kelpdiver 2 #126 May 9, 2007 Quote> No, the question was are unarmed people helpless or not. That's an easy one - no. well, gun owners, gun haters, residents of Bagdad, and all those with common sense disagree. Probably shouldn't be in a UK thread, though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #127 May 9, 2007 >well, gun owners, gun haters, residents of Bagdad, and all those >with common sense disagree. Ever been mugged? I have. Stopped the guy without a gun. That's happened to at least one other friend of mine; he stopped the mugger as well without a gun. Therefore, the correct answer to the question "are unarmed people helpless?" is no. Of course, that goes against what you see on TV, so it comes as a shock to many people. Indeed, were it to come down to a showdown between Steve H (former teacher) and a gun-wielding guy, I'd put my money on Steve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #128 May 9, 2007 A mugger wants money. Rarely is interested in killing the victim, since it will generate a lot more heat for him. He also expects cooperation. That's not the same as someone that wants to kill you. You feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? BTW, both of your anecdotes involved men. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #129 May 9, 2007 QuoteA mugger wants money. Rarely is interested in killing the victim, since it will generate a lot more heat for him. He also expects cooperation. That's not the same as someone that wants to kill you. You feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? BTW, both of your anecdotes involved men. Why would someone want to kill Billvon?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #130 May 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteA mugger wants money. Rarely is interested in killing the victim, since it will generate a lot more heat for him. He also expects cooperation. That's not the same as someone that wants to kill you. You feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? BTW, both of your anecdotes involved men. Why would someone want to kill Billvon? It's duck-hunting season?Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #131 May 9, 2007 >You feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? Nope. But I will generally be able to run faster than he can, and that's a much better defense than a gun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craddock 0 #132 May 9, 2007 QuoteYou feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? Or giving him some money. Having never been mugged, I envision it as someone confronting me demanding money. It would seem to me to make more sense to give some money away rather that have a confrontation, even if I was carrying. I don't carry enough cash to make a difference anyway. Chance are if I am being mugged I am probably not alone either, so running or fighting(guns or otherwise) would probably not be prudent. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #133 May 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteYou feel as confident putting up your fists against such a person? Or giving him some money. Having never been mugged, I envision it as someone confronting me demanding money. It would seem to me to make more sense to give some money away rather that have a confrontation, even if I was carrying. I don't carry enough cash to make a difference anyway. Chance are if I am being mugged I am probably not alone either, so running or fighting(guns or otherwise) would probably not be prudent. Uh, which part of the line before where you quoted me was confusing to you? "That's not the same as someone that wants to kill you." We're not talking about a mugging. We're talking about someone who wishes (in this hypothetical) Bill to be no more. Maybe he covets his wife, the classic story. Unarmed, I'd agree that running is one of the best options, but that again is more likely to be true for a mugging then someone breaking into your house, or lying in wait for you near the doorway. If the target has a gun, the killer has to be worried about getting fired upon. Even if he gets off the first shot, killing the victim, there will still be opportunity for return fire. But if that victim is unarmed, there are no such worries. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #134 May 9, 2007 QuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A .222 calibre rifle, commonly used in pest control, was recovered from the scene. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- uhh..... used for pest control?!? I have a .223 rifle. They sell "Varmint" rounds for it. Varmint (noun) any usually predatory wild animal considered undesirable; e.g., coyote Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #135 May 9, 2007 QuoteQuote uhh..... used for pest control?!? I have a .223 rifle. They sell "Varmint" rounds for it. Varmint (noun) any usually predatory wild animal considered undesirable; e.g., coyote Hippie Fixed it for you.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
craddock 0 #136 May 9, 2007 Yep I misread your post in haste. I was simply skimming to fast. I read your post as a mugger usually has no intent to kill so it is not the same debate as someone that wants to kill you. So because of this(mugger not wanting to kill) you feel confident putting up your fists against such a person(mugger). I realize now what you meant. The use of "as" and "?" in the sentence I quoted are what I overlooked. Sorry. That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
br0k3n 0 #137 May 10, 2007 QuoteWhy is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... Now neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... which makes you your point somewhat moot.----------------------------------------------------------- --+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #138 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhy is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
br0k3n 0 #139 May 10, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Why is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! and your point is, oh you dont have oneincase you didnt realise whether "your" guns have ever killed anyone does not detract from the FACT that they are and always will be a "weapon" thats what they were invented as and thats what they are.. this is not the same for the "car", or the "knife" or the "baseball bat"----------------------------------------------------------- --+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #140 May 10, 2007 .. this is not the same for the "car", or the "knife" or the "baseball bat" Not true, depends on the purpose for which they were purchased. I have guns that were NEVER intended to kill anything. Small caliber target rifles are an example. So, what generalization do you want debunked next??"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #141 May 10, 2007 Quote Quote Quote ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! and your point is, oh you dont have oneincase you didnt realise whether "your" guns have ever killed anyone does not detract from the FACT that they are and always will be a "weapon" thats what they were invented as and thats what they are.. this is not the same for the "car", or the "knife" or the "baseball bat" Then rocks were designed for killing (Cain / Abel). Your argument about design is without merit. You are (again and still) trying to blame the tool for the action of the user. A person determined to kill will use any tool to hand...just as you can put a person that is NOT determined to kill in a room full of guns, knives and chainsaws and he will just sit there.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #142 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! Damn, mine must be too.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #143 May 10, 2007 <> But that could change in a heart-beat. Not all gun owners are as responsible as you (or un lucky) or there would never be any accidental shootings or temper related ones (like the OP). I'm sure that the gun owner did not start the day planning to kill anyone, it just turned out that way but couldn't have done if he had not had a gun. The fact that the cop was armed did not save him, either. It was a total waste, 2 people died in a heart-beat and many more peoples lives were ruined for ever. . (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #144 May 10, 2007 Not being and Englshman, let me take a shot at it: Specifying "legal" in the news headline is common in the UK where guns are not legal unless specifically allowed under strict legal control. The assumption is that if you have a gun it's illegal unless specifically authorized. The US is different. In the UK the crook mentality is that if the cops are coming, they are not coming to shoot your ass dead for your infraction. They are coming simply to bring you in. In the US, cops are coming armed and quite prepared to blow your ass away so you'd better be armed and ready for them right up front. Different culture, different approaches. I like the UK way much, much better.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #145 May 10, 2007 That pretty much sums it up - Nice one. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #146 May 10, 2007 Got it in one. I have quite a good relationship with most the crooks in the area I work. We try to keep it a nice old fashioned style where we all know the score and have friendly banter when we cross paths. When we catch them they know its just their bad luck and us doing our job. We are on first name terms. Obviouslly there are the 100% scumbags out there that just dont care too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #147 May 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is it that only gun crime is reported like this? Why is the headline never: "Legal knife owner kills policeman." "Legal match owner sets building on fire." "Legal car owner kills 2." A gun doesn't cause crime anymore than a knife or car does, so why do people focus on the weapon only in gun crimes? ermm you answered your own question, well in a way. What you seem to "forget" is that a gun was designed soley as a weapon to kill, yeah yeah we can argue that they are now used for target practice, or shooting clay pigeons.. etc but they were still invented with a single purpose... No neither the Knife, the car, the match, alcohol, drugs or even cricket bats are desinged with the sole purpose of killing... Oddly enough, my guns haven't killed anything...they must be broken! Damn, mine must be too.... Seung-Hui Cho' guns must have been too, up until the time he shot the first of his 32 victims. Your point is completely and utterly stupid.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #148 May 10, 2007 Quotethis is not the same for the "car", or the "knife" or the "baseball bat" Wrong The knife and the club were both originally designed to kill (prey and other people). Edit: I believe the original purpose of the "Car" was to enable people to more readily have access to custome "Knife and Club" stores. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #149 May 10, 2007 Quote...just as you can put a person that is NOT determined to kill in a room full of guns, knives and chainsaws and he will just sit there. Most of us will just sit there or play solitaire or examine the tools. Apparently many, though, will wet themselves and cower in a corner. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #150 May 10, 2007 Quote > But that could change in a heart-beat. Not all gun owners are as responsible as you (or un lucky) or there would never be any accidental shootings or temper related ones (like the OP). I'm sure that the gun owner did not start the day planning to kill anyone, it just turned out that way but couldn't have done if he had not had a gun. The fact that the cop was armed did not save him, either. It was a total waste, 2 people died in a heart-beat and many more peoples lives were ruined for ever. . If you want absoultes (like respoinsibility) you are living on the wrong planet"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
