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.
"Ex-boyfriend breaking down your door? Sorry, budget cutbacks... no one on duty tonight. Can you ask him to go away?"
"Guy chasing you and you're trapped in a blind alley? Sorry, the police union is squabbling with the city."
"Someone breaking down your door in a rural county? We're on our way... be there in 45 minutes... an hour at most."
Anyone who relies on some governmental agency for their own protection is a fool. If they fail to protect you... I guess your surviving relatives can complain to the media or something. Because in every state in this country the courts have long ruled that the police have no legal obligation to protect you.
Presidents have been assassinated while surrounded by armed, trained, Secret Service personnel. Police Officers and State Troopers have been wounded or shot to death armed and ready, or armed but not ready. Armed women have been raped. Armed homeowners have been burglarized... ... the guy chasing you down a blind alley is going to get you. Gun or no gun, you are his. Sorry. It went bad from the moment you started running. I think gun haters could accept the reality of gun possession and ownership, if our intelligence was not insulted periodically, by these wild claims of guns conferring some kind of immunity to pillage and rape. Just stop it. Guns allow fearful people a means to murder people they suspect of having bad intentions towards them, whether or not it is in fact the case. Guns are of no use against military level weaponry and armor and IF, big IF, the government ever really turned on the citizenry... ... the best use for the ~320 million firearms in civilian possession... suicide. Anything else can be ameliorated by: living in an area known to be free from violent crime or home invasion; adequate home security, exterior grade doors, window treatment appropriate to the level of threat posed by the environment; common sense situational awareness when out and about. Ben Carson took some heat for saying that the classroom of students attacked by a mass shooter in Roseburg, OR should have rushed him rather than lie down like sheep and allow him to execute several of them. He was criticized for saying this, but he is in fact correct. Having a gun under those circumstances would have done little or nothing.
In just this last month of October I have heard of 3 incidents where a father has killed his own children in hunting accidents. One of them killed his daughter. He missed the deer or the bullet went through the deer... killed his daughter. WTF. I would also die. I would not be coming out of the woods alive after doing something like that. In 2015 does any adult need to be running around in the woods in camouflage shooting live ammunition at Bambi? The stars are waiting people. Over at Jet Propulsion Laboratory plans are being made to lift payloads to Mars. There is an International Space Station in orbit around this planet and an astronaut is in it going on 215 days in space. His wife is Gabrielle Giffords a former senator from Arizona whose career in politics was cut short when a gunman opened fire on her at an event where there must have been 50 or more attendees with handguns on their person. 8 or 9 people were killed that day and she was the only survivor. If you can call it that. I suspect she has recovered as well as she is going to recover. That is considerably short of "normal". Some people will still be able to get guns no matter what is done to prevent it. That shooter would not have been one of them. The Roseburg shooter would not have been one of them. The Newtown shooter would not have been one of them. The Sandy Hook shooter would not have been one of them. The Virginia Tech shooter would not have been one of them. The Colorado theater shooter would not have been one of them... ...
The difference is that today there is always a government agency which claims to protective jurisdiction everywhere. Not even that was the case in the early 20th century.
But it's also been determined by the courts that the police do not have a responsibility for the personal protection of any particular individual, which essentially does mean that each individual is responsible for his own personal protection.
So that raises a moral argument (apart from the constitutional argument) of whether it is moral for a government to acknowledge that it doesn't provide for personal protection and at the same time prohibit a person from protecting himself by the same means used by the government to protect government officials.
There is no "argument". It is not moral for a government to refuse to accept responsibility for protecting the safety of its citizens while simultaneously refusing to allow them the tools needed to protect themselves. Do a little research on various self-defense cases in England and Europe resulting in the victims being put in jail because they dared to protect themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
Presidents have been assassinated while surrounded by armed, trained, Secret Service personnel. Police Officers and State Troopers have been wounded or shot to death armed and ready, or armed but not ready. Armed women have been raped. Armed homeowners have been burglarized... ... the guy chasing you down a blind alley is going to get you. Gun or no gun, you are his. Sorry. It went bad from the moment you started running. I think gun haters could accept the reality of gun possession and ownership, if our intelligence was not insulted periodically, by these wild claims of guns conferring some kind of immunity to pillage and rape. Just stop it. Guns allow fearful people a means to murder people they suspect of having bad intentions towards them, whether or not it is in fact the case. Guns are of no use against military level weaponry and armor and IF, big IF, the government ever really turned on the citizenry... ... the best use for the ~320 million firearms in civilian possession... suicide. Anything else can be ameliorated by: living in an area known to be free from violent crime or home invasion; adequate home security, exterior grade doors, window treatment appropriate to the level of threat posed by the environment; common sense situational awareness when out and about. Ben Carson took some heat for saying that the classroom of students attacked by a mass shooter in Roseburg, OR should have rushed him rather than lie down like sheep and allow him to execute several of them. He was criticized for saying this, but he is in fact correct. Having a gun under those circumstances would have done little or nothing.
