Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control III
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 330 of 1184 (840489)
09-30-2018 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by jar
09-30-2018 3:19 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
jar writes:
You really need to stop posting really stupid comments Percy.
Apparently, calling arguments stupid is rebuttal to you.
I have not bragged about how great I am with guns.
You should read your own messages. Why don't you tell us again how you store your guns and ammo safely and separately, how no one else has access to them, how careful you are, how often you go to the shooting range and practice, how you sometimes have a trainer give you feedback, how you never rely on the safety, how you always assume there's a round in the chamber, and on and on.
And yes, I have never said that it has any relationship to any problems in general in the US.
Regardless of what you have never said, you *are* part of the gun problem in the US.
Percy writes:
Is it impossible for your guns to discharge and harm someone? Is it impossible for a gun to be taken from you? Is it impossible that you would ever be overcome by sadness, depression, insanity, etc? Is it impossible one of your guns could malfunction? Is it impossible you would ever misjudge a situation and harm an innocent person?
And what is the point of carrying a gun if it's impossible it could ever do someone harm?
It serves the same function as my car, it is something that provides comfort and protection to me.
If it's impossible that your guns could ever do someone harm, how could they protect you? How could you ever shoot them before they shoot you if your guns can't harm them?
I'm sure your guns are a great comfort to you, but it is a false comfort because they actually place you (and those around you) in greater danger.
And the malfunction possible with a gun is that it does NOT fire.
I never mentioned gun malfunctions. Everything I mentioned was a Jar malfunction.
And I train to try to make sure I do NOT harm an innocent person.
There you go bragging again about how safe you are with guns. If you want to make 100% certain you don't harm an innocent person then leave your guns locked up at home. Once you carry your guns out of the house that 100% certainty drops.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by jar, posted 09-30-2018 3:19 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 332 by jar, posted 09-30-2018 7:42 PM Percy has replied
 Message 336 by ICANT, posted 10-01-2018 1:11 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 340 of 1184 (840508)
10-01-2018 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 336 by ICANT
10-01-2018 1:11 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANt writes:
I been carrying a gun since I was 7 on a regular basis but not all the time. That means I have been carrying a gun for 72 years and never harmed any innocent person. Maybe that is because my guns are as much a part of me as my hands are. I can disassemble and reassemble most of my guns in less than 2 minutes blindfolded.
You are, like Jar, merely bragging about how safe you are with guns. Some 100 year old people have been smoking all their lives. Does that invalidate the smoking statistics? No. Some 79 year old people have been walking around with guns all their lives without hurting anyone. Does that invalidate the gun statistics? No.
Carrying your guns in public puts you and those around you in greater danger, not less.
You sure don't know anything about guns.
You mean about the details of the guns themselves? Yes, it's true that I don't know much about them. But just like one doesn't have to know any of the details of internal combustion engines or braking systems or exhaust systems or steering systems or tire characteristics to understand the dangers of automobiles, one doesn't have to be able to disassemble and reassemble a gun blindfolded to know how dangerous it is. Information about the dangers of guns is public and easily accessible. You should avail yourself of it.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by ICANT, posted 10-01-2018 1:11 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 344 by ICANT, posted 10-02-2018 1:14 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 341 of 1184 (840509)
10-01-2018 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 332 by jar
09-30-2018 7:42 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
jar writes:
That's certainly not bragging Percy...
It's not how you perceive yourself that counts but how you are perceived by others. You're most certainly bragging.
Percy writes:
Regardless of what you have never said, you *are* part of the gun problem in the US.
And I have said repeatedly I support your right to hold such a position.
But you have no rebuttal.
Percy writes:
If it's impossible that your guns could ever do someone harm, how could they protect you? How could you ever shoot them before they shoot you if your guns can't harm them?
I'm sure your guns are a great comfort to you, but it is a false comfort because they actually place you (and those around you) in greater danger.
But here again you first present a strawman position I have never claimed...
Really? You've never claimed that? Let me quote you again:
jar in prior messages writes:
Yet you have not presented any evidence that my own gun might do someone harm.
...
It serves the same function as my car, it is something that provides comfort and protection to me.
So there you are in your own words claiming there's no evidence your guns could do anyone harm and that your guns are a comfort to you.
...and the make another unsupported assertion where you have never provided any evidence in support.
This isn't true either. I present evidence and you respond with name calling. It's like your idea of rebuttal is frozen in time from when you were a 7-year old. See the evidence presented in Message 296, to which you still haven't posted a reply. See the predecessor thread, Gun Control Again. Also, as stated several times but never addressed by you, the probability of a gun causing injury or death must, by simple logic, be greater when the gun is present than when it is not.
And so you continue to post false and misleading assertions. Saying that I train is not bragging, it should be expected. Nor have I ever presented or claimed any 100% certainty.
You beat me in the "false and misleading assertions" category every time. You *are* bragging, and inappropriately since your individual experience cannot be extrapolated to the national gun crisis. And I never said you claimed 100% certainty - that was something I said. I said that not carrying a gun makes it 100% certain that you can't kill or injure anyone with a gun, but that once you start carrying a gun that 100% certainty drops. Carrying a gun in public puts you and those around you in greater danger, not less.
Really Percy, try something that's not as asinine as all you have presented so far. There, I did not say stupid.
But you did repeat your pattern of apparently believing that name calling somehow comprises rebuttal.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typos.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by jar, posted 09-30-2018 7:42 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 397 by jar, posted 10-03-2018 9:56 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 375 of 1184 (840623)
10-02-2018 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 344 by ICANT
10-02-2018 1:14 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
You are, like Jar, merely bragging about how safe you are with guns.
Yes but if everybody had my training and followed what they were taught there would be no accidental shootings period.
Again, you are, like Jar, merely bragging about how safe you are with guns. Do you get the irony of protesting that you're not really bragging about how safe you are with guns by bragging again about how safe you are with guns, that if everyone were more like you then there wouldn't be any accidental shootings?
There are no perfect humans. This means no perfect plumbers, electricians, carpenters, doctors, drivers or gun owners. When you carry your weapons in public then you become a public menace.
But people like jar and myself are not going to go on a shooting spree and kill a bunch of people.
Is it impossible that neither you nor Jar could ever become mentally ill or despondent or depressed or violently angry or decrepit or mentally infirm, etc? Is it impossible that neither you nor Jar could ever be careless or make a mistake or drink too much or exercise poor judgment, etc? These are rhetorical questions. Except for the most conceitedly in denial, the answer is that you are both human and imperfect and of course these things are possible.
Those people are going to exist whether gun ownership is allowed or banned.
Those people? You're one of those people. You all deny that arming yourselves presents any danger because, you brag, of how wonderful you are with guns and how important it is to be able to defend yourselves against criminals. Training and practice does not mean you are no longer imperfect human beings, and most people have much greater opinions of their abilities than are justified. Anyone who understands this and how dangerous guns are could not fail to conclude how wrong it is to place these instruments in people's hands. It's a recipe for disaster, as homicide and suicide statistics worldwide attest.
Gun owners are far more likely to become suicide victims than to save their lives by defending themselves against criminals bent on murder. Their guns are far more likely to be used against themselves or their family or friends than against criminals.
There will always be a black market. I can get a weapon in Tampa, Fl. in less than 30 minutes, and I am sure that is possible in most cities.
So you gun nuts are so determined to have your guns that you'd buy them on the black market if you couldn't obtain them legally? Wow!
Percy writes:
Does that invalidate the gun statistics? No.
Which ones.
The one that shows more people are killed by fists per year than all rifles...etc...
Rifles? I believe you and Jar's bragging has been about the handguns you all are toting, not rifles. Around 90% of murders are committed with handguns, as opposed to rifles and shotguns.
Oh I know it is like cars they are a necessary evil we can't get along without them.
Who views cars as a necessary evil? They're essential to the world economy, and they've become more and more safe over time, unlike guns which have become more and more deadly. If automated driving becomes an eventual reality then automobile deaths should drop dramatically by around 90% (Department of Transportation estimate as quoted in How autonomous vehicles could save lives).
You don't like guns so you think because you can get along without them...
Most people get along fine without guns. At most only 30% of Americans own guns. And statistics tell us that gun ownership increases the risk of death by gun for the gun owner, his family, and his friends.
...I ought to conform to your way of thinking and living, and forgo owning guns. You can forget that.
What I actually think you ought to do is think rationally while considering the facts.
There is probably 21 million ex military men that feel the same way as I do. The active service is more than 2 million men and women today.
God Bless,
Like others who have recently commented I am struck by the degree to which the religious are attracted to guns and the military.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by ICANT, posted 10-02-2018 1:14 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 389 by ICANT, posted 10-02-2018 9:09 PM Percy has replied
 Message 391 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-02-2018 11:39 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 376 of 1184 (840627)
10-02-2018 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 372 by Faith
10-02-2018 4:31 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
Faith writes:
It's unbelievers who are the arrogant ones who think they can better understand God's word against the entire history of the Church. THAT is the real arrogance here.
So the Bible's message is that God wants us to carry guns?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by Faith, posted 10-02-2018 4:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 377 by Faith, posted 10-02-2018 5:03 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 400 of 1184 (840708)
10-03-2018 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 389 by ICANT
10-02-2018 9:09 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Do you think I will become mentally ill after I leave my house on the way to town?...etc...
Obviously the onset of mental illness, despondency, violent anger, decrepitness, drunkenness, carelessness, poor judgment, etc., could occur at any time/place and then extend on into the future.
Yes I am imperfect...
Yes, you are susceptible to all the frailties man is heir to.
...but they will not happen in a day's time.
Some can happen in less than a day's time (carelessness, poor judgment, drunkenness), others can occur gradually.
I have a wonderful wife of 62 years and I am sure if I started suffering from any of the things you mentioned she would hide all my ammunition, car keys, and truck keys if they did happen.
I think we can assume that your wife is, like yourself and all other people, imperfect. So your proposal is that society's safety from your self of diminished capacity be dependent upon your wife detecting your altered state and how well she hides your weapons versus how good you are at finding them or acquiring others (30 minutes in Tampa, I think you said). And aren't your weapons locked up in separate boxes? And aren't the keys available only to you? Assuming they're available only to you, how is she to hide them? Or does your wife have access to the keys, too? If so, is your wife as good a safe weapons expert as you are? What if your wife experiences a diminished episode?
But I would hope that with all the training and practice I have had I would recognize them coming on and take care of the problem myself.
You think you'll recognize the onset of mental illness or mental decline?
Percy writes:
So you gun nuts are so determined to have your guns that you'd buy them on the black market if you couldn't obtain them legally? Wow!
No I have enough to last me the rest of my life.
But say gun laws change and your guns are taken away. You're saying you'd be willing to replace them on the black market. Scary.
But just think if I could get one that quick how long would it take a criminal to get one?
So driven by delusions of shootouts with criminals where you save the day, you're going to make things even worse by obtaining guns by any means necessary, thereby increasing the danger to yourself and those around you.
The those you referred to up above in your message are the criminals I just mentioned.
By "those people" I meant all who have such extravagantly elevated opinions of their gun skills that they're willing to place themselves and those around them in greater danger.
Percy writes:
Rifles? I believe you and Jar's bragging has been about the handguns you all are toting, not rifles. Around 90% of murders are committed with handguns, as opposed to rifles and shotguns.
Then why are you always talking about AR15 weapons of war?
I wasn't. I was responding to you and Jar about your open carry of your handguns. A quick search reveals that out of 80 messages I've mentioned the AR15 three times.
That is what is always put forth as the reason for banning guns.
The vast majority of gun deaths are due to handguns, and that is the primary motivation for banning guns. Semi-automatic weapons involved in mass murders get the bulk of the news space, but they are not responsible for most of the gun deaths.
But I prefer my shotgun over any other weapon. As Mr Bidden...
Mr. Bidden? You mean Joe Biden?
...says just shoot both barrels at once. That would not work out too well I would prefer a pump action magazine fed 14" barrel that can fire a shell that has 15 pellets per shell that are about the size of an AR15 bullet. Then if that magazine happens to hold 28 shells just think of the damage that could be done with it.
I prefer to think about preventing the potential death and injury.
Percy writes:
What I actually think you ought to do is think rationally while considering the facts.
Fact 1 is I have owned and used guns 72 years of my 79 years on the earth.
...
<More "facts" about I this and I that and I the other thing>
etc...
Are you daft? Of what possible use is a sample size of one? You speculated on what I thought you ought to do, and you were wrong. What I actually think you ought to do is think rationally while considering the facts. That doesn't mean facts about a single individual, namely yourself, but about the statistical information gathered across populations by certain groups, such as the FBI's Crime in the United States.
Percy writes:
Like others who have recently commented I am struck by the degree to which the religious are attracted to guns and the military.
We love our country and took an oath to protect the constitution of the United States of America which is a Republic not a democracy as many claim.
God Bless,
Ah, I see, you're expressing your love of country when you endanger your fellow citizens by strapping your piece to your hip and strolling about town. I am still struck by the degree to which the religious are attracted to guns and the military.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 389 by ICANT, posted 10-02-2018 9:09 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-04-2018 12:06 AM Percy has replied
 Message 414 by ICANT, posted 10-05-2018 10:26 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 404 of 1184 (840718)
10-03-2018 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 397 by jar
10-03-2018 9:56 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
jar writes:
Percy writes:
You *are* bragging, and inappropriately since your individual experience cannot be extrapolated to the national gun crisis.
But again Percy, you are just misrepresenting what I have posted. I have NEVER tried to extrapolate my individual experience to any national issue (I don't see a National Gun Crisis but to see a National intelligence and education crisis).
Throughout this whole topic I have tried to make it clear I am talking only about me and not any general principle.
That's why I said your bragging about yourself wasn't appropriate to this topic, which is about gun control and therefore about statistics about populations, not about individual experiences. This has been explained several times in several different ways. I do see a gun crisis since more than 30,000 people a year are killed by guns. I also see an education deficiency concerning the dangers of guns and how they place people in greater danger.
In fact if the subject was US drivers my position would be much the same, life would be better if all the other drivers were off the road.
All drivers off the road??? Seriously??? This is just a plain nutty thing to say. Cars contribute positively by transporting goods everywhere nationally including to your door, and by transporting people to work, soccer games, stores, shopping malls, amusement parks, friends and family, etc. Cars kill about the same number of people as guns. When guns make some equivalent positive contribution as cars, let us know. In the meantime you can contemplate this graph:
In more than 20 states gun deaths exceed car deaths. Texas isn't one of them (yet), but it was close, 3794 car deaths versus 3353 gun deaths in 2016.
The issue as I see it is NOT the gun but rather the fact that in so many ways the US today is really fucked up. What needs to be changed is the people and that will take generations or a major pandemic I fear.
People are the same the world over. Human beings in the US are the same as human beings everywhere else. All that needs to change is the culture of guns that causes people to see an instrument of death as their salvation.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by jar, posted 10-03-2018 9:56 AM jar has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 407 of 1184 (840784)
10-04-2018 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 406 by Hyroglyphx
10-04-2018 12:06 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
Hyroglyphyx writes:
Obviously the onset of mental illness, despondency, violent anger, decrepitness, drunkenness, carelessness, poor judgment, etc., could occur at any time/place and then extend on into the future.
Your whole argument seems to be that people can snap at any time,...
That would be false. I list many human weaknesses people might fall prey to. Some could be characterized as "snapping" I suppose, most could not.
...therefore they shouldn't be afforded even the opportunity to be armed.
No, that is not my argument. My argument is that people are too imperfect to be entrusted with something as dangerous as a gun.
How easily can you make that same argument for anything else...
You're referring to an argument I haven't made, but let's consider the remainder of what you say as if you had correctly characterized my position:
...knives, vehicles, cinderblocks, household kitchen items to make bombs, etc. You have to balance the utility of something with what its been demonstrated to do.
Yes, I agree. Cars are probably the best example of balancing risk and utility.
For every gun fired maliciously, there are 10,000 that haven't.... because it wasn't necessary.
The term "maliciously" is used inaccurately. The concern is about any gun fired for any reason that causes injury or death. The concern even extends to guns fired for any reason (excluding most target practice, I suppose) that by good fortune do not hit anyone, since that's sheer luck.
But say gun laws change and your guns are taken away. You're saying you'd be willing to replace them on the black market. Scary.
That's what violent felons would be doing and already do.
That's what ICANT says he would do.
So driven by delusions of shootouts with criminals where you save the day, you're going to make things even worse by obtaining guns by any means necessary, thereby increasing the danger to yourself and those around you.
Well, when you consider that virtually all the maniacs that have gone on shooting rampages have been stopped by guns its not so impossible to believe.
This is untrue. The Parkland shooter dropped his weapons and walked out of the school building with other students. The Sandy Hook shooter committed suicide. The Las Vegas shooter committed suicide. And while the Orlando nightclub shooter was killed by the police, he held off a hundred armed cops and killed many people during the four hours before he was killed.
There's an interesting YouTube channel named "Active Self-Protection" that gathers an assortment of clips of what would have been massacres that were stopped early... which is why we don't hear about them. Not sensational enough and not in keeping with the agenda.
I don't have infinite time, I don't like watching videos because I can read far faster than I can view a video, but I did watch the top three videos on that Active Self Protection YouTube page. One was a training film. The second was about an assault not involving guns. The third was an armed robber who displayed no murderous intent (was his gun even loaded?) being murdered by what is described as an off duty policeman who fired multiple shots when other people could have been behind the robber. One woman is shown walking behind the robber just before the shots are fired.
None of these are potential massacres, so I just wasted my time. If you have videos that support your claim of "massacres that were stopped early" then include them in your next post. Better would be documented news stories from legitimate sources because they can be read much, much faster than a video can be viewed.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-04-2018 12:06 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by ICANT, posted 10-05-2018 5:41 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 408 of 1184 (840856)
10-04-2018 6:29 PM


The Dangers of Guns at Home and Away
The eagerness of some here to own guns and even carry them around in public indicates that they doubt that guns really place them in greater danger, but there can be little doubt about this. I could go back in the thread and the predecessor thread and just cut-n-paste old links into this post, but I'll instead check what's out there on the web today.
Regarding guns in the home:
  • Living in a house with a gun increases your odds of death:
    quote:
    One meta-analysis "found strong evidence for increased odds of suicide among persons with access to firearms compared with those without access and moderate evidence for an attenuated increased odds of homicide victimization when persons with and without access to firearms were compared." The latter finding is stronger for women, a reminder that guns are also a risk factor for domestic violence.
    ...
    "When 34 injury prevention experts were asked to prioritize home injury hazards for young children, based on frequency, severity, and preventability of the injury, the experts rated access to firearms in the home as the most significant hazard," Harvard gun expert David Hemenway writes. The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that "the absence of guns from children's homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents."
  • Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study
    This study's from 2004. From the abstract:
    quote:
    Data from a US mortality follow-back survey were analyzed to determine whether having a firearm in the home increases the risk of a violent death in the home and whether risk varies by storage practice, type of gun, or number of guns in the home. Those persons with guns in the home were at greater risk than those without guns in the home of dying from a homicide in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 1.9, 95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4). They were also at greater risk of dying from a firearm homicide, but risk varied by age and whether the person was living with others at the time of death. The risk of dying from a suicide in the home was greater for males in homes with guns than for males without guns in the home (adjusted odds ratio = 10.4, 95% confidence interval: 5.8, 18.9). Persons with guns in the home were also more likely to have died from suicide committed with a firearm than from one committed by using a different method (adjusted odds ratio = 31.1, 95% confidence interval: 19.5, 49.6). Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.
  • More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows
    quote:
    Also in 2015 a combined analysis of 15 different studies found that people who had access to firearms at home were nearly twice as likely to be murdered as people who did not.
Regarding guns outside the home:
  • More Guns Do Not Stop More Crimes, Evidence Shows
    quote:
    In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least.
  • The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun:
    quote:
    A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths. The paper concludes: The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer. This finding is bolstered by several previous studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher rates than in other countries.
  • Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault
    This study has the most relevance for the gun nuts here bragging about open carry. This is from the abstract:
    quote:
    Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).
    Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.
By the way, in reading through this material I learned that the NRA is opposed to legislation requiring secure gun storage. I assume they're opposed to secure ammunition storage, too.
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 418 of 1184 (840983)
10-06-2018 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 411 by ICANT
10-05-2018 5:41 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
Hyroglyphx writes:
ICANT writes:
But say gun laws change and your guns are taken away. You're saying you'd be willing to replace them on the black market. Scary.
That's what violent felons would be doing and already do.
That's what ICANT says he would do.
I did not say that is what I would do.
You're being disingenuous. You've declared that if your guns were taken away you'd obtain new ones. Maybe you'd buy them on the black market, maybe you'd make them, who knows. Much of what you claim is your fantasy view of yourself and cannot be trusted.
You could ban guns and even confiscate guns and there would still be millions of guns available.
If guns were banned there would be declining quantities over time.
Besides that you can build a single shot shotgun for about $20, with stuff from your local hardware store.
Yes, just as I said, you'd break the law and somehow get a gun.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by ICANT, posted 10-05-2018 5:41 PM ICANT has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 419 of 1184 (840985)
10-06-2018 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by ICANT
10-05-2018 10:26 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
Obviously the onset of mental illness, despondency, violent anger, decrepitness, drunkenness, carelessness, poor judgment, etc., could occur at any time/place and then extend on into the future.
Well I don't have a mental illness problem.
You're not a mental health professional, and how would a mentally ill person know they were mentally ill anyway.
Nor a despondency problem.
As if you'd admit it here.
I do not have a problem with violent anger.
Says you.
I don't have a decrepitess problem other than I am old. Decrepit no I am not infirm.
So your judgment, coordination and reaction time are as good as when you were 30?
I don't have a drinking problem other than water and tea.
I didn't say you have a drinking problem. I said that because you have access to guns that drink represents an especial risk.
Training takes care of carelessness and poor judgment.
And yet people with training (the police are a good example) exhibit carelessness and poor judgment on a regular basis. You're claiming superman status, just another example of your fantasy view of yourself.
So there is none of those that will attack me on a moments notice. They could come on over time in which I would be advised of.
Many shootings are by people who a) no one suspected would ever do such a thing; b) people suspected could do such a thing but didn't report it; c) someone reported as a danger but they acted normal and respectful when the police investigated.
It is a myth that mental illness and anger issues and so forth are easily recognizable and exhibited to such a degree that a person may be deprived of property or liberty. Psychology is called a soft science, but it should more properly be called a very soft science.
Percy writes:
Yes, you are susceptible to all the frailties man is heir to.
I would have to know what you are calling frailties to comment.
The frailties are the ones I listed and that you responded to.
Percy writes:
Some can happen in less than a day's time (carelessness, poor judgment, drunkenness), others can occur gradually.
Carelessness and poor judgment happen to those who are unprepared.
You said this already, and it's obviously not true. As I said before, the police are trained and prepared, yet they exhibit carelessness and poor judgment all the time. You are not, as you seem to believe, superman.
Drunkenness can only happen if you bend your elbow and take a drink.
Which no doubt you do. Trump also denies ever taking a drink:
Percy writes:
I think we can assume that your wife is, like yourself and all other people, imperfect.
No my wife is perfect. And she is just as well trained as I am.
Your wife is perfect. So not only are you superman, your wife is superwoman? You're living in a fantasy world.
Percy writes:
And aren't your weapons locked up in separate boxes?
No my weapons are loaded and in easy reach at any time in the house. If you approach my house from the front or rear I will know you are there before you can reach the door. I will be alerted to your presence and you will be recorded. If I don't know you I will talk to you through a intercom.
You've made so many fantastical claims that I don't believe this one either.
But there is only my wife and myself that reside in my house. We do put the guns up when the great grandkids are going to be around because they have not been raised with guns and taught to respect them.
And it's impossible that you'd ever forget to hide your guns? It's impossible that the great grandkids could find the guns? It's impossible that the grandkids or kids couldn't find the guns? If they've become angry or despondent or mentally ill how would you know given you don't see them that often?
Percy writes:
But say gun laws change and your guns are taken away. You're saying you'd be willing to replace them on the black market. Scary.
Who is going to take my guns away from me?
How would I know, this hypothetical law doesn't exist at this time, but I assume it would be some group in law enforcement.
If someone was able to get my guns without killing me...
You'd violently oppose law enforcement?
...I would probably build my own.
So if gun possession were illegal, you'd break the law.
Percy writes:
So driven by delusions of shootouts with criminals where you save the day, you're going to make things even worse by obtaining guns by any means necessary, thereby increasing the danger to yourself and those around you.
hat
I don't need any guns I have enough thank you.
You're ignoring the point, which is that you're willing to break the law to obtain guns, and your possession of guns places yourself and those around in greater danger. Your arrogant cockiness and delusional impressions of how safe you are with guns when you don't even follow basic safety rules like locking them up likely increases the danger.
Percy writes:
By "those people" I meant all who have such extravagantly elevated opinions of their gun skills that they're willing to place themselves and those around them in greater danger.
Why does the president have men and women around that are well trained and armed everywhere he goes?
Because unlike your fantasies, the president is an actual target for assassins. See, for example, Gerald Ford's being shot at by Squeaky Fromme and Ronald Reagan's shooting by John Hinckley.
Do you think he and those around him are in more danger because they are there?
If we subtract out the various threats to the president, then yes, he is in greater danger because the agents around him are armed.
I have had the same intense training that they have had.
Training does not remove human beings' imperfect nature.
Percy writes:
The vast majority of gun deaths are due to handguns, and that is the primary motivation for banning guns. Semi-automatic weapons involved in mass murders get the bulk of the news space, but they are not responsible for most of the gun deaths.
So the feared assault weapon is not the most dangerous.
That's not what I said at all. Assault weapons are undoubtedly the most dangerous because they can kill the most people in the shortest period of time. But handguns are more prevalent and kill more people.
I agree and the most dangerous is the Saturday night special.
We don't agree, and there is no such gun as the Saturday night special. It's just a way of referring to cheap easily available handguns. A Saturday night special type of gun in a lockbox is just as safe as a high end gun like a Colt Python or a SVI Tiki.
Percy writes:
Are you daft? Of what possible use is a sample size of one? You speculated on what I thought you ought to do, and you were wrong. What I actually think you ought to do is think rationally while considering the facts. That doesn't mean facts about a single individual, namely yourself, but about the statistical information gathered across populations by certain groups, such as the FBI's Crime in the United States.
I get the impression there is at least 21 million of us. The only reason you know about me is that I argue with you.
The "you" that you describe does not exist. He is a fantasy of your own mind. There are not "at least 21 million" of these creatures of your fantasies, by which you mean the military. And this isn't true in the civilian sphere either, as the over 30,000 gun deaths per year attests.
Do you think I talk about these things anywhere else? I don't.
In that case I think you're describing your fantasies at one too many sites.
Percy writes:
Ah, I see, you're expressing your love of country when you endanger your fellow citizens by strapping your piece to your hip and strolling about town. I am still struck by the degree to which the religious are attracted to guns and the military.
I don't strap my piece on my hip and go strolling about I conceal carry.
