How many guns?

[juiblex]

originally posted by waterwizard:

Not purely. But they have been used for that purpose. Is it evil to kill a deer for food? Is it evil to protect your property and family by deadly force if necessary?

i dont mean this personally waterwizard, but you make the gun=death equation seem like a side-point. i dont think its evil to defend yourself, however, i do have problems with people having such easy access to firearms. Children, anyone can get a hold on them. If gun-control laws were imposed over there just as they have been here, there would be less need to protect yourselves from robbers armed with weapons. For example, in America there are 423,000 robberies with robberies defined as

the taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody or control of a person or persons by force, or threat of force, and/or violence or putting that person in fear

so you see, if someone enters your home and only tries to take something, and doesnt even use a weapon <let alone firearm>, there are still only 423000 robberies taking place every year. the total of murders with or without weapon is 14000. if we looked at the same percentage decrease as has been seen over a four year period, in 2005, the amount of murder <not necessarily in the home> would drop to 12500. i cant see why you would be opposed to gun-control, if, in such a short time as four years, the amount of murders by firearm would drop by 10%, and the amount of armed murders in the first place is so terribly small.

also, the population of America is currently approx. 287 million people. the amount of robberies that takes place is about 423000. therefore, with some simple arithmetic, 0.0015% of America is ever robbed. I dont see how protection is an acceptable excuse for the majority of America to own a gun, let alone more than one.

And i dont feel that your question "is it evil to kill a deer for food?" is valid. are you telling me you need to hunt for food, but can still afford an internet connection?

As I said before, a criminal is more likely to attack someone who they know is unarmed than someone who they may think is armed. Most guns acquired for protection have never been fired. They are a deterrent.

and as i have demonstrated, there is a 0.0015% chance you will be robbed. in fact, that should be less if you remove those which are unarmed and do not take place in the home.

If you could convince me that most guns are bought for protection, then i might start to think your way.

until next time.

 

[juiblex]

i should also point out all those statistic were acquired for the australian bureau of statistics, the fbi statistics and prb.org.

 

[Sharky]

I don't have a gun. I've got a sword though but i don't use it. I think i lost it somewhere too . I'm not against guns. Only thing i'm worried about is children who play with them or irresponsible people who abuse it.

For self defense, i think pepper spray or just plain old fashion kung fu or some form of martial arts will do.

 

[juiblex]

originally posted by Sharky:

For self defense, i think pepper spray or just plain old fashion kung fu or some form of martial arts will do.

absolutely, thats something i didnt remember to mention after all that statistics research, that there are other ways to defend yourself rather than filling someone with hot lead.

 

[Gunny]

When one is attacked, passive behavior is the safest approach.

The Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey reports that the probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than resisting with a gun.

By John R. Lott, Jr.

 

[coastie]

I'm in the market for A Rutger .357 Revolver. Prefrably something around 7" overall length. Not a big gun, just a nice sidearm for my backcountry fishing trips.

 

[waterwizard]

Originally posted by juiblex
i dont mean this personally waterwizard, but you make the gun=death equation seem like a side-point. i dont think its evil to defend yourself, however, i do have problems with people having such easy access to firearms. Children, anyone can get a hold on them. If gun-control laws were imposed over there just as they have been here, there would be less need to protect yourselves from robbers armed with weapons. For example, in America there are 423,000 robberies with robberies defined as

Study the Era of Prohibition in the USA.&nbsp; Alcohol was criminalized, and the crime rate soared by over 300% during that time.

A criminal will get a gun, regardless of whatever law is on the books.&nbsp; All the gun control laws in the world will not alter that fact.

 

[waterwizard]

Originally posted by gunnysgt
When one is attacked, passive behavior is the safest approach.

Gunny, that may be true, but it is a fact that if a predator knows or suspects the person is armed, the predator is less likely to even approach the person.&nbsp; They don't want to take that chance.

Wherever there is strict gun control, violent crime rises.

 

[Force]

Originally posted by juiblex
And i dont feel that your question "is it evil to kill a deer for food?" is valid. are you telling me you need to hunt for food, but can still afford an internet connection?

Where do you get your food?&nbsp; Someones killing it.&nbsp;

And I would much rather hunt my own (non steriod packed) animal then take a chance getting diseases or a nasty peice of meat&nbsp;from the grocery store.

Hunted food tastes WAY better!

What does me having money etc. have to do with not being able to hunt.&nbsp;&nbsp;So does that mean I shouldnt have&nbsp;a garden either?

&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;&nbsp;

&nbsp;

 

[TheBear]

Originally posted by Zorobabel
I own a gun, but I really see no reason in owning it.

PM me with the detals. I just might want to take it off your hands.

If the government feels the need to take it, they can have it.

Hmmmm. This sounds vaguely familiar. Oh, yeah! The German population's mindset under Hitler.

Guns are for killing people or hunting.

You forgot to add: collecting, trading, and recreational shooting.

At least outlaw handguns.

The only people this would affect, would be law-abiding citizens. The only people who would have handguns, under this scheme, would be the outlaws.

If we would get to the fundamentals of our society and fix problems maybe people wouldn't be so insecure about protecting themselves.

This is a loaded statment and assumes much, unless you are talking about a complete totalitarianism government or dictatorship. Even there, one is not 100% free from the need to protect themselves.

 

[TheBear]

Originally posted by gunnysgt
When one is attacked, passive behavior is the safest approach.

The Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey reports that the probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than resisting with a gun.

By John R. Lott, Jr.

Gunny, you should know, more than most, how government statisticians can make any numbers point to any desired results they want. You should also know how Clinton took advantage of this fact, then used and abused these government agencies, to advance his political agenda. I am somewhat taken aback that someone of your caliber and experience, would use this kind of source to make your point.

I will address your specific points, in another post.

John

 

[Gabriel]

Originally posted by TheBear
Gunny, you should know, more than most, how government statisticians can make any numbers point to any desired results they want. You should also know how Clinton took advantage of this fact, then used and abused these government agencies, to advance his political agenda. I am somewhat taken aback that someone of your caliber and experience, would use this kind of source to make your point.

I will address your specific points, in another post.

John

Wait a minute, Gunny is on our side.&nbsp; The stats that he shows are contradicting the resistance statement which I believe was his intention.&nbsp; As you see, the stats are showing that those who offer no resistance ar more likely to be injured.

John Lott was on our side in this statement.&nbsp; he even wrote a book about the benefits of armed defense.

I have opted to bow out of this arguement as I notice that most antis are not educated with the facts, but instead believe the propoganda spouted by the liberal media and Clinton-like politicians.&nbsp; It's hard to change the mind of people who believe that they are armed with the truth, but are not.

 

[Gunny]

Originally posted by TheBear
Gunny, you should know, more than most, how government statisticians can make any numbers point to any desired results they want.
John

I sure do know Bear, that's why took this little bit of info off a Pro-2nd Ammendment website.

 

[Gunny]

Originally posted by Gabriel
Wait a minute, Gunny is on our side.&nbsp; The stats that he shows are contradicting the resistance statement which I believe was his intention.&nbsp; As you see, the stats are showing that those who offer no resistance ar more likely to be injured.

John Lott was on our side in this statement.&nbsp; he even wrote a book about the benefits of armed defense.

Correct.

 

[Gunny]

Probably fewer than 2% of handguns and well under 1% of all guns will ever be involved in a violent crime. Thus, the problem of criminal gun violence is concentrated within a very small subset of gun owners, indicating that gun control aimed at the general population faces a serious needle-in-the-haystack problem.

-- Gary Kleck, "Point Blank: Handgun Violence In America"

 

[TheBear]

My misunderstanding.....Sorry, Gunny.

 

[TheBear]

/me drops and gives gunnysgt 100 push-ups.

 

[Mr.Cheese]

*Mr.Cheese peeps in*

I just wanted to say that I love guns.
Ok, I'll get out of here now.

*Mr.Cheese magically disappears*

 

[ZiSunka]

Originally posted by Force
Many reasons....hunting for one, protection etc etc etc.

Hunting. Okay.

Protection?
For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood people, but against the evil rulers and wicked authorities of the spiritual world, against those unseen forceful powers of darkness who rule this world, and against depraved spirits in the heavenly realms. Ephesians 6:12

 

[Force]

Originally posted by lambslove
Hunting. Okay.

Protection?
For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood people, but against the evil rulers and wicked authorities of the spiritual world, against those unseen forceful powers of darkness who rule this world, and against depraved spirits in the heavenly realms. Ephesians 6:12

And I can give you verses that support my view of protection etc.

Its all personal preference on whether you want to own one or not...

But I have&nbsp;a right to own mine and protect myself family and friends.