Gun Control is ridiculous

[shanek]

I have never been that angry, and I doubt I'll ever get to be that angry. There is no previous evidence that I will, and so all you have is speculation and assumption.

I've been pretty angry at time. Okay, there are times I've been really angry. But I can't imagine anger, no matter how extreme, making me not be in control of my actions. The fact that Claus said that gives me one more reason to worry about him...

My thanks, for the advice.

Whee!

(It's )

Thanks!

 

[baron]

Okay, then.

Run a background check on me. I have no previous convictions. I have never been to a court of law or gone to jail. I do not imbibe alcohol. The one drug I'm addicted to is caffeine (and who isn't?). I have no previous history of assault, though I got into rather silly fights when in middle school (and they were more pathetic than anything else). I also understand basic gun safety. I have never struck, nor been tempted to strike another human being in anger.*

Please demonstrate how I cannot be trusted with a firearm?

I wouldn't trust you with a firearm, not because of your intent, but because of your inexperience in real-life violent situations.

From what you've said I could probably trust you to want to do the right thing, but wanting and doing are two different things.

Don't think of this as a personal attack - it certainly isn't, but based on what you've written I would say that if you, inexperienced as you are, pulled a gun on a streetwise criminal it would be taken off you before you knew what was happening. And even if it wasn't, I'd lay monster odds that you couldn't pull the trigger if it came down to it.

Of course, you disagree, but I can only state my opinion.

In certain instances perhaps just possessing a gun would be enough to make your attackers run, but you need to balance out the pros and cons.

 

[Skibum]

No. What I have is human nature. Unless you live a life on Thorazine, you cannot possibly argue that you will never be so angry that you don't know what you are doing.

Nobody can claim to be able to control themselves at all times.

That is total BS.

I have never lost control, I have never hit anyone in anger, I have been in one "fight" in my life, that was in middle school. During that fight I allowed the kid (he was much smaller and weaker than I, and was pressured into fighting with me) to hit me until he gave up due to his hands hurting too much to continue hitting me.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Some of you anti-gunners are projecting your aggressive personalities onto others who aren't anywhere near as aggressive and apt to fly off into a rage as you.

Guess what no thorazine, I just prefer not to fight or hurt others.

 

[Lonewulf]

I wouldn't trust you with a firearm, not because of your intent, but because of your inexperience in real-life violent situations.

From what you've said I could probably trust you to want to do the right thing, but wanting and doing are two different things.

Don't think of this as a personal attack - it certainly isn't, but based on what you've written I would say that if you, inexperienced as you are, pulled a gun on a streetwise criminal it would be taken off you before you knew what was happening. And even if it wasn't, I'd lay monster odds that you couldn't pull the trigger if it came down to it.

Of course, you disagree, but I can only state my opinion.

In certain instances perhaps just possessing a gun would be enough to make your attackers run, but you need to balance out the pros and cons.

Okay, fair enough. I do lack real-life experience. But be aware that I am a self-practitioner of Krav Maga, which also teaches you how to retain your firearm, as well as knowing what to do in close combat. Never underestimate training and preparation.

If an opponent is close enough to disarm me quickly, then I doubt that I would even pull the firearm in the first place. Obviously, in quarters that close, it is not in my best interest to pull it.

In certain instances perhaps just possessing a gun would be enough to make your attackers run, but you need to balance out the pros and cons.

Perhaps, but I am not convinced that the cons for the gun control we have here in the U.S. is really going to be relieved just by taking firearms off the market. Your proposed control I do not agree with, for a few reasons.

The U.S. is a very large landmass, and we already have illegal smuggling of drugs, and when Prohibition hit, alcohol, and now, illegal immigrants. It's difficult to convince me that we won't just move up to firearms (which we already have a black market of) if you institute controls on the firearms.

 

[Lonewulf]

You have cheated in a debate, by changing your post to the opposite, after it had already been quoted.

I made a mistake in a debate. Yes.

You insult people you disagree with.

Yes, and calling me "dumb" and a "nut" isn't insulting...

