Why own a gun?

goingtoverona

i can't speak for anyone but myself, but i will tell you what i believe. i think you guys put values on human life, you make one life more important than another. for me, a little girl getting mangled in a car wreck is no different than a little girl getting shot to death. both are repugnant, both could be prevented. but people's response to that is, yeah but it's not intentional. so you're saying that preventable unintentional deaths arent worth preventing, because they are just accidents and accidents happen. i think banning cars is the best analogy because look at all the positive that could come from it, millions of cars no longer putting out pollution, tens of thousands of human lives and countless more animal lives being saved. like i said in the other threads, i'm willing to sacrifice my guns if yous guys are willing to sacrifice the other killers like cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. and i'm sure the "we don't need guns" reply is coming and my response to that is that as human beings we only NEED water, oxygen and food. everything else is just a convenience, so before you say, i need my car we don't need guns....uhhh no you don't.

know1 wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Kind of like people who abuse prescription meds...however that thread was locked. 112 people a day killed by that...but lets concentrate on guns. :?

I don't get the arguments i'm seeing from people comparing other types of deaths like overdoses, cigarette smoking, etc. to gun murder. It just makes no sense.

blackredyellow

DS1119 wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Don't be so obtuse or simple minded. How many of those 112 people killed each day are caused by someone else pushing that pill in their mouth? How many times is it because someone does this to dozens of people back-to-back-to-back, etc at the local school, mall, church, whatever?????

It's a ridiculous argument. But that's all your left with.

aawe man you're asking for it...you're going to get a hundred more analogies about smoking, slipping on banana peels, bullfighting etc etc, to try to make the mass shooting in CT look insubstantial in the "bigger picture."

I love it when gun fearing liberals dismiss valid points as ridiculous. What that basically means is it's "I have no answer for that".

Just an fyi, when everyone else thinks your" valid points" are ridiculous, chances are they are.

Any try answering a direct question for once, ok?

JimmyV

DS1119 wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

I love it when everyone who disagrees with the dogma of the right is branded a "gun fearing liberal".

So do I. Liberals instead of examining themselves and worrying about themselves always feel they need to change society and others. It must be this person's fault....it must be the guns that are the issue....it's not me, it's them.

Are these gun fearing liberals saying it is society that needs to be changed or that it is the guns that are the issue? You're not even making sense anymore.

JonnyPistachio

goingtoverona wrote:

i can't speak for anyone but myself, but i will tell you what i believe. i think you guys put values on human life, you make one life more important than another. for me, a little girl getting mangled in a car wreck is no different than a little girl getting shot to death. both are repugnant, both could be prevented. but people's response to that is, yeah but it's not intentional. so you're saying that preventable unintentional deaths arent worth preventing, because they are just accidents and accidents happen. i think banning cars is the best analogy because look at all the positive that could come from it, millions of cars no longer putting out pollution, tens of thousands of human lives and countless more animal lives being saved. like i said in the other threads, i'm willing to sacrifice my guns if yous guys are willing to sacrifice the other killers like cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. and i'm sure the "we don't need guns" reply is coming and my response to that is that as human beings we only NEED water, oxygen and food. everything else is just a convenience, so before you say, i need my car we don't need guns....uhhh no you don't.

They are all concerns. But if the auto accident analogy must be used, you can also consider it like this:
In some areas its likely that there werent speed limits or rules regarding driving in a car...until accidents started happening. So they made a speed limit of 50 miles an hour. Too many accidents still occurred, so they dropped it to 25 mph...

With guns, the majority dont want a ban, we just want it recognized that the USA has some of the weakest laws/restrictions in the world, with very easy access. So, if the speed limit is dropped from 50 to 25 in some places, its like dropping the magazine capacity from 30 to 12...

Also, I think we should make more difficult driving tests! I nearly get killed everyday here in south florida with these awful drivers!

know1

Cosmo wrote:

As long as everyone stands their ground on the issue... nothing is going to change.
If nothing is going to change... then, we... as Americans, will simply have to reach the conclusion that the deaths of people due to gunfire is just part of what defines us as 'American'. It becomes a part of who we are and we have to face the reality that we accept these types of losses as payment for our freedoms.

Exactly.

JonnyPistachio

know1 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

As long as everyone stands their ground on the issue... nothing is going to change.
If nothing is going to change... then, we... as Americans, will simply have to reach the conclusion that the deaths of people due to gunfire is just part of what defines us as 'American'. It becomes a part of who we are and we have to face the reality that we accept these types of losses as payment for our freedoms.

Exactly.

Perfectly said.

pjradio

know1 wrote:

I know the answer will be for "protection", but in my mind that is the same thing as saying "to potentially murder someone"

interesting

Cosmo

goingtoverona wrote:

i can't speak for anyone but myself, but i will tell you what i believe. i think you guys put values on human life, you make one life more important than another. for me, a little girl getting mangled in a car wreck is no different than a little girl getting shot to death. both are repugnant, both could be prevented. but people's response to that is, yeah but it's not intentional. so you're saying that preventable unintentional deaths arent worth preventing, because they are just accidents and accidents happen. i think banning cars is the best analogy because look at all the positive that could come from it, millions of cars no longer putting out pollution, tens of thousands of human lives and countless more animal lives being saved. like i said in the other threads, i'm willing to sacrifice my guns if yous guys are willing to sacrifice the other killers like cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. and i'm sure the "we don't need guns" reply is coming and my response to that is that as human beings we only NEED water, oxygen and food. everything else is just a convenience, so before you say, i need my car we don't need guns....uhhh no you don't.

...
The car vs. gun comparison... the bread and butter of the pro-gun arguement.
Fair enough... I'll play.
Q: How often do you operate your car?
Q: How many cars are operated on a daily basis?
Q: How often do you shoot your gun?
Q: Do you shoot you gun, everytime you operate your car?
Q: Would you feel safer is everyone who is driving around was firing a gun at the same time they are driving or if everyone who owns a car, owned a gun and used both the car and the gun in equal terms? (i.e. if someone drives to/from work 30 minutes a day (1 hour per day) they fired their guns for one hour per day)
...
Balance the equation with cars and their operational usage and apply equal numbers and usage to guns... or vice versa.
Now... your comparison of guns and cars can be made.

cp3iverson

I'm absolutely in favor or citizens owning a gun that's handled and locked up responsibly. Protecting your family in America with a firearm has saved thousands and thousands of lives from sickos and criminals. We can't be like _______(insert country here). It's kind of too late for that dream.

The issue is really about having tougher ownership laws, better training, and what guns you should be allowed to buy. But if someone breaks into my house i'm prepared. That's a nice feeling.

cp3iverson

know1 wrote:

I know the answer will be for "protection", but in my mind that is the same thing as saying "to potentially murder someone".

Absolutely and there's no shame there. If someone is "savage" enough to bust through your window or kick down your door and threaten your family you'll probably need to resort to seriously harming them or killing them. It happens in every neighborhood eventually.

know1

cp3iverson wrote:

I'm absolutely in favor or citizens owning a gun that's handled and locked up responsibly. Protecting your family in America with a firearm has saved thousands and thousands of lives from sickos and criminals. We can't be like _______(insert country here). It's kind of too late for that dream.

The issue is really about having tougher ownership laws, better training, and what guns you should be allowed to buy. But if someone breaks into my house i'm prepared. That's a nice feeling.

Do you have stats for this? What percentage of people who own guns have actually saved a life with them (outside of police officers)?

And if you save a life by ending one, is it really saving a life?

know1

cp3iverson wrote:

know1 wrote:

I know the answer will be for "protection", but in my mind that is the same thing as saying "to potentially murder someone".

Absolutely and there's no shame there. If someone is "savage" enough to bust through your window or kick down your door and threaten your wife or kids you'll probably need to resort to seriously harming them or killing them.

Maybe you think you need to, but I don't. Until they actually murder me, it's just speculation. I don't think murdering someone on speculation is acceptable.

goingtoverona

man i've read your post like ten times and i'm just not getting the point you're trying to make. it's over my head i think, but i'll answer your questions and you tell me how i did.
1.about once a week, i'm unemployed
2. no idea, tens of millions if i had to guess.
3. lately about once every 4 months
4. no i don't
5. no i wouldn't feel safe if people were driving around shooting guns in the air.

