Guns or not Guns

[Syco21]

Actually, you're flat out wrong about the UTA shooting. He was killed by police. An officer involved in the killing oh Whitman went on record to credit the armed citizens with helping to save lives and make it possible for the officers to take him out.

 

And how do you propose we keep guns out of the hands of the crazy? Strict gun laws? Because they work everywhere else? If we had the strict gun laws like Norway, then the shooter would have made it to the middle school and would have killed a lot more kids.

 

 

Many psychologists would disagree that most people aren't rational adults. They are.

 

Having been to a summer camp with guns and having ran a go kart track, I've seen more incidents, nasty ones at that, involving go karts than guns.

 

Of don't think it is a badly idea to instill the rules of gun safety in young children. Actually I think it's a very good idea and think that schools should be required to have gun safety courses. Courses that do not involve "guns are bad, never touch a gun!" Because that just makes kids want to play with them that much more.

[marharth]

Are you referring to another shooting? The one I am talking about ended up the shooter killing himself. Either way the police killed him. Not a citizen.

 

You are simply incorrect in saying that if we had strict gun laws like in Norway the shooter would have made it there. The police would have been called, and HE WOULDN'T OF HAD THE GUN IN THE FIRST PLACE...

 

The majority of people are rational, but we have a rather large chunk in this country that is not. Rationality isn't even a factor really. People do really stupid things when they are extremely mad. Anger makes you irrational.

[Syco21]

Are you referring to another shooting? The one I am talking about ended up the shooter killing himself. Either way the police killed him. Not a citizen.

There's only been one actual mass killing at UT. I assume you are referring to the crazy guy with the AK-47 that went around shooting wildly and then killed himself and himself only. I'm talking about Charles Whitman. Does it matter who killed him? The point is, that when they started shooting, he stopped killing.

 

You are simply incorrect in saying that if we had strict gun laws like in Norway the shooter would have made it there. The police would have been called, and HE WOULDN'T OF HAD THE GUN IN THE FIRST PLACE...

Because the guy in Norway totally didn't have a gun, amirite? The police would have been called, but they had no way of knowing where he was or where he was going or what he was doing. They can not respond instantaneously. How many times does it have to be said? The police are not omnipresent, they are not omniscient. Relying on them is just plain foolish.

 

The majority of people are rational, but we have a rather large chunk in this country that is not. Rationality isn't even a factor really. People do really stupid things when they are extremely mad. Anger makes you irrational.

It doesn't make people murderers.

[hoofhearted4]

Also consider the following. You are extremely mad at someone and you have a gun. In a fit of rage, how easy is it to pull the trigger on a gun, when you compare it to stabbing or beating them to death? You are going to think about cutting someone up or bashing their skull in a lot more then simply moving your finger.

 

sure. its very easy to pull a gun on an unarmed person and kill them. but how easy is it to pull a gun on someone who also has a gun? i have a gun. ive been mad at people. i have yet to kill anyone. any person who is willing to kill someone "in a fit of rage" is going to kill them regardless of the weapon. we might think there is no way we could beat someone, but anyone who can tip off that easily, probably can. so again its a case of, its not the gun, its the person.

 

 

i also think teachers in schools should be allowed to have guns. why not have a gun course required at school. if everyone were allowed to carry guns, a gun course in school would be just as important as taking a foreign language class....and this goes back to me saying, we dont just hand everyone guns and expect a change overnight, we give everyone guns, and once a generation or two grow up with guns, and it becomes the norm for everyone to have a gun at their hip, then you see change.

[WizardOfAtlantis]

Also you are rather lucky that you didn't get yourself killed if you played with a firearm as a kid. Not something you should be advocating, I can say that much.

No, I wasn't lucky, marharth. I was skilled. It is incredibly naive of you to say such a thing. Proves you didn't get the subtext of what I was saying, so no, you can't really say anything (that's true, in this case) because you have only opinions that aren't based on fact (unlike me, in this case).

And you think it's beneficial to help criminals in order to save lives? Well, don't plan on running for office (except maybe here in Italy, which has a corruption level equal to central African nations). Anyone, anywhere, who rules has to know better than that.

Once again:

 

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from man because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, will respect the less important arbitrary ones....and which, if strictly obeyed would put a end to personal liberty?....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence

than a armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

oh, and if it wasn't obvious...the man is talking about self-defense.

If you want to live in a bubble-wrapped world, where all the corners are rounded, and nobody tells you any bad words, where there are no challenges and you don't ever have to struggle, there are places like that, you know....the walls are padded, too, and they'll even give you a nice new jacket at the door.

http://forums.nexusmods.com/public/style_emoticons/dark/laugh.gif

 

[marharth]

Also you are rather lucky that you didn't get yourself killed if you played with a firearm as a kid. Not something you should be advocating, I can say that much.

No, I wasn't lucky, marharth. I was skilled. It is incredibly naive of you to say such a thing. Proves you didn't get the subtext of what I was saying, so no, you can't really say anything (that's true, in this case) because you have only opinions that aren't based on fact (unlike me, in this case).

And you think it's beneficial to help criminals in order to save lives? Well, don't plan on running for office (except maybe here in Italy, which has a corruption level equal to central African nations). Anyone, anywhere, who rules has to know better than that.

Once again:

 

"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from man because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, will respect the less important arbitrary ones....and which, if strictly obeyed would put a end to personal liberty?....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence

than a armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

oh, and if it wasn't obvious...the man is talking about self-defense.

If you want to live in a bubble-wrapped world, where all the corners are rounded, and nobody tells you any bad words, where there are no challenges and you don't ever have to struggle, there are places like that, you know....the walls are padded, too, and they'll even give you a nice new jacket at the door.

http://forums.nexusmods.com/public/style_emoticons/dark/laugh.gif

Personal experience does not equal fact.

 

Last time I checked it is not a very good idea to let kids play with guns, but okay.

 

Also helping criminals is only popular if the criminals are rich. I could easily get elected if I phrased it right :whistling:

 

Seriously though you need to decide which is more important, trying shoot someone who is pointing a gun in your face, or letting him rob you and not risk your life. Everyone wants to be a hero, but half of the time you are going to get shot by a nervous criminal by doing so.

 

Strange that you would say that in the last paragraph, because unlike you I am aware that guns are used for destruction and death. The world is not a pretty place and having more tools of destruction and death won't fix that problem. However if you really think everyone is smart enough and well trained enough to use a gun properly, that jacket might fit you a bit better.

[hoofhearted4]

Last time I checked it is not a very good idea to let kids play with guns, but okay.

 

who said let kids play? your twisting words. no one said just give kids guns and they will figure it out on their own....my 8 year old girl cousin has fired a 9mm with no problem at all. handling a gun teaches one a lot about discipline, and who needs that more then kids. its almost a win win situation.

 

Seriously though you need to decide which is more important, trying shoot someone who is pointing a gun in your face, or letting him rob you and not risk your life. Everyone wants to be a hero, but half of the time you are going to get shot by a nervous criminal by doing so.

 

you dont let it get to that point. your not supposed to wait until you yourself is being cornered with a gun. if it reaches that point, your probably screwed. no one said be the hero. it doesnt even have to end in a death. when a robber hears a gun shot, hes probably going to run. simple as that. if you got a shotgun, the sound of cocking it alone, is enough to make a would be robber run....the point of everyone having guns is to stop the act before it starts. criminals will think twice causing harm, when the likely hood of everyone being armed is much much higher.

 

you can sit there and think of stuff that just may or may not happen till your heart is content. and its not hard to think of. its not a perfect solution. but the amount of crime reduced by everyone having a gun > the amount of crime that continues with everything having a gun. any situation you think of already happens right now. its going to happen more when no one is armed. id place my money on it happening less once everyone is armed.

Edited February 10, 2012 by hoofhearted4

[dazzerfong]

Last time I checked it is not a very good idea to let kids play with guns, but okay.

 

who said let kids play? your twisting words. no one said just give kids guns and they will figure it out on their own....my 8 year old girl cousin has fired a 9mm with no problem at all. handling a gun teaches one a lot about discipline, and who needs that more then kids. its almost a win win situation.

 

Seriously though you need to decide which is more important, trying shoot someone who is pointing a gun in your face, or letting him rob you and not risk your life. Everyone wants to be a hero, but half of the time you are going to get shot by a nervous criminal by doing so.

 

you dont let it get to that point. your not supposed to wait until you yourself is being cornered with a gun. if it reaches that point, your probably screwed. no one said be the hero. it doesnt even have to end in a death. when a robber hears a gun shot, hes probably going to run. simple as that. if you got a shotgun, the sound of cocking it alone, is enough to make a would be robber run....the point of everyone having guns is to stop the act before it starts. criminals will think twice causing harm, when the likely hood of everyone being armed is much much higher.

 

you can sit there and think of stuff that just may or may not happen till your heart is content. and its not hard to think of. its not a perfect solution. but the amount of crime reduced by everyone having a gun > the amount of crime that continues with everything having a gun. any situation you think of already happens right now. its going to happen more when no one is armed. id place my money on it happening less once everyone is armed.

 

Hoofhearted4:

 

Use != play. Use involves a degree of care and discipline, the latter, not so much. Though, I have to agree with a marksmanship and handling course in high schools. My old high school had the privilege of the sport of rifle shooting, which I joined first at small-bore, then progressing to full-bore. Actually handling firearms with care involves a high level of discipline and concentration, something which I laud.

 

The problem, Hoof, is that for your plan to work, as you said, everyone must have a gun. If even one person is left out, there goes the status equality.

 

One thing: if you're cocking the gun, you don't think the 'robber' could just 'rush' you? Just a silly notion :).

Cars aren't essential and it's harder to remove all guns than it is all cars.

 

Guns are used everyday to protect people from threats by both humans and animals.

 

Wow.........just...wow.....you're either the funniest person I know, or the craziest. Please don't tell me that's what the country you live in is like......

Edited February 11, 2012 by dazzerfong

[WizardOfAtlantis]

... unlike you I am aware that guns are used for destruction and death.

Unlike me?

You say foolish things about people as if you knew them.

I can count among my teachers and those whom I hold as mentors members of the special forces, in varying degrees, from the United States, England, and Russia.

I teach military martial arts for a living.

Unlike me, huh?

[hoofhearted4]

Use != play. Use involves a degree of care and discipline, the latter, not so much.

 

so you agree with me then? cause thats what i was saying :P

 

The problem, Hoof, is that for your plan to work, as you said, everyone must have a gun. If even one person is left out, there goes the status equality.

 

by give everyone a gun, i mean allow everyone to have a gun. if anyone doesnt want to have a gun, when surrounded by guns, thats their problem. but to take away everyones right of having a gun, isnt right. you give everyone the option to have and carry a gun. those who dont want to wont, and they will be the ones in the statistics you read.

 

One thing: if you're cocking the gun, you don't think the 'robber' could just rush you?

 

yea, if your cocking in their face. im talking about grabbing your guns in another room....someone hears you cock the gun or better yet, fire a round. most likely they will run off. even if they are armed, they will till most likely run. robbers carry guns to use as a form of suggestion for lack of a better term. they show their guns to you (being unarmed) and you let them have their way. they dont plan on using them. i actually saw on Discovery once, thay many robbers who carry guns into homes dont even have loaded guns, just the gun itself.....so even if they have guns, even if they are loaded, most arent willing to risk their life over some jewelry or a DVD player or what have you, and will attempt another house another time. on top of that, you pretty much just made it clear to them your armed and chances of you being robbed again are slim (at least by them)