Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

“no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”

page: 5
40
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Everybody seems to hate everybody and everything.
I wish we could all be a happy little planet.I know,this
is probably off topic and unrealistic,we can still hope.




posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 




oh.... well then i guess you have never been mugged by three thugs, thrown to the ground, then headlocked by one mugger and your pockets emptied by another thug....
if i had had a gun, then when the leader came running across the street to stand in front of me to block my way...
i could have quickly shown a handgun & the end result would have not happened

wallet. ID, 200$ cash, all gone to a threesome of pot & crack heads that prey on others, live in a self imposed gulag hideout to hide from police/authorities...from their strategic, stalking hangout outside the bar called "Ponderosa"




phoenix. 2 blocks south of VA hospital & just 150' from a McDonalds...(just out of sight because of another building... the perps must have been keenly aware of the cover this particular street corner offered in striking their victim(s)
edit on 4-1-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-1-2013 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by St Udio
 


Im guessing sarcasm or you didnt read before reacting?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Well...I don't want to start straying into a different area...but a libertarian society would facilitate people doing what they want...so the guy down the block could just get his mates together and sort you out.

I know the stock response is either "well i'd get more mates myself" or "i wouldn't give him the chance" but in reality, unless you act pre-emptively and eliminate all potential threats or knock around in an infinitely large group of people, it would be good fortune that kept you alive, not good will.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 


A gun gives you (more) control of a situation.
wishful thinking or propaganda, you choose.


More people don't carry / own guns than people that do, so you aren't "balancing" anything...you are creating a situation where more often than not, you have an advantage = you have more control.
wrong again. over 60% of the population in my state have and use carry permits (CCW).
balance cannot be achieved until risk is revealed.
being prepared to mitigate risk is responsible, not criminal.


How can you say owning a gun is not an attempt at control?
cause owning a gun didn't stop the intruder from illegally entering the home.
although, it did mitigate the risk of her continued presence. {balance}


You would own that gun to increase the likelihood of an event occuring or not occuring - it would give you a statistically greater likelihood of your preferred outcome being reached.
that depends on the situation.
the ideal situation wouldn't illicit/permit knowledge of the gun's presence.
(concealed, remember?)


It is helping you control the outcome of a situation, positively or negatively.
agreed.
it is a TOOL in the process, nothing more.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe

I know the stock response is either "well i'd get more mates myself" or "i wouldn't give him the chance" but in reality, unless you act pre-emptively and eliminate all potential threats or knock around in an infinitely large group of people, it would be good fortune that kept you alive, not good will.



In reality that could happen to you right now anywhere in the world. Remember, police are only reactionary. They cannot be anything more than that. So after the guy down the block does whatever he wants to do to you, your family and your home he might get caught and be arrested. You'd still be dead, beaten, robbed, whatever.

In reality events like that are ridiculously rare. Even in horrible war-torn broken societies such as Somalia they are exceedingly rare.

Humanity isnt at each others throats all the time day in day out despite what the media portrays.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by St Udio
 


Im guessing sarcasm or you didnt read before reacting?


no, just publicizing the event that occurs way more often than those with rose-colored-glasses care to admit...
to diminish the frequency of these attacks gives the reader the false impression of the rarity of such unprovoked aggression



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 


That's interesting. Out of interest, what state do you live in? Phasing in the percentage of children, people unsuccessful in getting the license to carry, anti-gun folk, that's a pretty impressive percentage...almost all the eligible population, i'd imagine.

Having a gun gives you more control over a burglar than not having a gun. Also gives you a considerably higher chance of repelling a burglar (irrespective of whether they are carrying a gun also, it gives you more control however you interpret it).

If you are so keen to point out that its balance that guns bring, not control, then I would suggest that this substantially, fundamentally unbalanced society that you must carry guns to deal with proves my point more than words ever could.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Exactly. Events like that would occur in any human society, communist, libertarian, fascist or other.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 

my current state is FL and our CCW population has grown over 30% since 2010.

here are some old stats from 2007 - before the #1 salesman we know as Obama led the way.
usliberals.about.com...
and those are some really under-reported numbers.

notice, i didn't indicate they were all legal gun owners, so don't get that impression. (i should have said 60% of the law-abiding populus but didn't)

and more from the division of licensing themselves ... licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us...

only since Obama came to office have the permits being issued doubled and now they seem to have more than tripled since 2001 and are growing every month.

an OBJECT doesn't GIVE anything.
you are projecting your own fear.
seriously, let it go.

insurance enables the option to mitigate risk of financial damage.
guns enable the same option to mitigate risk of personal damage.


If you are so keen to point out that its balance that guns bring, not control, then I would suggest that this substantially, fundamentally unbalanced society that you must carry guns to deal with proves my point more than words ever could.
and i would suggest that you look harder at the relevance of risk.

you are free to accept and mitigate your own risks, not mine.
you are free to adjust your life in such a manner as to never encounter my gun.
you are also free to dismiss my desire to have a gun but you WILL NEVER eliminate my ability to defend myself against all oppressors, foreign or domestic.

that you would even seek to is evidence that tyranny comes in all forms from all directions, all the time.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 


I don't fear guns. Why would I? They don't kill people. Irrational people do. The issue is that the amount of unecessarily deadly weapons in circulation - coupled with the audacity, venom and indifference of those that tend to hoard and blindly protect them - create something of a perfect storm.

I find it interesting, now that you are discussing my supposed "projection", that the first line of defence for most gun-owners is to shout down anyone else by calling them cowards / fearful/ unpatriotic and just about anything else that calls into question their manliness. It's disappointing and rather transparent.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 


The issue is that the amount of unecessarily deadly weapons in circulation - coupled with the audacity, venom and indifference of those that tend to hoard and blindly protect them - create something of a perfect storm.

how can you conscientiously equate ownership of guns to a meteorologic anomaly ??
that's an interesting reach indeed.

i don't see such an issue at all.
are you an American ? if so, in which region do you reside ?
any chance you reside in a gun-restricted or gun-free zone ?

i view it in quite the opposite perspective.
more guns=more polite society

i walked on both sides of this fence for many years.
i fully understand your position.

however, several assaults and many years later, i finally took responsibility for my own defenses and have had to employ them at least once since ... does that make me a criminal ?

i do not represent "most" of anything or anyone, i am me.
if you are suggesting that i do not possess the inherrent right to defend (me) myself, who do you think you are ????

ETA - btw, i am not yet, a CCW holder.
i am a legal gun owner who defended home/family from an intruder.
perfectly legal to do without a CCW.

my weapon was purchased via FFL so it is registered
(whether i wanted it to be or not)
i have taken a safety course but it was not required to purchase the weapon.
i will be joining the CCW crowd directly but i thought it pertinent to the conversation as the CCW holders seem to be the 'target' lately and generally speaking, they (CCW) are the ones who utilize their weapons the least.

criminals utilize firearms much more than any CCW holder has.
criminals will get them regardless the restrictions placed on everyone else.
criminals will always exploit gun-free regions ... it happens all over the world.

if no guns = no criminals ... you'd have my vote all day, every day ... but,
we both know that'll NEVER happen.
edit on 4-1-2013 by Honor93 because: ETA



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
So here is a question, if guns where banned, and my wife were to get raped walking in the house at night, could I sue the government for denying her right to defend herself? I think there can be serious financial repercussions. If anything every happened to my family and it was because we were not allowed to protect ourselves by matching force then I would sue every single liberal gun grabber for everything they have.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 


It's called a metaphor.

I'm actually British, so yes, i'm acclimatised to a different viewpoint on guns. This doesn't mean I can't make an observation on a well-documented issue.

I've not suggested you are a criminal, or that you do not possess the inherent right to defend yourself - those are your words, not mine.

I re-iterate my point; that if you feel possession of a gun is a vital pre-requisite to reasonably defend yourself, then that is indicative of the culture allowed to perpetuate around you. That culture needs to be tackled and it will require at least some changes (legislative or otherwise) to make it happen.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe

I re-iterate my point; that if you feel possession of a gun is a vital pre-requisite to reasonably defend yourself, then that is indicative of the culture allowed to perpetuate around you. That culture needs to be tackled and it will require at least some changes (legislative or otherwise) to make it happen.


Our culture is just fine, without yet another Brit thinking they know what is best for the US and its citizens.

Why not look at your own country's culture, and the level of violent crime there, before you spout off about others.
It appears that England has it's own problem with violent crime.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Our culture is just fine, without yet another Brit thinking they know what is best for the US and its citizens.

Why not look at your own country's culture, and the level of violent crime there, before you spout off about others.
It appears that England has it's own problem with violent crime.


Well, I think you will find my view is shared by most of the developed world as well as a growing number of Americans themselves.

The violent crime figures here are oft-sited, but little care is taken in distinguishing what is constituted as violent crime in the figures. Gun crime, on the other hand, is fair easier to label and is quite definitive.

In any case, i'd still rather get beaten up five times in my life than shot once.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 

actually, metaphors usually have some basis in reality, yours, not so much.

i didn't infer that you had no point, just one lacking validity or value.
your observations are not based in fact, hence they are not relevant.
this, has already been proven.

i asked you questions, your deflection is not an answer.
you have indeed suggested such and you are inferring the same.


I re-iterate my point; that if you feel possession of a gun is a vital pre-requisite to reasonably defend yourself, then that is indicative of the culture allowed to perpetuate around you. That culture needs to be tackled and it will require at least some changes (legislative or otherwise) to make it happen.
you can re-iterate it all you want.
it doesn't render it any more valid than the first time.

back to the facts ...
guns have been part of this culture since it was formed.
if you don't like/approve of our culture, fine, we don't particularly care for yours either but you don't find us over there trying to change your foundation or environment, do you ?

it's not Americans driving the global deficit, them guys are British.
it's not Americans who are criminalizing Brits like PMorgan for their treasonous antics, is it ?

pre-requisite ??
nah, didn't used to be, then illegal immigration got way out of control and here we are.

of course, enduring life under leaders who are gun runners like Eric Holder, certainly isn't helping matters any, although, it does serve to reinforce the basic premise ... tyranny comes in all forms, from all directions, every day

grateful for your concern but i think i'll keep my defenses, thanks anyway.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 

ahhhh, there it is ... the view of the eternal victim ...

In any case, i'd still rather get beaten up five times in my life than shot once

that's a common viewpoint amongst persons who see themselves as perpetual victims.
perhaps it would do you good to evaluate that first and then get back to us.

it is surprising to see any human volly between their choice of demise

your risk is yours to accept ... i will mitigate my own, thanks anyway.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:08 AM
link   
I would just like to say that I find Americans telling people from other countries to stay out of their politics extremely hilarious and somewhat hipocritical.

Anyways more on topic, I don't think the issue is really "they are going to take away my guns and my right to bear arms" rather than it is an issue of "should you be able to so easily get them" and "what type of guns do you REALLY need to protect yourself"

*disclaimer - I am Canadian, have never owned a gun, have never held a handgun, shot a rifle a few times when I was a kid in the Scouts. I have never felt the need to have a gun, I have never been in a situation where I felt that a gun would have helped me and I grew up in a rough neighbourhood in one of the larger cities in Canada. This is just to point out that my life experiences may have been very different from others and that is where my view point comes from



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by Morrel

I remember 3 times his gun went of by accident in the house, 3 times we were lucky nobody got hurt.


Bull. Absolute bull.

Three time you remember somebody fiddling with that gun and negligently discharging that gun.

Under no circumstances does a gun just go off. It isnt a game of hot potato or a Jack in the Box just waiting to blow.

Your father or whoever was in control of that firearm was negligent.


Negligent or not the potential to shoot yourself is always there.
Here's a policeman 'educatiing' a class of school kids on the dangers of handling guns, immediately prior to shooting himself in the foot.
www.youtube.com...






top topics



 
40
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join