Recommended Posts
Richards 0
QuoteI question the intelligence of the belief that guns equal power. A citizen who believes his strength comes through the deadly weapon he carries, rather than through his common sense or his forethought, is a weak citizen indeed, and is easy prey. ("Hey! These victims come with their own handguns! Always wanted one of them.")
I do not totally disagree with you in that I feel most ugly situations can be avoided with a little forethought. I also agree that many people shut off their brain when they have the ability to defend themselves with force. That said, I have learned from experience that no matter how carefull you are you cannot completely avoid finding yourself in a potentially dangerous situation. I have on occasion while minding my own business (granted walking home from work late at night) found myself to be the target of thugs who had the urge to "Fuck this guy up" simply because I was there. In all of these situations I was able to get myself out of it through quick calm thinking (and once through quick running). I still felt in each situation that I was not in complete control of my fate...I had some influence but at the end of the day my walking away alive was not completely in my hands.
I have observed that many these thugs do understand the ability to apply force. When cornered, your perception that you are "intellectually above the need for violence" might not get you as far as you think. I deplore violence in all forms but I have personal experience that has taught me that sometimes turning the tables on such unsavoury characters can really influence the outcome of such an experience.
Richards
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
For the first time, I'm glad I live in a red state.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams
racer42 0
"Fair enough. I feel there is at least inferential evidence that most common criminals and thugs will vote for a more liberal style government. Granted some white collar corporate criminals will likely be conservative/republican voters."
I am not sure how many "Thugs and criminals " actually take the time to vote. Nor do I know who they would be inclined to vote for.
It's hard enough to get the regular "non thug and criminals" off their asses to vote.
I'm pretty sure that convicted felons are denied the right to vote as part of their of their punishment.
I'm also pretty sure that a concealed permit tends to open the carrier up to a higher level of responsibility and can lead to a more easily "actionable" prosecution if the carrier was mistaken in any way.
I am in agreement that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the citizenry from a hostile state.
Hence:
Amendment II
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.
Pretty staightforward stuff the Bill of Rights. Possibly the single most important piece of political philosophy ever written.
So you see while I may be a democrat( a blue dog at that) I have no problem with the law abiding responsible use of firearms.
Sometimes we "RED and "Blue" Americans share a lot more in common than we think.
I am not sure how many "Thugs and criminals " actually take the time to vote. Nor do I know who they would be inclined to vote for.
It's hard enough to get the regular "non thug and criminals" off their asses to vote.
I'm pretty sure that convicted felons are denied the right to vote as part of their of their punishment.
I'm also pretty sure that a concealed permit tends to open the carrier up to a higher level of responsibility and can lead to a more easily "actionable" prosecution if the carrier was mistaken in any way.
I am in agreement that the Second Amendment was intended to protect the citizenry from a hostile state.
Hence:
Amendment II
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.
Pretty staightforward stuff the Bill of Rights. Possibly the single most important piece of political philosophy ever written.
So you see while I may be a democrat( a blue dog at that) I have no problem with the law abiding responsible use of firearms.
Sometimes we "RED and "Blue" Americans share a lot more in common than we think.
L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>Surely you're not going to argue that Billvon without a gun has the
>same power as Billvon with a gun.
Right now I am safer _not_ carrying a gun, because the only defensive training I've had is in tae kwon do. (I've fired guns for fun, but never taken it seriously as a defensive art.) I've been mugged once, and I managed to throw him after a second or two. If I had had a gun? It would have done me no good when he grabbed me around the neck. And if he had found my gun first when he went for my wallet, I might have been looking down the barrel.
Now, if I had training in defensive use of a gun (i.e. how NOT to get in that situation) then I would likely be safer with a gun.
Similarly, if someone takes training in defense, they're going to be better off than someone without training - whether their weapon of choice is their feet, or a knife, or a gun. If they get a gun, fire it a few times and feel safe as a result, then they are walking targets - walking targets carrying a very valuable (and desireable to thieves) piece of hardware.
