Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 193. (Read 450482 times)

So guns cause mental illness? And home invaders are just good guys who need a little extra cash. 
You do not know any criminals, do you?
Jesus, no wonder so many people die curled up in a ball, hiding under a desk in utter disbelief at the evil people do.

If you know your house or the ones in your neighborhood will never ever ever burn down why keep an extinguisher ready? The logical conclusion your neighbors should have is you are a pyromaniac... Or a fireman looking for an excuse to justify its existence.

 

The government doesn't give anyone guns, people have a RIGHT to own them, and they are free to buy them if they want and they aren't a felon or otherwise known to be violent or severely mentally ill. Inanimate objects can't make people insane. You assume people home invade "not to kill people", but in fact people getting raped and killed in their  homes is a fairly common occurrence in a lot of places, so your assumption there doesn't fly.

Actually I never said that I am living in rich neighborhood, it's just my assumption. I'm living in low crimes area, which we don't need any weapons to protect our house. And I said I'm agree in the case someone lived in dangerous area where many crimes has happened there. I put my previous post here


If you said you are living in not safe area, it's okay if you want a gun in your house. In almost no crime happened area, why you need that? If your neighbors know that you have a gun, so you are considered as a threat in your neighborhood.

Surprisingly enough, I really don't see anyone concealed-carrying their handguns or open carrying their rifles on their back in the US. I've went to Florida, Michigan, NY, Ohio, Cali, Boston...

What liscenses do you have? Can you acquire a suppresor?

However, the government doesn't give people with mental issues firearms to begin with.
They get the gun, and then they become insane.

Also, people home invade not to kill people. They just want their shit.
In that case, not possessing a firearm will actually save a life... even if they're criminal.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anecdotally

You try again.  For example:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11663882

What I said makes sense, e.g. when you make casual observations or indications on the data you have selected.  "Says it all," eh?  Yeah...no it doesn't.

Edit:  Data corresponds to a data set.  A scientific data set is purely observational information.  The data, such as that indicated in your loaded (no pun intended) infographic, is not the result of rigorous analysis -- only mere observation.  That data can then be subjected to rigorous analysis to arrive at some kind of conclusion.  I had quit engaging you because you were unwilling to do such a thing, but instead preferred to keep pasting more infographics as if they somehow mean something all by themselves.  They don't (at least not in a way that is relevant to forming a reasonable conclusion about gun control issues).

This sentence does not make sense. Please try again.

Then why do you use your data anecdotally (i.e. pulling isolated data points and drawing conclusions without ever subjecting those data points to a formal reasoning process)?

That doesn't even include the three I could think of off the top of my head

 1) a supposedly would-be mass shooter in a mall in my state of Oregon who commited suicide when confronted by an off-duty security gaurd who carried.

 2) A chilling 9/11 call by an old lady who had someone breaking into her house:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_bhp-_e_D8  Actually this wasn't the one I was thinking of but there are lots of them like this.  Seems that elderly widows are targets for these kinds of things.

 3)  The most chilling one I can think of in recent times was the lady who fled upstairs into a bathroom crawl-space with her kids.  The invader followed her specifically and quickly.  When he broke down the third door to get at them she filled his head with .32 cal slugs.  Amazingly (and sadly) the guy survived.  He had been recently released from prison and claimed in court that in breaking into the house he was 'just trying to feed his family.'  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dr6EaxJ7XWo  The telephone recordings of this incident are hard to listen to.

As I said before, it is a very good bet that in my area any given house will be armed and we just don't see these kinds of things.  There is no doubt in my mind that the low rate of such events is precisely because criminals know very well what the outcome of a robbery attempt will be.  We've got a lot of property crime which happens when a criminal thinks they won't encounter anyone.  These types of crimes are much less lethal.  I'll bet that if gun controls happened here, confrontational crimes and fatalities from them would skyrocket.

Outside our main large population centers the sheriffs and even the Dem representatives tend to be between mildly and strongly pro-gun.  We've got a saying "Oregon Democrats don't want your guns...we've got our own."

Lastly I would say that even if guns were not effective at limiting violent confrontational crime it would be highly cruel to deny individuals the safety they feel in being able to defend themselves.  Even if that feeling were mis-placed (and it's not) it is very strong.  Being alone and vulnerable has to be a very bad feeling for many of our older and less physically capable citizens.  How these gun control fanatics can ignore this is beyond me.

11 times a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy, saving lives - Photos - Washington Times

It's not a one dimension spectrum, political ideology is a graph with 4 quadrants evaluating economic issues and social issues on two separate planes.

Check out http://politicalcompass.org. As a social anarchist / libertarian socialist, I fall in the extreme bottom left of this graph.

You, obviously do not need protection, you can afford to pay for it. I am happy for you. A soldier is a civil servant. Just like some teachers. Teachers use a blackboard and slides. A soldier uses guns. I cannot send an army to a country if I am not commanding an army or ordered to do so by my commander in chef, my emperor, my ayatollah, my king or supreme leader. 
"We" can use a shift system. That's a noble thought. No one ever said a "protector" should work 24/7. If a "protector' exists then it is to protect you. From whom? A baseball bat is not a weapon. It was created to play in this game millions of people love called baseball. A baseball bat is meant to hit a ball, not a human skull. It is cruel to smash the head of a another human being with a baseball bat. You would need more than one swing to stop your assailant. Also for a woman it would have been unfair for her to use a baseball bat to try to smash a man's skull twice her size, with a gun in his hand ready to rape her...I don't know what you have done to your rich neighborhood or your exclusive society, cause you need a "protector" doing shifts to protect yours 24/7...

Ah, you must mean Olympic target shooting. Yes down with Olympians!!! Go back to ancient Greece you nuts.

It shouldn't be as liberal as it is in USA, it should be more rigorous. As you said it, they are made for one purpose, therefore not everyone should be allowed to own a gun.

A+ Good points!
I am unaware of any gun statistics that do not include a bias one way or the other. The people who are against gun ownership have the right to live unprotected from violence if they choose. But stay away from us who know better. I'm sure the mental patient hacking up people at a mall will put down his hatchet to listen to your statistics.
The real problem with violence in this country is a societal problem involving poverty, mental illness, and the raising of children on a constant daily stream of hideous violent entertainment. You want to do something about violence? Try taking on TV advertisers, try paying for housing the mentally ill, try changing the tax code to reduce poverty.
This does not happen because YOU (a person wanting a gun ban) have to do something. Instead you would rather force someone else to do something. Until YOU can say what YOU are going to give up you should be ignored.

I am in favor of very strict gun control AND removal of guns from the hands of criminals.