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.
I understand your view...I understand statistics, too...statistics are statistics.
But, I'm not living alone without protection...I believe in pepper spray, lemme tell ya...
But, armed in my home?
It would never happen with my German Shep...so we really don't have much of an issue of
me having a problem...I appreciate your concern.
One of the things I learned from being married to an undercover LEO for a decade was that having one dog won't help you. It's easy to shoot one dog. Having two TRAINED dogs, however, appears to have a significant impact on an intruder, as even if he managed to shoot one dog, it's unlikely that he would manage to shoot two before the second dog attacked him. By that time, you (the householder) would have had sufficient time to pitch in and dial 911, and either knock the intruder out or kill him, depending on your preferences and the level of danger you were in.
Whatever reduces harm (i.e., death and mayhem) is a positive step. There is nothing of value in harm, whether it is coming from guns or knives or slingshots. You have no defense or excuse for all this harm. None. You simply don't care about it. You are not willing to take any step at all in order to help cut back on the senseless carnage.
This is the most irresponsible (or uninformed) comment I've ever read.
What the hell do you mean, "You simply don't care about it?" I've carried a gun for 35 years - while protecting you as a public servant.
You want to take a positive step to cut back on senseless carnage? Outlaw cars. More people died in motor vehicle accidents than with firearms in 2013, the last year for which decent stats are available.
Cars again? Take a look around. We very plainly go to great lengths as a society in seeking to reduce death and mayhem on our highways. How would doing the same for our city streets and alleys be any different? And I'll say it again --- you DON'T CARE. Some 30,000 flat-out dead and a shot-up six to seven times that number more or less surviving their trip to the ER is a perfectly reasonable price to pay in your mind. And for what again??? The ability to keep your John Wayne/Clint Eastwood fantasies alive? That's pretty much pathetic.
The homicide rate in American cities pales in comparison to others in the world in which it is illegal to carry guns, and most murders are committed by people using knives, bricks, sticks, and stones. (Did none of you here see Braveheart?)
Glasgow, in Scotland (where I grew up), holds the dubious distinction of being the most violent city in Western Europe, despite the fact that Amsterdam surpassed Glasgow's number of actual murders in 2013. (I believe Glasgow reclaimed the #1 spot last year though.)
So, the Glasgow/Renfrewshire/Dunbartonshire area (a tiny area in comparison to most U.S. cities) manages to be more violent than any city in N. America despite the fact that people don't own guns.
You might want to watch the movie The Angels' Share, not primarily about violence, but it's certainly an issue. It's a very good movie (don't forget to use the subtitles or you won't understand Glaswegian) with a positive ending and is well worth the watch. It's a must for whisky fans!
Back to the point; the 'Guns don't kill people; people kill people' statement is valid, in my opinion, and as I stated earlier in this thread, people who want to kill other people will find a way to do it -- they certainly don't need guns.
Whatever reduces harm (i.e., death and mayhem) is a positive step. There is nothing of value in harm, whether it is coming from guns or knives or slingshots. You have no defense or excuse for all this harm. None. You simply don't care about it. You are not willing to take any step at all in order to help cut back on the senseless carnage.
Want to reduce harm, and end senseless carnage? It's simple. Tell criminals to stop acting like a-holes, and be productive and contributing members of society. In the meantime, and until that happens I support the rights of law abiding folks to protect themselves. Another simple solution.... don't partake in home invasions, or armed robbery, and you just might not get your a** shot!
It's not as if anyone argues that guns get up by themselves and shoot people. Many of us just don't see a reason why so many people need to have the ability to kill people so easily and so MANY of them (as you can with a gun).
As most of us know, there was a recent attack in China on elementary school kids which left 22 wounded. If the guy had a gun, it would have been like Newton, CT. Sure, a knife can also kill (happened in China a few yrs ago), but in general, it takes longer and is harder (which would give others time to stop the attacker).
I really don't see why anyone, other than the cops and military, should have the ability to STOCK UP on guns and ammunition. Sure, I can see having a single gun if you live in a city/suburb if you're scared in your home and maybe a few if you live in a rural area....even in those scenarios, no one really needs to have a gun that can fire many times before re-loading. And only a tiny fraction of people need to be able to have like more than 10 bullets at any given time. I live in TX, a totally gun loving state, which was a bit of a culture shock. I see no reason why people I know should have multiple guns as a HOBBY.
If you're frightened by firearms, then by all means avoid them.
My guns and I have never harmed anyone.
Millions of law-abiding gun owners across America can say the same.
If you're frightened by firearms, then by all means avoid them.
My guns and I have never harmed anyone.
Millions of law-abiding gun owners across America can say the same.
I'm frightened by lunatics that typically own firearms. and they can be found in public places and shopping centers and malls (they do get kicked out from time to time though).
I'm frightened by lunatics that typically own firearms. and they can be found in public places and shopping centers and malls (they do get kicked out from time to time though).
And there you have the crux of the issue: mental defectives who nowadays instead of being institutionalized like they were until the mid 80s, are now free to circulate among us and wreak havoc.
We don't see drunk driving as an automobile problem.
The homicide rate in American cities pales in comparison to others in the world in which it is illegal to carry guns...
We can perhaps deal with them once we have our own mess straightened out. In the meantime, your sorry attempts at deflection must -- at best -- go on the back burner
Want to reduce harm, and end senseless carnage? It's simple. Tell criminals to stop acting like a-holes, and be productive and contributing members of society.
What a wonderful idea! I can't imagine why no one thought of that before!
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan
In the meantime, and until that happens I support the rights of law abiding folks to protect themselves.
You of course refer to the right to put themselves at additional risk.
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.
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.
