It also only takes one or two idiots in a car to kill someone, but you don't see people running out to ban cars, and cars kill more people in the US every year than guns. You are too hung up on the tool that is used to do the killing and ignoring the actual problem: that so many people want to fucking kill other people. to use your phrasing, "it's insane that people still don't think [having so many people wanting to kill people] is a problem".

Quote :

"ohh, let's see.. the branch of military where you see live combat"

hmmmm, I was not aware that the military trained people intensively in school/theatre/shopping mall shooting scenarios. learn something new every day

1/1/2013 12:33:32 AM

Quote :

"How about this, you want to get rid of all of the guns in the US? Start with those in the hands of criminals FIRST and THEN we can start talking reasonably about disarming the law abiding citizens that are protected by the 2nd Amendment of the constitution. Until then, quit treating inanimate objects as if they're evil incarnate and those that own them as if they're some sort of retarded freak with too many Rambo videos."

I am getting so tired of people delusioned by shit like this. We have police, they protect us. Stop hiding under your NRA priniciples and what not. We don't have to have guns with us to be safe.

How about you start citing all of the people that never ever once own a gun and never get harmed/killed. So, if you want to court science and shit, why don't you start digging into those numbers. People are just being persuaded by fear in some crazy profit-driven scheme by the gun industry to get you to buy more guns.

Not even yet to mention the dangers of escalation of violence. Sure people get mugged. Not gonna lie. One of my students last semester got mugged because he was drunk and stumbled on a dark street at night at 3 AM. But he (like so many people these days) didn't have mush cash on him, so everybody walked away. Now, if he had a gun on him, people including himself and the robbers, could have/would have gotten shot and seriously injured if not killed. It is the better scenario on the random freakish "you prolly should not have been doing this".





[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 1:00 AM. Reason : edit]

1/1/2013 12:37:00 AM

^^live combat is live combat. What, you think that they are not trained/experienced to keep their heads in the game lest they shoot a comrade? Seriously... seriously?

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 12:39 AM. Reason : a]

1/1/2013 12:39:01 AM

Quote :

"I am getting so tired of people delusioned by shit like this. We have police, they protect us. Stop hiding under your NRA priniciples and what not. We don't have to have guns with us to be safe."

Did you refuse to read a prior post that showed that it takes at least 3 minutes for the police to show up to "protect you", and that's on a good day? If your last hope is the police, you're already fucked.

Quote :

"How about you start citing all of the people that never ever once own a gun and never get harmed/killed."

Why? The evidence is already on our side when you see that less than 1% of guns are ever used in crimes, and even less are used in murders, yet people are calling to ban all of them or a large number of them. That literally makes zero sense. Why is the honus on US to show that guns shouldn't be banned, especially when the Constitution specifically says they can't be banned? And you're doing this to accomplish what, exactly? Prevent less than 100 mass murder deaths a year, at the expense of the hundreds of thousands of crimes prevented by guns every year? That's pure insanity, dude.

Quote :

"live combat is live combat. What, you think that they are not trained/experienced to keep their heads in the game lest they shoot a comrade? Seriously... seriously? "

You are showing a stark lack of understanding and naivete about combat scenarios if you think that the average training for a foot soldier translates to school/theatre/shopping center shootings.

1/1/2013 12:44:02 AM

It is pure insanity to think that 1 unnecessary death is worth having people losing whatever folding money they have on them.

Quote :

"You are showing a stark lack of understanding and naivete about combat scenarios if you think that the average training for a foot soldier translates to school/theatre/shopping center shootings."

Because when you are facing live combat you are experienced/trained enough to keep your calm aim and shoot the correct person. I am not even a big fan of the military, but damn, a vet has at least some credentials now come on.



[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 12:50 AM. Reason : s]

1/1/2013 12:48:09 AM

Quote :

"It is pure insanity to think that 1 unnecessary death is worth having people losing whatever folding money they have on them."

Then you agree that we should ban cars, too. People can walk, so there's no need to have those death machines flying around all over the place.

Quote :

"Because when you are facing live combat you are experienced/trained enough to keep your calm aim and shoot the correct person."

Keep showing your ignorance. You are seriously suggesting that those disparate scenarios could ever be adequately covered by the combat training received by any military service member. The guy running watch on a nuclear sub is totally prepared to take out a bad guy in a crowded theatre. You are grossly oversimplifying what's going on there. Hell, police in NYC shot several bystanders on the street trying to take out one guy, and that's ostensibly what your vaunted public protectors are trained to fucking do on a daily basis!

