for the record (re: guns thread)

In the now-closed Guns thread, Jon made the following claim in Message 292:

quote:

---

A claim that has been made here over and over again is that increased guns = increased violence

---

That is a strawman.Not only is that a strawman, it was corrected over and over and over and over again by me and others in that thread.I'd like to set the record straight here.Some quotes from me in that thread (bolding added): Message 237: Message 220: Message 174: Message 156: Message 154: Me quoting Dr. Hemenway in Harvard magazine about his research on violence in the US in Message 130: What I want to know is how the heck can anybody read my posts in that thread and just ignore the SEVEN seperate times I repeated the same simple idea? And then there were the multiple times Nuggin said that same thing...It wasn't just Jon, either. Edited by nator, : No reason given.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Personally, I liked it when he suggested that you should not be a gun owner cuz you would probably shoot someone just to get the last word...when earlier he admitted that he put a bullet between someones eyes if he felt that they had grabbed him in a sexual way. Good God, I hope he's not married.When I saw this thread, I actually thought that that was what you were going to address...for the record.

quote:

---

Personally, I liked it when he suggested that you should not be a gun owner cuz you would probably shoot someone just to get the last word...when earlier he admitted that he put a bullet between someones eyes if he felt that they had grabbed him in a sexual way. Good God, I hope he's not married.

---

I thought his post was really funny, because he just went on and on about how I have to get the last word, not having the least bit self-awareness of the fact that that was exactly what he was doing!What I think is happening, actually, is that he thinks that I am just trying to "get in the last word", but what I am actually doing many times is trying to get people to actually address the issues. I mean, this is a debate board. Why should I let an illogical, factually incorrect, or fallacious argument remain unaddressed? It's not my problem if those making such arguments can't defend them.The first sentence of his post addressed the message he was responding to (psychological evaluations before gun purchases) but the rest was just a silly personal attack (doubly ironic because he ran way from the thread earlier, accusing me of the same).It can be viewed here, and here is my analysis below:Here's my post that he quoted:

quote:

---

When I saw this thread, I actually thought that that was what you were going to address...for the record.

---

Yeah, well, Jon kind of retracted his statement about not hesitating to put a bullet between someone's eyes if they grabbed him in an unwanted sexual way, saying he was only "joking", but it is disturbing that he would even suggest such a thing. There wasn't any indication that he was "joking" when he wrote it, either, so perhaps it was just an attempt to back out the argument without retracting.I also thought it was amusing that Jon would think I was upset by pointing out that I like to get the last word in.Well, duh! Does he think I don't know this about myself?(clearly, he doesn't know it about himself)I wasn't going to respond at all, because it was just so silly and contrived, but since you've brought it up, well, why not?We all know that I can't help myself regarding getting in the last word, so much so that I will blithely commit MURDER to make sure I have my way! BWAHAHAHAHA!

Comming from the UK I have no idea why Americans feel the need to have guns in the hands of civilians.With that in mind; am I wrong to see guns as a 'force multiplier' in terms of a confrontation?

Double post!*looks for someone to shoot*Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Comming from the UK I have no idea why Americans feel the need to have guns in the hands of civilians.

---

The emphasis on individualism, placing a low value on compromise and many mythic holdovers from the "wild west", are my suggested reasons. Patriarchy helps, too.Mostly, though, the liberal interpretation of the Constitution, along with good old capitalism has allowed the gun culture to get completely out of hand.We in America are like spoiled little children used to always getting our own way and not having to compromise, negotiate, or back down.In fact, "backing down", even when it would be the wisest move, is considered horribly weak and distatseful in American culture.

quote:

---

With that in mind; am I wrong to see guns as a 'force multiplier' in terms of a confrontation?

---

Nope, you aren't wrong.

Guns are fun.They are beautiful works of art, extremely well designed tools, a combination of functionality and art.Shooting is fun.Shooting teaches control, both mental and physical.Most gun owners also take guns very seriously. Even more than the non-shooter, we are aware of just how dangerous guns are. Because of that, gun owners seem to be far more aware and careful than the general driving public.I enjoy shooting very much, and I am pretty good at it, not in the league of the best, but certainly better than the average policeman.When I carry a weapon, I am aware at all times that I do have a force multiplier, that use of the capability would have severe consequences, that I am prepared and trained to use it if necessary and that it really is a last resort capability.That knowledge influences me in several ways. I have a heightened situational awareness at all times. I consciously try to avoid situations where confrontation is likely, and when in such a situation, tend to shrug challenges off. I know that I can protect myself, and because of that, have nothing to prove. I am far more likely, based on my personal experience, to walk away from an insult, simply ignore the source as no more than an irritant.Edited by jar, : change sub-title

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Most gun owners also take guns very seriously. Even more than the non-shooter, we are aware of just how dangerous guns are. Because of that, gun owners seem to be far more aware and careful than the general driving public.

---

So, are those your personal opinions, or statements of fact that you can back up if asked?

I so would not have thought that you would carry a gun. I'm still trying to get my head around armed civilians.When you carry a gun around what is your primary motivation for doing so?

Just out of curiosity, why? Protection, protection of myself and others.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I guess I am guilty of making assumptions Seriously though, I have difficulty seeing people carrying guns for anything other than shooting or threatening to shoot people and from my interaction with you on these boards you don't seem the type.Don't forget I'm a Brit and we see guns very differently over here. Any civilian carrying a gun is most likely a criminal. How many times has your stated reason for carrying a gun come into play?

That's why we need more of the "good guys" carrying guns.When you pass laws regulating guns, all you do is affect the "good guys", as the "bad guys" aren't obeying the laws anyways.

Sorry to bang on with a mantra 'in my country.....'But in my country the good guys are highly trained police or soldiers. Not your average Joe who is more likley to get his kids shot in house hold accidental discharge than stop a mugging in the street.As an aside, is it legal to discharge fire arms as well as to carry them?

A few times. Certainly more often than I have turned in insurance claims.Remember, part of what I described is the change in MY personality and point of view. Carrying a gun, like insurance, other martial arts or physical training, or even just learning, is as much a mental discipline as the actual object.Just because I have insurance to cover me in an accident I do not drive carelessly. Insurance is hopefully something you do not use and that you try very hard to avoid needing.I do not use a gun as a threat. Would never use a gun as a threat. It is a last resort and to be used ONLY to stop a threat. You are almost right there.The emphasis though is on protecting self and others. It is passive until some external threat.You made two judgments it seemed in your post. One involved making assumptions about my personality. And based on the information available to you, you created some image of "jar" that excluded the possibility of my being armed.But would you expect me to be unarmed when it comes to insurance?Would you expect me to be unarmed when it comes to knowledge?Part of being prepared is that you DO change your mental attitude. When you know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you can protect yourself, then there is no need to show off, to test, to impress others. Should I be challenged, I don't have to show the size of my cajones, I can simply dismiss the challenger as not worthy of my effort just as I dismiss some posters here at EvC as simply not worthy of even acknowledgment.I do not have to win contests or arguments.But if my life or safety, or even more importantly, your life or safety were threatened, I would also be able to help protect either of us.If though, on the off chance you were threatened, and like another poster here on EvC would rather wait for the police instead of accepting my help, no problem. Just let me know and I will gladly just walk on by.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

LOLThere is little point of carrying them if you can't use them.But, like almost everything else, use carries consequence.If you use a gun inappropriately, you will be sanctioned.If you use a gun, it better be clear that the use was protection, and that other options were not available. Sorry but that is a strawman. I probably have more firearms training and proficiency than most police, and very likely far more handgun training (and maybe even more long gun training) then most military.The average policeman shoots during qualifying once or twice a year. I generally shoot at least once a week, and usually between 50 and a 100 rounds at a session.Edited by jar, : fix raging zeros

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion