Home invasion repelled with guns

[Gunn]

28 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree.   It just bugs me when people try to say I don't care about kids getting shot because I am against banning guns.   In my opinion, that can be used for any number of items we are allowed to have that have killed kids.  

That's just a psychological tactic to get you to feel ashamed about owning a gun. So don't let them brow beat you that way. Deep down, they know mental illness in this country has a lot more to do with it then anything else. Our mental health care system sucks and is the root of this problem, and as a gun owner that's what I care about. Fix the mental health care problem, fix the gun massacre problem. We don't need more gun control, there is enough of that already, we need more mental health control.

[psyche101]

10 hours ago, Myles said:

Kids still die because of these items and you are fine with that "worthy sacrifice.  

I can't imagine why you think I would be fine with that or how they compare, it's two completely different circumstances. None of those items are designed to take life, an accident can happen in a pool, but a pool does not empower a criminal mind to take advantage of others, they are no more dangerous than stairs and cause death by accident, not deliberate misuse. Guns are designed to take life, and they do empower people with false bravado. They are Misused and regulation does curb that misuse, and definitely saves lives. One doesn't go for a swim and feel that pool gives them the twisted idea to shoot up school kids, but a gun can have that effect on people. 

Regulation would put such deaths on an even playing field as death by gun accident is not the issue  deliberate misuse is. Shooting up school kids or a nightclub full of people because of their sexual persuasion is not an accident. That's what your comparing, accidents with murder. I don't believe they are comparable. 

[psyche101]

7 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

Lets cut through the rhetoric, shall we?

That's be great. 

Quote

If you believe that the overwhelming majority of people are stupid rotten criminals, that should be your view.

If, on the other hand, you believe that almost all people are good at heart and are just looking for a way to defend themselves, then you would want to allow themselves to have the tools to do so.

I think most people are good and the percentage that is not ruins things for everyone. That's not a uncommon happening in any circumstance. 

Quote

You still won't comment on the fact that according to US Justce Dept. stats, 2.5 million crimes were prevented by armed Americans. Why not?

Didn't know you were hanging on a response. But the conundrum explains itself, easy access to weapons makes a situation worse so there are more problems to deal with. Where gun regulation is in place the price of a weapon is put of the reach of the ordinary criminal, so it seems to me the situation that you claim is protecting lives is the same one causing the very problem. 

And I think a vigilante solution is outdated and barbaric. It's not the 1700s anymore. 

Quote

It must be true, since it comes from the all-benevolent and all-trustworthy Govt you indicate that we should always trust our existence to.

I never said that, I said you should be vocal about criticisms of such decisions and get involved. It's your tax payer dollars keeping their backsides shiny, make them accountable. 

Quote

That is a HELL of a lot more lives saved than a Handful of mass shootings a year would account for, and I have a name for that;

THE BIG PICTURE.

There's a bigger picture where the situations itself is curbed so that the need for defence is reduced. How is that not a better overall solution? 

Quote

You may not have heard, but there has been some controversy about that lately.... 

And would you like to guess at how many Countries only have one name on the ballot?

What Exactly are you referring to, and how does it affect gun regulation in the US? 

Quote

Two words; Ruby Ridge.

That's more a subject for a thread in true crime  but it hardly seems the weaver family flew under the radar. 

Quote

But it always leads to that, incrementally. It did in Russia, it did in the U'K., and it did in your country.

It most certainly didn't happen here  there was no confiscation whatsoever. I don't live in Russia or the UK but as a resident who lived through the change of gun regulation in this country, I can say outright that claims if confiscated weapons is an outright lie. It was voluntary. After that, if one chooses to break the law, that's not confiscation. 

Quote

And when they are being honest (you have to get them riled up or trusting you to hear it) the Anti-gun people in the USA admit it.

They are lying then. Confiscation is not what happened 

Quote

Oh, I know that a very small number of guns could ramain in private hands in Australia... if the owner was rich enough, had time to do all the paperwork, and was approved of by the Police and Govt as being their sort.

Utter nonsense. I know people who go to a local gun club myself. They are not rich by any stretch of the imagination, I earn more than they do. $100.00 a year on a personal hobby is hardly an exclusive option for the rich only. 

Read for yourself. 

For new applications, you will need to add the application fee + the number of years your licence is issued for e.g.:

New application for a Firearms licence for 5 years will be $101.25 + ($33.45 x 5 years) = $268.50.

For renewal of a licence you will not need to pay the application fee only the fees for the number of years the licence is to be issued.

https://www.police.qld.gov.au/programs/weaponsLicensing/fees/fees.htm

Quote

Does that sound very fair to everyone else?

Quite frankly yes, it's not a big cost. Most people would spend much more on social activities like the movies in that time period. 

Quote

The rich must love it, but then again they can hire armed guards to protect themselves, can't they?

Exactly, the logic defeats itself, so it's obviously not the case. 

Quote

Strawman.  Quote me or anyone else on this thread that used the term  "unrestricted access".

When did I attribute that to you or anyone else? I'm basing my claim on instances like the op story. Kids with guns. 

Quote

So.... you say that nobody ever promised Utopia, but then you say that it has been delivered... where?

Name the place.

You're quoting out of context 

I said 

No place is a perfect place 

And

Our government implemented gun control with community support to make this country safer. 

Is that clear, or were you being deliberately obtuse? 

Quote

Are you crazy?!?

Well, I'm talking to you........

Quote

Okay, so if I go to your house because of this very argument we are having, come in screaming and smash my way past your door, you are saying that if YOU don't let ME beat on your until you are dead or crippled for life, then YOU are the one that is in the wrong?

I think you had better hope there are on freaks looking at this that are looking for a good victim.... I mean, that's just insane!

Like the situation in the OP I would be aware of the aggressor and inform the police. If nether side had access to weapons, there would be a black eye, not a dead person and an injured kid. Criminal charges would be underway, not a funeral. How is that not a better situation? 

Quote

You say that to refute the idea that time makes a difference, but in the very next sentence; 

You speak out of both sides of your mouth at the same time like nobody I have ever encountered, outside of the Middle East.

Australia is already way in front in North Korea as a civilised nation, many places are, why wouldn't things come onto line eventually for a better outcome? People eventually rise against oppression and World conventions will have to get involved eventually. 

So again, your either not reading what I write, or being deliberate obtuse. 

Quote

You said that in the event of an uprising, the Govt could simply bomb We The People into submission.

Tell that to Vietnam.

I dare you.

Why wouldn't I? 

What makes you think the situation would change there? 

Quote

"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry."
-Thomas Jefferson

I doubt Jefferson ever envisaged something like a strike drone. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by psyche101

[psyche101]

6 hours ago, Gunn said:

That's just a psychological tactic to get you to feel ashamed about owning a gun.

No, its just how the situation looks to a great many people outside is the US who are not biased by gun culture. What I'm getting from gun proud posters is they don't think they should have to be responsible with a deadly weapon. 

Quote

So don't let them brow beat you that way. Deep down, they know mental illness in this country has a lot more to do with it then anything else. Our mental health care system sucks and is the root of this problem, and as a gun owner that's what I care about. Fix the mental health care problem, fix the gun massacre problem. We don't need more gun control, there is enough of that already, we need more mental health control.

You make an interesting point that might be of some impact, but why wouldn't regulation improve that issue as well? If your mentally ill, you won't be issued with a weapon. So how would it not help to make owning a weapon harder for criminals and mental health issues? 

Edited May 18, 2018 by psyche101

[Gunn]

15 hours ago, psyche101 said:

No, its just how the situation looks to a great many people outside is the US who are not biased by gun culture. What I'm getting from gun proud posters is they don't think they should have to be responsible with a deadly weapon.

Because they know it's a mental health care crisis and not specifically a gun problem. We don't hardly do squat about either getting the mentally ill the help they specifically need or locking them up before they go postal. We're too lax when it concerns controlling mental health.

Quote

You make an interesting point that might be of some impact, but why wouldn't regulation improve that issue as well? If your mentally ill, you won't be issued with a weapon. So how would it not help to make owning a weapon harder for criminals and mental health issues? 

And why go with that halfass solution, that only targets guns, when all we need to do is tackle the problem at the source - the mentally ill themselves? We would have zero deaths instead of less deaths with gun regulations, when a mentally ill individual is about to go postal. Because it doesn't matter to them what instrument they use to kill people, whether it be knife\bayonet\sword, or vehicle, and in a few cases bombs. They're going to find some way to kill some people in order to get the attention or help they trying to get from society. You take one instrument of death away, they'll still use or find some other inanimate object to kill people with, to get our attention, even it's only just a few deaths. That's what it's really about, they're trying to get our attention by killing even just a few people if not more. It's obvious that it doesn't matter to their ill minds how many people they've killed, the point is they've got our attention and by that time it's too late for the few who still got killed.

