West Virginia’s Crime Rates Decline After State Adopts Constitutional Carry Law FBI data indicates a steady decline in violent crime since 2016

[HeyYou]

For me, the issue of whether or not to carry a gun for protection boils down to one thing. Are you prepared to pull the trigger? If you aren't prepared to shoot another human being, then the argument for carrying a gun for protection is moot. Even if you have trained extensively and could shoot to wound rather than kill, you still have to fire on another person. Regardless of the law, there is no point in having a weapon you're unwilling to use. In fact, it's more likely that your gun will become their gun. I am a single woman living alone and would seem to be someone reasonably expected to have a gun for protection. However, I've never gotten one simply because I don't know if I could pull that trigger.

Very true, and that is something you won't know, until the time comes, that the decision presents itself.

 

I was a cop in the US Air Force though, so, I already know what the answer is for me. :D

[Striker879]

 

For me, the issue of whether or not to carry a gun for protection boils down to one thing. Are you prepared to pull the trigger? If you aren't prepared to shoot another human being, then the argument for carrying a gun for protection is moot. Even if you have trained extensively and could shoot to wound rather than kill, you still have to fire on another person. Regardless of the law, there is no point in having a weapon you're unwilling to use. In fact, it's more likely that your gun will become their gun. I am a single woman living alone and would seem to be someone reasonably expected to have a gun for protection. However, I've never gotten one simply because I don't know if I could pull that trigger.

Very true, and that is something you won't know, until the time comes, that the decision presents itself.

 

I was a cop in the US Air Force though, so, I already know what the answer is for me. :D

 

 

Time spent considering what you could or couldn't do in a hypothetical situation is all well and good, but I don't believe it will give you an accurate idea of what would happen if push came to shove. A decision made based on those ruminations could limit your possiblilities, and thus direct events to a certain outcome.

 

I'm a Canadian living in Canada so my situation doesn't have much in common with my brothers and sisters to the south but one thing I'm always mindful of ... I can't do those things I tell myself I can't do. Simple fact.

 

That doesn't mean I can do those things I've told myself I can do right out of the can, but if I'm determined enough to put in the effort required to master the skills needed I'll be able to do the best I can.

[xrayy]

i had to deal with weapons on a professional basis same like heyyou (?) and checked many scientific papers (not nra or lobby supported). they came all to the same conclusion: weapon in private hands does not prevent violence in any way it is just raising the risk of collateral damage and death rate (see el salvador or mexico).

the point is not to collect tomorrow all weapons (no heyyou i don't want your weapons!) but to think about how weapons should be a part of a modern society in future. and i don't think that people like majorie taylor greene have anything to contribute for more safety. the question is how long will america ignore the facts and how long will it take to develop a healthy sense of weapon use and delivery.

the "i carry a weapon, so I'm safe and i can protect anyone" attitude is not what anyone helps especially not in a violent conflict and is massively overrated while the psychological aspect is totally underrated. a war like behavior and reaction is not what is needed to deescalate a more and more violent situation as long it is not real war around. this is simply a very naive point of view.

the "can i pull the trigger" aspect is very important and also underrated while the "i can help with my weapon attiude" is overrated and a weak argument. the surprise effect counts and the chance that your weapon is collected by the surprising criminals to save your life or to use your weapon additionally is much more likely to happen. that is the sad truth and everything else is self deception if you are not a professionally trained killer.

[HeyYou]

i had to deal with weapons on a professional basis same like heyyou (?) and checked many scientific papers (not nra or lobby supported). they came all to the same conclusion: weapon in private hands does not prevent violence in any way it is just raising the risk of collateral damage and death rate (see el salvador or mexico).

the point is not to collect tomorrow all weapons (no heyyou i don't want your weapons!) but to think about how weapons should be a part of a modern society in future. and i don't think that people like majorie taylor greene have anything to contribute for more safety. the question is how long will america ignore the facts and how long will it take to develop a healthy sense of weapon use and delivery.

the "i carry a weapon, so I'm safe and i can protect anyone" attitude is not what anyone helps especially not in a violent conflict and is massively overrated while the psychological aspect is totally underrated. a war like behavior and reaction is not what is needed to deescalate a more and more violent situation as long it is not real war around. this is simply a very naive point of view.

the "can i pull the trigger" aspect is very important and also underrated while the "i can help with my weapon attiude" is overrated and a weak argument. the surprise effect counts and the chance that your weapon is collected by the surprising criminals to save your life or to use your weapon additionally is much more likely to happen. that is the sad truth and everything else is self deception if you are not a professionally trained killer.

Interesting. Of course, he leaves out a lot of information. One key piece is, the use of a weapon in self-defense is severely under-reported. And the whole "guns make crimes more violent" thing? Not a surprise, I would much rather see a dead attempted rapist, than another rape victim.

[xrayy]

 

... ...

... One key piece is, the use of a weapon in self-defense is severely under-reported. And the whole "guns make crimes more violent" thing? Not a surprise, I would much rather see a dead attempted rapist, than another rape victim.

 

... it seems more that you should wake up from your wet "i am the saviour" dream. seems you watched to many movies. the overly high death rate in america is obvious compared to civilized countries. wake up and turn on your brain. you can shoot only one weapon at a time regardless how many you own. and in case the rapists take hostages you can do only one thing: deliver your weapon arsenal or risk the life of the hostages. at least i would know what i would do...

so let us talk about reality ( the criminals commonly surprise you and your family and not vice versa): the more you own the more weapons the criminals will collect before they rape you and your family including your weapons - in case you are lucky and still alive. the more bullets they collect the higher the chance they kill you all and maybe other people in the next rape. your version sounds far away from reality but more like a wild dream. and even if you win the fight it will be at least a bloody slaughter on both sides.

the chance that rambo or bond save the situation including all hostages is minimal and works only in moviies. so do not let us talk about it.

the chance that a hobby rambo like you causes collateral damage among innocent is ulimately higher and please do not try to tell me more tales.

[HeyYou]

 

 

... ...

... One key piece is, the use of a weapon in self-defense is severely under-reported. And the whole "guns make crimes more violent" thing? Not a surprise, I would much rather see a dead attempted rapist, than another rape victim.

 

... it seems more that you should wake up from your "i am the saviour" dream. seems you watched to many movies. the overly high death rate in america is obvious compared with civilized countries. wake up and turn on your brain. you can shoot only one weapon at a time regardless how many you own. and in case the rapists take hostages you can do only one thing: deliver your weapon arsenal or risk the life of the hostages. at least i would know what i would do...

so let us talk about reality ( the criminals commonly surprise you and your family and not vice versa): the more you own the more weapons the criminals will collect before they rape you and your family including your weapons - in case you are lucky and still alive. the more bullets they collect the higher the chance they kill you all and maybe other people in the next rape.

 

We obviously have VERY different views on gun ownership, which doesn't come as a surprise, considering where we live...... Tell ya what, you do whatever you want in YOUR country, and we will do what we want in OUR country. Sound fair?

 

You have a very biased view of gun ownership, and the information you present is also rather one-sided. You can cite as many studies as you care to, telling us that 'guns are bad', and it won't make one whit of difference to us. We like our constitutional rights, and take a dim view of someone that doesn't live here, telling us how we should live. That is the very epitome of arrogance. I am not a fan.

 

Also, I have dogs. No one is going to get in here without me having a fair bit of advanced warning. All part of the plan. Anyone that comes here with evil intent is quite likely to be taken away in a body bag. I will be sitting at my table, cleaning my guns.

[xrayy]

sure i am biased and you and majorie tailor greene are the professionals. you do not need police support because you solve your problems on your own. brave boy and sadly very far away from reality. i know you are better protected than the president. but you forget one thing: 99% of the people just want to live and have better things to do than to play with a weapon arsenal and aggressive pets. so tell your story the one 1% or less who are james bond or rambo or in your exceptional situation. your arguments do not sound very trustworthy to me and they do not help any common household with a common budget. and now the true live version of your crime story: someone with evil intent will not tell you (as the vip you seem to be) that he comes, no he will take hostage and you will come - better without dogs and weapons - and pray that the hostage is still alive! and last but not least - the debate (also the latest posts) is not about you but about the american society and the relationship to weapons. the way you argue seems to me that you are not part of the center of the american society - at least i really really hope that.

[HeyYou]

Wow. Just..... wow.

 

Your bias is showing. (in spades....) You make a lot of assumptions based on your views, that are completely inaccurate. You don't have any idea who i am, or what I am about. You just lump me into your 'gun nut' category, and proceed from there. Which, of course, makes just about everything you said there... Wrong. You also make assumptions about american society, that aren't exactly accurate either. But then, I expect nothing less from you. Just another liberal, that doesn't live here, has no clue about us, and lets his bias and emotions dictate his views.

 

You would fit in well with the democrats here. (and that is NOT a compliment.)

[xrayy]

from your political position everyone is far left if not a left extremist apart from people like trump, taylor greene and some faithful far right posters here. that says all...

you ignore not only social media,which makes sense at least to me, you also ignore or laugh about science and proven scientific information which makes you someone i can not take serious. you do not even discuss the content in an adult like manner.

in worst case you are dangerous or at least it makes you suspicious for conspiracy, at least your own one.

a debate with someone who puts always himself in the focus instead of the society he belongs to (if he does ?) is just a waste of time. i hope that people like you will always be a minority in your society. if not we will see again what already happened the four years until the storm of the capitol and even worse.

i made biased inaccurate assumptions ? you mean the proven scientific and linked content you ignored and commented with "lololol" ? funny, just funny. or do you mean my replys to your "wet dream i´m the guardian with my weapons and dogs" story ? sorry, i do not want to debate any wet and surreal dreams. nothing of what you dreamed will work out in a plain real violent scenario with an arsenal of weapons. i don't know in what reality you live. it seems at least very strange to me and extremely focused on your personal believe, not taking any serious, social and scientifically proven information into account. after the last pages of debate with you this seems to me proven comparing with your responds and i introduce everyone to do a fact check.

it is just sad that a topic leads always to black white/discussions. this is at least not my intention. i hope for more open and (proven) content based (not content ignoring) discussions. if someone enters a discussion just to maintain a status quo and to ignore verything else a debate most likely is nonsense and the last two pages exactly this happened here. the scientifically proven content about the use of weapons in the u.s. was not even basically discussed. let me know if someone likes to discuss the u.s. problem with far too many weapons and related. and please no more stupid left or right debate.

[HeyYou]

from your political position everyone is far left if not a left extremist apart from people like trump, taylor greene and some faithful far right posters here. that says all...

you ignore not only social media,which makes sense at least to me, you also ignore or laugh about science and proven scientific information which makes you someone i can not take serious. you do not even discuss the content in an adult like manner.

in worst case you are dangerous or at least it makes you suspicious for conspiracy, at least your own one.

a debate with someone who puts always himself in the focus instead of the society he belongs to (if he does ?) is just a waste of time. i hope that people like you will always be a minority in your society. if not we will see again what already happened the four years until the storm of the capitol and even worse.

i made biased inaccurate assumptions ? you mean the proven scientific and linked content you ignored and commented with "lololol" ? funny, just funny. or do you mean my replys to your "wet dream i´m the guardian with my weapons and dogs" story ? sorry, i do not want to debate any wet and surreal dreams. nothing of what you dreamed will work out in a plain real violent scenario with an arsenal of weapons. i don't know in what reality you live. it seems at least very strange to me and extremely focused on your personal believe, not taking any serious, social and scientifically proven information into account. after the last pages of debate with you this seems to me proven comparing with your responds and i introduce everyone to do a fact check.

it is just sad that a topic leads always to black white/discussions. this is at least not my intention. i hope for more open and (proven) content based (not content ignoring) discussions. if someone enters a discussion just to maintain a status quo and to ignore verything else a debate most likely is nonsense and the last two pages exactly this happened here. the scientifically proven content about the use of weapons in the u.s. was not even basically discussed. let me know if someone likes to discuss the u.s. problem with far too many weapons and related. and please no more stupid left or right debate.

LOLOL.

 

Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point. You are so far off the mark, it's downright hilarious. None of your research you have presented is conclusive. It's filled with 'dodge words' like 'could', 'might', 'implies', etc. It's like politicians talking. They speak a lot of words, but, lack any meaningful content. (a lot like you.... interesting.)

 

So far, you haven't shown ANYTHING that is 'proven'. It's all supposition and innuendo. One of the main reasons for that is, the US government actually BANNED research of that nature. (at least, federally funded research) From everything I have found, (and yes, I perused a variety of sources) there is absolutely ZERO conclusive proof that guns influence crime rate one way or the other. You are oh so concerned about gun deaths, yet you ignore the millions of babies that are killed every year legally. (abortion) Or how about the 250,000 to 450,000 people killed by their DOCTORS every year? Or the 30K + people killed by cars every year? (and that's just here in the states) Lots of ways to get dead here. Guns are only one of them, and are a tiny fraction of the overall picture. Not to mention, if it weren't guns, it would be something else. Knives, clubs, baseball bats, etc.

 

Humans are a violent species. THAT is a FACT. One of our favorite passtimes is coming up with new and better ways to kill our fellow man. Trillions of dollars have been spent on the endeavor. Billions more are spent every year. That is unlikely to change, so long as human are around. Want to eliminate crime? Murder? Etc?? Get rid of the humans. That is the ONLY sure solution.