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.
Condi Rice once desribed herself as a 'Second Amendment absolutist.' It's interesting that a Jew remembering the Holocaust and a black from Birmingham should share the same perspective.
I am a 'Second Amendment absolutist', to use the OP's phrase, and I am not Jewish nor have I experienced what Rice experienced in Birmingham. I do not need that experience or their religion to comprehend that such tragedies are always a possibility. I truly hope that I will never need to use a firearm protect myself or others, but I am prepared to do so nonetheless.
If you live your life on alert to protect yourself from a danger which is infinitesimally likely to ever occur, then yes, you are stupid and crazy.
You don't live your life on alert to protect yourself from danger? How old are you? How did you stay alive?
When you walk on street, you watch for cars - I assume you do.
When you sit in an airplane, you buckle up your seat belt - I assume you do.
You.
When you sit in a car, you buckle up your seat belt - I assume you do.
When you go out, you don't watch for ways to avoid crime? I know you do but you just don't want to admit.
How is crime infinitesimally likely to ever occur? Can you provide stats to support this claim?
. Do you put batteries in your alarm clock in case the electric goes out in the middle of the night It'sAutomatic? So you are saying you are prepared? Wearing a gun at your hip is really no different. It's called being prepared to minimize the damage caused once someone makes the decision to do evil.
Is your alarm clock likely to be used as a tool to harm or kill you or your family?
The most fundamental problem gun fondlers have has to do with numbers. It's not the statistics regarding gun murders, crimes, accidents and suicides. No, the fundamental problem has to do with the digits that correspond to the median intelligence quotient of their species. When they offer up drivel like this or, "Should we ban cars," or advocate arming school janitors and college students on campus, normal people react mostly the same.
Is your alarm clock likely to be used as a tool to harm or kill you or your family?
The most fundamental problem gun fondlers have has to do with numbers. It's not the statistics regarding gun murders, crimes, accidents and suicides. No, the fundamental problem has to do with the digits that correspond to the median intelligence quotient of their species. When they offer up drivel like this or, "Should we ban cars," or advocate arming school janitors and college students on campus, normal people react mostly the same.
You are about 5000X more likely to save a life in your home by taking first aid and CPR training and purchasing an AED for about $1200 than you would protecting anyone with a gun.
Unless you live in Mogudishu.
On the other side your gun is something like 1000X more likely to kill or wound a loved one than actually protect them.
You don't live your life on alert to protect yourself from danger? How old are you? How did you stay alive?
When you walk on street, you watch for cars - I assume you do.
When you sit in an airplane, you buckle up your seat belt - I assume you do.
You.
When you sit in a car, you buckle up your seat belt - I assume you do.
When you go out, you don't watch for ways to avoid crime? I know you do but you just don't want to admit.
How is crime infinitesimally likely to ever occur? Can you provide stats to support this claim?
Once again, your seat belt is not going to be used as a tool to kill or maim you or your family, while it's not entirely unlikely that your gun will end up being used in that capacity in the future.
There are many factors that go into figuring the likelihood of an individual being the victim of a violent crime during their lifetimes. In general, your odds of being murdered are something like .003%.
If I were talking with rational, thinking people, I would submit those stats and then the stats regarding accidental deaths, suicides and guns being used against gun owners and ask them to make cost/benefit analyses. With gun fondlers, they are neither interested nor capable of doing such thinking and analysis to determine what exactly makes them safer. That the first conclusion they arrive at when asked what makes them safer from violent crime is to carry a gun illustrates the heart of the matter and how their minds work.
You are about 5000X more likely to save a life in your home by taking first aid and CPR training and purchasing an AED for about $1200 than you would protecting anyone with a gun.
Unless you live in Mogudishu.
On the other side your gun is something like 1000X more likely to kill or wound a loved one than actually protect them.
Again, these people are neither interested nor capable of doing such analysis.
I'm sure guns would have saved the Jews from the Wehrmacht What an idiot.
In fact, there is at least one clear instance of a civilian population attempting to resist the Nazi state with arms but without the backing of allied military force, the August 1944 Warsaw Uprising. Despite having been organized by the Polish resistance on a much larger scale than would be possible in most circumstances, iIt was a dismal and bloody failure.
A salutary lesson to anyone who believes that untrained or barely-trained civilians can resist tyranny backed by an efficient, cohesive and modern army, even when that army's resources are limited to what are by now the obsolete equipment of the 1940s.
The obvious counter-example, the Paris uprising in the same month, differed in several important respects: the German army in the West was still reeling from the fighting and collapse in Normandy, and was actually retreating through Paris, so it had lost much of its cohesion, fighting strength and will to resist when the Parisians rose. Secondly, the Parisians were reinforced within days by 2nd French Armoured Division under the Count of Hauteclocque.
Proponents of civilian possession of arms as a check on some putative tyranny would be well-advised to consider these examples.
Interesting that Holocaust fear and memory should be involved in this man's neurosis:
And then, of course, there's the unmistakable symptom of paranoia:
Please show us you back up your positions by your cancelled home owner's insurance policy, all your Life insurance policies, etc.
Where I worked, we were constantly given seminars on being cognasent on your surroundings. One of the items ALWAYS suggested was to NOT put your back to the door.
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.
What an idiot.