What about calling my grandmother crazy and liable to shoot at any noise she hears on the porsche? (Though Baron apologized for that comment, and I harbor no resentment, it was still insulting).

Doesn't really do my argument justice, though, I would admit. But there's been plenty of insults on both sides of this debate.

You have falsely accused people of wanting a woman to be raped and killed, merely because they disagree with you on guns.

I have seen no viable alternative for how she would have been able to defend herself. At least, no alternative that I would wish to force on someone, much less someone in her exact situation.

But yes, I made a mistake there, sure. I admit it, and wish to move on.

You don't strike me as someone who is in complete control at all times. You can't even think straight during a debate on an Internet forum. How can anyone trust you with a gun in real life?

When have I done anything that would even suggest that I am likely to seriously physically harm another person? Making mistakes in what I say is not the same as making mistakes and killing another human being.

The fact that you even connect these two things scares me.

And going by your comment on how you would kill an Air Marshal, I can honestly say that I can see why you project this "out of control" persona onto me. But I am not you. I would not kill another human being without a second thought. And quite frankly, when you proposed that you would kill another human being that had a firearm, you weren't talking about using guns.

And I have yet to get angry enough to think that even attacking another human being is a good thing, much less killing them.

 

[Ranb]

Excuse me, but what gives you the right to decide what weapons of choice I use for hunting?

I most certainly do. Guns are dangerous, there is no question about it. Even the staunchest gun proponent will tell you that it is a lethal weapon, especially in the hands of the wrong people.

Given that there are restrictions on how you can use your gun, how you can store it, what kinds of guns you can own, etc, etc, I would very much like to hear why I should trust you with a gun.

You have argued that guns are unsafe in some people's hands. I want to know why I should trust you with one.

That has to be the most inappropriate comparison I have ever seen.

Are you born with a gun?

If you re-read my post, you will notice that I said nothing about rights, only that your post was crap. It still sounds like you are whining.

Hoplophobia is not a good reason to distrust me. You have no good reason to believe I am a danger to society anymore than I have any reason to fear you even though you claim you would use deadly force to protect yourself and those around you. If I lived in an area where there were no restrictions on firearms, you would trust me with a gun?

I was not born with a gun. However, all men choose how to use their bodies, just as gun owners choose how to use their guns.

Ranb

 

[Lonewulf]

I'm still trying to understand the comparison between a handgun and a grenade...

 

[fuelair]

Call it "pre-minced meat".

Cute tag - but the travel distance of the frag pieces is quite limited under water - it's the concussive pressure that gets them - which is why dynamite is a better choice - you don't waste the more expensive grenades.

 

[Lonewulf]

Cute tag - but the travel distance of the frag pieces is quite limited under water - it's the concussive pressure that gets them - which is why dynamite is a better choice - you don't waste the more expensive grenades.

Did you know that the travel distance of bullets underwater is extremely short? The more powerful the round, the shorter the distance; the bullet actually shreds itself as it bleeds off the acceleration in an extremely short amount of time.

Mythbusters demonstrated this. The weaker the pistol, the less likely going underwater will protect you. Fun stuff.

 

[fuelair]

You might not, others do.



I can see why you don't worry about it, you have a habit of minimizing the statistics you look at.

The way I see it is
You in the UK have roughly a 1 in 20 chance of being a victim of a violent crime during any year.

Sure you can say that only a fraction of those are killed or seriously wounded, thats fine. I prefer to not allow the attacker to be the one to determine if I'm going to be one of those who are seriously wounded or killed.

You might be okay with curling up in a ball while a group of hooligans kick your teeth in, I prefer not to allow that to happen.

You like to look at statistics and say "It will never happen to me", I look at it and realize that anyone at anytime can become one of those statistics.

Call me scared all you like, maybe I am. Perhaps it comes from years of seeing the victims of violence where the attacker decided

not to stop beating the person after they were unconscious
or decided to gut an old man like a fish
or thought it would be fun to sodomize a woman with a knife after raping her
or take an axe to a man and woman while they were in bed

Thats just a portion of the things I've seen that made me realize that I prefer to defend myself rather than leave it up to the attacker to decide my fate.

Unfortunately for you, those types of things happen in your neck of the woods too, the only difference is you are defenseless.

Well and truly spoken - when you or a friend or loved one has been the statistic, you tend to think differently- and plan differently.

 

[fuelair]

People, people....

It's not about violent crime. It's about violent crime involving guns.

Let's say that the Brits had a penchant for beating up their spouses, while the Americans had a penchant for stringing up blacks.

Those two "violent crimes" are hardly comparable.

No, it is about violent crime period. One person with a knife or club, coming out of a dark corner 20 feet or less away from you can harm /kill you even if you are carrying a gun - but if they don't on the first contact, you still have a chance. Without one, congratulations you are a statistic.

 

[Lonewulf]

I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Some of you anti-gunners are projecting your aggressive personalities onto others who aren't anywhere near as aggressive and apt to fly off into a rage as you.

For CFLarson, he scares me, and I think that your statement somewhat applies to him...

Though, I see it as many differences.

Cultural; many of the anti-gun advocates seem to not live in the U.S. They grew up with different values and views of life.

Regional; What works for the U.K. or Singapore or Korea does not work for the U.S. The U.S. is just too big a landmass with an overclocked administration/armed forces that find it hard to stop smuggling.

Personal; I know people personally that have had to deal with a situation with a firearm.

Political; some people want more government regulations in general, and some make it a democratic/republican issue.

And then there's statistical, where the analysis is askew. Yeah, sure, you can prohibit guns and try to attempt to stop gun violence (which in the U.S., I'm not so sure it would work), but then you also have non-gun violence, as mentioned above, which still has the potential to turn deadly.

I'm just not sure that the total gun control advocated in this thread would work, at any level, and I still feel that if you demand people recall their firearms, you would end up making criminals out of a significant portion of the population. I just can't agree with that.

But there also seems to be this perception of the "gun-ho crazy Americans"; this seems to be the perception of people like The Fool, as well as some of the perceptions of Baron (please correct me if I'm wrong). The Fool has even gone on to attack Americans in general in the first few pages of this thread, which is rather irritating. Personally, I was born in Germany. I spent more time in Korea and Germany than in America (though, admittably, in American military camps, but I still got to learn about the local cultures). I don't agree with a lot of American policies and viewpoints; I'm an atheist, I believe in freedom of religion (but also freedom of debate of religion), I'm against the death penalty for a few reasons (was once for it, until I was convinced otherwise), and I just do not think of myself as the "average American". I'm also independent, and am not a member of the Democratic or Republican party (both have good points and bad points, especially at their extremes). I've also never owned a firearm and do not currently own a firearm, and only fired two (relatively recently), yet I knew how to safely operate them before I even laid my hands on them thanks to my book studies. I knew how to fire them, what stances to take, never to point them at someone you don't want to kill, how to make sure they aren't loaded, etc. I even knew how they worked, that a revolver is better than an automatic when it comes to jams, what the differing calibers could actually do, which would kick worse, etc.

 

[CFLarsen]

I've been pretty angry at time. Okay, there are times I've been really angry. But I can't imagine anger, no matter how extreme, making me not be in control of my actions. The fact that Claus said that gives me one more reason to worry about him...

Some of your posts here have been made in extreme anger, where you clearly wasn't able to control yourself.

If you claim that you were, you are in denial.

That is total BS.

I have never lost control, I have never hit anyone in anger, I have been in one "fight" in my life, that was in middle school. During that fight I allowed the kid (he was much smaller and weaker than I, and was pressured into fighting with me) to hit me until he gave up due to his hands hurting too much to continue hitting me.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Some of you anti-gunners are projecting your aggressive personalities onto others who aren't anywhere near as aggressive and apt to fly off into a rage as you.

Guess what no thorazine, I just prefer not to fight or hurt others.

If you have no real-life experience with violence, how do you know how you will react in a violent situation?

Okay, fair enough. I do lack real-life experience. But be aware that I am a self-practitioner of Krav Maga, which also teaches you how to retain your firearm, as well as knowing what to do in close combat. Never underestimate training and preparation.

