help me rip this guy a new one...

[grizz]

The following is taken from an email from my anti friend:


"If you really care about not getting raped or murdered, you have to wonder why the US has BY FAR the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the developed world -- much closer to the rates you find in Colombia and Mexico City than in say, Japan or England. (10x that of Japan, ~1/3 that of Colombia) Seems like the wide availability of guns in this country doesn't make us safe... in fact, the opposite is true.

It makes sense when you think about it. Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME, you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself. yet because guns are widely available, your attacker generally will. this is a big part of the reason why such encounters tend to go worse for victims in the US than in the rest of the developed world.

Think about it this way: if a criminal knows that you don't have a gun, he won't bother to carry one. That means you have a better chance of escaping without risk of being shot.

Making handguns and automatic weapons illegal does not stop all criminals from having them, but can greatly reduce the number of criminals who have them, and that makes us all safer.

I support legality of non-automatic rifles for hunting and defense of life (not of property)."

 

[loud-mouth shnook]

With all due respect: lemming.

 

[kfranz]

Tell him/her that he/she is an idiot and move on....

 

[shield20]

OUR point exactly:

Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME, you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself

Thought you said he was an anti??

 

[jojosdad]

Does this person even listen to what comes out of their mouth?

Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME

Perfect argument for shall issue CCW laws.

Think about it this way: if a criminal knows that you don't have a gun, he won't bother to carry one

Why not? Oh, I forgot - criminals always try their hardest to play fair - like in England and Australia, where the rate of violent crime has gone through the roof after both countries passed laws effectively disarming their law abiding populace.

 

[pax]

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel120501.shtml

That should be all the ammunition you need ...

pax

 

[Werewolf]

Think about it this way: if a criminal knows that you don't have a gun, he won't bother to carry one. That means you have a better chance of escaping without risk of being shot.

Even a criminal with just average intelligence could figure out with out much brain strain that having a gun when he knows you don't have one increases his odds of successfully robbing you greatly. A 5' criminal with a gun could easlily rob a 6' 10" 300 lb guy with out a gun fairly easily. Take away the 5' guy's gun and the 6' 10", 300 lb guy is gonna just pick him up, break him in half and leave the area without even breaking a sweat.

Your friend appears to lack the ability to reason as well as your average criminal.

 

[shaggycat]

I support legality of non-automatic rifles for hunting and defense of life (not of property).

Saying someone doesn't have the right to defend property is removing the right to property. Not having the right to own property flies in the face of everything capitalism is and believes in.

This guy doesn't sound as bad as some. It appears he is not completely brainwashed.

Does he realize that automatic weapons are already illegal? And if handguns are made illegal, how will that make us more safe? The bad guys will simply tote long arms and the good guys will have no reasonable way to carry a defensive weapon. A handgun ban only helps the criminal. Assume for a second that the ban actually works and keeps handguns out of the hands of criminals (yeah right), well the criminal can use a long arm in his crime because he doesn't have to conceal his weapon all the time in order for it to be useful. He only needs it for the short period of time when he runs into a gas station to rob it. In the event that he does need to temporarily conceal it, he can because it doesn't have to be done all day everday. He can easily wear a large coat to conceal an 870 for the short period of time to get inside a mall to the location he needs to be at. Meanwhile, no good guys have guns because they can't conceal a long arm 365 days a year, so why carry one at all?

And that's assuming the ban works!

 

[Trope]

"...the US has BY FAR the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the developed world...

"...you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself."

I'm really confused now.

 

[shaggycat]

I'm really confused now

So is this guy's friend.

 

[JCF]

"If you really care about not getting raped or murdered, you have to wonder why the US has BY FAR the highest rates of murder and violent crime in the developed world -- much closer to the rates you find in Colombia and Mexico City than in say, Japan or England. (10x that of Japan, ~1/3 that of Colombia) Seems like the wide availability of guns in this country doesn't make us safe... in fact, the opposite is true.

America's crime problem is an extremely complex social phenomena that is influenced by a myriad of factors ranging from comparatively low levels of education to poor responses to crime. To suggest that the availability of firearms is the reason for high rates of criminality is specious at best. In fact, overall access to firearms is significantly more restricted at this point in American history than in previous generations, yet crime rates are not decreasing significantly.

Also, as a point of comparison, Canada maintains relatively restrictive firearms regulation, and prohibits the defensive use of firearms, yet incarcerates at a dramatically higher rate than most European or Asian nations.

It makes sense when you think about it. Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME, you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself. yet because guns are widely available, your attacker generally will. this is a big part of the reason why such encounters tend to go worse for victims in the US than in the rest of the developed world.

Firearms restrictions of course do not serve to limit the availbility of guns to the criminal element.

If it were possible to eliminate all firearms from the nation there *might* be some validity to such an assertion, but there is really no way to know this. On the other hand, criminal encounters committed with weapons other than firearms are statistically more likely to end in injury in America also. This is an issue of violence. The implement of commission is of little significance in the matter.

Think about it this way: if a criminal knows that you don't have a gun, he won't bother to carry one. That means you have a better chance of escaping without risk of being shot.

Surveys of incarcerated criminals in America indicate that they do not presently anticipate armed response from their victims. They fear the possibility, but they do not anticipate it as a significant likelihood. Yet they continue to arm themselves.

Making handguns and automatic weapons illegal does not stop all criminals from having them, but can greatly reduce the number of criminals who have them, and that makes us all safer.

How? There has never been any sound empirical evidence produced which supports this assertion.

 

[ptmmatssc]

shaggycat

Does he realize that automatic weapons are already illegal?

Ummm they are not "illegal" , you have to pay a tax on em , but they ARE legal to own . Unless of course we are speaking of a foreign nation that disarms their populace.

 

[Standing Wolf]

It makes sense when you think about it. Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME, you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself. yet because guns are widely available, your attacker generally will.

It does make sense. Now you know why I never leave the house without a gun.

 

[Husker1911]

Tell him you just thought of a great idea. We'll make rape, robbery, and murder AGAINST THE LAW! That'll stop those darn criminals.

 

[SWModel19]

Think about it this way: if a criminal knows that you don't have a gun, he won't bother to carry one.

Grizz, just send these completely idiotic words right back to him and ask him to really, really think about this one. If your friend is a person who is truly capable of logical thinking he will get the point. If not, do you really wanna consider this person a "friend?"

 

[ArfinGreebly]

grizz

Sorry, dude.

Aliens have abducted your friend and left you this guy instead.

The arguments themselves are easily refuted, and the posts above do a good job.

The question that remains is whether he is making this crap up or being fed this crap. It looks like he already has his conclusion and is just sampling data that supports it.

I would have a hard time investing any time and effort into someone whose emotional state provides fertile ground for this kind of broken reasoning and falsehoods.

If the inquiry were honest, it wouldn't be phrased so as to make you feel small and stupid. The "put-down" slant seems to indicate he's not a "friend" in the sense that I would normally use that word.

That said . . .

I'm sorry your fear of weapons makes you so prone to accept bad data, and further inclined to reason badly with the data once you have it.

You figure you're safe? You don't need to be armed? That's fine. Maybe you'll never need it. You can drop off your spare tire & jack, your fire extinguisher, and your smoke alarms at Goodwill, since you won't be needing them either. Statistically you're safe. Why do you think the insurance company is willing to gamble on you? If they really thought something bad was going to happen to you, they wouldn't take your money. So ditch the insurance, too.

Tell you what: when the country to the South of us quits sending criminals that commit murder & violence at several times the rate we're losing troops in Iraq, when we don't have a dozen countries and non-state groups swearing daily to destroy us and then demonstrating graphically that they're not kidding, when the criminal "justice" system quits turning violent offenders loose into the general population, when criminals decide the law applies to them, and when the tyrants and tyrant wannabees in this country and everywhere else give up their religious quest for total power over the rest of us, then we can talk about whether disarming citizens is a good idea.

Unlike the rest of us, you must have your own private police escort keeping you safe all day every day.

Your arrogant and condescending outpouring of erroneous and badly reasoned "facts" and "logic" would be welcome in Uganda, where the U.N. has brought peace and love.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're using bad facts. You're "reasoning" to wrong conclusions using a combination of bad facts and bad logic, and you either *believe* what you're saying (which is sad) or you *know it's not true* and you're saying it anyway (which is worse).

