Subject:
|
Re: New Web Page
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 May 1999 18:22:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1059 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> James Brown wrote:
> > I do not want to own a gun, but if I lived in an area where guns were
> > commonly available (as in your suggestion above), I would likely need to
> > get one. Why?
> > The simple availability of them would necessitate, that for my own
> > protection, I would need one.
>
> If you live in the US (do you?) guns are readily available to criminals.
> When I was in highschool (roughly 1985-6) I was periferally associated
> with a group of kids who brought guns from Texas to Missouri and sold
> them to other kids at a huge profit. I don't know the details of how
> they got them, but I know that the 800 miles they travelled was worth
> it. Are guns readily available anywhere within 800 miles of your location?
I do not live in the US. Define 'readily available'. I can, with a certain
amount of paperwork, go down to my local sporting goods store, or outdoor
supplier, and pick up a hunting rifle or shotgun. I don't even know what I
would have to do to get a handgun, but would start by visiting a local firing
range. I am familiar with black market economics, and could readily acquire
most anything illegal, from drugs to contraband, but I have never encountered
a firearm available in such a fashion.
I would say that guns are probably 'readily available' in my area, but
certainly not 'commonly available' - in that they are expensive, and hard to
track down except through official channels.
> > I live in an area that has a low level of violence, and fairly strict gun
> > control laws. Odds are that the average criminal that would be likely to
> > invade my home will not have a firearm. So, to protect myself from said
>
> I suspect that the average robber (in the US) has a gun...he may not
> bring it to your house though.
I suspect that the average robber here (Western Canada) does not.
> > criminal, I need a fairly minimal level of personal combat training, and the
> > willingness to use it. Depending on the amount of training I have, I may
> > want
>
> No matter what, an encounter involves personal risk. By having a gun at
> your disposal you can dump more of the risk on the intruder and minimize
> the risk to yourself. If you enter a knife fight, you can still die,
> and who's to say that you're better trained and more brutal than your
> opponent?
Well, to be blunt, any idiot can point a gun and shoot. It takes a minimal
amount of skill to do so with enough accuracy to kill someone, whereas I will
bid my martial skills against those possessed by the average robber with a
fair degree of confidence.
> > access to a melee weapon of some sort - likely a club or a knife.
> > If I were to live in an area with minimal to no gun control laws (as you
> > seem to be suggesting - my apologies if I am mistaken) - the odds are that
> > anyone likey to invade my home would have a firearm - which means I am at a
> > serious disadvantage, regardless of how good I am in a fistfight.
> > Therefore, I would need to own a gun, for my own protection, despite my
> > unwillingness to do so.
>
> On the other hand, if you have a gun, you are more versatile. You can
> deal with intruders who also have a gun, which you can't do with a bat
> or a knife, and you're still equipped to deal with a knife-weilding
> thug, but better so than without the gun.
My method of dealing with an intruder with a gun is quite simple. Do what he
tells me. Co-operate completely, and do my damndest to figure out everything
I can that will help the cops hunt him down later. That's their job. I'm
sure that there are some here who consider me cowardly for this, but I simply
do not want to be involved in a gunfight. The odds of me dying, all things
being equal, are about 50/50, and my possessions are just not worth it.
Period.
> > When any weapon is freely available, the ones who are first to have it,
> > generally, are those who want to use it, either for intimidation purposes,
> > or for violence. Others who wish to maintain their freedom then need to
> > acquire
>
> They'll have it anyway.
Not if it isn't easily obtainable. I maintain that the caliber of criminal
that is going to be invading my home is stupid and lazy enough that he won't
go out of his way to get a gun unless he thinks I'm going to have one.
> > said weapon, or be at a disadvantage. Typically speaking, the first variety
> > will (assuming the option is available), upgrade to the next weapon that
> > will give them the advantage again, and the cycle will continue.
>
> OK, so in what way is it continuing? Intruders may have big guns, I can
> have a big gun. Do you suggest that they're then going to start
> burglarizing with kevlar vests and AKs? I don't see that happening.
It is happening. Not in the kind of criminals likely to break into your home,
agreed, but certainly in gangs and in organized crime.
> > remains that you need a firearm for protection, and I need a baseball bat.
>
> Most people don't need (i.e. have never needed, thus far) anything for
> protection.
>
> > invasion of your home would likely involve a fatality, an invasion of mine
> > would likely not. I would guess that the odds of either being a successful
> > invasion are about equal, since we are both prepared for the most likely
> > eventuality.
>
> But with a gun, I'm prepared for all eventualities, and you are simply not.
I am prepared for the eventuality of someone invading my home with a gun. As
I said above, I'll do what he tells me. To me, it's just not worth it.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) You're going to do what he says, huh? Even when he remembers that he forgot his mask, realises you probably ID'ed him very well (remember, you were pointing out how you'd be observing every detail, that's often a fairly noticable behaviour), (...) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) Ah, so there we have it. Canada. Now I understand. You guys have what, 2, maybe 3 people per square mile up there? Not enough people in one area to stir up the kind of trouble we have to deal with down here. :) (26 years ago, 20-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) If you live in the US (do you?) guns are readily available to criminals. When I was in highschool (roughly 1985-6) I was periferally associated with a group of kids who brought guns from Texas to Missouri and sold them to other kids at a huge (...) (26 years ago, 17-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
