Summations Only

Yeah, I get that. But those other things, especially a knife, a taser, pepper spray, even knowing how to choke someone out properly, can also be very good tools for self defense. That's why cops use all of those too - except for the knife I guess. But the have a stick instead.A trained professional like a cop uses a gun as a last resort. Citizens should not be able to do that also in the streets. The answer isn't to arm all of us for self-defense reasons. Wasn't the point. You asked if you could teach one - yes you can. Not to compete at the top level of MMA, but he can probably kick some ass in the street. Oh go fuck yourself you wanna-be dip shit. I don't care whether you find it easy or not to talk to me. You consistently prove how stupid you are in most subjects by pretending you know everything about every subject. You make an ass of yourself repeatedly, and then accuse everyone else of having an agenda against you. You're out of our fucking mind, dude. You can't even catch on when I'm obviously trolling you with the Kyle Maynard video. Stop taking yourself so serious, trust me, no one gives a fuck that you may not know something every once in a while. The point is that no one should have them, period. Like in the UK.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

...or shotguns. Well if that's the only thing we are left with to decide on then it's a pretty good start. I'm sure eventually some people in the know can decide what a strictly for hunting use rifle will be and then we can go from there.- Oni

I know very little about it, as I'm just now getting into big game hunting. But I can tell you I don't think of a .22 as a hunting round. In fact, it's illegal to hunt deer or boar (not to mention bigger game) with such a small caliber. 30-06 or .7mm seems more accurate for a hunting round.- Oni

I'm not insisting on anything. I'm just presenting alternative means of self-defense, like, self-defense classes, or tasers, or pepper spray.Most people don't walk around with a handgun strapped to their holster like Billy the Kid. Most of us ar not armed. In fact, where I live it is illegal to do so and we all get along just fine. Most people don't go about their day to day lives ready to get into a shoot-out with these giant, armed criminals that you seem so fearful of. First, I'd hate to get in an actual fight with the guys who play Murder Ball. I'm 6' have a brown belt in Judo and a green belt in BJJ and still, I don't think I could beat those guys. But that aside, what are you suggesting? That we arm everyone in a wheelchair for a potential gun fight in case they encounter a bigger person that's fucking with them?I countinue to believe the goal should be that no one walks around armed. I'm personally fine with a shotgun at home for protection though. But everyone carrying a concealed weapon fearing some bigger guy is going to beat them up is not the type of world I want to live in. Thankfully, I don't. I guess this must be one of those internet cool guy things, where you're only important here... or at least think you are. Trust me, no one gives a shit about you. My god man, try to follow the comedians flow here. I said we can do well with a taser, pepper spray and taking an MMA class for self-defense (not to be the next GSP just to have a basic understanding of self-defense) then you asked "What about the paraplegics?" and I show you a video of Kyle Maynard, and douoble amputee doing MMA (mind you, Kyle can't naturally pick up a gun a fire it either without some special device I've never seen) and you actually take to argue that too. Yes, I was trolling you with a silly video.Oh, and yes, paraplegics can learn MMA too. A high crime rate is better than a high death rate. UK's crime issue is due to social economical factors, and doesn't get resolved by arming everyone to shoot would be criminals out to steal a tv.- Oni

Yes, but I've admitted to not knowing enough (or anything at all, frankly) about assault rifles and hunting rifles to define what one is vs the other.So what I'm saying is, I'd turn that decision over to someone who does. Now of course, it's not you or anyone else debating on an internet forum - unless you work for the government or some military agency. Just like with everything else, a government official/s come up with the laws. Lucky for all of us I'm just a comic on stage and not actually working on a solution to the gun problem!I've admitted to my plan having flaws. Let's fix it though in a positive way, not be cunts about it. The flaws you're pointing out are just details in labeling a weapon "assault" or "hunting". Ehh, not a big deal. Everything? No, I guess when a light bulb goes out I can change it myself, or if my tire goes flat I can replace it. But when we're talking about government policies and laws, and the labeling of weapons, I will gracefully allow people who are experts on the subject to figure things out.- Oni

Varmint aren't the only things people hunt, crash. Anything bigger than a varmint, like boar and bigger, requires a larger caliber (by law) than a .22. I thought you said hunting round, not "teaching Jr. to shoot cans off the shed" rounds. My bad.- Oni

Seems like a good piece of evidence to start looking into the effects of strict gun laws. I admit, every country has it's own unique issues to deal with, but a positive outlook rather than negative nit-picking I feel would work to our advantage in the long run. Again, just giving alternatives for self-defesne that doesn't involve all of us strapped with a Glock yelling Yippy Ki Yay motherfuckers at the first sign of danger. Where are you living that this is happen to a degree that the people there are better off armed? Wait, you misunderstand. They're not 'dangerous' in the hands of expert shooters. They're dangerous when stolen and used by idiots out to harm people. I was suggesting eliminating those peoples source of acquiring guns. And, it would be fine to do so since those weapons are not of any real necessity to anyone aside from a hobby. Have they though? Have they though?And note, that I changed by opinion to simply making the weapons illegal like in the UK.- Oni

Equally I would ask you where did I suggest deer and boar are the only things people hunt for? See, I was being a sarcastic comic again turing what you said to me back onto you.- Oni

Then we can agree that carrying a handgun around in your day to day life is a bit excessive and unnecessary. Yes and no. Yes, we should come up with stricter gun laws that reduces the amount of guns on the streets. One of those methods would be to get rid of handguns. I don't however believe that people currently using handguns to defend themselves ar making the wrong decision because they ARE acting in accordance to the law (assuming that they are actually following the rules of gun ownership).I was just suggesting other means of self-defense rather than strapping a gun to your side and walking around the city like that. Close though... NYC Fair enough. But are you then suggesting all wheelchair bound people carry handguns? You've admitted most of us aren't in any particular danger of being attacked. So why should wheelchair people be worried to the point of arming themselves just to go outside? I agree. But are you suggesting we are all safer walking around with guns? Okay then, you're not crazy at all. Listen, I felt your counter to me saying there are alternative means of self-defense by bringing up the paraplegic was silly and I countered it with a silly video. That's all.- Oni

I didn't deny anything, dude. What the fuck is wrong with you?I said I didn't think of a .22 when I thought of hunting rounds.See: And I only said that because you said most people think .22 when they think of a hunting round. When someone says "I'm going hunting" I don't personally think of them using a .22, I think of a bigger caliber.- Oni

Ah, gotcha. I guess that would be a hard statistic to find. But overall, it seems as though you're suggesting that people would just make their own guns and that they would be used regardless of the law. If in fact that is what you're saying, statistically these countries see a decrease in gun deaths so I don't see how that could be. I don't see how they're that unrelated. They're first world countries with multi-cultural demographic, and equally similary social economical neighborhoods and people.I guess short of implementing a strict gun control policy and seeing what happens, not more will seem convincing to you. That's fine, but your personal preference doesn't negate the fact that there are alternatives that most people in the US already go with. In fact, guns for self-defense are in the minority (here I'm refering to concealed weapon permits, which is what "walking around with a handgun" requires) not home use. I get that, but you avoided the question. Where are you living, or can you name a place in the US, where the bigger people are kicking the shit out of the little people and they should be armed? I get that. But "you people" won't make the decision. OUR government will. It seems to work in places where they've implemented these laws. Well I guess we can just wait and see what happens. I'll take a high crime rate over a high death rate. And again, the crime in the UK specifically has to do with social economical issues and is NOT resolved by arming the population. Make up your mind, can we use a bunch of chewed up stats from unrelated cultures or not? Because if that's the case, I can use Germany's stats on gun issues or Swedens.- Oni

But you agreed that most of us are in no danger. So wouldn't it follow that most of us then don't need to be armed while walking around, if we're in no danger? I don't see why they would find it rational if we can all agree most of us are in no danger. I think it lends itself more to a "fear" or being "paranoid" rather than a rational feeling.If most of us can agree that we aren't in any danger of drowning at any moment, the person walking around wearing a lifevest is not acting rationally. He's a fucking loony. I'd like to see the law changed, yes. At that point, someone breaking the law would be making the wrong decision, yes. Would you say then, given those stats, that things would be safer in the city if everyone was armed? 8 million people are on the island of Manhattan. None of them are allowed to carry a gun. Everyone seems to get along just fine in their day to day activities without them. That's what I meant. Not that we are all nice to each other and "get along" in that sense. It's NY, everyone hates each other. Sure there is buddy, sure there is. I don't, and didn't suggest that at all. I felt you bringing them up as a counter to me saying there are alternative means to handguns for self-defense was silly.- Oni

It's still way better than the US's! - Oni

Forget the law for a moment, just follow the logic. Most people are not in danger, as you said and I agree with. So, it follows that most people don't need to walk around in their day to day lives with a handgun.It's not rational for most people to need a gun, just like it is not rational to walk around with a life vest to avoid drowning.A "few" people should however walk around with a gun. Those people are in law enforcement, which is taking applications for those who want to protect the masses. So what "few" people and where do they live, where it makes sense for them to carry a gun all day long? The right people ARE armed in NYC - we call them cops. Are paraplegics at greater risk of being killed or assaulted? I'd like to see those numbers.- Oni

Ok, and again, I have already said my initial plan was flawed in that I didn't add making handguns and assault rifles illegal. What global trend? I read that, it just seems like total bullshit. There is no global trend to shoot less people with guns. In fact, in the US it seems like the other way around. Please tell me you recognize the correlation there? This is just NRA talking points, CS. Hunting is ingrained in our culture, sure, but walking around with handguns like you're in Die Hard is NOT ingrained in our culture. Those people who do that are in the minority. I don't know why that matters. It would be a state to state thing. The goal has been to reduce the amount of people who carry concealable weapons and assault rifles. A total reduction. This will have, I believe, the effect of ALSO reducing the amount of deaths due to guns. But not the only thing I'm focused on. One, there are alternative means of self-defense. Let's recognize that. Two, I'm saying let's create a law that reduces the amount of guns on the street so that that "one guy" doesn't feel he needs a gun. You're the one who said the bigger guy would best the little guy to where little guys need guns. All I'm asking is where is this taking place and how common is it? Well, maybe, that remains to be seen. But at the very least a ban on assault rifles will happen and stricter gun laws will happen as well. Innocent people. Violent criminals are delt with by law enforcement.- Oni