 

[+and-then]

On 5/12/2018 at 11:30 PM, F3SS said:

Arguments for the second amendment aside, there are simply so many guns here that they’ll never go away. As the saying goes, I’ll give up my gun when everybody else does and that’s a lot easier to do and control on an island nation with a 1/16th of our population.

To listen to these folks, you'd think they actually believe that they're superior because they made a choice that in no way went against the culture they came from.  I'm done even trying to discuss it with them.  Let them bray.  It's become like a bunch of kids in a schoolyard.  Their opinions of MY rights matter not at all to me.

[AnchorSteam]

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

That's be great. 

 

This is getting WAY too long and drawn out.

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

 

They are lying then. Confiscation is not what happened 

Mandatory turn-in, called a Buy Back..... you are falling back on semantic B>s. again.

Boring.

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

 

When did I attribute that to you or anyone else? I'm basing my claim on instances like the op story. Kids with guns. 

 

 

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

 

Our government implemented gun control with community support to make this country safer. 

 

And nothing on this Earth can convince you otherwise, even when the stats for Violent Crime have been shown to be constant.

Question; would you rather be killed with one shot to the head, or beaten to death with bats wrapped with barbed wire over the course of many hours?

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

 

Like the situation in the OP I would be aware of the aggressor and inform the police. If nether side had access to weapons, there would be a black eye, not a dead person and an injured kid.

More people are murdered in the USA with Hammers than with Rifles. It is called blunt-force trauma, and it happens every day.

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

Australia is already way in front in North Korea as a civilised nation, many places are, why wouldn't things come onto line eventually for a better outcome? People eventually rise against oppression and World conventions will have to get involved eventually. 

Oh... so you are counting on the rest of the world to save you from some home-grown Dictator, once that comes about.

And you DO know that it can come no matter how your vote goes or how many peaceful protests you make.... as was the case in Czechoslovakia in 1968, Japan in the 1920s, Poland in.... well, the list is a LONG one.

 

So, there is an issue with that. 

You are Trying to guilt-trip America into following your lead in disarming because if some juvenile delinquent steals a gun and uses it then it is the fault of all Americans and we must be Collectively Punished.

(that IS what you have been harping on here, and anyone that flips back can see that)

So, if we do, and we fall under the same sort of Dictatorship that has always banned private guns first, then what?

Who is going to come liberate you, and then hand your country back to you with no strings attached, if not the United States of America? 

No nobody, that's who. 

 

And I think that is what is really at the bottom of all this;anti-gun folks come in two varieties. 1) the kind that really think that guns are some kind of symbol who's removal will change Human Nature forever and ever, amen. 

2) the kind that want a global hegemony to rule over these terrible and dangerous monsters called Humans, and will help it along if they can get themselves a favorable position within the ruling party.

On 5/17/2018 at 5:30 PM, psyche101 said:

 

I doubt Jefferson ever envisaged something like a strike drone. 

Go ahead and call him an ignorant primitive, you know you want to... but that ain't the point.

Drones have nothing to do with the subject he was speaking of; human nature. 

And while folks like you may have a great deal of fun mocking Americans, especially out founding fathers, as being primitive barbarians, we did have the only revolution that didn't turn against itself. You may want to look into how that happened, and read some history that wasn't penned by a self-serving Marxist. 

 

One last thing;

If you really want to make the world better by guilt-shaming people on the internet, how many threads have you started about a truly evil and backwards culture; Islam? Sure, it would be more dangerous, to you personally, what with all the violence THEY are constantly engaging in, but if you really want to improve a culture that is lost and behind the times, why not start there?

They have a MAJOR issue with violence, oppression and a whole host of other things.... every day.

Ever want to give being critical of this sort of thing a try? I'll be right there with you if you do.

 

Indonesia: 3 Churches Attacked  by Family of Suicide Bombers   Other Recent "Misunderstandings  of Islam"

2018.05.17 (Nigeria)  Four displaced persons at a rival mosque are purged by a suicide bomber.    2018.05.17 (India)  Islamic 'separatists' torture and kill a 23-year-old man at an orchard.    2018.05.16 (Iraq)  Eight mourners at a funeral are relieved of their sadness by a Fedayeen suicide bomber.    2018.05.16 (Indonesia)  Three Islamists wit swords enter a police station and begin hacking officers, killing one.    2018.05.15 (Nigeria)  A Fedayeen suicide bomber takes four civilians with him.    2018.05.14 (Burkina Faso)  A local official is assissinated at his home by Jihadis.   https://www.****************.com

[psyche101]

10 hours ago, Gunn said:

Because they know it's a mental health care crisis and not specifically a gun problem. We don't hardly do squat about either getting the mentally ill the help they specifically need or locking them up before they go postal. We're too lax when it concerns controlling mental health.

No 'they' don't know. I hadn't considered that angle myself until you brought it up, but I'm more than willing to admit it's an interesting correlation that deserves further investigation, perhaps if more of 'them' were aware of your observations there might be some positive action in that direction. 

10 hours ago, Gunn said:

And why go with that halfass solution, that only targets guns, when all we need to do is tackle the problem at the source - the mentally ill themselves? We would have zero deaths instead of less deaths with gun regulations, when a mentally ill individual is about to go postal. Because it doesn't matter to them what instrument they use to kill people, whether it be knife\bayonet\sword, or vehicle, and in a few cases bombs. They're going to find some way to kill some people in order to get the attention or help they trying to get from society. You take one instrument of death away, they'll still use or find some other inanimate object to kill people with, to get our attention, even it's only just a few deaths. That's what it's really about, they're trying to get our attention by killing even just a few people if not more. It's obvious that it doesn't matter to their ill minds how many people they've killed, the point is they've got our attention and by that time it's too late for the few who still got killed.

 

That's not happening though. Where guns are banned were not getting regular school or nightclub bombings like the US has had mass gun slaughter. 

And I more than support the idea of tackling both issues at once, but how would one get this ball rolling? Appeals to local government representatives, appeals to the medical association or the press, what do you feel would be the best way to approach the issue? 

A community voice is head well by many, maybe just trying to spread awareness? 

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, and then said:

To listen to these folks, you'd think they actually believe that they're superior because they made a choice that in no way went against the culture they came from.  I'm done even trying to discuss it with them.  Let them bray.  It's become like a bunch of kids in a schoolyard.  Their opinions of MY rights matter not at all to me.

Why don't you read the thread? I was simply stating I disagree that the thread is a good example of self defence, the debate arose out of that opinion and has been driven by what seems a paranoid defence of gun culture in general. I think I'm the only one who keeps mentioning the op in my responses. 

[Gunn]

On 5/18/2018 at 9:17 PM, psyche101 said:

No 'they' don't know.

Well I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread until I brought it up, again, but they (gun proud posters) are aware, Psyche, although this thread started out about specifics in a case of home invasion and now we're both talking about mental health. And as a matter of fact, some gun proud posters have acknowledged it on our side of the gun debates in past threads, even though they may not have elaborated on it much for various reasons. Yet what gets me, is the other side of the gun debate talks about it even less or barely talks about it at all in past threads on the mental health issue. Meaning I've had more discussion about it with gun supporters and recently only you coming from your side of the gun debate, but that's how I know they (the "gun proud posters" as you call them) are aware of it. Yet for an example, there are two anti-gun proponents in the last pages of the Texas School Shooting thread who are blaming it all on the NRA and guns and not a word in their posts about about mental health. There was only one other UM member who mentioned mental health at least, along with guns and other problems in the first or second page of that thread. (BTW I'm not trying to get into a detailed debate in this thread on that recent specific case or thread, and I'm just using this as an example.)
I would think anti-gun proponents, specifically in my country, would jump on the mental health care crisis and raise hell about it, since it's related to overall health care issues in the U.S. But no, they concentrate more on a world wide political gun control propaganda and seem to try and keep it separated from the many health care problems we have in the U.S.

Quote

I hadn't considered that angle myself until you brought it up, but I'm more than willing to admit it's an interesting correlation that deserves further investigation, perhaps if more of 'them' were aware of your observations there might be some positive action in that direction. 

At least you're considering it and I appreciate that, BTW.

Quote

That's not happening though. Where guns are banned were not getting regular school or nightclub bombings like the US has had mass gun slaughter. 

Yeah but it seems you do have a knife culture on the rise in your country, and from what I understand, there have even been some stabbing deaths in the schoolyards. And I'm not sure how any government could ban people from getting knives and swords, when those things can be easily homemade from junkyard scrap metal lying around, made with tools like a common file or grinder. But bombs, no I haven't read or heard about any being used over there.

Quote

 

And I more than support the idea of tackling both issues at once, but how would one get this ball rolling? Appeals to local government representatives, appeals to the medical association or the press, what do you feel would be the best way to approach the issue? 

A community voice is head well by many, maybe just trying to spread awareness? 

 

Pretty much all of the above combined, but it first starts with a community voice with more and more people jumping in and raising awareness. Mainly because more numbers in one voice unity gets the attention of the government reps and MSM. Whether they will do anything about it, remains to be seen.

Edited May 21, 2018 by Gunn

[Myles]

I'm not sure the "gun proud" label is great.  I have guns, but I'm no more "proud" of them than I am my TV.

Getting back to the start of this thread - If your home is invaded by armed masked people, you have every right to shoot them.   Really no question. 

[Gunn]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

I'm not sure the "gun proud" label is great.  I have guns, but I'm no more "proud" of them than I am my TV.

It's not. It's just another psychological shaming attempt - as if we worship our guns like gods or a living thing and we hold them dear to our hearts. Do you feel the guns you own are the center and love of your life? No? Me neither, but I don't let labels said about gun owners\supporters bother me, because I don't identify with such labels.

Edited May 21, 2018 by Gunn

[TomasaurusREKT]

I've learned that debating gun control with a liberal, or anyone really far left always ends up the same. Present facts and statistics showing gun crime in general is actually decreasing, and anything really showing guns aren't the problem and they will ignore it. There is no sense arguing with them. 

Kind of like there's no sense in arguing with me being on the other side. You can pry my AR, and all my other guns from my dead hands.

[psyche101]

On 5/19/2018 at 12:09 PM, AnchorSteam said:

This is getting WAY too long and drawn out.

Agreed. Your not focusing on the thread title, your insisting on defending gun ownership. 

Quote

Mandatory turn-in, called a Buy Back..... you are falling back on semantic B>s. again.

Boring.

It was not confiscation, people were trusted. That's somthing that seems very foreign to you. The laws changed, and people got behind it in the wake of Port Arthur to make our country a better place and they did. 

Quote

And nothing on this Earth can convince you otherwise, even when the stats for Violent Crime have been shown to be constant.

No they haven't, l a link offered earlier in the thread to illustrate crime here actually stated crime is falling. You can find media to support either claim if you look. I live here, I walk the streets. I don't believe stats saying things are getting worse when I can see the opposite. We don't have school shootings. We don't have public massacres happening with regularity. Gun crime makes big news because its rare and shocks people. 

Quote

Question; would you rather be killed with one shot to the head, or beaten to death with bats wrapped with barbed wire over the course of many hours?

Neither. And I'm not concerned either are any risk to me. Its good to be able to say that and mean it because of the measures we took to make this a safer better country. 

Quote

More people are murdered in the USA with Hammers than with Rifles. It is called blunt-force trauma, and it happens every day.

Sorry, I don't believe that. Hammers would be a sub-section of bludgeoning objects. We don’t know how many of those are hammers but my guess the number is much smaller than the overall “bludgeoning” category. Also, the FBI crime statistics make it clear that handguns, which are of course a type of gun, are the most popular choice as an implement of murder in the US.

Quote

Oh... so you are counting on the rest of the world to save you from some home-grown Dictator, once that comes about.

Any whom we have supported in the past that have nuclear armaments if that becomes the case. Citizens with guns aren't going to make any difference whatsoever in that situation. Irrelevant. 

Quote

And you DO know that it can come no matter how your vote goes or how many peaceful protests you make.... as was the case in Czechoslovakia in 1968, Japan in the 1920s, Poland in.... well, the list is a LONG one.

That was some tome ago, what makes you think old mistakes would be repeated in the same way? 

Quote

So, there is an issue with that. 

You are Trying to guilt-trip America into following your lead in disarming because if some juvenile delinquent steals a gun and uses it then it is the fault of all Americans and we must be Collectively Punished.

