Again and again and again... - Page 10 - Talk About Marriage
Politics and Religion This is the place to discuss politics, morality, religion, and anything controversial.

User Tag List

 301Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
post #136 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 10:00 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,137
Re: Again and again and again...

In my village yes. Like everyone else . Here, not yet. The place I mentioned has some real exotic and expensive Italian and Belgian stuff.... Tempting.

john117 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #137 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 10:01 AM
jld
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 18,697
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
In my village yes. Like everyone else . Here, not yet. The place I mentioned has some real exotic and expensive Italian and Belgian stuff.... Tempting.
What is holding you back?

One of the deepest feminine pleasures is when a man stands full, present, and unreactive in the midst of his woman's emotional storms. When he stays present with her, and loves her through the layers of wildness and closure, then she feels his trustability, and she can relax. -- David Deida, The Way of the Superior Man
jld is offline  
post #138 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 10:37 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,678
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhtred View Post
That makes the safety aspect of guns questionable. They will presumably decrease violent deaths, but increase suicides (guns make suicide easy so probably more common).
Many studies have been done on this and they consistently find that there is no increase in suicide rates dependent on the availability of guns. The method of suicide changes but not the overall rate. We don't see suicide by light saber because light sabers are not available. We do see suicide by driving cars off of a cliff or hanging by rope. When a person becomes determined to end his/her life they then find a method to do so.

What does change is the rate of suicide by gun. This is where many so-called studies and many activists throw around false numbers. We need to be careful to understand how the numbers are being presented to us.


Quote:
Originally Posted by uhtred View Post
For me, The 1% chance of dying by violence isn't worth the inconvenience of carrying a gun. If I were willing to put in the effort, I'd do better with advanced driving training, and if I want to help my fellow man / family, by becoming more expert at first aid.

Since violent deaths are a low risk in any case, I don't care very much if other people want to carry guns.
That is a very rational analysis. Many times we see people against lawful concealed carry because they fear being shot by those people, or fear that such a person will be converted to violent criminal only because they have a gun (they would not have become violent if they didn't have access to a gun). When one looks at the numbers for causes of death, crime rates, etc it becomes apparent that guns are simply not a major factor within the realm of the law abiding citizen.
Thor is online now  
 
post #139 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 10:46 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,678
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
Take a class offered by a sanctioning body like the NRA with content and instructor meeting some basic standards jointly set by the sanctioning body and some fed agency, pass a range test administered by said sanctioning body, and buy anti aircraft artillery for your backyard for all I know.

Here in the exclusive suburbia we're seeing high end indoor ranges that offer high end product, competent instruction, and are making money like there's no tomorrow. Our community, the type that balks at Victoria's Secret and liquor type places has no problem and I applaud that.

That's how you build more acceptance and introduce more people to legal, responsible, and fun gun ownership.
And the single mom who wants to borrow a friend's gun for self defense? How does she afford that high end class before you deem her worthy of possessing a firearm?

Most professional groups exist to further their member's wealth and to exclude competition. Back when we bought our first home there was no such thing as a professional home inspector. About 20 yrs ago we voluntarily paid some goofball to inspect our home. Nowadays it takes a state license in order to be able to do home inspections.

To get that license requires attending training, the requirements of which are generated by the professional association.

We have something similar actually for getting concealed carry licenses here.

Training requirements cost money, and studies show that anything which makes it harder to lawfully carry concealed will result in decreased overall public safety. Less carry means more violent crime. Just the act of carry has the effect of reducing violent crime. 98%+ of defensive gun uses do not result in the gun being fired, so there is no need to show accuracy. While it sounds good to require more training, it in fact has the unintended consequence of reducing public safety.

And you ignore what will happen when the training requirements are controlled by anti-gun factions. Just like DC and Chicago where they have made every possible effort to ignore Supreme Court mandates regarding allowing gun possession. Those who want to prohibit gun possession will do everything possible to make it happen. If we allow them to mandate training they will make it so expensive, time consuming, and inconvenient that nobody will be able to comply.
Thor is online now  
post #140 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 01:23 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,546
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech-novelist View Post
The reason that your overall violent crime level is lower than the US has already been explained, but I'll explain it again.

It is because your ethnic makeup is much different from the US, namely in the fact that you have almost none of the ethnic group that accounts for the excess violence of the US over Canada.

Hope that helps.
Right, as I said, the risk where I live is very low. UTred said even where you live the relative risk of violence is low. So even if your crime rate was as low as Canada's you would still want pack a gun? We won't let you and you don't need to. Why? People in civilized society are not allowed to do whatever they like. Twelve year olds cannot drive cars, and for good reason. Most people in our country are not permitted to carry handguns, also for good reason.

You can't claim it's risk, as that argument has already been debunked. If it were just about risk, you wouldn't drive a car.

