RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


BitYakin -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:19:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

ink.... illogically.
You can frighten people off without a gun.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I don't think anyone wants crazy people to have guns.

But you have millions of them.
The daily guns deaths prove that every day.





What do the daily knife deaths, auto accident deaths and drowning deaths then prove?


They prove that there are lots of ways to die.

What was the actual point you that you were attempting to make?





I think maybe her point was, that saying more people die by guns in a place where there are more guns is about as obvious and moronic as saying more people die by drowning near rivers/lakes/beaches than in deserts...

DUHHHHH




BitYakin -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:20:12 AM)

double post, CS said the 1st one didn't go threw




thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:34:52 AM)

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Specific case. He stated that putting someone in the emergency room with a broomstick was better than running them off by putting my hand on my gun and scaring them off without a fight. He stated that it would have been better to tear into them with a 2x4 than to show them that further hostility was ill advised. I am not talking about harsh words, I am talking about physical harm. Before I put my hand on my gun during the incident in question I had tried telling the individual repeatedly to leave my property (he had tried to sneak up on me at about 1 am) When he wouldn't listen and kept edging in on me I escalated my response. Result, nobody got hurt, no crime committed, no body has come after me in over three years.


Was this before or after the dog ate your homework?[8|]




BitYakin -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:37:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I have crack heads living less than 500 yards from me - a whole fucking street full of drunken kossovan nutters.
I can assure you that walking down there with my 2x4 with nails seems to keep them at arms length - drunk, stoned, or sober. [:)]



Something else I've been thinking about. We're constantly being told how ignorant and violent we Americans are. How our "gun culture" is dangerous and we're paranoid, and if only we'd do the sensible thing and get rid of guns we'd be far better off. (I'm paraphrasing, but that does seem to be the gist) So why is it that in the sensible and civilized UK, you don't feel safe walking down the street unless you're armed with an improvised morning-star? (And why do the police there allow this?) Or feel the need to keep other improvised weapons always within arms reach? Either the UK is a lot more dangerous place then other posters here have led us to believe, or maybe you're the paranoid one?

You're calling Bama a redneck. He carries a pistol concealed in a holster. You're walking down the street with a spiked club over your shoulder to, by your own admission, intimidate your neighbors. I know which one of those I'd call a dangerous redneck, but of course you're the civilized one because you don't like guns.


I was thinking the same thing, about how glad I am that I live someplace so uncivilized and hillbilly and redneck that I don't feel the need to brandish a deadly weapon to walk to the store...

I also know first hand that walking down the street with a club in your hands where I live will, at the very least, guarantee you a conversation with police...

I was carrying a pool stick home one night and had to explain it to a couple officers...

I get sick of the whole holier than thou thing, only to hear he is 4000% more fearful for his life in his civilized utopia than I am living in an inner city that usually rivals Chicago/Detroit for number of murders per year




thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:48:50 AM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

No the Constitution protects the right to own, not just firearms, but weapons.
And no the problem is that under the guise of stopping the sick evil people from having weapons is to stop the rest of us. You have to realize that the wild west wasn't the wild west. As is said in the intro to Tombstone the worst towns in the west (which sprung up before the law got there) had murder rates approaching modern day Detroit.


You are citing a movie as historical evidence...[8|] Would this be another instance of you being smarter than your peers?


The cities( which are the murder centers) have massive problems with gangs and drugs.

Of course you know this because you watch a lot of movies and tv. Have you any idea why a gang might exist? Why are drugs illegal?
Perhaps if you became aware of the cause you might (with help from a responsible adult)be able to construct a solution that did not involve you getting your fat ass shot.



This is what leads to the high crime rates.

Actually you are wrong once again. What leads to high crime rates is to make criminal those things that people ought not to be restrained from doing. Unless you are willing to remove all restrictions on drugs you are part of the problem and not part of the solution.


If you want to stop sick and evil people from getting guns why don't they prosecute people with a criminal record for trying to purchase one.
Could you cite for us where this is not being done?


Why don't they allow a diagnosis that a person is a menace to be included in the background check.

Dude the law already precludes the sale of firearms to the mentally incompetent.


Why do they violate the law and use the background checks to create databases on legitimate gun owners.


Really how is this done in contravention of the law?

The question in the OP is very simple.


I would agree it is a simple minded attempt to validate your kill em all let god sort them out attitude. Personally I hope you get the opportunity to fulfill your life long bloodlust with all of the attendant legal issues...and your new bff "bubba"




thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:51:39 AM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD
And most people are not nearly as smart as I am.


[8|]




thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 4:57:16 AM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR

A year ago I finally got Pizza Hut to deliver here.
To do so I had to promise to provide security for them.

Just how did you go about doing this?[8|] Common dude we are all "suppose" to be adults here. Are you really going to tell us you went to the pizza hut and told the owner you would be personally responsible for his drivers safety? That would require you driving to the pizza hut and ridding with the driver back to your house and then back to the pizza hut to get your car.[8|]roflmfao


The reason was that one of their drivers was, within a block of my house, attacked by 6 guys with baseball bats.
They stole his change money, his wallet, and his car.
They put him in the hospital.


So this would have been in the paper right? How about a cite to the local rag that carried this on their police blotter page?[8|]





thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 5:04:37 AM)

ORIGINAL: BamaD
No I live in Millbrook.
The neighborhood went to hell after I moved in here.

This implies that you were the cause of the demise of the neighborhood.


I have been told that the cops are hesitant to go south of my house.


Pussy cops with body armor and automatic weapons are afraid to do their job? Color me shocked. Oh waite maybe they could hire some of fugerersons rejects they are not afraid to shoot black people .


If you are that familiar with Montgomery I live next to Trenholm court lite.
And yes there was a period when a night without sirens meant I had gone deaf.
I hear gunfire from that area two or three times a month, mostly .22 autos.

Why do you assume that gunfire from "that neighborhood" is not law abiding citizens exercising their 2nd ammendment rights just as you claim to?





thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 5:09:26 AM)

ORIGINAL: BamaD

No the contention has been made, in effect, that it is morally superior and more socially aware to beat an assailant with a club, than to frighten them off with a firearm.

So far you are the only one who believes this has been said.[8|]


I don't think anyone wants crazy people to have guns.

Many here doubt your sanity...not me of course, I have no doubts what so ever.

The problem with stopping stupid people is the folks who think that wanting a gun proves you are stupid (of course many think it also proves you are crazy)

While doing stupid things on a regular bassis may not be proof that you are crazy it is an indicator.





thompsonx -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 5:14:02 AM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

The only time I have actually removed my gun from the holster was a couple of weeks ago when a guy came running at me from behind a tree in my yard about 20 ft from me, too close and moving too fast for me to discuss it with him.
Never even pointed it at him but he froze, fortunately cause three more steps and he would have run smack into my rottweiler who I was walking at the time (4:30 AM)
Turned out he was taking a short cut so I am real glad it didn't get worse.
Other than that, like you putting my hand on my gun and never moving it


[8|]Good lord the tarnished plate of turds you offer for public consumption. 04:30 is pretty dark. Two pussies out for a walk and a jogger across the street frightens them into pissing on themselves[8|]



was all that was needed to alter peoples intentions.

What did you alter this persons intentions to?[8|]






Politesub53 -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 6:26:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I have consistently used my firearms to avoid anyone being injured

How often have you been in that situation?

4 times


Wow, four times in sixty-ish years is "consistently" Who knew ?




BamaD -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 6:59:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted
I choose to carry. I've done so for 8ish years, and never had to shoot anyone or even draw it. The most I've ever had to do was lift my shirt and make it clear I was armed. That's happened twice, the car-jacking and the mugging. Both times were defused without further incident and everyone walked away safe and unharmed. Others may disagree, but I consider that a win.


That looks like a win to me too. It is hard to argue that in the hands of a competent, responsible, law-abiding person a gun isn't likely to be a pretty compelling and useful tool to use in self defence.

But, there does seem to be a fair whack of evidence that carrying a gun is more likely place you in danger than not. For example this study (http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301409?journalCode=ajph&) found a strong correlation between higher levels of gun ownership and homicide rates - although they make it clear that they cannot find a causal link.





There are two things wrong with these studies which is why they fail to find a causal link.
One they do not eliminate people who carry to facilitate crime.
Two they do not adjust to compare it not to the general population but to the people who try to fight back against criminals. Contrary to popular belief people don't fight back because they have guns, they have guns because they fight back.




BamaD -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 7:02:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
They must have nice criminals in the UK won't hurt you unless you make them.


While this is plainly a very stupid thing to say, there is an underlying point (which I've no doubt that Bama missed) and that is that because of the very low levels of gun ownership by both law-abiding citizens and criminals in the UK, the likelihood of encountering a thug with a gun is very very low, so the need to have a gun to defend yourself is correspondingly low. I hasten to add that this is not intended to be a dig, the low level of gun ownership isn't down to any moral, cultural or ethical superiority - it's an accident of history. So the question might be - "Would allowing every UK citizen to carry a gun make British people safer ?" I believe the answer to that question is no.

The US is different, however, gun ownership (whether it's a legal, registered, gun or an illegal unregistered gun) is much much higher.

I haven't even advocated that every American should have a gun let alone every Brit.




darkwanderer3305 -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 7:20:03 AM)

While I agree that it would be most satisfying to bust up some punk ass who is threatening my family with a 2x4, lead pipe, baseball bat, or (insert your favorite impact weapon here); a gun prevents the unlikely scenario that the threat would win that physical confrontation. The gun is the final word in such a confrontation. It ensures my family's safety, my safety, and the security of my home.




BamaD -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 7:34:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305

While I agree that it would be most satisfying to bust up some punk ass who is threatening my family with a 2x4, lead pipe, baseball bat, or (insert your favorite impact weapon here); a gun prevents the unlikely scenario that the threat would win that physical confrontation. The gun is the final word in such a confrontation. It ensures my family's safety, my safety, and the security of my home.

Yes




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 7:55:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Your words, nobody else's... because that's how you think.... illogically.
You can frighten people off without a gun.

That is not what I said. You told me it was better to injure someone with a yard broom than to scare them off with a gun. I say that is stupid.

I quoted you. So yes, that IS what you said.
Now quote where I said it was better to injure than scare off assailants; because I didn't say that.




lovmuffin -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 8:01:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

I thought this might be a curious discussion. On a topic far different than what it has become. Another 'gun supporting thread by BamaD'....what else is new?

I mean this in all sincerity BamaD: Do you understand that the material you show here does sound crazy, illogical, and dangerous? There are good reasons for owning a firearm (having a freedom) and negative reasons for a firearm (a prison). People have guns for target, competition, historical, and even self defense (enjoying a freedom). And people have guns to defend themselves due to their paranoid schizophrenia snapping into high gear (a prison). One whom can not tell which instance they are in, would be best not having such a tool so handily around them. That situations do arise that could easily be handled in a dozen other ways. If your so 'of need' of a firearm, because your afraid of something bad happening to you, answer me this:

Do you wear an NBC suit 24/7?

A Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical warefare suit? Lets face the reality here. Your more likely to be exposed to sunlight alittle to long, then dealing with some nut trying to rob you (the effects can be life threating). Your more likely to obtain a more deadly strain of the flu (last year's had two major bugs running loose in the USA), then someone attacking you in broad daylight. And its a sad fact, but chemicals can mix at the wrong time creating severe problems on the human body. If your so concern about your body's health, wouldn't it make sense to keep your mind and body healthy? To keep things in perspective, logical, and most of all...sane?

I can understand having a passion fore firearms. One of my many passions is good video games. But doing it to much. Obsessing over it. Sacrificing life for the game. Are the things that make up someone suffering more internally. How often do you see me bitching about Battlefield 4? A game I didn't get to play for one minute after purchasing it. Never, because I keep that passion controlled, in check, and responsible. A firearm is a device that requires responsibility to handle safely. When you talk, respond and even create new threads; it feels like your out of control. You can understand why people might get concern over the nature of your posting, right?

I've disagreed with you on the 2nd amendment. Its not an individual right to a firearm (or any other weapon), without responsibility or limit. You can not ignore the first half of the 2nd amendment because its politically inconvenient to you. I asked you (and all the other conservatives) if the US Government or other Americans could ignore half of the 8th and reinterpret the remainder however they wanted. Not a single person on this forum said "ok with that". If its not 'ok' for the 8th, nor twenty-five amendments,....WHY.....would it be 'ok' for the 2nd? Now, if your arms were part of 'A well regulated militia...', I wouldn't have a problem. Since that means someone somewhere, is in a position of credibility and responsibility with power in allowing you said arms. So if you went off the deep end, and they did nothing, given the warning signs, their goose is cooked! If you don't wish to be in that '...well regulated militia..." that is find too: but your arms are not protected under the 2nd amendment. Your arms would be subject to the 10th amendment.

You can be a good guy, BamaD. The question is, can you reflect on what others say and be honest to yourself? You don't have to admit anything on here. Might do you good, to consider the idea and not who it is from. I think most of us would enjoy a good, healthy discussion on the 2nd amendment in different situations. But like BDSM, it has to be kept sane, safe, and consensual. The idea of 'topic' that you give here, sounds like an interesting one. But it is to each of us, not to get the topic off track with pettiness, silly and stupid crap.

I've dealt with people that have used their fists on up to firearms. Each encounter was not pleasant. Would a gun have helped in all the situations? Not really. In some of them, it would have made matters worst. In one case, talking down a suicidal marine with a gun, would have been absolutely stupid. There is no one tool that handles all problems. But knowing when to apply the right tool, at the right time, for the right reasons, is not as easily as it sounds. And if your still having trouble, consider the following....

[image]http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000059809/polls_macgyveref2_0112_890801_poll_xlarge.jpeg[/image]


Maggyver would simply come up with some sort of improvised explosive. Of course there would be ample time to do it, it's in the script.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 8:04:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

You, on the other hand, are not like this.
You believe -
You need a gun... for defense. You think you are defenseless and a numpty if you don't have one.
You need a gun... to deter would-be thieves and criminals. You don't believe anything less will do.
You need a gun... to attack first. Because to do otherwise means they'll get the jump on you and you're dead.
You need a gun... because... you can't think beyond the end of a muzzle. You can't comprehend a life without one.
You need a gun... because the constitution and the law says you can and have the right to. And by golly, you'll exercise that right... just because you can, and will.


You need to give back your mind reading certificate, wrong on every count.
It is too late to talk about level headed gun owners you already declared all gun owners to be crazy.


You have proved your motives, intentions and total gun mindset through many of your posts.
I declared that people like you, with your type of mindset, are crazy and irresponsible - not everyone.

We speak to quite a few people in the US and they don't react like you have described that you do.
To quote our friend in NC, he said "that man is a nutter and shouldn't be allowed to own a gun".

Wrong on every count?? I don't think so.
I'm not the only one that has made such a comment and most of those similar comments have come from US posters.




NorthernGent -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 8:04:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
They must have nice criminals in the UK won't hurt you unless you make them.


While this is plainly a very stupid thing to say, there is an underlying point (which I've no doubt that Bama missed) and that is that because of the very low levels of gun ownership by both law-abiding citizens and criminals in the UK, the likelihood of encountering a thug with a gun is very very low, so the need to have a gun to defend yourself is correspondingly low. I hasten to add that this is not intended to be a dig, the low level of gun ownership isn't down to any moral, cultural or ethical superiority - it's an accident of history. So the question might be - "Would allowing every UK citizen to carry a gun make British people safer ?" I believe the answer to that question is no.

The US is different, however, gun ownership (whether it's a legal, registered, gun or an illegal unregistered gun) is much much higher.



It is not as clear cut as that.

We have a higher rate of burglary (per head) than the United States, and I'd hazard a guess that in the event we had the capacity to shoot anyone entering our homes uninvited, then a few of these people would think twice; thereby increasing the safety of those on the receiving end.

But, clearly the United States has a higher rate of gun murders as guns are more freely accessible, and this has possibly caused them to have a higher rate of murder (as you've more chance of surviving when stabbed rather than shot).

There is a cultural side to this. Most gangsters in places like London, who did have access to guns, preferred knives as the weapon of choice; and I think there is something in the English psyche (among the criminal element) that knives are acceptable and guns are not.

On balance, guns here would lead to a reduced burglary rate but a higher murder rate, because we have just as many idiots (per head) walking the streets as they do over there.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm? (10/5/2014 8:09:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
On balance, guns here would lead to a reduced burglary rate but a higher murder rate, because we have just as many idiots (per head) walking the streets as they do over there.

You are probably right on the button. [:D]

But because we don't have the prolific spread of guns amongst the populace, our murder rate is a lot lower and obviously guns deaths are almost (but not quite) non-existent.




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625