Its not punishment  that's a selfish view. Its community spirit to make a safer environment. Australia obviously finds community of greater value than personal ideals. People who are willing to be responsible act accordingly, anyone who doesn't would appear to have personal motives. I don't think that the fact we do not have massacres like you do is the best value for that collective movement for the better and is more than worthwhile. 

Quote

(that IS what you have been harping on here, and anyone that flips back can see that)

Its only guilt if you feel guilty, if your motives are truly honorable I can't see why one would even consider guilt a factor. 

Quote

So, if we do, and we fall under the same sort of Dictatorship that has always banned private guns first, then what?

Less people will die, school kids will be safer. 

And dictatorships are not required. Only community spirit. 

Quote

Who is going to come liberate you, and then hand your country back to you with no strings attached, if not the United States of America? 

No nobody, that's who. 

A bunch of overly confident people with guns isn't going to be of any help either, should such an extremely unlikely event occur in this day and age. I don't see why our troops would let us down, they never have before. 

Quote

And I think that is what is really at the bottom of all this;anti-gun folks come in two varieties. 1) the kind that really think that guns are some kind of symbol who's removal will change Human Nature forever and ever, amen. 

It has done exactly that where control has been implemented. Even the strong opponents of the buyback have since relented and admitted it made our country a better place. 

Quote

2) the kind that want a global hegemony to rule over these terrible and dangerous monsters called Humans, and will help it along if they can get themselves a favorable position within the ruling party.

That just sounds like an extreme case of paranoia. 

Quote

Go ahead and call him an ignorant primitive, you know you want to... but that ain't the point.

No, never entered my head, that's your paranoia yet again at play. I'm pointing out that we live in differnt times and in a different world. 

Quote

Drones have nothing to do with the subject he was speaking of; human nature. 

Exactly, way beyond his comprehension at the time. And I feel modem weaponry makes the excuse of a rogue government obsolete. He could not have forseen today's America from those beginnings. 

Quote

And while folks like you may have a great deal of fun mocking Americans, especially out founding fathers, as being primitive barbarians, we did have the only revolution that didn't turn against itself. You may want to look into how that happened, and read some history that wasn't penned by a self-serving Marxist. 

No idea what you are ranting about now. We had gun culture here too before the buyback. I can't see how modern developments that require things like gun control for a safer community are in any way connected to those who are known as founding fathers. Nothing to do with each other. And I haven't mocked Americans, I have stated that the Americans who heavily support gun culture in its current form are the reason more deaths happen than should. 

Quote

One last thing;

If you really want to make the world better by guilt-shaming people on the internet, how many threads have you started about a truly evil and backwards culture; Islam? Sure, it would be more dangerous, to you personally, what with all the violence THEY are constantly engaging in, but if you really want to improve a culture that is lost and behind the times, why not start there?

They have a MAJOR issue with violence, oppression and a whole host of other things.... every day.

No, your being a bigot. Radical Islam has real problems associated with it, the majority of Muslims are no threat whatsoever. And yes, I speak out against radical Islam like any other rational person on these boards. 

Quote

Ever want to give being critical of this sort of thing a try? I'll be right there with you if you do.

Check the religious skeptic section then. I'm an atheist and have no love or support for religion as a whole. It's also an outdated system that really should be rationalised as the literary work it is. 

Quote

Indonesia: 3 Churches Attacked  by Family of Suicide Bombers   Other Recent "Misunderstandings  of Islam"

2018.05.17 (Nigeria)  Four displaced persons at a rival mosque are purged by a suicide bomber.    2018.05.17 (India)  Islamic 'separatists' torture and kill a 23-year-old man at an orchard.    2018.05.16 (Iraq)  Eight mourners at a funeral are relieved of their sadness by a Fedayeen suicide bomber.    2018.05.16 (Indonesia)  Three Islamists wit swords enter a police station and begin hacking officers, killing one.    2018.05.15 (Nigeria)  A Fedayeen suicide bomber takes four civilians with him.    2018.05.14 (Burkina Faso)  A local official is assissinated at his home by Jihadis.   https://www.****************.com

And none of them equal the death count at the latest US school shooting. More children died at that sad occurence than adults at those sad massacres listed above. And I don't see why other people killing people for the wrong reasons has any bearing on each other, the goal shouldn't be to compare the highest death count  but to reduce it. I never understand why US posters think that death by other causes somehow justifies gun death. Unnecessary death is unnecessary death.

[AnchorSteam]

14 hours ago, TomasaurusREKT said:

I've learned that debating gun control with a liberal, or anyone really far left always ends up the same. Present facts and statistics showing gun crime in general is actually decreasing, and anything really showing guns aren't the problem and they will ignore it. There is no sense arguing with them. 

Kind of like there's no sense in arguing with me being on the other side. You can pry my AR, and all my other guns from my dead hands.

I hear you, and you are probably right, but look at all the lies, m********ory lingo and insults in the above post. 

If I don't respond to all that vile garbage, will somebody think that there is any validity to it?

 

[psyche101]

On 5/22/2018 at 4:57 AM, Gunn said:

Well I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread until I brought it up, again, but they (gun proud posters) are aware, Psyche, although this thread started out about specifics in a case of home invasion and now we're both talking about mental health. And as a matter of fact, some gun proud posters have acknowledged it on our side of the gun debates in past threads, even though they may not have elaborated on it much for various reasons. Yet what gets me, is the other side of the gun debate talks about it even less or barely talks about it at all in past threads on the mental health issue. Meaning I've had more discussion about it with gun supporters and recently only you coming from your side of the gun debate, but that's how I know they (the "gun proud posters" as you call them) are aware of it. Yet for an example, there are two anti-gun proponents in the last pages of the Texas School Shooting thread who are blaming it all on the NRA and guns and not a word in their posts about about mental health. There was only one other UM member who mentioned mental health at least, along with guns and other problems in the first or second page of that thread. (BTW I'm not trying to get into a detailed debate in this thread on that recent specific case or thread, and I'm just using this as an example.)
I would think anti-gun proponents, specifically in my country, would jump on the mental health care crisis and raise hell about it, since it's related to overall health care issues in the U.S. But no, they concentrate more on a world wide political gun control propaganda and seem to try and keep it separated from the many health care problems we have in the U.S.

I can't imagine why anyone would simply ignore the issue. The goal is a safer community, and any valid steps taken to achieve that. Once illustrated it is without doubt a serious issue. Are you mainly talking of posters or politicians and campaigners as well? Why wouldn't all aspects be of valid concern? 

Quote

At least you're considering it and I appreciate that, BTW.

You have a valid point  I can't deny good logic. 

Quote

Yeah but it seems you do have a knife culture on the rise in your country, and from what I understand, there have even been some stabbing deaths in the schoolyards. And I'm not sure how any government could ban people from getting knives and swords, when those things can be easily homemade from junkyard scrap metal lying around, made with tools like a common file or grinder. But bombs, no I haven't read or heard about any being used over there.

I'm not aware of any knife culture  or people insisting in the right to carry a knife, but it is an issue that our governments are taking very seriously and considering preventative measures 

Ahh, I haven't heard of anything like that because my part of the country is in decline  it seems the higher instances of immigration is where the problem lies cultural clashes I'll bet. If like to see data on the backgrounds of the perpetrators, but like mental health in your country, mine won't ever admit to immigrant cultural clashes because it might stain the ideal of multiculturalism, which for the majority works. 

but fell in Queensland (from 35% to 26%). 

https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi417

Quote

Pretty much all of the above combined, but it first starts with a community voice with more and more people jumping in and raising awareness. Mainly because more numbers in one voice unity gets the attention of the government reps and MSM. Whether they will do anything about it, remains to be seen.

I am still not seeing how regulation would not assist though, the checks required to ascertain a gun license would surely make the mentally ill stand out like sore thumbs, people like Cruze, surely such measures would have saved his victims in Florida? Wouldn't one issue highlight the other here? 

[psyche101]

On 5/22/2018 at 9:40 AM, Gunn said:

It's not. It's just another psychological shaming attempt - as if we worship our guns like gods or a living thing and we hold them dear to our hearts. Do you feel the guns you own are the center and love of your life? No? Me neither, but I don't let labels said about gun owners\supporters bother me, because I don't identify with such labels.

One poster I have long respected here, Diechecker said the lives of the children taken by these maniacs are worthy sacrifices to maintain the freedom of being able to personally own a deadly weapon, I really feel that is irrational, cruel and well illustrates a great reverence toward gun culture and weapons in general. That such a mindset can even breed such thoughts I have to say seem appalling and very much deserves the title of gun proud. Its what gun culture is all about from what I read from the posters here defending the right to own a deadly weapon without accountability. 

