This is why we should all have the right and the possesion of a firearms.

Originally posted by MR BOB
frightening at the time yes. not now. not many years after it happend. i was quite young then, and stupid.

getting shot is not something i fear. i dont live in a warzone, i haven't made myself any enemies. why would it frighten me? if i was scared of living here i would move.

edit on 27-1-2011 by MR BOB because: (no reason given)

well ok, that's a bit more likely to be truthful.
so both your youth and naivete then, and a lack of encounters since, contribute to your 'lack of fear today' ... that i'd believe.

i don't understand how you contrive 'afraid of living here' with defending oneself anywhere.
i am not afraid to live where i do but it certainly is a danger zone and being prepared is prudent.
besides, the person who did get shot was the 'new arrival' if ya will ... us 10yrs, them 1.5 ... even though they were the danger, why should we move?

For those using guns in a defensive manner they will always be reactive to the threat. Advantage, criminal for being proactive.

One could argue the elderly couple would now be dead for the price of $18 and their two guns now add to the firepower of their killers.

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by Rocky Black

 

Guns have no place in the world now and they will have no place in civilised society in the future

Its all very well and good claiming a Gun is for defensive purposes but they arnt they are an Offensive weapon that should neither be Used or even seen because of the distress they cause, Dont like it? Maybe try making our world a better place that doesnt require firearms.

Guns are for people who arnt powerfull enough to use words to sort thier problems

Yea,disarm all of the law abiding citizens while all the criminals are still armed?make sense?I don't think so,I think we should stop worrying about the rights of the criminals and remember the rights of the victims and lock these sob up for life ,better yet lets use the old an eye for an eye........... yes,that would make them think twice.

reply to post by Helmkat


Guns are used between 1.25 and 2.5 million times a year for defense. Sorry, but this idea that guns aren't effective for defense is unfounded.

ETA:
According to the 2000 criminal victimization survey 550 rapes and 1,100 posible murders were stopped every day by defensive gun use.

Originally posted by brokedown
If there were no firearms people would use swords and spears , bows and arrows. Some Humans are just violent by nature, the rest of us need to protect our families and ourselves from these mis-guided souls.

The sight of Firearms do not scare me, it is just the opposite for me, the lack of a visible firearm is disconcerting. I understand that most of my fellow countrymen are well adjusted, law abiding, patriot Americans, who would lay down their own life for the protection of others. So when I see people caring their firearm in public I am safer, because I know that a criminal will choose a soft, unprotected target over a well armed group. When they don’t make that choice we have a word for that as well, it is Suicide. There are some “crazies” out there and when the entire group is armed the actions of said “Crazies” is severely limited.

If is was up to me I would allow firearms to be carried openly by everyone, everywhere. I can assure you that the crime rate would fall.

Ha,ha isn't that one of Archie Bunker's laws?He once said how should you handle hijackers on airplanes?..........pass out guns to all the passengers.

Originally posted by Rocky Black
reply to post by Pittsburgh

 

Hey Pitts,

can you have a little real life chat with Mr ted.

Tell him how well his lip service would work on the streets of Philly.

I bet it would get him dead.

In Philly they shoot first and ask questions later and that is the cops!!

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
reply to post by TedHodgson

 

Your logic is flawed completely. In fact what your trying to say is the Utopian England, and everywhere else that has the foolish idea that self defense is the bailiwick of law enforcement, Is blessed with humans who can be reasoned with. That is just not and never has been logical. Passing laws that are supposed to legislate behavior is a fools errand. It makes victims of anyone who lets that be their guide and does nothing but fills the pockets of the ruling class that makes these laws ,Not to protect their citizenry , but to protect themselves from the unwashed they are overseeing. They look at it in that light also. They are 'The Rulers' and all else their serfs. If that wasn't true then English Common law, that our very Constitution is based on, would not have changed to make subjects of rather than citizens of Britain. Your 'Politically Correct' changes in English Law have caused more problems and made criminals of those same citizens.
You see here in the US, the coppers have no 'affirmative Duty' to protect their citizens. Even if they constantly bombard us with the logo "To Protect and Serve'! What that really means, and our courts have upheld,is that they are there to protect the laws themselves and NOT the citizens.

No Affirmative Duty

I'm willing to bet that the coppers in Britain have the very same mandate!
There's also the psychotic idea that self defense is unnecessary!

Raging against 'Self Defense'

Zindo

Damn that was well said,the day they remove our right to bear arms is the day we burn the Constitution.Officers protect the law and the criminals rights instead of the citizens and victims rights.

reply to post by TedHodgson


a world with no guns would be a world full of swords and blunt weapons id rather take a bullet to the temple instead of gettin my head smashed in think about it dude

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Helmkat

 

Guns are used between 1.25 and 2.5 million times a year for defense. Sorry, but this idea that guns aren't effective for defense is unfounded.

ETA:
According to the 2000 criminal victimization survey 550 rapes and 1,100 posible murders were stopped every day by defensive gun use.

edit on 27-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

Only because the criminal assumes there is no gun. When the criminal assumes there is a gun? they will shot first, take what they want, leave the victim bleeding.

The nature of the conflict will simply evolve.

reply to post by Helmkat


Actually 48 states allow for concealed carry. So, if a criminal assumes there is no gun he is taking a very dangerous gamble. Florida was one of the first to start allowing concealed carry in 1987 or 1988. They have had a declining crime rate ever since. Seems to me like the criminals haven't evolved their methods too much.

Gun use for personal defense is nothing new in America. John Adams argued for the second amendment partially based on the right to use guns for self defense. The idea that guns aren't useful in self defense is actually much newer than the proof that they do.

One of my biggest regrets is and always will be that I cannot own a firearm. While this seems to be turning into a pi$$i^g match, I just wanted to state that...
Unfortunately if SHTF I will be slinging a blade or some other form of ancient methods of defending myself. But I tell you one thing, I will fight for my right to survive. All of you peaceful loving "types" will be the first ones gone, taken advantage of by the people that put morals below self.
Of course this is, if the bottom falls out.

reply to post by liejunkie01


If they're LUCKY they'll be the first ones gone... It's FAR more likely they will be made into slaves and forced to work for those who are more aggressive...

Jaden

reply to post by Evanzsayz


gun control advocates are under a vast misapprehension of the lethality of firearms and for that matter the ease of use of firearms.

A blow from a sword or from an axe is FAR more likely to result in death than a bullet and something like 95% of all gun shots happen within 7-12 ft, well within the reach of a sword or axe.

If someone who wants to kill someone can't get a hold of a gun they will get a hold of some other type of arms.

People often don't consider that the right to bear arms applies to ALL arms, not just guns and rifles.

Jaden

reply to post by Truth_Hz


I didn't say all of it. I said the vast majority of it.

The rural areas have far less crime period... not just violent gun crime. Most violent crime world wide is in metropolitan areas and the poorer areas within metropolitan areas...

Yeah and I'm just another redneck from America with a 150 IQ and three university degrees...

Don't let my southern drawal and ability to shoot you at 1400 yds fool you, I'm as smart as a button...I was just smart enough to recognize an attempt at indoctrination by the educational paradigms that exist today...

Jaden

reply to post by Honor93


you're also full of crap... there is no such thing as registering your hands as lethal weapons... The only place that it is ever even considered is AFTER a crime of serious injury has occurred, then professional boxers and or fighters can be considered to have used a deadly weapon in the altercation.

One of the reasons I've never fought professionally.

I'd like to be able to USE my hands to defend myself without fear of going to prison for life.

Jaden

reply to post by Honor93


actually it's stupid to turn and run from someone who pulls a gun on you, tactically speaking. If you turn and try to run (depending on how close you are), they have to move only marginally to still shoot you as you run. if you get the right training, you can move toward them and to the outside of their shooting arm and gain control of the firearm. If you try to flee, you are putting your life in their hands, If you learn to protect yourself, you are taking responsibility for your own safety....

Jaden

Disarm??? LMAO, this site is full of bologna. If you " gun control" morons really want to take guns away how about we start with taking them away from the biggest gang in America: Law Enforcement. Maybe citizens would be more willing to lay down their weapons if this wasn't a world full of them. Go ahead and ban it all folks, last time I checked "criminals" don't care about what laws you pass.

Protect yourself and your family, don't be stupid!

Long live the 2nd amendment!

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by Rocky Black

 

Guns have no place in the world now and they will have no place in civilised society in the future

Its all very well and good claiming a Gun is for defensive purposes but they arnt they are an Offensive weapon that should neither be Used or even seen because of the distress they cause, Dont like it? Maybe try making our world a better place that doesnt require firearms.

Guns are for people who arnt powerfull enough to use words to sort thier problems

Your so full of crap and what makes it even worse is that I have no doubts that you believe every single word you posted. Make the world a better place?? Are you serious? Next thing you know, you are going to suggest I go out and buy the world a coke and a smile lol.

There is some very fundamental flaws in your logic. If a gun is an Offensive weapon, why do police carry them? If their sole purpose is offensive, would that not make every police officer a criminal? Of course it doesn't, we do not see (often) police running around waving guns for no good reason. Police use firearms defensively.

Here is a video for you... I would love for you to watch it and tell me what powerful words you would have used to settle the situation down...



The homeowner, didnt know who had entered his home. As you can see, they just pulled up in broad daylight, armed, and made entry into the home. Luckily for this homeowner, he was home and armed as well. Criminals look for easy targets and when he fired he was no longer an easy target and our armed suspects ran the hell out of there. Yet you would have people believe that this homeowner is wrong and could have settled this situation with words? You can feel free to believe that, that is why you will be a victim and I will be a survivor.

reply to post by TedHodgson


Meanwhile in reality. If guns were band criminals would still have them. That way, when you're being mugged and the aggressor is violently beating you, I'm sorry but I doubt he or she is going to kindly respond to your polite request of "Err... please Mr. Aggressor, could you not beat me so savagely? It does quite hurt."

reply to post by TWILITE22


Thank You, Amigo. I tend to be somewhat testy when others who have no vested interest in the USA keep trying to tell us how we should live when their own countries are screwing them more often then in a porno movie!

Zindo