Guns used for lawful self defense Pt. 4

[FBM]

In just about every debate I've seen - especially about guns - the most vocal and least rational from each extreme of the issue dominate the discussion with rhetoric and diatribes, while the more rational voices get shouted down from each side for not being extreme enough. Kinda makes it discouraging to try to interject reason into the war of rhetoric.

[charlou]

Yeah, so?

There is enough good data to quote, based on official statistics and academic studies, without having to weaken our arguments by quoting bullshit anecdotes.

But where's the emotive manipulation and leverage in that?

[charlou]

In just about every debate I've seen - especially about guns - the most vocal and least rational from each extreme of the issue dominate the discussion with rhetoric and diatribes, while the more rational voices get shouted down from each side for not being extreme enough. Kinda makes it discouraging to try to interject reason into the war of rhetoric.

Seems so, from what I've seen on discussion sites. I wonder how this debate is conducted on an actual policy proposal and decision making level, in that case?

[Seth]

And yet you can't stop yourself from replying to them.

Very true.

The reason I partake in these debates is mostly for my own amusement. That goal is regularly achieved. I even get to do quite a bit of laughing at the ridiculous things said by the less rational posters.

Um...so do we, in regard to the bum custard you post.

[Seth]

What a twat.

How come they are ALWAYS twats?

I think if you choose to carry a gun, and shoot an innocent person, you should be shot yourself. Only fair.

Generally you end up in prison for doing so, which is why we're very, very careful about whom we shoot and why, as evidenced by the extremely low numbers of permitees who are charged with ANY sort of crime, much less a gun-involved crime.

[Seth]

I started to watch that video, but stopped when I saw it was the Cato Institute. I have encountered them before, and they are to the right of Attila the Hun! It is impossible to get a balanced opinion from that mob.

Well, that's a refreshing admission that you've stuck your head firmly up your ass and are refusing to even look at anything that might refute your asinine arguments. Thanks for that. Your intellectual dishonesty is noted for the record.

[Seth]

Gallstones, you totally missed the point of my post. I well know that extremists such as yourself wish their selfish infatuation with owning guns to override any rational restrictions that your own community may wish to impose.

My point was to demonstrate that Mr Johnno's "all or nothing" approach was absurd, and that there will be many Americans seeking a more nuanced view of gun ownership than absolute freedom versus abolition.

You are in an angry little minority.

No, we're an angry, and armed, majority. That makes your opinion on the matter so much bum custard because you haven't the ability to bring your opinions to fruition because, of course, you have no arms with which to enforce it. That makes you a slave to anyone who is armed, criminal or otherwise. Enjoy your slavery...as long as you can. Someday you may regret willingly locking those fetters on your wrists and ankles. And if that happens, I'll be laughing my ass off as I clean my many firearms and stack my thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Just got back from the Big Sandy machine gun shoot in Arizona. What a blast, literally. More than 2500 pounds of binary explosive targets set off, and a firing line a quarter of a mile long. What a great weekend!

Too bad you'll never experience it...all those people armed with machine guns and not one single person got robbed, raped or shot.

How is that possible under your loony rationalization pray tell?

[Blind groper]

Well, that's a refreshing admission that you've stuck your head firmly up your ass and are refusing to even look at anything that might refute your asinine arguments. Thanks for that. Your intellectual dishonesty is noted for the record.

Not an unexpected opinion.

Not only is the Cato Institute a right wing extremist group, but you, Seth, appear to be even more right wing than they are. A marriage made in heaven.

all those people armed with machine guns and not one single person got robbed, raped or shot.

As I have pointed out before, the real problem is hand guns, not machine guns. Hand guns are the weapon of choice for most homicides in the USA.

[Seth]

I would also like to point out that laws mean diddly squat when they can be broken.

Yo, Einstein, we've been telling you exactly that for months. Derp.

