• 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!

Not Arming Yourself So Bad Guys Wont Arm Themselves

zsu2357

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
9,182
Reaction score
3,859
Location
The late great Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

mrjurrs

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
24,085
Reaction score
11,765
Location
The Bay
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I've never heard anyone ever suggest that as a good reason to not be armed. Not even once. Sounds like a straw man from cap to crocs.
" cap to crocs."

That's a good one.
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
36,641
Reaction score
14,947
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It is indeed a spurious argument, individual on individual. How is a criminal to know if their victim is armed?

Generalized though, the argument does make sense. Committing a crime without a gun is a lesser legal risk, and if gun ownership was very rare then burglars and muggers would be far less likely to carry. And that would be good, because fewer people would die.

Police not regularly carrying guns is worth considering as policy. If they didn't pose a risk to the lives of criminals, the latter would be far less inclined to shoot at them. In 2021, 73 officers were murdered, but 1,055 members of the public were killed by police. It's pretty obvious who is shooting first.
I think they should serve for a while at first before being able to carry a firearm. Partnered with an armed officer for safety.

Force them to learn to deal with situations in ways other than bullying backed by the potential for lethal violence.
 

tshade

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 12, 2021
Messages
6,284
Reaction score
3,605
Location
America, the place that has ALWAYS been great
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
In other words you still hold that AR-15s are "assault weapons" because of appearance and shoot more or rather hold more than 10 rounds in a standard magazine. "Assault weapons" are a myth designed to confuse the people that don't know the difference between those and actual assault rifles.
blah, blah--------just get regulations that keep these out of the hands of wackos............
 

The Old Soul

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
1,976
Reaction score
1,044
Location
PHX
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
Good stat

Out of interest, where did you get it ?
A general search on DuckDuckGo concerning self defense and those who carry; they seem to come up with less marketing and sales content than Google.
 

The Old Soul

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
1,976
Reaction score
1,044
Location
PHX
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private

The Old Soul

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Messages
1,976
Reaction score
1,044
Location
PHX
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
So I protect some unarmed person being attacked? I would assume I would become a target if said target wasn't neutralized ASAP.
As a 3rd party to a crime, I suspect using deadly force against someone targeting someone else would be very thin ice. In this type of a situation, it would likely only stand up in court if the perp actually shot their victim, and was not just waving a gun around for intimidation.

It may seem to be the best thing to do at the moment, but taking the life of another, even when 100% justified, is the thing nightmares and psychosis is made of; worse yet if left to contemplate in prison for 10 to life...
 

zsu2357

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
9,182
Reaction score
3,859
Location
The late great Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
As a 3rd party to a crime, I suspect using deadly force against someone targeting someone else would be very thin ice. In this type of a situation, it would likely only stand up in court if the perp actually shot their victim, and was not just waving a gun around for intimidation.

It may seem to be the best thing to do at the moment, but taking the life of another, even when 100% justified, is the thing nightmares and psychosis is made of; worse yet if left to contemplate in prison for 10 to life...
Don't worry I know the difference between waving around to intimidate and actually a threat on his or her life. How do I know? I just do. You carry you know.
 

zsu2357

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
9,182
Reaction score
3,859
Location
The late great Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
blah, blah--------just get regulations that keep these out of the hands of wackos............
There are regs. the 1934 NFA banning them (assault rifles) unless you jump through their hoops and pay the silly ass tax.
 
Last edited:

zsu2357

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
9,182
Reaction score
3,859
Location
The late great Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I can't wait to see what you think would work.
What the baby brigade would love is a 2023 YGFFA. YOU. GOT. ****ED. FIREARM. ACT. and if you were a good little boy or girl you could maybe have a DBL shotgun. And real good one, a muzzle loader .50 exemption. Might shoot down an airliner.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
26,818
Reaction score
17,202
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Much stricter wait periods for certain weapons; liability laws stricter, etc............
Would mass murders be concerned about liability or waiting periods?
 

Willie Orwontee

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
1,086
Location
Upper Bucks County, Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well, there is this - the mere presence of a gun increases the likelihood of a shooting incident:

people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens

Laughable "study", two glaring problems . . .

No differentiation was attempted to identify criminals shooting each other from citizens legally (permitted) carrying (other than eliminating all possible subjects under 21 y.o., because they cannot legally own / possess a firearm).

The authors made the ridiculous assumption that all citizens across the entire city at all times all shared the same risk of gun injury.
 

Willie Orwontee

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
1,086
Location
Upper Bucks County, Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So what, they carried guns and got shot

How do the people who shot them differ from the people who rob other demographics ?

The point of the study (and the poster's point in citing it) was to discourage the carriage of arms by law-abiding citizens only intending to protect themselves.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
26,818
Reaction score
17,202
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
The point of the study (and the poster's point in citing it) was to discourage the carriage of arms by law-abiding citizens only intending to protect themselves.
You mean the gangbusters in Philly didn't read and heed it?
 

Willie Orwontee

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
1,086
Location
Upper Bucks County, Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You mean the gangbusters in Philly didn't read and heed it?

At least back then Philly had a real DA and gun criminals would be prosecuted.

Today, cops are making more gun arrests than ever but Philly's most dangerous gun criminals are virtually guaranteed a free pass from the DA; Krasner has fully retreated from prosecuting carry by a prohibited person and shootings / murders follow . . . As 70%+ cases are withdrawn, the result is 225+ shootings a month . . .


FbDAZShaIAAxwxs.png

 
Last edited:

NolanVoyd

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
15,191
Reaction score
8,439
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
One of the most pathetic reasons why you shouldn't arm yourself according to the gun control crowd is because if you do arm yourself the bad guys will arm themselves too so they will be more evenly matched when they commit crime, well if that is a good idea not to arm yourself then maybe the police and military shouldn't arm themselves either for that same reason, if the police and military arm themselves then the bad guys they go up against are going to arm themselves too.
You just make stuff up huh?

Or is it that you just believe made up stuff on right wing websites?
 
Top Bottom