• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun Free Signs: Homes

TurtleDude said:
yeah they should, why should they benefit from the uncertainty instilled in the minds of criminals who don't know who has guns
Click to expand...

Forcing them to post signs? That's not very Libertarian of you.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I figure if the asshole in question doesn't have any qualms about advertising my home as a prime target for thieves, I don't have to fact-check when I return the favor.
Click to expand...

Why would anyone consider a home without firearms a prime target for thieves? From what I understand, you are more likely to injure yourself or a loved one with a firearm than protect/defend your home with one. I would think a gun safety advocate would be proud to live in a gun free home rather than hide behind security through obscurity provided by gun owners.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I was responding to a picture someone else posted. It's one of those things that is funny only if you don't stop to think about it.

Also, you never really clarified what "the point" was until now.
Click to expand...
Thought about it, and its still funny. Very funny.
 
BretJ said:
Why would anyone consider a home without firearms a prime target for thieves? From what I understand, you are more likely to injure yourself or a loved one with a firearm than protect/defend your home with one. I would think a gun safety advocate would be proud to live in a gun free home rather than hide behind security through obscurity provided by gun owners.
Click to expand...

I would suggest placing a "Gun Free Home" sign in your yard to test your hypothesis...
 
BretJ said:
Why would anyone consider a home without firearms a prime target for thieves? From what I understand, you are more likely to injure yourself or a loved one with a firearm than protect/defend your home with one. I would think a gun safety advocate would be proud to live in a gun free home rather than hide behind security through obscurity provided by gun owners.
Click to expand...

It's one of those self-evident kind of things.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I was responding to a picture someone else posted. It's one of those things that is funny only if you don't stop to think about it.

Also, you never really clarified what "the point" was until now.
Click to expand...

Really didnt think I needed too.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
I would suggest placing a "Gun Free Home" sign in your yard to test your hypothesis...
Click to expand...

Actually, if I did that and ended up shooting an intruder, that could be considered trolling of some sort and I would be open for prosecution or civil liability.

Perhaps you misunderstood the intent of my post. If a gun free home is a prime target for thugs, doesn't logic dictate that in a gun free society all homes are a prime target? By disarming the population, you remove the very real threat to thugs that they may be shot and injured/killed if they choose to break in to a home while it is occupied. As it stands, the UK has a very rate of hot burglary of homes, especially in the case of pensioners. It is very high because they know there is very little likelihood of threat to themselves.
 
Last edited:
TacticalEvilDan said:
It's one of those self-evident kind of things.
Click to expand...

Interesting. It is self evident isn't it? Is it not also self evident that by banning possession of firearms by your neighbors, you are essentially making them prime targets as well? Or are you hoping that by increasing the number of prime targets, that you increase the odds it will happen to someone else rather than you? Seems pretty straightforward to me.
 
Last edited:
BretJ said:
Actually, if I did that and ended up shooting an intruder, that could be considered trolling of some sort and I would be open for prosecution or civil liability.

Perhaps you misunderstood the intent of my post. If a gun free home is a prime target for thugs, doesn't logic dictate that in a gun free society all homes are a prime target? By disarming the population, you remove the very real threat to thugs that they may be shot and injured/killed if they choose to break in to a home while it is occupied. As it stands, the UK has a very rate of hot burglary of homes, especially in the case of pensioners, is very high because they know there is very little likelihood of threat to themselves.
Click to expand...

My point was that it is challenging for some to burglarize homes with "security" signs out front. I do not think anyone should advertise their decisions as to defensive tactics or lack thereof...
 
Guy Incognito said:
That's a stupid question.
Click to expand...

I don't see the problem. First, if it's true there is no legal problem. The argument from you anti gun folks (calling it like it is here Guy, you aren't fooling anyone) is that a gun free home is safer, why not own it? You should be proud of yourself for doing your part to make the world a better place. Unless of course you don't believe the crap you spew...
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1062350974 said:
Like this?

Click to expand...

My rifles are expensive and very portable. Considering that burglars come when no-one's home, I'm not advertising them, and I live in the middle of nowhere. In a city or suburb burglars know your house and the one next door have pretty much the same stuff except for two things- guns and jewelry. Those two can give a burglar that, "Bonus!" reaction.
I wouldn't tell thieves that there's guns in the house. I bet the insurance company doesn't want you to, either.
 
BretJ said:
Interesting. It is self evident isn't it? Is it not also self evident that by banning possession of firearms by your neighbors, you are essentially making them prime targets as well? Or are you hoping that by increasing the number of prime targets, that you increase the odds it will happen to someone else rather than you? Seems pretty straightforward to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in banning the possession of firearms.
 
Kobie said:
Forcing them to post signs? That's not very Libertarian of you.
Click to expand...

when dealing with freedom sucking scum bags, radical options must be explored. I am merely helping such people not feel hypocrisy
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Or a big dog, or car batteries hooked to the doorknobs. Whatever. The point is to make the asshole who advertised to the world that I don't have any guns can't shoot you when he isn't home to protect his stuff.
Click to expand...

I don't worry too much about that. I live in a small town. My business and my home both have some pretty awesome video coverage inside and out complete with time stamps. So you can get away with what you came for and we can handle the rest later. Maybe I turn it over to the police, or maybe we play a game of "what's it worth to you?". Or maybe you just never get a chance to do that again. Ever.
 
stonewall50 said:
Should homes that are gun free...have to post a sign?
Click to expand...
If it is a criminal act to otherwise legally carry a gun into a place open to the public, then logically it should be an even greater crime to carry the same into a private residence. In order for it to be a crime, a sign has to be posted, and IMO since it would be a greater crime, a bigger sign is required.
 
Guy Incognito said:
No self respecting libertarian would ever advocate such a thing.
Click to expand...

NO self respecting libertarian (and since I was an official spokesman for Ed Clark 80, I think I qualify) would buy into the nonsense you spew as being libertarian. Rather your posts are contrarian populist nonsense that demonstrate a hatred of success, education and "powerful institutions" you claim conspire to keep you 'down'
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Good for you. As a father of two, anybody who advertises my home as a softer target for criminals should consider themselves lucky if all I do is rip up the sign.
Click to expand...

If he has guns, and you do not, then you'd probably better not think of trying to do any more to him than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom