self-defense? lol

Mandalorian FaLLouT GoD · Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:15 pm

you are trythebill and i am sorry for the overly generalized generalization that all americans are gun nuts. even though most are.
and canadians arent anti-gun nuts, we have as many as the americans we just have more guns that are illegal, such as the desert eagle, which has no other purpose than killing people and target practice.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:20 pm

trythebill wrote:if violent crime in england keeps skyrocketing they might not be anyone alive there in 20 years. if england enacted laws similar to the u.s. i think it would be a much safer place. you cannot seriously tell me that if england passed a CCW law the streets would become less safe(hard to do since the streets are about as safe as a war torn african nation right now)

Of course less muggers would succed in mugging, but to what end? The muggers will get shot and most likely killed. Is that a way to decrease violence? No, its just a way of saying "Come on you bastard ive got a gun and I aint afraid of using it!!" what message will that give a mugger? They will go get themself a weapon and shot first, then steal. And unless you wana walk the streets with your hand on you gun and in ever constant fear of somone gunning you down to get your valuables, you shouldnt send them that message. You cant make someone less violent by trying to be even more violent, it will only result in getting bigger and even deadlier weapons to defend yourself and in turn the criminals will get even bigger ones Etc. One day guns will be so common that its gona be hard to see whats right and whats wrong, there will only be the gun and your power to use it to the end of empowering your point of wiew. I dont want to live in a world where people live by their weapons. Of course this is pretty far fetched, but fact is, people are egocentric and many people will do most anything to get the upper hand. Why not get a gun then? Its a good way to silence your opposition.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:29 pm

Forty-six & Two wrote:
Of course less muggers would succed in mugging, but to what end? The muggers will get shot and most likely killed. Is that a way to decrease violence? No, its just a way of saying "Come on you bastard ive got a gun and I aint afraid of using it!!" what message will that give a mugger? They will go get themself a weapon and shot first, then steal. And unless you wana walk the streets with your hand on you gun and in ever constant fear of somone gunning you down to get your valuables, you shouldnt send them that message. You cant make someone less violent by trying to be even more violent, it will only result in getting bigger and even deadlier weapons to defend yourself and in turn the criminals will get even bigger ones Etc. One day guns will be so common that its gona be see whats right and whats wrong, there will only be the gun and your power to use it to the end of empowering your point of wiew. I dont want to live in a world where people live by their weapons. Of course this is pretty far fetched, but fact is, people are egocentric and many people will do most anything to get the upper hand. Why not get a gun then? Its a good way to silence your opposition.

your arguement is that it is better to be mugged and have both parties live then not be mugged and have one less criminal? does that also apply to rape victims? you're kind of a sick individual if you'd rather see a woman get raped and beaten than defend herself with a firearm. and no, there are no equally effective means of defense to women. pepper spray does not work on everyone, knives take high levels of strength to use effectively and martial arts can take long hours to learn and is not always effective.

As for the arguement about muggers arming themselves why hasn't it happened in the U.S. yet?

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:37 pm

Everyone should own a gun, mabye something like a .22 or mabye like a bolt-action pistol, but everyone should be entitled to be able to use a gun. Just because a gun is made for killing doesn't make much difference. A car is made for driving, but more people die from cars than guns? I guess you want like a DRIVING LISCENSE eh? Ban all the automatics eh?

It seems that anti-nut folks are more violent than perfectly healthy-minded people with a hobby? Bizarro.

Slave_Master · Post by **Slave_Master** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:41 pm

Of course less muggers would succed in mugging, but to what end? The muggers will get shot and most likely killed. Is that a way to decrease violence? No, its just a way of saying "Come on you bastard ive got a gun and I aint afraid of using it!!" what message will that give a mugger? They will go get themself a weapon and shot first, then steal

.

I already addressed that issue. A criminal will not mug you if he knows that you will shoot him. He will not immediately open fire if he knows that doing so will result in death. And who gives a shit if the mugger dies? He had it coming to him.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:41 pm

trythebill wrote:your arguement is that it is better to be mugged and have both parties live then not be mugged and have one less criminal? does that also apply to rape victims? you're kind of a sick individual if you'd rather see a woman get raped and beaten than defend herself with a firearm. and no, there are no equally effective means of defense to women. pepper spray does not work on everyone, knives take high levels of strength to use effectively and martial arts can take long hours to learn and is not always effective.

No, I dont think rape is ok, neither do I think muggers who for no care of others than themself kill and hurt people for money, deserve to live. vut you know? Everybody has an opinion on who deserves to live, now dont they? Guns might as well be used to racists or extreme political fanatics Etc. they would also be used by people who just snap or gets a depression, which you cant deny happens. And im not just talking about columbine, im talking about all the times someone who had a grudge on another person for any reason what so ever freaked and drew his gun. This includes martual disputes, unfaithfullness and familiy fudes. Also includes people jumping out of their car and capping the guy who cut them off on the road or at least anyway shooting up his/her car.

trythebill wrote:As for the arguement about muggers arming themselves why hasn't it happened in the U.S. yet?

Oh, it hasnt? Im pretty sure it has. Most criminals who are succesfull enough criminals will most likely have a gun if violent assault is thier bag, and they will most likely be just as well armed as any law abiding citizen looking to protect himself with a gun.

Slave_Master · Post by **Slave_Master** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:43 pm

Oh, it hasnt? Im pretty sure it has. Most criminals who are succesfull enough criminals will most likely have a gun if violent assault is thier bag, and they will most likely be just as well armed as any law abiding citizen looking to protect himself with a gun.

Yeah. It would be dumb to say "Criminal has gun, law abiding citizen has no gun" is better than "Both criminal and all the citizens have guns". Oh wait, now you're going to copy and paste your battlefield argument again. We're going around in circles here.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:46 pm

Slave_Master wrote:I already addressed that issue. A criminal will not mug you if he knows that you will shoot him. He will not immediately open fire if he knows that doing so will result in death. And who gives a shit if the mugger dies? He had it coming to him.

How the hell do you know that for a fact?

And again, a mugger or a rapist might not deserve to live, but alot of other kinds of people might end up infront of the gun that was bought legally. This isnt just about crime, its about anyone owning gun having personal power over other peoples lives and literally has the power to take a life very easily at any time he wishes to. A world where anyone has that power doesnt seem like a nice place. It seems like anarchy. Police and militarys should be the ones carrying the guns, not the common populace.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:47 pm

Forty-six & Two wrote:Oh, it hasnt? Im pretty sure it has. Most criminals who are succesfull enough criminals will most likely have a gun if violent assault is thier bag, and they will most likely be just as well armed as any law abiding citizen looking to protect himself with a gun.

made up facts are always fun for the discussion. too bad crime statistics show that it hasn't. i recommend you consult the FBI Crime Report Data before speaking again.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:50 pm

Forty-six & Two wrote:It seems like anarchy. Police and militarys should be the ones carrying the guns, not the common populace.

great. now we have a totalitarian state where no one has freedom to do anything. good call!

photo by Oleg Volk

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:52 pm

Slave_Master wrote:Yeah. It would be dumb to say "Criminal has gun, law abiding citizen has no gun" is better than "Both criminal and all the citizens have guns". Oh wait, now you're going to copy and paste your battlefield argument again. We're going around in circles here.

No I wont, cause you simply dont get it do ya?

Violence breeds violence. If you wana stop violence, dont promote or buy tools of violence. Im not argumenting for self-defense, im argumenting for a solution to bring an end to violence at any cost.

Im pretty sure it will never happen, and that the world will slowly dissolve into anarchy, fear and hate. So why am I bothering trying to argument for a lost cause?!

Im gona go make my math assignment, which is already late and should have been handed to my teacher today. I have till 00:00 hours tonight to mail it to her.

Edit:

trythebill wrote:great. now we have a totalitarian state where no one has freedom to do anything. good call!

Dont you think I realise that? Its one of the facts about human history that makes me strongly believe we will never get a better way of life, and that things will only get worse.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:54 pm

who said we wanted to crusade against violence? that is obviously a cause that cannot be won in our lifetime, if ever. what i want to crusade against is people who take away my right to defend myself and my family using the effective means avaliable to me.

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 4:55 pm

You sounds like a depressed hippy.

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:00 pm

the guardian wrote:You sounds like a depressed hippy.

Me? Well you hit the spot. Fairly accurate anyway....

Forty-six & Two · Post by **Forty-six & Two** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:04 pm

trythebill wrote:who said we wanted to crusade against violence? that is obviously a cause that cannot be won in our lifetime, if ever. what i want to crusade against is people who take away my right to defend myself and my family using the effective means avaliable to me.

Really? Well I realised that a long time ago, and my reasoning never had anything to do with self defense.

The conclusion to my part of this discussion is: You cant make a better world if youre only interest is yourself. You must make sacrifices. Noone ever changed the world for the better without sacrificing something personal.

I dont believe in carrying a weapon. So I dont, and I wouldnt do it even if it was legal to buy a gun in my country. Its not excatly a sacrifice, but its doing what I feel is right. So yea, there you go.

Slave_Master · Post by **Slave_Master** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:07 pm

Violence breeds violence. If you wana stop violence, dont promote or buy tools of violence. Im not argumenting for self-defense, im argumenting for a solution to bring an end to violence at any cost.

Not buying tools of violence to defend myself is way better than getting murdered. If you want to ban guns to solve violence, then find another way. Say, hypothetically, you can destroy every firearm in the world, and prevent anyone from building them. What then? People will stab and bludgeon eachother. Violence can never be solved. So why make law abiding citizens victims of violence by taking away the most effective way for them to defend themselves?

The conclusion to my part of this discussion is: You cant make a better world if youre only interest is yourself. You must make sacrifices. Noone ever changed the world for the better without sacrificing something personal.

Not defending yourself won't stop violence in any way, fashion or form.

I dont believe in carrying a weapon. So I dont, and I wouldnt do it even if it was legal to buy a gun in my country. Its not excatly a sacrifice, but its doing what I feel is right. So yea, there you go.

That's your right, and I respect that. But why want to take everyone else's right to defend themselves away?

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:10 pm

Making the world a better place, yeah, ok. Sounds like you're chanting a governement film though, "no guns-better world". All that's missing are 100 children from different nationalities, all holding hands together and forming a circle, oh, and a catchy emotional song.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:10 pm

What if you were attacked by a bunch of people who kicked all your teeth out and raped your girlfriend? What then eh TRAVIS BICKLE?

Slave_Master · Post by **Slave_Master** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:13 pm

How the hell do you know that for a fact?

Unless he's retarded, or insane, he won't open fire in a public area full of armed people.

trythebill · Post by **trythebill** » Fri Oct 10, 2003 5:16 pm

Slave_Master wrote:
How the hell do you know that for a fact?
Unless he's retarded, or insane, he won't open fire in a public area full of armed people.

and if he did and all those people were armed then he'd he proper fucked indeed.