It's Not Too Soon to Debate Gun Control

[TLK Valentine]

It's important for us to remember that it's only too soon to politicize death when the political topic is guns. Any other topic, and at least you'll know that the death accomplished a worthy political goal.

After border agent is killed and partner injured in Texas, Trump renews call for wall

 

[Aldebaran]

How good a shot are you when peddling away as fast as you can on your bike? Seems to me that even armed, your options are somewhat limited.

The need to shoot is when I am no longer able to peddle as fast as I can. Intersections happen. So does that curb I had to hit that could have put me down.

Indeed -- you missed out on your opportunity to be a hero. Shucks. Maybe next time.

Nice attempt at snark. But what would you be saying if I had told you that the same dog attacked and severely disfigured a 6 year old kid who was on his way to school? Would you say, "Shucks. Better luck next time."?

And yet the option you did take turned out to be effective. Beat the odds, did you?

This time, yes. Should I take it that I'll always beat the odds?

I already did when I looked up the stats. Shall we post gunshot wounds to go with them?

If what we're talking about is a desire to go around shooting people rather than defending against pit bull attacks, then go ahead. However, that's not what we're talking about.

"by any means necessary" it is, then.

Glad you agree.

260 in 12 years vs. 13,000 in one -- the numbers agree with me.

Then you agree that being attacked and mauled by a pit bull is acceptable. Interesting.

I'd show you some people who agree with me, but the mods would ban me -- you can google "gunshot deaths" yourself -- make sure the filter's off.

If those deaths are the result of someone committing murder, then it might be relevant. Pit bull attacks rarely happen because the pit bull was exercising a basic canine right to defend himself by attacking bicyclists.

 

[Aldebaran]

It's important for us to remember that it's only too soon to politicize death when the political topic is guns. Any other topic, and at least you'll know that the death accomplished a worthy political goal.

After border agent is killed and partner injured in Texas, Trump renews call for wall

It's too soon when both sides are only going to speak or legislate out of pure emotion.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The need to shoot is when I am no longer able to peddle as fast as I can. Intersections happen. So does that curb I had to hit that could have put me down.

Sounds like the answer is to stop (assuming the curb doesn't wipe you out), draw, aim, and shoot before the pit bull mauls you.

Good luck.

Nice attempt at snark. But what would you be saying if I had told you that the same dog attacked and severely disfigured a 6 year old kid who was on his way to school? Would you say, "Shucks. Better luck next time."?

Nah, I would say, " I don't believe you."

This time, yes. Should I take it that I'll always beat the odds?

Depends on how often you run into a pitbull you want to shoot.

If what we're talking about is a desire to go around shooting people rather than defending against pit bull attacks, then go ahead. However, that's not what we're talking about.

Right... I keep forgetting that firearms are only useful against dogs... In fact, they're ideal!

Glad you agree.

Statistically speaking, you were due.

Then you agree that being attacked and mauled by a pit bull is acceptable. Interesting.

Poor attempt at snark. Don't make it personal just because you can't face the numbers.

If those deaths are the result of someone committing murder, then it might be relevant. Pit bull attacks rarely happen because the pit bull was exercising a basic canine right to defend himself by attacking bicyclists.

Indeed, dogs have no rights. Fire at will.

By the way, what do you think those firearm deaths are from? I already told you they don't include suicides.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It's too soon when both sides are only going to speak or legislate out of pure emotion.

You condemn Donald's politicizing this tragegy, then?

 

[Aldebaran]

Sounds like the answer is to stop (assuming the curb doesn't wipe you out), draw, aim, and shoot before the pit bull mauls you.

Good luck.

Or I could do it your way and simply allow myself to be mauled. Unless there are any other ideas, those are the two to choose from.

Nah, I would say, " I don't believe you."

To which I would (and do) say, "I don't care"

Depends on how often you run into a pitbull you want to shoot.

Defense isn't based on want.

Right... I keep forgetting that firearms are only useful against dogs... In fact, they're ideal!

Nobody made the argument that a gun is exclusively useful against dog attacks. Some attackers walk on two legs.

Statistically speaking, you were due.

I guess we all are at some point. That's the point where we have to decide what to do--either fight or flight. When flight isn't possible, then you fight (or surrender, if that's your desire).

Poor attempt at snark. Don't make it personal just because you can't face the numbers.

I wasn't the one who implied that I wanted to be a hero. (post #540).

Indeed, dogs have no rights. Fire at will.

If they attack me, then I'd be perfectly willing.

By the way, what do you think those firearm deaths are from? I already told you they don't include suicides.

Accidents, self defense, police shootings, etc.
But since they're your numbers, why don't you just tell me?

 

[Aldebaran]

You condemn Donald's politicizing this tragegy, then?

I don't remember Trump calling for bans on bump fire stocks, semi auto rifles, or any other type of firearm just because it was used by the shooter.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Or I could do it your way and simply allow myself to be mauled. Unless there are any other ideas, those are the two to choose from.

Don't blame me if you can't think of more than two things -- you took a third option the last time and it worked out fine, didn't it?

Guess it just goes to show that not every problem needs to be solved at muzzle velocity.

To which I would (and do) say, "I don't care"

I'm glad we can put that story behind us -- it wasn't all that convincing in the first place.

Defense isn't based on want.

Nor is it based on odds, but don't let that stop you.

Nobody made the argument that a gun is exclusively useful against dog attacks. Some attackers walk on two legs.

It was the only thing you could think of against that dog... you just said so.

I guess we all are at some point. That's the point where we have to decide what to do--either fight or flight. When flight isn't possible, then you fight (or surrender, if that's your desire).

