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.
Home owners don't shoot their families. It would read, most do not, rarely they do, not always which is what that rant was implying.
And did you notice there were zero references to the studies, backing up those claims? It's because they're really old, flimsy studies that don't even stand up to basic scrutiny.
It's like that "having a gun in the home is 22 times more likely to kill a family member" nonsense study that's still cited today, even though the study only included a few cases from 3 cities from over 20 years ago.
The fact remains that the antis don't have any factual basis for their claims, only rhetoric.
You fear me and I fear the bad guys and the government.....
OK. We get each other completely.
I refuse to be easy prey.
Since this is a big bad dog eat dog world and we all wear milkbone underwear, it is better to have it and never ever need it, than to need it life or death and not have it. Meaning certain death.
I don't fear you. I pity you. You live in fear and you are willing to endanger yourself, your family, and society in order to feel better about yourself.
I am someone who has survived two shootings and am absolutely confident in my ability to defend myself or get out of a jam without needing a gun. That's why I also don't fear the bad guys and I certainly don't fear the government.
I don't live in fear.... at all. I know such a world is foreign to you and that's why you have my pity.
.
Can you give me some quotes from people in this thread that think guns are a 100% guarantee against tragedy?
Nobody said gun is 100% guarantee against an intruder, but all pro-gunners unequivocally said it is a major part of their "defense". Besides whether they think it is 100% guarantee is irrelevant, the important thing is that they all consider guns to be a vital protection tool.
Do you disagree with this assessment?
Quote:
Originally Posted by numberfive
You seem to continually create this caricature of nobody that actually exists here.
If it is a caricature, it's strange that every pro-gunners owned up to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by numberfive
I'm a concealed carry permit holder with dozens of hours of professional training and thousands of hours of range time. I carry because I'm NOT an action hero that can fist fight my way to safety, while my family (including an infant and toddler) cheer me on from the sidelines. I carry because even if it increases my odds of success slightly, I'll do it. Just like securing my home properly with locks and other security systems also help increase the odds of success.
I guess I'm a dreamer if you want to peg me as that. In my self-defense dream though, I'll probably soil myself from the immediate trauma, maybe temporarily or permanently disabled from the scuffle. My family will have to go into hiding (since dead bad guys still have bad guy friends). And there's the emotional trauma, counseling, job performance issues, etc. Quite a fancy dream, huh?
Or maybe it's you that is the real dreamer, thinking banning guns will keep them out of the hands of criminals, just like banning drugs "did".
Your narrative is 180 from the typical gun nut who think it's the bad guys who would soil their pants and that the home owner holds tremendous advantage over the baddies because of familiarity with the house, thus can eliminate the threat easily.
I wouldn't call you a dreamer because you seem to at least grasp the reality of what a gun fight is like.
Banning guns will not prevent all guns from getting into the hands of criminals, but it WILL eliminate a lot of the gun crimes on civilians. If you want to give your family the best chance at surviving an attack, you should champion banning guns and getting other weapons to protect your family.
.
After we banned guns, criminals will have a very hard time getting gun. So no, criminals will not be carrying.
If you want to play hero and get shot, that's your right.
.
You think so? Just like drugs are illegal and they are everywhere. Putting a ban on guns won't make it harder to get them. It will be just as easy as getting drugs. The guns will come in from mexico or somewhere else.
Nobody said gun is 100% guarantee against an intruder, but all pro-gunners unequivocally said it is a major part of their "defense". Besides whether they think it is 100% guarantee is irrelevant, the important thing is that they all consider guns to be a vital protection tool.
Have you read any of the responses in this thread? When out in public, my first line of defense is situational awareness. If there is an altercation, then my defense moves to deescalation. A weapon is my last line of defense whether is be a pistol, knife or monkey fist (I carry all 3).
Similarly for my home, I make sure there is nothing "interesting" to catch the bad guy's eyes. From there, I have posted alarm signs. I actually have an alarm. Finally, I carry the same weapons in the house that I carry outside. I also have additional ones staged in less than obvious locations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p
Banning guns will not prevent all guns from getting into the hands of criminals, but it WILL eliminate a lot of the gun crimes on civilians. If you want to give your family the best chance at surviving an attack, you should champion banning guns and getting other weapons to protect your family.
