Concealed weapons

Originally posted by Amuk

And there were 1,000s of people who were killed or raped because the offender had a gun.

Sounds like they should have been packin too

Unfortunately its very hard to get a gun out to shoot someone when a guy walks up behind you and puts a gun to your head.

Originally posted by GabRaz
Yet if the victim had a gun how do u think the offender would react?
In my previous post in this thread I mentioned that 2 million crimes a year are stopped because the potential victim had a gun.

How many of these crimes wouldnt have been attempted in the 1st place if the criminal didnt have a gun himself?

Unfortunately its very hard to get a gun out to shoot someone when a guy walks up behind you and puts a gun to your head.

Would it be better if they hit them from behind with a stick? A gun will not save you EVERYTIME but it d*mn sure increases your odds.

If someone was gonna kill you would you rather be armed or unarmed?

Why is it that in the US yearly almost 12.000 people are killed by guns and in countries like England (60 last year) or France (about 180) so many less?

i think it's this;

When two people fight, they will always look for a way to be stronger than the other. In the emotion of the fight people sometimes go over the edge. Sometimes they grab a stick, a lamp or a bottle that's near them to attack the other. Sometimes a knife. Just anything nearby that will contribute to their strength.

A hit with a stick, lamp or bottle hurts but won't kill, at least that risk is low. When grabbing a gun that's nearby, one single shot can kill the other. Next to that, with a gun you dont have to be near the other one, you can shoot him from a distance. Something you can't do with a stick or bottle.

Having guns around people makes them use it when in a fight. Just because it's there. Keeping the guns away from people will take away the possibility to use this killing-device.

There will not be less fighting. But there will be less dead or badly ingured people.

Originally posted by Dostinus
Why is it that in the US yearly almost 12.000 people are killed by guns and in countries like England (60 last year) or France (about 180) so many less?

i think it's this;

When two people fight, they will always look for a way to be stronger than the other. In the emotion of the fight people sometimes go over the edge. Sometimes they grab a stick, a lamp or a bottle that's near them to attack the other. Sometimes a knife. Just anything nearby that will contribute to their strength.

A hit with a stick, lamp or bottle hurts but won't kill, at least that risk is low. When grabbing a gun that's nearby, one single shot can kill the other. Next to that, with a gun you dont have to be near the other one, you can shoot him from a distance. Something you can't do with a stick or bottle.

Having guns around people makes them use it when in a fight. Just because it's there. Keeping the guns away from people will take away the possibility to use this killing-device.

There will not be less fighting. But there will be less dead or badly ingured people.

We all ready have laws for murder or assult with a deadly weapon...so theres no need for a ban on guns...get my point???

Originally posted by McGotti
We all ready have laws for murder or assult with a deadly weapon...so theres no need for a ban on guns...get my point???

No, because the above statistics prove that they dont work.

Flyer

You did not answer so I will ask you directly......

If some one attacked you and was gonna kill you would you rather be armed or unarmed?

Simple question armed or unarmed?

And what is the difference between someone coming up behind you with a gun to your head, or coming up behind you putting a knife to your throat? Or, coming up behind you and smacking you over the head with a rock? Or, coming up behind you and punching you in the back of the head an knocking you out?


Getting rid of guns does not get rid of weapons. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Knives don't kill people, people kill people. Rocks don't kill people, people kill people.

Originally posted by Milk
And what is the difference between someone coming up behind you with a gun to your head, or coming up behind you putting a knife to your throat? Or, coming up behind you and smacking you over the head with a rock? Or, coming up behind you and punching you in the back of the head an knocking you out?

Thank you for proving my point, the other poster said guns will protect him, they wont even if the criminal doesnt have a gun.

Originally posted by Milk
Getting rid of guns does not get rid of weapons. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Knives don't kill people, people kill people. Rocks don't kill people, people kill people.

Wrong, have a look at the number of people kill by rocks and the number of people killed by guns each year in the US and then get back to me.
Also look at the guncrime in the US vs say Germany, Sweden, Australia or the UK.

