[W:2270] Does a Gun Make Your Home Safer?

[aociswundumho]

Jeeeezus this is so hard for you isn't it? No, my position is if you have something that is made to maim or kill and can EASILY AND IS EASILY used to maim and kill people it requires a MUCH HIGHER LEVEL OF CONTROL BY SOCIETY ON THAT THING.

No, you mean control by the government, not society. You have no problem with state agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things", correct?

 

[Hafnium1979]

No, you mean control by the government, not society.

I'm sorry if the American system of government confuses you so.

You have no problem with state agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things", correct?

I'm not so stupid as to take your bait. Because you're going to start making argumenta ad absurdem around "mouse traps".

Why is this topic so difficult for you? If you don't appreciate that guns are an extremely dangerous item then you should be the first person from whom guns are taken and NEVER allowed to own one.

It is people who fail to appreciate the special place guns have in our society that have made America into some sort of first-world freakshow of death.

Why is it so hard to be honest about your own hobby?

 

[Hafnium1979]

No, you mean control by the government, not society. You have no problem with state agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things", correct?

Hey, I keep forgetting to congratulate you on one of the most offensive handles I've seen in a while "aociswun...". I can see you are a true "wit".

 

[TurtleDude]

...to what end? (I know you are going to dance around like this is some intellectual form of Zeno's Paradox, but it would be refreshing if the gun owners were honest about their guns for once.

we are. to fire bullets. the real dishonesty comes from the gun banners who pretend that public safety is their goal rather than harassing people who don't buy into the leftwing agenda that almost every anti gun advocate prefers

 

[aociswundumho]

I'm sorry if the American system of government confuses you so.

What confuses me is why you won't answer a simple question. I'll ask you again:

You have no problem with state agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things", correct?

A simple yes or no would be fine, thanks.

 

[TurtleDude]

Hey, I keep forgetting to congratulate you on one of the most offensive handles I've seen in a while "aociswun...". I can see you are a true "wit".

I like it-he is honest in his beliefs.

 

[Hafnium1979]

I like it-he is honest in his beliefs.

Of course you do! And he's eloquent! Just the kind of clever wordplay one expects from the highly educated.

 

[Hafnium1979]

What confuses me is why you won't answer a simple question. I'll ask you again:

You have no problem with state agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things", correct?

A simple yes or no would be fine, thanks.

Sorry you couldn't read my reply. I will endeavor to use simpler words when I speak with you.

 

[Hafnium1979]

we are. to fire bullets.

So weird that you'd try to claim an Ivy League and Legal education and then say things like this.

the real dishonesty comes from the gun banners who pretend that public safety is their goal

What if public safety actually IS my goal? Oh, I get it, you can't allow that because you couldn't possibly fight against that. That would make you a psychopath.

rather than harassing people who don't buy into the leftwing agenda that almost every anti gun advocate prefers

"harrassing"? You're hilarious! Such a big talker all about guns and protection and safety and big man stuff...and you are "harrassed" by someone who doesn't agree with your cartoon view of your own manhood.

LOL.

 

[TurtleDude]

Of course you do! And he's eloquent! Just the kind of clever wordplay one expects from the highly educated.

some highly educated people are dishonest or criminals. some people who barely have a HS diploma are very bright and wise.

 

[aociswundumho]

Sorry you couldn't read my reply. I will endeavor to use simpler words when I speak with you.

The problem is you can't defend your own position.

To be honest, I don't blame you for running away. I wouldn't answer the question either if I held your views on the issue.

 

[Hafnium1979]

some highly educated people are dishonest or criminals. some people who barely have a HS diploma are very bright and wise.

And people who run around calling women "dumhos", where do they fall?

 

[Hafnium1979]

The problem is you can't defend your own position.

I can and did. The fact that you couldn't understand it is not my problem.

 

[aociswundumho]

I can and did.

No, you did not. You refused to answer a simple question regarding your own position. I'll ask it again right here, and we'll see if you answer it:

While you obviously don't want civilians carrying guns, do you have any problem with government agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things"?

 

[soylentgreen]

I tried and tried to debate with you and you ignore all the links and facts that proved you wrong...so you just resort to lying...you still are. Posts 2100, 2105, 2106 for reference.

My proof of good faith is that I continue to post debatable posts and you dont address them directly.

