A belief no one should be armed

barr151 · September 18, 2007, 07:57 PM

I have been following a local forum, in one thread the discussion has turned to firearms and citizens being armed. The post would have you believe that a citizen being armed is on the same level as a criminal being armed with violence being the sought out end by both party's. The board is run by the Green Party and needs a good dose of reality. I figured what better place to come to and ask for some post, to help. Here is the link and thanks:

http://www.ala-chua.com/SpeakOut/vie...r=asc&start=30

BerettaCougar · September 18, 2007, 08:12 PM

Sometimes not entertaining a monkey is the best way to avoid poo on your face.

longeyes · September 18, 2007, 09:05 PM

How many of them have been mugged?

Alnamvet · September 18, 2007, 09:11 PM

a lot of people over the years who are legally eligible to own and carry a firearm, but I don't believe they should ever be around a weapon...some of these folk I knew in the military, and unfortunately, they too are on my list of "I hope they never get a gun..." list.

ConfuseUs · September 21, 2007, 05:08 PM

Some people will never learn that gun owner != agent of criminality and disorder no matter how much you try to convince them through argument. On the other hand, they really have no counter points to debate you with, ergo the vicious ad hominem attacks.

example:

Quote:

Hey big boy, what the **** are you so afraid of? The only good thing that carrying a gun would result in, in your case, is if it accidentally went off when you slip it into the front of your pants, and blew what small nuts you must have to have to carry a gun to protect you!

That was all too typical of the anti-gun "case". The pinnacle of reasoned, polite discourse is to imply that someone is a deeply insecure coward and then hope for that person's accidental dismemberment. [/sarcasm]

He/she really made the case for a disarmed citizenry there, didn't he/she? I personally am so convinced that I will NOT be turning in my arms to be melted down.

Manedwolf · September 21, 2007, 05:23 PM

Ask them how a 90lb woman vs a 250lb rapist is "equality".

BillCA · September 21, 2007, 06:07 PM

ManedWolf has a good point about not feeding the monkeys.

It seems that a few of these people are either academia types who never stray far from campus or they are so heavily medicated they can't see reality.

Quote:

you feel that to avoid becoming a VICTIM you have to carry a GUN???
there are other means of self-defense. seems to me you need a medical evaluation, in your world the ONLY way to diffuse a situation is to use EXTREME VIOLENCE.

- So a neighbor's 5'1", 101 pound Vietnamese wife has to spend how many months or years training to defeat the 6'3", 240 pound rapist who just forced his way into her car at the grocery store?

- What special ninja techniques are available for my 85 year old mother with arthritis in her knees and ankles? Mind you she is most likely to be defending against an 18-25 year old male who is anywhere from 6" to a foot taller and 80 to 120 pounds heavier.

- What other means do you suggest for a 53 year old man who has had two spinal fusions, has limited mobility due to a knee injury? Keep in mind that his work as an insurance adjuster means he frequently enters "bad areas" of town while being required to dress professionally and drive a late model car. And he's been assaulted by both policy holders as well as common street thugs (hence the knee injury).

Note that when a person threatens you with a gun, knife, broken bottle or even fists, it is he that threatens extreme violence. If he is prepared to inflict violence to get what he desires, he cares not at all about the injuries you will receive, about the law or the police catching him. What do you do when what you can give him isn't enough? What do you do when he decides you'd simply look better with your throat cut?

Quote:

The people so adamant about carrying a gun in public are just as a reckless part of society as the criminals they seek. This need for power is the same as in violent criminals. You think you are different because of who you aim your aggression. Violence is violence, the simple fact you want to carry a gun reveals just how unbalanced you are. The propensity to violence is no different in cops, criminals or in wannabes. There is a place for people like you but it's not in a civilized society.

Reckless? Is it reckless to put on your seat belt? Or to carry fire insurance on your home? Or to put smoke detectors up? Why is it "reckless" to take measures to protect yourself against violent crime? Are people who put alarms on their homes paranoid? Is it paranoid or reckless to lock up your car when it's parked? Is carrying pepper spray reckless and violent?

"Violence is violence" is a true statement, however you have the right to defend your life against one who threatens violence against you. There are people who will violently assault you for their own reasons, however meaningless to you. There are people who will assault you as a group because you are wearing the wrong color or you are in their "turf". Some will attack you because you "looked at them" while others will attack you because you didn't look at them. The difference is, the violence I may offer is only in response to violence initiated by others.

