Robert Ap Ioan Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 I found this news item today about the gun laws debate in America. For me it raises a few questions that really frustrate me. Every time we have discussed gun laws and gun control on this forum we have had the following statement:- It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun From what I have seen Texas has to be one of the gun happiest states in the US and most people are permitted to carry a gun, when the shootings in Dallas took place there were pictures of people carrying semi-automatic rifles and the like on the streets. Surely the people who were carrying guns were good guys, so why didn't they shoot the cop killer? It seems to me that actually carrying firearms about isn't a deterrent. What is the purpose of mass arming the nation in such a situation, is there any reason other than a constitutional one that has been changed in the past and could surely be changed again? The second thing that comes to mind is this. why do you arm you police to the max? I know police go into dangerous situations, but surely if you took their guns away you would see less gun crime and police killings? The British cops aren't perfect, but hell I feel a lot safer knowing that bent cops are less likely to hold a firearm to my body and kill me. If I distrust the police, as most Americans seem to, I wouldn't exactly want them armed to the max. It all makes little sense to me. Quote Still a man hears what he wants to hearAnd disregards the rest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 #Bluelivesmatter me dad's an officer . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trump Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 (edited) The problem is mental health and Mexican crooks coming over the border. To fix this, a wall needs to be built and our mental healthcare services. A lot of this is to do with Obamacare, which has ruined mental healthcare for millions of Americas, Obamacare needs to be abolished and a wall needs to be built to stop the trade of drugs and Mexican criminals over the border. Hillary would have us endorse Obamacare, which has very much ruined the lives of millions and caused suffering to countless Americas, as drug dealers come over the border for Mexico and shoot up our schools, allowing the Democrats to endorse gun control and multiculturalism. There are rapist and drug dealers all marching across the border, they are very much bad people and the Democrats want us to help them, as they are fools and criminals who support such things. My suggestion is that we build a wall, we deport all criminals, we ban the democrat party from holding elections, as they're very much bad people and we put armed guards in-front of schools and abolish any form of gun control in America. Give the teachers guns, as Mexican and Muslim terrorists won't be able to shoot our children, build a wall and bar them from entering and they won't even be able to get in. Repeal Obamacare, as it's very much a bad thing and has lead to people shooting up schools, due to mental health issues. Build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, as there's some real bad people there and it'll stop them from getting in, block Muslim terrorists from entering our nation and killing people, only then can America be great again. Edited July 27, 2016 by Donald Trump 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 A lot (not all) of citizens carry guns specifically because they are cowards. So, most people carrying guns will be crawling on the floor with the rest of the victims. Plus, in the case of a sniper it's hard to do otherwise. People that don't resist arrest are almost never shot by cops. Cops must always use the least force necessary, though. Basically, British cops are defenseless. I could shoot someone and they couldn't do a thing to stop me. I could shoot cop after cop, very casually, until they called in armed cops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covenant Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 A lot (not all) of citizens carry guns specifically because they are cowards. I agree with your other points, but this one I feel is an unfair assessment. Wanting a gun for extra protection, or if you are too weak to defend yourself through other means is not the same as cowardice. It's about not trusting your protection to a phone number that will be there in 5 minutes, things happen in seconds, ad nobody is more qualified to defend you in that instant but yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 Let me rephrase that, then. A lot of people are cowards. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Ap Ioan Posted July 27, 2016 Author Share Posted July 27, 2016 #Bluelivesmatter me dad's an officer . I am not disputing that. I like the police I know and respect them, that being said I wouldn't necessarily trust most of them to not get trigger happy. I think the fact that most of our police are unarmed is why the majority of us don't feel the need to carry firearms. The problem is mental health and Mexican crooks coming over the border. To fix this, a wall needs to be built and our mental healthcare services. A lot of this is to do with Obamacare, which has ruined mental healthcare for millions of Americas, Obamacare needs to be abolished and a wall needs to be built to stop the trade of drugs and Mexican criminals over the border. Hillary would have us endorse Obamacare, which has very much ruined the lives of millions and caused suffering to countless Americas, as drug dealers come over the border for Mexico and shoot up our schools, allowing the Democrats to endorse gun control and multiculturalism. There are rapist and drug dealers all marching across the border, they are very much bad people and the Democrats want us to help them, as they are fools and criminals who support such things. My suggestion is that we build a wall, we deport all criminals, we ban the democrat party from holding elections, as they're very much bad people and we put armed guards in-front of schools and abolish any form of gun control in America. Give the teachers guns, as Mexican and Muslim terrorists won't be able to shoot our children, build a wall and bar them from entering and they won't even be able to get in. Repeal Obamacare, as it's very much a bad thing and has lead to people shooting up schools, due to mental health issues. Build a wall and make Mexico pay for it, as there's some real bad people there and it'll stop them from getting in, block Muslim terrorists from entering our nation and killing people, only then can America be great again. This is Satire right? A lot (not all) of citizens carry guns specifically because they are cowards. So, most people carrying guns will be crawling on the floor with the rest of the victims. Plus, in the case of a sniper it's hard to do otherwise. Why is it then that people always say you mustn't take your guns away? It's stupidity surely, if you can't defend yourself with a gun why have one; except for hunting, in which case get a license for the fecking gun. People that don't resist arrest are almost never shot by cops. Cops must always use the least force necessary, though. Which is probably why the recent news stories get so much press. What worries me is that a lot of cops who do shoot without reason seem to get away with it. The least that would happen with our police is suspension from all police work until the inquiry is taken to court and examined. A lot of such police then get taken off the firearms squad and rightly so, if it has been proved they wrongly discharged a firearm. Basically, British cops are defenseless. I could shoot someone and they couldn't do a thing to stop me. I could shoot cop after cop, very casually, until they called in armed cops. I just think what strikes me is that every time a police officer shoots someone in this country the first thing that happens is a inquiry is opened. Usually it is found that the police made mistakes that they need to learn from, police officers have found themselves with the very real possibility of facing prison time for using the firearm wrongly. Our cops had up until 2005 only shot 30 people total, that number will have risen over the last decade, but I think the number is still below fifty. In the whole history of British policing only 68 police have been shot. A lot of police now carry tasers so aren't exactly defenceless. Quote Still a man hears what he wants to hearAnd disregards the rest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted July 27, 2016 Share Posted July 27, 2016 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaupkJPw8wE Go Kurt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I just think what strikes me is that every time a police officer shoots someone in this country the first thing that happens is a inquiry is opened. Usually it is found that the police made mistakes that they need to learn from, police officers have found themselves with the very real possibility of facing prison time for using the firearm wrongly. Our cops had up until 2005 only shot 30 people total, that number will have risen over the last decade, but I think the number is still below fifty. In the whole history of British policing only 68 police have been shot. A lot of police now carry tasers so aren't exactly defenceless. And you are focusing in on one incident where armed citizens did not attack the gunman. I can find multiple cases of citizens deterring or defending themselves from an armed assailant. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=camera+caught+armed+citizens+stopping+crime Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 I am not disputing that. I like the police I know and respect them, that being said I wouldn't necessarily trust most of them to not get trigger happy. I think the fact that most of our police are unarmed is why the majority of us don't feel the need to carry firearms. Carrying a gun makes you far unsafer when you come into contact with police. I think the majority of you don't feel the need to carry a firearm is because most people don't need to carry one. Police do, though. They're like playground monitors without a gun. This is Satire right? Donald Trump is a satire. This guy is a satire of Donald Trump. Why is it then that people always say you mustn't take your guns away? It's stupidity surely, if you can't defend yourself with a gun why have one; except for hunting, in which case get a license for the fecking gun. Because if we don't have guns something bad that never happens will suddenly happen. You may not know it, but you're living in a tyranny because you don't have armed citizens. Your government is breaking in your doors and doing something that doesn't make sense...they're taking the guns that you don't have. That's pretty much the only tyrannical thing I've heard the government will do if we don't have guns. Some people can defend themselves and others with guns. A legitimate need for that will likely never happen. If it does, it's worthwhile. Most people carry guns because they're little men and a gun makes them feel big. Hopefully they keep it in their pants. Too often they shoot kids with skittles. Which is probably why the recent news stories get so much press. What worries me is that a lot of cops who do shoot without reason seem to get away with it. The least that would happen with our police is suspension from all police work until the inquiry is taken to court and examined. A lot of such police then get taken off the firearms squad and rightly so, if it has been proved they wrongly discharged a firearm. I just think what strikes me is that every time a police officer shoots someone in this country the first thing that happens is a inquiry is opened. Usually it is found that the police made mistakes that they need to learn from, police officers have found themselves with the very real possibility of facing prison time for using the firearm wrongly. Our cops had up until 2005 only shot 30 people total, that number will have risen over the last decade, but I think the number is still below fifty. In the whole history of British policing only 68 police have been shot. A lot of police now carry tasers so aren't exactly defenceless. Usually, the cop is tried in the media. If it goes viral, he's fuct. It was better when there wasn't video and the cop said he fought me, so I had to shoot him. Now you have video of the guy fighting the cop and because the guy gets shot the cop is a criminal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Coolidge Posted July 30, 2016 Share Posted July 30, 2016 Well he started shooting at cops, cops shoot back. Unless you have a clean shot, let the cops handle it. And they did with a robot drone, which kinda pissed me off but also kinda cool. But in a lot of cases the police won't be there so you shoot the little !@#$er who's shooting people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted August 2, 2016 Share Posted August 2, 2016 -snip- I stopped watching when they said that there was a mass shooting every day and showed part of a video where only one person died. From what I have seen Texas has to be one of the gun happiest states in the US and most people are permitted to carry a gun, when the shootings in Dallas took place there were pictures of people carrying semi-automatic rifles and the like on the streets. Surely the people who were carrying guns were good guys, so why didn't they shoot the cop killer? It seems to me that actually carrying firearms about isn't a deterrent. What is the purpose of mass arming the nation in such a situation, is there any reason other than a constitutional one that has been changed in the past and could surely be changed again? The second thing that comes to mind is this. why do you arm you police to the max? I know police go into dangerous situations, but surely if you took their guns away you would see less gun crime and police killings? The British cops aren't perfect, but hell I feel a lot safer knowing that bent cops are less likely to hold a firearm to my body and kill me. If I distrust the police, as most Americans seem to, I wouldn't exactly want them armed to the max. It all makes little sense to me. Mostly because when there is a shooting, there is confusion and they didn't want to be shot by police thinking he was the shooter. It is. Would you break into a house where you knew someone was armed? http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2012a/commsumm.nsf/b4a3962433b52fa787256e5f00670a71/5de089825c00843e872579b80079912d/$FILE/SenState0305AttachB.pdf http://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Armed-Resistance-to-Crime.pdf http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1359178916300258?via=sd&cc=y http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/10/11/report-92-percent-of-mass-shootings-since-2009-occured-in-gun-free-zones/ https://gunowners.org/pdf/2014gunfacts.pdf(Page 37) Because it has saved lives before. The Center for Disease Control, in a 2013 study commissioned by President Obama, noted that almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals. http://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1 Besides specific deterrence, there is more general deterrence. Would-be attackers think twice before acting in a place where there is a high probability that one or more people have weapons, though they don’t know which ones, and that they are more likely to seek “soft targets†where they know there is a very low probability of resistance. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/10/11/report-92-percent-of-mass-shootings-since-2009-occured-in-gun-free-zones/ That said, here are some occasions when an armed civilian stopped what probably would have turned into a mass shooting: Conyers, Ga., May 31, 2015: A permit holder was walking by a store when he heard shots ring out. Two people were killed. The permit holder started firing, and the killer ran out of the store. Rockdale County Sheriff Eric Levett said: “I believe that if Mr. Scott did not return fire at the suspect, then more of those customers would have [been] hit by a gun[shot] . . . . So, in my opinion he saved other lives in that store.†Chicago, April 2015: An Uber driver who had just dropped off a fare “shot and wounded a gunman [Everardo Custodio] who opened fire on a crowd of people.†Assistant State’s Attorney Barry Quinn praised the driver for “acting in self-defense and in the defense of others.†Philadelphia, Pa., March 2015: A permit holder was walking by a barber shop when he heard shots fired. He quickly ran into the shop and shot the gunman to death. Police Captain Frank Llewellyn said, “I guess he saved a lot of people in there.†Darby, Pa., July 2014: Convicted felon Richard Plotts killed a hospital caseworker and shot the psychiatrist that he was scheduled to meet with. Fortunately, the psychiatrist was a concealed-handgun permit holder and was able to critically wound Plotts. Plotts was still carrying 39 bullets and could have shot many other people. Chicago, July 2014: Three gang members fired on four people who had just left a party. Fortunately, one of these four was a military serviceman with a concealed-handgun permit. He was able to return fire and wound the main attacker while keeping the others at bay. The UK’s Daily Mail reported, “The night might have had a very different outcome had the incident occurred a year earlier [before Illinois’s concealed-handgun law was passed].†Plymouth, Pa., September 2012: William Allabaugh critically wounded one man inside a restaurant and murdered a second man on the street outside. Luzerne County Assistant District Attorney Jarrett Ferentino said that without the concealed-handgun permit holder who wounded Allabaugh, “we believe that it could have been much worse that night.†Spartanburg, S.C., March 2012: Armed with a shotgun, Jesse Gates kicked in a door to his church. Concealed-carry permit holder Aaron Guyton drew his gun and held Gates at gunpoint, enabling other parishioners to disarm Gates. Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright called the churchgoers heroes. Though Gates was stopped before anyone was harmed, he was still charged with one count of kidnapping and three counts of pointing and presenting a firearm. Police agencies want their cops to be armed equal slightly more than equal to what they might see. For example, they wouldn't want me to shoot a cop and have to wait for an hour for a firearm cop to show up. Most of the distrust you see on the news is related to the BLM. Other Americans who "distrust" the police distrust them in the sense that they won't do their jobs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I stopped watching when they said that there was a mass shooting every day and showed part of a video where only one person died. I felt my a priori beliefs were challenged. FTFY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 FTFY The bias and misinterpretation runs deep in the stupid video. Also, the narrator was a horrible jackass who was not funny. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 The bias and misinterpretation runs deep in the stupid video. Also, the narrator was a horrible jackass who was not funny. I found it hilarious. The video thoroughly debunks the stupid idea of lax gun laws reducing violent death. Newsflash: it does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I found it hilarious. The video thoroughly debunks the stupid idea of lax gun laws reducing violent death. Newsflash: it does not. The issue is the report quoted from the 2014 FBI file is applied Federally, and not strictly for situations including citizen possession of a firearm in self defense. It is a blanket number, used in bias and to spread a huge lie. And no He was acting like a jackass the entire time. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 The issue is the report quoted from the 2014 FBI file is applied Federally, and not strictly for situations including citizen possession of a firearm in self defense. It is a blanket number, used in bias and to spread a huge lie. And no He was acting like a jackass the entire time. I have no information on the details of the report quoted from said report. That, however, does not really ruin the video for me, because the main idea does not require the citation of said data to make the point. If you are going to cite scientific studies which "show" lax gun laws reducing violent death, please share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can find dozens that say this all day long. However you could probably find the complete opposite as well. I get it. You hate guns. But the fact remains, that video was stupid and the narrator is a biased, shitty pseudo-comedian/no talent hack on a dead show. Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Aside from the shitty comedian being especially useless, the video was an accurate depiction of the "good guy" fallacy. He shot a kid ffs. I've been through 100 hours of training to not shoot the kid. That's the hardest part. That and knowing when to not use deadly force. Pointing a gun at an unarmed guy is great. It's also kinda unnecessary isn't it? Exchanging gunfire isn't as much fun, because odds are fair you're going to be shot. It's not easy to be effective when someone's actually pointing a gun at you. The "facts" in this debate are manipulated on both sides. My favorite is the 3000 rapes/day that are never attempted because of gun ownership. The prevention of attempted crime is kinda a negative that you really can't prove. Only the negative aspects make it to the genuine statistics. And, you could have put anything on that chart to compare with the drop in gun homocides. Like, the unemployment rate or the price of tea in China. You can't link causation. Every story of a good guy with a gun starts with a bad guy with a gun. It makes just a tiny bit of sense to try something to remove all guns from that equation. But, that's not going to happen in America any time soon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Every story of a good guy with a gun starts with a bad guy with a gun. It makes just a tiny bit of sense to try something to remove all guns from that equation. But, that's not going to happen in America any time soon. I like this bad guy's gun. If only you could carry in the UK... Australia has a big problem with illegal guns, and it’s a problem that’s getting bigger. When people can’t find manufactured guns, they just make them out of parts they find at the hardware store: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/deadly-diy-homemade-guns-hit-sydney-streets-in-record-numbers/story-fni0cx12-1227581151383?sv=ef8ab66b2848f4aa8f539637463c5ee1&nk=71000246701f728a7c9ba75c6222acaf-1445736638 FTFY Then why don't you try to prove me wrong instead of posting a link to some comedian? And John Denver is playing on YouTube. Every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoS Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Yes, the obvious solution is to give the guy with the hatchet a gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can find dozens that say this all day long. However you could probably find the complete opposite as well. I get it. You hate guns. But the fact remains, that video was stupid and the narrator is a biased, shitty pseudo-comedian/no talent hack on a dead show. That's a blog, not a scholarly article. And it's laughable, in that it claims correlation is causation. Instead of looking at levels, it looks at growth rates, as if it would fix the issue of causality. It does not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemal Ergenekon Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Then why don't you try to prove me wrong instead of posting a link to some comedian? I think that video itself is sufficient to show the ridiculousness of the idea "the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun." Why don't you just not give anyone any guns? That reduces the bad guy's capability set to much less advantageous weapons, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WISD0MTREE Posted August 5, 2016 Share Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) Yes, the obvious solution is to give the guy with the hatchet a gun. He had the option. I think that video itself is sufficient to show the ridiculousness of the idea "the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun." Why don't you just not give anyone any guns? That reduces the bad guy's capability set to much less advantageous weapons, no? The D.C. Chief of Police DC Cathy Lanier disagrees with you. According to her, times have changed: “What we tell them is the facts of the matter is that most active shooters kill most of the victims in 10 minutes or less, and the best police department in the country's going to be about a five-to-seven minute response ... I always say if you can get out, getting out's your first option, your best option. If you're in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it's the best option for saving lives before police can get there. And that's- you know, that's kind of counterintuitive to what cops always tell people, right? We always tell people, "Don't-- you know, don't take action. Call 911. Don't intervene in the robbery"- you know- you know- we've never told people, "Take action." It's a different- this is a different scenario ... You can be prepared and you can have a society that is resilient and alert and conscientious and safer without scaring people ... If you educate people on actions they can take to reduce their risk, then you can save some lives. And I think it's irresponsible for us not to do that ... That's not an option anymore.†And as stated previously ITT... Australia has a big problem with illegal guns, and it’s a problem that’s getting bigger. When people can’t find manufactured guns, they just make them out of parts they find at the hardware store: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/deadly-diy-homemade-guns-hit-sydney-streets-in-record-numbers/story-fni0cx12-1227581151383?sv=ef8ab66b2848f4aa8f539637463c5ee1&nk=71000246701f728a7c9ba75c6222acaf-1445736638 And John Denver is playing on YouTube. Every time. Edited August 5, 2016 by WISD0MTREE 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.