Bitcoin Forum
December 16, 2017, 08:47:55 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: As a gun control advocate, have you or a close family member ever owned a firearm?
Yes - 28 (19.9%)
No - 21 (14.9%)
I am not a gun control advocate. - 92 (65.2%)
Total Voters: 141

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Poll for Gun Control Advocates  (Read 17526 times)
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 17, 2012, 11:20:53 PM
 #41

I'm not sure how to do that. Perhaps if you give guns to inmates on one US prison where the offenders are violent, and compare the effects to a regular prison?

Or, you could compare violent crime rates in countries both before and after gun laws were passed, like this guy did:
http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636

States, as in US states I assume.
What if the opposite had been done? What if guns had been removed from everybody but the police, what then? Perhaps that would have reduced violent crimes even more. No way to know.

Guns are tools for killing. That's what they do. They make killing easy. If killing is harder to do, fewer people will probably do it. Or at least succeed at it. By how much is anyone's guess.

No, he also examines other countries, such as England. Crime rates went up (still low, but did increase). Read the book, or at least the wiki page on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/More_Guns,_Less_Crime

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513457275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513457275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513457275
Reply with quote  #2

1513457275
Report to moderator
1513457275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513457275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513457275
Reply with quote  #2

1513457275
Report to moderator
1513457275
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513457275

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513457275
Reply with quote  #2

1513457275
Report to moderator
BitcoinINV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:21:01 PM
 #42

I'm not sure how to do that. Perhaps if you give guns to inmates on one US prison where the offenders are violent, and compare the effects to a regular prison?

Or, you could compare violent crime rates in countries both before and after gun laws were passed, like this guy did:
http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636

States, as in US states I assume.
What if the opposite had been done? What if guns had been removed from everybody but the police, what then? Perhaps that would have reduced violent crimes even more. No way to know.

Guns are tools for killing. That's what they do. They make killing easy. If killing is harder to do, fewer people will probably do it. Or at least succeed at it. By how much is anyone's guess.

Guns a tool for killing or a way to keep some dumb ass from robing me? If they know I got a gun and they come in my house to rob/rape/murder eat my munchies and they know I got a gun, it will make them think twice.

AntiCap
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:23:46 PM
 #43

Do you always avoid answering questions by asking a question of your own?

And, from just looking at the pictures, obviously the second one. But what you're proposing if I understand you correctly, is that everywhere should be like the second pic. Arm everybody.

I answered your question by not answering it. I ceded the point. Yes, a violent environment makes people violent. But note that while we only see one person open carrying in the first picture, there is no reason why everyone there would not be armed, even Bongo-boy there. The situation, however, is not violent, regardless of how many people are armed, because the people are peaceful. The second picture, on the other hand, is violent, because the people with the guns are violent. A little backstory: That gentleman there with the knife was minding his own business, smoking something that "looked like a marijuana cigarette", and is simply (unsuccessfully, and unwisely) attempting to defend himself from their aggression.

"Everybody" isn't armed in that picture, only the thugs in the blue costumes are.

I get that everybody isn't armed. But that was your suggestion a few posts up, wasn't it? Arm everybody. Did I get that wrong?

Not sure how US police handles things, but if there's a law (agree or not) that you break (or not) and police comes to question you about it, and you pull a knife, you're really not defending yourself are you?
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 17, 2012, 11:26:17 PM
 #44

Do you always avoid answering questions by asking a question of your own?

And, from just looking at the pictures, obviously the second one. But what you're proposing if I understand you correctly, is that everywhere should be like the second pic. Arm everybody.

I answered your question by not answering it. I ceded the point. Yes, a violent environment makes people violent. But note that while we only see one person open carrying in the first picture, there is no reason why everyone there would not be armed, even Bongo-boy there. The situation, however, is not violent, regardless of how many people are armed, because the people are peaceful. The second picture, on the other hand, is violent, because the people with the guns are violent. A little backstory: That gentleman there with the knife was minding his own business, smoking something that "looked like a marijuana cigarette", and is simply (unsuccessfully, and unwisely) attempting to defend himself from their aggression.

"Everybody" isn't armed in that picture, only the thugs in the blue costumes are.

I get that everybody isn't armed. But that was your suggestion a few posts up, wasn't it? Arm everybody. Did I get that wrong?

Not sure how US police handles things, but if there's a law (agree or not) that you break (or not) and police comes to question you about it, and you pull a knife, you're really not defending yourself are you?

I did say it was unwise, what the man did, did I not? Wink

And yes, my suggestion was to arm everyone, like in the first picture. Peaceful armed people do not suddenly become violent.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
BitcoinINV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:29:07 PM
 #45

Do you always avoid answering questions by asking a question of your own?

And, from just looking at the pictures, obviously the second one. But what you're proposing if I understand you correctly, is that everywhere should be like the second pic. Arm everybody.

I answered your question by not answering it. I ceded the point. Yes, a violent environment makes people violent. But note that while we only see one person open carrying in the first picture, there is no reason why everyone there would not be armed, even Bongo-boy there. The situation, however, is not violent, regardless of how many people are armed, because the people are peaceful. The second picture, on the other hand, is violent, because the people with the guns are violent. A little backstory: That gentleman there with the knife was minding his own business, smoking something that "looked like a marijuana cigarette", and is simply (unsuccessfully, and unwisely) attempting to defend himself from their aggression.

"Everybody" isn't armed in that picture, only the thugs in the blue costumes are.

I get that everybody isn't armed. But that was your suggestion a few posts up, wasn't it? Arm everybody. Did I get that wrong?


Not sure how US police handles things, but if there's a law (agree or not) that you break (or not) and police comes to question you about it, and you pull a knife, you're really not defending yourself are you?

I did say it was unwise, what the man did, did I not? Wink

And yes, my suggestion was to arm everyone, like in the first picture. Peaceful armed people do not suddenly become violent.


I agree I think like everything education is key.

AntiCap
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:32:45 PM
 #46

This is what I used to sound like, I guess I've grown up since then... Guns ARE tools for killing, and when you need to kill someone you want it to be easier for you than it is for them

Oh, you have a little master suppression technique going there. Implying that I somehow lack the mental capability to understand what you have grasped. Bravo.
Point 1.2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_suppression_techniques

Explodicle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 947


View Profile
August 17, 2012, 11:49:23 PM
 #47


Correct, which is what mandatory liability insurance would do. You haven't justified just having one sweeping policy for the foolish and wise alike.

Would you rather face a robber while you are armed or unarmed?

I'm not disputing American aggression. I'm disputing a causality between permissive gun laws and homocide rate, so you'd have to show how homocides decrease in jurisdictions once gun bans are enacted.

What sweeping policy have I proposed?
Gun prohibition before "we're" grown up, and legalization after. This is opposed to handling it on a case-by-case basis with liability insurance.
Quote
I have been robbed. I was unarmed and gave up what little I had on me. He got a little cash, I got away unharmed. Had I been armed I might have resisted which would have ended badly for one of us.
Do you always rely on personal anecdote to support your political beliefs? Perhaps armed AntiCap would be reflecting on how he could have been stabbed anyways.
drakahn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 12:21:14 AM
 #48

This is what I used to sound like, I guess I've grown up since then... Guns ARE tools for killing, and when you need to kill someone you want it to be easier for you than it is for them

Oh, you have a little master suppression technique going there. Implying that I somehow lack the mental capability to understand what you have grasped. Bravo.
Point 1.2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_suppression_techniques



No, not really, just that I see the world differently then when I used to sound like you, Not to imply I think you are not grown up, just that I was not when I was anti-gun.

And you are so cute when you are angry.

14ga8dJ6NGpiwQkNTXg7KzwozasfaXNfEU
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 12:32:32 AM
 #49

This is what I used to sound like, I guess I've grown up since then... Guns ARE tools for killing, and when you need to kill someone you want it to be easier for you than it is for them

Oh, you have a little master suppression technique going there. Implying that I somehow lack the mental capability to understand what you have grasped. Bravo.
Point 1.2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_suppression_techniques

Maturity ≠ mental capability. Lacking one does not indicate you lack the other, and stating that someone lacks one does not imply that they lack the other.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988


Nemo me impune lacessit


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 01:03:16 AM
 #50

I'm not sure how to do that. Perhaps if you give guns to inmates on one US prison where the offenders are violent, and compare the effects to a regular prison?

Or, you could compare violent crime rates in countries both before and after gun laws were passed, like this guy did:
http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493636

States, as in US states I assume.
What if the opposite had been done? What if guns had been removed from everybody but the police, what then? Perhaps that would have reduced violent crimes even more. No way to know.

Guns are tools for killing. That's what they do. They make killing easy. If killing is harder to do, fewer people will probably do it. Or at least succeed at it. By how much is anyone's guess.

Actually, it's far easier to kill with most everything but guns. Guns make LOTS OF NOISE, and handgun fatalities are rare, according to morbidity stats. Full auto rifle fatalities at further than contact distances are also rare, when you realize that most of that lead is spraying everywhere but at the target's vital organs, if it even hits the target at all.

You only begin to approach the difficulty of killing with a gun if you are screaming like a banshee while you wield whatever silent weapon you're about to use. And yes, that even means bombs, because once they make noise, either the suicide bomber is dead (stupid suicide bombers announcing their intentions get shot in the head), or the command detonator is safely away. Smart killers (real ones, not fictional ones with 'silencers' that in real life, don't silence SHIT) use guns as a last resort, and only at the furthest imaginable distances so they minimize their chances of getting caught.

You don't have to go to Camp Peary to know this common sense shit.

MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1708



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 03:30:18 AM
 #51

This is what I used to sound like, I guess I've grown up since then... Guns ARE tools for killing, and when you need to kill someone you want it to be easier for you than it is for them

You're right, guns are tools.  They have a specific purpose and use.  That's how cops use them too, right?  They kill people every day with them, and yet you don't advocate that the cops stop carrying them, do you?  When you get down to the root of the gun control argument, it's about trust.  We're supposed to be able to trust men in uniform, but when these same men are wearing street clothes; whether simply off-duty or retired from service, they're no longer trustworthy?  If you can't imagine yourself comfortable around someone that you know is armed & not wearing a badge, your choices involve carrying yourself to even the odds or simply advocating for government to remove firearms from the public spaces.  The former requires much from you, including the responsiblity to brush up on both the law concerning justifiable use of force and the practical skills required in safely using a firearm; as well as the rather steep personal cost of obtaining the weapon to start with.  The latter option is simply easier, as is doesn't require anything from you other than a vote and imposes the burden of enforcement upon the police & those who wish to carry for whatever reason.  The facts remain, though, that any practical level of reducing the number of firearms in public is impossible by statutes.  Firearms are very old tech, and easily produced by skilled people today, and soon enough it will be possible to print out a crude firearm on a hobby level 3D printer.  And this one might actually be all plastic.

http://defensedistributed.com/

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
AntiCap
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 04:07:41 PM
 #52

Maturity ≠ mental capability. Lacking one does not indicate you lack the other, and stating that someone lacks one does not imply that they lack the other.

Is that somehow better you think? Implying that I lack maturity? What if I was a gun advocate before but matured into my current position?
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 04:17:25 PM
 #53

Maturity ≠ mental capability. Lacking one does not indicate you lack the other, and stating that someone lacks one does not imply that they lack the other.

Is that somehow better you think? Implying that I lack maturity? What if I was a gun advocate before but matured into my current position?

"Matured" into acting out of fear, rather than logic?

When you grow up, you'll realize there's no need to fear peaceful people.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 04:21:45 PM
 #54

That's interesting. Someone voted yes. I'd be very interested in hearing the story there.

I find this statement to be funny.
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 04:25:14 PM
 #55

That's interesting. Someone voted yes. I'd be very interested in hearing the story there.

I find this statement to be funny.

Oh yes, quite humorous that I would wonder why a gun control advocate would have a gun.

Of course, I had not considered that there might be police officers or ex-police officers responding.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
FirstAscent
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
August 18, 2012, 04:48:24 PM
 #56

Of course, I had not considered that there might be police officers or ex-police officers responding.

I find this statement funny as well. I don't think you really know who's responding.
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
August 18, 2012, 05:09:25 PM
 #57

Of course, I had not considered that there might be police officers or ex-police officers responding.

I find this statement funny as well. I don't think you really know who's responding.

I know I responded. That's the only person who I know has responded. I don't even know if you have. Honestly, I don't care.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
Roland68
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 96



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 05:12:23 PM
 #58

gun control works only for honest people ...

Bad guys still get theys weapons ...

as a bad guy I would vote for gun control ...

I'm honest ... and vote against any gun control .
drakahn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 06:32:51 PM
 #59

gun control works only for honest people ...

Bad guys still get theys weapons ...

as a bad guy I would vote for gun control ...

I'm honest ... and vote against any gun control .

Replace gun control with, "marijuana prohibition",  "internet filter", "DRM" the bad guys will still be doing bad things, and the honest people will be limited

At a certain point the line between good and bad will be so blurred the government will have us all locked in work camps (Maybe biden wasn't being racist, maybe they are going to put y'all back in chains, all y'all) .... Being unarmed is only going to help.

14ga8dJ6NGpiwQkNTXg7KzwozasfaXNfEU
BitcoinINV
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448



View Profile
August 18, 2012, 07:33:53 PM
 #60

gun control works only for honest people ...

Bad guys still get theys weapons ...

as a bad guy I would vote for gun control ...

I'm honest ... and vote against any gun control .

Replace gun control with, "marijuana prohibition",  "internet filter", "DRM" the bad guys will still be doing bad things, and the honest people will be limited

At a certain point the line between good and bad will be so blurred the government will have us all locked in work camps (Maybe biden wasn't being racist, maybe they are going to put y'all back in chains, all y'all) .... Being unarmed is only going to help.

So very true, and this is the way the U.S.A is moving sadly.

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!