The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 5121 - 5140 of total 5937 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Jul 7, 2014 - 11:40am PT
If you grant, as you appear to, that packing a gun can be a good thing in a "high crime area," then its goodness is sweeping, as you simply don't know what is "high crime" and what is just you getting mugged or accosted.

Not so at all. Owning a gun increases the chances of you or a family member being shot. Any increase in safety against muggers/burglars/mass murderers/bogeymen needs to offset the increased risk from intentional or accidental use of that gun, or from the poor decisions you make because you have that gun. For most people, this calculation should be simple.

The FBI reports about 200 "justifiable homicides" by civilians each year, compared to about 600 accidental deaths by firearm, and almost 2000 women murdered with a firearm by their husband or boyfriend. You'd have have to live in a really shitty area to counteract those odds.

TE



madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:20pm PT
You'd have have to live in a really shitty area to counteract those odds.

It all depends on how you interpret the "odds." This is a classic example of why Twain said, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Put your "odds" up against hundreds of millions of handguns owned and tens of millions carried, and I'd say that the "odds" are looking pretty good that you're gonna get hit by lightening many times before you're gonna shoot yourself or be shot by your own gun.

And the FBI statistics don't list how many incidents were outright averted just by the presence of a legally-carried handgun. Those are impossible to know. What we DO know is that in the US there is a clear correlation between increasingly restrictive handgun laws and increased incidents of homicides by handgun. Again, Chicago is a tough nut to crack for gun-control proponents, as is Washington DC.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:26pm PT
LOL... so I did a bit of a test today. I drank a lot of caffeinated soda until I was nice and jittery. Then at the range I fired at double my typical cadence. As expected, I had about half the accuracy as usual.

After thousands of rounds fired, it never ceases to amaze me what slight variations of "aim" produce a huge difference down range. The physics of trajectory make it downright amazing that we can ever hit anything at all. LOL

So, trying to approximate something of the physical jitters that would be likely in a real incident, it's clear that I need to stay with the caffeine and change up the cadence until I get that more dialed in. Today reminds me yet again: "Gun control is a steady hand."

The whole discipline of shooting well is extremely enjoyable.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:28pm PT
Shooting under stress is key to real practice. Try out a few IDPA events or local club shoots... Even just the timer buzzing with people watching will get the blood pumping. And it will still be NOTHING compared to a real armed situation...
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:34pm PT
que es your recomandacion por un pistola to use for problem with ocupantes ilegales?

Pistola, no!


Mina Terrestre, Si!

scrubbing bubbles

Social climber
Uranus
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:40pm PT
This whole trend of professional urban milquetoasts waving boutique Glocks around in public is going to yield some alarming stats in a while...think Florida

gun totin hysterical types becoming increasingly confident about drawing on anyone who stares at them funny?

Try pulling a gun on a lot of extremely violent ex-convicts, men who have lived with brutal violence from an early age, and I'd wager many of them won't flee in terror at all, just the opposite...they will just insert that gun up your keester

If your lucky, that's all they will do
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 7, 2014 - 01:40pm PT
Again, Chicago is a tough nut to crack for gun-control proponents, as is Washington DC.

yes

clearly the answer to Chicago's gun violence is more guns

if more people are armed then the bad guys will think twice before shooting

stupid efforts to curb shootings are futile and should be given up on

after all, these things are just the price to be paid to make our society stays Free

seems a small price to protect the 2nd Amendment
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 02:00pm PT
Try pulling a gun on a lot of extremely violent ex-convicts, men who have lived with brutal violence from an early age, and I'd wager many of them won't flee in terror at all, just the opposite...they will just insert that gun up your keester

Actually, you yet again reveal that you have no clue what you are talking about.

For myself, I grew up in Riverside/San Bernardino and hung around these "types" almost my whole life. I spent years around the Diablos, and I think I can say something about criminal thinking and activity from very intimate association with it.

