Self defense not a valid reason to own a firearm

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
i.stuff.co.nz...

THIS WEEK In NEW ZEALAND, guns save lives and prevent crime

And to think, the homeowner is facing ZERO charges for this

Much to the dismay of the pathetic left

Please re-read the article.

The offender was shot, in his hand, with his own gun. No lives were taken, no lives were saved. Things could have gone horribly worse.

This is an example of the criminal having the gun, and is therefore, a strong argument for tighter firearm restrictions.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Alien Abduct
a reply to: chr0naut

The point is as far as guns, the cat is out of the bag. If starting today they were to make guns illegal, who would turn in their guns? Law abiding citizens or criminals?

Obviously the criminals won't be turning in squat because those murdering raping thieves are already felons and are already illegally possessing guns so all you would have left would be unarmed sitting ducks and armed rapist-murdering- thieves.

Get it now?

In other countries that have limited proliferation, simply having a weapon in your possession without legal permit, is a criminal offense, with mandatory sentence of jail time.

It's already illegal for convicted felons to possess a firearm. It is also already illegal to carry one without a permit. How's that working out now?

If a criminal has such a weapon on them during the commission of a crime, that is taken by the law as intent and extends their sentence at least to intended manslaughter.

They are going in there fully intended on killing and raping, they aren't worried about another lesser felony LMAO

So the criminals come to know that they must either divest themselves of their illegal firearms, or they must hide them very carefully. If they hide them carefully, they are far less likely to be carrying them during the commission of a crime or for any other reason. So therefore, gun crime is reduced over time.

Did you not know that it is already illegal for criminals to possess fireams?

Where law enforcement have strong suspicion of suspected criminals holding illegal firearms, that in itself may well be enough for authorities to perform a raid and search, and the criminals can be jailed on that criteria alone. Further reducing the criminal ownership of illegal weapons, and getting criminals off the street.

What's stopping them from doing that now?

The 2nd Amendment and the inability to prove intent, prior to a court case and the commission of a crime, is stopping that.

In countries where firearms are properly regulated, the firearm must be registered and the owner must be vetted and adjudged fit to own a firearm. Almost universally, in those countries, self defense is not a valid reason to own a firearm.

Gun law in New Zealand - Self Defense
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This thread is about South Africa. There is no 2nd amendment there.

I know that.

South Africa is amending their law to make it clear that under that law, self defense is no good reason to own a firearm.

Probably this is because of the number of criminals who try and legitimize their purchase firearms, predominantly used in criminal activity, as being for "self defense".

a reply to: chr0naut

South Africa, the U.S., Australia, Jordan, Spain, Mars, anywhere, the criminals are always going to be able to get guns. When you control what the law-abiding citizens get, the criminals rejoice.

Thank you, Suh, may I have another. That is true everywhere. The only equality is to allow the law-abiding citizen to protect themselves.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: chr0naut

stupid 3 strikes laws *cough* biden *cough* that primarily impacted minority communities and revolved around oh you have a little marijuana on you and you have been arrested twice before for possession ... to the gulag with you for 10-20.

that is the biggest single reason for our heavy incarceration rate, and neither party wants to stop taking for profit prison money so its not likely to stop.

The three strikes laws were first put forward towards the end George H. W. Bush's (Republican) Presidency and passed into law under the subsequent Presidency of Bill Clinton (Democrat). In some states, Repeat or Habitual Offenders or Persistent Felony legislation's had existed since prohibition in the 1920's.

Three-strikes law From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The real rise in incarcerations in the USA began from 1982, under the presidency of Ronald Reagan (Republican). It peaked in 2008 under the Presidency of George W. Bush (Republican).

United States incarceration rate From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

originally posted by: argentus
a reply to: chr0naut

South Africa, the U.S., Australia, Jordan, Spain, Mars, anywhere, the criminals are always going to be able to get guns. When you control what the law-abiding citizens get, the criminals rejoice.

Thank you, Suh, may I have another. That is true everywhere. The only equality is to allow the law-abiding citizen to protect themselves.

Sure, some criminals will always get illegal firearms - that is no reason to distribute them to all other criminals.

And weapons proliferation leads to tactical escalation, too.

a reply to: chr0naut

And weapons proliferation leads to escalation, too.

Were that bs opinion true, there would be rpg exchanges in the streets.
Go try lies elsewhere.

You can, however, expound on the ability to exploit another countries welfare system.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut

And weapons proliferation leads to escalation, too.

