Whether Or Not A Gun Makes Your Home Safer Depends On...

[soylentgreen]

the anti gun arguments are not sound, they are propaganda based on fear and hate and a desire to engage in political paybacks.

I reject your arguments and all we can say to you, if you don't like us owning guns, try to change that.

Stop bothering me with the fact that you can do nothing but whinge.

This is a debate site and you cannot debate your cause.

Repeating back a statement makes you more a parrot than a debater.

 

[TurtleDude]

Stop bothering me with the fact that you can do nothing but whinge.

This is a debate site and you cannot debate your cause.

Repeating back a statement makes you more a parrot than a debater.

stop bothering us with the fact that you are upset we have rights that you do not have. That is what this comes down to. You merely saying our arguments are not sound is not debating.

 

[TurtleDude]

And like cars, they should be regulated.

and they are-at the state level. Next

 

[Rucker61]

Stop bothering me with the fact that you can do nothing but whinge.

This is a debate site and you cannot debate your cause.

Repeating back a statement makes you more a parrot than a debater.

Do you accept the Constitutional protections afforded the individual right to keep and bear arms in the US?

 

[TurtleDude]

Do you accept the Constitutional protections afforded the individual right to keep and bear arms in the US?

He rejects that. He rejects every argument in favor of an armed citizenry. Its a contrarian rabbit hole

 

[soylentgreen]

Do you accept the Constitutional protections afforded the individual right to keep and bear arms in the US?

As a fact, yes. As a good reason to exist, no.

 

[TurtleDude]

As a fact, yes. As a good reason to exist, no.

define good reason. what we have is this=your opinion only.

 

[soylentgreen]

define good reason. what we have is this=your opinion only.

Of course it is just an opinion. But one that I can argue with good reasons while all you can do is whinge that it is a fact.
The very fact that you can do no more than give fear as a reason for 2nd to exist is in itself a good reason to question the existence of the 2nd.

 

[TurtleDude]

Of course it is just an opinion. But one that I can argue with good reasons while all you can do is whinge that it is a fact.
The very fact that you can do no more than give fear as a reason for 2nd to exist is in itself a good reason to question the existence of the 2nd.

you claim it is fear. I reject that and state you are pretending to know what others are thinking. What is a good reason for the second NOT to exist? what is a good reason for the government not to trust its masters with the same weapons it issues its employees?

 

[Rucker61]

As a fact, yes. As a good reason to exist, no.

Do you believe that an individual has a right to self defense?

 

[swing_voter]

A gun is more likely to get stolen #1, kill you #2, kill a spouse, friend or relative #3

But yes, once in a while you can scare away a burglar who was too stupid to make sure you weren't home.



.

 

[Rucker61]

A gun is more likely to get stolen #1, kill you #2, kill a spouse, friend or relative #3

But yes, once in a while you can scare away a burglar who was too stupid to make sure you weren't home.



.

More likely that what? To be used in lawful purposes?

 

[TurtleDude]

A gun is more likely to get stolen #1, kill you #2, kill a spouse, friend or relative #3

But yes, once in a while you can scare away a burglar who was too stupid to make sure you weren't home.



.

than what? even the Obama DOJ noted thousands of DGUs a year

and again, if you are afraid to own a gun, please do not

 

[swing_voter]

More likely that what? To be used in lawful purposes?

Let me explain.

"more likely"

You can exchange that with "There is a higher probability"


.

 

[Rucker61]

Let me explain.

"more likely"

You can exchange that with "There is a higher probability"


.

Are you claiming that a law abiding citizen is "more likely" to use a firearm stored in their home for suicide, murder or in an accidental shooting than to use it for all lawful purposes?

 

[swing_voter]

Are you claiming that a law abiding citizen is "more likely" to use a firearm stored in their home for suicide, murder or in an accidental shooting than to use it for all lawful purposes?

Are you Turtle's alt account?

A gun in the house is more likely to kill you(suicide) than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to get stolen than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to kill someone you know than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

 

[Rucker61]

Are you Turtle's alt account?

A gun in the house is more likely to kill you(suicide) than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to get stolen than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to kill someone you know than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

The right, however is for "all lawful purposes".

Why do you compare unlawful purposes to a very small subset of lawful purposes?

And no, I'm not an alt account for Turtle. I suffer fools much more gladly than he does.

 

[Lursa]

If a gun was defective it wouldn’t shoot anyone, so no it wouldn’t be recalled.

How insanely stupid.

Of course it would...people would be entitled to be compensated for their property. And defective could mean just slips in spring or firing pin or other mechanisms...still shoot, just not reliably.

How insanely stupid to not understand better before posting insanely stupid stuff AA?

 

[Wayne Jr]

Safe storage should be encouraged but not required by law.

That's like arguing in favor of storing gasoline in ziplock bags and camping totes.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Are you Turtle's alt account?

A gun in the house is more likely to kill you(suicide) than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to get stolen than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

A gun in the house is more likely to kill someone you know than stop a burglar from stealing your stuff.

I would need to see stats on that. I think your misconstruing it. It seems you are adding stats
that were not meant to go together.

 

[Rich2018]

when you call guns "toys" and claim that we wanting to own our toys is costing other people their lives, you have demonstrated that you understand you do not have a valid and rational position.

No, I'm likening gun owners' love of their guns to a child's love of his toys
ie: they exist just for his amusement

...and your stupid nonsense about 400 is hilarious given you have ADMITTED that your anti gun schemes would cost lots of honest citizens their lives

"There were 434 mass shootings in 2019 that fit the inclusion criteria of this article, resulting in 517 deaths and 1,643 injuries, for a total of 2,160 victims. Compared to the previous year, there were 111 more incidents."

List of mass shootings in the United States in 2019 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And would you say the number of "honest citizens" that would die because of any hypothetical gun ban*, would be "significant" ?

*Subject to exemptions, previous discussed

...because they would be handicapped when being confronted by better armed criminals

Would you estimate their numbers would be "significant" ?

You-at best-can claim I am not willing to change the laws in order to PRETEND I am doing something to stop shootings that are already illegal. YOU, on the other hand-want to AFFIRMATIVELY do things that you ADMIT will cost innocent citizens their lives.

Would you quantify that number as "significant"

You do not have the moral high ground here

Because I'd try to stop over 400 mass shootings a year at "insignificant" cost ?

 

[TurtleDude]

No, I'm likening gun owners' love of their guns to a child's love of his toys
ie: they exist just for his amusement



"There were 434 mass shootings in 2019 that fit the inclusion criteria of this article, resulting in 517 deaths and 1,643 injuries, for a total of 2,160 victims. Compared to the previous year, there were 111 more incidents."

List of mass shootings in the United States in 2019 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And would you say the number of "honest citizens" that would die because of any hypothetical gun ban*, would be "significant" ?

*Subject to exemptions, previous discussed




Would you estimate their numbers would be "significant" ?



Would you quantify that number as "significant"



Because I'd try to stop over 400 mass shootings a year at "insignificant" cost ?

you want to start a civil war.

 

[calamity]

you want to start a civil war.

Seems to me it's the gun zealots pining to put caps in other people's asses. The rest of us just want fewer guns on the street.

 

[Rucker61]

Seems to me it's the gun zealots pining to put caps in other people's asses. The rest of us just want fewer guns on the street.

How do you get to "fewer guns on the streets"?

 

[TurtleDude]

Seems to me it's the gun zealots pining to put caps in other people's asses. The rest of us just want fewer guns on the street.

I think if the gun banners instigated doors being broken down, and people caught with guns they owned legally for years, but are now facing serious felony time, many would fight back