[psyche101]

On 5/22/2018 at 8:23 AM, Myles said:

I'm not sure the "gun proud" label is great.  I have guns, but I'm no more "proud" of them than I am my TV.

But would you be happy to melt them down if there was a guarantee that it would end school shootings? 

On 5/22/2018 at 8:23 AM, Myles said:

Getting back to the start of this thread - If your home is invaded by armed masked people, you have every right to shoot them.   Really no question. 

No, that's the mindset gun culture breeds. These were not armed masked people  they were kids, one of which apparently had  weapon that we don't even know was used and their made all the noise in the world, yet these armed men took the opportunity to riddle an 18 year old with bullets. They would have well known who it was, which is why I personally feel they should be facing manslaughter charges. 

The point is, in any place on earth that has gun regulation, this would not have resulted in dead people and kids in hospital. Facebook fights going to life and death situations just shows that gun culture in the US is way out of control to a ridiculous extent. 

[psyche101]

47 minutes ago, AnchorSteam said:

I hear you, and you are probably right, but look at all the lies, m********ory lingo and insults in the above post. 

You are the only one in this discussions resorting to insults, and wildly off topic to defend gun culture, and really, that says it all right there. 

47 minutes ago, AnchorSteam said:

If I don't respond to all that vile garbage, will somebody think that there is any validity to it?

I'm or sure what impact you think you have  but I'm sure you have overestimated it. The only true valid point I have seen raised in this thread so far is regarding mental health. 

[TomasaurusREKT]

1 hour ago, AnchorSteam said:

I hear you, and you are probably right, but look at all the lies, m********ory lingo and insults in the above post. 

If I don't respond to all that vile garbage, will somebody think that there is any validity to it?

 

I've read a lot of his posts. The best way to explain how I feel too someone like that is simple. Although banning guns won't make anyone safer... FREEDOM > SAFETY 

[Myles]

52 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

But would you be happy to melt them down if there was a guarantee that it would end school shootings? 

No, that's the mindset gun culture breeds. These were not armed masked people  they were kids, one of which apparently had  weapon that we don't even know was used and their made all the noise in the world, yet these armed men took the opportunity to riddle an 18 year old with bullets. They would have well known who it was, which is why I personally feel they should be facing manslaughter charges. 

 

No, I am not melting down my TV.

These people were wearing masks, so they were masked.  At least one of them were armed, so it was a group of armed masked people who physically broke into the home of another.   Actions come with consequences and breaking into a home armed and masked has severe consequences.  

 

[psyche101]

21 minutes ago, Myles said:

No, I am not melting down my TV.

Not even if it genuinely saved lives? 

21 minutes ago, Myles said:

These people were wearing masks, so they were masked.  At least one of them were armed, so it was a group of armed masked people who physically broke into the home of another.   Actions come with consequences and breaking into a home armed and masked has severe consequences.  

Death is too far. That's a ridiculous consequence for a Facebook disagreement, it shows the complacency with weapons has gone too far. 

[AnchorSteam]

14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

 

Death is too far.

You are blaming the survivors for winning the fight.

14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

That's a ridiculous consequence for a Facebook disagreement,

No, it is a just consequence of Home Invasion.

14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

it shows the complacency with weapons has gone too far. 

The only people who are complacent about weapons are idiots. A world that moves at a pace set by idiots is called an Idocracy. 

I guess I will have to take on that monsterously huge post up there after all, but I will do it at my own pace.

[aztek]

not sure what is there to debate, home invasions are repelled with guns, thousands, if not tens of thousands a year, it just works, that is all there is to it.

[Alaric]

Women who employed no self defense methods against a rapist had rape completed against them 48% of the time and suffered injuries 31% of the time.

Women who employed a gun in self defense against a rapist had rape completed against them 0.09% of the time and were injured 0.0%.

Those using a knife or other weapon in self defense had rapes completed 0.0% and 9.9% of the time, respectively... but were injured 69% and 59% of the time in the process.

Statistics are pretty clear here, the best way for women to prevent rape and associated injuries is to use a firearm in self defense.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gary_Kleck/publication/249985228_Rape_and_Resistance/links/57164c1d08aedb90cac43482/Rape-and-Resistance.pdf?origin=publication_detail