If a thief were to come upon myself, my friend Marc (who has a .38 he hasn't fired much) and my friend Gene, they would be well advised to go for Marc. Not only will it be easier, they will get a .38 for their trouble.
It's like anything else. If you get good training as a student, get a good feel first for using your altimeter, then judging altitude visually, then an AAD is a good backup. If you decide to skip AFF, not do any sort of formal training, and get an AAD to keep you alive - you're going to be less safe than someone who has gone through the program, and is now jumping without an AAD. In a very real sense, the false confidence that AAD gives you just might lead to your demise.
>same power as Billvon with a gun.
Right now I am safer _not_ carrying a gun, because the only defensive training I've had is in tae kwon do. (I've fired guns for fun, but never taken it seriously as a defensive art.) I've been mugged once, and I managed to throw him after a second or two. If I had had a gun? It would have done me no good when he grabbed me around the neck. And if he had found my gun first when he went for my wallet, I might have been looking down the barrel.
Now, if I had training in defensive use of a gun (i.e. how NOT to get in that situation) then I would likely be safer with a gun.
Similarly, if someone takes training in defense, they're going to be better off than someone without training - whether their weapon of choice is their feet, or a knife, or a gun. If they get a gun, fire it a few times and feel safe as a result, then they are walking targets - walking targets carrying a very valuable (and desireable to thieves) piece of hardware.
If a thief were to come upon myself, my friend Marc (who has a .38 he hasn't fired much) and my friend Gene, they would be well advised to go for Marc. Not only will it be easier, they will get a .38 for their trouble.
It's like anything else. If you get good training as a student, get a good feel first for using your altimeter, then judging altitude visually, then an AAD is a good backup. If you decide to skip AFF, not do any sort of formal training, and get an AAD to keep you alive - you're going to be less safe than someone who has gone through the program, and is now jumping without an AAD. In a very real sense, the false confidence that AAD gives you just might lead to your demise.
Quote
Similarly, if someone takes training in defense, they're going to be better off than someone without training - whether their weapon of choice is their feet, or a knife, or a gun. If they get a gun, fire it a few times and feel safe as a result, then they are walking targets - walking targets carrying a very valuable (and desireable to thieves) piece of hardware.
actually, pieces of hardware with a very real potential to kill the mugger. Even if 4 times out of 5, they get the money and the gun, the odds of dying over a few twenties and maybe another gun really don't justify the action. Criminals aren't that much dumber than average, and no one intentionally walks into a fair fight where the loser may end up dead.
And, btw, using a gun isn't rocket science. Or even close to skydiving.
craddock 0
I am not sure what you mean but you may want to update your profile. It shows you still live in Wisconsin where I lived for 30 years
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
kallend 1,623
QuoteQuote>I also question a government that wants it's citizens to be helpless.
I question the intelligence of the belief that guns equal power. A citizen who believes his strength comes through the deadly weapon he carries, rather than through his common sense or his forethought, is a weak citizen indeed, and is easy prey. ("Hey! These victims come with their own handguns! Always wanted one of them.")
Surely you're not going to argue that Billvon without a gun has the same power as Billvon with a gun.
I walk down the street unarmed, content with the knowledge that there is a lot of prey smaller than 6' 200lbs.
I have no knowledge of Billvon's gun skills, but I strongly suspect Billvon without a gun to be in far less peril than 75% of the population WITH guns.
I might add that I have worked for 29 years and lived for 4 years in close proximity to one of the most feared neighborhoods in the USA (the south side projects of Chicago), and have never been a victim, nor do I worry about becoming a victim.
I'd choose common sense (including street smarts) over a gun any time.
I can see why those lacking in common sense might entrust their safety to guns.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Richards 0
Quoteactually, pieces of hardware with a very real potential to kill the mugger. Even if 4 times out of 5, they get the money and the gun, the odds of dying over a few twenties and maybe another gun really don't justify the action. Criminals aren't that much dumber than average, and no one intentionally walks into a fair fight where the loser may end up dead.
Too true. Thugs are cowards who want a situation they are certain to dominate. There was a documentary on Bernard Goetz . For those who do not recall the name, he was the subway vigilante who shot four muggers who tried to rob him, and shot one of them as he tried to crawl away wounded saying "You look OK, heres another one"
No-one knew who the shooter was for a week before Goetz turned himself in with his lawyer present. All anyone knew was that someone out there was prepared to shoot back.
Anyway, one of the police inspectors involved in the case was being interviewed, and he said bluntly that during the week that Goetz was at large, there were almost no muggings/purse snatchings/violent assaults...etc. All the bad guys decided to stay at home that week. Once the guy who would shoot back was in police custody, the thugs went right back to business as usual. It's amazing how the threat of lead poisoning really does deflate the testicular fortitude of thugs who's courage is derived from being in a position of advantage.
Richards
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
Richards 0
QuoteI'd choose common sense (including street smarts) over a gun any time.
I can see why those lacking in common sense might entrust their safety to guns.
Why is this debate based on the premise that gun ownership and common sense have to be mutually exclusive. Can someone recognize that a gun can be usefull if all else goes wrong yet not forfeit all good judgement and prudence the instant they are carrying?
Richards
My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.
kallend 1,623
QuoteQuoteI'd choose common sense (including street smarts) over a gun any time.
I can see why those lacking in common sense might entrust their safety to guns.
Why is this debate based on the premise that gun ownership and common sense have to be mutually exclusive. Can someone recognize that a gun can be usefull if all else goes wrong yet not forfeit all good judgement and prudence the instant they are carrying?
Richards
There are typically some 600 "accidental" gun fatalities each year in the USA. Many more accidental injuries. One might claim that each of these represents an absence of common sense.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteI am not sure what you mean but you may want to update your profile. It shows you still live in Wisconsin where I lived for 30 years
On that map, the non-ccw states are red.
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams
billvon 2,400
>Even if 4 times out of 5, they get the money and the gun, the odds of
>dying over a few twenties and maybe another gun really don't justify the
>action.
Well, like I said before, had the three people I mentioned above been walking down the street, the risk/reward ratio would be lowest for the guy with the gun. And criminals, while not that smart, aren't so dumb as to ignore such things.
In a crowd (where I was attacked) a gun isn't all that useful. You're not going to pull a gun and fire into a crowd, and thieves know that. You're not going to pull a gun when someone grabs you around the neck (which is what happened with me) and fire blindly in the general direction of your neck. Indeed, if you do pull the gun at all, the guy's accomplice will be there to take it from you. Now thy have a gun and your wallet - and they're NOT afraid to fire into a crowd.
>And, btw, using a gun isn't rocket science.
Neither is skydiving. You jump out and pull your string, right?
Skydiiving is something that seems very easy at first. After someone has learned a bit more about it, they start to see how complex it is, how much you have to know about spotting, flying a canopy, moving your body, being aware of things in three dimensions etc.
Self defense is similar. Seems easy to pull a gun and shoot someone. I know just enough about it to know that a) it's not that simple and b) someone who DOES think it's that simple is an easy mark.
>dying over a few twenties and maybe another gun really don't justify the
>action.
Well, like I said before, had the three people I mentioned above been walking down the street, the risk/reward ratio would be lowest for the guy with the gun. And criminals, while not that smart, aren't so dumb as to ignore such things.
In a crowd (where I was attacked) a gun isn't all that useful. You're not going to pull a gun and fire into a crowd, and thieves know that. You're not going to pull a gun when someone grabs you around the neck (which is what happened with me) and fire blindly in the general direction of your neck. Indeed, if you do pull the gun at all, the guy's accomplice will be there to take it from you. Now thy have a gun and your wallet - and they're NOT afraid to fire into a crowd.
>And, btw, using a gun isn't rocket science.
Neither is skydiving. You jump out and pull your string, right?
Skydiiving is something that seems very easy at first. After someone has learned a bit more about it, they start to see how complex it is, how much you have to know about spotting, flying a canopy, moving your body, being aware of things in three dimensions etc.
Self defense is similar. Seems easy to pull a gun and shoot someone. I know just enough about it to know that a) it's not that simple and b) someone who DOES think it's that simple is an easy mark.
craddock 0
Ok. I missed the part of the non CCW being red. Now i understand the smily face. I actually forgot about the graph.
So you are glad Wisconsin is one of only two states with no form of CCW.
Do you think the people of Wisconsin are less capable than the rest of the country? Or do you just feel as Doyle does that the public has no right to protect itself from criminals by means of a firearm?
So you are glad Wisconsin is one of only two states with no form of CCW.
Do you think the people of Wisconsin are less capable than the rest of the country? Or do you just feel as Doyle does that the public has no right to protect itself from criminals by means of a firearm?
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
kallend 1,623
QuoteOk. I missed the part of the non CCW being red. Now i understand the smily face. I actually forgot about the graph.
So you are glad Wisconsin is one of only two states with no form of CCW.
Do you think the people of Wisconsin are less capable than the rest of the country? Or do you just feel as Doyle does that the public has no right to protect itself from criminals by means of a firearm?
Maybe he's glad that Wisconsin has less than half the national average rate of violent crime, less than half the national average rate of homicides, and way less than half the rate of, say, Florida or Texas in each of these categories (source, FBI UCR, latest edition).
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
craddock 0
Then why did he not say that rather that that he was glad to be in a red state.
Mabey he likes the fact that they have a large whitetail population. Mabey he likes the fact that they have Wolves and large bear.
Mabey... Mabey...Mabey
Mabey he likes the fact that they have a large whitetail population. Mabey he likes the fact that they have Wolves and large bear.
Mabey... Mabey...Mabey
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
QuoteSo you are glad Wisconsin is one of only two states with no form of CCW.
Do you think the people of Wisconsin are less capable than the rest of the country? Or do you just feel as Doyle does that the public has no right to protect itself from criminals by means of a firearm?
I believe that people are ignorant, stupid, and quick to anger.* Adding guns to the mix just doesn't sound smart to me. You can quote statistics till you're blue in the face, but I have never heard an argument that makes sense. You claim the Constitutional right to bear arms -- fine. Just don't bear the arms near me. I have the right to feel safe walking down the street, and I shouldn't have to be packing to feel that way. I live in a place where that is still true, and I hope it stays that way.
*This is not a personal attack, just my opinion
Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams
Quote>Even if 4 times out of 5, they get the money and the gun, the odds of
>dying over a few twenties and maybe another gun really don't justify the
>action.
Well, like I said before, had the three people I mentioned above been walking down the street, the risk/reward ratio would be lowest for the guy with the gun. And criminals, while not that smart, aren't so dumb as to ignore such things.
Come on, Bill, you know game theory better than this. The criminals don't have the benefit of the knowledge you possess on the 3 candidates. They don't know which ones practice a lot, which ones don't. They just know that they can get killed.
And I'll repeat - your belief on the relative difficulties of skydiving versus safe gun use are utterly wrong. Your fantasy notions of criminals mugging people, taking the guns, firing into crowds...we have 30 some shall issue states and millions of CCW holders and your fantasy remains just that.
The high end of the training requirements for CCW states appears to be an 8 hour class. Or the equlivient to the FJC alone. We spend many dozens of hours just to get the A license, and still die at an annual rate of 1 in 1000. You got nothing remotely close on the CCW side. If you did, states would be eliminating shall issue, not migrating to it.
mnealtx 0
QuoteI have the right to feel safe walking down the street, and I shouldn't have to be packing to feel that way.
Actually, no you don't... but if you feel that way more power to ya!
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706
JohnRich 4
QuoteThere are typically some 600 "accidental" gun fatalities each year in the USA. Many more accidental injuries. One might claim that each of these represents an absence of common sense.
There are 40,000 auto fatalities each year.
Licensed drivers are more deadly than unlicensed gun owners!
Anyone who is ever involved in an accident of any type, is going to have to be imprisoned to make society safe. We just can't trust 'em!
Surely you're not going to argue that Billvon without a gun has the same power as Billvon with a gun.
I walk down the street unarmed, content with the knowledge that there is a lot of prey smaller than 6' 200lbs.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites