Poll for Gun Control Advocates

[MoonShadow]

If cousin Sally regularly carries her S&W Ladysmith wherever she goes, maybe Uncle Bob thinks twice about doing anything untoward. Maybe that co-worker decides to just have another drink instead of following her into the supply closet, on the off chance she really did just need to go get some rubber bands. Maybe the mugger sees the pistol on the guy's hip and decides that this guy will not be the easy mark he was hoping for. Maybe the robber thinks twice when he sees the sign on the door: "Warning, Cashier is ARMED." As to the home invasion, well, have a peek at this.

Except that's not how most rapes happen. Read a bit more about it. Uncle Bob starts with a few innocent things that eventually progresses. The colleague takes advantage of someone that had too much to drink, or changed her mind when they reached the bedroom.
A mugger that sees an armed person will hopefully not attack, or they will see the threat and act to neutralize it first. All depending on the level of desperation. Same goes for the shopkeeper. Shoot first and get money later. In any case the assault will be more violent, not less.

It doesn't really work that way.  Have you ever heard of someone robbing a gun store at gunpoint?

Or a doughnut shop with three cop cars parked out front?

[BitcoinINV]

If cousin Sally regularly carries her S&W Ladysmith wherever she goes, maybe Uncle Bob thinks twice about doing anything untoward. Maybe that co-worker decides to just have another drink instead of following her into the supply closet, on the off chance she really did just need to go get some rubber bands. Maybe the mugger sees the pistol on the guy's hip and decides that this guy will not be the easy mark he was hoping for. Maybe the robber thinks twice when he sees the sign on the door: "Warning, Cashier is ARMED." As to the home invasion, well, have a peek at this.

Except that's not how most rapes happen. Read a bit more about it. Uncle Bob starts with a few innocent things that eventually progresses. The colleague takes advantage of someone that had too much to drink, or changed her mind when they reached the bedroom.
A mugger that sees an armed person will hopefully not attack, or they will see the threat and act to neutralize it first. All depending on the level of desperation. Same goes for the shopkeeper. Shoot first and get money later. In any case the assault will be more violent, not less.

It doesn't really work that way.  Have you ever heard of someone robbing a gun store at gunpoint?

Or a doughnut shop with three cop cars parked out front?

Lmfao thats a great way to put it

[TheButterZone]

If cousin Sally regularly carries her S&W Ladysmith wherever she goes, maybe Uncle Bob thinks twice about doing anything untoward. Maybe that co-worker decides to just have another drink instead of following her into the supply closet, on the off chance she really did just need to go get some rubber bands. Maybe the mugger sees the pistol on the guy's hip and decides that this guy will not be the easy mark he was hoping for. Maybe the robber thinks twice when he sees the sign on the door: "Warning, Cashier is ARMED." As to the home invasion, well, have a peek at this.

Except that's not how most rapes happen. Read a bit more about it. Uncle Bob starts with a few innocent things that eventually progresses. The colleague takes advantage of someone that had too much to drink, or changed her mind when they reached the bedroom.
A mugger that sees an armed person will hopefully not attack, or they will see the threat and act to neutralize it first. All depending on the level of desperation. Same goes for the shopkeeper. Shoot first and get money later. In any case the assault will be more violent, not less.

It doesn't really work that way.  Have you ever heard of someone robbing a gun store at gunpoint?

Or a doughnut shop with three cop cars parked out front?

Key word missing: successfully.

[AntiCap]

It doesn't really work that way.  Have you ever heard of someone robbing a gun store at gunpoint?

Or a doughnut shop with three cop cars parked out front?

Yes, yes I have. http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/87598762.html
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_fefbf848-af8b-5be4-b41d-2d3aaec10d77.html

However that is obviously not the most common crime. You would only rob a gun store if you needed guns, not cash.

[TheButterZone]

It doesn't really work that way.  Have you ever heard of someone robbing a gun store at gunpoint?

Or a doughnut shop with three cop cars parked out front?

Yes, yes I have. http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/87598762.html
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/crime/article_fefbf848-af8b-5be4-b41d-2d3aaec10d77.html

However that is obviously not the most common crime. You would only rob a gun store if you needed guns, not cash.

Notice he said AT GUNPOINT.