It could be that Canadians, and Australians are more risk-tolerant than Americans. I would buy that. Also we just don't believe there are that many "bad people" out there waiting to get us. Because, per our crime stats, there aren't.

So, we do weigh the risk of casual gun carrying and the risk of violence associated with it, with the loss of our ability to identify "bad people" in the general public per my earlier example about the RCMP officer, and we decide its not worth it. For the <1% who might be affected (our violent crime stat is even less than the US) we have less mass murders with guns, less kids shooting each other, less domestic violence with a gun, etc. Same for Australia when they banned handguns.

Also, guns are not the only way to protect oneself. It's actually quite a lazy way to go about it. It could even create a false sense of security, promoting more risky behaviour than is prudent. Taking some kind of personal self-defense training and being intelligent about ones choices (avoiding dodgy areas, calling security escorts) will do far more than simply carrying a gun.
sapientia is offline  
post #141 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 06:26 PM Thread Starter
Personal is online now  
post #142 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 06:31 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,073
Re: Again and again and again...

While I'm not worried about gun ownership, I think that owning a gun but not being trained to use it effectively is not going to make you and the people around you safer.

Statistics are of course tricky. If you are evaluating your personal risk, and you are not yourself involved in criminal / gang activities, your risks may be different than the average.
uhtred is online now  
post #143 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-19-2016, 06:36 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,546
sapientia is offline  
post #144 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 11:35 AM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,678
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapientia View Post
So even if your crime rate was as low as Canada's you would still want pack a gun? We won't let you and you don't need to.
I bet this 19 yr old man would say he needed a gun. 19-year-old man sexually assaulted by four women in Toronto | National Post. But if there is no need for self defense in your utopian Canada, why does this organization even exist? Toronto Rape Crisis Centre Multicultural Women Against Rape

If you went there and talked to the women victims I bet you'd find out that they weren't lazy, visiting dodgy areas of town, etc. You're blaming the victims for being lazy and un-intelligent rather than empowering them to use an effective tool to defend their bodies against violence!

This one man and his wife could have been stopped before the body count stacked up, if only one of his intended victims had been capable of applying enough violence to stop him. But maybe they were all lazy and stupid, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Bernardo

Calgary is no stranger to violent crime. Looks like you have some nasty characters up there. Calgary police say murder charges pending after 'significant organized crime operation' - Calgary - CBC News

Here's one of your stellar Canadian citizens with a long history of criminal activity culminating in murder. Too bad one of his victims wasn't lazy and stupid. Or maybe all the Canadian security escorts were busy that day and it was just plain bad luck for the victims. Suspect in murder of Calgary mother, daughter not an ?undue risk to society?: parole board in 2010 | National Post

The truth is that every single victim of a violent crime needed some better method to defend their life and body. While you are ok accepting the risk of being unarmed, that does not mean that you have no need for self defense. Whenever the risk is more than zero, somebody is going to be victimized by a violent criminal.

You might be the Kung Foo master, but the wheel chair bound grand mother won't be. Cops aren't everywhere all the time, nor are there security escorts available most places. You're just playing ostrich when you say there are other methods essentially as effective as armed self defense.
Thor is online now  
post #145 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 11:37 AM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,137
Re: Again and again and again...

I have a feeling the French are going to VERY SOON react with some very unpopular and heavy handed (for some) measures. It will be interesting to see their reaction and how other countries in the EU respond.

Too much of anything tends to bring such responses, and in the aftermath of USA shootings again it will be interesting to see how a more country wide policy develops.

john117 is offline  
post #146 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 11:54 AM
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,485
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by john117 View Post
I have a feeling the French are going to VERY SOON react with some very unpopular and heavy handed (for some) measures. It will be interesting to see their reaction and how other countries in the EU respond.

Too much of anything tends to bring such responses, and in the aftermath of USA shootings again it will be interesting to see how a more country wide policy develops.
I will predict that they will not react with the only method known to be effective in stopping attempted mass murders in progress.

Always remember the LD motto: "Sex isn't important!!!"
tech-novelist is offline  
post #147 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 12:20 PM
Member
 
john117's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 11,137
Re: Again and again and again...

In progress isn't the issue. Long term stability and security are the issues, and it's not going to go well for the "guests" regardless.
john117 is offline  
post #148 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 03:36 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,546
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thor View Post
The truth is that every single victim of a violent crime needed some better method to defend their life and body. While you are ok accepting the risk of being unarmed, that does not mean that you have no need for self defense. Whenever the risk is more than zero, somebody is going to be victimized by a violent criminal.

You might be the Kung Foo master, but the wheel chair bound grand mother won't be. Cops aren't everywhere all the time, nor are there security escorts available most places. You're just playing ostrich when you say there are other methods essentially as effective as armed self defense.
LOL, and you told off that other poster for an essay? "I would have written you a shorter, better letter if I had more time", would apply.

Look how far back in time you have to go to find crime in Canada that I can show you happens in a single year in the US!

Why do you keep saying crime must be Zero? It doesn't, that's not how risk works. You are trying to concoct a BS argument that even you don't believe. This is you wanting to "win", not you believing you are making a good argument.

The crime risk just needs to be low enough so that it doesn't justify the need for the general public to carry guns. Our risk is low, so we don't permit them. Folks who have a legit reason like hunting can have them, but not to walk around the grocery store with. We just don't need them. Sure, you can find isolated cases of violence, that would be true anywhere. But what you ALSO DON'T FIND are cases of kids shooting each other, repeated school massacres, theatre shootings, fathers taking out their entire family systematically walking through their white, upscale mansion (remember that? Just last year was it?), etc. You could go back to the founding of Canada for gun and violent crime and fill up a few pages. A comparable study for the US fills VOLUMES.
sapientia is offline  
post #149 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 03:38 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,546
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech-novelist View Post
I will predict that they will not react with the only method known to be effective in stopping attempted mass murders in progress.
What method is that? I'd love to see that study.
sapientia is offline  
post #150 of 362 (permalink) Old 07-20-2016, 04:46 PM
Member
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 8,678
Re: Again and again and again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sapientia View Post
LOL, and you told off that other poster for an essay? "I would have written you a shorter, better letter if I had more time", would apply.

Look how far back in time you have to go to find crime in Canada that I can show you happens in a single year in the US!

Why do you keep saying crime must be Zero? It doesn't, that's not how risk works. You are trying to concoct a BS argument that even you don't believe. This is you wanting to "win", not you believing you are making a good argument.

The crime risk just needs to be low enough so that it doesn't justify the need for the general public to carry guns. Our risk is low, so we don't permit them. Folks who have a legit reason like hunting can have them, but not to walk around the grocery store with. We just don't need them. Sure, you can find isolated cases of violence, that would be true anywhere. But what you ALSO DON'T FIND are cases of kids shooting each other, repeated school massacres, theatre shootings, fathers taking out their entire family systematically walking through their white, upscale mansion (remember that? Just last year was it?), etc. You could go back to the founding of Canada for gun and violent crime and fill up a few pages. A comparable study for the US fills VOLUMES.
I don't recall telling off a poster for writing an essay. You are confusing me with someone.

My argument is that there is always a need unless the risk is zero. By your logic I have no need for a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. I've been driving cars since 1977 and riding motorcycles since 1983 with no accidents and never needing those safety devices. Obviously, then, I don't need to wear them when driving or riding.

Yet we know that the accident rate is greater than zero. Today somebody in my city is going to need a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet. And people will choose at times to ignore the risk and not wear a seatbelt or helmet.

What you advocate is "acceptable losses" amongst innocent victims. You believe that your personal risk is zero from violent criminals, so you want to disarm others so that you can feel safer that a law abiding gun owner won't go nutso in your presence and convert to a violent criminal. In other words, you fear the law abiding gun owner far more than you fear the armed career criminal.

This would be akin to banning seat belts and motorcycle helmets because there are a few cases each year where a person is killed because of the safety device. I've never needed them, I drive safely, and I don't ever expect to need them. But I might be killed by getting trapped in a burning car or have my neck broken by the helmet. So if you or anybody else dies due to lack of a seat belt or helmet, it isn't my problem is it?

I've pointed out that there are places in your country which have much higher violent crime rates than my gun riddled metro area. While you do have an overall lower murder rate than the overall US murder rate, you certainly do not have a materially or substantially better rate than many places in the USA. Compared to places like Chicago, Newark, DC, and Baltimore with super strict gun control, probably stricter than in Canada, yes you have a lower murder rate.

You are so entrenched in your belief system that you are incapable of logical analysis. Guns are not the problem, it is the violent people who are the problem, and yes we do have areas with far too many violent people.

The correlation between violent crime and illegally possessed firearms is pretty high. The correlation between lawful gun ownership and violent crime is negative. You have no reason to fear the law abiding citizen carrying his gun in a grocery store, and he in fact provides some generalized benefit to you by lowering the overall crime rate and perhaps stopping a violent crime which affects you while you're there. The one you should worry about is the violent criminal, who is not going to be peaceably walking around with his gun concealed (or if he is, he isn't a threat to you at the moment is he?). You're not going to know he's a problem to you until he suddenly is. Unless your police have x-ray vision and can see who is carrying a concealed weapon.

Last edited by Thor; 07-20-2016 at 04:53 PM.
Thor is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on Talk About Marriage, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Important! Your username will be visible to the public next to anything you post and could show up in search engines like Google. If you are concerned about anonymity, PLEASE choose a username that will not be recognizable to anyone you know.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome