Not sure what you’re saying here. If your saying my friend should have let the guy hit him with the pipe, I have to disagree. I don’t see the benifit. It’s not an extreme circumstance, its something that happens all the time. A lot of the time the victim doesnt havce a gun to defend himself and winds up dead. I got assaulted in a road rage incident myself when I was a teenager…that was 25 years ago. It’s nothing new.
1 and 2 differant things. Hunting is killing animals for food or sport.
Sport shooting is shooting at tagets.
as for four and five. I’ve got several guns that I have for sentimental reasons…the gun my grandfather taught me to shoot with for instance. I wouldnt consider it a collection, none of them are particularly valuable. I just like them.
I’ve never seen a discussion of crime rates that didn’t get bogged down in an endless discussion about definitions,measurements, and the relative merits of being assaulted/mugged/robbed/assaulted versus being shot/stabbed/raped or whatever. Patterns of crime vary so much it’s hard to decide which country is safer - if you look at this linky you can see there isn’t even agreement in whether the numbers are comparable from year to year within the UK.
And there certainly are plenty of ‘hot’ household burglaries such as you describe. However, burglars in the UK are generally junkies and petty criminals looking to steal DVD players, jewellery and such. Just like burglars anywhere else, they generally go for properties they believe to be empty and scarper whenever disturbed, if for no other reason than that a violent confrontation with a terrified person who has home-field advantage really isn’t worth it for a few knicknacks that will be fenced for a pittance.
I’m not drawing the distinction with these two. I do appreciate the distinction you drew between 4 and 5.
I wasn’t saying that your friend should have been hit by the pipe, but I am saying a lot of people aren’t driving around with lead pipes or guns in their cars. It sounds to me that someone with a gun or a pipe in their car are looking for some trouble. I reserve the right to be wrong in this matter, but violence begets violence.
I think** Least Original User Name Ever** is somewhat uncomfortable with the notion of people having firearms ready to hand in case someone else, or they themselves, lose their rational faculties due to a minor traffic incident.
Correct. You get a piece of the pie.
There are serious moral arguments to be made against hunting, especially for sport. There is no such serious moral argument against shooting inanimate objects.
Ah. Thanks much.
I wasn’t thinking about the animal angle of it.
We’ve done this before many times, and I believe just about all the arguments have been made on both sides. Unsuprisingly, I believe no one has ever changed their mind about it.
Der Trihs, you directed some comments at me, so I feel obliged to answer. Few things in life are absolutes, and in firearm ownership as well as other things there are definite risks and benefits. You’ve made your points, and while I think you may be exaggerating the downsides of having a gun, it certainly isn’t for everyone.
I waited until after the second time a no-goodnik came over to my property before deciding to buy a pistol. In my experience, criminals are the cowardliest of any segment of the population, but that isn’t to say they all are. Folks get robbed, beaten, raped, burgled every day. Odds are, even where I live, that it only gets “range fired”, but… I’m a pretty analytical guy, and I’m confident in my assessment it’s better to be with than without.
Out of curiousity, do you feel the same way about any tool of defense? EG, pepper sprays, Taser, a hefty walking stick? Would a pepper canister be more liable to injure it’s owner or a family member? Would a criminal also armed with a stick just beat me with it, or would I stand a chance now? How about mastering a martial art? Is there a legitimate degree of self defense preparation, or are they all “penis extensions” as you put it?
Der Trihs can speak for himself, but pepper spray and tasers are defensive weapons and designed to be as such. this is where someone says that guns are also defensive weapons, but tasers are defensive weapons first
Guns aren’t all penis extensions. I suppose they can be clitoral extensions as well, seeing as how some females are also fervent gun supporters.
Out of curiousity, where do you live, Thrasymachus?
I was speaking specifically of oversized handguns as penis extensions, not guns in general. Nor am I automatically or morally opposed to gun ownership; I just think that for most people, most of the time, owning a gun has more downsides to them and society in general than benefits. I’d also have fewer reservations if all gun owners were required to have serious training in gun safety and using the things. I think what I object to most is the common Wild West fantasy that the White Hats will automatically win gunfights; the most extreme being the folks who think that guys with rifles can take on the US military.
As far as the other weapons you mentioned, I have fewer problems with them; one of my major objections to guns is that it’s so easy to kill people by accident. Sure, someone could have an allergic response to pepper spray, or a bad heart could kill someone who gets tasered; bullets are lethal to everybody.
Man, threads fly when you go take your mother to lunch. 
As for this one: Good Luck with that. There never has been, nor will there ever be any such security force. Hell, guards in a maximum security prison can’t keep inmates from killing each other. How do you expect any security force to do that in the real world? Cops aren’t even legally obligated to answer a 911 call. You can’t sue them if they don’t show up. (I’ll try to find the relevant cite for this, but I know there are court cases that said such.) I am an adult citizen. Therefore it is my right and my duty to protect my life, my wife and my property from harm at the hands of the anti-social.
I would favor more restrictions on firearms in exchange of an iron-clad, constitional guarantee that I could CCW anywhere, any time after passing the background and training checks. And that my property would never be confiscated by “people who know better than me” or who feel that they are morally superior because guns make them feel oogy.
There are no serious moral arguments against hunting animals, for sport or otherwise. They are animals, period. Some people may think that hunting for sport is cruel and barbarous. Fine, they are entitled to their opinion. Other feel otherwise. Personally I think sport-hunting is wasteful, but I have zero problems with hunting for food. I’ve eaten too much deer and moose and duck over the years to be that hypocritical.
You’ve just contradicted yourself. There is a debate to be made over it. You just said there is one, yourself.
This particular friend as a kid watched his brother get knifed to death in a mugging. I don’t blame him for carrying a gun, and I’m glad he had it.
when I lived in a bad neighorhood, I carried a gun…when you can afford to live in an area where you dont have to worry, then thats a bonus. Not everybody does.
Obviously, the solution is to not take your mother anywhere.
I regard morals as individual, not societal. We are talking at cross-purposes due to definitions.
Now we’re back to “Carrying a handgun for self-defense!”
pepper spray and tasers are good when you don’t have a gun. They arent nearly as effective. I’ve used pepper spray before succesfully and under the right circumstances its great…I keep a can or two around the house.
Tasers you get one shot with, and if it works great. I wouldnt substitute my gun for a taser, neither would the police. Thats why they carry both.
Hmm…I still dont get it. someone shouldnt have a firearm to defend themselves when someone else loses control and tries to kill them with a deadly weapon? THat makes no sense at all.