And the next time you see a dog, you'll be glad you had your gun with you.

I wasn't the one who implied that I wanted to be a hero. (post #540).

The children, Alde! Think about the children!

If they attack me, then I'd be perfectly willing.

I never implied otherwise. Fire at Will... and Rover, and Spot, and Fido...

Accidents, self defense, police shootings, etc.
But since they're your numbers, why don't you just tell me?

What does it matter? Unless we also limit all those pitbull maulings to the ones where the owners deliberately sicced their dogs on someone -- fair is fair, after all.

... or we can agree that a person injured/killed by "accident" is no less hurt/dead than one killed by malice.

 

[Aldebaran]

Don't blame me if you can't think of more than two things -- you took a third option the last time and it worked out fine, didn't it?

Guess it just goes to show that not every problem needs to be solved at muzzle velocity.

As I pointed out before, escape as an only option (if it exists) can't always be counted on. Yes, flee if you can, but be ready and able to fight if you can't. If you'd rather flee if you can, or suffer the consequences if you can't, then be my guest.

I'm glad we can put that story behind us -- it wasn't all that convincing in the first place.

It was a hypothetical. Go back to post #542 and read it more carefully this time.

Nor is it based on odds, but don't let that stop you.

Says the person who just got through showing me statistics.

It was the only thing you could think of against that dog... you just said so.

I said that a gun isn't just for dog attacks. Please read more carefully.

And the next time you see a dog, you'll be glad you had your gun with you.

If it's a large dog that growling and sprinting toward me out of the control of its owner, then you are correct.

The children, Alde! Think about the children!

Then you admit what I said is true. Good to know.

I never implied otherwise. Fire at Will... and Rover, and Spot, and Fido...

And Killer, and Brutus, and Trayvon....

What does it matter? Unless we also limit all those pitbull maulings to the ones where the owners deliberately sicced their dogs on someone -- fair is fair, after all.

... or we can agree that a person injured/killed by "accident" is no less hurt/dead than one killed by malice.

I've never seen a gun run out of someone's yard and try to shoot me. Dogs have a mind of their own. Guns don't. That's why vicious dogs need to be controlled and not allowed to run loose and unsupervised. There are laws about dogs having to be on a leash when off their property for good reason.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I don't remember Trump calling for bans on bump fire stocks, semi auto rifles, or any other type of firearm just because it was used by the shooter.

Have you lost track of the conversation, Alde?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I've never seen a gun run out of someone's yard and try to shoot me.

Is that why accidental gun deaths don't count in your mind? Only deliberate killings?

Dogs have a mind of their own. Guns don't. That's why vicious dogs need to be controlled and not allowed to run loose and unsupervised. There are laws about dogs having to be on a leash when off their property for good reason.

There are laws about keeping firearms under control as well... also for good reason.

 

[Aldebaran]

Have you lost track of the conversation, Alde?

Not at all. I was responding to:

You condemn Donald's politicizing this tragegy, then?

Did you forget asking me this? That's ok. I understand.

 

[Aldebaran]

Is that why accidental gun deaths don't count in your mind? Only deliberate killings?

What are they supposed to count for?

There are laws about keeping firearms under control as well... also for good reason.

And therein lies the reason for the concealed carry permit. It's one of those "sensible gun control measures" that are already in place that doesn't seem to satisfy certain (hint, hint) people.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Not at all. I was responding to:

Did you forget asking me this? That's ok. I understand.

You forgot what you were responding to:

It's important for us to remember that it's only too soon to politicize death when the political topic is guns. Any other topic, and at least you'll know that the death accomplished a worthy political goal.

After border agent is killed and partner injured in Texas, Trump renews call for wall

That's ok. I understand.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What are they supposed to count for?

Gun deaths, of course. Those people are just as dead, are they not?

 

[Aldebaran]

You forgot what you were responding to:

I showed you in post #552 what I was responding to, the original of which can be found in post #545. I won't trouble you with making you read it though.

 

[Aldebaran]

Gun deaths, of course. Those people are just as dead, are they not?

As dead as someone mauled by a Pitbull. What does that have to do with the right to defense against a mauling by a Pitbull?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I showed you in post #552 what I was responding to, the original of which can be found in post #545. I won't trouble you with making you read it though.

Perhaps if you had, you would've remembered post #543 is where is began.

 

[TLK Valentine]

As dead as someone mauled by a Pitbull. What does that have to do with the right to defense against a mauling by a Pitbull?

How long have firearms been the only means of defense against pitbulls? Surely not every threat merits a .45 caliber solution.

 

[Aldebaran]

How long have firearms been the only means of defense against pitbulls? Surely not every threat merits a .45 caliber solution.

Did I say it was the only means? Please try to read more carefully. I know you can do that.

Read this and then tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to defend myself.

Weapon success rates
I have been logging fatal and disfiguring dog attack data for nearly 35 years now. Based on actual case data, a firearm has about an 80% success rate in stopping a charging pit bull, but with a high rate of accidentally killing or injuring other people nearby, as occurred on June 21, 2017 when a ricochet from a police round fired at a charging pit bull killed 17-year-old Armando Garcia, who was reportedly 40 feet away and out of view of the officers who were trying to stop the attack.

A fire extinguisher has about a 70% success rate, with no risk to bystanders. A bite stick can be used by an experienced person, or anyone who has an appropriate object to use as a bite stick and keeps his or her head.

Knives and blunt instruments have negative success rates, meaning that the people using them are more likely to increase the severity of an attack than to help themselves or others get away.
http://www.animals24-7.org/2017/06/25/15-real-life-tips-for-surviving-a-dog-attack/