1/1/2013 12:54:27 AM

Quote :

"hmmmm, I was not aware that the military trained people intensively in school/theatre/shopping mall shooting scenarios. learn something new every day"

Just look at the wonderful job the Russian military did a few years ago.

1/1/2013 12:56:28 AM

Quote :

"Why? The evidence is already on our side when you see that less than 1% of guns are ever used in crimes, and even less are used in murders, yet people are calling to ban all of them or a large number of them. That literally makes zero sense. Why is the honus on US to show that guns shouldn't be banned, especially when the Constitution specifically says they can't be banned? And you're doing this to accomplish what, exactly? Prevent less than 100 mass murder deaths a year, at the expense of the hundreds of thousands of crimes prevented by guns every year? That's pure insanity, dude."

we are talking about deaths not bloody noses. And saying "1% of guns are ever used in crimes" is a misleading scientific factoids that people love to use to court science. It is also largely irrelevant because in that argument you are quantifying the value of 1 death, which is in itself vile.

1/1/2013 12:58:20 AM

Quote :

"We have police, they protect us."

wrong wrong wrong

1/1/2013 1:20:57 AM

CCW works and all the data supports that. that shouldn't even be up for debate anymore.

1/1/2013 1:29:23 AM

Quote :

"Then you agree that we should ban cars, too. People can walk, so there's no need to have those death machines flying around all over the place."

Stop. Fucking. With. Science.

Seriously just because you can throw numbers around does not make you some academic wizard. That comparison is epic apples to oranges so I will not even get into it.

^ define works? The streets are safe enough so they don't actually have to use them?

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 1:36 AM. Reason : c]

1/1/2013 1:35:41 AM

it saves lives

1/1/2013 1:37:10 AM

you say it saves live

I say escalation of violence.

If you had to put on the table 1000 people getting mugged and walking away versus 1 person getting shot, I would unequivocally take the 1000 people getting mugged and walking away. This is something that America has been duped into not caring about.

1/1/2013 1:42:50 AM

^ and I will take 10 criminals getting shot over 10 innocents being beaten, stabbed, or shot because they made the mistake of going to the movies and then walking to their cars.

Your scenario is ridiculous. If there are 1000 muggings that occur without violence, arming the victim does not equal someone dying or getting shot. The reality is that in that 1000 muggings, there will be several victims harmed. What you're basically saying is that you prefer the victim to be hurt or even killed instead of the CHANCE of the victim being able to defend themselves and something POTENTIALLY happening to the criminal. Great argument.

You are right about one thing. I don't give a damn about the person that CHOOSES to lead a life where they are putting themselves in harm's way SPECIFICALLY to harm innocent people (whether physically or monetarily). They have a choice: 1) don't be a piece of shit or 2)prison or a grave. They made their choice. They get to worry about the consequences, not me.

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 2:41 AM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 2:21:59 AM

^^ not enough information there.

Who is getting shot, and does this person die of his injuries?

Of those thousand people, how many are also raped?

1/1/2013 2:43:09 AM

Quote :

"What you're basically saying is that you prefer the victim to be hurt or even killed instead of the CHANCE of the victim being able to defend themselves and something POTENTIALLY happening to the criminal. Great argument. "

potentially happening to the criminal and the victim. My scenario is getting your wallet stolen and pushed to the gorund/scuffed up which does happen unfortunately. Guns don't really solve that problem as much as they do escalate an already dangerous situation.

Let's just put this way: I don't want a gun on me and don't want one in my house because I would rather someone take my wallet or a couple possession over me starting a gun fight because I pulled my gun out.

People are all for "Defending themselves", but they don't understand the finality behind death, and how it is nothing that can be healed or changed.

And once again, point to your evidence all you want, and I will point to the U.K.

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 3:08 AM. Reason : dp]

1/1/2013 3:02:51 AM

and i'll point to the constitution and recent SCOTUS rulings

no one is telling you to go get a gun and carry it. we're just saying that some of us prefer to have the option of defending ourselves and we have proven that we can do so safely and have what most folks agree is a positive impact.

sorry, bud, this isn't the U.K. (that's what one of you antis told me when i compared the U.S. to Australia, so fuck it)

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 8:17 AM. Reason : adsf]

1/1/2013 8:11:14 AM

Hahaha "we have police,they protect us" haha
This mindset is why these debates go no where and partly how worthless gun control gets passed
It is also why some people are victims of crimes and government corruption

1/1/2013 10:06:21 AM

Just out of curiosity, how does your (or any private citizen's) gun help from being a victim of government corruption?

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 10:27 AM. Reason : dd]

1/1/2013 10:21:12 AM

Would the gun nuts in here be okay with a FOID system where you need an ID to purchase guns and ammo?

1/1/2013 10:29:06 AM

as long as it didn't require jumping through a bunch of ridiculous hoops and didn't go any farther and abolished the NFA of 1934 (or had an advanced level that allowed NFA items), then i would be ok with that. but it's a slippery slope. if it didn't reduce gun violence they'd just say, "welp, that didn't work. now we've gotta start banning stuff. oh, here's a list of doors to kick in. how convenient."

it's no secret that a lot of politicians don't want anyone to have any guns whatsoever. they're just trying to boil frogs.

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 10:39 AM. Reason : sadf]

1/1/2013 10:34:33 AM

Quote :

"This mindset is why these debates go no where and partly how worthless gun control gets passed"

It's also the Big Stick theory with our prison system. Now, I am not a big fan of how it just perpetuates drug crimes and does not focus on Rehab, but putting that aside, most criminals on average know how fucked you are if you shoot/kill somebody. It is a pretty serious threat.

The whole response time argument is a little bit misleading.

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 1:44 PM. Reason : ha]

1/1/2013 1:43:37 PM

Quote :

"And saying "1% of guns are ever used in crimes" is a misleading scientific factoids that people love to use to court science."

Bullshit. If the gun, itself, is evil, and it causes all sorts of problems as you suggest, then we should see much higher incidence of crime related to it, not just "less than 1%". You can't come in here with your "court science" bullshit statement and get away with it. Truly, if guns are terrible, then anywhere there is a gun, there should be tons of problems, yet we see that simply isn't the case.

Quote :

"It is also largely irrelevant because in that argument you are quantifying the value of 1 death, which is in itself vile."

Then, LIKE I SAID, cars should be banned.

Quote :

"Stop. Fucking. With. Science."

hahaha. This is all you got left when someone throws your emotional rhetoric back in your face with worse numbers. "STOP FUCKING WITH SCIENCE, MAN!!! it hurts my feelings!!!"

Quote :

"My scenario is getting your wallet stolen and pushed to the gorund/scuffed up which does happen unfortunately. Guns don't really solve that problem as much as they do escalate an already dangerous situation."

Except, of course, the numerous cases every fucking day where they DO help, namely by people brandishing a gun and the criminal punk realizing he no longer has a soft target. What you propose only makes people MORE defenseless and criminals more brazen.

Quote :

"Let's just put this way: I don't want a gun on me and don't want one in my house because I would rather someone take my wallet or a couple possession over me starting a gun fight because I pulled my gun out. "

Fine. You go be a sitting duck. Don't take MY right to an actual defense of my person away from me just to make YOU feel better.

Quote :

"Would the gun nuts in here be okay with a FOID system where you need an ID to purchase guns and ammo?"

Only if you're also OK with needing an ID to vote.

Quote :

"The whole response time argument is a little bit misleading."

Except, it's not. If the police can't get there in time to save you, and 99999 times out of 100000 they can't, then they might as well not exist in terms of them protecting you at that moment.

1/1/2013 1:58:11 PM

Saying crimes is pretty broad, that is what I was getting at. It is very misleading.

1/1/2013 2:20:32 PM

I don't know why any of you engage aaronburro

1/1/2013 2:28:24 PM

Quote :

"hahaha. This is all you got left when someone throws your emotional rhetoric back in your face with worse numbers. "STOP FUCKING WITH SCIENCE, MAN!!! it hurts my feelings!!!""

If you want to talk about real numbers, talk about the per capita gun violence in the USA vs. UK, or just violent in general between the two. And again, what is your value of 1 death?

Quote :

"Then, LIKE I SAID, cars should be banned."

So are you just gonna ignore everything that I accurately said about this comparison? Yes ofcourse, because you are on an agenda/x


[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 2:31 PM. Reason : x]

1/1/2013 2:30:30 PM

a value is put on our lives every day by corporations. your life is worth whatever it would cost to settle a wrongful death dispute out of court.

1/1/2013 2:34:13 PM

Quote :

"The whole response time argument is a little bit misleading."

Do explain. If someone breaks into your house and intends to do you and your family harm do you think that the police will respond in time to save you?

1/1/2013 2:48:40 PM

guns will pass cars as causes of death within the next 48 months

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-19/american-gun-deaths-to-exceed-traffic-fatalities-by-2015.html

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 3:08 PM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 3:08:41 PM

^^ Ahem, just because they don't show up instantly does not meant that they have no influence.

1/1/2013 3:10:36 PM

^dumbass. police with guns don't provide deterrence to crime. only untrained individuals do

Quote :

" You want more restrictions on us that are similar to those on LEOs when many of us far exceed those and ALL ccw holders set an example for the US as far as behavior goes as one of the absolute lowest groups likely to commit serious crimes"

again "many" isn't good enough. not for me. and if you really care, it shouldn;t be for you either. your CCW vs. LEO canard is pure bullshit.

not to mention the fact that, at best, CCW makes up about 17% (at best, assuming CCW permits are 1:1 with HH's that have weapons) of all gun owners out there. so not only does your little cherry-picked demographic not have to live up to the standards, they make up an OVERWHELMING minority of gun HH's out there


[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 3:17 PM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 3:11:39 PM

Quote :

"^^ Ahem, just because they don't show up instantly does not meant that they have no influence."

Perhaps you missed it the first time...

Quote :

"If someone breaks into your house and intends to do you and your family harm do you think that the police will respond in time to save you?"

1/1/2013 3:20:11 PM

if someone wants do you harm...like they want to murder you or rape your wife...and not just rob you, do you really think the fact that there might be a .22 next to the bed is going to change their mind?

there are hundreds of millions of guns in the country right now, and this shit still happens. it's not going to turn into mad max if we start putting tighter controls on guns

what city has the lowest violent crime rate? NYC, Houston, or Dallas? now which 2 have the most CCW's and guns

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 3:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 3:22:29 PM

Is George Zimmerman still walking around town?

1/1/2013 3:31:24 PM

Quote :

"again "many" isn't good enough. not for me. and if you really care, it shouldn;t be for you either. your CCW vs. LEO canard is pure bullshit. "

No, your "we should have restrictions similar to LEOs" is what's pure bullshit. I'm pointing out that you don't even know what you're arguing. You want us to have restrictions and training that equals something you view as good when you don't even know what that training and those restrictions are! You want to hold up LEOs as a shining example of what should be when they're already surpassed by a large minority of gun owners. People like you are the problem with the whole "gun control" issue. You want to make arguments that you think sound good when you don't actually know what you're talking about. People like you are the reason the NYPD has to use 12lb triggers in their duty weapons to make everyone safer when it does just the opposite and makes it harder for the officers you put on a pedestal to accurately use their weapons when needed so we end up with innocent civilians shot along with the criminal like happened earlier this year. If you don't know what you're talking about then just shut up until you can intelligently discuss the issue at hand instead of resorting to feel good crap that doesn't help anyone and only puts more lives in danger.

1/1/2013 3:47:25 PM

LOL at "large minority" - CCW's are nowhere near a "large minority." and even if you want to call 17% a "large minority" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION they aren't all REQUIRED to have training like LEO and military

take a look at, for example, the State of Washington's CCW requirements:

http://www.dol.wa.gov/business/firearms/faconcealreq.html

ok, you back now? now, please copy and past the text that refers to a CCW permit REQUIREMENT for training

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 3:58 PM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 3:57:04 PM

Quote :

"if someone wants do you harm...like they want to murder you or rape your wife...and not just rob you, do you really think the fact that there might be a .22 next to the bed is going to change their mind?"

When they have two in the chest and one in the head I think that sure would help to prevent that from happening. And I wouldn't use a .22 for home defense either

But you are right, if someone wants to rape my wife or murder us, I would rather just be unarmed and let it happen.

1/1/2013 3:58:33 PM

Quote :

"if someone wants do you harm...like they want to murder you or rape your wife...and not just rob you, do you really think the fact that there might be a .22 next to the bed is going to change their mind?"

No but a 9mm slug in their chest stands a good chance of changing their minds. Here we go again with the evil inanimate object. The gun doesn't do anything by itself. You don't keep it on the nightstand so it can jump up and save you in the middle of the night.

1/1/2013 3:59:14 PM

how about you answer my NYC/Dallas/Houston question and then apply ^, and ^^ to the result

1/1/2013 4:00:09 PM

Quote :

"When they have two in the chest and one in the head I think that sure would help to prevent that from happening. And I wouldn't use a .22 for home defense either"

Tough guy, here. Odds are, you'd fumble your goddamn gun the moment you realized what was happening, and then accidentally shoot your dog.

I seriously doubt you'd act out your Charles Bronson fantasy.

1/1/2013 4:07:00 PM

Quote :

"LOL at "large minority" - CCW's are nowhere near a "large minority." and even if you want to call 17% a "large minority" BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION they aren't all REQUIRED to have training like LEO and military"

You're right, we should use the police as an example. You can pass a basic mental evaluation? Check. Qualify once or twice a year on a very easy range test? Ok. Automatic disqualification if you have a criminal record? Don't worry, of course not! Rate of felonies committed higher than many of the very people you want to deny rights? Yep!

Damn man, you are really great at this. Please continue to completely ignore my point because you obviously know what you're talking about. Lets completely ignore that, in reality, most LEOs couldn't shoot their way out of a box, are more likely to commit crime, have very basic background test that's pretty much no different than what's required for gun owners already (and may actually be easier, I know one cop that couldn't get a ccw but had no problem getting a job), and who face a mental evaluation that basically makes sure they don't grin when asked if they think they could shoot someone. Solid argument man. Solid.

1/1/2013 4:22:06 PM

Can someone post the support behind the claim that CCW carriers commit fewer crimes/felonies (it's been stated both ways) than LEOs

I want to see the qualifiers to this claim

1/1/2013 4:29:52 PM

See, this is the escalation of violence that I am talking about. Nobody here needs to get shot over a shoving match in a pizza shop.
http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/michael-jock-pizza-shop-shooting-case-randall-white-shot-during-little-caesars-pizza-shop-argument

Quote :

"t. Petersburg police say 52-year-old Michael Jock was waiting in line at a Little Caesars on Sunday when another customer, 49-year-old Randall White, began complaining about the slow service. The men exchanged words, which turned into a shoving match. The Tampa Bay Times reports that Jock pulled a revolver and shot White in the lower torso. The two struggled and White was shot a second time."

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 4:37 PM. Reason : j]

1/1/2013 4:37:21 PM

^^Of course we'll just be one sided here... To counter your escalation, how about lives saved?

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=20161608&title=man-buys-knife-stabs-2-at-salt-lake-city-store&s_cid=featured-4

Quote :

"According to a witness, it appears one man was stabbed in the side of the head and another was stabbed in the stomach. The exact condition of the victims is unknown, but police believe the injuries are very serious and possibly critical. Police say a bystander with a concealed carry permit witnessed the attack and stepped in to keep it from escalating. "(The bystander) was suspicious of what might be going on, and when he saw the stabbing, he just drew his pistol and challenged the individual," which caused the alleged attacker to lie down on the ground, said Salt Lake City Police Lt. Brian Purvis. "

1/1/2013 5:49:17 PM

Quote :

"how about you answer my NYC/Dallas/Houston question"

1/1/2013 6:18:03 PM

Texas has an overall crime rate higher than the US average (including property crime). If you expect violent crime to be lower, you're a moron. But while we're at it, since these stats mean so much to you, explain Chicago. They've all but banned guns but their violent crime rate is nearly 3x the national average.

1/1/2013 7:08:44 PM

hey look, you still won't address the NYC part of the equation. not at all surprised.

are guns outlawed in philly? they have a higher murder and violent crime rate than chicago. i live near baltimore. they have a pretty high murder rate and violent crime rate. are guns "all but banned" in baltimore?

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 8:24 PM. Reason : .]

1/1/2013 7:59:20 PM

^ what point do you want to make about NYC? I'm on an ipad so I'm not doing a bunch of searching to try to figure out what your bullshit argument is.

And why'd you edit out the "you're full of shit statement"? Realize that your own numbers show the utopia of Chicago is more violent than the US despite a gun ban?

As for Baltimore, again, what's your point? Chicago shows that your ideal doesn't work. Do we need to talk about the town in Georgia that has a law requiring a gun in every household that has virtually no crime?

The problem is PEOPLE, not guns or gun owners. When you get that through your thick skull, we can start to work on the problem.

1/1/2013 8:31:39 PM

Per capita firearm murder rate of Illinois is much lower than that of NC

1/1/2013 8:43:20 PM

I'd say NYC is an outstanding example of what gentrification does to inner-city violence.

What do all the most-dangerous cities have most in common-- gun laws, or being shit holes?

Rhetorical question: what percentage of inner-city murders are perpetrated by people in legal possession of their firearm?

[Edited on January 1, 2013 at 8:53 PM. Reason : ]

1/1/2013 8:50:56 PM