Gun control ... actual question

[BotanyBoy]

See post 652. What you're doing pretty much fits the actual definition of victim-blaming.

That bold bit where you say "pretty much" is you bullshitting.

It's not the definition of victim blaming at all.

You just got called on your control freak bullshit and are trying to worm out on owning it.

 

[badbabysitter]

Show me research that says you're more likely survive an attack from an armed assailant if you're unarmed.....you'll never find anything of the sort, because it's bullshit.

its called the Tueller drill, dumbass

I accepted that you'd rather not be armed against an armed attacker.

not with a gun, unless he was more then 20 feet away

LMFAO......except every security force on the face of the planet.

the planet does not end at the gates to your potfarm

Clearly "respectable" = anti-gun in the case of badbabysitter.

If guns are such a HORRIBLE and ineffective defense weapon then how come they are the global standard BBS?

because they dont rely on guns for everything and they are trained to not use firearms in close quarters

I mean, seriously, how can you not fucking know this?

https://nebraskafirearms.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/hillary-security-detail-1.jpg

umm wow

your " proof" the guns will protect a single woman from a comic book villain is someone surrounded by the secret service?


newsflash dipshit, the vast majority of women are sorely lacking in visible detachments of secret service surrounding them

words cannot describe the stupid

 

[badbabysitter]

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!

If the police think guns are a terrible defense option against hostile threats then why the fuck do they carry them???

because they're trained not to shoot people in close quarters

but please, keep doubling down on the stupid

 

[BotanyBoy]

its called the Tueller drill, dumbass

Controlled pair center mass is more effective....dumbass.

not with a gun, unless he was more then 20 feet away

Yes with a gun, at point blank range.


Guns > knifes.

the planet does not end at the gates to your potfarm

Show me a single unarmed security force that is taken any more seriously than mall cops.

because they dont rely on guns for everything and they are trained to not use firearms in close quarters

I mean, seriously, how can you not fucking know this?

Who is "they"??

Are you seriously claiming that security forces aren't trained to used guns in close quarters?

I've personally trained at least 4 sheriffs departments, 3 major metro PD's and 4 SWAT teams between them in exactly that. And there are at least several hundred others just like me who have done the same in the last 20 years.

You're absolutely wrong.

umm wow
your " proof" the guns will protect a single woman from a comic book villain is someone surrounded by the secret service?

My proof that guns are the most effective defense tool...via the worlds best security force.

Answer the question bbs.

If guns are such a terrible security/defense tool then how come all the anti-gun folks use guns for security/defense?

How come all the best security forces out there use guns?

newsflash dipshit, the vast majority of women are sorely lacking in visible detachments of secret service surrounding them

words cannot describe the stupid

Which is why they should be allowed to arm themselves if they so choose....

2A...because we're not all rich privileged white women.

 

[BotanyBoy]

because they're trained not to shoot people in close quarters

but please, keep doubling down on the stupid

https://media.giphy.com/media/EysAMIOt4GOmk/giphy-downsized-large.gif

You can go watch Youtube videos of dozens of PD's and sheriffs departments training to do just that.

Shit even socialist euro cops are trained to do that and they even get special close quarters weapons to do it with.

Look at em' with reflexive close quarters sights on stubbies and everything...it's like some American badass's with nothing better to do and a desire to capitalize on their skills taught them how to go shoot people in close quarters and then sold them everything they would need to accomplish that mission, including all the tacticool shit needed to look tacticool while doing it.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a4/b0/44/a4b044353e6e167fc81e338ed2387745--brave-police.jpg

That's why they have their guns drawn when they go into buildings where a known or even a possible threat is present.

Even your average patrol cops get the basics on clearing shit...pie your corners GTFO of your fatal funnels etc.

Google it......

There are dozens of schools across the US where even you as a Canadian tourist can come learn how to effectively employ a variety of weapons as effectively as possible. From knives to carbines, from self defense to "security contractor" (mercinary) ready to deploy.

For a fee of course......or don't and double down on derp.

 

[Unabatable]

...allowing just anyone...and for the thousandth time, I am not anti gun..

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif

No, you're clearly just another fucking wannabe dicktator who fantasizes you have any power/authority to "allow" "anyone" to do any fucking thing that doesn't directly violate your individual liberty.

Why can't you just switch genders, steal some kids, and be the wannabe mommy over EVERYBODY you've obviously forever longed to be?

 

[Unabatable]

See, this is exactly what happens when you spend so much blood & fortune securing, comforting and spoiling ALL women (and all the men they've femmed): the socialist ones (and especially the cucks they've femmed), freely given their inch, stand-up and start DEMANDING a mile, like they're anything else but nature's weaker sex (generally speaking, of course), yet still need to go all wannabe badass, anyway, just like psychotic socialist neci did on socialist femboynextdoor00 the other day.

While us unalienably and manly honorable men just stand back, laugh covertly as not to further trigger the utterly pathetic, spoiled, socialist fools, thinking how in the hell do these bozos EVER even imagine any logical person could possibly take them seriously at all.

 

[Wats_butthole]

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif

No, you're clearly just another fucking wannabe dicktator who fantasizes you have any power/authority to "allow" "anyone" to do any fucking thing that doesn't directly violate your individual liberty.

Why can't you just switch genders, steal some kids, and be the wannabe mommy over EVERYBODY you've obviously forever longed to be?

You just described AJ to a tee.

 

[KimGordon67]

You just described AJ to a tee.

I was vacillating between him being Lance or AJ, but I think it is AJ.

 

[Wats_butthole]

I was vacillating between him being Lance or AJ, but I think it is AJ.

unthinkable is eyer. He suffers from dementia.