In just this last month of October I have heard of 3 incidents where a father has killed his own children in hunting accidents. One of them killed his daughter. He missed the deer or the bullet went through the deer... killed his daughter. WTF. I would also die. I would not be coming out of the woods alive after doing something like that. In 2015 does any adult need to be running around in the woods in camouflage shooting live ammunition at Bambi? The stars are waiting people. Over at Jet Propulsion Laboratory plans are being made to lift payloads to Mars. There is an International Space Station in orbit around this planet and an astronaut is in it going on 215 days in space. His wife is Gabrielle Giffords a former senator from Arizona whose career in politics was cut short when a gunman opened fire on her at an event where there must have been 50 or more attendees with handguns on their person. 8 or 9 people were killed that day and she was the only survivor. If you can call it that. I suspect she has recovered as well as she is going to recover. That is considerably short of "normal". Some people will still be able to get guns no matter what is done to prevent it. That shooter would not have been one of them. The Roseburg shooter would not have been one of them. The Newtown shooter would not have been one of them. The Sandy Hook shooter would not have been one of them. The Virginia Tech shooter would not have been one of them. The Colorado theater shooter would not have been one of them... ...
Slow down there... I never said a firearm made you immune to all forms of danger, and anyone who does say that doesn't understand reality. Even trained and armed military troops can be ambushed and killed. That said, given the choice between being armed with a firearm and being armed with a cell phone in a SHTF situation, I'd choose the firearm every time. If armed I'd never need to go into that blind alley because I would never run in the first place, nor would I draw and start firing at the first sight of some strange person sharing the street with me. If you think those are the only two options then you don't understand self defense. About 99% of would-be attackers are looking for a soft target. The first hint that their would-be victim may be able to fight back and most will go find someone else to attack.
Also, it's nice that you apparently have the financial means to live in a "crime-free area with adequate home security, exterior grade doors", etc., but I know many people without that kind of money. And in case you weren't aware, criminals have vehicles and know how to drive to areas where people have more money.
You need to read up a little more on the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, because your numbers are ridiculously off. There were only at most 30 total people at the "event", and only one was known to posses a firearm; I have no idea which anti-gun blog the "50 or more attendees with handguns" came from. The one armed person never pulled his weapon because he was outside the main crowd. He did charge the shooter, but by the time he got there the shooting was over. Others had already charged the shooter (as Mr. Carson got into so much trouble for suggesting), causing him to fumble the reload and taking him down. Tragically, six people were killed (not 8 or 9), and 14 were injured. By my math, that means exactly eight survived with injuries (including Mrs. Giffords) and up to 16 survived without any injury at all.
Last edited by An Einnseanair; 11-04-2015 at 02:51 PM..
Want to see the real end game of firearms confiscation? Look to Venezuela
The Venezuela "experiment" in civilian disarmament (begun decades ago, stepped up in 2009 with ammunition limits, and culminating with Hugo Chávez's ban on private gun ownership in 2012), is a textbook example of how gun confiscation is accomplished in stages, and the impact of eliminating private firearms on violent crime rates, including crimes against the (armed) police.
Anyone who relies on some governmental agency for their own protection is a fool.
Truer words have never been spoken nor printed.
Anyone who wishes to rely solely upon a governmental agency for protection may do so, but they have no right to demand that the rest of us do the same.
OP, what you are missing is that we have the NRA here in the US... More guns. Guns for everyone. Guns in the classroom. In church. In public buildings...
Actually, there was a time when this was common and expected, even children bringing guns to school. The NRA had nothing to do with it.
There is no "argument". It is not moral for a government to refuse to accept responsibility for protecting the safety of its citizens while simultaneously refusing to allow them the tools needed to protect themselves. Do a little research on various self-defense cases in England and Europe resulting in the victims being put in jail because they dared to protect themselves.
