NSSF: Gun Crimes Plummet as Gun Sales Skyrocket.

[kail]

The people what dislike guns do not care for facts. This will be ignored by them.

So prepare to debate this ad Naseum forever.

I fuckin love facts. So lets allow the CDC or other trustworthy government agency to collect the facts and process them to legible information for the public to view. ATM, an ancient and unneeded bill keeps this from happening.

Right now you and the OP are simply asking others to take this blog's word as fact. What data are they using? Did they collect it themselves? You will have to excuse me if I'm skeptic as to what's credible or not.

[Tempguy]

I fuckin love facts. So lets allow the CDC or other trustworthy government agency to collect the facts and process them to legible information for the public to view. ATM, an ancient and unneeded bill keeps this from happening.

Right now you and the OP are simply asking others to take this blog's word as fact. What data are they using? Did they collect it themselves? You will have to excuse me if I'm skeptic as to what's credible or not.

You mistake me. I support the collection of info. The only source we have that is reliable is FBI stats. That shows gun related deaths on the downtick. So it's stupid to not support more information gathering. It only hurts the argument that gun violence is sensationalized.

So I support the CDC collecting info so long as it is just the bare facts.

[May90]

I think that if you need guns to defend yourself, then either you live in a pretty messed up place, or you are a bit paranoid. Which one is the case usually? I'm inclined to think that it is the latter, since even in crime-ridden third world pits the vast majority of people live without guns just fine.

[Tempguy]

I think that if you need guns to defend yourself, then either you live in a pretty messed up place, or you are a bit paranoid. Which one is the case usually? I'm inclined to think that it is the latter, since even in crime-ridden third world pits the vast majority of people live without guns just fine.

Not really.

If you are relatively weak, then you would most definitely want some kid of equalizer for defense. Even if you are only attacked once in your life, having that equalizer can mean all the difference.

Let's face it, bad people exist. And unless you are physically superior to your attacker, you're a possible victim. People don't like being victims.

[Deleted]

Not really.

If you are relatively weak, then you would most definitely want some kid of equalizer for defense. Even if you are only attacked once in your life, having that equalizer can mean all the difference.

Let's face it, bad people exist. And unless you are physically superior to your attacker, you're a possible victim. People don't like being victims.

You could always, you know, run away. Don't need to kill people.

[Killadrix]

People need to realize that correlation is not causation.

I dunno...

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

[May90]

Not really.

If you are relatively weak, then you would most definitely want some kid of equalizer for defense. Even if you are only attacked once in your life, having that equalizer can mean all the difference.

Let's face it, bad people exist. And unless you are physically superior to your attacker, you're a possible victim. People don't like being victims.

The chance that you will get into a life threatening situation randomly in which having a gun will save your life is so minuscule, you might as well carry a large sign on your back, "Please don't attack me", with about the same resulting safety level.

To handle the bad people, you have police and the army, as well as common sense letting you avoid the vast majority of dangerous situations by just following basic rules, such as "Don't walk in bad neighborhoods late at night". The system works fine almost everywhere, even in places like Somalia; I'm not sure why some people in the US think their state should be an exception.

[Tempguy]

You could always, you know, run away. Don't need to kill people.

And if your attacker is faster? I mean, being weaker tends toward mean you are weaker. So if your attacker is strong enough to overpower you, they probably can catch you too.

Also, you don't get a heads up your attacker is coming. This isn't the animal planet where you see a cheetah and run. When your potential assailant is another zebra , you don't get much of a chance to run.

So telling someone to simply run away is 3rd grade logic.

[Tempguy]

The chance that you will get into a life threatening situation randomly in which having a gun will save your life is so minuscule, you might as well carry a large sign on your back, "Please don't attack me", with about the same resulting safety level.

To handle the bad people, you have police and the army, as well as common sense letting you avoid the vast majority of dangerous situations by just following basic rules, such as "Don't walk in bad neighborhoods late at night". The system works fine almost everywhere, even in places like Somalia; I'm not sure why some people in the US think their state should be an exception.

Like I said. That one time makes the difference. No one wants to be that outlier.

And the army doesn't handle policing. An f the police will arrive in time to get your account on how you were raped, robbed, beaten, or to clear the area so the medics can bag your body.

So it's logical that some folks would want a way they can have some control over their lives and not be at the whim of an attacker.

[PickleballAce]

I'm not really into the gun culture thing but as Europeans you probably live somewhere where the police response is fairly quick. There are a lot of rural places in the US where you're waiting at least half an hour for cops in an emergency.

Even if your backwoods community is safe, all it takes is one nutjob to break into your home in the middle of the night. People see the need to defend themselves without having to depend on police that won't arrive until long after the intruder has done their work.

[Tempguy]

There is nothing in the world that can stop you from being a possible victim. For most people, a gun is entirely unnecessary for self-defense purposes because victimization, if it even occurs, will not occur in a way that allows you to make use of the firearm to prevent it from reaching completion.

I'm talking about the mindset.

You could argue that the chances of you catching AIDS is minimal (it is ). But you would still opt to have a condom right? It's basic selve preservation mentality.

You could explain all day that the chances of you catching AIDS from non anal sex is tiny , even if your partner has HIV, but you sure as shit don't want to be that unlucky bastard. So it makes sense some will want a gun. It's basic self preservation mindset.


Im explaining that someone who chooses to get a gun may have other factors than just being paranoid or live in an uber deadly area. They just want the feel safe. Especially if they had already been attacked before. Peace of mind is valuable.

[Sunseeker]

I dunno...

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

If I were a moron I'd be terrified.

[May90]

Also, you don't get a heads up your attacker is coming. This isn't the animal planet where you see a cheetah and run. When your potential assailant is another zebra , you don't get much of a chance to run.

That's exactly why I said that your weapon is unlikely to save you. If someone is out to harm you, you won't see them coming, and having a loaded gun strapped to your pants won't be of much use. And in a situation in which you have the time to pull out your weapon, to get a good aim at your attacker and to shoot them, you probably have multiple other options available anyway, such as running away, screaming to attract attention, etc.

Now, where I can see a gun useful is when protecting your property from burglars. If you are in your house and you hear people breaking into it, you have a real chance to pick your weapon up unnoticed and then to chase them away or to shoot them. But on the streets... I see no point bothering carrying one.

Like I said. That one time makes the difference. No one wants to be that outlier.

And the army doesn't handle policing. An f the police will arrive in time to get your account on how you were raped, robbed, beaten, or to clear the area so the medics can bag your body.

So it's logical that some folks would want a way they can have some control over their lives and not be at the whim of an attacker.

The thing is, in most countries (the US included), the chance that one time will come is negligible. I definitely do not feel threatened in my everyday life, even though I don't have a gun on me.

I can see the desire of people to have a tool to be able to defend themselves. It is when they need that tool that I become concerned. Sounds like a pretty bad thing to rely on a weapon and to feel endangered without it.

---

Don't get me wrong, I am not an anti-gun guy who wants guns banned or strongly restricted. I am more of the, "Why do you want to have guns so badly?", kind of guy. This isn't a war zone, after all!

[Deleted]

And if your attacker is faster? I mean, being weaker tends toward mean you are weaker. So if your attacker is strong enough to overpower you, they probably can catch you too.

Also, you don't get a heads up your attacker is coming. This isn't the animal planet where you see a cheetah and run. When your potential assailant is another zebra , you don't get much of a chance to run.

So telling someone to simply run away is 3rd grade logic.

Spare me your bullshit bravado, i have been attacked a number of times - I don't have any gun at my disposal.

If i had a gun or they had a gun, i'd probably be dead.

But i ain't. So go figure.

It's people like you that keep toting tons of bullshit about things you have no f'cking clue about.

"But what if, herp derp, this that this" - You f'cking paint shit out to be some f'cking super scary ass situation where you are beset by übermench cuz you are scared shitless.

Well, guess what, ain't everyone is some welp who is weak, slow and a fat slug - Some of us can run, some of us steer clear from bad areas, some of us know how to cope with danger.

And some of us, don't have guns either. Different deal if you're in the US, where everyone and their baby can carry one, but you folks brought that on yourself.

[May90]

You could argue that the chances of you catching AIDS is minimal (it is ). But you would still opt to have a condom right? It's basic selve preservation mentality.

Pretty sure though that most people use condoms to avoid conception and not to avoid AIDS.

[Tempguy]

Spare me your bullshit bravado, i have been attacked a number of times - I don't have any gun at my disposal.

If i had a gun or they had a gun, i'd probably be dead.

But i ain't. So go figure.

Bravado? Hold on while I google that...

Hm. I neither tried to impress or intimidate you. Not sure why you think I did.

All I am saying is that it isn't some crazy paranoia or extreme danger threat that causes people to buy guns. You or anyone claiming that is wrong.

Bravado, ha! Good one.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty sure though that most people use condoms to avoid conception and not to avoid AIDS.

All of the above. Sti's (including AIDS since that is a big one) and kids. But most people also think the pull out method works for kids. Plus birth control pills and shit. So if you use conforms it's probably for disease reasons.

[May90]

All of the above. Sti's (including AIDS since that is a big one) and kids. But most people also think the pull out method works for kids. Plus birth control pills and shit. So if you use conforms it's probably for disease reasons.

I don't think though that the thought, "I might get AIDS, I better protect myself", crosses most people's minds. Most do it just because, well, everybody knows that condoms = "safe sex".

I don't know much about these matters though, so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

[Tempguy]

That's exactly why I said that your weapon is unlikely to save you. If someone is out to harm you, you won't see them coming, and having a loaded gun strapped to your pants won't be of much use. And in a situation in which you have the time to pull out your weapon, to get a good aim at your attacker and to shoot them, you probably have multiple other options available anyway, such as running away, screaming to attract attention, etc.

Now, where I can see a gun useful is when protecting your property from burglars. If you are in your house and you hear people breaking into it, you have a real chance to pick your weapon up unnoticed and then to chase them away or to shoot them. But on the streets... I see no point bothering carrying one.


The thing is, in most countries (the US included), the chance that one time will come is negligible. I definitely do not feel threatened in my everyday life, even though I don't have a gun on me.

I can see the desire of people to have a tool to be able to defend themselves. It is when they need that tool that I become concerned. Sounds like a pretty bad thing to rely on a weapon and to feel endangered without it.

---

Don't get me wrong, I am not an anti-gun guy who wants guns banned or strongly restricted. I am more of the, "Why do you want to have guns so badly?", kind of guy. This isn't a war zone, after all!

I am saying that all of what you said doesn't matter. The feeling of safety isn't based in logic most times. You can tell someone that their chances of getting killed by a terrorist is slim to none and they still fret over it. Tell them their chances of getting shot by a handgun is much higher than a big black rifle, and try wanna ban the rifle still.

The feeling of safety, even if it ultimately leads to a falsehood , is what is important to them. Like cops. The fact remains that the chance of a cop actually saving you and preventing a crime are low. Yet having cops gives people peace of mind.

That is my argument against the one saying that the only reason to own a gun is paranoia or living in a bad area. And that doesn't even touch on folks who do live in bad areas and do not have the means to move.

[PickleballAce]

Spare me your bullshit bravado, i have been attacked a number of times - I don't have any gun at my disposal.

If i had a gun or they had a gun, i'd probably be dead.

But i ain't. So go figure.

It's people like you that keep toting tons of bullshit about things you have no f'cking clue about.

"But what if, herp derp, this that this" - You f'cking paint shit out to be some f'cking super scary ass situation where you are beset by übermench cuz you are scared shitless.

Well, guess what, ain't everyone is some welp who is weak, slow and a fat slug - Some of us can run, some of us steer clear from bad areas, some of us know how to cope with danger.

And some of us, don't have guns either. Different deal if you're in the US, where everyone and their baby can carry one, but you folks brought that on yourself.

You seem like an angry, petulant child. It sounds like we're all better off with you not being armed.

[Deleted]

You seem like an angry, petulant child. It sounds like we're all better off with you not being armed.

Haha, are you scared that a percieved "child" is gonna cause trouble?

Also, nice baseless accusation, it really brings forth your "argument" (See: Nothing.)