|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On December 15 2012 05:37 Hryul wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism  But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. On December 15 2012 05:07 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:04 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 05:01 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 04:59 L3g3nd_ wrote:On December 15 2012 04:53 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:On December 15 2012 04:25 L3g3nd_ wrote:
whens the last time you heard of a school shooting outside of the US? i can name 5-6 major school shootings from the US in the last 10 years, but not a single one outside of the US. it isnt a bloody coincidence. If, for example, three dudes with a baseball bat or two kicked in my door (not particularly unreasonable) with the intent of robbing our apartment, all my training and experience would mean about jack shit in close quarters, unarmed. With a knife or other hand weapon, WITH considerably more training than the average civilian, I give myself good odds of taking one out of the fight, and injuring a second in that situation, if I was awake when it happened. In other words, doing just enough damage to guarantee reprisals against myself and my family. Give me my handgun, and I guarantee you, even if I'm asleep when it happens, best case scenario, three criminals fleeing or in custody, worst case, the body count doesn't include my wife or three year old son. I'd be able to look myself in the mirror if I took a life to protect my family. You're so afraid that you don't even see the danger you put all of you in? You say yourself the criminals are there to rob your apartment. Do you think they willingly commit murder as well? No. You own a handgun and if you do criminals are more careful and probably wont hesitate to kill you because they know it's you or them. I can't even remember the last time I heard about a robbery turning into gun violence here in Denmark. The vast majority of people don't own weapons and the thieves realy have nothing to fear but getting caught. They don't bring a gun into a robbery because there is no need for it when civillians don't have any. i think this is a very good point, by resisting a robbery you are putting yourself in more risk, and everyone around you in even more risk. Are you honestly saying it's better to let criminals breaking into your house do as they please instead of defending yourself? Why would you EVER risk the life of yourself or any of your family members for material goods? The thieves are there to get MONEY not to fight you, not to take your life. When you bring a gun into the mix of course they will be wary. You just showed you're willing to kill them and they ironically act in self defense. You're trusting a criminal who breaks into your house to not kill you or your family? That's the difference between your country and ours, we'd rather defend ourselves and not take that risk. The fact that a criminal breaks into your house in the first place shows the criminal means you or your family harm. The fuck is it with these arguments? The burglar wants money. He doesn't get money by killing you. http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/suspect-in-violent-break-in-bustedYou can find countless other examples in the news if you actually try. There are people who commit acts of violence upon breaking in, be it rape, assault, or whatever else. If nothing else, if they break in, here in Texas, they know I could own a firearm, at which point my very presence could constitute a potentially violent response, even if I was NOT armed. Thus, if they have the means to visit violence upon me preemptively, I would be surprised if they didn't, just to control the situation. Now, if someone said "your house is going to be robbed in ten minutes" while I was out eating dinner, I'd stay out for a while, and let it happen, call the cops and insurance. That's common sense, keeping my family out of a dangerous situation. However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. I simply doubt the "countless". And I doubt the situation "it is my life or the life of the thiefes" occurs oh so often. I thought you were living in a first world country not fucking somalia.
If it's enough to not be readily counted, it's countless enough for countless.
And if it's a choice of my physical well-being vs a dead criminal, I'm content with a dead criminal.
|
On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe  At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy.
He is mocking you for claiming that somehow countries with harder gun control are letting the "criminals win", while the fact is that everything points is that they are doing way more damage in the US.
|
On December 15 2012 05:42 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:29 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. No it's not. What you are doing by having guns for self-defense is making the criminal move on to another house where the people don't have them. Why rob someone with a gun instead of someone who doesn't have one. do you think that people with guns all have signs posted on the door saying that?
NRA membership stickers on front doors. I spent a summer doing prep-work for the census. More people have these than you'd think. Same as "beware of dog" or "neighborhood watch". There are warnings on many houses.
|
On December 15 2012 05:43 Hypemeup wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy. He is mocking you for claiming that somehow countries with harder gun control are letting the "criminals win", while the fact is that everything points is that they are doing way more damage in the US.
How can you mock me for a stance I never took? I'm talking about the reality of home invasions in the US. Not some make believe fantasy america where guns aren't in the hands of every criminal.
|
On December 15 2012 05:42 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:
However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. Appeals to emotion make my brain hurt. Let's avoid fallacies people.
His scenario is not an appeal to emotion. This actually happened to me. It's a real scenario. And one that people are faced with.
|
On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy.
It's common sense, not fantasy. If a criminal's objective is to kill you, and he is armed and you are not, then the criminal will kill you. But why would a criminal want to kill you? Criminals want money. Criminals want to stay out of prison. Killing people does not help them.
I have no fear of armed criminals. No one has ever stolen from me (as of yet). If a criminal wanted my money then it is highly likely that they will be unarmed and try to steal it without me noticing. I am comfortable in being in an unarmed confrontation if needed. Even if I am outnumbered, worst case I get beaten up a bit. I would not be comfortable being armed vs armed criminals, as someone is going to get killed.
|
On December 15 2012 05:42 divito wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:
However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. Appeals to emotion make my brain hurt. Let's avoid fallacies people.
How is it a fallacy? A criminal is, by definition, endangering the rights and/or well-being of his victims. If his victims are my family, then it's not fallacious to say a dangerous situation came to my family. It's also not an appeal to emotion. It's a fact. I place the well-being of my wife and son higher than the well-being of anyone who knowingly endangers them.
|
1019 Posts
On December 15 2012 05:40 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:32 hzflank wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. No it's not. What you are doing by having guns for self-defense is making the criminal move on to another house where the people don't have them. Why rob someone with a gun instead of someone who doesn't have one. Criminals do not burgle random houses. They usually plan the robbery in advance and cannot just move to another house. Have you ever discussed burglary with anyone who knows anything about it? (Police or crimianl) Can you provide me some evidence that backs up even a tiny inch of what you are saying? http://www.gunsandammoenthusiastblog.com/criminals-fear-armed-citizens-more-then-the-police-poll-states/1. Would you B&E (break and enter) a home if you thought it occupied?
A. No — 88 percent (the other 12 percent are hard-core burglars).
2. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and maybe had a gun?
A. No — 95 percent (the other 5 percent are called cat burglars)
3. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and did, in fact, have a gun?
A. No — 100 percent (I told you they fear the homeowner).
No other survey I studied in my 27 years of law enforcement in Miami Metro Dade County did I see a 100 percent, not even for a Mother’s Day holiday.In the US, most criminals fear us, in your country it's appears to be the opposite.
Aren't the answers to those questions so obvious? I'm pretty sure the statistic would be basically the same if you polled those questions in every other country.
Theres nothing wrong with having a gun. Theres something wrong with letting all the wrong people get guns. Stricter gun laws shouldn't be a problem for the responsible gun owners, but apparently it isn't.
And lol at your macho attitude about criminals fearing the brave, armed citizenry of the United States.
|
On December 15 2012 05:45 BluePanther wrote:
His scenario is not an appeal to emotion. This actually happened to me. It's a real scenario. And one that people are faced with.
Re-read the way he worded it and the ending. That's the appeal to emotion part, regardless of whether it's a scenario that occurs. These kinds of arguments are always devoid of facts or statistics, or the statistics are ignored.
|
On December 15 2012 05:46 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy. It's common sense, not fantasy. If a criminal's objective is to kill you, and he is armed and you are not, then the criminal will kill you. But why would a criminal want to kill you? Criminals want money. Criminals want to stay out of prison. Killing people does not help them. I have no fear of armed criminals. No one has ever stolen from me (as of yet). If a criminal wanted my money then it is highly likely that they will be unarmed and try to steal it without me noticing. I am comfortable in being in an unarmed confrontation if needed. Even if I am outnumbered, worst case I get beaten up a bit. I would not be comfortable being armed vs armed criminals, as someone is going to get killed.
a criminal is someone who commits a crime, i think you are confusing "criminal" and "thief"
|
On December 15 2012 05:45 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:42 divito wrote:On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:
However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. Appeals to emotion make my brain hurt. Let's avoid fallacies people. His scenario is not an appeal to emotion. This actually happened to me. It's a real scenario. And one that people are faced with.
