The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Home Base

Home Base A starting point, and place for threads don't seem to belong anywhere else

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-09-2007, 11:02 PM   #196
xoxoxoBruce
The future is unwritten
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post
Good of you to pluck one incident to point out. But big picture facts indicate that the US has 27 times more firearm murders than the UK, where firearms are illegal. Coincidence? I think not.
My point is outlawing guns in Britain didn't make them go away.
Quote:
The question really is this: is it worth giving up firearms to reduce the murder rate by two-thirds? Notice, I said giving up, not have them taken from you.
No.:p
I am not the problem or the solution.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.
xoxoxoBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 02:32 AM   #197
Urbane Guerrilla
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 6,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post
Monster has a good point. In terms of the number of deaths, there would be a wash, at best. For instance, if Bruce was in a fender bender with Maggie, and got out of his car and approached Maggie, and she was the only one armed, she might feel threatened and shoot Bruce. Or if Bruce was the only one armed, he might shoot her. Either way, there's only one dead body. The shooter would have all the time in the world to shoot, and probably wouldn't miss. If both were armed, they could rush their shots, and shoot innocent bystanders, or they could both hit their targets and kill each other. It's much more likely to have a higher body count.
This entire scenario has been utterly, completely debunked in all 38 states of the Union that have strongly liberalized concealed carry of weapons, Spexx. It simply does not happen, and is a hoplophobic fantasy of yours brought on by your unbalanced thinking on the subject -- as set forth in Raging Against Self Defense. I'll rely more on the experience of 38 states, with the body count and the economic loss count to crime going permanently down, than on the views of one hoplophobe. You should rely upon that yourself -- even if you're terrified of what this might open a trapdoor to, inside your forebrain.

We know the truth, and it has made us free. But if you can't know the truth, it shan't make you free. I think I'd want to be free of what afflicts you, though, if I stood in your shoes. You're really being creepy, Spexx.

Guess I'd better link to Raging Against Self Defense to show people what I'm on about.
__________________
Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.

Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 02-10-2007 at 02:41 AM.
Urbane Guerrilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 02:37 AM   #198
Urbane Guerrilla
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 6,674
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post

The question really is this: is it worth giving up firearms to reduce the murder rate by two-thirds? Notice, I said giving up, not have them taken from you.
You mean volunteer for genocide, and extra crime, the only results ever seen from this kind of thing. Spexx, even with your twisted values, it's not worth it even for you.

This idea we moral people reject forever and ever. If you wish to be a moral person, you must reject it forever also. Do it, man! No matter how much it scares you, I guarantee disarming yourself so you get killed without means of resisting it, retail as in crime or wholesale as in genocide, is much more terrifying, much more the pit of despair.
__________________
Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course.
Urbane Guerrilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 04:45 AM   #199
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
I don't think anyone could possibly disagree, though, that someone with NO guns is less likely to shoot me than someone with any.

Right?
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 08:32 AM   #200
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Right but wholly irrelevant.

A) The world cannot be sterilized from danger, nor would you want to live in such a place. But more importantly,

B) I caution, resist the urge to solve politics with equations. It seems like it would work that way sometimes, but math is perfect and humans are imperfect.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 08:33 AM   #201
Clodfobble
UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 20,012
In exactly the same way that someone with no hands is less likely to shoot you than someone with any. Fantasy-land scenarios are a waste of time.
Clodfobble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:26 AM   #202
lisa
Etherial
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkzenrage View Post
I keep bringing this up, I wonder if you read all the posts or don't think of it yourself.
Making a gun of your own, or for others is quite simple.
I get the impression that you think that if you outlaw something it will just go away.
Many of the guns that are used by gangs in the US come from China along with their drugs. The laws would only harm those who are law abiding citizens, making them criminals... they would accomplish nothing else.
This reminds me of an "old" joke, which I tell for the humor and not at all as part of the debate:

Q: How many gun control proponents does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: None. They just pass a law against darkness.
lisa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:32 AM   #203
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clodfobble View Post
In exactly the same way that someone with no hands is less likely to shoot you than someone with any. Fantasy-land scenarios are a waste of time.
Isn't it a fantasy-land scenario that you'll have a gun and be able to use it to stop personal injury or loss of posessions? For that to happen, you would have to have your gun with you, loaded, safety off, at the ready, and anticipate the threat, be able to correctly determine if the threat is real (don't want to make a victim out of an innocent person), be able to aim and hit a target, and have the willingness to kill and face the consequences of killing - all before the aggressor does it to you first.
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:33 AM   #204
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
I wonder how many American thought, in 1860, that slavery could be eliminated?
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:48 AM   #205
Jordan
Sibling of the Commonweal
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16
The factof the matter is that firearms are here to stay. There is no way of hunting down each and every criminal and taking away their weapons. Do you truly believe that our law enforcement is capable of rounding up every gun that every criminal currently has, and then keeping new ones from being smuggled in? If that were the case then no country would have a drug problem either.