It's possible nothing bad will ever happen and you'll never have to protect yourself. Or, maybe you'll be able to reason with the thug holding you up, and explain to him that you're one of the good guys, and the fellow he wants is the one with the gun. Good luck with that.

I don't think I'll be that trusting. I've had a look at the world, and I think I'll take the path of preparedness.

Excerpt as needed.

 

[10 Ring Tao]

 

[CA357]

I would hate to appear judgemental, but it sounds like your friend's head is stuck in a dark, damp, smelly part of his anatomy.

 

[gdvan01]

...but can greatly reduce the number of criminals who have them, and that makes us all safer.

What a load of horsey-poop! What a ma-roon.

I would hate to appear judgemental, but it sounds like your friend's head is stuck in a dark, damp, smelly part of his anatomy.

Agreed.

And quite deep, I might add.

 

[45/70]

Ahhhhhhhhhhh JEEZ . . .

Ad hominem is against the rules in here. So that only applies to people who post, and not to non registered types?

You wanna twist your panties into a bunch? Take them off and tie a knot in them.

 

[nibb]

Why the US has the such gun violence i dont know, but its not because of guns for sure.

I can tell you this. I live in South America, here people get shoot for 4$ bucks, I can assure you they never try to breake in a house where they now they have guns, or rob a police officer that for sure has one, the people that get shot are people that doesnt have guns and will not defend, they know that. Just last week a japanese guy that came for the first time in his life to visit the country was shoot in the head. The guy, a drug head wanted to steal his digital camera, when the police got him and asked why he did that, he said he did just wanted to scare the guy and he did not even know that he shoot him the head. They never tend to assault a young men, or 2 for example, they take weak victims like womens or old people, why? Because they are cowards, in the country ist not the same story since most farmes do have guns, they dont want to get shoot, i think gun control doesnt make safe the people, a guy that kills, kills with or without a gun, like those 10 people that are killed with a knife or a brick every weekend here, they are poor and if they would have a gun they would shoot you, they dont, so they use that they have on the hand, they will think twice if they know people are armed. The guy that shoots you in the street is going to get a gun no matter what, you can make 100 gun laws or bans, do you think they register their weapons? Gun regulation has never drop crime. I think gun regulation is more a government excuse to disarm people incase they rase somehow and not to stop crime.

 

[Handgun Midas]

Saying someone doesn't have the right to defend property is removing the right to property.
Not having the right to own property flies in the face of everything capitalism is and believes in.

I love this. I hadn't heard it stated this way before.
I'll be using this phrasing in the future. Although I think I'll switch "capitalism" out for "Life, Liberty, Happiness\Property"

However, even with this idealism, the fact still remains that legal fees for a shooting will always outweigh the cost of property.
Just sayin'


In any case, the author of the original diatribe instantly declared himself a fool when in the first paragraph,
after pointing out that guns don't make crime disappear, he deduces that guns must indeed create crime.

 

[AStone]

Tell him/her that he/she is an idiot and move on....

I'd recommend a slightly different strategy:

Don't waste your breath
with the idiot comment.

Just move on.

 

[shaggycat]

Ummm they are not "illegal" , you have to pay a tax on em , but they ARE legal to own . Unless of course we are speaking of a foreign nation that disarms their populace.

I do know that one can own automatic firearms legally, but the price makes them essentially illegal for the majority of firearms owners.

Most cannot pay $15000+ for an M16.

Plus, there manufacture has effectively been banned. So there exists a limited supply to satisfy a tremendous demand. Price is only going to increase and the supply is just going to continue to decrease as things break.

 

[foob]

Unless you carry your firearm on your person EVERYWHERE YOU GO, ALL THE TIME, you are generally not going to have it at hand on those EXTREMELY RARE OCCASIONS when you need to defend yourself. yet because guns are widely available, your attacker generally will.

Er.. he basically won the argument for you. You should tell him that he should now work towards getting the government to allow concealed carry everywhere a person goes.

Also, since guns are widely available, and an attacker will generally have one, gun control will never remove firearms from an attacker's hands.