They won't "flee in terror" as you describe it, but they WILL take a pulled gun very, very seriously. They will look to deescalate the situation, even if they started escalating it in the first place. They respect strength and are not looking to get killed. Give them an out in the context of matched strength, and they will take it.

Furthermore, they do not train! Most of the guys I knew couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. Even with knives they were often completely incompetent. One story....

One of the Diablos I knew decided that some guy needed all of his tires slashed one night. I mean all of them, twelve tires, as a simple message.

First tire, my friend stabs into the tire and his hand slides on the grip. Cut to the bone across most of his palm.

Most easily concealable knives don't have a good grip, and his showed how useful it would typically be in a real fight. How much did this guy train with his knife? Not at all. Same with the two guns he carried. Same with all of the guys I knew.

They depend largely on the intimidation factor. I'm not saying that they can't get down for real, almost on a whim. But they are NOT trained nor tactically aware. And they DO respect strength for strength.

Those are your typical "gangland" elements. When you get to sad-off street thugs, well, their situation is even more pathetic!

You need to watch a few of the many YouTube videos showing gang-bangers and street thugs intent on harming citizens, and they scatter like roaches as soon as the first citizen pulls a gun and starts shooting.

There are always exceptions to the rule, but the rule IS that these elements do not expect to confront strength for strength, and they are VERY prepared to back away when the odds are not heavily in their favor. Give a clear out, be calm and serious, and you can deescalate virtually all such situations.

I can tell you from repeated personal experience that producing the gun in all seriousness has an amazing tendency to back the situation down rather than escalate it. But I do mean "in all seriousness." Gangland types can tell if you are not serious. The rule is absolutely true: Do not pull the gun unless you really are prepared to kill what you are aiming at.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 02:13pm PT
clearly the answer to Chicago's gun violence is more guns

Finally you are starting to see the light!

Would somebody please explain how ANY of the federally-proposed gun control laws will keep guns out of the hands of criminals? Causal chains, please?

I really want to understand this from your perspective. I mean that. I just don't get the causal theory that underlies these proposed laws.

Even our lib/dem governor, Hickenlooper has backed entirely away from his earlier stance that got Colorado its first significant slate of gun control laws. Quotes from a recent meeting with Sheriffs (virtually all of whom vehemently oppose the new laws)....

"Iíll tell you the funny story, and it is a weird... I think we screwed that up... we were performing legislation without basic facts, which I think is a bad idea in every case. It took almost a month to get the facts. By that time I had pissed you guys off... There was passed legislation that I had said I was going to sign."

"I apologize. I donít think we did a good job on any of that stuff."

And regarding the Aurora shooting, Hickenlooper said that the whole slate of new laws would have had no effect, summarizing: "This person, if there were no assault weapons available, if there were no this or no that, this guyís going to find something. Right? Heís going to know how to create a bomb. Who knows where his mind would have gone. Clearly a very intelligent individual however twisted. Thatís the problem, this is a human issue in some profound way."

Hickenlooper is STARTING to get a clue about how badly down the road Bloomberg led him. But the political damage has already been done. Now, literally nobody in Colorado has a CLUE what the guy actually stands for!

But he is admitting the gun-control laws don't have an effect on the sorts of shootings they are designed to protect against. Again, STARTING to get a clue.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jul 7, 2014 - 03:49pm PT
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-military-member-concealed-carry-shoots-attacker-20140706,0,5324984.story
HighDesertDJ

Trad climber
Jul 7, 2014 - 06:42pm PT
madb0lter posted
And the FBI statistics don't list how many incidents were outright averted just by the presence of a legally-carried handgun. Those are impossible to know.

Which means we can all take comfort in imagining it to be a super huge number!

madb0lter continued

What we DO know is that in the US there is a clear correlation between increasingly restrictive handgun laws and increased incidents of homicides by handgun.

We also know how to abuse statistics.
StahlBro

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jul 7, 2014 - 07:03pm PT
How many people have lived because no one had a gun when things got out of hand? I bet it is 10X the amount of times guns have saved someone.