Cosmo wrote:

goingtoverona wrote:

i can't speak for anyone but myself, but i will tell you what i believe. i think you guys put values on human life, you make one life more important than another. for me, a little girl getting mangled in a car wreck is no different than a little girl getting shot to death. both are repugnant, both could be prevented. but people's response to that is, yeah but it's not intentional. so you're saying that preventable unintentional deaths arent worth preventing, because they are just accidents and accidents happen. i think banning cars is the best analogy because look at all the positive that could come from it, millions of cars no longer putting out pollution, tens of thousands of human lives and countless more animal lives being saved. like i said in the other threads, i'm willing to sacrifice my guns if yous guys are willing to sacrifice the other killers like cars, tobacco, alcohol, etc. and i'm sure the "we don't need guns" reply is coming and my response to that is that as human beings we only NEED water, oxygen and food. everything else is just a convenience, so before you say, i need my car we don't need guns....uhhh no you don't.

...
The car vs. gun comparison... the bread and butter of the pro-gun arguement.
Fair enough... I'll play.
Q: How often do you operate your car?
Q: How many cars are operated on a daily basis?
Q: How often do you shoot your gun?
Q: Do you shoot you gun, everytime you operate your car?
Q: Would you feel safer is everyone who is driving around was firing a gun at the same time they are driving or if everyone who owns a car, owned a gun and used both the car and the gun in equal terms? (i.e. if someone drives to/from work 30 minutes a day (1 hour per day) they fired their guns for one hour per day)
...
Balance the equation with cars and their operational usage and apply equal numbers and usage to guns... or vice versa.
Now... your comparison of guns and cars can be made.

cp3iverson

know1 wrote:

cp3iverson wrote:

I'm absolutely in favor or citizens owning a gun that's handled and locked up responsibly. Protecting your family in America with a firearm has saved thousands and thousands of lives from sickos and criminals. We can't be like _______(insert country here). It's kind of too late for that dream.

The issue is really about having tougher ownership laws, better training, and what guns you should be allowed to buy. But if someone breaks into my house i'm prepared. That's a nice feeling.

Do you have stats for this? What percentage of people who own guns have actually saved a life with them (outside of police officers)?

And if you save a life by ending one, is it really saving a life?

Yes. You're saving your life and your family's life. You are ending a criminal's life in favor of innocents.

elvistheking44

know1 wrote:

cp3iverson wrote:

know1 wrote:

I know the answer will be for "protection", but in my mind that is the same thing as saying "to potentially murder someone".

Absolutely and there's no shame there. If someone is "savage" enough to bust through your window or kick down your door and threaten your wife or kids you'll probably need to resort to seriously harming them or killing them.

Maybe you think you need to, but I don't. Until they actually murder me, it's just speculation. I don't think murdering someone on speculation is acceptable.

When someone breaks in your house, go ahead and make sure you ask if they plan to rape, murder or just rob your family. You certainly won't need that gun when they are just gonna rob you.

know1

cp3iverson wrote:

know1 wrote:

cp3iverson wrote:

I'm absolutely in favor or citizens owning a gun that's handled and locked up responsibly. Protecting your family in America with a firearm has saved thousands and thousands of lives from sickos and criminals. We can't be like _______(insert country here). It's kind of too late for that dream.

The issue is really about having tougher ownership laws, better training, and what guns you should be allowed to buy. But if someone breaks into my house i'm prepared. That's a nice feeling.

Do you have stats for this? What percentage of people who own guns have actually saved a life with them (outside of police officers)?

And if you save a life by ending one, is it really saving a life?

Yes. You're saving your life and your family's life. You are ending a criminal's life in favor of innocents.

My family is far from innocent.

cincybearcat

DS1119 wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Kind of like people who abuse prescription meds...however that thread was locked. 112 people a day killed by that...but lets concentrate on guns. :?

Don't be so obtuse or simple minded. How many of those 112 people killed each day are caused by someone else pushing that pill in their mouth? How many times is it because someone does this to dozens of people back-to-back-to-back, etc at the local school, mall, church, whatever?????

It's a ridiculous argument. But that's all your left with.

Doesn't matter. If peole are going to use reasons such as "accidental death" and "suicidal people" as reasons to limit guns this is a 100% valid point.

Yes it does matter. Your point couldn't be further from 100% valid, it is exactly 0% valid

redrock

cp3iverson wrote:

I'm absolutely in favor or citizens owning a gun that's handled and locked up responsibly.

And how would that be?

know1

ofthegirl99 wrote:

When someone breaks in your house, go ahead and make sure you ask if they plan to rape, murder or just rob your family. You certainly won't need that gun when they are just gonna rob you.

I actually feel sorry for people who live with this kind of fear.

cp3iverson

know1 wrote:

My family is far from innocent.

LOL uh okay.