Banning criminals and the mentally unsound from bearing guns means absolutely nothing when hand guns are sold, without background checks, through any outlet that can call itself 'second-hand'.

False statement. It's unlawful for anyone engaged in commerce in firearms to sell a handgun (or a rifle or shotgun or any other firearm) without holding a Federal Firearms License and completing a NICS background check on EVERY transaction. You're either a liar or a dunce. I favor the former since I know you've been educated on this point many times.

This is the real problem. It is the simple fact that anyone, and I mean anyone, with a few dollars, can get a hand gun and ammunition in the USA. End result is 8,000 hand gun homicides each year.

So can anyone in the UK, or NZ, or anywhere else on the planet, if they choose to do so illegally. So what? That just supports the notion that law-abiding citizens need access to arms parity with criminals, since there's is absolutely no way to keep criminals from obtaining firearms if they really wish to do so...even where you live.

Gallstones calls what we are referring to, a 'pacifist fantasy.' It is no fantasy. In the 24 richest nations on this planet, that 'pacifist fantasy' exists on 23 of them. Only in the USA, with its crazy second amendment, and insane gun culture, is there a major, big time, problem with hand guns and hand gun homicides.

Is your gun crime rate non-zero? Yes it is. Is your violent crime rate non-zero? Yes, it is. Gun bans don't eliminate gun crime or reduce violent crime. Only armed citizens defending themselves does that. Of course you don't care how many people are victimized by violent criminals so long as they are rendered helpless against them on the asinine theory that if victims don't have defensive weapons (even OC spray) criminals won't harm them, which is patently false everywhere on earth.

I'll stick with arming myself and taking responsibility for my own safety thanks. You can wear your chains for as long as you like.

[Seth]

Well, that's a refreshing admission that you've stuck your head firmly up your ass and are refusing to even look at anything that might refute your asinine arguments. Thanks for that. Your intellectual dishonesty is noted for the record.

Not an unexpected opinion.

Not only is the Cato Institute a right wing extremist group, but you, Seth, appear to be even more right wing than they are. A marriage made in heaven.

all those people armed with machine guns and not one single person got robbed, raped or shot.

As I have pointed out before, the real problem is hand guns, not machine guns. Hand guns are the weapon of choice for most homicides in the USA.

Evasion. Besides, quite literally everybody there owns a handgun or ten, in addition to their machine guns, artillery pieces, bowling ball cannons and other destructive devices.

Your theory is proven false by this event alone. More guns, no crime. You lose.

[Seth]

I would also like to point out that laws mean diddly squat when they can be broken.

Banning criminals and the mentally unsound from bearing guns means absolutely nothing when hand guns are sold, without background checks, through any outlet that can call itself 'second-hand'.

This is the real problem. It is the simple fact that anyone, and I mean anyone, with a few dollars, can get a hand gun and ammunition in the USA. End result is 8,000 hand gun homicides each year.

Gallstones calls what we are referring to, a 'pacifist fantasy.' It is no fantasy. In the 24 richest nations on this planet, that 'pacifist fantasy' exists on 23 of them. Only in the USA, with its crazy second amendment, and insane gun culture, is there a major, big time, problem with hand guns and hand gun homicides.

You must be under the assumption that we Americans want to live in a less violent place, with more murders and more shooting. We'd rather carry guns! Big guns! Big guns that fire lots of bullets within seconds!!! Carrying guns is way more important than living in a safer environment where it's not necessary to carry guns!

As if such a thing is possible.

That's a delusional utopian fantasy, as all of human history has proven over and over again.

[Seth]

You refuse to acknowledge the most fundamental fact of your utopia--the police show up after the fact. They can only ever "shoot dead" someone threatening them.
It is too late for you and yours by the time LE gets there.

And you refuse to recognise that most people in 1st word live in countries where self defence is as relevant to their lives as winning the lottery. Normal mentally healthy people in a health society do not think about self defence (armed or unarmed)

No, only brainless idiots who think life is safe don't think about self defense. We call them "sheeple" because of their strong resemblance to the bleating herds of stupid animals that are easily slaughtered by nearly anything.

