Why Do People Think They Need A Gun?

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Answer

Excellent examples of the need for a gun, and S&F for the thread. All considered, I wonder why anyone believes they don't need a gun!

I personally don't need a gun. But I live in a place where almost nobody has a gun, so I don't worry about getting raped at gunpoint. Though, I still do carry a small blade in my purse.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: butcherguy
How would your arm reach from the property line to my throat when I am in the third floor window aiming a rifle at your noggin? Stretch Armstrong?

Hey. I wasn't against your gun right but you still had to go all..... imo stupid.

Just saying, if you are against it now, and want to come take them.....

Don't forget your stiff arm and a knife, if that's all it takes.

I was just pushing the old 'sheep passing a law that insists on wolves being vegetarian' line.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Manual override option makes sense, just like making sure that children under the age of 10 are always supervised while outside, just to make sure that nothing horrible happens to them, right?

Under ten? Oh yes. Don't let them out of your sight. Once they hit the double digits, depending on their personal development up to then, they can be afforded some measure of freedom.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes i don,t need one cause probably 90-95% of britain don,t own one and the ones that do are farmers.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

To you and to those of you who didn't actually click and study the link, the stats ARE broken down and have full details of the incidents and links to news sources covering the incidents.

I agree that the stats doesn't really tell anything other than people die from other peoples use of guns, but it clearly shows a picture of who is using the guns, defender as well as attacker and the situations they were used in.

And that picture is clear, the wrong use of a gun is the dominator.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Totally agree with you there. No point at all in attempting to ban guns in America. Not gonna happen. Ever.

Just talking theoretically here though, it's better to have a society with no guns than to have a society where everyone has a gun. Surely no one can disagree with that. It's a damn shame America got so enamored with guns early on, in my opinion - too late for us to fix the situation now. All we can do is try to keep the wackos and the weirdos and the retards from getting them.

Humans have been carrying and stocking weapons since we first found out that a rock hammer can kill another person. It's no different. Personally, I don't see a need for me to own a gun or a weapon. Just one more thing for me to worry about.
If someone wants to own one, then go ahead. Just educate yourself and those immediately around you (family and such).

But, think of this, all the stories you come up with about people defending themselves is severely outweighed by miss use, illegal, evil etc use. So yes it might have saved a couple hundred thousand over the last 300 years or so, but guns have have also killed millions. It's a double edged sword here.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Totally agree with you there. No point at all in attempting to ban guns in America. Not gonna happen. Ever.

Just talking theoretically here though, it's better to have a society with no guns than to have a society where everyone has a gun. Surely no one can disagree with that. It's a damn shame America got so enamored with guns early on, in my opinion - too late for us to fix the situation now. All we can do is try to keep the wackos and the weirdos and the retards from getting them.

Agreed 100%. A society sans guns is always preferable to a society with guns, so long as the government is honorable, democratic, and fair. I sometimes worry about what would happen if Emperor Akihito suddenly was like "To hell with all this diplomacy and democracy crap, we feudal now!", since I can't defend myself against Japanese troops, but so far the experiment in Japan seems to be a rousing success story to a civilization without guns. Though admittedly, we're a little weird. What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Totally agree with you there. No point at all in attempting to ban guns in America. Not gonna happen. Ever.

Just talking theoretically here though, it's better to have a society with no guns than to have a society where everyone has a gun. Surely no one can disagree with that. It's a damn shame America got so enamored with guns early on, in my opinion - too late for us to fix the situation now. All we can do is try to keep the wackos and the weirdos and the retards from getting them.

Agreed 100%. A society sans guns is always preferable to a society with guns, so long as the government is honorable, democratic, and fair. I sometimes worry about what would happen if Emperor Akihito suddenly was like "To hell with all this diplomacy and democracy crap, we feudal now!", since I can't defend myself against Japanese troops, but so far the experiment in Japan seems to be a rousing success story to a civilization without guns. Though admittedly, we're a little weird. What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

I think it has more to do with testing a blade by bisecting peasants.

That gets in to the gene pool at some point.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Totally agree with you there. No point at all in attempting to ban guns in America. Not gonna happen. Ever.

Just talking theoretically here though, it's better to have a society with no guns than to have a society where everyone has a gun. Surely no one can disagree with that. It's a damn shame America got so enamored with guns early on, in my opinion - too late for us to fix the situation now. All we can do is try to keep the wackos and the weirdos and the retards from getting them.

Agreed 100%. A society sans guns is always preferable to a society with guns, so long as the government is honorable, democratic, and fair. I sometimes worry about what would happen if Emperor Akihito suddenly was like "To hell with all this diplomacy and democracy crap, we feudal now!", since I can't defend myself against Japanese troops, but so far the experiment in Japan seems to be a rousing success story to a civilization without guns. Though admittedly, we're a little weird. What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

I think it has more to do with testing a blade by bisecting peasants.

That gets in to the gene pool at some point.

At least we knew they WORKED. >:|

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

That does not make you weird, it makes you hot.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Totally agree with you there. No point at all in attempting to ban guns in America. Not gonna happen. Ever.

Just talking theoretically here though, it's better to have a society with no guns than to have a society where everyone has a gun. Surely no one can disagree with that. It's a damn shame America got so enamored with guns early on, in my opinion - too late for us to fix the situation now. All we can do is try to keep the wackos and the weirdos and the retards from getting them.

Agreed 100%. A society sans guns is always preferable to a society with guns, so long as the government is honorable, democratic, and fair. I sometimes worry about what would happen if Emperor Akihito suddenly was like "To hell with all this diplomacy and democracy crap, we feudal now!", since I can't defend myself against Japanese troops, but so far the experiment in Japan seems to be a rousing success story to a civilization without guns. Though admittedly, we're a little weird. What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

I think it has more to do with testing a blade by bisecting peasants.

That gets in to the gene pool at some point.

At least we knew they WORKED. >:|

It doesn't hurt if its done quickly.

The thing about guns is-- they are a handle on the thought that our country was made by force, and force is the last resort against tyranny.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

What with the tentacle porn and seifuku.

That does not make you weird, it makes you hot.

originally posted by: strongfp


But, think of this, all the stories you come up with about people defending themselves is severely outweighed by miss use, illegal, evil etc use. So yes it might have saved a couple hundred thousand over the last 300 years or so, but guns have have also killed millions. It's a double edged sword here.

Of course I'm aware of that but my thread was addressing a very particular point i.e. "nobody needs a gun for protection" and the constant claims that self-defense with a firearm is incredibly rare.

I found 14 media-reported stories since just the beginning of March, 2015 and that doesn't account for the non-stories when someone showed a gun and the criminal ran away.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

You started.

Anyway, i made my point, and see we get no further as i see your counter points as flawed.

It's not that i don't want to debate, i just see your points as silly, thereby a waste of time.

So despite the facts I've posted, you can dismiss my entire argument because you think it's "silly"?

Okay.

Well that's the technique--arbitrarily declare opposing points as "silly" so you can ignore them and then claim victory. It won't get you very far in a highschool debate team, but works well for the Internets.

Great post man! I was expecting a completely different view until I read it.. I believe if people are to own any type of fire arms then they should be responsible enough to shoot them frequently enough so they know how to use them properly. Otherwise the gun owner might not hit the target they were aiming for... And I'm only talking about people who buy guns that have never owned or used them before and are buying them for home protection. Obviously when getting a CCW you have to pass the class with some more knowledge then you would need to buy the gun in the first place. I'm from Cali and our laws are ridiculous out here you can hardly get a CCW in most of the counties here its sad. Again thank for a great posta reply to: Answer

originally posted by: NavyDoc

Well that's the technique--arbitrarily declare opposing points as "silly" so you can ignore them and then claim victory. It won't get you very far in a highschool debate team, but works well for the Internets.

And in Monty Python films.

originally posted by: sparky31
trying to convince an american that guns are the problem i may as well talk to a brick wall so i aint even going to try.

all i,ll say is where i stay in the last 15 years i,ve heard of 2 gun crimes,now i maybe way off but it mite be fact that not everyone carrys a gun.

i know thats probably just crazy.

Crime is the problem, not guns.

In Switzerland, gun ownership is very prevalent but the crime rate is incredibly low. In the UK, gun ownership is very low but the crime rates are incredibly high.

The US just happens to have a combination of high crime and a lot of guns. When one focuses only on "gun crime" it always skews the figures. When you look at overall crime rates, both violent and non-violent, you find that it has absolutely nothing to do with the availability of guns.

Anti-gun folks always choose to focus on "gun violence" instead of the overall crime picture because the broader data doesn't fit with their agenda.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

You started.

Anyway, i made my point, and see we get no further as i see your counter points as flawed.

It's not that i don't want to debate, i just see your points as silly, thereby a waste of time.

So despite the facts I've posted, you can dismiss my entire argument because you think it's "silly"?

Okay.

Well that's the technique--arbitrarily declare opposing points as "silly" so you can ignore them and then claim victory. It won't get you very far in a highschool debate team, but works well for the Internets.

That sounds like a Debate Forum challenge. We have a good one.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Answer

Excellent examples of the need for a gun, and S&F for the thread. All considered, I wonder why anyone believes they don't need a gun!

I personally don't need a gun. But I live in a place where almost nobody has a gun, so I don't worry about getting raped at gunpoint. Though, I still do carry a small blade in my purse.

Better not be over 6cm blade length!