|
| Thread: Right to Self Defense, Gun Ownership, and Deterence of Crime |  This thread is pages long: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 20 30 40 50 55 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
posted January 06, 2012 06:48 PM |
|
|
Guns are necessary for a large part of the population here. Canada has a fairly high percentage of hunters and out gun ownership is (meaning people owning guns, not guns per person though) even higher than the US. We have far fewer gun deaths however, and a good chunk of the ones that do happen involve Americans (especially in the area near Windsor, the part of Canada south of Detroit).
Generally we consider them to be acceptable as long as you have a license and don't wave it around like a maniac. They're like cars. Useful tools that can cause a lot of harm, thus are only allowed into the hands of those responsible enough to handle them (or are directly supervised by said responsible people).
Here's a comment from the page I got that comic from:
Quote:
There’s a shop where my friend bought her prom dress called Addisons (or maybe its Allisons) Guns and Gowns. There is hunting supplies along with prom/wedding wear available. The story behind why she did it is cool though. She’s this super awesome redneck lady who couldn’t afford a dress when she was younger, since she lived on her own, and so she wanted to sell dresses when she was older. Buuut, she turned out to love guns too. So she combined the two. Perfect shop for northern Canada. 
I see the laws that let people openly trade weapons without any ID, checks or anything of that sort in the US as being fairly irresponsible. They make it easy for anybody to easily arm themselves with second-hand guns quickly and anonymously. How many people can you think of legitimately need a gun fast and without having any sort of check? There's a reason both Al Qaeda and the Mexican drug cartels direct members to arm themselves in the states. It's basically the "free market" undercutting the "black market" (are they really so different?) and making guns cheap and easy to acquire for terrorists.
In summary: Responsible ownership and selling of guns is great.
Irresponsible reselling is scary.
That's how I feel.
(The tones of this post may be different bit by bit as it was written gradually over many random intervals)
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:08 PM |
|
|
The thing is, a gun is no defensive weapon, but an offensive one.
An electrical fence is one. An alarm system with pitfalls around a houses door and windows is one. Pepperspray. A herding dog is one. Even a system that electrifies the complete outside of your home is.
A gun is not.
Being able to kill easily, self-defense or not, is just upping the ante for everyone, includingan ill-willed perp: if guns are allowed, chances are, as a perp you are up against one, which means, if in doubt - shoot.
This may discourage those who wouldn't want to be forced into shooting someone - but their victims were never really threatened for life in the first place.
Those who would threaten your life anyway will just do it that much more readily if chances are the victim has a gun.
Remember, ONE case of "all well" doesn't say much. My mom is 76 now, and she has smoked at least 40 years of her life, if not longer. She is of extremely good health, everything is in order, she has no health problem whatsoever - so, hey, smoking can't be that bad.
Guns are DANGEROUS. For a lot of people. Potentially, everyone having a gun can do a nearly unlimited amount of damage. If you allow that, sex and drugs are minor problems - you BUY drugs only to hurt yourself, so what?
Also, if guns are readily available, why make a fuss of ending one's life with drugs - you can always do it with your gun, so where is the problem?
Lastly sex. How can you allow to SELL weapons, but not sex? That makes no sense either.
Watch Boston Legal, Series 5, Episode 3, for an interesting legal take on things.
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:08 PM |
|
|
Better to be tried by 12 than to be carried by six
Nonissue. She was completely in her rights to defend herself and her baby. What would have happened to her if she didn't have the gun? Tried to use a knife against two assailants who were most likely bigger and stronger than her? Puhhlease. Guns are an equalizer for women when it comes to protecting themselves from male violence.
I won't celebrate the loss of life here but I sure as hell won't condemn her for the choice she made. Because of that choice, she and her baby are living and breathing today.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:41 PM |
|
|
she didn't need to kill
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:47 PM |
|
|
Easy for you to say. Your life wasn't at stake.
____________
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
They're like cars. Useful tools that can cause a lot of harm
huh what? guns are useful tools?? for what? controlling demography?
Quote:
An electrical fence is one. An alarm system with pitfalls around a houses door and windows is one. Pepperspray. A herding dog is one. Even a system that electrifies the complete outside of your home is.
well, in that last case, you are just completely mad  and what if a child accidentaly throws his ball in your garden and then climbs your fence?
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 07:59 PM |
|
|
I guess that was just an example.
But why can't the americans use things like stun guns instead?
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 08:04 PM |
|
|
|
People, weapons are here to stay, get used to it. 5000 years of civilization preceded by a much longer period is a story of people killing each other with various tools. That ain't gonna change soon. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. And I think that's what the topic is about.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 08:08 PM |
|
|
I thought the topic was generally about if its right that anybody can just have a killing weapon in their home.
Imo there should be very very heavy weapon restrictions. If you have a society where people are running around with guns everywhere, then you're basically asking for crime.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 08:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
the other perp, who turned himself in, is likely to be charged with 1st degree murder. Apparently the law can assign blame for the one burglar's death to the other burglar, because the death happened during the course of committing a crime - even if the other criminal didn't actually kill him.
Holy crap. If this is true - and if you're a bright young entrepreneur such as meself - your reaction to someone standing at your front door trying to pick your lock could and should be "HELL YES".
Pay attention.
Scenario 1. There's an intruder at your front door. You set fire to your house. He gets prosecuted for arson, you get insurance moneyz, and invest it in more houses, to increase the chance that someone tries to rob them. After a while, you can start investing in a myriad of things: crack cocaine distribution around your homes, to ensure a steady supply of junkie robbers; or explosives around your house instead of a fire, so that the process is quicker and it also damages the houses around you (which you, at that point, own - earning you additional insurance moneyz). The options are limitless. Repeat and eventually you will possess infinite money.
Scenario 2. This approach is the most enticing if you're a religious person. There's an intruder at your front door. You swiftly disable him and sacrifice him in the glorious name of Satan. Satan - growing in power - will gain a greater hold over humanity, causing more of them to do drugs and break into your home, for further sacrifice. Eventually, Satan will bring down the heavens, rule the world and grant you infinite cosmic power.
Scenario 3. Two guys break into your apartment. You shoot one of them to illustrate to the other one that he better do whatever you say, and then keep him around to do the dishes, prepare meals, wash the clothes and everything, all while living in constant knowledge that you are fully entitled to blow his brains out at any moment.
Scenario 4. Two guys break into your apartment. You shoot the one that did the dishes from the last time to show them you're not kidding, dress them up ridiculously and stage a gladiatorial fight in your basement, which you will sell over the internet. The loser will die, while the winner will stay to do the dishes, to be shot when another two guys try to break into your apartment, when the process will be repeated. This is more of an elaboration on scenario 4, based on the assumption that you wouldn't mind risking both gladiators to die in the same combat, rendering you responsible for your own dishes until another two perpetrators show up.
The list goes on and on. It's foolproof. If you have trouble enticing people to rob you, you can put on a fake moustache and top hat and pretend you're the new rich guy that just moved in. Make sure to put up posters around the neighbourhood, going "My name is Abraham Richinger, I have just moved in, I have unscrupulous amounts of money and none of you are invited to my party."
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 09:20 PM |
|
|
@JJ
Quote:
The thing is, a gun is no defensive weapon, but an offensive one.
An electrical fence is one. <snip>. A gun is not.
What about a fence with guns mounted on it, and if you touch the fence, the guns fire at you? Defensive or offensive weapon?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 09:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I guess that was just an example.
But why can't the americans use things like stun guns instead?
Automatic chance of cardiac arrest, easy to resist if planned against, the non electrical kinds involve nerve toxins....
Better complaint: Why can't the US law enforcement make it to the door in time, and arrest em?
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 10:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
@JJ
Quote:
The thing is, a gun is no defensive weapon, but an offensive one.
An electrical fence is one. <snip>. A gun is not.
What about a fence with guns mounted on it, and if you touch the fence, the guns fire at you? Defensive or offensive weapon?
That's what I would want for my Porsches and Ferraris. An alarm system, that doesn't honk like an idiot, but instead triggers the machine guns and the grenade launchers.
Sure, a rocket launcher might be cooler, but I suppose you have to draw a line somewhere.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 06, 2012 11:28 PM |
|
|
|
I'm not sure your ferrari will appreciate a rocket at point blank range
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 12:17 AM |
|
|
Quote:
...Sure, a rocket launcher might be cooler, but I suppose you have to draw a line somewhere.
Nah,a 100 megaton thermo-nuclear bomb inside the engine is a far better choice.It even kills the thief´s friends.
Away from my crappy humor...
If somebody is inside someones house and is trying to kill/steal from him/her,the owner of the house should have the possibility to neutralize the criminals.
The ends do justify the means in this case imo.If the thiefs end up dead,it was their choice.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 02:07 AM |
|
|
Here is a link about the situation that works.
Clicky
At the top of the story is a video of an interview with her. Watch it, hear her voice, look at her picture and see the person who in the terrifying situation.
The woman's husband had died of lung cancer a week previously, on Christmas day. The scumbags had undoubtedly scoped out her home and said, "Yeah a single teenage mom...easy pickings.."
Fortunately she had a 12 gauge shotgun (the absolute best gun for home defense) and a pistol. The scumbag broke down the door and began pushing her barricade aside and she fired. One scumbag died, the other ran.
For those of you who think it is easy to shoot someone in the knee or shoot off their right pinky when they are running at you with a knife, you are just clueless about real world confrontational situations.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 02:08 AM |
|
Edited by Fauch at 02:10, 07 Jan 2012.
|
she fired a shotgun while she had a pistol in her other hand?? sounds pretty hard to do, especially for a woman.
Quote:
If the thiefs end up dead,it was their choice.
no, I think they would find easier ways if they wanted to suicide
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 02:26 AM |
|
Edited by baklava at 02:31, 07 Jan 2012.
|
>pushing her barricade aside
>running at you with a knife
People with access to various firearms should probably learn to differ between the two.
Still, I understand she shot where she could. Just saying that if you possess a firearm, you should learn to use it properly and be familiar with it, no matter if you are a teenage mom or an ex-marine.
Of course, as I said, she had no incentive not to shoot to kill.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 02:35 AM |
|
|
|
I wonder how do you feel after killing a person out of self defense? do you feel rather good or rather guilty about it? (after the relief of being in safety of course)
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted January 07, 2012 02:54 AM |
|
|
|
I would not give a penny about. I have no particular respect for human life, but for what you do with.
|
|
|
|