CrazyIvan007 · September 21, 2007, 06:09 PM

Here is my response:

Quote:

Originally Posted by guest

you feel that to avoid becoming a VICTIM (sp) you have to carry a GUN???
there are other means of self-defense. seems to me you need a medical evaluation, in your world the ONLY way to diffuse a situation is to use EXTREME VIOLENCE.

In a case where you are threatened by EXTREME VIOLENCE, how do you plan on diffusing the situation other than by using EXTREME REACTION?

If guns aren't needed to defend oneself and others from evil on the streets, then you should be acting to remove guns from police & government agencies as well. If a person can avoid use of a gun in defense of themselves, their families and their good neighbors, why shouldn't that be extended to EVERYONE?

~CrazyIvan

barr151 · September 21, 2007, 08:04 PM

I have been fortunate(

) in that, I get to deal with this group for a while now. The majority of the group has criminal histories and consider themselves "fighters for freedom" as long as it goes hand-in-hand with their agenda. This group started off debating issues currently facing a small city (which there is nothing wrong with debating), then turned into smear campaign and progressed into being arrested for battery on LEO and other charges. But, they believe no person should be armed. Once the thread turned to guns, which falls inline with the "Green Party" which this group in aligned with. I decided to enlist help, which has really helped. This group is great at dismissing anyone that disagrees with them as being an idiot or a part of the corrupt establishment. I really appreciate the post that members have submitted so far. I have posted this same thread on several other forums also. Thank you.

ronc0011 · September 22, 2007, 12:29 AM

No one being armed works great as long as no one is armed. There is one really major flaw in this reasoning…

You can’t get everyone disarmed.

Here it is in a nutshell. Our country and in fact the whole world has untolted number of prisons. This is because people break the law, i.e. they don’t comply with the rules. This has been the case for as long as there have been people and for almost as long as there have been people we have had prisons. People disobey the rules. It’s in our genes, it’s who we are. Even people who obey the rules don’t obey all the rules all the time. Bottom line; people are going to do bad things to other people. It’s been that way for as long as there have been people. To think that you are going to just turn the entire history and existence of the human race around fly’s in the face of thousands of years experience to the contrary.

So this is how the whole argument breaks down for me. Either these people who think no one should be armed are just stunningly stupid, dumber than a box of rocks, or they have some other agenda and getting everyone disarmed is a necessary first step. In the first case they should probably be locked away for their own good and in the second case they should probably be locked away for our own good.

OK I’ll accept that it is reasonable for a 15 year old to think like this but anyone past the age of about 25 should be able to figure out the true shape of the world and the true nature of the human animal.

blume357 · September 22, 2007, 05:38 AM

I feel the same.... that no one should be armed. NO ONE.. person or government.... when someone can figure out how to do that, then the arguement works.

Martyn4802 · September 22, 2007, 08:16 AM

Utopia doesn't exist, and never will.
Look no further than England for your answer to this utopian dream. They took guns away from honest, law abiding citizens, and the crime rate went through the roof. Honest people trying to defend themselves against violent criminals, when the criminals are armed, and the honest citizens aren't, is insanity at its highest level. Look no furthere than Virginia Tech for your answer.
Liberals aren't capable of rational thinking. And, they live in this dream world where everything is perfect; no crime, no guns, everyone lives according to their dream. The only problem with that is, this is the real world, where criminals exist, and have existed for thousands of years.
While the dimwit Liberals dream of Utopia, I'll be armed and able to defend myself. Let them be victims, but not me.
And, oh by the way, Liberals, don't peddle your BS bigotry to me.

Martyn

sw_florida · September 22, 2007, 08:54 AM

doesn't work. Three scumbags, with or without iron bars, would do you in for good. Why should we mind people who don't want guns for protection? Darwin's theory works fine with taking care of those. Bye bye, nuts...

DesertDawg · September 22, 2007, 09:24 AM

Guns have been "demonized" for several decades. Quite often, the anti-gun folks use nothing more than deductive reasoning for their angst: i.e., "Guns can kill, therefore they should be abolished".

Okay, it's true that guns can and DO kill! But, if you were to use that same deductive reasoning, medical doctors are responsible for MORE deaths per year than guns, so all M.D.'s should also be abolished!

There are MORE drowning deaths per year than gun-related deaths, so abolish swimming pools, rivers, lakes, oceans and even bath tubs! (P.S.: Vomiting has also caused "drownings", so don't ever puke!)

Manedwolf · September 22, 2007, 10:04 AM

A bad guy can always be armed.

A gun is the equalizer.

homefires · September 22, 2007, 02:03 PM

They just need to get over it! Every sence man figured out how to throw a rock, the cat was out of the bag. That would be like telling people you don't really need a knife, a fork, or say a sharp stick!

Maxb49 · September 22, 2007, 10:57 PM

Many people who live or work in high crime neighborhoods choose to exercise their right to defend themselves by carrying pistols, revolvers, shotguns, or rifles on their person or in their vehicles. Others do not feel comfortable being armed fearing that a weapon may be more of a liability in their hands than an asset. Now is the time to embolden the point that exercising the right to bear arms is not enough to ensure a safe and secure society. Everyone who purchases a gun for safety needs to be educated with the appropriate operation of their firearms. It is also important for a firearm owner to practice with their weapon often to keep their skills sharpened.

MosinM38 · September 22, 2007, 11:31 PM

Yeah... Your enver gonna convince them....

I just ignore them for the most part...

BUT... I have gotten a couple decidedly anti-gunners to go out and shoot. 1 actually BOUGHT a gun

and the other 2 are at least grudgingly admitting that guns arent as bad as they thought.

C Philip · September 23, 2007, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Hey big boy, what the **** are you so afraid of? The only good thing that carrying a gun would result in, in your case, is if it accidentally went off when you slip it into the front of your pants, and blew what small nuts you must have to have to carry a gun to protect you!

I like that one.

Maxb49 · September 23, 2007, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Yeah... Your enver gonna convince them....

I just ignore them for the most part...

In the wrong hands - not just a criminal but a person unfamiliar with the safe handling and operation of a firearm - a gun is a terribly destructive appliance. Some may produce a fireball at the end of a barrel, all of them make loud noises, they shoot projectiles that can maim. . .when you get right down to it, these notions are what drive the public fear of guns. None of them are unjustified. I have had similar experiences as you in finding that many of the anti-gun crowd can be won over with patience, explanation, and giving them some first hand experience with a gun. Remember, people's biggest fear is that the gun will wind up in the wrong hands and someone will venture over to an elementary school, shopping mall, college campus, government building, airplane, etc., and open fire on innocent people. Once again, not an unjustified notion. This is the point where politicians step in to legislate needless firearm regulation that endangers our liberty and security. Gun rights advocates need to set the tone of the debate, a goal we have in large part failed to accomplish. We need to begin from the point of recognizing the public's very real fears of criminal violence and lawlessness, explaining to them how guns in responsible hands do more to prevent needless killing and assault than gun restrictions ever could. Then bring up the appropriate statistics relating to crime in a nation with strict gun control and a nation without. Then talk about the language of the Second Amendment. That's how we can win this issue. Remember, no one really objects to the right to self defense, nor do they object to shooting sports. (Some object to hunting, but that is a different issue for a different group of people to address.)

**Bud Helms** · September 23, 2007, 11:09 AM

Quote:

ManedWolf has a good point about not feeding the monkeys.

That would be BerettaCougar.

deanf · September 23, 2007, 11:25 AM

What purpose is served by cutting and pasting arguments from one forum into another? If people want to read the thread, they can just go to that board.

I think this is an off-topic thread. It really has nothing to do with furthering the goals of TFL, and I don't find it to be gun related.

PistolWhipped1911 · September 24, 2007, 08:35 AM

i thought it was funny how one guy felt in necessary to tell everyone his life story

CrazyIvan007 · September 24, 2007, 11:59 AM

Quote:

What purpose is served by cutting and pasting arguments from one forum into another? If people want to read the thread, they can just go to that board.

I think this is an off-topic thread. It really has nothing to do with furthering the goals of TFL, and I don't find it to be gun related.

It is gun related. We are on topic. We are discussing the thoughts of anti-gunners. It helps readers of TFL to increase their knowledge about this discussion. You don't like what you see, don't read it.

Sigma 40 Blaster · September 24, 2007, 12:26 PM

In a perfect world guns wouldn't be necessary, there is nothing perfect in this world and generally speaking there are good guys and bad guys. Good guys generally follow the rules, bad guys generally don't. It's that plain and simple in my eyes, I actually wrote an essay that ended with that argument sometime in junior high school after citing several mind numbing facts about how gun control was actually counter productive.

I will say that the majority of CHL holder I know do not have the training or knowledge of the law that I would expect "us" to have. I'm in TX, the CCW test is breezy, marksmanship portion VERY hard to fail. I would have liked the training to be a bit more complete and some form of tactical shooting discussed, I've taken one basic course and got a lot of good advice from some action pistol matches and still realize I need a lot more training...a lot of "us" don't acknowledge that need and may well be more dangerous with their weapon than not having one at all. Just my opinion...

September 18, 2007, 07:57 PM	#1
barr151 Junior Member Join Date: June 13, 2007 Location: Fl Posts: 7	A belief no one should be armed I have been following a local forum, in one thread the discussion has turned to firearms and citizens being armed. The post would have you believe that a citizen being armed is on the same level as a criminal being armed with violence being the sought out end by both party's. The board is run by the Green Party and needs a good dose of reality. I figured what better place to come to and ask for some post, to help. Here is the link and thanks: http://www.ala-chua.com/SpeakOut/vie...r=asc&start=30

September 18, 2007, 09:11 PM	#4
Alnamvet Senior Member Join Date: January 2, 2002 Location: VA Posts: 366	I have been around a lot of people over the years who are legally eligible to own and carry a firearm, but I don't believe they should ever be around a weapon...some of these folk I knew in the military, and unfortunately, they too are on my list of "I hope they never get a gun..." list.

September 22, 2007, 05:38 AM	#11
blume357 Senior Member Join Date: August 2, 2005 Location: Greenville, SC Posts: 3,943	dead on ronc0011, I feel the same.... that no one should be armed. NO ONE.. person or government.... when someone can figure out how to do that, then the arguement works.

September 22, 2007, 08:54 AM	#13
sw_florida Junior member Join Date: April 28, 2007 Location: In the shadow Posts: 526	The idea that no one should be armed doesn't work. Three scumbags, with or without iron bars, would do you in for good. Why should we mind people who don't want guns for protection? Darwin's theory works fine with taking care of those. Bye bye, nuts...

September 18, 2007, 08:12 PM	#2
BerettaCougar Senior Member Join Date: January 7, 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 1,224	Sometimes not entertaining a monkey is the best way to avoid poo on your face.

September 18, 2007, 09:05 PM	#3
longeyes Senior Member Join Date: September 9, 2000 Location: True West Posts: 1,350	How many of them have been mugged?

September 21, 2007, 05:23 PM	#6
Manedwolf Junior member Join Date: May 28, 2007 Posts: 3,266	Ask them how a 90lb woman vs a 250lb rapist is "equality".

September 21, 2007, 08:04 PM	#9
barr151 Junior Member Join Date: June 13, 2007 Location: Fl Posts: 7	I have been fortunate( ) in that, I get to deal with this group for a while now. The majority of the group has criminal histories and consider themselves "fighters for freedom" as long as it goes hand-in-hand with their agenda. This group started off debating issues currently facing a small city (which there is nothing wrong with debating), then turned into smear campaign and progressed into being arrested for battery on LEO and other charges. But, they believe no person should be armed. Once the thread turned to guns, which falls inline with the "Green Party" which this group in aligned with. I decided to enlist help, which has really helped. This group is great at dismissing anyone that disagrees with them as being an idiot or a part of the corrupt establishment. I really appreciate the post that members have submitted so far. I have posted this same thread on several other forums also. Thank you.

September 22, 2007, 12:29 AM	#10
ronc0011 Senior Member Join Date: November 1, 2006 Posts: 543	No one being armed works great as long as no one is armed. There is one really major flaw in this reasoning… You can’t get everyone disarmed. Here it is in a nutshell. Our country and in fact the whole world has untolted number of prisons. This is because people break the law, i.e. they don’t comply with the rules. This has been the case for as long as there have been people and for almost as long as there have been people we have had prisons. People disobey the rules. It’s in our genes, it’s who we are. Even people who obey the rules don’t obey all the rules all the time. Bottom line; people are going to do bad things to other people. It’s been that way for as long as there have been people. To think that you are going to just turn the entire history and existence of the human race around fly’s in the face of thousands of years experience to the contrary. So this is how the whole argument breaks down for me. Either these people who think no one should be armed are just stunningly stupid, dumber than a box of rocks, or they have some other agenda and getting everyone disarmed is a necessary first step. In the first case they should probably be locked away for their own good and in the second case they should probably be locked away for our own good. OK I’ll accept that it is reasonable for a 15 year old to think like this but anyone past the age of about 25 should be able to figure out the true shape of the world and the true nature of the human animal.

September 22, 2007, 08:16 AM	#12
Martyn4802 Senior Member Join Date: June 12, 2007 Location: Grayling, Michigan Posts: 737	Utopia doesn't exist, and never will. Look no further than England for your answer to this utopian dream. They took guns away from honest, law abiding citizens, and the crime rate went through the roof. Honest people trying to defend themselves against violent criminals, when the criminals are armed, and the honest citizens aren't, is insanity at its highest level. Look no furthere than Virginia Tech for your answer. Liberals aren't capable of rational thinking. And, they live in this dream world where everything is perfect; no crime, no guns, everyone lives according to their dream. The only problem with that is, this is the real world, where criminals exist, and have existed for thousands of years. While the dimwit Liberals dream of Utopia, I'll be armed and able to defend myself. Let them be victims, but not me. And, oh by the way, Liberals, don't peddle your BS bigotry to me. Martyn

September 22, 2007, 09:24 AM	#14
DesertDawg Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2007 Location: So Cal Posts: 158	Guns have been "demonized" for several decades. Quite often, the anti-gun folks use nothing more than deductive reasoning for their angst: i.e., "Guns can kill, therefore they should be abolished". Okay, it's true that guns can and DO kill! But, if you were to use that same deductive reasoning, medical doctors are responsible for MORE deaths per year than guns, so all M.D.'s should also be abolished! There are MORE drowning deaths per year than gun-related deaths, so abolish swimming pools, rivers, lakes, oceans and even bath tubs! (P.S.: Vomiting has also caused "drownings", so don't ever puke!)

September 22, 2007, 10:04 AM	#15
Manedwolf Junior member Join Date: May 28, 2007 Posts: 3,266	A bad guy can always be armed. A gun is the equalizer.

September 22, 2007, 02:03 PM	#16
homefires Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2007 Location: Deming New Mexico Posts: 1,495	They just need to get over it! Every sence man figured out how to throw a rock, the cat was out of the bag. That would be like telling people you don't really need a knife, a fork, or say a sharp stick!

September 22, 2007, 10:57 PM	#17
Maxb49 Senior Member Join Date: March 8, 2007 Location: Jamestown, New York Posts: 256	Many people who live or work in high crime neighborhoods choose to exercise their right to defend themselves by carrying pistols, revolvers, shotguns, or rifles on their person or in their vehicles. Others do not feel comfortable being armed fearing that a weapon may be more of a liability in their hands than an asset. Now is the time to embolden the point that exercising the right to bear arms is not enough to ensure a safe and secure society. Everyone who purchases a gun for safety needs to be educated with the appropriate operation of their firearms. It is also important for a firearm owner to practice with their weapon often to keep their skills sharpened.

September 22, 2007, 11:31 PM	#18
MosinM38 Senior Member Join Date: August 23, 2007 Posts: 1,030	Yeah... Your enver gonna convince them.... I just ignore them for the most part... BUT... I have gotten a couple decidedly anti-gunners to go out and shoot. 1 actually BOUGHT a gun and the other 2 are at least grudgingly admitting that guns arent as bad as they thought.

September 23, 2007, 11:25 AM	#22
deanf Senior Member Join Date: June 6, 1999 Location: N47º 12’ x W122º 10' Posts: 1,599	What purpose is served by cutting and pasting arguments from one forum into another? If people want to read the thread, they can just go to that board. I think this is an off-topic thread. It really has nothing to do with furthering the goals of TFL, and I don't find it to be gun related.

September 24, 2007, 08:35 AM	#23
PistolWhipped1911 Member Join Date: March 25, 2007 Location: Virginia Beach Posts: 21	i thought it was funny how one guy felt in necessary to tell everyone his life story

September 24, 2007, 12:26 PM	#25
Sigma 40 Blaster Senior Member Join Date: July 2, 2007 Location: East Texas Posts: 997	In a perfect world guns wouldn't be necessary, there is nothing perfect in this world and generally speaking there are good guys and bad guys. Good guys generally follow the rules, bad guys generally don't. It's that plain and simple in my eyes, I actually wrote an essay that ended with that argument sometime in junior high school after citing several mind numbing facts about how gun control was actually counter productive. I will say that the majority of CHL holder I know do not have the training or knowledge of the law that I would expect "us" to have. I'm in TX, the CCW test is breezy, marksmanship portion VERY hard to fail. I would have liked the training to be a bit more complete and some form of tactical shooting discussed, I've taken one basic course and got a lot of good advice from some action pistol matches and still realize I need a lot more training...a lot of "us" don't acknowledge that need and may well be more dangerous with their weapon than not having one at all. Just my opinion...