Gun Control Thread- Should we?

Ok so what's the intent of most firearms? Educate me. Outside of shooting targets for sport, there's not much else they're used for that doesn't involve killing humans or animals as far as I see.

The same intent of nuclear weapons. Deterrence.



DuhKCiY-lu0

For all your claims that people freeze when confronted with these types of events, there isn't much evidence to support that. I think you all underestimate one's ability to survive and act. I do think it boils down to how comfortable you are with using a gun and training.


qPhOHamq308

I have now determined this is a merry go round thread; I am out.

For all your claims that people freeze when confronted with these types of events, there isn't much evidence to support that. I think you all underestimate one's ability to survive and act. I do think it boils down to how comfortable you are with using a gun and training.


qPhOHamq308

So show evidence that supports they don't freeze up

So show evidence that supports they don't freeze up

You are asking me to prove a claim I didn't make. Secondly, I'm showing you instances of this very proof you are asking for. Just go to youtube and search "robber gets shot" and you'll see quite a few instances where people act when confronted.


Don't get me wrong, I've been on record with saying even if that whole theater was armed, it would have changed anything. You can't prove that. I'm not saying people will or will not freeze when confronted. I just think you all underestimate a human's will to survive.


Take this guy. A old man who just got hit with a bat on the head and still have the ability to act. Not everybody is going to respond as such, but let's not sell out people so short.

sNf8v4m5Vdg

There were a string of robberies in my sister in law's apartment complex, a few years back. Guy would basically mug a couple at gunpoint, usually when they had their hands full with groceries. He'd make them take him to their apartment, he'd rob the place and leave. Nobody harmed, other than emotionally. Happened a couple of times until the third or fourth mugging.

Dude who was being mugged along with his girlfriend had a gun, so he pulled it out. Suspect shot them both dead right away.

Now I know that's just one example, but it's an example of everyone having a gun not being the solution.

Now I know that's just one example, but it's an example of everyone having a gun not being the solution.


I agree totally. Having a gun isn't going to be the ultimate solution. Those who claim it is, well, lets just say they are a bit misguided. I still think the numbers and percentage will weigh more in favor of those having guns.


I will say this. A robber/criminal will more than likely think twice about robbing stores or individuals that are packing heat. I know I sure as hell would unless I was looking for a shootout. I would guess that most criminals are looking for easy scores.

From the Nugent thread. My take on criminal predators and guns.

Predators always pray on the weakest and pay very close attention to whom they prey upon.If you need proof just observe every living creature on the planet.

Human predators may or may not be animalistic in their pursuit. But I would agree with you that predators pay very close attention to there prey. It is for this reason that gun ownership likely does not prevent an attack.

For example, if the human predator is simply looking to waylay a weakling for a quick score, certainly they would chose someone who "appears" weak. In such a situation, only an unconcealed weapon will prevent an attack. Otherwise, the predator will likely pick based on the appearance and may be unlucky to draw someone who has a gun.

Even in the "prey upon those who appear weak" situation, however, a concealed weapon does not guarrantee safety. As long as we are doing the animal analogy here - How many predators announce their presence to the prey prior to the strike? Not many successful ones. (The cheetah stands up and shouts across to plain to the gazelle "Hey buddy - I'm on my way and your dead meat"). The "prey on the weak" type of human predators will use stealth and will likely have some type of weapon for intimidation purposes. Again, by the time the predator is upon you, you may or may not have time to draw your weapon and disable them. I would suggest that, generally, this is not a given and, depending on the situation, may result in the serious injury of those you are trying to protect. Okay, you killed the bad guy but he managed to kill/maim your wife/child during the exchange. A risk you're willing to take? Maybe. It all depends on how "good" a "predator" he is.

Quite frankly, the only way to ensure protection from this kind of "find a weakling" predator is to permit people to openly carry weapons. Not sure how I feel about that.

Also, I would suggest to you that not all human predator's seek the weak. Many are very human with very human desires and capabilities for thought. Thus, many human predators, the truly dangerous ones, seek a specific thing (money, to rape your wife or daughter, to exact revenge, to inflict pain upon you, etc.). These predators are more along the lines of hunters and they know that they need not attack the weak to succeed, attacking the strong at a weak moment will work just as well. You have a gun? Or you may have a gun? I don't care if you have a gun b/c I will attack you (again with surprise) at a point in time when you will be unable to use it. Hell, I will assume you are armed and plan my attack accordingly. (Your putting your wife's coat on her, I can see both your hands and will kill your wife if you move them out of my sight). In such a case, the fact that you may be armed has already been factored into my attack and is of no deterrent value.

In each of these scenarios, the only time a gun offers protection is when the predator is looking for a weakling, surprises someone who, instead, has a gun, AND the predator was dumb enough to let the prey access and use the gun. In this situation, if you do kill the predator, you are actually reducing the long term effectivenes of your gun by culling out the dumb predators and leaving more of the smart ones out there.

Bottom line, personal safety is about awareness of self and situation. While carrying a concealed weapon can often help, it is simply not a guarantee of safety.

Gun control is a good thing provided it incorporates responsible gun ownership.

On a side note, i think that in a macro sense human civilization will eventually benefit from the technological path set by gunpowder and it's denominations. I'm not being naive, in that i know where we are at right now. I understand the massive deaths and the individual deaths humanity has been exposed to because of guns. I think there are tangents to the technology that tunnel vision doesnt allow us to consider normally.

I would speculate that wars that would have killed millions of people in the past, are now ended with deaths in the 10's of thousands. The tech that has been developed that allows the alleged 'good guys' to reach into a situation remotely and fix a 'bad guy' has allowed for quick solutions that i believe save lives.

That's for the most part conceptual, and will no doubt upset a vast majority of us. I would encourage you to refrain from the knee-jerk reaction you've developed on this topic and while not agreeing with me, you cant get around one basic fact. Guns are here. You cant wholly restrict them, and until you can, i will stand by my right to defend my territory in as responsible and as safe a way as i was taught.

Two other small points. Citizen gun ownership is necessary as leverage in a country built on rebellion.

I see both sides of the argument, but i have a visualization i fall back on. It's of me hearing a noise, getting up and looking down past my son's room at the front door of my condo wide open with a man with a gun standing there. No law or regulation will ever prevent me from bringing equal threat to that potential criminal. Ever.

Dude who was being mugged along with his girlfriend had a gun, so he pulled it out. Suspect shot them both dead right away.

That's merely an example of a gun owner not knowing how to react in a situation, not a failure of the concealed carry.

Why would you think you could pull a weapon and put a round on the target if the aggressor already has his weapon on you?

Every week in the NRA magazine I get there are police reports listed of a gun owner defending themselves or helping others using their firearm. I'd compile them or link to them if I wasn't so lazy.