Seriously. If these people ever get robbed and their families lives are at risk, they'd change their minds and have some sort of practicial tool for self defense like a gun if they are lucky enough to survive the encounter. I don't need that to happen to me, I can't imagine waking up at night and hearing 3 people break into your home not knowing what the hell they are going to do.
|
On December 15 2012 05:43 Hypemeup wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy. He is mocking you for claiming that somehow countries with harder gun control are letting the "criminals win", while the fact is that everything points is that they are doing way more damage in the US.
These sort of internet debates usually bring out the extremes on both ends. Neither side will ever be convinced otherwise of the other's points. In the end, all they'll remember is points that supported their original view.
I'm a little ashamed to even be a part of it.
It doesn't matter what the facts are. It doesn't matter how the US has the highest deaths by gun per capita. Not to mention their failure in crime control relating to gun violence. Facts and statistics won't get through.
|
On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy.
Of course you don't, i mean what redneck would actually know when most of them never shot a weapon to a mobile person on their fucking life. Unfortunately, i had, and i also trained the recruits at shooting, which even people with background using weapons, they are still really unlikely to pull the trigger when the time comes. You think you are safer because you have a gun, in reality you are not because you lack the training, the experience and you are more likely to get shot than kill the robbers if they are armed and had actually planned how to break into your house. If they planned to rob mine (which is more unlikely than yours, even with a gun), they wouldn't be armed.
|
On December 15 2012 05:48 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:46 hzflank wrote:On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:[quote] And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy. It's common sense, not fantasy. If a criminal's objective is to kill you, and he is armed and you are not, then the criminal will kill you. But why would a criminal want to kill you? Criminals want money. Criminals want to stay out of prison. Killing people does not help them. I have no fear of armed criminals. No one has ever stolen from me (as of yet). If a criminal wanted my money then it is highly likely that they will be unarmed and try to steal it without me noticing. I am comfortable in being in an unarmed confrontation if needed. Even if I am outnumbered, worst case I get beaten up a bit. I would not be comfortable being armed vs armed criminals, as someone is going to get killed. a criminal is someone who commits a crime, i think you are confusing "criminal" and "thief"
I don't know what in the world goes on in your country but here someone who breaks and enters or steals is a criminal.
|
On December 15 2012 05:47 white_horse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:40 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:32 hzflank wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. No it's not. What you are doing by having guns for self-defense is making the criminal move on to another house where the people don't have them. Why rob someone with a gun instead of someone who doesn't have one. Criminals do not burgle random houses. They usually plan the robbery in advance and cannot just move to another house. Have you ever discussed burglary with anyone who knows anything about it? (Police or crimianl) Can you provide me some evidence that backs up even a tiny inch of what you are saying? http://www.gunsandammoenthusiastblog.com/criminals-fear-armed-citizens-more-then-the-police-poll-states/1. Would you B&E (break and enter) a home if you thought it occupied?
A. No — 88 percent (the other 12 percent are hard-core burglars).
2. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and maybe had a gun?
A. No — 95 percent (the other 5 percent are called cat burglars)
3. Would you B&E a home if you knew the owner was home and did, in fact, have a gun?
A. No — 100 percent (I told you they fear the homeowner).
No other survey I studied in my 27 years of law enforcement in Miami Metro Dade County did I see a 100 percent, not even for a Mother’s Day holiday.In the US, most criminals fear us, in your country it's appears to be the opposite. Theres nothing wrong with having a gun. Theres something wrong with letting all the wrong people get guns. Stricter gun laws shouldn't be a problem for the responsible gun owners, but apparently it isn't. And lol at your macho attitude about criminals fearing the brave, armed citizenry of the United States.
I actually addressed this. Our polarized politics make it difficult to approach common-sense gun laws. Most politicians either do token measures to show they're doing something, or they go all-or-nothing.
A convicted felon can't legally own a gun. I call that a good thing. Yes, it's too easy for them to get around the law, but that's a problem with implementation.
And, again, I wish there was more mandatory training, because, with my training, I know the worst thing is an idiot with no training holding a deadly weapon. But again, too many laws are either token, or all-or-nothing appeals. The extreme right gun lobby is probably the last group of people I want owning a firearm though. Fuck, those guys are insane.
|
On December 15 2012 05:35 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:29 mcc wrote:On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. On December 15 2012 05:07 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:04 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 05:01 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 04:59 L3g3nd_ wrote:On December 15 2012 04:53 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
[quote]
If, for example, three dudes with a baseball bat or two kicked in my door (not particularly unreasonable) with the intent of robbing our apartment, all my training and experience would mean about jack shit in close quarters, unarmed. With a knife or other hand weapon, WITH considerably more training than the average civilian, I give myself good odds of taking one out of the fight, and injuring a second in that situation, if I was awake when it happened. In other words, doing just enough damage to guarantee reprisals against myself and my family.
Give me my handgun, and I guarantee you, even if I'm asleep when it happens, best case scenario, three criminals fleeing or in custody, worst case, the body count doesn't include my wife or three year old son. I'd be able to look myself in the mirror if I took a life to protect my family.
You're so afraid that you don't even see the danger you put all of you in? You say yourself the criminals are there to rob your apartment. Do you think they willingly commit murder as well? No. You own a handgun and if you do criminals are more careful and probably wont hesitate to kill you because they know it's you or them. I can't even remember the last time I heard about a robbery turning into gun violence here in Denmark. The vast majority of people don't own weapons and the thieves realy have nothing to fear but getting caught. They don't bring a gun into a robbery because there is no need for it when civillians don't have any. i think this is a very good point, by resisting a robbery you are putting yourself in more risk, and everyone around you in even more risk. Are you honestly saying it's better to let criminals breaking into your house do as they please instead of defending yourself? Why would you EVER risk the life of yourself or any of your family members for material goods? The thieves are there to get MONEY not to fight you, not to take your life. When you bring a gun into the mix of course they will be wary. You just showed you're willing to kill them and they ironically act in self defense. You're trusting a criminal who breaks into your house to not kill you or your family? That's the difference between your country and ours, we'd rather defend ourselves and not take that risk. The fact that a criminal breaks into your house in the first place shows the criminal means you or your family harm. The fuck is it with these arguments? The burglar wants money. He doesn't get money by killing you. http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/suspect-in-violent-break-in-bustedYou can find countless other examples in the news if you actually try. There are people who commit acts of violence upon breaking in, be it rape, assault, or whatever else. If nothing else, if they break in, here in Texas, they know I could own a firearm, at which point my very presence could constitute a potentially violent response, even if I was NOT armed. Thus, if they have the means to visit violence upon me preemptively, I would be surprised if they didn't, just to control the situation. Now, if someone said "your house is going to be robbed in ten minutes" while I was out eating dinner, I'd stay out for a while, and let it happen, call the cops and insurance. That's common sense, keeping my family out of a dangerous situation. However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. Of course not. But this is about societal change, not one particular scenario. You are more than in your right to defend yourself within reason. But prevalent attitudes toward guns in US are not actually making you safer, quite the opposite in the long run. Problem is that to get safer society you would need to suffer a period of being less safe. And that is why strict gun control is such a problematic thing in US. You are in local maximum, to get to a global one you first need to reach local minimum. In other first world countries gun ownership for defense is mostly nonsensical as it is more likely that it will cause you harm then help with any defense. Well, how effective people are at defending themselves with handguns just speaks to a failure in the process. In a perfect system, people would be required to have a fair amount of training to be able to carry, or to keep a gun in their home outside a gun safe. Again, ex-Infantry. I'm more than aware of how dangerous inexperienced people with guns can be. However, the guns don't cause the problem, the people cause the problem. I sincerely doubt that if we built a giant electromagnet to collect every gun in the country, it would cease violent crime. It would just stop us from hearing the story of the young female stopping the violent ex-boyfriend instead of ending up in the hospital or worse.
Accidents will happen no matter how well trained people are. In countries I am talking about owning a gun would be decrease in safety just due to the inevitable accidents and it would not be offset by successful defensed, because the gun does not increase your ability to do so in any significant degree, because the crime rates are lower and criminals also do not have guns. Why have a gun for defense when there is no such need.
EDIT: And nobody is claiming it would cease violent crime. But it would decrease it and that is the point.
|
On December 15 2012 05:46 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:41 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:35 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:33 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:29 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:26 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 05:25 Godwrath wrote:On December 15 2012 05:15 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. LOL. You'd sit down and have a beer with a burglar in your own house wouldn't you? You actually respect or think burglars have any rights whatsoever when they violate others' rights by trying to rob them? Wow. For hell sake, most robberies occur when there is no people inside the house, why do you think it works this way ? Killing instead of robbing will make you way more likely to get caught. What you do by having guns as self defense is forcing robbers to escalate their "intimidation" tools. Again were talking about reality, not a fairy tale where people won't have guns. I am talking about reality. You are the one who has a distorted vision of how to do a robbery. Get in, get out. As I said before if someone is breaking into an occupied home you would be very wise to assume they plan on doing more than a robbery. If you want to pretend that violent crime never happens during burglaries go right ahead, the rest of us living in the real world will continue to safe guard the lives of ourselves and families. Yet you have the highest ratio of death by gun. Keep being safe At this point I don't even know what youre getting at. What does that have to do with anything? I wouldn't expect much more from someone who claims you shouldn't have guns because criminals won't kill you if you don't have them. Talk about living in a fantasy. It's common sense, not fantasy. If a criminal's objective is to kill you, and he is armed and you are not, then the criminal will kill you. But why would a criminal want to kill you? Criminals want money. Criminals want to stay out of prison. Killing people does not help them. I have no fear of armed criminals. No one has ever stolen from me (as of yet). If a criminal wanted my money then it is highly likely that they will be unarmed and try to steal it without me noticing. I am comfortable in being in an unarmed confrontation if needed. Even if I am outnumbered, worst case I get beaten up a bit. I would not be comfortable being armed vs armed criminals, as someone is going to get killed.
This is bullshit.
My cousins' fiance was nearly beat to death in a random mugging down in Raleigh. All they wanted was the money.
I'm sorry, but your opinion is so incredibly naive it hurts. You can't shoot a gun so you don't like guns. You can win a fist fight so you like fists. For someone who is trained in arms and has training for controlling armed situations, I'd rather have a gun 100% of the time. At least I know I'll be safe in that situation. Will it be more volatile? Maybe. But I won't have to worry about hidden weapons and I know 100% of the time I will walk away.
|
On December 15 2012 05:42 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:37 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:On December 15 2012 05:12 Hryul wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
However, a gun is a great equalizer. And I thought you Americans don't like communism But on a serious note: No it's not. Reflexes can be trained, the will to use a gun is different for every person. Situational advantages factor in greatly. This argument is a lie. For the rest of your wall of text: A burglar is not a murderer. The sentence to robbing is not death. On December 15 2012 05:07 Esk23 wrote:On December 15 2012 05:04 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 05:01 heliusx wrote:On December 15 2012 04:59 L3g3nd_ wrote:On December 15 2012 04:53 iLikeRain wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:
[quote]
If, for example, three dudes with a baseball bat or two kicked in my door (not particularly unreasonable) with the intent of robbing our apartment, all my training and experience would mean about jack shit in close quarters, unarmed. With a knife or other hand weapon, WITH considerably more training than the average civilian, I give myself good odds of taking one out of the fight, and injuring a second in that situation, if I was awake when it happened. In other words, doing just enough damage to guarantee reprisals against myself and my family.
Give me my handgun, and I guarantee you, even if I'm asleep when it happens, best case scenario, three criminals fleeing or in custody, worst case, the body count doesn't include my wife or three year old son. I'd be able to look myself in the mirror if I took a life to protect my family.
You're so afraid that you don't even see the danger you put all of you in? You say yourself the criminals are there to rob your apartment. Do you think they willingly commit murder as well? No. You own a handgun and if you do criminals are more careful and probably wont hesitate to kill you because they know it's you or them. I can't even remember the last time I heard about a robbery turning into gun violence here in Denmark. The vast majority of people don't own weapons and the thieves realy have nothing to fear but getting caught. They don't bring a gun into a robbery because there is no need for it when civillians don't have any. i think this is a very good point, by resisting a robbery you are putting yourself in more risk, and everyone around you in even more risk. Are you honestly saying it's better to let criminals breaking into your house do as they please instead of defending yourself? Why would you EVER risk the life of yourself or any of your family members for material goods? The thieves are there to get MONEY not to fight you, not to take your life. When you bring a gun into the mix of course they will be wary. You just showed you're willing to kill them and they ironically act in self defense. You're trusting a criminal who breaks into your house to not kill you or your family? That's the difference between your country and ours, we'd rather defend ourselves and not take that risk. The fact that a criminal breaks into your house in the first place shows the criminal means you or your family harm. The fuck is it with these arguments? The burglar wants money. He doesn't get money by killing you. http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/suspect-in-violent-break-in-bustedYou can find countless other examples in the news if you actually try. There are people who commit acts of violence upon breaking in, be it rape, assault, or whatever else. If nothing else, if they break in, here in Texas, they know I could own a firearm, at which point my very presence could constitute a potentially violent response, even if I was NOT armed. Thus, if they have the means to visit violence upon me preemptively, I would be surprised if they didn't, just to control the situation. Now, if someone said "your house is going to be robbed in ten minutes" while I was out eating dinner, I'd stay out for a while, and let it happen, call the cops and insurance. That's common sense, keeping my family out of a dangerous situation. However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. I simply doubt the "countless". And I doubt the situation "it is my life or the life of the thiefes" occurs oh so often. I thought you were living in a first world country not fucking somalia. If it's enough to not be readily counted, it's countless enough for countless. And if it's a choice of my physical well-being vs a dead criminal, I'm content with a dead criminal.
It could also be that it happens that rarely that nobody counts it.
All you do is throw around the "but what if I and my family are threatened with deadly force". And I call it bullshit: You are living in a first world country. You are not at war. Why do you make up scenarios like you are at Afghanistan fighting Osama bin Laden?
|
On December 15 2012 04:51 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 04:49 L3g3nd_ wrote:On December 15 2012 04:43 JingleHell wrote:On December 15 2012 04:25 L3g3nd_ wrote:
whens the last time you heard of a school shooting outside of the US? i can name 5-6 major school shootings from the US in the last 10 years, but not a single one outside of the US. it isnt a bloody coincidence. There's gun crime elsewhere too. Of course, it's utterly ridiculous to get into the "what if" arguments of whether an armed civilian could have mitigated a situation. The answer is pretty blatantly "sometimes". The fact is, all other arguments aside, criminals in America own firearms. Even the ones who don't own firearms tend to work in groups, or use other potentially lethal weapons. Nothing is guaranteed to save your life in a potentially lethal situation. However, a gun is a great equalizer. I'm ex-Infantry, do martial arts to stay in shape, and I still own a handgun, and plan to get a CHL for it. In the meantime, I take advantage of the Texas Motorist Protection Act, and carry while driving, when it seems like the better option. Just recently, me and my wife bought something on Craigslist, for example. Worse side of town, carrying cash, had our toddler with us. You're goddamn right I had my 9mm in the truck with me, and loaded. It's not like every person who owns a gun uses it for crime. In fact, it's probably a paltry percentage. Plenty of law abiding citizens just feel better knowing they have the means to defend themselves and their families against bodily harm or worse, regardless of the situation. If, for example, three dudes with a baseball bat or two kicked in my door (not particularly unreasonable) with the intent of robbing our apartment, all my training and experience would mean about jack shit in close quarters, unarmed. With a knife or other hand weapon, WITH considerably more training than the average civilian, I give myself good odds of taking one out of the fight, and injuring a second in that situation, if I was awake when it happened. In other words, doing just enough damage to guarantee reprisals against myself and my family. Give me my handgun, and I guarantee you, even if I'm asleep when it happens, best case scenario, three criminals fleeing or in custody, worst case, the body count doesn't include my wife or three year old son. I'd be able to look myself in the mirror if I took a life to protect my family. What really sickens me, though, is people who have never experienced crime or violence, who think it's some sort of moral high ground to sacrifice the well-being of the innocent on the altar of gun control. Do guns solve more problems than they create? I don't know, there's all kinds of statistics out there, and sifting through the muddle is insane. In a situation where the criminals are already armed, however, I can only imagine one response, and that's protecting my family. Does that make me some kind of sicko, just waiting to go all cowboy on someone? No. I've just seen the ugly side of reality. In my eyes, anyone who sets out to endanger others for their own gain is gambling their rights. The judicial system sees it the same way, prison is a denial of rights, to protect the well-being of society. It isn't vigilantism, it's prevention. Would we really rather see some guy in prison for killing three people than seeing one guy dead for trying to kill three people? If so, what the fuck has society come to, where the well-being of the criminal becomes more valuable than the well-being of the victim? i think this post perfectly demonstrates how fucked up the situation in america is, you need to carry a gun around to feel safe? "land of the free" Yeah, I'm free to defend myself from criminals. There's plenty of other places where if someone decided to attack me, I'd be stuck with whatever capabilities I have in hand to hand, or whatever was lying around.
The slight change for you to be able to actually use your gun for your defense doesn't warrant all the dead and wounded that are caused by far to easy to get guns.
The bigger problem however is the need for using them in the first place. The crime rates of the US are of the charts (for a 1st world country). The cause of high crime rates is directly linked with the social economic system of the country. All other developed democracies offer a wide spectrum of political choices. The US misses too much of the political left.
We (humans) have a hard time compromising; choosing the lesser evil. We, at least in large groups, act more emotionally than with reason. That's why, in a democracy, we go from left to right and back again. We are never content with what we have and that is a good thing because that is how we stay in the save, reasonable middle. The US however has demonized a vital line of thinking in their politics. Choose between center right and right wing. This caused it even to be possible to have talks about tax cuts while having an enormous budgetary deficit on top of all the people living below the poverty threshold.
Poverty creates crime creates violence. Violence + guns = this..
|
On December 15 2012 05:48 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2012 05:45 BluePanther wrote:On December 15 2012 05:42 divito wrote:On December 15 2012 05:22 JingleHell wrote:
However, if the dangerous situation comes to my family I'm going to protect them with any and all means at my disposal. If, somehow, you consider the life of a criminal to be worth more than that of myself, my wife, or my son, there's not even a point in trying to argue with you, because your outlook is utterly incomprehensible. Appeals to emotion make my brain hurt. Let's avoid fallacies people. His scenario is not an appeal to emotion. This actually happened to me. It's a real scenario. And one that people are faced with. Seriously. If these people ever get robbed and their families lives are at risk, they'd change their minds and have some sort of practicial tool for self defense like a gun if they are lucky enough to survive the encounter. I don't need that to happen to me, I can't imagine waking up at night and hearing 3 people break into your home not knowing what the hell they are going to do.
I had no idea you were some sort of prophet who knows how people will react to these situations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
