Originally posted by leonheartmm
pepper sprays are good, and even though most tazers CAN be used for torture, the fact is that overwhlemingly, they are never lethal, as opposed to bullets which overwhelmingly ARE lethal. newer tazers have significant range{definately anything at robbing or indoors ranges anywhere where people can CLAIM to have a slef defence issue}. if you domt liek the idea and just wanna se a gun for intimidation than buy the non lethal rubber bullet type. there is absolutely NO justification for owning normal firearms in the house.n no, i wudnt wanna fight fire with fire, id wanna fight fire with ANYTHING WITH STOPPING POWER, i do not aim to kill, but only to stop the other person from harming me or my family or a loved one or any1 around me. nuthing more to it.
most deaths from tazering are from over tazering by intentional individuals i.e. sum prejudiced cops n stuff, on people with heart conditions or old age etc. now compare that 300 number with the number of GUN related deaths that occur every year domestically. youll see the difference.
and civil war and terrorists invading america are bizaare and unreal scenarios which shud not be considered unless you are a paranoid, they are just rationalisations.
another problem is that if EVERY1 starts keeping ONE gun for SAFETY{as is the case in many areas} then due to accidental or social reasons alone, a significantly large number of people will start dying as a result of these guns which was never present before. so in a very real way, you are actually flaming gun violence as opposed to purchasing a weapon to DEFEND from gun violence. if no1 has guns then theres no gun violence!!!!!
also, i wud like to warn you that it is in a very small percentage of cases that having guns in the house actually does lend to using it effectively against an agressor like a robber etc. this is because you dont have ready acces to them and often times u can miss even if the bleak oppurtunity presents itself and there isnt much to suggest that u wont get shot in the process or that sum loved one hasnt already been shot, plus such situations are very panicky so self harm can occur. evidently, in neighbourhoods where people posess the most number of weapons domestically, ud think that they wud be more PROTECTED from such peole, and yet, these are usually the places where most people end up dead domestically.
about the military training part, its a myth to think that even most veterans can stay very calm and aim and shoot an agressor non lethally, training and combat are two very different things, that is why so many soldiers screw up on the battlefield, and engagin is always a place where people panic{since a lot of troops only engage at close range a handful of times even in years of service these days} , plus engaging isnt generally at point blank ranges in war as opposed to houses. so i wudnt wanna test that theory.
basically, the second ammendment's SPIRIT was appropriate for the time of lawlessness and the apparent principals of america{where the people cud raise arms against the government or rulers if they became liek the imperialistic british and tried to force property and rights fromt he people, in which case they cud bare arms. the concept, as i see it, was to give POWER TO THE PEOPLE, but it is COMPLETELY unjustified in today's day and age. right now, it shud be taken out of the constitution of america.
ONE! If people want to have guns, they'll have guns. The Black Market for example.
You never know, Someday 30 years from now America could be divided. You just have to be prepared. I'm not saying it's gonna happen 2 years from now but you have to be safe.
If people get up at night and a robber breaks in, a taser wouldn't help at all in aiming. In fact if you miss, you're screwed. Again if people keep them locked up in a gun locker and ONLY take them out in an emergency and keep them unloaded and the safety on. Most deaths are because of Irresponsible adults.
Taking out the 2nd Amendment is wrong. What if America is in extreme conflict with an invading country many years from now. Only the military would have guns and they would be busy fighting battles elsewear. People should always have the right to bear arms if they are responsible enough.
knife violence is harder to pull of and not responsible for as many deaths. knife wounds are also a lot more likely to be less lethal. knives do not work at long ranges and hence can not be used to threaten and invade homes or kill sum1 easily and are esier to defend against. rock violence is even more noticeable and even harder to pull off. it is a fact that putting a gun into a person's reach is that much more likely in the long run to end up in sum1 getting killed.
as for furion's post, i wud say it is presumptuous. guns would stick out overwhelmingly more if no1 has them and hence the person cud be arrested on sight, no questions asked for the posession of a weapon. and really, black markets are called the underground for a reason, they only provide a small fraction of the firearms that legal ways provide.
and again, you are using bizaare example to rationalise. there is no reason to suspect that such will happen in your lifetime or the near future{and ive already explained how individual guns wud be USELESS in those situations for the greater part} and you arent being safe at all. the chances of what u say, happening, are very very slim, yet the chances of sum1 getting shot as a result of mistake or just the presence of a gun un the house are SIGNIFICANT, so even by that logic, you are making urself more prone to harm. and tasers can be very good at aiming, and again, as i said, it matters little if u have a gun in the hourse. furthermore, why not just use rubber bullet handguns or shot guns or pepper pellet ones?? why do u have to use lethal weapons. newer taser have greater stopping power than a 9mm .
also, if u take all those safety precautions then itll be that much harder to use it in an EMERGENCY on which ur argument stands. furthermore, the frequence of gun accident is a testament to how many times people can forget things in the long run. u also have not adressed the point about people getting angry after sum incident and using guns.
the second ammendment is completely wrong right now for all the reasons i stated before. it is helping in doing nothing but makign a helluva lot more people end up in body bags. guns shud at best be confined to the gun ranges. no1 shud be allowed to keep lethal weapons domestically.
and dont forget what i said, numbers of incidences of breakins etc are completely UNHINDERED by the presence or absence of guns{not that im saying that institutions and body guards an dbanks and stuff cant have gun security, just civilians} just like crime is unhindered by the presence or absence of capital punishment, so the argument doesnt hold.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
just look at how many americans get killed by firearms in home every year!
Because of irresponsible morons, which I happen not to be.
Originally posted by Nod
Please don't tell me you have a kid. 😬
I do. My weapons are very, very much out of her reach/grasp/ability to even look at.
Originally posted by SoylentBlue
That Remington of Imp's could probably load rubber slugs.Seeing as Imp has military training, I wouldn't put it past him to have the capabilities to shoot to disable, in self-defense.
It can, and I have, and I do. 😉
Knives are silent. Knives are plentiful. Knives are painful. Knives require no ammunition, no knowledge of assembly and firing and no license. Knives are still used. It's the people's will to do it, not the weapon's.
If people are so damn thick that they can't even maintain and keep away from the wrong end of their own weapons, they don't deserve to own guns. Precautions can easily be taken to prevent children from reaching weapons. I didn't even know my dad owned a pistol until I was 10 and it'd been gotten rid of...
I just said better be safe then sorry. It's not meant to go out and join the war, it's to protect you from anybody who tries to take your home. If they know you have a gun, they might just stay way since they don't want to lose men. Again lock it up in a chest or locker, keep it locked and always put the key where only you could find it and always keep them unloaded and on the safety. And you can keep the bullets in a safe place for emergencies and use non lethal ammo like you said.
If you hear someone break into your home, simply lock the door, call the police, and get your gun. You should keep it in your room in a closet so children don't find it. But even if they did, they wouldn't be able to open it because it would be LOCKED.
The 2nd amendment is completely right right now. The goverment is paranoid and are putting all these things out like ID chips in your arm and wanting to know all about your guns WHICH IS COMPLETELY USELESS IN ANY SITUATION! Like I said, those people in body bags from guns are because people are ignorant and just leave their gunslying about. If somebody's going to own a gun they should be responsible.
the only even close to valid argument ive heard is that people are thick and those kind of people shudnt own guns. not to even go into not accepting that these things happen even in the most responsible fo places ALL THE TIME, id say that thats exactly true, people ARE thick headed and idiotic, but the law doesnt discriminate and neither does the ammendment, and dum people WILL always get these weapons and they WILL always be dum with them, leading to a whole host of problems. so unless you can accept anytime soon that every1 is gonna suddenly become super smart about it{and even then this stuff happens} there really is no argument.
all the other arguments i have answered to already. the second ammendment is possibly the single most idiotic thing which exists in the american constitution of today and in american laws. guns are cool and fun , but they shud be confined to the shooting ranges permanently.
Hoo boy.
Dude. There shouldn't BE an argument in the first place. I don't want to derail this thread by seriously addressing your arguments, but if I DID we'd be far from any final statement.
So, rather, I'll just disengage from this argument and go back to the original purpose of this thread:
Those are some fine damn guns, Imp.