It took 1 gun rampage for guns to be banned here yet people are still being killed year after year in schools and at random in the US.
It very hard to do a school rampage with a rock or knife, isnt it?
Have you ever heard of several people being killed by a drive by rock throwing or a drive by stabbing?

the point is that they would try 2 stop that situation from ever hapaning also what is with u must carry a weapon if u wanna protect ur self learn a martial art or be sensible and stay in numbers and 1 thing would u like your children 2 have acess 2 fire arms

oh and wot happens if in the middle of the night u shoot a burgler oh no wait its ur child having a midnight snack u think about that

Never gonna answer that question Flyer?

Armed or unarmed?

Originally posted by Amuk
Never gonna answer that question Flyer?

Armed or unarmed?

Unarmed, because if theres a ban on guns, I know the other guy will not have a gun so Ill take my chances with a fistfight. My friend was attacked by 3 guys, he knocked one out cold, disabled a 2nd and the 3rd ran away. Are you telling me that would happen if both parties had guns?

Besides, if you are attacked by someone with a gun, you will not have time to get your gun and possibly have to load it.

Would you rather have a gunfight than a fistfight?

Hmmm, well it looks like I sparked up a good little debate. Oh and all the harsh words from some of you people, grow up. This is MY opinion, and for me to be ignorant because I don't like violence, well then I wish the rest of the world was as ignorant as me.
Basically this world is a piece of # and we all live in it. Very few people try to make it any better. And those that do get hardly any credit for it.
Guns make people feel powerful, and if you were to have this power taken from you, you would feel weak.
Like I said before I just wish we lived in a world were you didnt have to protect yourself or your belongings from the millions of crazy criminals in this world.
Who knows maybe I am wrong. Maybe we should all be issued a gun when we turn 13 and then we are all protected from each other.
In the end I guess it is people who kill people, so lets do away with all the people!

Originally posted by Flyer


Armed or unarmed?

Unarmed, because if theres a ban on guns, I know the other guy will not have a gun so Ill take my chances with a fistfight.



sorry but....

how can you know if the other guy is following the law or NOT?

Originally posted by Russian
sorry but....

how can you know if the other guy is following the law or NOT?

Look at the guncrime statistics of the UK vs those of the US. If our police dont need guns, why would I?

Originally posted by devilwasp
the point is that they would try 2 stop that situation from ever hapaning also what is with u must carry a weapon if u wanna protect ur self learn a martial art or be sensible and stay in numbers and 1 thing would u like your children 2 have acess 2 fire arms

oh and wot happens if in the middle of the night u shoot a burgler oh no wait its ur child having a midnight snack u think about that

Even the most retarded person can tell the difference between their child rummaging for a snack and the sound of forced entry, sorry. There is a world of difference between the sound of someone breaking out a window or kicking in a door, or even picking the lock and quietly opening the door to get into a house when compared to the sound of a child digging through a cupboard.

I was raised in a household where firearms were plenty. They were all kept locked up, and my father had one key, my grandfather held the spare. That's the way it still is, all the guns are kept locked up to keep children or whoever else doesn't need them from getting them. Also, trigger locks are a wonderful idea. I'm not saying every citizen needs access to assault rifles, but owning a hunting rifle or a handgun doesn't hurt a thing. Also, for us poor bastards in the midwest, our guns aren't here for decoration or use against fellow man, we use them during hunting season to save on our grocery bills. An orange vest, a box of slugs, and a hunting license and BAM, I don't have to buy any meat for almost 4 months.

Speaking from a victim's standpoint, taking away guns will do jacksh�t for violent crime. I have had guns pulled on me, I do know the sound of a bullet as it wizzes by (stumbling onto a methlab is a dangerous fu�king activity, by the way.) and it would be nice if people didn't have to deal with that. The night that I became a victim, no guns were involved, instead, I was cracked in the back with a baseball bat, one of the other guys had a tire iron, and then someone else stabbed me so they could have my wallet. No guns, same result. A guy laying in a parking lot bleeding. Obviously, the wound wasn't fatal, but neither are all gun wounds.

I'm not saying that every person should get a concealed firearm permit, but I think that some sort of a concealed weapon should be allowed. Even in the situation I was in, where I could tell trouble was about to happen, a baton would have helped, I could have cracked at least one of them in the head and maybe kept myself from getting stabbed.

Just my $0.02