| |
| Social Justice and the Gun |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| An inconvenient lie |
 Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Posts: 138
Location: florida orlando/daytona area
|
WOW im actually surprised the consensus on this topic is as it is!
absalutely criminals will continue to operate guns no matter what and they will always get them! as for me i am no criminal but my house has been broken into twice (both times by illegal aliens) and since i was 13 my dad has allowed me to keep a pistol in my room. We have a lot of guns all over the house though.
_________________
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming.html
Global warming is an inconvenient lie!
Student |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| JX |
| Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Moderator
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 318
|
| An inconvenient lie wrote: |
| (both times by illegal aliens) |
Ok, the fact that you 'know' that it was illegal aliens suggests to me that either (1) they were caught both times, in which case I don't see why you need a gun; or (2) you're making a baseless assumption based on racism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kojax |
| Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 3136
|
| skeptic wrote: |
kojax
You can make any case you like when you refer to individuals. That is because humans are so variable. Every type of person is out there, from psychopathic killers to those who are totally saintly.
I once had a friend who regularly got drunk, and then would drive home. If the police had known how often he did that, he would have ended in prison! However, when drunk, he was the safest driver I knew. He would slow right down, and his concentration over the wheel was startling. He was a good driver and more than compensated for the effects of the booze.
However, I am still a complete supporter of the drink driving laws. My friend might have been able to drive safely, but millions cannot, and become disasters when driving drunk.
In the same way, you can argue about some people who are good with guns. Enough are the direct opposite to make widespread gun ownership seriously undesirable. |
That is a good point. The problem is situations like Inconvenient Lie's situation, where not owning a gun can lead to a person being subject to intolerable circumstances. It's unrealistic to expect the police to be everywhere all the time, and some areas have higher crime rates than others. Where I live, there is no reason at all that I would need a gun, so I don't own any.
I don't think being unable to drive drunk is more than just a minor inconvenience, but being unable to defend your home is. How extremely should some people have to suffer in order for others to avoid suffering? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
kojax
There was a New Scientist article that covered that situation. Apparently the statistics show that if your home is invaded, and you confront the invaders with a gun in your hand, you have a probability of getting killed or maimed, and your family has an equivalent probability of harm, of 450% higher than if you confronted the nasty bastards with no weapon.
Not my figures. Just the results of a team of researchers who worked out the figures.
Basically the principle seems pretty much universal. The more people who own guns, the greater the number of people killed by homicide, suicide or accident.
Some interesting statistics for Americans.
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm
The biggest firearms problem in the USA appears to be the widespread ownership of hand guns. It is hard to justify owning a firearm if it is a hand gun. It is not much use in hunting, and frankly, has its main value in that it can be concealed until used to kill a human (mainly a member of the possessor's family, since suicide is the biggest killer).
86% of firearm related crime involve a handgun. And, quoting from my reference :
"Since 1962, more than one million Americans have died in firearm homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings. Handguns were used in more than 650,000 of these fatal shootings."
As I pointed out, you cannot rationally justify owning a firearm, and especially not a hand gun, to protect your family, since statistically such ownership actually increases drastically the chances of them being harmed.
Also from my reference.
"The largest category of firearms fatality is suicide, not homicide. In 1997, 54 percent of all gun deaths were suicides, and 42 percent were homicides.16
About six out of 10 suicides are committed with firearms.17
For firearm suicides, it is estimated that handguns are used twice as often (69 percent) as rifles and shotguns.18
For all suicides, it is estimated that more than four out of 10 were committed with handguns." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Leszek Luchowski |
| Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 16 Jun 2008
Posts: 723
Location: Gliwice, Poland
|
I wonder how the New Scientist statistics were calculated. Did they take into account the fact that a greater percentage of house owners are armed in areas where gun ownership is more popular, and hence the burglars are also more likely to be armed? I don't know, I'm just asking the obvious question. If not, you could just as well say that wearing a helmet increases your chances of dying of shrapnel wounds (because helmets are worn by soldiers in war and not by safe civilians in countries enjoying peace).
On the other hand, in all my life (and I'll be 50 soon) I was only once in a situation (not counting target shooting) where I would have used a gun if I had one. And I would have been badly wrong to do so. So perhaps it's just as well I don't have a gun.
_________________
Leszek. Pronounced [LEH-sheck]. The wondering Slav.
History teaches us that we don't learn from history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| skeptic |
| Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Professor
Joined: 05 Nov 2008
Posts: 1172
|
Leszek
I do not know how they calculated the stats. I doubt that the researchers would have overlooked something so obvious. But even if they did, it would be difficult to account for a 450% increase in deaths and maiming from that cause.
I was sitting and watching a repeat of the old MacGyver series the other day. I had forgotten that the hero of that series hated guns. He solved his problems without using firearms. A good role model. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| An inconvenient lie |
| Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Posts: 138
Location: florida orlando/daytona area
|
| JX wrote: |
| An inconvenient lie wrote: |
| (both times by illegal aliens) |
Ok, the fact that you 'know' that it was illegal aliens suggests to me that either (1) they were caught both times, in which case I don't see why you need a gun; or (2) you're making a baseless assumption based on racism. |
im not a racist we had to chase one of them for a couple blocks (my dad and me) my dad eventually cuaght the guy and we did find out he was an illegal and he probabbly would of tried to fight if we had not had the gun.
The second time we just came home and he was in my dads bed room but he did look latino (so maybe a little biased) but he just ran away out the window.
I dont live in the best of neighborhoods and a very high percent of my population here is illegal aliens.
_________________
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming.html
Global warming is an inconvenient lie!
Student |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kojax |
| Posted: Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 3136
|
| skeptic wrote: |
kojax
There was a New Scientist article that covered that situation. Apparently the statistics show that if your home is invaded, and you confront the invaders with a gun in your hand, you have a probability of getting killed or maimed, and your family has an equivalent probability of harm, of 450% higher than if you confronted the nasty bastards with no weapon.
Not my figures. Just the results of a team of researchers who worked out the figures.
Basically the principle seems pretty much universal. The more people who own guns, the greater the number of people killed by homicide, suicide or accident.
Some interesting statistics for Americans.
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm
The biggest firearms problem in the USA appears to be the widespread ownership of hand guns. It is hard to justify owning a firearm if it is a hand gun. It is not much use in hunting, and frankly, has its main value in that it can be concealed until used to kill a human (mainly a member of the possessor's family, since suicide is the biggest killer).
86% of firearm related crime involve a handgun. And, quoting from my reference :
"Since 1962, more than one million Americans have died in firearm homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings. Handguns were used in more than 650,000 of these fatal shootings."
As I pointed out, you cannot rationally justify owning a firearm, and especially not a hand gun, to protect your family, since statistically such ownership actually increases drastically the chances of them being harmed.
|
The problem with trying to compile any statistic on home invasions is that people with the right personality who own guns are very unlikely to be invaded in the first place. Any criminal with a brain (and I know that's an oxymoron, but most criminals do think about their crimes before doing them.) will do some basic research, or at least case a home before invading. They'll look for tell tale signs of the owner's personality and gun ownership. If you see an NRA sticker on the outside, that is definitely a home to avoid.
A gun owner with the "right personality" I'm talking about would probably not "confront" an invader at all. They would shoot on sight. If the invader isn't dead already, then the criminal either does one of two things: either they run, or they don't run. The sound of the gun itself serves as an alarm the neighbors will hear, so the police will already be on the way.
If you're smart about it, you could effectively defend your home with blanks. Just fire your gun down the hallway a few times and most criminals will run for their lives. It's the morons who walk out of their bedroom with a gun and try to talk about it who get hurt. The main problem with confronting is that, in the first place, that means you've seen the burglers, and you may be able to identify them. (even with masks). At that point, they've got no choice but to kill you or go to jail. In a confusing gun battle, they're more likely to run because that offers them a high probability of not getting caught at all.
| Quote: |
Also from my reference.
"The largest category of firearms fatality is suicide, not homicide. In 1997, 54 percent of all gun deaths were suicides, and 42 percent were homicides.16
About six out of 10 suicides are committed with firearms.17
For firearm suicides, it is estimated that handguns are used twice as often (69 percent) as rifles and shotguns.18
For all suicides, it is estimated that more than four out of 10 were committed with handguns." |
I don't lose any sleep at night over suicides. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| LunchBox |
| Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 130
Location: Texas
|
| kojax wrote: |
I don't lose any sleep at night over suicides. |
LOL...I was thinking the same thing as I read that, and I've had a suicide in my close family.
I was going to start a new thread, but instead, found this one.
To (hopefully) add to the conversation...why is it that I should be unarmed? I've never had a car wreck bad enough to need a seat belt, but I put the damn thing on every time I turn the key.
_________________
"Let your anger be as a monkey in a pinata, hiding with the candy, hoping the children do not break through with a stick."
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." *Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| kojax |
| Posted: Mon May 24, 2010 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Radioactive Isotope
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 3136
|
| Leszek Luchowski wrote: |
I wonder how the New Scientist statistics were calculated. Did they take into account the fact that a greater percentage of house owners are armed in areas where gun ownership is more popular, and hence the burglars are also more likely to be armed? I don't know, I'm just asking the obvious question. If not, you could just as well say that wearing a helmet increases your chances of dying of shrapnel wounds (because helmets are worn by soldiers in war and not by safe civilians in countries enjoying peace).
|
I like this point. Just noticing its implications now. What if the criminals were the first to get armed, and the civilian population were simply trying to keep up with them?
| Quote: |
On the other hand, in all my life (and I'll be 50 soon) I was only once in a situation (not counting target shooting) where I would have used a gun if I had one. And I would have been badly wrong to do so. So perhaps it's just as well I don't have a gun. |
I used to live in an area where people were constantly breaking into cars by smashing their windows. Had to replace 3 window panes in 3 months. I'd have loved to have gone outside with a cell phone camera and taken their picture the next time it happened, but only if I was armed. I'm not going to win a 3 on 1 fist fight, but gun fights have a way of being a little more equal than that.
My main problem with gun-free societies is that numbers rule. Any group of people larger than 1, can freely rob or take advantage of a person traveling alone. And if you charge them with assault, they can argue that it was a mutual challenge of some kind, provoked by both parties, but hand to hand combat is different from gun combat. If they shoot you, nobody is going to think you challenged them to a draw. All of the ambiguities favor the defender. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
