RZ1029 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 In which fantasy world do you live where the police can respond instantaneously? Because unless I am mistaken, violent crime happens all the time in all parts of the world. Poor police response times are by no means exclusive to the US. I know people like to talk crap about the police but don't assume that cops are necessarily incompetent. Let's ask a hypothetical question, would you rather be mugged by someone with a knife or someone with a gun? It's possible to dodge and outrun a knife... Bullets are another matter altogether. Edit: also about guns in daycares. So what if there is a difference? Daycares are not prohibited places in many states. Yet, there aren't any rivers of blood flowing from them. The need to protect against violent criminals still exists, doesn't matter if it's a daycare or your home. In which crazy world do you live where it is normal to carry a gun when visiting a daycare center?There's a difference between incompetence and poor response times. I live out in the country, I know if I call cops, I can expect to wait 15-20 minutes, because I am so far from town that the physical travel time slows their response, assuming I can get city boys and don't have to call county instead. Who knows when they might show. Also, I'd rather be mugged by someone with a gun. They're either incompetent (likely) and will miss under stress (happens a surprising number of times, from some things I had been reading/hear through the generally-well-informed-grapevine), or they shoot me and I'm dead, far less painful. I've been stabbed a time or two with a knife, I would definitely rather be shot. And ummm... where I live, it's pretty common to see people carrying EVERYWHERE. (That is, excluding banks, schools, government offices, and hospitals.) I think you'd be surprised how many people in your area may carry, if you know how to spot it. I've been to a daycare on more than one occasion with my gun, to pick up my nieces and nephew. I also carry in other people's homes, but I do tell them I am carrying, and will take it out and lock it in my vehicle if they feel uncomfortable with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I grew up on a farm myself, so I don't care, again ad nauseum, about using firearms to protect the home. I'm very happy to report that around here there are very few people who carry, and it is not socially acceptable here. And it never will be if I have any say in it, which I and many like me still do. In fact I'm sick to death of guns being glorified like they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syco21 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I'm not saying we shouldn't have guns available to us, I am a gun owner and I will use it. But I don't want to see guns at the little league games, in the park, at the bowling alley, at the skating rink, nor at the grocery store. And I think the majority is still with me.IDK about where you live, but here in the states, the majority opinion is shifting heavily in favor of carry. People are starting to realize that the threat of being the victim of a violent crime does not stop at home, but follows them everywhere they go. I know people like to talk crap about the police but don't assume that cops are necessarily incompetent.The competency of the police has nothing whatsoever to do with response times. It is simply a fact of life. Unless the police have some form of faster than light travel, it is not possible for them to respond to every call in time to be of any use to the victim. But that really doesn't matter, because even if so, the police are not psychic, they can not know to respond to a situation unless they see/hear it or someone calls them. If someone is trying to attack you, you generally don't have time to call the police and there's no guarantee that anyone else will. In mentioning this, I am reminded of the girl that was gang raped while about 50 people stood and watched. This went on for a ridiculous amount of time, because not a single one of them bothered to call the police. That's not because they didn't have phones, but because they were too busy using their phones to take photos and videos. Do not rely on the kindness of others to help you, and do not rely on the police to protect you. Even the most competent police forces in the world simply do not have the ability to do so. It's a physical impossibility. There have even been cases where the police have flatout refused to do anything. They were sued for this, and as the individual above me pointed out, the courts have ruled everytime that the police are not obligated to protect you. Again, this has nothing to do with competency and everything to do with ability. They are not superheroes nor are they gods. They're mortal men and women just like you and I. Let's ask a hypothetical question, would you rather be mugged by someone with a knife or someone with a gun? It's possible to dodge and outrun a knife... Bullets are another matter altogether. I'd rather be mugged by neither. Neither choice is a good one. A man with a knife is just as deadly, if not more so, than a man with a gun. If I have a gun, then atleast I have a fighting chance. And no amount of laws are going to take the guns out of a criminal's hands. That's why we call them criminals. ;) Also I may not live in a war zone but violent crimes do exist and more often than not they still involve guns (mostly meant for hunting) but things like that are not so common over here. You live in France, right? Violent crime is on the rise in France, meanwhile violent crime in the US is on a decline. France's violent crime rates have already been higher than those of the US. But now that gap is widening. You know what's on the rise in the US? Gun ownership. Whether or not they're linked is irrelevant, what is relevant is that this disproves the theories that higher gun ownership rates will increase violent crime. In which crazy world do you live where it is normal to carry a gun when visiting a daycare center?The real world, where we realize that no place is safe. Doesn't matter how much society wishes otherwise. Do not confuse the realization that one can be attacked anywhere as meaning that one is likely to be attacked everywhere. Nor does it indicate paranoia. It's simply being prepared in case something does happen. It is better to be prepared, than to wish you were prepared. Just ask this lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 That's not the majority that's a vocal minority. Mostly southern. And if you're gonna start trotting out your anecdotal evidence, have I ever got an anecdote for you. It's personal though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beriallord Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Rtc.gif Gun rights have expanded quite a bit over the years in most states. And its not just about the South, look at Vermont, unrestricted and been that way for a long time. Edited January 30, 2012 by Beriallord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoofhearted4 Posted January 30, 2012 Author Share Posted January 30, 2012 people seem to think that if people had guns, they would be walking the streets with an AR strapped around their shoulder....if you walked into a place, and everyone had a handgun, you wouldnt necessarily know it. yes some people prefer to carry them in holsters. other prefer to conceal them in purses, waistbands or what have you....also, any weapons ppl would carry would be a handgun. not an AR or anything like that. and if anyone was carrying such a weapon, you wouldnt have to fear. there is no way in hell a person would be able to target down people with an AR when everyone else around him had a gun. he would have more bullets in him then he could fire. on the statement of not wanting dangerous people have guns. only responsible people....how do you make the decision. you say check their history. what if a legit psycho bought a gun, but had a clean history. not everyone whos out to harm has already done so and as such a background check does absolutely nothing....also those people who are out to harm, usually only harm those who cant defend. again, if someone plans on robbing a bank, they dont expect everyone in the bank to be packing. even a psycho realizes 10 against 1. making the process to get a gun harder and longer only deters one from getting a gun. getting a gun should be as simple as going to the gun store and buying one. if a law was passed to make it easier to own guns and carry those guns, and the majority of people did in fact own a gun, its quite possible you would see gun accidents or crimes involving guns rise. at first. something like this wouldnt be the norm over night. it would take a generation or two of kids growing up with guns, using them at a young age. you wouldnt need to require gun safety classes because a gun would be second nature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 You'd be surprised what I notice about people. You can stop trying to paint me as a non-gun owner, or as if I don't support gun ownership. Many people support gun ownership. Not many people support open carry. What I see is a trend toward unhealthy lifestyles, irresponsibility, mental and bodily illness, entitlement, and incivility. Not the generation I want to see brandishing weapons when they're pissed off at the customer service counter, or they didn't get the cole slaw with their happy meal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syco21 Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 That's not the majority that's a vocal minority. Mostly southern. It's not just the south. Northern states have some of the least restrictive gun laws in the nation. http://www.opencarry.org/maps.htmlHell, just look at those maps. As you can see, in many of the maps, there are more favorable northern states than southern. If it is just a vocal minority, then how do you explain the large number of states change their laws to be more pro-gun ownership/carry? If the majority are against carry, then why is support for gun control groups at an all time low? Why is it that ownership and carry license applications are on the rise? Why are pro-carry groups swelling in numbers? And if you're gonna start trotting out your anecdotal evidence, have I ever got an anecdote for you. It's personal though.Where did I trot out anecdotal evidence? What's your story? You'd be surprised what I notice about people. You can stop trying to paint me as a non-gun owner, or as if I don't support gun ownership. Many people support gun ownership. Not many people support open carry.Really? http://www.opencarry.org/images/opencarrymap.png Looks like a lot of states allow open carry whereby they didn't allow carry at all not that long ago. Mostly northern states at that. :whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 You'd be surprised what I notice about people. You can stop trying to paint me as a non-gun owner, or as if I don't support gun ownership. Many people support gun ownership. Not many people support open carry. What I see is a trend toward unhealthy lifestyles, irresponsibility, mental and bodily illness, entitlement, and incivility. Not the generation I want to see brandishing weapons when they're pissed off at the customer service counter, or they didn't get the cole slaw with their happy meal. And I bet your parents would say the same about the generation after them, and your grandparents of the generation following them, etc. You are in england, are you not? I think a lot of it is about culture. By and large, those that have lived with extremely strict laws regarding gun ownership, have an entirely different attitude than those that have not. I support gun ownership, and I support the right to carry. Open, or concealed, should the choice of the carrier. If you look at the compiled information, you will find few, if any, instances where a LICENSED gun possessor committed a crime with that weapon. When Gabrielle Giffords was shot, several CIVILIANS with weapons subdued the shooter, none of them fired a shot, a couple of them didn't even draw their weapons. Just because you ARE armed, doesn't REQUIRE you to fire your weapon at any available opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myrmaad Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Yes really. Even by that map. Calls us an open carry friendly state, but it means carry in your car in the open, (which means bullets have to be away from the gun). I can carry my gun on the seat next to me, but I have to put the bullets in the trunk. That's not strapped to my thigh in public. Now you boys have fun with your pipe dreams. I'll leave you to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts