It's Not Too Soon to Debate Gun Control

[Aldebaran]

You don't find those comments in poor taste? Interesting.

What's interesting is when you come to conclusions like that.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What's interesting is when you come to conclusions like that.

I can phrase it more like a question, if it'll clear up your confusion.

Don't you find such comments in poor taste?

 

[TLK Valentine]

You snooze, you lose: Now it's too soon after the Colorado shooting:

3 killed in Colorado Walmart shooting; suspect sought

 

[Ada Lovelace]

 

[Aldebaran]

I can phrase it more like a question, if it'll clear up your confusion.

Don't you find such comments in poor taste?

Yes, I do.

 

[Aldebaran]

View attachment 212896

They talked about it back in 1994. They even did something about it. But true to form, it was only the "first step" they wanted to take. Small wonder that gun owners are reluctant to let the antis take another mile.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, I do.

Then it is too soon... For which massacre hardly matters anymore; at this point, even Donald can't keep them all straight.

 

[Aldebaran]

Then it is too soon... For which massacre hardly matters anymore; at this point, even Donald can't keep them all straight.

What are you talking about now?

 

[TLK Valentine]

What are you talking about now?

My point exactly. It's "too soon" after the recent gun-related bloodbath in ________ to discuss gun control.

(feel free to fill in the blank with any US location... it's either a site of a mass shooting, or it will be shortly.)

 

[Aldebaran]

My point exactly. It's "too soon" after the recent gun-related bloodbath in Waco, TX and Ruby Ridge to discuss gun control.

(feel free to fill in the blank with any US location... it's either a site of a mass shooting, or it will be shortly.)

Blank filled in.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Blank filled in.

And there you have it. "Too Soon."

 

[Aldebaran]

And there you have it. "Too Soon."

Yep! As long as I'm restricted to operating within the narrative you laid out, it's going to read that way.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yep! As long as I'm restricted to operating within the narrative you laid out, it's going to read that way.

The question was, "is it too soon?" You seemed confused about too soon after what, so I took the liberty of explaining it to you.

 

[Aldebaran]

The question was, "is it too soon?" You seemed confused about too soon after what, so I took the liberty of explaining it to you.

I'm not sure what part of it you want to talk about. FYI, just a couple hours ago while I was bicycling home, I got attacked by a Pit Bull that came within inches of having me for dinner. If I would have had the opportunity to shoot the dog instead of narrowly escaping to live to tell about it, would you still want me to talk to you about gun control? Experiences like this make me more grateful for the right to defend myself. Trust me, it's when the need arises that you appreciate the ability the most.

 

[The~Cerberus~Infinite]

Listen folks, it's the wild west now. Get armed, get trained, get prepped, bad things are coming, more false flags, more "high casualty incidents" are coming, more deep state terror attacks meant to justify gun grabs or more security theater. Calm before the storm folks.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm not sure what part of it you want to talk about. FYI, just a couple hours ago while I was bicycling home, I got attacked by a Pit Bull that came within inches of having me for dinner. If I would have had the opportunity to shoot the dog instead of narrowly escaping to live to tell about it, would you still want me to talk to you about gun control? Experiences like this make me more grateful for the right to defend myself. Trust me, it's when the need arises that you appreciate the ability the most.

Did you shoot the dog?

 

[Aldebaran]

Did you shoot the dog?

No. I don't have a carry permit, but now I'm wondering if I should. I shouldn't have to worry about being attacked every time I go out. But that's the reality of it, and it's up to me to be ready in case I have to defend myself, and it's even more obvious now that I can't count on anyone else to do that for me. I called the police on the phone when I got home and reported what happened and where the dog was. They sent an officer to that area but couldn't find it. So now I have to worry about it happening again.
I hope you understand now why I don't want the government looking for more ways to further control the best means I have of defending myself. I'm not interested in seeing politicians doing another one of their "first steps" toward "taking guns off the streets". Why don't they take Pit Bulls off the streets? It's already illegal to let those things run loose, but yet the police aren't all that interested even when someone is attacked. However, if I had called about someone waving a gun around, there would have been a SWAT team there in 5 minutes. Oh well. And no, I wasn't implying that a SWAT team should have been called to look for the dog. I was just pointing out that a gun and a Pit Bull can be dangerous, but the government puts different priorities on them.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No. I don't have a carry permit, but now I'm wondering if I should. I shouldn't have to worry about being attacked every time I go out. But that's the reality of it, and it's up to me to be ready in case I have to defend myself, and it's even more obvious now that I can't count on anyone else to do that for me.

And yet, you defended yourself just fine without a gun.

Don't worry, friend -- your secret's safe with me.

I called the police on the phone when I got home and reported what happened and where the dog was. They sent an officer to that area but couldn't find it. So now I have to worry about it happening again.

Whereas if you had a gun, they could've just followed the buzzards. I can see the advantage.

I hope you understand now why I don't want the government looking for more ways to further control the best means I have of defending myself.

would a firearm have been the best means you had of defending yourself in that situation? I highly doubt that a pit bull would understand what it is, therefore, the intimidation factor would've been zero, forcing you to shoot.

Had you shot and missed, you might scare off the animal, or just enrage it further... and those things move pretty fast. You might not have gotten a second shot.

I'm not interested in seeing politicians doing another one of their "first steps" toward "taking guns off the streets". Why don't they take Pit Bulls off the streets? It's already illegal to let those things run loose, but yet the police aren't all that interested even when someone is attacked.

Why indeed? And yet the police are going to be less lackadaisical regarding firearms because...?

However, if I had called about someone waving a gun around, there would have been a SWAT team there in 5 minutes. Oh well.

guy waving gun around more dangerous than dog -- film at 11.

And no, I wasn't implying that a SWAT team should have been called to look for the dog. I was just pointing out that a gun and a Pit Bull can be dangerous, but the government puts different priorities on them.

Imagine that. Incidentally, you might be interested in knowing that there have been about 260 pit bull related deaths in the United States over the past 12 years -- 2005-2017 inclusive.

On the other hand, in the year 2015 alone, gun-related deaths (excluding suicides) were at 13,286.

Seems to me that there are different priorities for a reason.

 

[Aldebaran]

And yet, you defended yourself just fine without a gun.

Don't worry, friend -- your secret's safe with me.

If by "defended", you mean being forced to ride as fast as I could toward a curb and hope I don't crash because it was the only direction I could go since the dog was on my right side, then sure. I'd rather not have to rely on that any more than a woman being chased by potential rapist would see it as acceptable that she had to do something similar to get away, and not be allowed any other means of defense if it happened again. NOBODY should have to fear for their life and be limited in their ability to defend themselves. I certainly would hope you wouldn't tell a woman who was nearly raped or killed and barely got away from her attacker that she doesn't need a method of defense since she got away the first time.

Whereas if you had a gun, they could've just followed the buzzards. I can see the advantage.

Or at least found the dog right where it was when it attacked me, never to attack anyone again. As it is, it's still free to attack any of the children at the grade school that is located just 3 blocks from that location. Maybe one of those little kids will be successful in "defending" himself by running fast enough. Let's just hope. That seems to be adequate for some people. If not, then I'm sure there will be a child or parent who will wish I had shot the dog.

would a firearm have been the best means you had of defending yourself in that situation? I highly doubt that a pit bull would understand what it is, therefore, the intimidation factor would've been zero, forcing you to shoot.

At least you admit it wouldn't be voluntary.
In my online research, it shows that a gun is 80% effective in stopping a dog attack. All other options are less effective, while a knife was shown to be ineffective. That's something else I was considering.

Had you shot and missed, you might scare off the animal, or just enrage it further... and those things move pretty fast. You might not have gotten a second shot.

If I hadn't been able to get away as I barely did--are you willing to speculate on that? In case you're unaware of it, people have been killed, or at least severely disfigured after being mauled by a Pit Bull. You can look up the pictures online easily. I don't think I should have to go through that. No one should. People should have any means necessary to prevent it if they so choose.

Imagine that. Incidentally, you might be interested in knowing that there have been about 260 pit bull related deaths in the United States over the past 12 years -- 2005-2017 inclusive.

On the other hand, in the year 2015 alone, gun-related deaths (excluding suicides) were at 13,286.

I guess being attacked by a Pit Bull isn't so bad then in the minds of some. Personally, I think it's a serious thing. And now for your viewing pleasure, meet some people who no doubt agree with me: pit bull attack damage - Google Search

 

[TLK Valentine]

If by "defended", you mean being forced to ride as fast as I could toward a curb and hope I don't crash because it was the only direction I could go since the dog was on my right side, then sure.

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.

Or at least found the dog right where it was when it attacked me, never to attack anyone again. As it is, it's still free to attack any of the children at the grade school that is located just 3 blocks from that location. Maybe one of those little kids will be successful in "defending" himself by running fast enough. Let's just hope. That seems to be adequate for some people. If not, then I'm sure there will be a child or parent who will wish I had shot the dog.

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

At least you admit it wouldn't be voluntary.
In my online research, it shows that a gun is 80% effective in stopping a dog attack. All other options are less effective, while a knife was shown to be ineffective. That's something else I was considering.

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

If I hadn't been able to get away as I barely did--are you willing to speculate on that? In case you're unaware of it, people have been killed, or at least severely disfigured after being mauled by a Pit Bull. You can look up the pictures online easily.

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

I don't think I should have to go through that. No one should. People should have any means necessary to prevent it if they so choose.

"by any means necessary" it is, then.

I guess being attacked by a Pit Bull isn't so bad then in the minds of some.

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

Personally, I think it's a serious thing. And now for your viewing pleasure, meet some people who no doubt agree with me: pit bull attack damage - Google Search

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.