It appears both links you provided were pure strong-arm robberies. In other words, hand to hand combat only. Both attributable to lack of preparation on the part of the victims. They let the perps close distance and apparently because the perps were unarmed, they felt they couldn't shoot. Even an unarmed robbery of a gun shop justifies homicide in self-defense (assuming the perps end up being rare fatalities from handgun wounds), because if you don't neutralize the threat, criminals get the guns and can kill you and god knows how many others.

[myrkul]

There's a video in the Guns thread, I think, of just such an action. They go in with, if I remember correctly, a shotgun, and come out with several more guns and whatever was in the register. Ballsy move, but had the clerk been armed, and proper security measures been followed, it would never have happened.

The doughnut shop example still stands, though.

A mugger that sees an armed person will hopefully not attack

That's the idea. Though the events will still happen, if the assailants are desperate enough, and when they do, they'll be bloodier, that very bloodiness will deter most of them from happening in the first place. Reducing the level of desperation in the society is important too (but isn't really relevant to a gun control discussion).

[TheButterZone]

There's a video in the Guns thread, I think, of just such an action. They go in with, if I remember correctly, a shotgun, and come out with several more guns and whatever was in the register. Ballsy move, but had the clerk been armed, and proper security measures been followed, it would never have happened.

Even that's apples and oranges. If you're not able and willing to protect your merchandise or your life by any means necessary, your merchandise will be taken, and you have to pray they don't load your merchandise and take your life.

[vampire]

This is all I have to say

I assume you aren't familiar with soviet union. There were plenty of armed factions fighting it.... And still didn't help a bit.

During WW2 in Ukraine there were plenty of ukrainian freedom fighters, in the end they were all crushed: and they had access to weapons, plenty of them. Guns cannot protect against an army, not 60 years ago, not today. And that picture exactly what happened to UNA, OUN and others.


The organized mobs are much stronger than the disorganized ones. The only thing that crushed Soviets was greed.

[AntiCap]

There's a video in the Guns thread, I think, of just such an action. They go in with, if I remember correctly, a shotgun, and come out with several more guns and whatever was in the register. Ballsy move, but had the clerk been armed, and proper security measures been followed, it would never have happened.

The doughnut shop example still stands, though.

That's the idea. Though the events will still happen, if the assailants are desperate enough, and when they do, they'll be bloodier, that very bloodiness will deter most of them from happening in the first place. Reducing the level of desperation in the society is important too (but isn't really relevant to a gun control discussion).

Well, no, the doughnut example won't stand either I'm afraid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa-wfOo36qY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHg56J3yhLQ

I agree that the best thing to do is to reduce desperation levels, and  also that it's not relevant here.
Have you ever had anything to do with criminals? I don't mean victimized, but worked with them? I have, by association, done that. They are not generally deterred by consequences, since few of them plan that far, or if they do they are convinced that they will come out on top. The assault will be bloodier, and that's about it. Best case nobody is seriously hurt. Worst case someone lost a son/daughter/father/mother.

[TheButterZone]

Well, I have seen criminals in prison saying they were scared shitless of armed victims, and that they sought softer targets if they knew their victims could defend themselves. So shove your pro-criminal safety BS where the sun don't shine, because that's the only place it can survive.

[myrkul]

Well, I have seen criminals in prison saying they were scared shitless of armed victims, and that they sought softer targets if they knew their victims could defend themselves. So shove your pro-criminal safety BS where the sun don't shine, because that's the only place it can survive.

This.

[AntiCap]

Well, I have seen criminals in prison saying they were scared shitless of armed victims, and that they sought softer targets if they knew their victims could defend themselves. So shove your pro-criminal safety BS where the sun don't shine, because that's the only place it can survive.

Very eloquent.
Yes, robbers seek the easiest target. The ones that aren't a threat. I agree with that. What I don't agree with is your solution. Do you honestly think that a robber won't need any money if people around him are armed, or do you think he will work out a way to neutralize the threat that his intended victims now pose?

What robber would you rather meet? A confident one that believes that he can take your money and get away safely, or one that is scared beyond belief that you might be armed and could shoot him at any moment?

[myrkul]

Well, I have seen criminals in prison saying they were scared shitless of armed victims, and that they sought softer targets if they knew their victims could defend themselves. So shove your pro-criminal safety BS where the sun don't shine, because that's the only place it can survive.

Very eloquent.
Yes, robbers seek the easiest target. The ones that aren't a threat. I agree with that. What I don't agree with is your solution. Do you honestly think that a robber won't need any money if people around him are armed, or do you think he will work out a way to neutralize the threat that his intended victims now pose?

What robber would you rather meet? A confident one that believes that he can take your money and get away safely, or one that is scared beyond belief that you might be armed and could shoot him at any moment?

OK, see, now you've gone fully off the "criminal safety" deep end.

If the criminal is so scared, maybe he should try earning his money, rather than taking it by force?

[AntiCap]

OK, see, now you've gone fully off the "criminal safety" deep end.

If the criminal is so scared, maybe he should try earning his money, rather than taking it by force?

I don't care about the criminals safety. Ok, a little bit then, but mostly the victims. Even a criminal should get the opportunity to better himself, and until he does we should try to mitigate the damage he does, and keep him away from society until we have given him the tools to coexist with it. That includes helping him find a way to earn his own money.

[myrkul]

OK, see, now you've gone fully off the "criminal safety" deep end.

If the criminal is so scared, maybe he should try earning his money, rather than taking it by force?

I don't care about the criminals safety. Ok, a little bit then, but mostly the victims. Even a criminal should get the opportunity to better himself, and until he does we should try to mitigate the damage he does, and keep him away from society until we have given him the tools to coexist with it. That includes helping him find a way to earn his own money.

Great! Then let's give him an incentive to "go straight" on his own, namely, safety. Rather than keeping him away from society, why don't we offer him opportunities within society to better his position without using violence?

[AntiCap]

Great! Then let's give him an incentive to "go straight" on his own, namely, safety. Rather than keeping him away from society, why don't we offer him opportunities within society to better his position without using violence?

Threatening him with violence isn't a working incentive. Criminals are threatened by institutionalized violence every day. Doesn't really scare them straight now does it? If you want to help, which I'm all for, you need early intervention in schools, extra resources dedicated to helping kids in danger. Social programs to help single parents. Early diagnosis and treatment of kids with mental disabilities.  That's how you reduce crime.
Education, and help to find a job for those who already are committing crimes. Tools for them to handle their issues. That's what to do if you want to help people to "go straight".

None of the above is relevant for the topic however.

I see crimes as a result of social problems. Adding a lot of guns to the mix doesn't solve the problems. It attacks the symptoms, with a lot of extra bloodshed.

[Oinsane1]

i wanna know when the citizenry get to have some sabo orbiting rounds

[AntiCap]

i wanna know when the citizenry get to have some sabo orbiting rounds

Screw that, I want a Californium-251 mini-bomb on me, capable of producing say 100 tonnes of TNT-blast, all connected to a hidden switch, as well as an EKG and an EEG, so if I get killed in a robbery people will know, and the robber won't survive. That would give criminals incentives not to rob me, and people nearby incentive to keep me safe as a baby.

[myrkul]

i wanna know when the citizenry get to have some sabo orbiting rounds

Screw that, I want a Californium-251 mini-bomb on me, capable of producing say 100 tonnes of TNT-blast, all connected to a hidden switch, as well as an EKG and an EEG, so if I get killed in a robbery people will know, and the robber won't survive. That would give criminals incentives not to rob me, and people nearby incentive to keep me safe as a baby.

So long as you advertise that fact. One robber comes along who doesn't know, and your estate will have one hefty class-action suit to deal with.

[AntiCap]

i wanna know when the citizenry get to have some sabo orbiting rounds

Screw that, I want a Californium-251 mini-bomb on me, capable of producing say 100 tonnes of TNT-blast, all connected to a hidden switch, as well as an EKG and an EEG, so if I get killed in a robbery people will know, and the robber won't survive. That would give criminals incentives not to rob me, and people nearby incentive to keep me safe as a baby.

So long as you advertise that fact. One robber comes along who doesn't know, and your estate will have one hefty class-action suit to deal with.

Why do I have to advertise it? Are concealed weapons not allowed in your world?
And why my estate? I didn't hurt anybody. Go pester the robbers estate. He was the one who triggered the device.