Oh. When you piggybacked on Jar's open-carry posts I assumed you were also doing open carry. You are wise to do concealed carry given that open carry seems to place you in greater danger than conceal carry.
You would be even wiser to carry no guns at all because of the danger they represent.
Anywhere you see me you would never know I was carrying except in the woods or fields hunting. I always strap on a revolver to use on snakes and I have my shotgun on my shoulder, or at the ready if bird hunting.
You religious people sure enjoy killing things.
So yes I believe in God and I believe in a strong military to protect us from outside interference.
I think the vast majority of people think we need a strong military for the defense of our nation. What we don't need is a military that attempts to impose our will around the world in places like Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
But you've diverged completely from your original point, which is that the 21 million men in the military agree with you. They don't. Notably they probably think your failure to lock up your weapons is particularly boneheaded.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Typo.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by ICANT, posted 10-05-2018 10:26 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 422 by ICANT, posted 10-06-2018 8:12 PM Percy has replied
 Message 431 by ICANT, posted 10-08-2018 1:22 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 426 of 1184 (841024)
10-07-2018 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 422 by ICANT
10-06-2018 8:12 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
The 21 million men I am talking about served in the military in the past, and if you think I talk wild you should hear some of their conversations. You would think I was a saint.
So what it's come down to is that you have a few ex-military friends who talk foolishness with you about the old days. Seriously, do you actually believe that there are many gun-trained people, military or not, who endorse your decision to not lock up your guns?
You are, as Tangle says, dodging most of the points.
If you're mentally ill, how would you know?
And this idea that other people would know if you were mentally ill is absurd. In the vast majority of cases people had no inkling of what shooters were about to do, so this idea that what's inside a person's head is outwardly apparent is a big time myth. Even when someone expresses an actual threat it is usually discounted as exaggeration or hyperbole. And even a very disabled person is capable of deception. You wouldn't believe how long someone with Alzheimer's can hide it.
About your anger, you're certainly paranoid, and paranoia and anger go hand in hand.
Do you really believe your judgment, coordination and reaction time are as good as when you were 30?
Do you recognize that alcohol and guns do not mix well? Given all the obviously false stuff you've said over the years, do you really expect us to believe you never drink? Especially when you get together with your ex-military buddies?
Do you really believe, given the evidence of the police, that training eliminates carelessness and poor judgement?
Why did you say something as crazy as, "My wife is perfect"?
Why do you believe that you and your wife are superman and superwoman when it comes to gun safety?
Why to you believe your kids, grandkids or great grandkids could never find your guns? Wouldn't it be more wise, and more indicative of good judgment about gun safety, if you had a lockbox for them?
Would you truly be willing to break the law if gun ownership were illegal?
And about making that shotgun, here's a hilarious video of a guy making and testing a shotgun:
About the testing part at one point he says:
quote:
If I did miss the backstop [a small pile of dirt] then it would have gone between the houses and there's nothing but hundreds of yards of woods.
This gun nut thinks it's safe to fire guns into the woods. He has no idea if there are people in the woods, he just thinks if it's the woods then fire away. There's houses in the background. Where I live many of my neighbors take walks in the woods. I have, too, but not often - taking walks isn't my thing.
How do you like his shotgun? You wouldn't want to be standing behind him when he fires that thing off.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 422 by ICANT, posted 10-06-2018 8:12 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 428 by ICANT, posted 10-08-2018 12:27 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 436 of 1184 (841161)
10-08-2018 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 428 by ICANT
10-08-2018 12:27 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
Percy writes:
So what it's come down to is that you have a few ex-military friends who talk foolishness with you about the old days. Seriously, do you actually believe that there are many gun-trained people, military or not, who endorse your decision to not lock up your guns?
I am tame compared to most to my friends.
How is this a defense or a rebuttal or even anything meaningful, which is sort of the question you could ask about your whole post. What does it matter if you're talking the least foolishness of anyone there. So what? You're all still talking foolishness.
But I don't care what their opinion or yours of me locking my guns up are.
How is "I don't care" a defense or a rebuttal or anything even relevant. Facts and reality say that you and your friends and family are safer if the guns are locked up.
I can just see a couple of thugs coming up to my front door with their ak47's and my guns locked in a safe.
Yes, exactly. This has been explained many times to the many people in this thread (like Jar) who when bragging about how safe they are with guns explain that they are kept locked away.
But whether you lock your guns up or not, the fact remains that you are in greater danger of death by gun when there's a gun in the house then when there isn't.
What am I supposed to do? Do I say you fellows will have to wait a little bit while I open my safe and get my guns before you kick my door in?
What you're supposed to do is step out of fantasyland and realize that guys with AK47s are never going to appear at your door, and your measly guns would be no match for them anyway.
No I will keep my guns within reach.
It's your funeral.
Percy writes:
And this idea that other people would know if you were mentally ill is absurd. In the vast majority of cases people had no inkling of what shooters were about to do, so this idea that what's inside a person's head is outwardly apparent is a big time myth.
There is nothing wrong with most of those people they just decide to kill a bunch of people because they want too.
So now you're a mental health professional? You don't know what you're talking about.
Percy writes:
Do you really believe your judgment, coordination and reaction time are as good as when you were 30?
I don't know. I do know I can produce my weapon and hit the target as fast as I ever could. And no I don't miss the target.
You cannot draw your weapon and hit the target "as fast as I ever could." Your strength, quickness and reaction time peak at a relatively young age. You're not fooling anyone but yourself. At your age you're more a menace than anything else.
Percy writes:
Why did you say something as crazy as, "My wife is perfect"?
Because she is.
ICANT, claiming nonsense like this is just plain provocative. If you're not going to take the discussion seriously but instead just waste people's time then take it elsewhere.
Percy writes:
Why do you believe that you and your wife are superman and superwoman when it comes to gun safety?
Training.
That's not true, as I just explained in my previous message where I explained that the police with their training are not supermen when it comes to gun safety. And anyway, you're already ignoring your training since any gun instructor will tell you to lock your guns up.
Percy writes:
Why do you believe your kids, grandkids or great grandkids could never find your guns? Wouldn't it be more wise, and more indicative of good judgment about gun safety, if you had a lockbox for them?
Well I buried both my sons and besides that the room I put them in while they are at my house they can't get in. It takes my thumb print or my wife's to open the door.
Oh, I'm sure a locked door is insurmountable, especially one requiring a - oh my - thumbprint. And as I've asked before, is it impossible that you'd forget to lock them away? Or that family members might stop by unexpectedly leaving you no opportunity to lock them away, if you even happened to think about it? Or that you'd lock away some but forget to lock away others? And what happens if those guys with AK47s show up at your door while your family is visiting? Are they going to wait nice and polite while you go fetch the guns from the locked room?
Percy writes:
Would you truly be willing to break the law if gun ownership were illegal?
As far as I am concerned it will never be against the law until 38 states ratify an amendment to the constitution. And I don't see that happening in my life time because it only takes 13 states to block an amendment to the constitution being ratified.
It's a hypothetical, and you've already stated you'd break the law to obtain guns. You're already pretty crazy. If you decided you wanted an automatic weapon, then you'd break the law to get one. Good show!
Percy writes:
And about making that shotgun, here's a hilarious video of a guy making and testing a shotgun:
That is not just hilarious you could get hurt with that thing.
Yeah, no kidding, he's as dangerous as you, just another member of the gun nut club.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 428 by ICANT, posted 10-08-2018 12:27 AM ICANT has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 439 by Capt Stormfield, posted 10-08-2018 8:11 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 437 of 1184 (841162)
10-08-2018 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 431 by ICANT
10-08-2018 1:22 AM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
I missed this.
Percy writes:
Which no doubt you do.
I do not drink other than water or tea, I thought I made that perfectly clear.
Yeah, right, and your wife is perfect, and you're both like supermen when it comes to gun safety.
If you're going to make one ludicrous claim after another then how am I to separate the chaff from any wheat that might happen to be present, if any. Until you start making sense so that I can gain some sense of trust in what you say then I'm going to bet you're a wet drunk, which would explain why you say so many of the things you do.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 431 by ICANT, posted 10-08-2018 1:22 AM ICANT has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 442 of 1184 (841229)
10-09-2018 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 441 by ICANT
10-09-2018 5:22 PM


Re: Today's carry package:
ICANT writes:
So the 22,018 firearm suicide's would have been a different form but would have taken place guns or no guns.
Really? Given that the suicide rate in the US (rampant guns) is 13.7 per 100,000 people while in the UK (very few guns) it's 7.6, how do you conclude that?
But the biggest problem I see with those stats are the 2,226 that die from malnutrition. That is a disgrace in a country that throws away more food than many countries have for their total population. And is totally preventable without infringing on anyone's Constitutional rights.
So you're in favor of increased funding for welfare and social services?
Gun deaths would probably triple if guns were outlawed.
Then why are gun death rates the lowest in states with the lowest gun ownership rates? Why did the gun death rate decline in Australia in the years after they outlawed, bought back, and confiscated guns?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 441 by ICANT, posted 10-09-2018 5:22 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 446 by ICANT, posted 10-13-2018 4:31 PM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024