Why Would Anyone Be Against Self Defense? - page 3.

o48o

legendary

Activity: 3066

Merit: 1169

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Self defence ≠ open carry automatic weapons

Quote from: BADecker on January 11, 2023, 10:17:41 AM

But how do you defend against the military and the police without a gun? And especially when you meet a rogue or vicious cop?
-cut-

Military or police would be pretty lame if you could make them back down if you just had a gun. And good luck getting in a gunfight with a police and explaining how that was a fault of the cop.
I can see zero changes that going your way. In a best outcome you would just be brushed off as a person who did suicide by cop. But i totally understand the conspiratard fantasy of being in a control or a hero.

And people in US are asking why they have a gun problem. It's because of attitude like yours. You don't have a gun problem in countries where they are only used for hunting.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Zlantann

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1101

Quote from: BossTrack on January 10, 2023, 11:10:23 PM

What is the rationale of those who want to make self defence illegal?

I get how a liberal could want social programs, since it's basically more money for them taken from someone else: Immoral but understood, more resources for your, less for someone else. But why is the first reaction of liberals in an altercation to criticise the person reacting to being assaulted and not the person starting the violence?

Do they just assume nothing bad will ever happen to them and thus can't empathize with someone being genuinely victimized? I can't see what they would gain from outlawing self defence. If anything, liberals are more likely to be assaulted since they tend to not workout and are more sensitive - see journos, they aren't even inclined to do petty crime and would benefit from people being sheepish about self defence. They would be the exact type of person a petty criminal WOULD target.

Regarding self defense, I don't have any strong position. I hear news from America where little children as little as six shoot their parents or classmates because they have access to guns. The US has the highest rate of mass shootings carried out by sometimes innocent teenagers just because they have access to firearms. In my country, we don't have such experiences because gun ownership is strictly regulated.

But there is a need for arms in self-defense. The world is going mad and sometimes we need these guns to protect ourselves from criminals. In my area kidnapping would reduce if people are allowed to carry arms.

But it might be good to increase the age of legal gun ownership and some sophisticated hand gone or riffles should be restricted.

coolcoinz

legendary

Activity: 2814

Merit: 1192

Quote from: dimonstration on January 11, 2023, 09:32:58 AM

Allowing self-defence such as carrying a gun legally will just make people fearsome about making a commotion. People with bad intentions can use self-defence to assault someone legally by just provoking there target.

This is a common argument used by gun haters. "What if someone has a gun and I don't and that someone shoots me?" First there's this thing called permits. Gun access should be free, but only when you've passed some tests, weren't jailed for a serious crime, underwent a course that taught you basic gun safety.
When you take your gun out in public you should be aware that someone else may carry and you can get killed. Allowing people to carry changes things because there won't be situations like that in Norway where guns aren't allowed and Breivik kept shooting people for hours because he was the only one with a gun and nobody could fight him. People were hiding, waiting to be slaughtered. This is a good example that banning guns won't stop criminals from obtaining them.

Quote

I believe you will not need self-defence if guns are not allowed to carry by anyone except by the police and other military units.

What's the response time of the police in your area? I live about 3km from the nearest town and it takes a minimum of 5 minutes before the police can arrive at my house. Usually it's 10 (checked).
Imagine sitting there for 10 minutes, waiting for the police, while the robbers steal your shit. They could literally rape your wife and kill you both before the police arrives. I'd rather have a gun.

Gyfts

legendary

Activity: 2828

Merit: 1515

Most liberals aren't against self defense, the socialist/communist lefties are against self defense of deadly threats because they think private firearm ownership is inherently evil. Of course, they're only against such use of force if it's being used against their own. If it's the government using "self defense" against right wing protestors, they support it. If it's a private citizen defending himself from deranged rioters, they'll call for life imprisonment.

There is no logic behind it so no one can rationalize it.

Spaceman1000$

sr. member

Activity: 700

Merit: 270

Well, if the self-defense involved allowing citizens the free use of guns as means of defence against a perceived opponent then we'll be having a society that will be filled with chaos, no matter what, the constitution, the laws, the police the security the military are supposedly the ones constituted by the constitution to protect lives and properties. it will be a no-brainer for citizens in the name of self-defense be wanting to take arms into the hands. We can still have a sane society, if we push for more, equity, fairness and justice. Because i believe they laws and the constitution are there to also protect the weak and downtrodden in our society. These are the layed down procedures to get a true library society and not a radicalized society.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: dimonstration on January 11, 2023, 09:32:58 AM

Allowing self-defence such as carrying a gun legally will just make people fearsome about making a commotion. People with bad intentions can use self-defence to assault someone legally by just provoking there target. I believe you will not need self-defence if guns are not allowed to carry by anyone except by the police and other military units. US violence increases tremendously when guns become legal in some states. Putting the law into the hand of there own citizens to decide when to shoot or not is really a bad decision. They should just improve there police and monitoring unit to provide a better safety rather than a self-defence mechanism that involves gun.

But how do you defend against the military and the police without a gun? And especially when you meet a rogue or vicious cop?

Musk is using twitter to show us much of the bad, hidden stuff that government has been doing over the last two years. If gun freedom in the US were gone, government would run right over us all, and convert the whole world into outright slavery.

More gun freedom is what keeps us free. In addition, you can find all kinds of times when a good gunner shoots a bad shooter who is on a killing spree, because he illegally obtained a gun.

Is this the answer?
Make robots that can do everything for us that we need done.
Then put all the people of the world into strait jackets.
The robots can feed us, bathe us, wipe our butts, and do everything we need for us.
But we can't hurt anybody or anything... total green earth without our interference.

Cool

EDIT: Btw, does the guy who controls the robots have special guns to shoot rogue robots?

dimonstration

hero member

Activity: 2744

Merit: 702

Dimon69

Allowing self-defence such as carrying a gun legally will just make people fearsome about making a commotion. People with bad intentions can use self-defence to assault someone legally by just provoking there target. I believe you will not need self-defence if guns are not allowed to carry by anyone except by the police and other military units. US violence increases tremendously when guns become legal in some states. Putting the law into the hand of there own citizens to decide when to shoot or not is really a bad decision. They should just improve there police and monitoring unit to provide a better safety rather than a self-defence mechanism that involves gun.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Right!!! Like, their should be gun freedom. Because a young, tiny girl can fend off a bully muscleman if she has a gun.

Muscleman was at the bar without his gun. He was simply have a relaxing drink during some pleasant conversation with some friendly buddies. A couple of small, timid girls, who he had never bothered, snuck up on him and shot him to death... because they were mean, and simply didn't like his looks or smell. The fleet-footed girls got away because his buddies were too drunk to stop them.

There really isn't any peace in this world. Somebody always has a weapon to use against someone else who is napping regarding his own self-defense. Peace in society requires everybody - at least the majority - to be peaceful and respectful in his heart, towards everyone else... or it won't work very well. We see this in the violence done by the Soros-paid-off Antifa and BLM against unsuspecting people of the general public.

We see it in the US-provoked, tiny, timid Ukraine sneaking up on Russia since at least 2014... until Russia couldn't take it any more, and had to fight back to protect herself and her people.

Cool

BossTrack

copper member

Activity: 43

Merit: 1

What is the rationale of those who want to make self defence illegal?

I get how a liberal could want social programs, since it's basically more money for them taken from someone else: Immoral but understood, more resources for your, less for someone else. But why is the first reaction of liberals in an altercation to criticise the person reacting to being assaulted and not the person starting the violence?

Do they just assume nothing bad will ever happen to them and thus can't empathize with someone being genuinely victimized? I can't see what they would gain from outlawing self defence. If anything, liberals are more likely to be assaulted since they tend to not workout and are more sensitive - see journos, they aren't even inclined to do petty crime and would benefit from people being sheepish about self defence. They would be the exact type of person a petty criminal WOULD target.

Topic: Why Would Anyone Be Against Self Defense? - page 3. (Read 557 times)