Page 1 of 2 [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

T-rav20
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,853
Location: South Jersey

02 Mar 2007, 6:40 am

From http://www.wrongplanet.net/modules.php? ... highlight=
Continue...


_________________
Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam

The following statement is True, the preceding statement was False.

I'm A PINEY from my head down to my HINEY.


davethecave
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 39

02 Mar 2007, 7:15 am

"It's not nonsense. Firearms are an equalizer, a way for the weak to fight against the strong. If you hate guns, then you hate the ability to stand up for yourself, the ability to defend yourself aganst those who would lord over you."

Can I assume that Saddam was right to have weapons of mass destruction. To defend Iraq against those who would lord over it.
Or does the right to defend oneself only apply to America.

Remember the scene from Crocodile Dundee? "That's not a knife. This is a knife"
Whilst a gun may protect you from un-armed assailants, what about the attacker that uses a bigger gun, or a bomb or an aeroplane.



T-rav20
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,853
Location: South Jersey

02 Mar 2007, 8:59 am

davethecave wrote:
T-rav20 wrote:
It's not nonsense. Firearms are an equalizer, a way for the weak to fight against the strong. If you hate guns, then you hate the ability to stand up for yourself, the ability to defend yourself aganst those who would lord over you.


Can I assume that Saddam was right to have weapons of mass destruction. To defend Iraq against those who would lord over it.
He didn't, remember?


davethecave wrote:
Or does the right to defend oneself only apply to America.

No, as I said in the other thread, It's a natural right, everyone has it.

davethecave wrote:
Remember the scene from Crocodile Dundee? "That's not a knife. This is a knife" Whilst a gun may protect you from un-armed assailants, what about the attacker that uses a bigger gun, or a bomb or an aeroplane.
The last time I checked, most street thugs don't zoom around in F-15s, and when it comes down to gun vs. gun, the person who is smarter, and has better training, wins.


_________________
Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam

The following statement is True, the preceding statement was False.

I'm A PINEY from my head down to my HINEY.


davethecave
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 39

02 Mar 2007, 10:13 am

What scares me is when the person who is smarter, and has better training, is the street thug.

If your arguament, for gun toting, is self defence, wouldn't body armour be more appropriate?

Whilst America may be the land of the free, I am very happy to live in the UK where I am not afraid to go out on the streets for fear of being shot.



T-rav20
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,853
Location: South Jersey

02 Mar 2007, 10:24 am

davethecave wrote:
What scares me is when the person who is smarter, and has better training, is the street thug.

Thugs, as a general rule, aren't that smart, it's why they're thugs in the first place.

davethecave wrote:
If your arguament, for gun toting, is self defence, wouldn't body armour be more appropriate?

Have you ever been shot while wearing body armor? It's like being hit in the chest with a hammer, it's incapacitating. It will save your life if you're shot, but the only appropriate response to a firearm is another firearm.

davethecave wrote:
Whilst America may be the land of the free, I am very happy to live in the UK where I am not afraid to go out on the streets for fear of being shot.

Really?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gu ... crime+2007


_________________
Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam

The following statement is True, the preceding statement was False.

I'm A PINEY from my head down to my HINEY.


TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

02 Mar 2007, 11:06 am

T-rav20 wrote:



Quote:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."


What that statement, does not say, speaks volumes, it doesn't say "you will only keep arms for hunting squirrels", or "You will only keep arms to repel tyrannical governments" It says:

Quote:
"the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

That seems rather simple to me.


Rather simple to me also.

Quote:
security of a free State


That means defending ones country from attack.

Quote:
free State


That means opposition to tyranny.



peebo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,627
Location: scotland

02 Mar 2007, 11:26 am

T-rav20 wrote:
Thugs, as a general rule, aren't that smart, it's why they're thugs in the first place.


i am afraid this is a very flawed assumption.


_________________
?Civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor, or of those who have some property against those who have none at all.?

Adam Smith


lau
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,579
Location: Somerset UK

02 Mar 2007, 11:56 am

T-rav20 wrote:
davethecave wrote:
What scares me is when the person who is smarter, and has better training, is the street thug.

Thugs, as a general rule, aren't that smart, it's why they're thugs in the first place.

I thoroughly agree. In fact, I agree with an enormous amount of what T-rav20 says...

T-rav20 wrote:
davethecave wrote:
Whilst America may be the land of the free, I am very happy to live in the UK where I am not afraid to go out on the streets for fear of being shot.

Really?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gu ... crime+2007

... but then he spoils it by giving a Google search, which says nothing. Strangely enough, not everything on the web is true, and some of it is is just a tad opinionated.

However, in the above quote, the "afraid to go out on the streets" bit is one I'm guilty of covering up. According to the statistical source I quoted earlier, http://www.nationmaster.com, we in the UK are actually more afraid to go out on the streets. (I could suggest that that just means that our US cousins are less sensitive to their vastly greater insecurity, but would I?) ( :-> ).

I'm sorry T-rav20, but I really have to believe that you have a blind spot when in comes to guns. In most other respects, you offer perfectly rational arguments. As soon as anything damning about guns is mentioned, you disregard whatever is said and offer nothing but completely specious reasoning.

E.g. in response to a comment about your "right to bear arms" waffle, you say "What that statement, does not say, speaks volumes", which is so trite and not at all what you then do. What you mean is "What that statement, does not say, I will, because I think they left it out."

Also, I find it odd that you switched threads just after I tried to bring the original thread away from the tub-thumping gun lobby to a genuine autistic concern. The original poster was showing their concern for the effect of mixing autistic traits with weapons. My (not so) little tale was an example of where I atypically managed to respond in a way that averted violence, which just might have involved a weapon - how would I have known - in fact, maybe he never intended to mug me at all. I know I felt threated and I was expecting at least a knife to appear.

.........

So... I may or may not continue watching this thread, as I think "Politics" is vaguely synonymous with "Lies" and ditto for "Religion", and such "Philosophy" as is sandwiched between those two bedfellows, to mix a metaphor, I might not want to handle. I've certainly not visited this forum before.



T-rav20
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,853
Location: South Jersey

02 Mar 2007, 11:56 am

peebo wrote:
T-rav20 wrote:
Thugs, as a general rule, aren't that smart, it's why they're thugs in the first place.


i am afraid this is a very flawed assumption.

It's not an assumption, it's a rule of thumb. I have no doubt that there are smart criminals out there, but they are certainly in the minority.


_________________
Ceterum autem censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam

The following statement is True, the preceding statement was False.

I'm A PINEY from my head down to my HINEY.


TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

02 Mar 2007, 12:25 pm

T-rav20 wrote:
peebo wrote:
T-rav20 wrote:
Thugs, as a general rule, aren't that smart, it's why they're thugs in the first place.


i am afraid this is a very flawed assumption.

It's not an assumption, it's a rule of thumb. I have no doubt that there are smart criminals out there, but they are certainly in the minority.


I heard one person theorise if you teach criminals marksmenship the murder rate would go down because they more often than not hit an innocent bystanders. If you
had more bad guys killing bad guys it would not be such a bad thing. :)



davethecave
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 39

02 Mar 2007, 12:29 pm

Really?

Yes, really. I am not scared of gun crime in the UK.

Statistics from US Department of Justice; # According to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) in 2005, 477,040 victims of violent crimes stated that they faced an offender with a firearm.

Compare to
UK Home office; There were 50 shooting victims in 2005/06 compared to 75 in 2004/05.

There has been a lot of press coverage recently because of a spate of shootings in London. In reality, gun crime has decreased in the last two years.



TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

02 Mar 2007, 12:37 pm

davethecave wrote:

Yes, really. I am not scared of gun crime in the UK.


Most likely Americans are not scared either. The odds of you being killed by a firearm
are quite low if you do not piss anyone off or kill yourself.



Corvus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Sep 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,667
Location: Calgary

dexkaden
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,970
Location: CTU, Los Angeles

02 Mar 2007, 1:00 pm

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html


More people die from automobiles than guns. Shall we hate cars because they kill people? I suppose you can rationalize that there are auto ACCIDENTS rather than intent to kill---but if you adjust the report to reflect ONLY homicides involving a firearm, only half the deaths qualify.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people, but the guns help. Banning the guns, though, only removes PART of the problem as CRIMINALS don't seem to care about THE LAW (that is what makes them criminals, right?) and can probably get a hold of weapons to use against people, while law-abiding citizens aren't able to own weapons.

If you really want to stop violent crime, address the causes of violent crime rather than taking an illogical, reactive approach. And that is what any argument based on "I hate weapons; they make me sick" is. It is entirely emotional and therefore illogical.


_________________
Superman wears Jack Bauer pajamas.


TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.