What would you do about Virginia Tech?

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
bless their hearts, they think they are doing good / have my best interest at heart, but they are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think this is very questionable. Strong anti-gun types (in my experience) are almost always people who have never touched a firearm. Their motivation is simply fear of the unknown. Educating someone in the proper use and safe handling of firearms will amost always moderate (at least) their opinion on gun control -- I've seen in happen several times. (with the possible exception of cops, some of whom may have an "us vs. them" mentality that fosters a "guns are for US" point of view)

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Borodog,

If the net effect is saving one person, it is a good thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the net effect is ponies for everyone and pixies and rainbows, is that a good thing?

It's a ridiculous false dichotomy, because it isn't a choice between "saving just one person" and not "saving just one person". It is a choice between making yourself feel better now at the cost of gulags and deathcamps a few decades down the road, and wringing your hands now and avoiding the gulags and deathcamps down the road.

Guns are not protected in the US constitution so that individuals can protect themselves from burglars and muggers. They are protected so that US citizens can kill government officials when it becomes necessary.

In other words, even if it were true that banning guns would magically result in fewer random homicides (even though it of course wouldn't; it's a ridiculous notion), that still would not justify it, because that inevitably ends in mass systematic murder of disarmed populations by governments. Governments murdered of order 200 million of their own citizens in the 20th century (this is not during war; this is governments murdering their own citizens). If governments are to exist at all, they should be afraid of their citizens. I like the idea that every politician, bureaucrat and jackbooted thug knows that he operates in a country teeming with a billion firearms in the hands of the people he is trying to feed off of.

It's only a fringe benefit that guns are used defensively of order 10 times more often than they are to commit crimes.

I mean, really, why do you think all the mass shootings are confined to places where the victims are guaranteed to be unarmed, like schools? When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting at a gun show? I mean, is this really so difficult to comprehend?

In my office hours today I had a girl come see me for help on the homework. I was just back from lunch where I'd watched about the VT shooting on the TV, and asked her if she'd heard about it. She had, and after we talked about how crazy it was, she said to me, without any prompting, "They really should allow professors to carry guns." DUH.

You want to save "just one life"? How about letting those people chained inside that building today have the chance to defend themselves? A $20 revolver on each of the airliners on 9/11 could have prevented what a half a trillion dollar defense budget of the government that banned them could not.

Man you gun banners make me gag.

[renodoc]

I knew this thread would call out the borodog.

one well placed gun-toting ACer at Vtech today could have made a big difference.

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
Metric,

But what if it would save the life of JUST ONE CHILD???

You can't possibly argue with that.

[/ QUOTE ]
There is only one way to parry such a devistating case...

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]


I mean, really, why do you think all the mass shootings are confined to places where the victims are guaranteed to be unarmed, like schools? When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting at a gun show? I mean, is this really so difficult to comprehend?



[/ QUOTE ]

Makes sense to me.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Borodog,

If the net effect is saving one person, it is a good thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the net effect is ponies for everyone and pixies and rainbows, is that a good thing?

It's a ridiculous false dichotomy, because it isn't a choice between "saving just one person" and not "saving just one person". It is a choice between making yourself feel better now at the cost of gulags and deathcamps a few decades down the road, and wringing your hands now and avoiding the gulags and deathcamps down the road.

Guns are not protected in the US constitution so that individuals can protect themselves from burglars and muggers. They are protected so that US citizens can kill government officials when it becomes necessary.

In other words, even if it were true that banning guns would magically result in fewer random homicides (even though it of course wouldn't; it's a ridiculous notion), that still would not justify it, because that inevitably ends in mass systematic murder of disarmed populations by governments. Governments murdered of order 200 million of their own citizens in the 20th century (this is not during war; this is governments murdering their own citizens). If governments are to exist at all, they should be afraid of their citizens. I like the idea that every politician, bureaucrat and jackbooted thug knows that he operates in a country teeming with a billion firearms in the hands of the people he is trying to feed off of.

It's only a fringe benefit that guns are used defensively of order 10 times more often than they are to commit crimes.

I mean, really, why do you think all the mass shootings are confined to places where the victims are guaranteed to be unarmed, like schools? When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting at a gun show? I mean, is this really so difficult to comprehend?

In my office hours today I had a girl come see me for help on the homework. I was just back from lunch where I'd watched about the VT shooting on the TV, and asked her if she'd heard about it. She had, and after we talked about how crazy it was, she said to me, without any prompting, "They really should allow professors to carry guns." DUH.

You want to save "just one life"? How about letting those people chained inside that building today have the chance to defend themselves? A $20 revolver on each of the airliners on 9/11 could have prevented what a half a trillion dollar defense budget of the government that banned them could not.

Man you gun banners make me gag.

[/ QUOTE ]
A+ as always Borodog. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Are you familiar with the paper I linked earlier in the thread concerning the "wild" west which actually had a much lower crime rate relative to other parts of America? I doubt there is anything in there you don't already know, I just found it interesting.

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
There is an argument for having people carry guns. They are called cops. They carry guns because they have training to do so in a safe manner.

[/ QUOTE ]
*I* have training to do so in a safe manner, and I happen to be a good deal more efficient with their use than your typical cop on the beat. So I guess this means we're good.

[iron81]

[ QUOTE ]
*I* have training to do so in a safe manner, and I happen to be a good deal more efficient with their use than your typical cop on the beat. So I guess this means we're good.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is efficient synonymous with trigger-happy?

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is an argument for having people carry guns. They are called cops. They carry guns because they have training to do so in a safe manner.

[/ QUOTE ]
*I* have training to do so in a safe manner, and I happen to be a good deal more efficient with their use than your typical cop on the beat. So I guess this means we're good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who wants to understand why citizens of america have the right to carry guns see Borodogs post.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is an argument for having people carry guns. They are called cops. They carry guns because they have training to do so in a safe manner.

[/ QUOTE ]
*I* have training to do so in a safe manner, and I happen to be a good deal more efficient with their use than your typical cop on the beat. So I guess this means we're good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone who wants to understand why citizens of america have the right to carry guns see Borodogs post.

[/ QUOTE ]

So a [ QUOTE ]
well regulated militia

[/ QUOTE ] can [ QUOTE ]
kill government officials when it becomes necessary

[/ QUOTE ]

not so every Tom, Dick, and Harry can carry a pistol for fun