[Seth]

Gawdzilla,
You are right. Deep sigh.

I live in hope, that maybe the members of Rationalia can engage in rational discussion. I am a hopeless optimist.

No, you're a hopelessly biased and irrational debater who wouldn't know a rational debate from his asshole if his head was stuck in it. (his asshole, that is)

[rainbow]

You refuse to acknowledge the most fundamental fact of your utopia--the police show up after the fact. They can only ever "shoot dead" someone threatening them.
It is too late for you and yours by the time LE gets there.

And you refuse to recognise that most people in 1st word live in countries where self defence is as relevant to their lives as winning the lottery. Normal mentally healthy people in a health society do not think about self defence (armed or unarmed)

No, only brainless idiots who think life is safe don't think about self defense. We call them "sheeple" because of their strong resemblance to the bleating herds of stupid animals that are easily slaughtered by nearly anything.

Pink Floyd:

And when you loose control, you'll reap the harvest you have sown
And as the fear grows, the bad blood slows and turns to stone
And it's too late to loose the weight you used to need to throw around
So have a good drown, as you go down, all alone
Dragged down by the stone.
I gotta admit that I'm a little bit confused
Sometimes it seems to me as if I'm just being used
Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise
If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze?
Deaf, dumb, and blind, you just keep on pretending
That everyone's expendable and no-one has a real friend
And it seems to you the thing to do would be to isolate the winner
And everythings done under the sun
And you believe at heart, everyone's a killer.
Who was born in a house full of pain

[Blind groper]

It's unlawful for anyone engaged in commerce in firearms to sell a handgun (or a rifle or shotgun or any other firearm) without holding a Federal Firearms License and completing a NICS background check on EVERY transaction.

Totally incorrect.

http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaign ... ophole-faq

I quote :

"Unlicensed sellers are people who may sell a small or large amount of guns but do not (or are not supposed to) earn their livelihood from firearm sales. These sellers do not have to conduct criminal background checks on gun sales. Unlicensed sellers may sell guns at gun shows, out of their homes, or even over the Internet."

So can anyone in the UK, or NZ, or anywhere else on the planet, if they choose to do so illegally.

Sometimes this becomes possible, but not often. Most of the time, a criminal who wants a hand gun in my country has to do without. Ditto Australia, UK etc. Even illegal hand guns are few and far between in NZ. We get very, very few hand gun murders. Most firearms murders are with rifles or shotguns, which are available legally to those with a licence. In the USA, the situation is very different, with hand guns far more readily available, and a ridiculously high level of hand gun homicide.

since there's is absolutely no way to keep criminals from obtaining firearms if they really wish to do so...even where you live.

23 out of the 24 richest nations has shown that is is very possible to prevent the vast bulk of hand gun sales to criminals, by making hand guns illegal for everyone except the police. Hand gun murders in all those 23 nations are extremely rare. Only in the USA are hand gun murders common.

Gun bans don't eliminate gun crime or reduce violent crime.

No, but they reduce gun crime dramatically and reduce gun murder dramatically. You are correct in that such bans do not reduce violent crime. But a violent crime with no gun is much less likely to result in death or permanent disability.

On self defense.
The vast bulk of threats are able to be countered with non lethal methods. I have been twice threatened as an adult. I talked my way out both times. A gun was not needed, or wanted.

If you need more than the 'gift of the gab' to extricate yourself, then there are various non lethal self defense systems available, including acoustic alarms that generate such a piercing noise that no person can hang around, pepper sprays, and even tasers. All work very well, and all are normally non lethal.

A hand gun is unnecessary and more likely to result in the death of the wielder or a member of his/her family. Bearing in mind the statistics, that show clearly increased mortality among family members where a hand gun is owned by one of them, simply owning a hand gun is the mark of an idiot.