Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #451  
Old 03-13-2019, 03:39 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Wait for the fire dept and a ladder,
When the flames are seconds away, the fire department is minutes away.
Quote:
or break a window and jump out, which can be done from one room.
But, you wouldn't do that if there was someone invading your home?
Quote:
Still, that doesnt answer the Op's question.
Yeah, it does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Who would that be?
Any of the posters that have a plan of escaping, including the ones scoffed at for having 2 methods of egress.
Quote:
Note that I said that the best thing is a Plan and a good alarm system, then a plan and a gun (if you are trained and it is safely secured if you have kids) and then just a plan. But I dont see the anti-gunners here having any of those things.
Why do you make that presumption, when it is counterfactual to posts in this very thread? Many posters have said what they would do. The fact that you don't like their answers doesn't mean that they didn't answer. They have pointed out that they have alarms and or dogs, and they have a plan fow what they would do if this incredibly unlikely even is to come to pass. This comment that you make has no factual basis, and is invalidated by reality.

Besides, the OP asks what you would do *when* your home is being invaded, and if it is too late to call your congressman to try to lessen the chances that that home invader has a gun, then it is also too late to follow your advice of getting and alarm system and making a plan.

Do you pro-arming-of-criminals have a plan for when you are assaulted by a dozen gang members with assault rifles? I haven't seen any.

Last edited by k9bfriender; 03-13-2019 at 03:39 PM.
  #452  
Old 03-13-2019, 03:42 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,497
It's odd, I just had an incident two nights ago where someone was trying to get into my house. I was sitting up at the dining room table with my laptop at like 2am, my GF was asleep in the bedroom. Suddenly I heard the doorknob turn and the sound of someone clearly trying to open the front door.

I took the following actions:

1. Raced over to the front door and made sure that both locks were locked.

2. Raced over to the back door and made sure that both locks were locked.

3. Went to my office and unlocked my gun safe. Loaded 5 rounds into my Smith & Wesson .357 (I do not keep any guns loaded.)

4. Went back to the front door, placed the loaded revolver on the coffee table, and looked through the peephole. There was a woman there. She was still trying to turn the doorknob and open the door. I have to assume she was intoxicated in some way.

5. Told her to get away from my door and get off the porch.

6. She continued trying to open the door and speaking incoherently. I informed her that I had the weapon and instructed her again to get away from my house.

7. I called 911 and reported the situation to the police. They said someone would come by and try to find the woman if she wasn't still at the door.

8. Went back to the door and she was gone. I stayed in the living room with the revolver (still on the coffee table) for another 30 minutes or so, before putting it away and going to bed.

I have no idea what her deal was. Maybe she was just fucked up and went to the wrong house. But maybe she was trying to distract me at the front door so that someone could break through the back door and try to rob me. I have no idea. What I do know is that the whole thing took place inside of about two minutes. I was relieved as hell that I had that gun, because if there HAD been malicious intent and someone HAD tried to break in to rob me, I would have had to wait at least 5 minutes for the police to get there, and just the two minutes that I spent dealing with the situation felt like 30 minutes.

It's also worth mentioning that I have a dog. While the dog normally does bark if he sees someone at the window or hears someone knocking, he was in the bedroom and while he must have heard the woman at the door messing with the handle and knocking, for whatever reason he did not get up and he did not bark. A dog cannot be relied on in this situation. It's an animal with its own mind and you cannot know how it would react. You can only know how YOU will react.

Does this mean that everyone should own a gun, that guns are the only thing that can ever keep anyone safe, and that all gun control arguments are nullified? No. It's just one person's experience, but I will say that after this experience I am more convinced of a gun being useful for home defense.

"When seconds count, the cops are minutes away" is a well-worn catchphrase at this point, but it's still true.
  #453  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:00 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,418
In what way would not having a weapon available change what happened?
  #454  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:03 PM
gvntofly is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Question: Lets say your at home and someone is outside trying to break down your door and get in to either rob or hurt you. Yes, you can and should dial 911 (assuming your phone is working) but you need protection NOW.

What would you do since you dont own a firearm?
In the state I live in itís legal to shoot someone if you feel threatened by them. It doesnít matter who you are or where you are (in your home, on a street in front of Dairy Queen) you have the right and it is legal to shoot anyone if you feel threatened.

I also live in a state where I know 911 means a wait too long to help if the intruder is knocking down my door.

