This should make some gun enthusiasts crazy

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

So the point that murder is murder is invalid?

No, it is irrelevant. If you tracked back to where and how it was introduced, you'd see it yourself.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

as far as believing my little story, i could actually give a flying fuck what you believe.

Same to you. Bye-bye.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

What's the matter, George - can't answer the question?

Was it a question? I thought you made some irrelevant and rather stupid point, and somehow wanted ME to provide proof for the point YOU made. Not even funny.

There *was* an irrelevant and rather stupid point made - that being murdered by one specific method was somehow different.

That was the gist of YOUR argument, by the way.

Quote

Quote

Here's a simpler one: Why are you so afraid of guns?

I'm not. I just do not want to own one, and do not want to be killed from one.

Why do you think someone with a gun wants to kill you, and not someone with a screwdriver, hammer, fire axe, lead pipe, machete, garrote, cyanide gas, or bubonic plague?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[crewkeith 0]

how about charcoal?? i can make one hell of a bomb out of bbq charcoal. we need to regulate that too. let me just say any gun nut wants my guns come get em

.

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I didn't make that assumption. Nice try.

Sure, you made another assumption instead.

Nope - just asked you to prove your claim that the robber wasn't going to kill him.

Quote

Quote

I have - you haven't.

Yeah, exactly like Ron - "I said something, and it is considered proof. You said something - unless you provide a bunch of evidence, there is no way I gonna believe in it". Been there, seen that.

Bullcrap - you were given statistics, studies, news stories...they didn't meet with your 'approval' - tough shit. You spout off your opinion, just like in this thread and we're supposed to take it as gospel truth.

If you don't want to get called out on your opinions, quit stating them as fact.

Quote

Quote

Which is EXACTLY what you have done both in this thread and the other gun thread. Ron, myself and others HAVE provided info - you're provided Yuri Orloff fantasies and surmises.

Exactly. The problem was that I asked for proof - references, facts, evidence - and you just provided "info". I'm not interested in info, I can go to nralia and read it myself.

You were given stats - you didn't like who wrote them.

You were given news stories - you didn't like the site they were hosted on.

You were given facts about spree killings - you dismissed them because not every single one was stopped by a concealed carry holder.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

There *was* an irrelevant and rather stupid point made - that being murdered by one specific method was somehow different.

It is different if this person would be alive otherwise. As I said, it is very unlikely Cho would kill the same amount of people with a knife or baseball bat, so unless you're saying they all would die the same day from a stroke or car run, I do not see how your point is relevant. What you're saying is essentially that murder is fine, as the victim would die anyway.

Quote

Why do you think someone with a gun wants to kill you, and not someone with a screwdriver, hammer, fire axe, lead pipe, machete, garrote, cyanide gas, or bubonic plague?

Because a chance for a regular person who goes nuts and starts a massacre to kill a significant number of people are pretty low if all they have is a screwdriver, hammer, fire axe, lead pipe, machete or garrote. And cyanide gas and bubonic plague are not as easy available as guns.

Using the same logic, however, we should make both cyanide gas and bubonic plague available to everyone as well - after all, they can already buy guns to murder, why not cyanide?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Where the fuck did you grow up?

Somewhere you hope you'll never be.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

You'd be alive as well if you just gave him your money

Listen GeorgeRussia, people (jogging victims, store clerks, store owners, college students, bus passengers, home owners, etc...) Have brutally died by knife/bullet/wire/axe/hammer, and the perp was looking for money. STOP THE PRESSES..You are saying that that quote "You'd be alive as well if you just gave him your money"

Plenty of the deceased gave up their wallets only to get clobbered to death. Do some reading. In fact..buy the local paper !

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

There *was* an irrelevant and rather stupid point made - that being murdered by one specific method was somehow different.

It is different if this person would be alive otherwise. As I said, it is very unlikely Cho would kill the same amount of people with a knife or baseball bat, so unless you're saying they all would die the same day from a stroke or car run, I do not see how your point is relevant. What you're saying is essentially that murder is fine, as the victim would die anyway.

No, I'm *NOT* saying that. Quit trying to put words in my mouth, for once.

Quote

Quote

Why do you think someone with a gun wants to kill you, and not someone with a screwdriver, hammer, fire axe, lead pipe, machete, garrote, cyanide gas, or bubonic plague?

Because a chance for a regular person who goes nuts and starts a massacre to kill a significant number of people are pretty low if all they have is a screwdriver, hammer, fire axe, lead pipe, machete or garrote. And cyanide gas and bubonic plague are not as easy available as guns.

So, you're scared of a spree murderer killing you with a GUN, and not a spree murderer killing you with a knife or club like back in the old country.

How about worrying more about the killer and less about the tool he chooses?

Quote

Using the same logic, however, we should make both cyanide gas and bubonic plague available to everyone as well - after all, they can already buy guns to murder, why not cyanide?

Speaking of stupid points...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[crewkeith 0]

if i go postal i'll leave my guns at home. i bet i can take out more than 30....... not that i would do that.

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

You'd be alive as well if you just gave him your money, as he was not trying to kill you. If you take out another knife, or a dummy gun it might also have the same effect. So far pretty much every gun story I heard the same effect might be achieved having unloaded broken gun, as none actually used it.

I love this post ! Someone puhleease tell me what it means!

I'm going to rephrase in bold:
So far pretty much every gun story I heard the same effect might be achieved having unloaded broken gun, as none actually used it.


LOL
LOL

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Nope - just asked you to prove your claim that the robber wasn't going to kill him.

No, dude. You asked me to "prove it OR withdraw it", which is different from what you are saying right now. However you provided no reason why should I withdraw my opinion, nor you apply the same strict standard to yourself.

Quote

Bullcrap - you were given statistics, studies, news stories...they didn't meet with your 'approval' - tough shit.

Where? Please point out exact posts where I was given "statistics, studies, news stories", and didn't address them? Most of the "references" I've got were "I mentioned you Aa Bb, now you should google it and research it yourself". No, thanks, it's your job to spend time finding facts to support your point.

Quote

You spout off your opinion, just like in this thread and we're supposed to take it as gospel truth.

This is not even funny. Where did I say that my opinion is supposed to be taken as gospel truth? Evidence, please, or at least you owe an apology (but again, it was long time ago, when Republicans actually believed in personal responsibility for everyone - now it seems to be "everyone but me").

Quote

If you don't want to get called out on your opinions, quit stating them as fact.

I even said explicitly multiple times that everything I write is my opinion (and everything you write is your opinion as well). Which facts you're talking about?

Quote

You were given stats - you didn't like who wrote them.
You were given news stories - you didn't like the site they were hosted on.

Proof, please. Somehow I'm getting impression that you either confuse me with someone else, or didn't really follow the thread.

Nevertheless, don't you think it is relevant whether the stats are produced by a non-biased party or not? Would you honestly accept all stats from Brady?

Quote

You were given facts about spree killings - you dismissed them because not every single one was stopped by a concealed carry holder.

No, this was actually my point - that concealed carry holders are quite useless in stopping spree killings, and the facts prove it. I remember you had excuses WHY it was like that (guns not allowed in VA tech, only for MPs on the military base), but so far nobody disputed the point itself.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Prove it.

Prove what? I didn't see you presenting any evidence, so why are you asking me to present any?

Quote

Tell that to the Rwandans - 500k+ killed in 3 months, most with machetes.

You do not see a difference between a civil war, and your regular murderer, don't you?

Nope.. I do not see a difference at all.

Would you say that most of the dead had no way of defending themselves or their families???

Think the guys carrying machetes would have been able to murder as many people had all of their victims had the right to own a weapon that they could protect themselves with.

YOU very much sound like you want EVERYONE to be as helpless as you in any circumstance.... sorry but I am not into being a victim... your milage may vary.

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

So far pretty much every gun story I heard the same effect might be achieved having unloaded broken gun, as none actually used it.

I think after I read your reply 90 times that you're saying that if we all carried "unloaded weapons" it would thwart the criminals just the same??

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Listen GeorgeRussia, people (jogging victims, store clerks, store owners, college students, bus passengers, home owners, etc...) Have brutally died by knife/bullet/wire/axe/hammer, and the perp was looking for money.

Some indeed were, but in the described situation - on a bus stop (not a backdoor street then), having either two witnesses, or three people against one with a knife, I would say the chance was pretty slim.

Quote

Plenty of the deceased gave up their wallets only to get clobbered to death. Do some reading. In fact..buy the local paper!

If the story was true and the author indeed did not call the police and have the robber arrested, I can believe in it. If he just let the guy go, then the next time the guy might suspect another gun holder, and prefer to stab him in the back and frisk a dead body instead of risking being shot. In fact this was probably the worst possible example of using a gun to prevent crime - representing a gun owner as a selfish pig, being concerned about his wallet more than about lives of his fellow citizens.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[crewkeith 0]

the problem is not the weapon it is the person using it. to be fair i am a ccw holder as well as a class 3 ffl yes i have automatic weapons and yes i have suppressed weapons. the regulation for weapons is not the problem. i have a lathe in the shop i could go spin out a barrel and make my own gun. we don't need more gun laws just tougher ones. illegal possession of a hand gun? 25 years. second offense? life. i bet criminals would be throwing them in the river in a hurry

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[LongWayToFall 0]

Cool story! I love how you were asked to present a situation in which people were saved with a concealed gun, and you could tell a story of your own!

George: If he had indeed given him his money, and was lucky enough not to be injured/killed by not giving any resistance, do you think this would make it more, or less likely for the criminal to repeat the crime?

Also, why argue a situation where no guns are present at all? This is not reality, and except for a very few exceptions, guns can be obtained illegally just about anywhere. To pretend that it is possible to make widespread areas and numbers of people completely unable to get a gun, is a waste of time.

[crewkeith 0]

you gonna chase some you know to be armed down a back alley in vegas at 330 in the morning? i didnt think so. my end of the situation was handled i was not about to pursue it. war 101 dont pursue enemy into unknown territory. you would have given him your wallet and called the cops to save your ass. think about what is in your wallet. id, insurance card? credit cards. he now knows where you live what you drive and that you roll over like a little bitch and pee down your leg when threatened. good luck with that. he'll probably come seeing you at home with the wife and kids in bed. stupidest thing you can do in todays world

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[crewkeith 0]

handgun magazine american rifleman combat tactics all have monthly columns about citizens saving their ass or asses of people like this guy that sit there and pee on themselves when threatened. common story. oh by the way my quote earlier was from general yanamoto of the Japanese military during ww2. just the specter of gun ownership was enough to stave off an invasion of the us mainland

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Nope - just asked you to prove your claim that the robber wasn't going to kill him.

No, dude. You asked me to "prove it OR withdraw it", which is different from what you are saying right now. However you provided no reason why should I withdraw my opinion, nor you apply the same strict standard to yourself.

Then perhaps you should quit stating your OPINION as if it were fact.

Quote

Quote

Bullcrap - you were given statistics, studies, news stories...they didn't meet with your 'approval' - tough shit.

Where? Please point out exact posts where I was given "statistics, studies, news stories", and didn't address them? Most of the "references" I've got were "I mentioned you Aa Bb, now you should google it and research it yourself". No, thanks, it's your job to spend time finding facts to support your point.

We *did* find the facts, and presented them.

Quote

Quote

You spout off your opinion, just like in this thread and we're supposed to take it as gospel truth.

This is not even funny. Where did I say that my opinion is supposed to be taken as gospel truth? Evidence, please, or at least you owe an apology (but again, it was long time ago, when Republicans actually believed in personal responsibility for everyone - now it seems to be "everyone but me").

You've done nothing but - go back and read your own words (usually mentioned in my replies with some variation of "do you have proof of that").

As for apologies - when I've done something that I need to apologize for, I will. Maybe you can start the ball rolling with an apology for attempted idiological smear, above.

Quote

Quote

If you don't want to get called out on your opinions, quit stating them as fact.

I even said explicitly multiple times that everything I write is my opinion (and everything you write is your opinion as well).

No, you whine about how I think that my opinion is better, when I've never said that. I *have* said that I'm much more conversant on the FACTS surrounding this area of discussion. The conversation in the couple of gun threads you've entered have proven this out.

Quote

Which facts you're talking about?

You stating your (unlabeled) opinion as if it were fact?

"You'd be alive as well if you just gave him your money, as he was not trying to kill you." - stated as a fact.

"No, I'm just pointing out that your assumption that three of you would be dead if you didn't have a gun is definitely groundless. " - stated as fact.

It wasn't until AFTER I called you out on it that you backtracked and started talking about how it was 'just your opinion'.

Quote

Quote

You were given stats - you didn't like who wrote them.
You were given news stories - you didn't like the site they were hosted on.

Proof, please. Somehow I'm getting impression that you either confuse me with someone else, or didn't really follow the thread.

You were given stuff from NRA-ILA and KABA in the other thread - that wasn't acceptable because of the website it came from.

Quote

Nevertheless, don't you think it is relevant whether the stats are produced by a non-biased party or not? Would you honestly accept all stats from Brady?

When Brady starts publishing stats on defensive uses, let me know - I'd LOVE to see it. They still use Kellerman's "43 times more likely" statistic that has been debunked over and over again.

Quote

Quote

You were given facts about spree killings - you dismissed them because not every single one was stopped by a concealed carry holder.

No, this was actually my point - that concealed carry holders are quite useless in stopping spree killings, and the facts prove it.

The fact that several spree killings WERE stopped by concealed carry holders disproves your point. What you claim as a 'fact' is, in fact, another of your OPINIONS.

Quote

I remember you had excuses WHY it was like that (guns not allowed in VA tech, only for MPs on the military base), but so far nobody disputed the point itself.

You're not going to find ANYONE dispute that spree killers are most 'effective' in places where their prospective victims are disarmed. Your labeling of Federal LAW and military REGULATIONS as "excuses" only serves to further prove that you have no intention of learning, as you claim.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

In fact this was probably the worst possible example of using a gun to prevent crime - representing a gun owner as a selfish pig, being concerned about his wallet more than about lives of his fellow citizens.

And once again, you show that you have NO idea what you're talking about.

You *do* realize that a concealed carry permit is, in fact, not a Jr. Policeman badge, right?

You *also* realize that a concealed carry holder cannot use deadly force except in self-defense, right?

So...how is he supposed to keep the robber there, when the guy turns and runs? Shoot him and get charged with murder/attempted murder?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[crewkeith 0]

he thinks i should have filed a report and jonny law would magically find this guy. yeah right.

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[crewkeith 0]

dude you believe in the american justice system. thats fine and dandy. i hope im wrong but i would not trust my life to the system for anything. i train with my weapons more in a month than most cops train in a career. i fire about 15000 rounds a year. and thats not alot by some peoples standards.
good luck in life, sir.

The skies are no longer safe

I'm back

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Nope.. I do not see a difference at all.
Would you say that most of the dead had no way of defending themselves or their families???

In a civil war - yes, mostly there is no way.
In a regular murder - very likely. In a lot of cases it's just being there in a wrong time.

Quote

Think the guys carrying machetes would have been able to murder as many people had all of their victims had the right to own a weapon that they could protect themselves with.

If this was the case, those guys wouldn't carry machetes, they would carry machine guns. As you know, Nazi soldiers had much more than just guns - they had tanks, artillery and airplanes, and still a lot of them died in 1945. Response provokes appropriate counter-response, and if you have regular people without guns, a lot of criminals will also be without guns. If you have regular people with guns, a lot of criminals will be also with guns.

Quote

YOU very much sound like you want EVERYONE to be as helpless as you in any circumstance.... sorry but I am not into being a victim... your milage may vary.

Not having a gun does not mean you're helpless, it is culture thing. If you were born and grew up in a country without guns culture, it's very likely you'll feel fine without one. Having a gun does not mean you're not victim - Mixon killed four COPS in Oakland, who not only carried guns, but were apparently more proficient in their usage comparing to average Joe. I guess for some people having a gun might make it worse than not having one, as they might end up in the situation they'd never be if they didn't have a gun.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Response provokes appropriate counter-response, and if you have regular people without guns, a lot of criminals will also be without guns. If you have regular people with guns, a lot of criminals will be also with guns.

Incorrect. You make the presumption that the criminal is a rational actor, when such is not the case. The criminal is concerned with having a means to COERCE compliance. A criminal that already has a gun isn't going to get rid of it and carry a stick, just because the victims in that area are unarmed.

Quote

I guess for some people having a gun might make it worse than not having one, as they might end up in the situation they'd never be if they didn't have a gun.

That's a common fallacy that the anti-gun crowd brings up - the 'vigilante' scenario. The *fact* is that concealed carry holders are taught that the gun is a LAST resort, not a first one, and that they are held to a higher standard in regards to de-escalating potential situations because of it.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706