Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

A USA gun thread. That won't be controversial, will it?

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

A USA gun thread. That won't be controversial, will it?

Old 6th Nov 2014, 09:29
  #1121 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
SFFP, you have had that 30,000 broken down for you several times, plus I challenged you on your claim of the number that were accidental deaths, which you never responded to.

If, as is always the case in these threads we ask for evidence of the regular 'putting down of the bad guy by the good guy' stories then inevitably there nowt but several tumbleweed moments.
This suggest that there are never stories of good guys putting down bad guys. Examples were given which demonstrates your were wrong, and so you change your stance to talking about numbers again.

LSM, at least with SFFP I can understand what he is saying. What EXACTLY is your question about these shootings? That they don't prove the outcome was due to the householder having a gun? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it proves....
Mr Chips is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 09:32
  #1122 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
My question is EXACTLY what is the desired outcome of owning a gun? Same as my last post.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 10:25
  #1123 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
No Chips you are right, those 4 incidents certainly do highlight the context of my post
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 11:24
  #1124 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 664
"Nowt but crickets" (or some such phrasing)

Four examples given to simply illustrate the "nowt" was a lie.

Not enough it is now claimed. Hence, the moving goal posts.

You distinctly wrote "nowt" which I believe means none/zero/nada. You were easily shown to be wrong and the writer of a lie. Now those provided examples "prove your point."

Some estimates - FBI - are 2.5 million times per year of a gun used for self-defense. Exact numbers are near impossible to determine because it is believed that many instances aren't reported at all.

Meanwhile, you've done absolutely nothing to convince anyone of your position and the number of guns, particularly handguns, hasn't lessened by even 1 due to you.

Nothing accomplished. Well done.
brickhistory is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 11:36
  #1125 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Right, I'm trying really really hard to understand LSM, but I think I have got it...

What is the desired outcome of owning a gun?

Well, as we appear to be referring to the cases highlighted where gun-owners took the loaded gun that they keep ready and used it to protect themselves from home invaders, I would guess that the desired outcome might have been to protect themselves from home invaders.

Now, I'm only guessing in these cases of homeowners who had a loaded gun ready and used it against home invaders, but I'm willing to bet that the desired outcome of of gun-owners who kept a loaded gun and used it to protect themselves against home invaders was to protect themselves against home invaders.

Any questions on that?
Mr Chips is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 11:42
  #1126 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by brickhistory View Post
Nothing accomplished. Well done.

Absolutely, those 4 incidents alone show just how I am light years away from the actuality of it all
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 11:45
  #1127 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
I should imagine the desired outcome is to deter an intruder or to be able to see him off. If such intruders are regularly armed (are they? I suspect so, but am far from sure) then I would agree that a gun is wise.
I wonder if intruders come armed because they want to be able to see armed homeowners off. I also wonder if the laws on shooting intruders were more restrictive then perhaps those intruders would come unarmed fairly safe in the knowledge that they wouldn't get shot themselves, thereby reducing the likely worst-case scenario for the intruder from "dead" to "ran away". I wonder if the laws as they are lead to an arms race as much as anything else.
PTT is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 12:24
  #1128 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Detroit got a new police chief who got quite a bit of publicity by advocating Detroiters arm themselves not long ago.

Since then there have been frequent news reports of self-defense killings of intruders. Here's one with an interesting video news clip from the local media:

Detroit police: 1 dead after shootout between homeowner, home invaders | News - Home
BenThere is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 14:46
  #1129 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by PTT View Post
I should imagine the desired outcome is to deter an intruder or to be able to see him off. If such intruders are regularly armed (are they? I suspect so, but am far from sure) then I would agree that a gun is wise.
I wonder if intruders come armed because they want to be able to see armed homeowners off. I also wonder if the laws on shooting intruders were more restrictive then perhaps those intruders would come unarmed fairly safe in the knowledge that they wouldn't get shot themselves, thereby reducing the likely worst-case scenario for the intruder from "dead" to "ran away". I wonder if the laws as they are lead to an arms race as much as anything else.
Maybe the burglar should just send the homeowner an email with a list of desired items and the homeowner can leave those on the porch, thus eliminating costly repair to the broken door. Also good from H&S point of view for the burglar. Win/win.

What world do you live in PTT?
 
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:12
  #1130 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by Dushan View Post
What world do you live in PTT?
One where I don't need a gun in order to feel safe in my own home.

The point you obviously missed was that if homeowners are allowed to shoot intruders then intruders, who are already breaking the law, will come suitably prepared. If law abiding citizens are not allowed to shoot intruders then the intruders have no need for a gun. Who wants to turn a robbery into a murder if they have the choice?
PTT is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:15
  #1131 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Originally Posted by Mr Chips View Post
Any questions on that?
Yes.

If the desired outcome is for the homeowner to protect himself and his property can you prove your assertions that the desired outcome is achieved solely because the homeowner is armed?

Are you also saying that it isn't possible to achieve the desired outcome without being armed?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:19
  #1132 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
Who wants to turn a robbery into a murder if they have the choice?
Cruel and vicious psychopaths. And you have no guarantee that the perp on your doorstep, should that unhappy event occur, cares about your physical comfort or survival.

If you can't or won't defend yourself, you're letting probabilities have their way with you. If you're happy with that, I'm happy to have you make that determination. Doesn't work for me, though.
BenThere is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:28
  #1133 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 76
Posts: 452
Brick history - your country must be in a hell of a mess if you have 2.5 million occasions per year that required someone to defend themselves with a firearm.
bcgallacher is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:33
  #1134 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Age: 56
Posts: 218
Criminals will go where the pickings are easy. Notice the spate of crimes when Connecticut gun owners were made public last year. Also note the general outcry that occurs when people put up signs in their yards supporting their neighbors right not to be armed.
421dog is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:34
  #1135 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Scotland
Age: 76
Posts: 452
Ben there in the UK we are basically unarmed,would you like to make a guess as to why so few of us are killed by intruders or that we have almost zero incidents of defending ourselves with a firearm. Brick history has informed us that on 2.5 million occasions in the USA in one year citizens defended themselves with a firearm.
bcgallacher is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:39
  #1136 (permalink)  
Hardly Never Not Unwilling
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 481
We are in a helluva mess, bcgallacher. We've been telling you that for years.

The fact is, today, that you need to arm your household to do the best you can protect yourself from a significant threat. If you do, you are doing something to mitigate the threat. If you don't, you're playing the odds.

The odds may be in your favor, but the consequences of losing that lottery can be severe, painful, devastating, and terminal.
BenThere is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:44
  #1137 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,656
There is no "win" and no "lose" in this argument.

No-one is influencing anyone.

Should we not just close this thread?

Please?
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:50
  #1138 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Patterson, NY
Age: 62
Posts: 436
AO:

this thread could be closed ,and should be closed, but another one will pop up in its place. Just like the weeds in your garden.
rgbrock1 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:53
  #1139 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,656
rgb
I reckon that if I lived where the baddies had guns, I would get one for self defence.
Not too many of the baddies around here have guns, so I don't need one.

Not many folk on this thread appear to understand differences in context and culture.

As no-one has influenced anyone on this thread, typing about it is a waste of time.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2014, 16:54
  #1140 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by BenThere View Post
Cruel and vicious psychopaths.
You have them at that high a rate over there that you think most people would prefer murder over robbery? I suspect not, but if it is the case then you guys have a major mental health issue over there (not you personally!).
If you can't or won't defend yourself, you're letting probabilities have their way with you.
I can and I will defend myself, I just don't need a gun to do so. Like I said, if I lived in the US where more people have guns then I'd probably want one myself. I'm simply questioning whether or not the right you guys have to kill an intruder exacerbates the issue by forcing them to come armed, thereby escalating the situation.
PTT is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.