Were that bs opinion true, there would be rpg exchanges in the streets.
Go try lies elsewhere.

You can, however, expound on the ability to exploit another countries welfare system.

No, in terms of portable and concealable weapons, escalation would take the form of automatic and semi-automatic weapons or larger caliber and higher velocity rounds.

The examples of such escalation in criminal weapons of choice are already apparent.

a reply to: chr0naut
We have gone from tommy guns weilded by al capone to ak's weilded by crips and bloods.
Your "escalation " theory is crap.
As is your assessment of self defense.

But those that have no rights pissing on those who do is always amusing.
Thanks for the laughs hobbit.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut
We have gone from tommy guns weilded by al capone to ak's weilded by crips and bloods.
Your "escalation " theory is crap.
As is your assessment of self defense.

But those that have no rights pissing on those who do is always amusing.
Thanks for the laughs hobbit.

We do have rights here down-under. Ours are more comprehensive than the US Bill of rights, because ours are compliant with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US does not ratify.

We have economic, social, educational, medical, and cultural rights the US Bill does not even address.

In fact it appears to me that there is actually nothing in the US Bill of rights that guarantees anything to do with standard of living.

Pretty crap, eh. Imagine living in a country where there was no guiding principles with consideration for the well-being and happiness of its citizens, just a balance between autocracy and anarchy where people must eke out an existence however they can.

a reply to: chr0naut

We do have rights here down-under.

Down under?
You left Australia didn't ya?
Lol to try to steal that moniker now is hilarious!!!
Thanks for another laugh refugee.

ours are compliant with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US does not ratify.

Yep
We do not need the rest of the world to show "compliance ".
We will NEVER bow to the rest of the world. Why would we when we are far above it.

In fact it appears to me that there is actually nothing in the US Bill of rights that guarantees anything to do with standard of living.

Correct, as we are not communist.
We afford opportunities, not government leashes.
I understand how much you enjoy yours.
What the government gives, it can take.

But we do lack a right to open carry a firearm.

Yep, you do.
Quite sad your government doesn't think you have enough responsibility to do so.

Interesting you chose to ignore your crap "escalation" theory. Or perhaps not......

Good day hobbit.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut

We do have rights here down-under.

Down under?
You left Australia didn't ya?
Lol to try to steal that moniker now is hilarious!!!
Thanks for another laugh refugee.

'Down under' refers to the Southern Hemisphere, not Australia. And I am an Australian citizen, living at an even lower latitude than many Australian cities, so I'm even further South.

ours are compliant with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which the US does not ratify.

Yep
We do not need the rest of the world to show "compliance ".
We will NEVER bow to the rest of the world. Why would we when we are far above it.

It has nothing to do bowing to other authorities. Rights are guidelines that assist in the fair application of laws for all who live under them. Not having rights is the same as allowing oppression in those regards.

In fact it appears to me that there is actually nothing in the US Bill of rights that guarantees anything to do with standard of living.

Correct, as we are not communist.

Do you perceive that Communist regimes have a better standard of living than you or I? I doubt that.

I live in a strongly Capitalist and affluent country. I'm happy with that. The adoption of so many human rights that the US does not even acknowledge means that there is some assurance here of stability in regard to governance and law.

We afford opportunities, not government leashes.
I understand how much you enjoy yours.
What the government gives, it can take.

Opportunities? There is also nothing to prevent me from taking advantage of the same sort of opportunities within my countries, that you seem to think are only available to US citizens in theirs.

There is also nothing to limit a US government with an authoritarian approach, from doing all but the grossest actions against its own citizens.There is a civil rights history in the US that reflects that.

As established through the statistics previously discussed, the true position of the average US citizen is far from idyllic and truly free.The incarceration to crime statistic indicates an oppressive use of law, to prosecute minor crimes, with long duration sentences. How is that right?

Also, if you look around, there are vast numbers of Americans who do not attain to the very pinnacle of existence - debt free, healthy, and living comfortably, and safely. It will always be this way. But at least there should be some limitation and minimum standards for the vast majority who don't get lucky, or are normal, rather than exceptional.

That is where codifying human rights can help.

But we do lack a right to open carry a firearm.

Yep, you do.
Quite sad your government doesn't think you have enough responsibility to do so.

Interesting you chose to ignore your crap "escalation" theory. Or perhaps not......

Good day hobbit.

Actually, upon contemplation, I realized we do have the legal permission to carry firearms. It is just that we don't just let everyone do it, only those legally authorized to do so safely.This is why I deleted that sentence from my post. I live in an agricultural community and sometimes we need to dispatch an animal or deal with a pest.

Generally, we know those who have firearms for those purposes, and we can call on them for assistance if required. I have done so twice on my property, in as many years.

I can't, however, see a need for me to carry a weapon that has no other use other than being a weapon, in a peaceful and mostly law-abiding modern society. Mine is not a reaction of fear at all. Quite the opposite.

But it sounds like where you live is fairly awful, so I sort of understand your fear.

I still think the USA will never achieve any sort of overcoming of their current situation while they are reactive to it and lack the guts to take affirmative action.

a reply to: chr0naut

Down under' refers to the Southern Hemisphere

Lol
Rio sends its 'down under' regards....
Hahahaha you are so full of crap

Rights are guidelines that assist in the fair application of laws for all who live under them.

Permission from your government is in no way a right.
That's your problem, you don't have a basic understanding of what a right is.
Our Constitution does not grant rights, it limits government from infringing on citizens rights.
All people have rights, not all governments recognize such.

Actually, upon contemplation, I realized we do have the legal permission to carry firearms. It is just that we don't just let everyone do it, only those legally authorized to do so safely.This is why I deleted that sentence from my post.

Such a great example, thank you for it!
If one has to get permission, and is "authorized ", it is not a right.

But it sounds like where you live is fairly awful, so I sort of understand your fear.

Lol
Your insults indicate your failure.
No fear here hobbit, only free people who can do as they like, when they like; with no need for government permission.
Where I live has gained in population recently, so it is in no way as you described "fairly awful".

Again the omission of the crap "escalation " discussion just deflections.
TLB

Invoking the UN Human Rights commission as thought that is somehow a credible or valid institution

Chaired by the likes of Saudi Arabia, Iran, China and Pakistan

Countries that PALE in comparison to the United States as at as human rights are concerned

Held in high regard by morons though

The UN Human Rights Commission is as irrelevant and as discredited as the sham institutions like the CDC and the WHO




Self Defense IS a valid reason for owning a firearm

That’s not disputed

a reply to: Breakthestreak

Chaired by the likes of Saudi Arabia, Iran, China and Pakistan

Excellent point as to why we don't care what "the world" thinks.

a reply to: chr0naut

I live in an agricultural community and sometimes we need to dispatch an animal or deal with a pest.

Generally, we know those who have firearms for those purposes, and we can call on them for assistance if required. I have done so twice on my property, in as many years.

I can't, however, see a need for me to carry a weapon that has no other use other than being a weapon, in a peaceful and mostly law-abiding modern society. Mine is not a reaction of fear at all.

Wait, wait, wait... let me try to wrap my head around this.

You live in a farming community and you call on your neighbors when you have a critter problem to shoot them? And the critters sit quietly and wait for the neighbors to show up and kill them?

Wow... I have a newfound respect for New Zealand. Any country that can train a rabid dog or a angry coon or a ticked off rattlesnake to sit and patiently wait for someone to come and kill them is pretty awesome!

Or plenty full of 100% USDA certified crap...

And you don't experience fear? What was it you experienced when you had to call neighbors to come shoot animals? Melancholy? Happiness? Joy?

So far I have never seen what you are describing. I've seen possums foaming at the mouth in broad daylight heading toward me; I have seen coyotes surrounding me in preparation for an attack; I have seen razorbacks daring anyone to move... but I have never seen one of those sit and wait for someone to come kill them. I have also experienced fear quite a few times in those situations. Ever had a coon break into your house? It's a load of laughs, let me tell you! It's even funnier when you have to call a neighbor, a half-mile or more away in the middle of the night, to come shoot this critter because you deem yourself too irresponsible to own a gun yourself.

Sheesh, I've never seen you but I already know your eyes are brown.

TheRedneck

What’s funny about this is the US is top 5 countries in murders by guns in the world. HOWEVER if you remove NY city Chicago, Los Angeles Miami, and Atlanta all blue cities the US drops to almost 200 in the world.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: chr0naut

I live in an agricultural community and sometimes we need to dispatch an animal or deal with a pest.

Generally, we know those who have firearms for those purposes, and we can call on them for assistance if required. I have done so twice on my property, in as many years.

I can't, however, see a need for me to carry a weapon that has no other use other than being a weapon, in a peaceful and mostly law-abiding modern society. Mine is not a reaction of fear at all.

Wait, wait, wait... let me try to wrap my head around this.

You live in a farming community and you call on your neighbors when you have a critter problem to shoot them? And the critters sit quietly and wait for the neighbors to show up and kill them?

Wow... I have a newfound respect for New Zealand. Any country that can train a rabid dog or a angry coon or a ticked off rattlesnake to sit and patiently wait for someone to come and kill them is pretty awesome!

It is New Zealand. Our biosecurity means that we don't have rabies.

Rabies and other lyssaviruses - NZ Ministry of Health

Nor do we have raccoons.

Nor do we have rattlesnakes.

Or plenty full of 100% USDA certified crap...

And you don't experience fear? What was it you experienced when you had to call neighbors to come shoot animals? Melancholy? Happiness? Joy?

So far I have never seen what you are describing. I've seen possums foaming at the mouth in broad daylight heading toward me; I have seen coyotes surrounding me in preparation for an attack;

Ohhh, big scary possums. We do have Possums, but not the big scary kind.

We don't have Coyotes, either.

I have seen razorbacks daring anyone to move...

I do think we have wild pigs. Just not here in the upper North Island.

but I have never seen one of those sit and wait for someone to come kill them.

Generally, pest species need food and water, and they wait around in areas where they can get those things readily. They aren't hard to find if you are familiar with the territory, because they don't roam very far from where they find those things.

The area where I live is noted for its dairy. The farms are almost uniformly rolling green fields with occasional shelter patches of trees, and sometimes bounded by hedges. It isn't dense wilderness. Even up the nearby peninsula which does have some wild and craggy areas, the farms are not usually heavily wooded.

I have also experienced fear quite a few times in those situations. Ever had a coon break into your house? It's a load of laughs, let me tell you! It's even funnier when you have to call a neighbor, a half-mile or more away in the middle of the night, to come shoot this critter because you deem yourself too irresponsible to own a gun yourself.

Sheesh, I've never seen you but I already know your eyes are brown.

TheRedneck

My eyes are grey-blue. It is due to a mix of genes common to about 10% of people of European or Scandinavian ancestry, and with those that occur in about 1% of Scythian/Caucasian ancestry.

You were probably just making a guess based upon the most frequent human eye color, but you were wrong.

Perhaps it is my light eye color that gives me extra light sensitivity and so I can see pest species at a distance better than most?

originally posted by: Golfintexas
What’s funny about this is the US is top 5 countries in murders by guns in the world. HOWEVER if you remove NY city Chicago, Los Angeles Miami, and Atlanta all blue cities the US drops to almost 200 in the world.

If you similarly remove the largest population centers of all countries used for comparison, in a similar manner, I'm fairly sure that the USA would still fairly close to the top, if not at the very top, in gun violence.

I mean 'what's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander' and 'comparing apples to apples' et al...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut

Down under' refers to the Southern Hemisphere

Lol
Rio sends its 'down under' regards....
Hahahaha you are so full of crap

Rights are guidelines that assist in the fair application of laws for all who live under them.

Permission from your government is in no way a right.
That's your problem, you don't have a basic understanding of what a right is.
Our Constitution does not grant rights, it limits government from infringing on citizens rights.
All people have rights, not all governments recognize such.

Actually, upon contemplation, I realized we do have the legal permission to carry firearms. It is just that we don't just let everyone do it, only those legally authorized to do so safely.This is why I deleted that sentence from my post.

Such a great example, thank you for it!
If one has to get permission, and is "authorized ", it is not a right.

But it sounds like where you live is fairly awful, so I sort of understand your fear.

Lol
Your insults indicate your failure.
No fear here hobbit, only free people who can do as they like, when they like; with no need for government permission.
Where I live has gained in population recently, so it is in no way as you described "fairly awful".

Again the omission of the crap "escalation " discussion just deflections.
TLB

The weapons escalation occurred years ago and is so pervasive that you don't even seem to notice it.

For instance, would a criminal choose a low caliber small magazine pistol for commission of a crime, or would they opt for something with significant stopping power and repeatability?

There are small pistols available...

a reply to: chr0naut

The weapons escalation occurred years ago and is so pervasive that you don't even seem to notice it.

Ahahahaha
Ahahahahaha Ahahahaha
So you are selling that Al Capone and his ilk didn't use tommy guns?
Just quit with the easily debunked lies!!!!

"You lose,
Good day sir!"
Gene Wilder as Willie Wonka