Here it is the libs are coming after our guns
POSTED BY: kaneman
UPDATED: Saturday, February 19, 2011 15:04
VIEWED: 19911
PAGE 7 of 22
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:Quote:I don't agree with that either. I said they save lives, never said they save more lives than they take. Without being omniscient, I cannot possibly know how many lives have been saved, if any at all, because of the deaths that occurred.
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I really don't agree that guns save more lives than they take,Quote:My analogy is simply to say guns, like lots of other causes of death, are tools that are useful and do save lives despite that fact. No more.
That is their sole purpose, unlike knives, cars, doctors et al.
I understand seeing guns as a tool whose only purpose is to maim and kill. But the results are larger than that.
If you have a gunman who is there to maim and kill your whole family of 7 people, and you either maim or kill him first, wouldn't you have just used a gun to save the lives of 7 people?
It all depends on WHO you maim and kill, and WHEN. If used judiciously on the right people and at the right time, this instrument which is largely used for killing can paradoxically be an exceptional life-saving tool as well.
All that to say, the gun is simply a neutral tool that can fire a small projectile at high speeds. How people use this powerful tool, that is the crux of it all. The real weapons are in the hearts and minds of Homo sapiens.
Can't Take (my gorram) Sky
------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.
So I'll talk about crime in my country, because that is all I know. I have no idea whether this applies to the US.
Home invasion, a gunman wielding a gun and threatening families is incredibly rare. Incredibly. Most burglars wait until you are away from home. They don't want the confrontation, they are useful pathetic junkies trying to get enough stuff for a quick fix.
Most violence happens between people who know one another, families, friends, rivals, and so on. Not by the stranger. CHild homicide is predominately carried out by someone who knows the child, often the parent or stepparent. Rape is predominantly by someone known to the victim.
Maybe we have incredibly disfunctional relationships, I'm not sure. I think that gun ownership in these circumstances would make things worse, not better as people who are demonstrating an incredible lack of control in conflict situations would have access to deadlier weapons than they already do. And before anyone says knives and handmade weapons can do equal damage, bullshit. In that case, would your military consider going back to using rapiers and swords instead of guns and rifles? Guns are a superior weapon, it was why they were invented and why they continually are 'improved' - to kill more people more quickly.
I have no time for the guns for self defence argument, but I can see the point of guns against tyranny.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I lived in 4 different countries for the first 16 years (avg 4 years each), and lived in the USA for well over 20 years.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
I'm curious CTS, you are living in Peru now and were in these other countries, how long did you live in the US and how long in these other places?
Quote:True. The question is, do we need to keep our guns in case we need to become more like us AGAIN, in the future?
... but it seems like you have it kind of backwards - countries have armed revolts to be more like us and have the freedoms we have.
Can't Take (my gorram) Sky
------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, different weapons have their unique strengths.
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Guns are a superior weapon, it was why they were invented and why they continually are 'improved' - to kill more people more quickly.
I'm not sure killing speed is the main strength of the gun. I tend to think the gun's advantage over swords is 1) it does not require strength, which gives the power to kill/defend to a larger portion of the population ("God made all men, Sam Colt made them equal"), and 2) it can kill/defend from a distance, which allows you to attack without as much risk of being attacked back.
Swords do have their own advantages such as not running out of bullets.
This conversation is so weird, because I really am a pacifist. LOL.
Can't Take (my gorram) Sky
------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem
You mean it's incrementalism. I get that.
Happy, on where to draw the line. Spot on.
Quote:
How did Afghan win against the Russians? How are the Iraqis and Afghans still keeping us there?
CTS,
It's more complicated than that.
Because we helped the Afghans defeat the Russians
Ergo, what do you think is happening to us, mirror, mirror.
It's not that the Afghans aren't badass, it's that they also have the advantage and disadvantage of geography:
They are center board. It's the most powerful position. Everyone wants it. But no one wants anyone else to have it. So, when you have us, Iran, Pakistan, China, Russia, then you have a bunch of players, all of whom have a vested interest in any one of the others failing.
Hell. Even *Pakistan* has admitted to sabotaging us in Afgh. and they are the only ones here who are even nominally on our side. The Iranians have admitted to opposing us, the Russians are keeping mousy quiet about it but they're all over the place, and the occasional chinese person and lots of chinese weapons just keep showing up, so IMHO it's pretty obvious.
There are too many cross topics in this thread, my brain is full. Hrm.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
Approximately 30% of non-suicide gunshot victims die from their wounds. Modern warfare actually designs military arms that are inefficient killers, for reasons related to the Geneva convention. I wonder if this will change with the 'War on Terror.'
Still, guns are indeed a superior weapon for three reasons. You already mentioned the magic of engaging targets at a distance, possibly from a safe remove.
You also added that guns allow the engagement of targets that possess a physical advantage. Hence, guns allow the weakling to engage the behemoth with equal chance of success. This is why we can employ females in front-line warfare to great effect. Upper-body-strength and superior body weight is not a serious advantage in the theater of modern warfare.
Finally, as has been said, guns can be built with amazing firepower. They can engage multiple targets quickly, or one target redundantly. Or even both, if you include military machineguns and miniguns into the argument.
Having said that, I would be perfectly content if everyone was armed with swords or cudgels. It might be unfair to women and old people, who would have to close with threats and place themselves at a potential physical disadvantage. However, if there was an arms parity, I could content myself with any system
that recognized my right to defense.
Magons,
I appreciate that you consider the possibility of tyranny. It is nice of you to consider the other side of the argument.
--Anthony
Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As I said Anthony, I don't want to live somewhere where there are lots of guns for personal protection, but I like the idea of militias. I'd probably prefer the Swiss model to that of the US, however.
When travelling alone, i did for a while carry around hairspray for protection. To be used the same as mace. My worry was that I would end up spraying myself in the face.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Maybe we have incredibly disfunctional relationships, I'm not sure."
Hello,
Proximity, availability, knowledge of the target, and emotional investment in the target. This is why you are more likely to be harmed by people you know. I think it is true everywhere.
--Anthony
Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"My worry was that I would end up spraying myself in the face."
Hello,
This is a valid concern. I prefer streaming chemical weapons to spraying chemical weapons.
It is worth noting that while I live in a state that allows me to carry firearms both concealed and in the open, I usually carry less-lethal arms.
95% of the time, if I have a gun on me, I'm going to do some target shooting.
--Anthony
Assured by friends that the signal-to-noise ratio has improved on this forum, I have disabled web filtering.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If I had any guns, I'd be concerned. Might make me go out and buy more ammo.
If I had any guns.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:Quote:Well, different weapons have their unique strengths.
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Guns are a superior weapon, it was why they were invented and why they continually are 'improved' - to kill more people more quickly.
I'm not sure killing speed is the main strength of the gun. I tend to think the gun's advantage over swords is 1) it does not require strength, which gives the power to kill/defend to a larger portion of the population ("God made all men, Sam Colt made them equal"), and 2) it can kill/defend from a distance, which allows you to attack without as much risk of being attacked back.
Swords do have their own advantages such as not running out of bullets.
This conversation is so weird, because I really am a pacifist. LOL.
Can't Take (my gorram) Sky
------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.
Yes it is a weird conversation as I know little about guns. I'd assume that could kill more people quickly with an automatic weapon than a knife.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME