The Gun Culture is Somewhat In Denial About Gun Safety.

Post Reply New Topic

facts are funny as both sides have statistics and facts. seems anyone can just gather statistics. so whos right. you say your side and ours is wrong and you wont' change and neither will we as we see our facts as right. I don't see a point in this continueing you won't change our minds. name calling won't help either.

why do cops carry guns if they don't make them safer?
why do we keep fire extinguisher around?
theres situations will a firearm will save my life. theres others will it won't. most people will encounter neither. however carrying it doesn't harm anyone in 99% of the time. I've carried for years and had nothing happen. I'm not the only one. I'm not paranoid nore am I using the gun as some kind of man maker feeling. I like knowing it's there like having a fire extinguisher or keeping some food, water and blankets in my car. I carry a flashlight too, though I've rarely had to use it but if the power goes out I have it.

theres a difference between being a gun owner and supporting gun ownership or rather (pro gun vs pro 2nd amendment) some call them fare weather supporters. supporting some guns but not others, supporting hunting but not carrying daily, bolt action vs simi autos. I support all of it. I am also against the nfa laws that are so stupid. come on so a 16" gun is ok but a 15 1/2" gun is super dangerous? yeah wheres the logic in that?
whys it 18 for shotguns but 16 for rifles. apparently the m1 carbine. but if guns under 18 are so bad, then why change the law and make an exception for the m1. better if they so dangerous why let people pay $200 and still get one. hmm. maybe its just for the money making .....

as for gun safty real gun safty. maybe if we started teaching it in high school like they use to more people would learn. lots of people get into guns from anti gun familys so they have no knowledge. I had to learn everything I did from forums, youtube videos, ccw class, etc. reality is that most people don't have a special interest in guns, nor anxiety issues. they don't take the time to learn this. its becoming common kids who played cod grow up and buy guns they saw in the game. people literally walk into a shop and ask for such and such gun from Cod.

some people say I'm one of the safest people with guns. but I have anxiety so I am always worrying something will happen and checking to see if they loaded etc. however I had a friend come over once, take my daily carry out and pull the trigger(he owns guns). he didn't check it. fortantly I unloaded it cause we had kids over, so I unloaded and stored it. this was before I carried though, so it was just my home gun. now its always on me. or holsted in my pocket. if we teach everyone about gun safety and only 50% of them own guns we still reached all people who own guns. currently we don't teach anyone, so only those who have interest in it will seek it out, say what maybe 50% of gun owners?

though really accidents are so low and anit gun people are dead set about teaching about guns.

Seriously, I know where you are coming from, yes people have all sorts of accidents but really...it is so trying to read every few seconds another post about someone having a car accident or coughing to death on a piece of carrot. It's like, yeah I know. People die from other causes besides guns. It's been established.

As far as the most careful gun owner...that would probably be my Uncle...who recites gun safety lectures on a daily basis and this is probably why he has never had a lapse that I know of, unless he has and no one said. If you have gun safety on your mind you tend to be safer, if we have him to go by.

My sources have been rock-solid.

In the UK, they never did for a long while.

Cops carry guns because part of their job description is dealing with wackoes who cannot manage to follow the law. They are given special training on the appropriate use of their weapons, and the laws on the use of those weapons are so incredibly strict that they are put on administrative leave just for them being discharged, under any circumstances.


In other words, it makes you feel less helpless. Stand up for this as a valid aspect of your quality of life.

The logic is that the people gravitated toward them are crazy.

I was taught about guns when I was two. If I had used a picture of someone pointing a gun at the viewer, my father would have tanned my hide. "You should never point a gun at a person unless you intend to shoot that person. *smacksmacksmacksmack*"

I just keep inheriting them because I could barely stand to throw away a moon-pie wrapper.

The quotation above is what I intended to say. The distinctions between it and my previous post are due to somebody deciding that I could not POSSIBLY have a good reason for wanting to come back later to edit a post.

You have demonstrated that you refuse to accept that you may have made misstatements or fallacious argument on this topic, or even that you can be wrong here. The insults prove it.
This means you refuse to play fair in this discussion, therefore everything you say on this topic is voided and invalid and pointless to read.

YOU are the unbendingly biased one on this topic.

This is just my observation, not an insult -probably everyone has a topic.
I admire and respect many of your brilliant comments on WP.

As if you had a point.....


Which demagogues would those be? I don't follow politicians or listen to political commentators. I am an NRA member but I don't read their literature or visit their website other than to renew.


It makes perfect sense to someone able or willing to comprehend simple logic. You're apples to oranges equation of personal defense weapons and WMD's is what's idiotic.


Says it all right there......


The fact that you have to pepper each post with personal insults speaks volumes about the weakness of you argument. I've been accused of trolling and incivility in this forum but you've got me beat. Keep it up just for the entertainment value of it, though...

The main thing I got from that study is to not participate in criminal activity, be female, and to be white, rather than to owning a firearm or not (insofar as legal concealed carry and actual home defense are concerned).

(80%+ are black, 50% have prior arrests, and 25% or so are unemployed. That isn't a typical breakdown of the population in the US.)

People should do a study on people with concealed carry permits. Though I bet it's already been done.

Last edited by Dillogic on 04 Jan 2015, 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

and yet none of us say stuff like you just did. so if we disagree with you we are extremists who should be killed?
you sir are an extremist who can't see the other side as anything but an enemy. you say your side is rock solid pro 2nd amend people say the same and use fbi stats. you're better off just calling it quits this is accomplishing nothing.

if you cant accept any possibility that you might be wrong and attack others, then you're extremist.

this is why I can never join the left despite agreeing with them on other matters. you and they get so stuck on guns its crazy. and you call us crazy why cause we like guns. I can't help be see such similarities to racism or other forms of discrimination.

all this accomplishes is pushing people like me and middle ground people away.

And none of us unwashed peasants ever has an encounter where we need the level of protection a firearm and the knowhow to use it provides?



Most cops will tell you the training that the average cop on the streets gets is rather lacking. Our shooting range where I am also a volunteer range officer has about 15 separate ranges of various configurations that also serve as law enforcement training facilities for local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies so I know a little of what I speak of. SWAT and other tactical teams usually get good training but that’s about it.

BTW; cops do not necessarily get placed on admin leave just for discharging their weapon, either. I don’t know where you got that from.



Depending on the situation you may very well be helpless without the tools needed to deal with those situations.


That’s actually my avatar you’re talking about. At one time I use one here that was the insignia of the Totenkopfverbande of the SS. Yes, that SS. Would you like that one better?


We’ve had threads like this at least since I started here in ’07 and it has always been a rout since you side has never been able to bring anything remotely valid to the table. This “rout” is no exception thanks to you.


So you’re labeling people with a difference of opinion vermin, filth, and water moccasins and calling for their eradication.

Okaaaaay we know some of you are on one side of the fence, and some are on the other. It's established.

the study may not have been done, as congress made it illegal for the CDC to study the effects of guns.

You know, a lot of people who worry about other people with guns do so because of projection, they don't trust themselves to use guns responsibly, imagine themselves shooting people over petty arguments and such, and they think everyone else is like them; given the level of anger and personal attacks coming from the anti-gun side in this thread, I don't think I'd trust some of them with guns either.

I may respond more substantively to some of the posts later depending on my mood, I normally make it a policy of arguing gun claims aggressively, but I also try make it a policy to recognize when a lemon isn't worth the squeeze.

I did a search, and it said there was a block on funding, but I read that it was repealed.

It shouldn't be too hard to do an unbiased study.

Get 1,000 law-abiding random people with concealed carry permits and compare them against 1,000 law-abiding people without (this one is for basic safety); then do the same of 1,000 each, though use those that have been victims of violent crime (those with a permit had a weapon on them), and then see the outcome (whether having a firearm helped, made matters worst or didn't do anything).

Hell, I'd do it for free if I lived in the US.

The problem I have with many studies is that they include qualifiers that aren't related to the main point, i.e., firearms. Like the one linked here. It's cherry picking. 50% of the subjects being criminals means absolutely nothing to most people, as most people aren't criminals (this is a perfect example). It'd be closer if they used police shootings for most normal people.

^

Yeah, when it comes to gun studies, it's really important to look at the selection method and study size, as they often use some really wonky ones trying to work backwards from a conclusion.

I think a lot of problems could be solved with voice recognition triggers or ones that only recognize the finger of the person who owns the gun. Just think, such weapons could not be accidentally discharged by kids nor could someone you are trying to shoot grab your gun and shoot you instead.

obama lifted the ban, but congress hasn't funded any research. the NRA is afraid of more information showing that the net effect of owning a gun for protection is likely to be negative.