.
While I agree with this, unless there is a 100% guarantee then I will not give up the most efficient defensive tool in my tool box.
Nobody said gun is 100% guarantee against an intruder, but all pro-gunners unequivocally said it is a major part of their "defense". Besides whether they think it is 100% guarantee is irrelevant, the important thing is that they all consider guns to be a vital protection tool.
Do you disagree with this assessment?
If it is a caricature, it's strange that every pro-gunners owned up to it.
Your narrative is 180 from the typical gun nut who think it's the bad guys who would soil their pants and that the home owner holds tremendous advantage over the baddies because of familiarity with the house, thus can eliminate the threat easily.
I wouldn't call you a dreamer because you seem to at least grasp the reality of what a gun fight is like.
Banning guns will not prevent all guns from getting into the hands of criminals, but it WILL eliminate a lot of the gun crimes on civilians. If you want to give your family the best chance at surviving an attack, you should champion banning guns and getting other weapons to protect your family.
.
For the bolded part: this is precisely the caricature that I'm debunking. Please show me quotes -- from this thread -- of the "typical gun nut" that wants to be Johnny Swat Team Superstar Gun Battle Hero in their own home.
For the italicized part: I fail to see how disarming my wife and I helps protect my family from attacks that can happen anywhere. Can you share some better defense tools that would be suited while I'm pushing an infant in a stroller and my wife is wrangling a toddler? Or home invaders pushed my wife through the door while she was distracted with kids/groceries/etc? Or I'm knocked unconscious while my wife is in another room, etc? Also note my wife has a herniated disc and a bad knee, and I have moderate hearing loss.
A firearm seems like the most versatile tool for the job, but if you can think of one more effective and versatile, I'd love to hear about it.
Its no myth. If you have a gun. your given enough time. Your attacked. . the gun can offer a measure of protection. That isn't the myth
Yet your cherry picking isn't why people don't think guns are a good idea
and your straw man fallacy about guns "never protecting" is a bit out there too
The reality is in a 24x7 news cycle and internet we both can flood this forum daily with stories like "Man protects family" " Toddler shoots dad/mom".
Yet if you look at widespread gun statistics you will find
-Criminals shoot each other with guns, not normally homeowners
-Home owners shoot their friend and families with guns, not normally criminals (suicides, spouse violence, accidents).
so if you wanted to protect your family, you would . . not own a gun. Since the chance of you being attacked is far lower than one of your family doing something stupid.
And - if you secure your weapon in a good and justifiable way, you couldn't stop a zombie attack let alone a determined intruder.
I choose to protect myself and my family, and i choose to have firearms in my home as well. plus I have had my home broken into twice and had more than that happen to me in my past.
Nobody said gun is 100% guarantee against an intruder, but all pro-gunners unequivocally said it is a major part of their "defense". Besides whether they think it is 100% guarantee is irrelevant, the important thing is that they all consider guns to be a vital protection tool.
Do you disagree with this assessment?
If it is a caricature, it's strange that every pro-gunners owned up to it.
Your narrative is 180 from the typical gun nut who think it's the bad guys who would soil their pants and that the home owner holds tremendous advantage over the baddies because of familiarity with the house, thus can eliminate the threat easily.
I wouldn't call you a dreamer because you seem to at least grasp the reality of what a gun fight is like.
Banning guns will not prevent all guns from getting into the hands of criminals, but it WILL eliminate a lot of the gun crimes on civilians. If you want to give your family the best chance at surviving an attack, you should champion banning guns and getting other weapons to protect your family.
.
So basically you have no idea what you are talking about, use debunked talking points, skip over facts, and make up your own idea of what a pro-gun person is.
Yep, your anti-gun.
Why don't you scroll through some of my posts and try to answer the questions or debunk the math.
It is one thing to deny one's self training and the tools to deal with the aggressive and abusive in society.
But to presume to think for your fellow man, and deny him that right, is criminal, nothing less.
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.