So, for me, this question gets elevated to something much higher than laws and physical barriers. It comes down to this: would I rather kill or be killed? In a whole world view type of way. I would rather be killed. Iím a big believer in karma.

Having this belief allows me many things, such as not having to worry about it if someone comes to knock down my door and kill me, Iíve already done the Risk/Benefit Analysis and Iím on the side of not killing.

This does NOT mean I would go passive if this ever did happen to me. I would fight, but not with a gun, there are no take-backs with guns.
  #455  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:21 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
It's odd, I just had an incident two nights ago where someone was trying to get into my house. I was sitting up at the dining room table with my laptop at like 2am, my GF was asleep in the bedroom. Suddenly I heard the doorknob turn and the sound of someone clearly trying to open the front door.
What would you have done if you were asleep, as most would be, that time of night?
Quote:
I took the following actions:

1. Raced over to the front door and made sure that both locks were locked.

2. Raced over to the back door and made sure that both locks were locked.

3. Went to my office and unlocked my gun safe. Loaded 5 rounds into my Smith & Wesson .357 (I do not keep any guns loaded.)

4. Went back to the front door, placed the loaded revolver on the coffee table, and looked through the peephole. There was a woman there. She was still trying to turn the doorknob and open the door. I have to assume she was intoxicated in some way.

5. Told her to get away from my door and get off the porch.

6. She continued trying to open the door and speaking incoherently. I informed her that I had the weapon and instructed her again to get away from my house.

7. I called 911 and reported the situation to the police. They said someone would come by and try to find the woman if she wasn't still at the door.

8. Went back to the door and she was gone. I stayed in the living room with the revolver (still on the coffee table) for another 30 minutes or so, before putting it away and going to bed.

I have no idea what her deal was. Maybe she was just fucked up and went to the wrong house. But maybe she was trying to distract me at the front door so that someone could break through the back door and try to rob me.
It being 2AM, if they were looking to break in, it wouldn't be distracting you, it would be assuming that you were asleep.
Quote:
I have no idea. What I do know is that the whole thing took place inside of about two minutes. I was relieved as hell that I had that gun, because if there HAD been malicious intent and someone HAD tried to break in to rob me, I would have had to wait at least 5 minutes for the police to get there, and just the two minutes that I spent dealing with the situation felt like 30 minutes.
Would you have considered this to be a DGU?
Quote:
It's also worth mentioning that I have a dog. While the dog normally does bark if he sees someone at the window or hears someone knocking, he was in the bedroom and while he must have heard the woman at the door messing with the handle and knocking, for whatever reason he did not get up and he did not bark. A dog cannot be relied on in this situation. It's an animal with its own mind and you cannot know how it would react. You can only know how YOU will react.
Or your dog could have been thinking, "I'm not getting up to deal with this drunk woman."

Unless I tell my dog that someone is coming over, she will bark her head off if anyone comes to the door.
Quote:
Does this mean that everyone should own a gun, that guns are the only thing that can ever keep anyone safe, and that all gun control arguments are nullified? No. It's just one person's experience, but I will say that after this experience I am more convinced of a gun being useful for home defense.
What role did your gun play in repelling the intruders?
Quote:
"When seconds count, the cops are minutes away" is a well-worn catchphrase at this point, but it's still true.
Is that something that would make gun owners feel more comfortable? Having more police around?
  #456  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:01 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
....

Why do you make that presumption, when it is counterfactual to posts in this very thread? Many posters have said what they would do. The fact that you don't like their answers doesn't mean that they didn't answer. They have pointed out that they have alarms and or dogs, and they have a plan fow what they would do if this incredibly unlikely even is to come to pass. This comment that you make has no factual basis, and is invalidated by reality....
Who has said they have alarms? or dogs? We have had three answers; 1. run out the back door (no plan for what if the wife and kids are upstairs or if they are coming in both ways) 2. Petition congress for stronger gun laws and 3. Do nothing and die.

Show me the plans, eh?
  #457  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:02 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
...

Do you pro-arming-of-criminals have a plan for when you are assaulted by a dozen gang members with assault rifles? .
No one is "pro-arming-of-criminals" and you know that.
  #458  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:33 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Who has said they have alarms? or dogs? We have had three answers; 1. run out the back door (no plan for what if the wife and kids are upstairs or if they are coming in both ways) 2. Petition congress for stronger gun laws and 3. Do nothing and die.

Show me the plans, eh?
The hypothetical in the OP was one dude banging on the door. Shockingly, that's what many of the people answering the OP responded to.

If you're going to change the hypothetical, I'll just change it to the person sniping you through your window while you sleep. With a rocket launcher.

What's your plan?

Last edited by begbert2; 03-13-2019 at 05:34 PM.
  #459  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:44 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Who has said they have alarms? or dogs? We have had three answers; 1. run out the back door (no plan for what if the wife and kids are upstairs or if they are coming in both ways) 2. Petition congress for stronger gun laws and 3. Do nothing and die.

Show me the plans, eh?
Posts 8, 17, 44, 55, 65, 85, 145, 179, and 349, just as a real quick skim, I'm sure there are more.

Just because you didn't bother to read it doesn't mean that people didn't bother to post it.

What is your plan for when a dozen heavily armed gang members break into your house? Do you have one? Or will you just do nothing and die? Or even worse, accede to their demands and then spend the rest of your life trying to convince yourself that you did the right thing.

Quote:
No one is "pro-arming-of-criminals" and you know that.
I really don't. Can you tell me anything that you have ever advocated for that would reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals? All I see from your crowd is an insistence on making it easier and less accountable for a criminal to possess a firearm, along with making rather flimsy excuses for irresponsible gun owners.

The very policies that you advocate for make it easier for criminals to get their hands on guns, while not making it any easier for law abiding people to defend themselves. If you are going to call anyone that advocates for any gun control policies as "anti-gun", then those who advocate for loosening gun control are "pro-arming-of-criminals." Sorry, but that is the obvious and inevitable result of the policies that you favor. Don't like being known for being for the arming of criminals? Then stop being for arming criminals.
  #460  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:05 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
I really don't. Can you tell me anything that you have ever advocated for that would reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals? All I see from your crowd is an insistence on making it easier and less accountable for a criminal to possess a firearm, along with making rather flimsy excuses for irresponsible gun owners.

The very policies that you advocate for make it easier for criminals to get their hands on guns, while not making it any easier for law abiding people to defend themselves. If you are going to call anyone that advocates for any gun control policies as "anti-gun", then those who advocate for loosening gun control are "pro-arming-of-criminals." Sorry, but that is the obvious and inevitable result of the policies that you favor. Don't like being known for being for the arming of criminals? Then stop being for arming criminals.
I perceive the typical pro-gun person as being 'neutral-arming-of-ciminals', which is not the same as 'pro'. Which is to say that they only care about being guns themselves, and don't give a flying crap if the steps they take to ensure they're properly armed without jumping through hoops or undergoing oversight also allow every criminal on the planet to arm themselves. As has been amply demonstrated in this thread, they're of the opinion that because they're armed it doesn't matter what anybody else has - they're invulnerable because they're armed. So the fact that they've thrown open the door for criminals to get a guns is no skin off their nose.

However, even with all that being true, they don't prefer that criminals have guns. They just think it doesn't matter if they have them, because, being armed themselves, they're safe.
  #461  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:56 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
What would you have done if you were asleep, as most would be, that time of night?

It being 2AM, if they were looking to break in, it wouldn't be distracting you, it would be assuming that you were asleep.
I don't care about any of these hypotheticals if someone is trying to open my door here, in this reality we live in, all I know or care about is "there's someone trying to enter my house who should not be doing so."

Quote:
What role did your gun play in repelling the intruders?
It did not play any role in this scenario, other than my saying that I had it may have served as a motivation for her getting away from my door, which is the only thing I was trying to do at that time. "Repelling the intruders" doesn't really apply to what happened, in hindsight, but you only get hindsight after an event takes place, which anyone surely knows.

What I posted is only relevant to the thread insomuch as it got me thinking about how the situation could have gone down if it was in fact someone trying to break into the house and potentially hurt me. I'm glad what happened did not go any further than it did...I don't like to think about having to hurt anyone or get hurt myself, it's something I hope does not happen, but I feel that having a weapon gives me better odds if it ever does.

Even so, it would be a measure of last resort.

Quote:
Is that something that would make gun owners feel more comfortable? Having more police around?
I have no idea what others may think, some of them probably would...I think there's a problem with overpolicing though, especially as police use of force seems to be disproportionately applied to minorities and the poor. In some ideal world where all police were properly trained, incorruptible, and not capable of doing some of the horrific things that we have seen police officers do (despite the presence of body and dash cameras) - I am ambivalent, to say the least, about the idea of putting more police on the streets.
  #462  
Old 03-13-2019, 07:38 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Posts 8, 17, 44, 55, 65, 85, 145, 179, and 349, just as a real quick skim, I'm sure there are more.

Just because you didn't bother to read it doesn't mean that people didn't bother to post it....
I really don't. Can you tell me anything that you have ever advocated for that would reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals? All I see from your crowd is an insistence on making it easier and less accountable for a criminal to possess a firearm, along with making rather flimsy excuses for irresponsible gun owners....

Yeah, two people said they had dogs on the first page, eons ago. One person said he might get a alarm, another said a alarm could be a good idea, one of the people who said he had dogs suggested others get a dog, one said he had steel doors and alarms- and another suggested a type of alarm. You just searched for "dog" and alarm" without actually reading the posts. Exactly one person said he had a alarm.

That's not that thread. This thread isnt another "gun control good or bad" thread, and I resnet this, your fifth? Sixth? attempt to hijack it into one.

And who is "my crowd"? Do you know anything about "my crowd"? You clearly think I am a NRA member or something, or a gun nut. I own a .22 rifle my dad gave me when I was a kid, and my old service pistol. I am a retired fed. I do support the 2nd Ad- because I support the whole Bill or Rights, but I have always been a proponent of responsible gun ownership (if that is what is right for you) and and effective and constitutional- controls on guns.
  #463  
Old 03-13-2019, 07:47 PM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Yes, I think cities are more likely to have condominiums and apartment complexes. Certain cities have "residential areas" where houses are crammed closely together but even that isn't common in big cities. I guess it would be dependent on what you are referring to "city".
City limits?
ETJ?
Sub urban areas that feed the city?
Oh you are confused between the words "houses" and "homes".
  #464  
Old 03-13-2019, 08:50 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
In what way would not having a weapon available change what happened?
In that particular incident, it wouldn't have. He had no way of knowing that in advance, though; a fact of which you were very well aware before you posted.
  #465  
Old 03-14-2019, 01:11 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
In that particular incident, it wouldn't have. He had no way of knowing that in advance, though; a fact of which you were very well aware before you posted.
We have no way of knowing much of anything in advance when it comes to life. Ghod knows what could have happened if that drunk woman had wandered into the wrong house and no one had a firearm to shoot her.
  #466  
Old 03-14-2019, 06:02 AM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
No one is "pro-arming-of-criminals" and you know that.
You're "pro-policies-that-arm-criminals" which is totally different.
  #467  
Old 03-14-2019, 07:40 AM
Kearsen1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
Oh you are confused between the words "houses" and "homes".
Not so much, living space is living space.

But a particular type of "home" is more easily accessible to break into, IMO.
  #468  
Old 03-14-2019, 12:15 PM
Lamoral's Avatar
Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
We have no way of knowing much of anything in advance when it comes to life. Ghod knows what could have happened if that drunk woman had wandered into the wrong house and no one had a firearm to shoot her.
I think you're misrepresenting the situation a bit. Nobody wandered into my house. My doors were locked. If my doors weren't locked and a drunk woman wandered into my house, I think I could get her out without having to use a weapon.
  #469  
Old 03-14-2019, 03:00 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
You're "pro-policies-that-arm-criminals" which is totally different.
Again, that's not true, either, unless you say the Constitution is "pro-policies-that-arm-criminals".
  #470  
Old 03-14-2019, 03:33 PM
Cheesesteak's Avatar
Cheesesteak is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 13,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Again, that's not true, either, unless you say the Constitution is "pro-policies-that-arm-criminals".
Yes, the second amendment arms criminals. It armed criminals back then, and it arms criminals today.



I have an idea, please explain to me how it doesn't arm criminals. How is it even possible to have a society where handguns are widely available in retail stores, yet those guns don't find their way into criminal hands? What realistic collection of laws and law enforcement techniques could make that happen?

Please, when you educate us with your brilliance, don't forget the gun lover's anti-gun-law mantra "criminals don't follow the law".
  #471  
Old 03-14-2019, 04:18 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
I perceive the typical pro-gun person as being 'neutral-arming-of-ciminals', which is not the same as 'pro'. Which is to say that they only care about being guns themselves, and don't give a flying crap if the steps they take to ensure they're properly armed without jumping through hoops or undergoing oversight also allow every criminal on the planet to arm themselves. As has been amply demonstrated in this thread, they're of the opinion that because they're armed it doesn't matter what anybody else has - they're invulnerable because they're armed. So the fact that they've thrown open the door for criminals to get a guns is no skin off their nose.

However, even with all that being true, they don't prefer that criminals have guns. They just think it doesn't matter if they have them, because, being armed themselves, they're safe.
I'd give them that benefit of the doubt if it were not for the fact that they insist that any attempts at preventing criminals from being armed is a desire on our part to deprive law abiding americans the ability to defend themselves, and the rest of the BS that is thrown in about how many will have to die in order to advance any gun control at all.

OTOH, given that in this very thread, it has been mentioned on several occasions that you cannot protect yourself from someone with a gun without a gun yourself, I do not actually put it past many to be for the arming of criminals, as, if criminals are armed, that gives them an excuse to be armed as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lamoral View Post
I don't care about any of these hypotheticals if someone is trying to open my door here, in this reality we live in, all I know or care about is "there's someone trying to enter my house who should not be doing so."
My point was more that, being at that time, were it an actual break in, most home owners would have found out about it in the morning when they wake up and find their stuff missing.
Quote:

It did not play any role in this scenario, other than my saying that I had it may have served as a motivation for her getting away from my door, which is the only thing I was trying to do at that time. "Repelling the intruders" doesn't really apply to what happened, in hindsight, but you only get hindsight after an event takes place, which anyone surely knows.

What I posted is only relevant to the thread insomuch as it got me thinking about how the situation could have gone down if it was in fact someone trying to break into the house and potentially hurt me. I'm glad what happened did not go any further than it did...I don't like to think about having to hurt anyone or get hurt myself, it's something I hope does not happen, but I feel that having a weapon gives me better odds if it ever does.

Even so, it would be a measure of last resort.
Fair enough, you were scared of this drunk confused woman who ended up at your door at 2 AM, and that reinforces the security that you feel your gun provides you.

Several years back, my neighbors had a big party. When I got up, there was someone asleep on the couch. I figured it was one of my roommates' friends. Later, when I talked to them, we found that it was none of our friends, just a random drunk guy that wandered into the wrong house late at night.
Quote:

I have no idea what others may think, some of them probably would...I think there's a problem with overpolicing though, especially as police use of force seems to be disproportionately applied to minorities and the poor. In some ideal world where all police were properly trained, incorruptible, and not capable of doing some of the horrific things that we have seen police officers do (despite the presence of body and dash cameras) - I am ambivalent, to say the least, about the idea of putting more police on the streets.
I'm all for better training and better community relations. Having a cop actually walking a beat would deter much more crime than sleeping with a gun under your pillow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yeah, two people said they had dogs on the first page, eons ago. One person said he might get a alarm, another said a alarm could be a good idea, one of the people who said he had dogs suggested others get a dog, one said he had steel doors and alarms- and another suggested a type of alarm.
Okay, and so is that different from when you said that no one had said anything abut alarms or dogs or plans?

Also, I was only responding in that post to your claim that no one had mentioned alarms or dogs. There were several others that actually said what they would do, whether it be to leave or to confront them with a weapon.

That those "plans" did not meet your approval did not mean that there were not plans. If you were trying to be productive, you would give constructive criticism of the plans, rather than dismissing them as you have done.

Now, there have not been that many after it was made obvious that the only reason to ask for plans was to ridicule them for not having a gun. Did you really expect people to continue to take the OP seriously after that?

If you want to talk plans, then tell me what your plan is for when a dozen heavily armed gang members invade your house. And don't say that it's not likely, as neither is the OP's hypothetical, nor your constant modifications to it.
Quote:
You just searched for "dog" and alarm" without actually reading the posts. Exactly one person said he had a alarm.
You just made that accusation up with no justification or reason whatsoever. While it is true that I did do a search for dogs and alarms (which is something that you couldn't be bothered to do before making your claim that no one had mentioned them), I did in fact read the posts, as there were many other mentions of dogs and alarms that were not relevant, and so I only listed the posts that actually advocated for such. I take it that you do not consider someone recommending an alarm to be saying that they have an alarm, but I consider that to be extremely motivated reasoning on your part.