You can have it both ways.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 07:09pm PT
How many people have lived because no one had a gun when things got out of hand?

Yes, and if you can figure out how to answer my question from above, please do let us know: Exactly how will ANY proposed gun laws keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

When you can insure that bad guys are not going to accost us in armed fashion, then and only then will you start to get some sympathy from me for your anti-gun cause. Meanwhile, I'll exercise my right of self-defense (that has NOTHING to do with the Second Amendment) with any appropriate means.

"Appropriate means" is any tools necessary to effectively respond to the sorts of threats I as an individual, or me and my family, are likely to encounter.

At present, that includes guns.

Show me how you are going to disarm criminals and whack-jobs, and if that can come to pass I will then not have any use for a gun.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jul 7, 2014 - 07:37pm PT
What we DO know is that in the US there is a clear correlation between increasingly restrictive handgun laws and increased incidents of homicides by handgun.

very true

for example: Alaska, the state with the least restrictive gun laws has the highest rate of guns deaths per capita

example: Massachusetts, the state with the most restrictive gun laws, has the lowest rate of gun deaths per capita

thanks for pointing out that there is a clear correlation
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 7, 2014 - 08:32pm PT
Where are you getting those stats? What I see is that Alaska has one of the lowest gun-murder rates per capita. Cite your source(s).
couchmaster

climber
Jul 7, 2014 - 08:42pm PT
Anyone who is desiring gun control should be happy to move to Mexico, strict gun control in place for years. Sigh, if only they could get the criminals to co-operate. Of interest is the gun crime stats of Laredo Tx and right across the border. In the US, guns everywhere, and there is minimal gun crie. Oh - there is some. In Mexico, big gun control, BIGGER issues with all kinds of huge craziness entailing crime, often with guns and grenades. Lots of kidnappings by "authorities" and "police" preying on the population.

So move. Simple. But you will be unarmed and at the mercy of criminals and rogue police. Goodby Norton. Hable amigo?
scrubbing bubbles

Social climber
Uranus
Jul 7, 2014 - 08:43pm PT
Actually, you yet again reveal that you have no clue what you are talking about.

haha! madbolter1, I wish you luck in becoming the Wyatt Earp of your suburban hood, sounds like you have memorized all the NRA manuals for sure!!!

BUT, madbolter1, please describe in full detail all the armed confrontations and citizens arrests you have engaged in...if the list is not substantial, you have no real credibility


a few people in my family were lieutenant-level and watch-commander level police in the Inland Empire, one was high-level CHP brass, AND I truly believe the last thing they want in these counties are millions and millions of "citizen dorks" wearing open pistols on their belts and legal AKs strapped to their backs

they'd advise you instead to just take that Sig Sauer money and put it toward a home security system, and greatly increase your situational awareness of probable criminal threats

!!!
couchmaster

climber
Jul 7, 2014 - 08:50pm PT
Good advice from scrubbing bubbles although I have a soft spot for Sigs. Mr Bubbles said:
"... advise you instead to just take that Sig Sauer money and put it toward a home security system, and greatly increase your situational awareness of probable criminal threats"
.

And get a good safe too. A big one. LOL

johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 7, 2014 - 09:04pm PT
Would somebody please explain how ANY of the federally-proposed gun control laws will keep guns out of the hands of criminals

Would somebody please point out any current federally proposed gun control laws.
johnboy

Trad climber
Can't get here from there
Jul 7, 2014 - 09:21pm PT
Put your "odds" up against hundreds of millions of handguns owned and tens of millions carried, and I'd say that the "odds" are looking pretty good that you're gonna get hit by lightening many times before you're gonna shoot yourself or be shot by your own gun.

I'd say your odds of getting hit by your own gun are much higher then being hit by your own lightening bolt.

Nice comparison switch there.
Messages 5121 - 5140 of total 5937 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews