I really don't know what to say. I have been ticked off for over a week. Only to find out that I have been ticked off for over a week for nothing-just ticks me off. At any rate, I truly am sorry for the oversight (undersight)...fudgenuggit.
Hey - its OK. I've had lots of "those weeks" in my life.

Now - back to the butt kickin'
 
Old 06-27-2009, 03:48 PM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
Regarding stats:
1. The guns are not registered.
2. Private sales
3. Stolen guns may not be reported.
4. Stolen guns reported but serial number is unknown. Or none at all.
5. Guns stolen from one area used in another area.
6. Trades

It is not about making it harder or treating legit owners like criminals. I think it would increase the ability to solve crimes. For instance, a registered gun was stolen in this area (and reported) and several robberies occur. 2 weeks later (or whatever) several robberies occur in another jurisdiction and this time that individual is caught. Point A-Point B. Maybe even point C,D, and E. Or it is traded or sold to someone else and is moved around quite a bit.

I know this sounds crazy but there are times where the paper trail or reports or investigations are actually time saving. There may be available information but I think that people have falsely come to believe that A) information is shared and B) every place is CSI. Most places do not have the budget to work with.

Sharing information is pivotal. Agencies do not always work hand and hand. They should but they donít. Often ego or the belief that it represents a centralized type of government prevents that information from being shared. Perhaps a little from column A and a little from column B.

Regarding martial arts. Iím thinking of what is necessary in my environment. We have A.C.T. Which I have lovingly coined as, ďHow may I redirect you today?Ē I am pretty sure I am not that original and somebody else thought of it first. In most situations, you would not have to remove a weapon, where as, I would have to. I think in those terms and to the extent that I canít imagine it any other way. I got the impression that it was one at the expense of the other. Of course, I had another impression as well. Too, I just came off a debate where if I was not one then I must be the other. Tricky enjoys provoking so I tend to skip it.

In response to the prior comment on bringing a karate kick to a whatever: Not so much. I think when people visualize being attacked they see it as coming towards them. That is not always the case. 9 out of 10 times it wonít occur in the same manner as the last time. When someone comes from behind and places their arm around your neck and under your chin and pulls backward cutting off your air supply, what do you need first? Air. If you canít breath, your done. Using your fingers to pull the arm back is not a very good response. Things happen so fast. So fast. Especially in any type of physical assault.
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
Old 06-28-2009, 11:24 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,752 posts, read 18,393,018 times
Reputation: 8941
Quote:
Originally Posted by rarch View Post
Would a gun free USA be possible for the USA
Absolutely impossible.

Quote:
or just a ideal of pacifists, and religous types, or would this mark the US becoming a moral and decent society if this were to occur
There is no correlation between morals, decency, religion of pacifism and gun ownership.
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