Guns as the great equalizer

Page 5 of 18 [ 281 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 18 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

10 Jun 2015, 9:28 am

blauSamstag wrote:

...You cannot, however, brandish a weapon.

Or communicate in any way the presence of a weapon on your person or within your reach.

Specifically you cannot verbally state that you have a gun....

Hm. I often conflate the bazillions of facts in my head into some creative permutations, so I re-checked and found that the Utah Code does, in fact, include a statute which allows for an individual with a firearm who "(a) threatens the use of a dangerous weapon; or [...] (b) draws or exhibits a dangerous weapon" ... "to prevent another's use of unlawful force" ( http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE76/htm/76_10_050600.htm ). I remember lobbying for this statute. It was determined by a majority of the legislators to allow for certain behaviors that would likely prevent an escalation of violence. In other words, they (and I) believed that showing your otherwise concealed or holstered firearm, and telling others who appear threatening that you have a firearm and will use it if necessary are now a lawful acts.

_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

10 Jun 2015, 9:48 am

blauSamstag wrote:

Statistics suggest that the presence of a firearm in any human interaction increases the probability that someone will die.

Interestingly, that probability increases even more if one of the people present is a cop.

The Wikipedia.org article about "Defensive gun use" includes some good references to research reviewed and replicated by economist John Lott Jr., Ph.D., who, "...repeated the survey [of studies showing DGUs ended most violent attacks], and reported that brandishing a weapon was sufficient to stop an attack 95% of the time" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive ... t_research ). The other previous studies showed results between 92 and 98 percent. I wrote earlier that the result was "99 percent." Clearly, that wasn't an accurate claim. Nonetheless, studies consistently show that over 90 percent of DGUs cause the violence to end immediately and, in most cases, without shots fired. So, while "the presence of a firearm in any human interaction increases the probability that someone will die[,]" that increase appears to be negligible.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Jun 2015, 11:22 am

AspieUtah wrote:

But, what a tool! A cranky old woman without a firearm is just a cranky old woman. But, women are notably better shots than men (see Annie Oakley). Give a firearm to the cranky old woman, and she could defend herself better than most men of any age.

Better shots? Not that I've noticed. Women are more often easier to teach firearms use because they usually lack the "I'm a man, I can do anything" male ego. Women tend to lack the sense of urgency about bringing the gun to bear and quickly engaging the target or targets (threats) in a defensive scenario. It can be drilled into them but it's frustrating and at times impossible.

Quote:

But, again, DGU statistics suggest that just the introduction of a firearm (no shots fired) to the interaction of a threatening thug and a victim is, most of the time, the one factor that convinces the thug to run away. That advantage is huge when the firearm is owned and used by a woman or another individual with physical limitations.

I'm of the mind that once my gun is drawn the convincing and/or talking phase is over. The convincing part is what pepper spray, or a fist to the face, or kick in the nads is for but the gun is a last ditch put holes in MFers tool.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

10 Jun 2015, 11:50 am

Raptor wrote:

I respect that. And, it is a good philosophy and strategy. As I wrote earlier, my state has a law protecting the liberty of individuals who choose to possess concealed firearms to warn threatening individuals verbally or visually. When that statute's bill was being debated, one of the reasons it was adopted was the knowledge that the mere awareness of a firearm usually makes the threatening individual to piss and run. Lott's data bears this out. While I was quite good with taekwondo in my teens, I now live with physical disabilities which make non-lethal convincing abjectly academic. As a result, I am grateful that my state protects my liberty to convince in new and improved ways.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Jun 2015, 12:14 pm

AspieUtah wrote:

Raptor wrote:

I fully support ANY law that stacks the odds in favor of the would be victim, even if it's something I personally would not choose to practice. Keep the mugger, armed robber, burglar, and rapist at a disadvantage and in fear for THEIR lives and wellbeing.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

Last edited by Raptor on 10 Jun 2015, 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

spiritnja
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 5 Jun 2015
Posts: 49

11 Jun 2015, 7:17 am

For those suggesting it, I just want to say that putting yourself at the mercy of a potential robber/murderer/rapist and hoping that they just take your money and leave is a TERRIBLE idea for protecting yourself. Much better to have a gun or learn a hardcore martial art or something than that..

heavenlyabyss
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,393

11 Jun 2015, 8:31 pm

I don't want to live in a society in which the way we combat violence is to introduce more violence into the equation. I love action movies but I don't want my real life to be an action movie. For the most part it isn't.

Self-defense classes is a good idea. But in some situations the best strategy is to simply turn the cheek. If you value your life of course.

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

11 Jun 2015, 8:45 pm

spiritnja wrote:

it sort of depends on how they selected their victim, doesn't it?

What percentage of muggings result in an injury? How about other crimes that include a threat of violence -- how often does the perpetrator commit some violence?

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

12 Jun 2015, 10:42 am

blauSamstag wrote:

spiritnja wrote:

Some of us just have a problem with being a victim at the disposal and mercy of someone who would do us harm. We cannot all be sheep....

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

12 Jun 2015, 10:45 am

I don't think a gun would do me much good in such a situation as I would be reluctant to kill someone even if they were attacking me.

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

12 Jun 2015, 10:50 am

blauSamstag wrote:

...What percentage of muggings result in an injury? How about other crimes that include a threat of violence -- how often does the perpetrator commit some violence?

I don't know about any rates of injuries in muggings. But, I and my partner were injured in 1985 in San Francisco during a mugging. I hesitate to call them injuries as we were simply punched by a group of knife-wielding teen-aged boys who robbed us of our cash. The experience was one of many reasons I possess a firearm frequently today.

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

12 Jun 2015, 10:53 am

androbot01 wrote:

I don't think a gun would do me much good in such a situation as I would be reluctant to kill someone even if they were attacking me.

Possessing a firearm doesn't obligate the possessor to fire at anyone. And, as I have written here, simply displaying a firearm ends the criminality in an instant most of the time. Firing it is simply plan-B if displaying it doesn't work as expected.

androbot01
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Sep 2014
Age: 54
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,746
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada

12 Jun 2015, 10:54 am

AspieUtah wrote:

androbot01 wrote:

I don't think a gun would do me much good in such a situation as I would be reluctant to kill someone even if they were attacking me.

What about the possibility of being overpowered and disarmed?

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

12 Jun 2015, 10:57 am

androbot01 wrote:

AspieUtah wrote:

androbot01 wrote:

I don't think a gun would do me much good in such a situation as I would be reluctant to kill someone even if they were attacking me.

What about the possibility of being overpowered and disarmed?

If anybody grabs for my firearm for any reason when I have drawn it, I will fire it. In my state, that is a clear reason to do so.

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

12 Jun 2015, 10:57 am

heavenlyabyss wrote:

It's not necessarily introducing more violence to counter violence but the implied threat of violence against the aggressor. If they're not going to abide by the laws of civilized society then let the fear of someone fighting back and possibly winning help determine thier social behavior.

_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

12 Jun 2015, 11:02 am

Raptor wrote:

heavenlyabyss wrote:

And, "60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed. Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because they fear being shot" ( http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-my ... e-and-guns ).

Page 5 of 18 [ 281 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 18 Next

Jump to:

Guns as the great equalizer Post Reply New Topic

Guns as the great equalizer