Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2013, 06:22 PM
 
21 posts, read 15,411 times
Reputation: 12

Advertisements

@DewDropInn:

I never suggested that we did that. I said there was no feasible way to protect the children being raped by their parents/guardians. I was trying to point out how absurd your goal post move was from, 'Guns can't be used to protect children because children can't own guns.' to, 'WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN BEING RAPED BY THEIR PARENTS/GUARDIANS?'

So since you don't intend to actually debate the points I presented and choose to argue against yourself instead of what I say so you can appear as though you are "winning" then you are a lost cause.

@remoddahouse:

Is there some reason you can't shoot someone you know? Did you notice that the US has a gang problem and an extremely large and diverse population to police, unlike other countries?

Seriously, you are lecturing about logic when your argument is:

Rape victims personally know their rapist personally.
Therefore, they can't shoot them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2013, 06:24 PM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,489,598 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMagUdspEllr View Post
@DewDropInn:

Little kids should be in the care of their parents/legal guardians so they could easily use a firearm to protect those kids.

But, I understand why you can't imagine using a firearm to protect children. After all, that is how we allowed gun free zones to become law. And, mass murders in those zones.

If you want to rephrase the question to, "What is the best way for children to prevent themselves from being raped." Then that would be remaining in a locked house, staying near a police officer (who hopefully isn't a rapist), or remaining in a public place with lots of witnesses. The last option doesn't really protect against rape, though. The kid will get taken, probably raped but the police will be on their way thanks to all the witnesses around contacting the police. Maybe, if they care that day. Eh, well, we can't expect them to do that if they aren't even willing to actively protect an innocent child (because violence isn't the answer, of course).
Idiot; the poster suggested in the vein of arming all females to prevent rapes, the two year old having the gun themselves since it's probably a close associate or even a family member that will rape her.

You ok with mommy giving her little darli'n a Taurus Judge for christmas 'cause she's got a live-in boy friend and you can never be too safe?

You tough talking gun-nuts really take the cake. Walking Oxymorons are what you actually are.

The Land of the Free and Home of the Brave???

More like land of the paranoid and home of the chickenchits all strapped, afraid of each other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 06:34 PM
 
21 posts, read 15,411 times
Reputation: 12
@BruSan:

Ad hominem right off the bat. I can tell I'm speaking with highly intellectual people.

The original poster suggested that everyone should go about having a firearm on them at all times in order to deter and stop rape. People like DewDropInn completely missed the point and started asking about outliers like children not being about to legally have a gun on them at all times. Even though that wasn't the point and that he was still wrong because the parents/guardians of those children could protect them with their firearms. Then DewDroppInn moved the discussion to yet another course of action that was outside the scope of the point being asserted where the parents/guardians are the rapists themselves. DewDroppInn is failing to address the initial point by asking about obscure outliers that in no way invalidate the assertion that legally arming yourself is a great way to protect yourself and even your children from rape.

The original poster never asserted that children should carry Taurus Judges. Have any of you gotten professional strawman argument training? Because you are sure accomplished in making them.

And, just to end with another ad hominem.

You guys would not be able to debate a "tween".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 07:10 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,527,236 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by iMagUdspEllr View Post
@BruSan:

Ad hominem right off the bat. I can tell I'm speaking with highly intellectual people.

The original poster suggested that everyone should go about having a firearm on them at all times in order to deter and stop rape. People like DewDropInn completely missed the point and started asking about outliers like children not being about to legally have a gun on them at all times. Even though that wasn't the point and that he was still wrong because the parents/guardians of those children could protect them with their firearms. Then DewDroppInn moved the discussion to yet another course of action that was outside the scope of the point being asserted where the parents/guardians are the rapists themselves. DewDroppInn is failing to address the initial point by asking about obscure outliers that in no way invalidate the assertion that legally arming yourself is a great way to protect yourself and even your children from rape.

The original poster never asserted that children should carry Taurus Judges. Have any of you gotten professional strawman argument training? Because you are sure accomplished in making them.

And, just to end with another ad hominem.

You guys would not be able to debate a "tween".
Dewdrop most certainly did not 'miss the point'. The FACT is that a gun might deter some rapes and might NOT deter very many more.

Having a gun is ONE way to POSSIBLY prevent a rape - depending on the situation. There are many other ways to ensure that you are yours are not the victim of a rape.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
Dewdrop most certainly did not 'miss the point'. The FACT is that a gun might deter some rapes and might NOT deter very many more.
Are you saying that if you can't deter 100%, then you shouldn't bother deterring any? Why not deter as many as you can?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 08:27 PM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,080 posts, read 14,324,813 times
Reputation: 9789
A gun? So he can move on and rape someone else? No.
An anti-rape condom. If his penis gets shredded, I don't think he'll be trying it again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 08:39 PM
 
1,250 posts, read 1,488,922 times
Reputation: 1057
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz View Post
A gun? So he can move on and rape someone else? No.
An anti-rape condom. If his penis gets shredded, I don't think he'll be trying it again.
Those don't prevent rape, they only hurt the rapist during the act.

Anti-rape condom:
Victim still gets raped.

Gun:
There is no victim.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:01 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,527,236 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Are you saying that if you can't deter 100%, then you shouldn't bother deterring any? Why not deter as many as you can?
What would give you the slightest idea that I am saying that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:05 PM
 
Location: 500 miles from home
33,942 posts, read 22,527,236 times
Reputation: 25816
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhms View Post
Those don't prevent rape, they only hurt the rapist during the act.

Anti-rape condom:
Victim still gets raped.

Gun:
There is no victim.
Maybe. Guns can be useful in the right situation and useless in others. IF they were useful in all situations - no gun owner would ever be the victim of any violent crime and that simply is not the case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:10 PM
 
32,068 posts, read 15,062,274 times
Reputation: 13687
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruhms View Post
is to have a gun with you at all times.

Any questions?
I don't agree. Let's say your gun is in your purse and you are caught from behind. How are you going to get to your gun when you are struggling with your assailant. Self defense is what all women should learn. Hit these guys in the nuts and they will fall like a baby. No gun needed.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:43 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top