That is an argument. An "argument" is a logically supported assertion. In this case, the logically supported assertion is that it is immoral for a government to refuse to accept responsibility for protecting the safety of its citizens while simultaneously refusing to allow them the tools needed to protect themselves.
That is an argument. An "argument" is a logically supported assertion. In this case, the logically supported assertion is that it is immoral for a government to refuse to accept responsibility for protecting the safety of its citizens while simultaneously refusing to allow them the tools needed to protect themselves.
Sheesh, why are you debating me when we agree?
I was defining "argument" as "disagreement", and stating that there isn't any disagreement with your assertion. However, you are right; there are other definitions of "argument" where my statement would be false.
You are also right in that we agree with the premise.
Presidents have been assassinated while surrounded by armed, trained, Secret Service personnel. Police Officers and State Troopers have been wounded or shot to death armed and ready, or armed but not ready. Armed women have been raped. Armed homeowners have been burglarized... ... the guy chasing you down a blind alley is going to get you. Gun or no gun, you are his. Sorry. It went bad from the moment you started running. I think gun haters could accept the reality of gun possession and ownership, if our intelligence was not insulted periodically, by these wild claims of guns conferring some kind of immunity to pillage and rape. Just stop it. Guns allow fearful people a means to murder people they suspect of having bad intentions towards them, whether or not it is in fact the case. Guns are of no use against military level weaponry and armor and IF, big IF, the government ever really turned on the citizenry... ... the best use for the ~320 million firearms in civilian possession... suicide. Anything else can be ameliorated by: living in an area known to be free from violent crime or home invasion; adequate home security, exterior grade doors, window treatment appropriate to the level of threat posed by the environment; common sense situational awareness when out and about. Ben Carson took some heat for saying that the classroom of students attacked by a mass shooter in Roseburg, OR should have rushed him rather than lie down like sheep and allow him to execute several of them. He was criticized for saying this, but he is in fact correct. Having a gun under those circumstances would have done little or nothing.
In just this last month of October I have heard of 3 incidents where a father has killed his own children in hunting accidents. One of them killed his daughter. He missed the deer or the bullet went through the deer... killed his daughter. WTF. I would also die. I would not be coming out of the woods alive after doing something like that. In 2015 does any adult need to be running around in the woods in camouflage shooting live ammunition at Bambi? The stars are waiting people. Over at Jet Propulsion Laboratory plans are being made to lift payloads to Mars. There is an International Space Station in orbit around this planet and an astronaut is in it going on 215 days in space. His wife is Gabrielle Giffords a former senator from Arizona whose career in politics was cut short when a gunman opened fire on her at an event where there must have been 50 or more attendees with handguns on their person. 8 or 9 people were killed that day and she was the only survivor. If you can call it that. I suspect she has recovered as well as she is going to recover. That is considerably short of "normal". Some people will still be able to get guns no matter what is done to prevent it. That shooter would not have been one of them. The Roseburg shooter would not have been one of them. The Newtown shooter would not have been one of them. The Sandy Hook shooter would not have been one of them. The Virginia Tech shooter would not have been one of them. The Colorado theater shooter would not have been one of them... ...
40 million people hunt and will continue to hunt. You can keep eating at McDonalds where someone else did the dirty work.
In 2015 does any adult need to be running around in the woods in camouflage shooting live ammunition at Bambi?
Well I don't think my neighbors would appreciate re-introducing wolves, so yes, actually, we do. I have several acres of land, if we don't act to control the deer population, they will wipe out my garden, and then either run out in the road to get hit by a car (causing injury or death to the driver) or starve, spread disease then die a slow painful death ( unless they're eaten alive by bobcat or coyotes instead).
In Michigan, hunters are more likely to die in a automobile-deer collision on the road than a hunting accident in the woods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
40 million people hunt and will continue to hunt. You can keep eating at McDonalds where someone else did the dirty work.
Hunting is not just sport, there are still many rural areas in the USA where hunting is a significant part of how people put food on the table, including keeping pests out of the garden and predators away from livestock.
Hunting is also big business -- Firearms hunters (primarily deer and waterfowl hunters) in just the state of Michigan contribute nearly $2 billion to the state economy. That's just one US state.
Move to Canada. Lovely, warm, safe, non-warring culture.
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.
Want to see the real end game of firearms confiscation? Look to Venezuela
