Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,332 Year: 3,589/9,624 Month: 460/974 Week: 73/276 Day: 1/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Guns
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 250 of 301 (398420)
04-30-2007 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Nuggin
04-30-2007 5:12 PM


Re: No Self Defense
You "pro-shoot people" people keep claiming that you can use a gun for defense against someone.
A hand gun is piss poor defense against a bullet. Look at the size and shape of a handgun. If the attacker doesn't hit the gun directly, they aren't going to be stopped at all.
A better tool for self defense would be a bullet proof vest or an armor plated car.
Its for preventative defense...
Someone is less likely to assault someone else if they think that person has a gun.
You want to have a gun so that you can KILL someone who you think is going to do you harm. Stop pretending like you aren't looking to KILL someone.
That's a bigoted statement.
Have you ever shot a gun?
They're really fun. I shot a few fully automatic ones too. Just right into the dirt, it was a blast and I can't wait to do it again. We shot some worn out bowling pins too, btw.
Its also fun to target shoot and watch yourself improve. You get a sense of accomplishment by increasing your skills. And chicks dig guys with skills
But you've already conflated pro-gunners with drunk rednecks, so I don't really expect much of a high quality reply, and with all the sarcasm and smart-ass stuff...
But seriously.... preventative defense.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Nuggin, posted 04-30-2007 5:12 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:31 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 261 by Nuggin, posted 04-30-2007 6:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 263 by ringo, posted 04-30-2007 6:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 252 of 301 (398422)
04-30-2007 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
04-26-2007 12:30 AM


But, as we've seen recently, easy access to guns yields massive casualties.
Didn't Cho shoot himself as soon as he met any resistance from the cops?
If there had been more guns then maybe he wouldn't have gotten so far. Hell, if there had been more guns, he probably wouldn't have started it in the first place.
Easy access isn't to blame.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 04-26-2007 12:30 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Nuggin, posted 04-30-2007 6:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 253 of 301 (398423)
04-30-2007 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by nator
04-30-2007 5:31 PM


Re: No Self Defense
quote:
Someone is less likely to assault someone else if they think that person has a gun.
Do you have any data to support that assertion?
No, its intuitive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:31 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:50 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 265 by Nuggin, posted 04-30-2007 6:17 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 254 of 301 (398425)
04-30-2007 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by nator
04-28-2007 7:44 AM


1) I do not think there is a legitimate reason for anyone other than the military to be able to own a firearm that is capable of firing off rounds in very rapid succession.
It might not be what you're defining as "legitimate", but they sure are a hell of a lot of fun to shoot.
Reason: Entertainment.
Have you ever shot a gun?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by nator, posted 04-28-2007 7:44 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 256 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:53 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 267 by Nuggin, posted 04-30-2007 6:19 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 257 of 301 (398432)
04-30-2007 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by nator
04-30-2007 5:50 PM


Re: No Self Defense
Actually, it is empirical.
As in, it is a testable hypothesis.
How much less likely is it for someone to assault someone if they think they have a gun?
What if both people have a gun? What are the chances then?
I don't know. You're the stat master, look it up for me. Do you disagree with the assertion? Or are you just busting my balls?
But how are you going to know what people are thinking? And how do you measure the assaults that are prevented? It doesn't really seem all that empirical to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:50 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 6:09 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 258 of 301 (398435)
04-30-2007 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by nator
04-30-2007 5:53 PM


The idea of shooting a real gun does not appeal much to me.
Understood. And they're scary too.
The adrenaline rush is great though.
They were just air rifles, though.
You need something with some kick to get the full effect, but air rifles are alright.
I don't have a problem with people going to a firing range and "renting" guns for target practice.
Yeah.... I don't think they are going to like that idea very much. Some people really want their guns. I know someone who collects guns and enjoys firing them at the range. Collecting them (and taking care of them [cleaning,etc]) is a big part of it too and the "renting" would remove some of the enjoyment from their hobby.
I would definately go to a range to rent some guns though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 5:53 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by nator, posted 04-30-2007 6:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024