What do you mean, "self-practitioner"? Did you receive qualified tutoring?

Perhaps, but I am not convinced that the cons for the gun control we have here in the U.S. is really going to be relieved just by taking firearms off the market. Your proposed control I do not agree with, for a few reasons.

What else do you think they will do? Based on what?

The U.S. is a very large landmass, and we already have illegal smuggling of drugs, and when Prohibition hit, alcohol, and now, illegal immigrants. It's difficult to convince me that we won't just move up to firearms (which we already have a black market of) if you institute controls on the firearms.

You are demanding that people are psychics.

I made a mistake in a debate. Yes.

Yes, you did. Which is evidence that you are not as much in control as you like to think.

Yes, and calling me "dumb" and a "nut" isn't insulting...

What about calling my grandmother crazy and liable to shoot at any noise she hears on the porsche? (Though Baron apologized for that comment, and I harbor no resentment, it was still insulting).

Doesn't really do my argument justice, though, I would admit. But there's been plenty of insults on both sides of this debate.

Do you honestly think that is promoting your case? You are saying here, very clearly, that you feel justified in behaving the same way people behave towards you.

Yet another reason why you shouldn't be trusted with guns.

I have seen no viable alternative for how she would have been able to defend herself. At least, no alternative that I would wish to force on someone, much less someone in her exact situation.

But yes, I made a mistake there, sure. I admit it, and wish to move on.

Yep. But if you had reacted with a gun in a way that you were later sorry for, it isn't as easy to "move on" as this is.

When have I done anything that would even suggest that I am likely to seriously physically harm another person? Making mistakes in what I say is not the same as making mistakes and killing another human being.

The fact that you even connect these two things scares me.

It is testament that you are not able to act rationally, at all times. Sheesh, you are on an Internet forum, for chrissakes! How will you react in real life?

And going by your comment on how you would kill an Air Marshal

I didn't say that. Get the story straight.

I can honestly say that I can see why you project this "out of control" persona onto me. But I am not you. I would not kill another human being without a second thought.

There are quite many people on death row who also said that. What makes you any different?

And quite frankly, when you proposed that you would kill another human being that had a firearm, you weren't talking about using guns.

That's exactly what I wasn't talking about.

And I have yet to get angry enough to think that even attacking another human being is a good thing, much less killing them.

You are simply not making a compelling case why you are incapable of being so angry that you don't know - or care - what you do.

What makes you such a special human being?

If you re-read my post, you will notice that I said nothing about rights, only that your post was crap. It still sounds like you are whining.

But when you tell me what weapons I can use for hunting, you are doing the exact same thing that you complain gun control proponents are doing.

Hoplophobia is not a good reason to distrust me.

I don't suffer from hoplophobia.

You have no good reason to believe I am a danger to society anymore than I have any reason to fear you even though you claim you would use deadly force to protect yourself and those around you. If I lived in an area where there were no restrictions on firearms, you would trust me with a gun?

Absolutely not.

Is it impossible that you become so angry that you don't know - or care - what you do?

I was not born with a gun. However, all men choose how to use their bodies, just as gun owners choose how to use their guns.

But having a penis is the default position. Do you see gun ownership as the default position?

You don't think women can commit sexual crimes?

 

[CFLarsen]

No, it is about violent crime period. One person with a knife or club, coming out of a dark corner 20 feet or less away from you can harm /kill you even if you are carrying a gun - but if they don't on the first contact, you still have a chance. Without one, congratulations you are a statistic.

Read the thread I linked to in an earlier post about Knife myths.

 

[Skibum]

Personally, I was born in Germany.

Hey, I was too. Sounds like we have a similar background.

 

[Lonewulf]

Some of your posts here have been made in extreme anger, where you clearly wasn't able to control yourself.

If you claim that you were, you are in denial.

Who, Shanek?

Name them, please.

If you have no real-life experience with violence, how do you know how you will react in a violent situation?

Because of what I'm prepared and not prepared to do, and based on the few times that what I perceived as a violent situation came up.

What would you do in a violent situation?

What do you mean, "self-practitioner"? Did you receive qualified tutoring?

Not yet, though I have been trained in Hapkido and Taekwondo a bit. However, there are no local Krav Maga centers; but I bought a book made by some Krav Maga masters, and follow the guides listed inside. I also have two videos demonstrating how to handle someone that has a knife and that has a gun. It's exquisitely detailed and demonstrates perfectly what to do.

If you believe that that teaches you nothing, please demonstrate how.

What else do you think they will do? Based on what?

Hell, if a Krav Maga instructor came by and taught me a few tricks, that would be great. I'd love to get certified training, and I'd jump for it in a second flat.

However, I've tried this moves IRL, practicing with friends, going by what was listed as good and not good. It works. If you disagree, then I could run a tutorial for you?

Do you honestly think that is promoting your case? You are saying here, very clearly, that you feel justified in behaving the same way people behave towards you.

Yet another reason why you shouldn't be trusted with guns.

Wonderful logic. Because debating with words is SO much like physically harming another human being.

Glad you aren't the one deciding whether or not I can be trusted with a firearm legally. In fact, I hope you have no political power here in the U.S. at all, that's for sure.



Anyways, I'd go on, but CFLarson's posts are a pain to go through.

 

[baron]

But there also seems to be this perception of the "gun-ho crazy Americans"; this seems to be the perception of people like The Fool, as well as some of the perceptions of Baron (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Yes and no.

No, in that I don't believe the US has any greater proportion of crazy people than the UK or anywhere else.

Yes, in that the crazy people in the US have guns.

 

[CFLarsen]

Who, Shanek?

Name them, please.

Examples of shanek completely losing control:

Source

Source

Source

Source

Source

Source

Because of what I'm prepared and not prepared to do, and based on the few times that what I perceived as a violent situation came up.

But you don't have real-life experience with violence, so you don't know how you would react.

Let me remind you of your post #573. You used the argument that, unless people had actual experience with something, it was a "factor in the argument".

What would you do in a violent situation?

It isn't a question of what I would do. It's a question of what gun proponents would do.

Not yet, though I have been trained in Hapkido and Taekwondo a bit. However, there are no local Krav Maga centers; but I bought a book made by some Krav Maga masters, and follow the guides listed inside. I also have two videos demonstrating how to handle someone that has a knife and that has a gun. It's exquisitely detailed and demonstrates perfectly what to do.

If you believe that that teaches you nothing, please demonstrate how.
...
Hell, if a Krav Maga instructor came by and taught me a few tricks, that would be great. I'd love to get certified training, and I'd jump for it in a second flat.

However, I've tried this moves IRL, practicing with friends, going by what was listed as good and not good. It works. If you disagree, then I could run a tutorial for you?

Do you feel confident that you know enough Krav Maga to adequately defend yourself in a violent situation?

Wonderful logic. Because debating with words is SO much like physically harming another human being.

It proves that you are not in as much control as you would like to think you are.

Glad you aren't the one deciding whether or not I can be trusted with a firearm legally. In fact, I hope you have no political power here in the U.S. at all, that's for sure.

Anyways, I'd go on, but CFLarson's posts are a pain to go through.

There are quite many people on death row who also said what you said. What makes you any different? What makes you such a special human being?

 

[Skibum]

If you have no real-life experience with violence, how do you know how you will react in a violent situation?

I realize this might be difficult for you to realize but, violence is the absolute last resort. I've been in plenty of situations where I could have resorted to violence to "solve" the problem, I unlike those of you who project your violent personalities and shortcomings onto others choose to walk away. The only time I find violence necessary is in a life or death situation.

You might not need a valid reason to kill someone, but I do.

 

[CFLarsen]

I realize this might be difficult for you to realize but, violence is the absolute last resort. I've been in plenty of situations where I could have resorted to violence to "solve" the problem, I unlike those of you who project your violent personalities and shortcomings onto others choose to walk away. The only time I find violence necessary is in a life or death situation.

You might not need a valid reason to kill someone, but I do.

That doesn't answer the question.