 

[KimGordon67]

unthinkable is eyer. He suffers from dementia.

Eyer predates me by quite a bit, and I never worked out who he morphed into.

 

[Wats_butthole]

Eyer predates me by quite a bit, and I never worked out who he morphed into.

The 'wannabe' gives it away every time.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The 'wannabe' gives it away every time.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/c6c50a275736a9c45c6003fd3b908be3/tenor.gif?itemid=4423036

 

[cowslinger64]

I've personally trained at least 4 sheriffs departments, 3 major metro PD's and 4 SWAT teams between them in exactly that. And there are at least several hundred others just like me who have done the same in the last 20 years.

It just keeps on getting deeper.



megalomania
[meg-uh-loh-mey-nee-uh]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
Psychiatry. a symptom of mental illness marked by delusions of greatness, wealth, etc.
2.
an obsession with doing extravagant or grand things.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It just keeps on getting deeper.



megalomania
[meg-uh-loh-mey-nee-uh]
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
Psychiatry. a symptom of mental illness marked by delusions of greatness, wealth, etc.
2.
an obsession with doing extravagant or grand things.

It's never been any different.

You can keep posting that definition but nothing I've said fits the bill, just because you're pathetic doesn't mean I am.

Detroit...LOL

 

[cowslinger64]

It's never been any different.

You can keep posting that definition but nothing I've said fits the bill, just because you're pathetic doesn't mean I am.

Detroit...LOL

A compulsive lying pussy excuse for a man living in meth head ghetto in californey wants to call me pathetic. Hilarious.

You didn't train anyone... Unless it was a class on how to spend ungodly amounts of hours talking out their ass while stoned. ...

 

[richard_daily]

little organization you may have heard of, they're called the police.

Really?

They... carry guns for self defense, right?

 

[cowslinger64]

http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/roflmao.gif

No, you're clearly just another fucking wannabe dicktator who fantasizes you have any power/authority to "allow" "anyone" to do any fucking thing that doesn't directly violate your individual liberty.

Why can't you just switch genders, steal some kids, and be the wannabe mommy over EVERYBODY you've obviously forever longed to be?

As usual.. Your ranting is so over the top and ridiculous.. And really makes no sense.

Why don't you and botany boy go get the first piece of ass either of you have had in a few years.. With each other. You could both certainly use it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

A compulsive lying pussy excuse for a man living in meth head ghetto in californey wants to call me pathetic. Hilarious.

You didn't train anyone... Unless it was a class on how to spend ungodly amounts of hours talking out their ass while stoned. ...

DD214 says otherwise, so does the bankroll that got me living on the north coast in the first place, shits expensive here.

 

[Taggy1]

Out of the 74 countries for which data seems to be available, the US has the 11th highest rate of gun deaths (and the 10 higher countries are not exactly surprising). Of the 64 countries for which data is available, the US is the 12th highest for accidental gun deaths. (Source - yes, it's Wikipedia, but the way they make their tables able to be manipulated works pretty well. If anyone has a more reliable source for these data, I'd be interested to see it.)

Since the Vegas shooting, I've read a lot of stuff here and been thinking a lot about the issue of gun control. I personally don't have a problem with guns as a concept. However, we don't own a gun, and we don't live in a context in which gun ownership is common. We also have an incredibly low rate of gun death.

I've learnt a lot about the Second Amendment in the last few days, and read quite complex arguments about how gun ownership is a 'right' ... I'm not sill convinced that it's a human right, but I get that it's a right under the US constitution. And I have a better understanding (although far from complete) of the history of the US that's created the culture in which that seems to make sense.

So, in the light of all that, I'm thinking most people would still agree the stats in para one above are not great? Given that, what is proposed as the solution? If you don't think greater gun control is the answer, what is?

It would be great if any thoughts along any lines were supported by actual evidence.

*Feel free to hurl whatever insults you want in my general direction in response to anything that's said in this thread, but I won't respond to that. I'm actually genuinely interested in getting an understanding of the situation.

I’m from the U.K. and we aren’t allowed guns. Something I’m sad to say will lead to our downfall as a nation. I only hope the USA does not ban guns. Our last beacon of freedom

 

[oggbashan]

I’m from the U.K. and we aren’t allowed guns. Something I’m sad to say will lead to our downfall as a nation. I only hope the USA does not ban guns. Our last beacon of freedom

We are allowed shotguns, air rifles and crossbows.

But 'downfall of a nation'? That's extreme. We haven't needed weapons for a state enemy since the civil war.

No matter how many guns US civilians have, they are useless against modern tanks and artillery.

 

[FlowersForFun]

No matter how many guns US civilians have, they are useless against modern tanks and artillery.

The Vietnamese and Afghani's proved your statement false as recent as a few years ago.

Tanks and arty are big, slow and extremely vulnerable to small and fast teams of legs, not to mention totally fucking useless in urban environments and civil war where killing everyone will absolutely lose you your objective.

They stay way back in the rear with the gear and are use more for illumination than shelling.

Heavy indirect fire like that are largely relics of an old "all out war kill everyone' warfighting style that had it's place pre-nuclear WWII, but it just isn't applicable in most modern combat environments.

The rifleman is still and extraordinarily effective weapon and the backbone of warfare still to this day.

 

[Conager]

One kill per round fired is the ultimate in economic efficiency in warfare.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The rifleman is still and extraordinarily effective weapon and the backbone of warfare still to this day.

Yes, they are. Damned shame you couldn't hack it, and had to get a permanent profile.

 

[Conager]

Yes, they are. Damned shame you couldn't hack it, and had to get a permanent profile.

Always projection with you. Always.