Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
F3SS

Guns save lives thread

2,946 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Kowalski

Thought this was funny....

290087794.gif?282

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yamato

LOL that's not gonna happen

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kowalski

LOL that's not gonna happen

Your right it won't....Worth pointing out anyway....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Thought this was funny....

290087794.gif?282

Reminds me of the various Politicians and Celebrities who are Rabidly anti-gun, but who try to get their security guards to smuggle guns onto planes and whatnot.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

Reminds me of the various Politicians and Celebrities who are Rabidly anti-gun, but who try to get their security guards to smuggle guns onto planes and whatnot.

Hammer....Nail and head... Absolutely

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Hammer....Nail and head... Absolutely

Then when the Press gets ahold of them, they complain that they need those gun toting security men to defend their family and property.... Well, I wonder what Joe Average needs the guns for??

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

BM, awesome post. That website is insane. I had no idea there was site like that. Looks like there is source material to keep this thread going for in its proper direction for a very long time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS
ROBBER THREATENS TO KILL SHOP OWNER’S FAMILY DURING STICKUP – HE WAS LATER PRONOUNCED DEAD FROM SINGLE GUNSHOT WOUND

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/18/armed-robber-threatens-to-kill-nj-shop-owners-family-during-stickup-he-was-later-pronounced-dead-from-a-single-gunshot-wound/

NEWARK, N.J. (TheBlaze/AP) — A Newark shop owner shot and killed an armed robbery suspect.

Authorities say 28-year-old Mustafa Sheffield of Newark entered the store Monday afternoon and ordered the owner to fill a backpack with money and gold while threatening to shoot the owner’s family.

Authorities say the shop owner, whose name was not disclosed, brandished his own gun and shot the suspect, who died at a hospital from a single gunshot wound.

No other injuries were reported in the robbery.

“No charges have been filed so far, but authorities say it’s likely that the matter will be reviewed by an Essex County grand jury,” according to the Associated Press.

Unless there is additional evidence not reported by the AP, the incident appears to be a clear-cut case of self-defense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

Then when the Press gets ahold of them, they complain that they need those gun toting security men to defend their family and property.... Well, I wonder what Joe Average needs the guns for??

"Ahh but ya see, you average Joes don't have a family or property worth saving, just us, the rich and famous...Nuff said.". It is so obnoxious and hypocritical, that alone would cheese me off and I am not an American.. Granted not all rich and famous people would be like that, just those who are anti gun and hypocritical..

BM, awesome post. That website is insane

It is insane... It would take you a week just to read through every link to the stories about the guns saving lives....It's amazing how these stories are tucked away??.

I had no idea there was site like that.

I can find anything lol

Looks like there is source material to keep this thread going for in its proper direction for a very long time.

Ideally it should do... Those stories speak in volumes, and if read properly, they can leave an impact on you... It opens your eyes to what really does go on out there, that the media do not report....

It is too easy to sit on your backside and slam guns..It is easier if you splash horror stories of people being shot to death.. BUT the question is... - How easy is it to let everyone hear of the guns that saved lives and stopped crime in it's tracks? Answer - To the anti gunner - not that easy, because they tuck those stories away and pretend they don't exist...

It takes a few good people to expose the real truth...

Edited by Beckys_Mom
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

I begin to think there are two types of country in the world, the civilizations and the less civilized. In one you don't find guns except where they belong, people are very rarely if ever executed, religions that represent vestiges of the past are pretty much ignored, science is taken seriously, especially evolution -- and the population understands it, and people use metric units. (Of course with regard to that last test, only, to my knowledge, does the US fail and then not in science).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

"Ahh but ya see, you average Joes don't have a family or property worth saving, just us, the rich and famous...Nuff said.". It is so obnoxious and hypocritical, that alone would cheese me off and I am not an American.. Granted not all rich and famous people would be like that, just those who are anti gun and hypocritical..

It is insane... It would take you a week just to read through every link to the stories about the guns saving lives....It's amazing how these stories are tucked away??.

I can find anything lol

Ideally it should do... Those stories speak in volumes, and if read properly, they can leave an impact on you... It opens your eyes to what really does go on out there, that the media do not report....

It is too easy to sit on your backside and slam guns..It is easier if you splash horror stories of people being shot to death.. BUT the question is... - How easy is it to let everyone hear of the guns that saved lives and stopped crime in it's tracks? Answer - To the anti gunner - not that easy, because they tuck those stories away and pretend they don't exist...

It takes a few good people to expose the real truth...

The raw stats do not lie here.

Crime rates about the same, homicide rates about 5x.

Its not a tenable argument to say that guns make you safer unless you accept that you live in a society which is intrinsically dangerous and bloodthirsty. Gun's make it easy to kill and find their way into criminals hands allowing them to commit lethal crimes more easily.

The USA claims to police the world in a fair way and to represent the high water mark of civilization. Such a brutal country can do neither.

Br Cornelius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

I begin to think there are two types of country in the world, the civilizations and the less civilized. In one you don't find guns except where they belong, people are very rarely if ever executed, religions that represent vestiges of the past are pretty much ignored, science is taken seriously, especially evolution -- and the population understands it, and people use metric units. (Of course with regard to that last test, only, to my knowledge, does the US fail and then not in science).

so you're saying vietnam is more civilized than usa??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bavarian Raven

The less civilized countries seem to care more about the criminals then the victims IMHO.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

The less civilized countries seem to care more about the criminals then the victims IMHO.

american judicial system is an industry, there is no money in victims, yet criminals make money for lawers. and entire system (jails for profit, bails, bonds...), whoever thinks it is about actual justice should move to vietnam, lol

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

The less civilized countries seem to care more about the criminals then the victims IMHO.

than uk is less civilized than zimbabwe, or kenya

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beckys_Mom

Its not a tenable argument to say that guns make you safer unless you accept that you live in a society which is intrinsically dangerous and bloodthirsty. Gun's make it easy to kill and find their way into criminals hands allowing them to commit lethal crimes more easily.

Guns do make you safer because criminals have them and you need something to defend yourself, and YES the country is dangerous and bloodthirsty, it's no wonder they like to protect themselves... It's different for us, because we grew up in a country were guns are not available to buy so easily.......

We also do not live in a country that has a constitution that says we own a right to bare arms. We don't know what it is like to live in a society like that...In our country we cry rivers and riot if someone wants to remove our flags...Crazy as crazy does... But it is a good example on how we all view things and differ....

So I personally feel that I should not be saying to others they shouldn't be allowed to protect themselves with guns Who am I to say so? I am not saying that you have said this to anyone, I am speaking on my own behalf...

I think the more you read about them, things that the media do not report, and the more you listen, you wind up learning something more than what the media could ever tell you..

than uk is less civilized than zimbabwe, or kenya

I guess if I said things you didn't agree with, you'd think that Ireland was less civilised too? .... I do not get what is up with putting other peoples countries down.... Is it OK to slam the USA if a couple of people don't like a few posts? I say NO... This whole tit for tat carry on is annoying at best....

I wish people could at least read the thread properly and not turn it into a slanging match on who is more civil than who...? If you really wish to show who is more civil then please by all means demonstrate it...I aim that at anyone ..

Edited by Beckys_Mom
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aztek

I guess if I said things you didn't agree with, you'd think that Ireland was less civilised too? .... I do not get what is up with putting other peoples countries down.... Is it OK to slam the USA if a couple of people don't like a few posts? I say NO... This whole tit for tat carry on is annoying at best....

i actuially was not puting anyone's country down this time.

BR said less civilized countries care more about crimials than victims, and in uk a victims of crimes were sued by the criminal and criminal won. i wont post link, since it was posted many times before), yet in african counrys they do justice (real justice) on the spot, thus care about victims more.

so by this formula zimbabwe, and kenya are more civilized.

or in other words, one can relatively harmlessly rob a house in uk with owners being in the house, but i dare you to try it in kenya.

Edited by aztek
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

i actuially was not puting anyone's country down this time.

BR said less civilized countries care more about crimials than victims, and in uk a victims of crimes were sued by the criminal and criminal won. i wont post link, since it was posted many times before), yet in african counrys they do justice (real justice) on the spot, thus care about victims more.

so by this formula zimbabwe, and kenya are more civilized.

or in other words, one can relatively harmlessly rob a house in uk with owners being in the house, but i dare you to try it in kenya.

Care to support that statement with a quote from me. i don't think you have been reading what i have said since I have never defended a criminals rights over those of a non-criminal.

It really doesn't help your position to misrepresent what I have said.

It may just be true to say that Zimbabwe is a less crime ridden place than the UK (but I think you would have a very hard time making that case), but using violent crime stats as reported by the states themselves will not take you far down that path, since I can guarantee that more crimes are reported and classified as violent in the UK compared to Zimbabwe. Such misuse of stats is what this whole debate really boils down to.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sweetpumper

I aim that at anyone ..

Pun intended?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

I begin to think there are two types of country in the world, the civilizations and the less civilized. In one you don't find guns except where they belong, people are very rarely if ever executed, religions that represent vestiges of the past are pretty much ignored, science is taken seriously, especially evolution -- and the population understands it, and people use metric units. (Of course with regard to that last test, only, to my knowledge, does the US fail and then not in science).

The more civilized nation than... are those that end up being conquored.

The Romans rejected committing their own violence and turned to mercenary armies and proxy killing in arenas. And as a result when their foriegn military turned on them, the Empire was destroyed.

A strong youthful nation will allow its citizens to be armed. An old dottering nation will seek to disarm its citizens and have them rely on proxies to defend them, rather then defending themselves. Once those proxies are hired from among the "savages", the game is almost over.

Its not a tenable argument to say that guns make you safer unless you accept that you live in a society which is intrinsically dangerous and bloodthirsty. Gun's make it easy to kill and find their way into criminals hands allowing them to commit lethal crimes more easily.

Yes. Americans are more intrinsically dangerous and bloodthirsty.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ciriuslea

I'm pretty sure efficiency would actually be the main factor...

Which is why people prefer guns......I do agree to some degree, but if knife murder hadn't rose by almost half after the controls were introduced you would have had a valid point...but it is a fact reduce the number of guns in a society and you reduce the number of gun crimes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

Which is why people prefer guns......I do agree to some degree, but if knife murder hadn't rose by almost half after the controls were introduced you would have had a valid point...but it is a fact reduce the number of guns in a society and you reduce the number of gun crimes...

I know the logic or idea behind a ban is ultimately the source will dry up for criminals...

So lets say we have an outright ban with door to door confiscation without a revolt about it. The first people to lose their guns would be registered and most people would turn their unregistered guns in out of compliance. There is going to be a long period of time when only criminals have them because it isn't going to be easy or fast trying to find all the underground guns if in fact it ever happened. That will be a period in time when all sorts of violent crimes and property crimes happen because why not? Whose to stop them? It would be criminal Christmas out there. It is for that reason that nobody wants to give them up. It may have sort of worked out on an island like England but we are practically the size of Europe with 5 times the population and huge land borders and vast coastal lines making the likelihood that guns will find their way in for the black market for all time pretty high. Our borders are loose now and they will be until we build a great wall and that won't happen and all these smuggling things happen now and people illegally cross our borders every day undetected. How is a gun ban going to stop an already illegal activity like border trafficking from continuing with its still illegal activities when laws making that illegal have never stopped it before? Bottom line, we don't want to be disarmed while we wait for the government to disarm everybody else and that probably would never happen anyways so we'd be defenseless forever and this all assumes the government has our best intentions in mind the whole time! So getting this done with real national support isn't ever going to happen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ciriuslea

I know the logic or idea behind a ban is ultimately the source will dry up for criminals...

So lets say we have an outright ban with door to door confiscation without a revolt about it. The first people to lose their guns would be registered and most people would turn their unregistered guns in out of compliance. There is going to be a long period of time when only criminals have them because it isn't going to be easy or fast trying to find all the underground guns if in fact it ever happened. That will be a period in time when all sorts of violent crimes and property crimes happen because why not? Whose to stop them? It would be criminal Christmas out there. It is for that reason that nobody wants to give them up. It may have sort of worked out on an island like England but we are practically the size of Europe with 5 times the population and huge land borders and vast coastal lines making the likelihood that guns will find their way in for the black market for all time pretty high. Our borders are loose now and they will be until we build a great wall and that won't happen and all these smuggling things happen now and people illegally cross our borders every day undetected. How is a gun ban going to stop an already illegal activity like border trafficking from continuing with its still illegal activities when laws making that illegal have never stopped it before? Bottom line, we don't want to be disarmed while we wait for the government to disarm everybody else and that probably would never happen anyways so we'd be defenseless forever and this all assumes the government has our best intentions in mind the whole time! So getting this done with real national support isn't ever going to happen.

I do understand this point, firstly you can't reintroduce the genie to the bottle, and like I commented earlier the irony is you need guns in society because you have guns in society, and your right to defend yourself takes a precedent, (even from your Gov) which was also a secondary theme to the discussion with Odds, Knife crime grew which suggested removing guns doesn't address the issue of people committing serious crimes or wanting to kill each other, only the weapon in which the majority of crimes were committed, remove guns and the next weapon of choice was a knife, so do we then keep removing every potential weapon people then turn to, It was interesting when Odds stated he had a room full of potential weapons, its quite easy to kill someone a hard enough crack on the head will do it...a hammer, an axe, a brick, drive a car at someone, a screwdriver, a pen,

I think we only really need to look at what's happening in the jails in the US, the weapon of choice is a stabbing type weapon, the fact no guns exist doesn't stop the violence, I think the knee jerk reaction is to one guy hell bent on loading up like Rambo and killing as many people as possible, which I think we would all agree we don't want to see but its quite a rare event. ?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Br Cornelius

Which is why people prefer guns......I do agree to some degree, but if knife murder hadn't rose by almost half after the controls were introduced you would have had a valid point...but it is a fact reduce the number of guns in a society and you reduce the number of gun crimes...

I think you will find this was whats called normal sample variation, ie knife crimes go up and down on a yearly or few yearly basis. The overall trend in homicides after the ban was a gradual decline over the subsequent decade or so. That is a statistically significant trend, the short term blip reported is not and cannot be directly tied to the gun control.

This is called cherry picking, focus on a short term statistically insignificant even to distract from the significant overall trend.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frank Merton

Reviewing the posts here I suppose made to prove how helpful guns are I notice two things,

first the reliance on statistics to lie (such as Illinois has more murders than Wyoming -- well duh) and the reliance on anectdotes and individual instances and testimonials where guns were useful (as though there weren't a lot of times when they got the parties involved killed).

This is perhaps the single thing most wrong with deomcracy -- much of the public is too easily fooled by these sorts of arguments.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.