BamaD
Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD quote:
ORIGINAL: joether And what is the 'criminal advantage'? Oh that's right, they just call 1-800-Need-Gun, and the customer service operate sells them everything they need. Back to reality.... I have explained this repeatedly but I will try again for the learning challenged. Don't strain yourself.... quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD Set aside the fact that after banning firearms you would have a period of from a few to several years when only the criminals had gun. Your assumption that when such a ban goes into effect, all the guns in civilian hands go 'poof'; sounds like a fairy tale, because it IS a fairy tale. Its not based on reality or psychology. Actually, law enforcement would have firearms. And we have to keep tabs on that group at all levels to make sure things are not fucked around (just as we do right now). In addition, not all persons would turn in their firearms immediately. There are PLENTY of firearms that no one knows of, except for the owner, of said firearm. Proving that the crime rate increased, solely, due to the ban would be a tough argument. There are numerous factors to weigh in, any of them could easily be argued as the better reason. To have good government, we would look at things objectively. quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD I mean they are criminals they won't turn theirs in. And there are criminals that have a stockpile of meth. For when they need some fast cash. Yes, criminals break laws. How many identity thieves do you know routinely break the laws of the road? Just because they have broken one or more laws, doesn't mean they break ALL the laws. Because when they do that, it makes catching them...much...easier. quote:
ORIGINAL: BamaD But that isn't what I was talking about. Your fantasy world doesn't seem to admit that criminals don't need guns to commit crimes, particularly when you have disarmed their victims. A punk with a knife has the edge on me, the same punk when both of us have guns doesn't. With the knife even if I can take him I will have to prove it. With the guns there is no percentage in it for him, even if all I do is wound him he is still caught, has still failed, and has not gotten his fix. People who run off when I touch my gun wouldn't do so if I pulled my bowie knife on them. Fantasy world? After that line in which you try to style everything within a vary narrow space of viewpoint? I call bullshit. You assume your attacker is numbered as just '1'. How about five of them? You assume your skill level is better than his? And that's based on...WHAT...in reality? And could that guy have a homemade bomb or grenade? Doesn't take much chemistry knowledge to put something together. You also assume you'll get the first shot off. Unfortunately, when they attack, its when your not ready. That is what is called surprise. Remember that guy running from a tree while you were out walking your dog? You didn't see him until he was right on top of you. Where was your gun? Not in your hand nor pointed at him. Could he have just unloaded shots on you? Yes. You wouldn't have known until it was too late to resist. You assume a huge amount of bullshit without any reality; then complain when people give you the reality check. Now that I have eaten I will give you a better answer. You are still not a mind reader none of your assumptions about what I think are right. I know what surprise is. What you are saying, in effect is I should give up a situation where I might not win for one where I can't. It is like saying that since Boston College might not beat UConn they should play the Patriots instead.
_____________________________
Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.
|