sundaynfl Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 If the sane all possessed guns they could shoot the crazies before the crazies caused any harm? True... just like this guy goes crazy and gets shot before he can shoot anyone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 You guys? Who around here has argued that persons should have unfettered access to fiearms? Word, I got your back, Turd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Well, it appeared in the case of the kid from V Tech, there had been diagnosis prior to him getting the gun. So the background check in that case doesn't seemed to have been very good. As I understand it, the judge did not tick off the box that would have had this individual throw a flag on a background check. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Once again. If you voted that there shouldn't be stricter controls on gun ownership, then, by default you are saying it's OK for crazy people to own them because it appears they aren't currently strict enough to prevent that. wrong. pretty sure the very first gun control law ever passed in the US, in 1968, bans the sale of firearms to people with a diagnosed history of mental illness. so it is not a matter of enacting new regulations so much as enforcing current ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted May 24, 2007 Author Share Posted May 24, 2007 One might argue that those restrictions are currently in place and simply need to be adhered to, but I think that is simply a matter of semantics. If nobody ever got speeding tickets regardless of how much they went over the limit and that caused an increase in accidents, one could argue that simply enforcing the current laws on speeding would amount to "stricter controls on speeding". wrong. pretty sure the very first gun control law ever passed in the US, in 1968, bans the sale of firearms to people with a diagnosed history of mental illness. so it is not a matter of enacting new regulations so much as enforcing current ones. I sort of covered that. Great, so there may currently be rules in place to prevent crazy people from having guns. Are they being followed? In my book, actually following a law that is not currently being followed is pretty much the same as having stricter controls. Call it what you want, but I see it like this. Right now, it appears you can be crazy and legally get a gun. I don't want that to be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 So if we just got rid of crazy people... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Word, I got your back, Turd. Word up my brother. :afro: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 So if we just got rid of crazy people... Got rid of them? I'd be happy if we just quit electing them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted May 24, 2007 Author Share Posted May 24, 2007 Got rid of them? I'd be happy if we just quit electing them. OK, I'm down with that. No guns or public office for crazy people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 So if we just got rid of crazy people... Nice...end my career. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I said it before, I don't own a gun and have managed just fine. Thus, I know first hand that it can be done. i'm guessing this just means you have been fortunate enough to not be in a life threatening situation where having a gun could have potentially saved your life, or the life of someone you love. so rather than "managed just fine", i'd say you've just been lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 i'm guessing this just means you have been fortunate enough to not be in a life threatening situation where having a gun could have potentially saved your life, or the life of someone you love. so rather than "managed just fine", i'd say you've just been lucky. I have lightning quick reflexes and can kill with a thought. Oh no, it hasn't been me who has been lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 i'm guessing this just means you have been fortunate enough to not be in a life threatening situation where having a gun could have potentially saved your life, or the life of someone you love. so rather than "managed just fine", i'd say you've just been lucky. isnt that as sad way to look at things... what does it say about our society.... is this the wild wild west .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 (edited) i'm guessing this just means you have been fortunate enough to not be in a life threatening situation where having a gun could have potentially saved your life, or the life of someone you love. so rather than "managed just fine", i'd say you've just been lucky. Unbiased stats on situations where having a gun have actually made a difference in a life threatening situation are pretty sketchy. But unbiased stats on situations where having a gun made zero difference in those same situations are even worse, so its hard to say if being a gun owner is really even worth while for the reason you've stated, other than giving someone the feeling of safety (even if part of it is illusory). What we do know for sure is that most of the time a gun is discharged in the home, it's not to defend against a home invader. Stats for accidental shootings, suicides with guns, kids getting a hold of them, are readily available and conclusivley establish that there is significant downside risk to owning a gun. So when we're talking about people who've been "lucky," let's not forget to count the people who opted *not* to own a gun, and thereby avoided having their children shot themselves or someone else accidentally. You simply can't pretend "that won't happen to me, I'm a responsible gun owner." It happens every year, even to responsible gun owners. Of course, a kid is like 8 times more likely to drown in a back yard pool than to get hurt with a family gun. And you don't see anyone trying to ban back yard pools. So I totally get the relativism of the risk involved. I just wish gun proponents better understood the relativism of the reward involved. Edited May 24, 2007 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted May 24, 2007 Author Share Posted May 24, 2007 Unbiased stats on situations where having a gun have actually made a difference in a life threatening situation are pretty sketchy. But unbiased stats on situations where having a gun made zero difference in those same situations are even worse, so its hard to say if being a gun owner is really even worth while for the reason you've stated, other than giving someone the feeling of safety (even if part of it is illusory). What we do know for sure is that most of the time a gun is discharged in the home, it's not to defend against a home invader. Stats for accidental shootings, suicides with guns, kids getting a hold of them, are readily available and conclusivley establish that there is significant downside risk to owning a gun. So when we're talking about people who've been "lucky," let's not forget to count the people who opted *not* to own a gun, and thereby avoided having their children shot themselves or someone else accidentally. You simply can't pretend "that won't happen to me, I'm a responsible gun owner." It happens every year, even to responsible gun owners. Of course, a kid is like 8 times more likely to drown in a back yard pool than to get hurt with a family gun. And you don't see anyone trying to ban back yard pools. So I totally get the relativism of the risk involved. I just wish gun proponents better understood the relativism of the reward involved. Well said. I have been given no reason to believe that owning a gun would make my life better. It could prevent me from getting robbed. Then again, it could turn a situation where I was simply getting robbed into a situation where someone, including me or my wife, gets shot. I'm not implying that owning a gun is a bad thing. However, if you think that not owning one is a reckless decision (as your implication that I'm simply "lucky" that my life has played out in such a way that I haven't realized the downside of not owning one), I believe your thought process to be very flawed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 The crazy drunk drive better than the elderly. Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I have lightning quick reflexes and can kill with a thought. Oh no, it hasn't been me who has been lucky. Unta is deadly with his Spatulajutsu and TongFu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I'm not implying that owning a gun is a bad thing. However, if you think that not owning one is a reckless decision (as your implication that I'm simply "lucky" that my life has played out in such a way that I haven't realized the downside of not owning one), I believe your thought process to be very flawed. don't think it's reckless, i was reacting to your comment about "managing just fine." i don't own one myself and i'm hoping the situation will not arise where i would need one. that's not a situation i'm managing, however, because the odds are if i am held up or my house is broken into, there would probably be little i could have done to prevent it (other than have my ferocious lasa-poos attack on command). and if one did come up, it could lead me to buy one to never put myself in that position again. so it is pretty much going on hope. regarding the stats, it only takes one time where a gun used to successfully defend a family. i don't let psychos and accidents get in the way of that, even if they do outnumber those situations. i agree with your premise that we need to have strong controls on who gets them and dmd raises the very valid counterpoint that it can be very hard to put those controls in place (and costly). we need to find the right balance that preserves and protects our right to bear arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I said it before, I don't own a gun and have managed just fine. Thus, I know first hand that it can be done. So the drunk driver that has successfully navigated his car from the bar to his home every night for the last 5 years while drunk can also argue that since he has managed just fine that it can be done? Therefore, since he has done it, it must follow that all drunk drivers can drive safely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 Unbiased stats on situations where having a gun have actually made a difference in a life threatening situation are pretty sketchy. But unbiased stats on situations where having a gun made zero difference in those same situations are even worse, so its hard to say if being a gun owner is really even worth while for the reason you've stated, other than giving someone the feeling of safety (even if part of it is illusory). What we do know for sure is that most of the time a gun is discharged in the home, it's not to defend against a home invader. Stats for accidental shootings, suicides with guns, kids getting a hold of them, are readily available and conclusivley establish that there is significant downside risk to owning a gun. So when we're talking about people who've been "lucky," let's not forget to count the people who opted *not* to own a gun, and thereby avoided having their children shot themselves or someone else accidentally. You simply can't pretend "that won't happen to me, I'm a responsible gun owner." It happens every year, even to responsible gun owners. Of course, a kid is like 8 times more likely to drown in a back yard pool than to get hurt with a family gun. And you don't see anyone trying to ban back yard pools. So I totally get the relativism of the risk involved. I just wish gun proponents better understood the relativism of the reward involved. Another thing I know for sure ... I can respond to a life threatening situation in my home much quicker with my own fiream than it will take for the police to mosey their way on down to my house to check out the situation. Steps can be taken to educate your children about firearms and to keep the home safe. Clearly not all gun owners take those steps. But you can point to many places where people don't make the right decision ... including the one where the person that has been drinking all day chooses to drive home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 Also come in handy if you need to blow off the lock on a bathroom door if the door is locked from inside and can not be opened and if hinges can not be removed if they too are on the inside I find the bottom of my boot works really well in these cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I find the bottom of my boot works really well in these cases. Doesn't that leave a manurety foot print on the door? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 "Freedom isn't free" and this is part of the cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 Doesn't that leave a manurety foot print on the door? Yeah, I suppose blowing the door lock to hell and back with a .44 bullet would be cleaner and more of a conversational icebreaker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 (edited) Another thing I know for sure ... I can respond to a life threatening situation in my home much quicker with my own fiream than it will take for the police to mosey their way on down to my house to check out the situation. Steps can be taken to educate your children about firearms and to keep the home safe. Clearly not all gun owners take those steps. But you can point to many places where people don't make the right decision ... including the one where the person that has been drinking all day chooses to drive home. Hey, I'm not arguing with your thought process, which is rational. What I am questioning is the logic of betting the odds of your gun being discharged in a way that makes a difference in a home invasion-type situation (which I hope never happens to you) versus the odds of your gun being discharged in some other manner that you would ultimatley regret. It sounds as if you think that being "responsible" helps you shift the odds more favorably, and I can't argue with that. But even still, IMO the odds are still worse choosing to have a gun in the home, compared to not. However, I grew up in the country and the cops were 30 minutes away, assuming they weren't busy. My family had guns then, and I think that was the right call. So I totally acknowledge the more remote your location, the more you must rely on principles of self-help. Edited May 25, 2007 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.