You made a claim, that claim was shown to be counterfactual. Whining that I called you on it doesn't change that.
Quote:
That's not that thread. This thread isnt another "gun control good or bad" thread, and I resnet this, your fifth? Sixth? attempt to hijack it into one.
You have obviously not been following this thread if you think that is the case. I didn't make it a "gun control good or bad", the OP made it a "gun control bad." Even with that well poisoning in the first place, many still responded in good faith, to have their replies ridiculed with "BANG your dead!" as the response.

The pro-gun contingent has been trying to claim that nothing short of a gun will protect you.

While you may want to turn it into a gun control thread, it is not, it is a pros and cons of guns in the house thread. the gun control aspect only comes up as an aspect of the defense, in that the main reason why you would need a gun for self protection is if the invader has a gun.

Should I be resentful that this was just meant to be yet another gun worshipping thread? Your fifth or sixth one?
[/quote]
And who is "my crowd"? Do you know anything about "my crowd"?
[/quote]
I know that you advocate for policies that will make it easier for criminals to arm themselves, and that is all I need for this thread.
Quote:
You clearly think I am a NRA member or something, or a gun nut.
You clearly think wrong.
Quote:
I own a .22 rifle my dad gave me when I was a kid, and my old service pistol. I am a retired fed. I do support the 2nd Ad- because I support the whole Bill or Rights, but I have always been a proponent of responsible gun ownership (if that is what is right for you) and and effective and constitutional- controls on guns.
That's nice.
  #472  
Old 03-14-2019, 04:56 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak View Post
Yes, the second amendment arms criminals. It armed criminals back then, and it arms criminals today.



......
...
Sure, we could toss out the whole Bill of Rights- the 5th and 8th have let many guilty men free, the 1st is likely guilty of most school shootings (a noted expert dud a study where it was shown that media attention on school shootings made them common), you can buy a copy of the Anarchists cookbook and blow shit up, etc. etc.

With every Right comes problems. I'd rather have the Rights. Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

And of course, murders still happen without guns, not to mention it isnt all that hard to make a makeshift gun. GB, with strong gun controls has had to put in place new laws banning types of knives as murder by stabbings have increased. Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.

Several times a hour a plane leaves America for nations without those rights. You could be on one tomorrow.
  #473  
Old 03-14-2019, 04:58 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
....

Should I be resentful that this was just meant to be yet another gun worshipping thread? Your fifth or sixth one?
And who is "my crowd"? Do you know anything about "my crowd"?
[/quote]
I know that you advocate for policies that will make it easier for criminals to arm themselves, and that is all I need for this thread.

....[/QUOTE]

Not my thread.

Name one. Name one legal policy I have advocated for that makes it easier for criminals to arm themselves.
  #474  
Old 03-14-2019, 05:18 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Sure, we could toss out the whole Bill of Rights- the 5th and 8th have let many guilty men free, the 1st is likely guilty of most school shootings (a noted expert dud a study where it was shown that media attention on school shootings made them common), you can buy a copy of the Anarchists cookbook and blow shit up, etc. etc.

With every Right comes problems. I'd rather have the Rights. Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Alternatively, we could take a more nuanced view to whether it would be prudent to amend the bill of rights than "Accept it all or burn the entire country to the ground".

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And of course, murders still happen without guns, not to mention it isnt all that hard to make a makeshift gun. GB, with strong gun controls has had to put in place new laws banning types of knives as murder by stabbings have increased. Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.
If somebody is sufficiently determined to do something there's no way to guarantee they will fail. This is a stupid reason not to try.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Several times a hour a plane leaves America for nations without those rights. You could be on one tomorrow.
This sort of 'argument' is not impressive.
  #475  
Old 03-14-2019, 05:23 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Name one. Name one legal policy I have advocated for that makes it easier for criminals to arm themselves.
I'm of the opinion that having guns kept in poorly-defended gun shops and department stores (and the supply warehouses for such places) cannot help but make it easier to illegally get a hold of them than if they were only to be found in the possession of swat teams and the military, and in carefully monitored manufacturing facilities that served only such organizations.

Plus, YOU owning a gun makes it easier for criminals to get guns - guns stored in private residences have got to be easier to illegally get a hold of than ones stored in guarded armories. And before you argue that your personally-owned guns are locked up more securely than fort knox, not all of your neighbor's guns are so carefully monitored.
  #476  
Old 03-14-2019, 05:34 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Sure, we could toss out the whole Bill of Rights- the 5th and 8th have let many guilty men free, the 1st is likely guilty of most school shootings (a noted expert dud a study where it was shown that media attention on school shootings made them common), you can buy a copy of the Anarchists cookbook and blow shit up, etc. etc.

With every Right comes problems. I'd rather have the Rights. Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
And there is no reason to work to make any improvements to any of that, right? It was written in stone, with no room for change or interpretation?

Are you one of those that believe that 2A was written with the idea of prohibiting states from regulating guns?
Quote:
And of course, murders still happen without guns, not to mention it isnt all that hard to make a makeshift gun. GB, with strong gun controls has had to put in place new laws banning types of knives as murder by stabbings have increased. Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.
But that is all harder than going to your local gun shop (or your local black market dealer, if you want it cheaper).
Quote:
Several times a hour a plane leaves America for nations without those rights. You could be on one tomorrow.
And there are planes leaving for places where your gun would actually be useful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And who is "my crowd"? Do you know anything about "my crowd"?
I know that you advocate for policies that will make it easier for criminals to arm themselves, and that is all I need for this thread.

....[/QUOTE]

Not my thread.
[/quote]
You help to turn it into a gun worshipping thread, with your accusations of not having a plan and so on. As far as that goes, it appears as though you skipped posts, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

To be fair, I now take it that that was the intent of the thread all along, so you didn't help to hijack it, but rather, to help keep it on track for ridiculing people without guns, you know, at least 2/3rd's of the US population.

And you still haven't gotten back to me on your plan to deal with a dozen heavily armed gang members invading your home. Do you not have one?
Quote:
Name one. Name one legal policy I have advocated for that makes it easier for criminals to arm themselves.
You are adamantly against a federal law requiring that people are required to determine that identity of the person to whom they will transfer their gun to and that they have passed a background check. You say that state laws are enough, and then call it an "excuse" when we point out the glaring loopholes that the policy that you advocate for leaves open.

Name a policy that you have advocated for that would lessen the ease of getting guns into the hands of criminals.
  #477  
Old 03-14-2019, 05:57 PM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 17,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Name one. Name one legal policy I have advocated for that makes it easier for criminals to arm themselves.

By definition, any policy that makes it easier for "law abiding people" to get strapped also helps criminals. "Criminal" is not a soul stamp you get on birth. It's something you can choose to do or become at any single point of your life, for any reason whatsoever. Therefore, again, by definition, any measure you support that makes it trivial for law abidin' good guys with guns to get said guns also makes it effortless for criminals to get guns.
And if you think "b-b-b-but I support background checks !" gets you off the hook, remind yourself that even that only means a guy with a rap sheet longer than my... pretty long only needs to threaten, coerce or bribe a "law abiding person" into getting a gun for them. And that's just the least convenient method.
__________________
--- ---
I'm not sure how to respond to this, but that's never stopped me before.

Last edited by Kobal2; 03-14-2019 at 05:58 PM.
  #478  
Old 03-14-2019, 06:00 PM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 17,751
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
GB, with strong gun controls has had to put in place new laws banning types of knives as murder by stabbings have increased. Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.

Oh for fuck's sake, not this retardation again.
__________________
--- ---
I'm not sure how to respond to this, but that's never stopped me before.
  #479  
Old 03-14-2019, 06:36 PM
Taber is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.
.
Cool, that's my plan then. Thanks for answering the thread question for me.
  #480  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:03 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And of course, murders still happen without guns, not to mention it isnt all that hard to make a makeshift gun. GB, with strong gun controls has had to put in place new laws banning types of knives as murder by stabbings have increased. Hell, you can kill a man with a hammer.
That explains why people have large hammer collections, and the thriving underground hammer market.

  #481  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:14 PM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
the 1st is likely guilty of most school shootings (a noted expert dud a study where it was shown that media attention on school shootings made them common), .
You either realise this is utter nonsense or you don't. It's literally two different levels of intelligence.
  #482  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:39 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
That explains why people have large hammer collections, and the thriving underground hammer market.

Yeah, big guy, you tell him. Only people killed by guns are really murdered. You are just so smart I don't see how anybody could ever disagree with you.
  #483  
Old 03-14-2019, 11:06 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,188

Moderating


I don't even know what this thread is about anymore. Most of the last 100 posts or so have been petty dumbness. I'm closing this before some one escalates to where I'm going to start giving warnings. Go to the Pit and bicker to your hearts' content but it's not going to happen here.

[/moderating]
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017