Keep in mind, I'm not advocating the use of firearms. As far as I'm concerned, they serve no purpose beyond killing. I'm a gun RIGHTS advocate, I believe that you have the right to defend what is yours within reason. If someone breaks into my apt and goes after me, my girlfriends, or Kait, we should have the right and ability to protect ourselves.
Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 09:50 AM   #206
Jordan
Sibling of the Commonweal
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16
Sorry, not a fantasy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post
Isn't it a fantasy-land scenario that you'll have a gun and be able to use it to stop personal injury or loss of posessions? For that to happen, you would have to have your gun with you, loaded, safety off, at the ready, and anticipate the threat, be able to correctly determine if the threat is real (don't want to make a victim out of an innocent person), be able to aim and hit a target, and have the willingness to kill and face the consequences of killing - all before the aggressor does it to you first.
I was in just that situation 1 1/2 years ago and the story's here
Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 10:04 AM   #207
Clodfobble
UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 20,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet
Isn't it a fantasy-land scenario that you'll have a gun and be able to use it to stop personal injury or loss of posessions?
There have already been several firsthand accounts of that exact thing here. How many do you need?
Clodfobble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 10:54 AM   #208
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clodfobble View Post
There have already been several firsthand accounts of that exact thing here. How many do you need?
How many do you need to justify all the shooting deaths? Philadelphia averaged more than a shooting death a day last year. How many lives does it take to justify foiling the theft attempts of Mrnoodle's sound equipment, Kitsune's car, and Jordan's generator?
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 11:30 AM   #209
Jordan
Sibling of the Commonweal
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16
I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it.

Tell me, do you ever gamble? That's what criminals do, they know that they run the risk of getting shot and/or going to jail for doing something illegal... then they go out and commit the crime anyways. They willfully break the law, and the police can't be everywhere at once. Now you're saying we eliminate half of their risks? I just don't think so. Why should I work my butt off for a generator I may only use ever once 2-3yrs only to have a crook waltz off with it?

Not far from where I grew up they fire off guns for a birthday, Independence Day, New Years, sporting events and occasionally at one another. Are you saying that I should give up my defensive tools and allow others to prowl the streets with their firearms at the ready? Nopers, not gonna happen.
__________________
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Jordan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2007, 12:47 PM   #210
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
...
Tell me, do you ever gamble?
I don't gamble with my life or my family's life. I think owning a gun is taking a gamble. Will a child get hold of it? Will there be an accidental discharge that kills someone? Will I misjudge a situation, and kill an innocent person? Will my brandishing a gun cause someone to kill me before I can kill them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
... Now you're saying we eliminate half of their risks?
No. My position is about handguns. Can you protect yourself and your family with a rifle or shotgun?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
... Why should I work my butt off for a generator I may only use ever once 2-3yrs only to have a crook waltz off with it?
Would you have killed someone - taken a life - over a generator that you use once every 2-3 years?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
... Are you saying that I should give up my defensive tools
No. There are plenty of defensive tools. Motion lights, alarms, tasers, bullet-proof vests, and all kinds of behavior. Most of them can't be used to commit crimes or hurt others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan View Post
... and allow others to prowl the streets with their firearms at the ready? ...
No. I disagree that handguns would be around long, if it's handled properly. Just by enforcing or strengthening current laws, for instance a mandatory life sentence for using a handgun to commit a crime or for irresponsible use of a handgun, those who misuse handguns will be out of circulation pretty quickly. If they switch to rifles, they'll be more identifiable. I know there will be exceptions to these rules, but guns will go away the same way cigarette smoking is going away.

Listen, you can pack a piece, and protect your family while they are with you. Other gun owners may not be as responsible as you. If your child's classmate gets a hold of his father's gun, brings it to school and shoots your child, the gun in your pocket didn't help. If someone breaks into a house and steals guns, and shoots you pre-emptively while they're stealing your generator, your gun didn't help. If you get raped in a parking lot because your gun is locked in your gun safe at home, it didn't help. But, because you reserve the right to own a gun, others have guns, and can use them to commit crimes, and have lethal accidents. Is it worth it?
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.