Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LeoLeonardoIII]

The next seemingly innocent, pram pushing new mother on the street could really be a COLD BLOODED MURDERER!!! BETTER SHOOT THEM BEFORE THEY KILL YOU.

I cannot say what I think of that statement, or you.

I agree with the fact that you have the right to defend yourself if you life is put at risk. I disagree that home invasion alone suffice to justify such a reaction. At least evidence that the robber is bearing weapon is needed. Else you're being selfish. i's not because somebody is doing something illegal that he loose all its right. Even if it put you in a dangerous situation.

K, send me an address, I'll send someone to your house to take your shit.

Seriously, it's very easy to grandstand and act morally superior until you're in the situation yourself.

This.

I've never been attacked and that's why I pro gun regulation.
I've never been robbed and that's why I'm considerate about robber.
I've never lost anyone important and that's why I'm an atheist.
You've watched fox news too much and that's why you use this kind of argument.

Phmcw, I will address these in order of appearance rather than in order of ridiculousness.

1: Gun regulation doesn't keep a criminal from shooting you. It keeps you from shooting back. Criminals get their guns illegally - they are, after all, criminals. Gun regulation also makes you weak so your government has no reason to fear you. A healthy, powerful, informed citizen demands good things from his government, and gets them. A sick, weak, ignorant citizen gets the opposite. It is in the interests of the people that their government fears and respects them.

2: I suppose your ideas would be different if you had been robbed then? So your issue seems to be that until you personally experience hardship, you don't care about it, and you don't care about other victims. Preparing for disaster is a good thing. Burying your head in the sand is not.

3: So you'll believe in religion when it has something to give you - comfort, in this case. That's not really belief or faith. It's just desire for community. It sounds like you'll be an atheist regardless.

4: Fox News is pretty bad. I can't stand watching it, I will actually get up and leave the room rather than listen to that ignorant propaganda. I sure wish we had more real journalists ...

[Phmcw]

1) False, it make sure that every criminal have a gun, make anyone with an anger management problem ten time more dangerous, make good guns readily available. If you're taken hostage in a bank robbery , you won't have your gun and it will be useless.
In home invasion, sure you will have your gun. In a safe. Because else you've just increased a lot the risk of domestic accident and not much anything else.

To end endless stream of argument compare number of violent death by inhabitant in country with and without gun.

2) Irony, it was Irony.

3) Ditto

[LeoLeonardoIII]

The US has a lot of gun-related deaths, sure. Way way beyond other countries'. It's pretty crazy. But we also have a lot of other violent crimes. And taking away the guns owned by law-abiding folks isn't going to stop gun-related crimes. It's just as likely that its a problem with America, rather than a problem with legal gun ownership.

You give two specific examples of places where a gun wouldn't be much help. But then there's the other 99.9% of the town a person lives in.

Regardless, off topic. Whether you off the burglar by shooting him or by smashing him with your bedside lamp. It seems like a sitcom, like Seinfeld or something, to just stand there and watch a guy wander through your house.

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I got up, you know, and turned on a light. But the burglar said his eyes were really sensitive, so I turned it off. And then he asked me to help him move my TV downstairs to his van.
Jerry: Oh come on, you didn't help him did you?
Kramer: What was I supposed to do Jerry?! He said he had a bad back!

EDIT: Austria, as an example, allows anyone to own a shotgun without a permit. Austria has 3.7 gun deaths per 100,000 compared to the US 14.24. This is just one example, but I might not have the best sources.

[Virex]

Regardless, off topic. Whether you off the burglar by shooting him or by smashing him with your bedside lamp. It seems like a sitcom, like Seinfeld or something, to just stand there and watch a guy wander through your house.

I already sugested using a taser to circumvent that problem

I'd actualy prefere someone using an improvised weapon because, you know, guns are made to kill, not to knock people out. You might kill someone with the bedside lamp, but the odds are far greater if you use a gun. I don't have a problem with using weapons in self-defence, but using weapons that are specificly meant to kill (guns) instead of weapons that are used to disable (pepper spray) doesn't sit right with me.

[Phmcw]

It would likely go as :

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I got up, you know, and turned on a light. He saw I was there and ran off.

which is way better then

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I woke up, shot him, and you know what? It was my son, coming home drunk. Too bad he died.

of course it could go

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I got up, you know, and turned on a light but he had a gun. So he held my at gunpoint while his friend stripped my house of anything valuable.

but with a gun it could also happen, not mentioning the fact that you can get killed while trying to get your gun, or otherwise in the shooting.

Of course he may also come to rape and murder you... just, it's not likely. At all.

Also what Virex say, which is also true the other way around, here tugs are more likely to bring a knife than a gun.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Regardless, off topic. Whether you off the burglar by shooting him or by smashing him with your bedside lamp. It seems like a sitcom, like Seinfeld or something, to just stand there and watch a guy wander through your house.

I already sugested using a taser to circumvent that problem

Strangely, a lot of weapons are illegal where I live in WA state US. For example, in my town it's illegal to even own a slingshot. You can't have a knife over 3.5 inches unless it's in your house (or, for one exception, if you have a hunting etc license and you're on a hunting trip). You can't own brass knuckles. The list is enormous and actually includes a category that counts it as a weapon if it has the potential for deadly harm.

Good gravy, a skillet has potential for deadly harm. And they let you buy such dangerous weapons in a department store!

We talk big about the right to bear arms. But really it's the right to bear a loud, non-automatic pistol using allowed ammo types, except in a lot of places where it's illegal to have it. And you have a huge waiting period and you have to register it and pay a bunch of fees.

Compared to the guns that exist, that is an already-hideous level of weapons control. Any more and you might as well cross out the appropriate part of our Constitution.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

It would likely go as :

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I got up, you know, and turned on a light. He saw I was there and ran off.

which is way better then

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I woke up, shot him, and you know what? It was my son, coming home drunk. Too bad he died.

of course it could go

Kramer: So this guy broke in to my apartment last night.
Jerry: Oh? (Doesn't really care much)
Kramer: Yeah, he just kicked in the door and walked in, and started going through my drawers.
Jerry: You didn't do anything?
Kramer: Well I got up, you know, and turned on a light but he had a gun. So he held my at gunpoint while his friend stripped my house of anything valuable.

but with a gun it could also happen, not mentioning the fact that you can get killed while trying to get your gun, or otherwise in the shooting.

Of course he may also come to rape and murder you... just, it's not likely. At all.

Also what Virex say, which is also true the other way around, here tugs are more likely to bring a knife than a gun.

So you're okay with getting stabbed?

Life is not the same in every neighborhood. And I laughed when I read your description of the burglar running out because you turned on a light. Please link me to a single story online where that happened. I have to say that's a ridiculous criminal.

And I don't care about the chances of success or not: I can't just sit there while someone robs me.

I have to ask, are you specifically a pacifist? Because I just don't understand what your ethical basis is for this. It sounds like "the value of human life is great enough that I would rather be killed than kill in my own defense." Is that wrong? I think you greatly underestimate how violent criminals can be, even where you live.

[Virex]

There's a difference between not interfering with a burglar and not interfering with a murderer. If they're after your guts, you'd bet anyone will either fight or flee, depending on situation and preference. Nobody would stand idily. In the case of theft, it's a bit of a gamble. Agitating the robber might provoke a violent reaction, but threathning him might also detter him. It can go either way. Some thiefs will let you go unharmed if you don't pose a treath, but try to kill you if you reach for a weapon and for others it may be the other way around. And then there's still the chance that the thief gets a hold of your gun before you do, in which case you've probably got an agitated thief and no weapon left...

[LeoLeonardoIII]

I think this isn't going anywhere. I forgot for a moment that nobody changes each others' minds through this sort of thing.

Phmcw has a different set of values than I do.

Guy breaks into my house at night, it all ends in tears. My conscience has no room for feeling sorry about that kind of BS.

I do agree that the people who keep a gun under their pillow are pretty crazy, and they're just as likely to blow away Cute Little Jimmy as some burglar. Armed with an at-hand melee weapon, or just unarmed, you have that extra moment to not hit with all you've got.

Hopefully that's enough.

It has to be.

[Phmcw]

I wasn't only arguing about moral sense, but also about efficiency. Firearm make a terrible response to a burglary.

For ethics : I didn't know robbery specifically associated thieving and violence, I just checked wikipedia, of course then firearm may be useful in a robbery.
Still I would prefer a solution with no death and a few buck lost, even I am put at risk, then one with a death, should it be him or me. Of course rather him then me.

So Personal possession and safety<burglar life<my or anyone else life.
 
For firearm, assuming you have relative living with you, especially if some of them are young, you cannot be a)safe from them and b) in position to use them if need be.
Any other question on the subject can be usefully answered by statistics (of course gun regulation are useless if there is a lot of gun in the country in the first place (cue Mexico). A "gun regulation now" law would simply fail. Maybe only allowing .22 long?
Right now yours laws seems crazy, I was astonished to see that there was a civilian version on the f2000, the P90 and the  five seven for instance. Designed in my country, sorry.)

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Also, check this out. Handgun bullets are easily able to penetrate several layers of drywall (a couple of interior walls), and a rifle or shotgun slug can get through a dozen and keep going.

In fact he has an "elephant gun" with a really large caliber bullet and a lot of propellant, and it blew through 12 drywall sheets, a half inch of wood, and busted the bricks behind it.

So yeah, a bedside gun is pretty dangerous to everyone in the house.

[Grakelin]

On the other hand, certain handguns have trouble penetrating raincoats.

[hemmingjay]

deleted

[Grakelin]

Took you 12 years of experience to tell us to lock our doors and put bars on the window, eh?

[hemmingjay]

Yes. It's not what to do, but rather why to do it.