​

You're the one lying, blatantly and totally. And all you do is deny that we've proven you wrong. The entire thread proves you're wrong LOL. And I'm just posting the outline...the proof is all out there, ignored, denied, or lied about by you. Feel free to prove the 3 different examples in my post by refuting the proof and data that we posted. It's all there.​

​

Here you go again. And you have claimed specifically, 'me', and then demanded we prove it. Stop lying. Your most blatant lie.​

​

1) And we proved it. You got loads of links and data you couldnt refute, including RUcker's that showed the ratio for gun accidents to home invasions.​

​

2) And you have never explained how my gun, sitting waiting ready for my defense, makes me unsafe. Jaeger's been pretty good about shooting holes (pun intended) in just how silly your argument is there. Care to answer that now?​

​

3) And I've also provided the links that show you cant predict where crimes in the home will occur: see the lady in the nice condo on the golf course that was raped and the man who defended his family against the guy who climbed up to their apt with an ax, also in a good neighborhood. (and I have another few hundred too...I posted about 30 for someone else in the thread...but I have a few hundred from Bum's weekly thread posts.)​

Why are you still bothering me?

What makes you think i should waste my time with someone who has clearly demonstrated that they are not here to debate but simply shout loudly and ignore any response.

You have proven yourself to be a waste of time.

 

[soylentgreen]

Okay great..please explain how if I have an accident with a firearm..its more likely to be more severe if I handle firearm from my bedside cabinet that if I handle it from the table where I eat lunch.

FFS! Lacking in comprehension skills or deliberately misconstruing what is said.

No one gives a **** where you might have an accident. That does not change the fact that leaving a gun unattended, unsecured and loaded.

 

[soylentgreen]

But if you drop a gun on your toe, that was not an unattended gun.

That is true.

But if you leave a gun loaded and come back to it and drop it.

You do know the safety rule. Always unload your gun when leaving it. So that when you next pick it up if an accident occurs then hopefully not as bad as if you left the gun loaded.

I am greatly amused at the way all of you dance around the fact that where and when an accident happens is not the issue. The issue is that of following safety rules to avoid lethal accidents. Not to mention the issue is that not one gun pro person here will touch on the subject of whether they have any justification for leaving a loaded gun unattended, unsecured.

 

[soylentgreen]

I know about guns, I am a world class shooter with over 50 years of competitive experience. I teach people how to shoot. You don't own guns, you don't live with guns in your home and you apparently are unwilling to really debate the key issue. You have no clue about someone else's personal environment and you only prove that you are intending to be contrarian and afraid to debate the real issue that agitates you

How do you know what I own? I have not mentioned whether I have , not once, deliberately.

And again please give a link that I cannot own a gun in my country as you claimed in your last post and then run away from answering.

No one cares about how good you are with a gun or how experienced. This is a debate site not a gun site. Here you do not need a gun, you need intelligence, wit and logic. I see none of that in someone who simply posts fallacious arguments. Again your pointing out your experience with a gun as a means of saying you are correct is an appeal to authority fallacy.
Not to mention the fallacy of ad hom you are using by trying to make the argument about me.

 

[soylentgreen]

I don't agree with Lursa on many things. She has attacked my posts and perhaps me more than a few times over Trump. However, she is correct here. Your arguments are specious and dishonest. and most of us are wondering why you pick this issue to battle over. You don't know the people, you don't know their environments, you don't understand gun ownership and you apparently are upset we can own things you cannot

As I have told lursa many times. I could not give a **** about her or her situation. It is she who has made this personal by the fact that she has no real argument to make other than personal pleading.
And I am on the opposite. I quite respected her views on abortion and if she is against trump then good for her. But in this she is nothing more than a victim of propaganda.

 

[Hafnium1979]

No, you did not. You refused to answer a simple question regarding your own position. I'll ask it again right here, and we'll see if you answer it:

While you obviously don't want civilians carrying guns, do you have any problem with government agents owning and carrying something "created specifically to kill things"?

I answered it. Go back and read it dimbulb. Here’s a challenge for you: quote my entire response if you are honest enough

 

[jaeger19]

FFS! Lacking in comprehension skills or deliberately misconstruing what is said.

No one gives a **** where you might have an accident. That does not change the fact that leaving a gun unattended, unsecured and loaded.

You are too funny. You have demonstrated you have no clue what unsecured and unattended mean when it comes to gun safety.
According to you..my loaded firearm on my bedside cabinet is more likely to shoot me..than the loaded firearm in my hand.

 

[RF667799]

That is true.

But if you leave a gun loaded and come back to it and drop it.

You do know the safety rule. Always unload your gun when leaving it. So that when you next pick it up if an accident occurs then hopefully not as bad as if you left the gun loaded.

I am greatly amused at the way all of you dance around the fact that where and when an accident happens is not the issue. The issue is that of following safety rules to avoid lethal accidents. Not to mention the issue is that not one gun pro person here will touch on the subject of whether they have any justification for leaving a loaded gun unattended, unsecured.

In that case it is an attended gun, but you have been going on about unattended guns.

 

[Lursa]

Still waiting for answers on this from @Hafnium1979 and @iguanaman :

So you wrote you're on board with Iguana's claim?

Cool.

Let's examine why man needed to injure and kill, shall we? Why was it necessary to kill and injure?

To protect families and homes. To wage war to protect resources and territory. To kill for food. Since all of prehistory.

The gun was designed as better technology to PROTECT people and keep them alive. The need had always been there and man had always designed weapons to protect themselves and those things.

So should man not have invented a better means of protection? For getting food? Yes? No? If no, why not?

So you agree that my post is accurate then, and that they were designed for the purpose of protection? Yes?

So then why shouldnt people still keep them for that purpose?

To protect families? OK, so what does the gun do exactly? It represents a THREAT to those who would harm your family. ERGO it is intended to show the attacker that the gun owner can KILL OR MAIM them. That is 100% exactly what it is for. That is because it is made 100% to kill or maim. That is why you use it to protect your family.

Yes...and you have yet to explain why that is wrong, despite your use of such emotionally-loaded words.

You managed to reiterate and support my point anyway. What's wrong with keeping firearms to protect your family?

(And now please stop using the argument about them being designed for injury and killing...we now have agreed that the reason for that need is to protect individuals and families. So that argument is refuted and does not work.)

Honestly how can you not understand this simple, simple, simple fact?

I do, and it seems I had to spell it out for you. You still havent explained what's wrong with keeping firearms for protection. Please do?

What do you think the use of the gun is for in "protection"? That you want to show the attacker a nice piece of machined metal and it will cause the other person to think "Hmmm, that's a nice piece of machined metal, I should not rob them or hurt them because I like machined metal too and we now have a common point of agreement!"

Well, just displaying or drawing a firearm can be very effective in stopping violence. Do you take issue with that? If so why?

Do you take issue with someone using the firearm TO injure or kill in order to protect self or family? If so, how so?

 

[Lursa]

As I have told lursa many times. I could not give a **** about her or her situation.

Blatant lie and you have asked me AND others to prove it regarding me specifically. (Which we did, lol)

And the people you're responding to have all read it...AND most responded to it. Good lord, do you imagine that all your previous posts and failures have just disappeared? That people have no memories?

Exactly what is your perception of how forum's work and retain information? LOL, then same question for the human brain.

 

[Lursa]

Why are you still bothering me?

What makes you think i should waste my time with someone who has clearly demonstrated that they are not here to debate but simply shout loudly and ignore any response.

I tried and tried to debate with you and you ignore all the links and facts that proved you wrong...so you just resort to lying...you still are. Posts 2100, 2105, 2106 for reference.

My proof of good faith is that I continue to post debatable posts and you dont address them directly.

You're the one lying, blatantly and totally. And all you do is deny that we've proven you wrong. The entire thread proves you're wrong LOL. And I'm just posting the outline...the proof is all out there, ignored, denied, or lied about by you. Feel free to prove the 3 different examples in my post by refuting the proof and data that we posted. It's all there.​

​

Here you go again. And you have claimed specifically, 'me', and then demanded we prove it. Stop lying. Your most blatant lie.​

​

1) And we proved it. You got loads of links and data you couldnt refute, including Rucker's that showed the ratio for gun accidents to home invasions.​

​

2) And you have never explained how my gun, sitting waiting ready for my defense, makes me unsafe. Jaeger's been pretty good about shooting holes (pun intended) in just how silly your argument is there. Care to answer that now?​

​

3) And I've also provided the links that show you cant predict where crimes in the home will occur: see the lady in the nice condo on the golf course that was raped and the man who defended his family against the guy who climbed up to their apt with an ax, also in a good neighborhood. (and I have another few hundred too...I posted about 30 for someone else in the thread...but I have a few hundred from Bum's weekly thread posts.)​