Guns are banned, people still died.

[Sidelle]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The ubiquity of guns in America is the reason our police officers have to treat urban streets like a goddamn war zone.

Also, the "I NEED a gun for protection" argument is bullshit. You're not an assassination target, and the hypothetical burglar you're worried about just wants your flat screen. By all means, use anecdotal evidence about the times when it was helpful for someone to own a gun. Just know that for every 1 story like that, there's 10 tragic stories that begin the same way.

Well, here's one example right off the top of my head. Remember the woman who was beheaded in Oklahoma? Yeah, well as the jihadi asshole started stabbing a second female, he was shot dead by one of the company's execs. If he didn't have his firearm that day, more people would have surely died.

As for the rest of your post. You sound like a condescending douche. Might wanna tone that down a little.

[Raev]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

By all means, use anecdotal evidence about the times when it was helpful for someone to own a gun. Just know that for every 1 story like that, there's 10 tragic stories that begin the same way.

So you start by criticizing someone for anecdotal evidence, and finish by pulling numbers out of your ass? If you go google, you will find that there is just no clear evidence that gun control works, probably because its very difficult to select a control group.

[DrKvothe]

Sidelle: Good catch on me being condescending. That was intentional, and I'm glad it didn't go to waste. Too bad the rest of my post did, though. Good job on another "guns saved the day!" anecdote, bahhhh bahhhh Fox News bahhh bahhh I'm a sheep baahhhhh.

Raev: the point I was making didn't require an accurate number, so I didn't bother trying to find one. I was speaking colorfully, but my argument still stands.

Supreme: What sort of regulation would apply to this constitutionally mandated militia? Training? Licensing? Restrictions of some sort?

[Sidelle]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Sidelle: Good catch on me being condescending. That was intentional, and I'm glad it didn't go to waste. Too bad the rest of my post did, though. Good job on another "guns saved the day!" anecdote, bahhhh bahhhh Fox News bahhh bahhh I'm a sheep baahhhhh.

Raev: the point I was making didn't require an accurate number, so I didn't bother trying to find one. I was speaking colorfully, but my argument still stands.

Supreme: What sort of regulation would apply to this constitutionally mandated militia? Training? Licensing? Restrictions of some sort?

Great impression of what a sheep sounds like as you're fucking it.

[Supreme]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Supreme: What sort of regulation would apply to this constitutionally mandated militia? Training? Licensing? Restrictions of some sort?

There is no regulation. That is why it states "shall not be infringed upon". While the interpretation has been danced around for decades the core of the amendment is that citizens shall have the right to bear arms. Against threats both foreign and domestic.

We do have training, licensing and restrictions as it has been interpreted by the courts. While there have been many incidents by criminals involving firearms there is millions of other law-abiding citizens that use their firearms legally everyday.

The premise you offer is that by doing away with guns will somehow makes us safer is the same logic that making drug free zones magically keeps drugs away.

[Misto]

Originally Posted by DrKvothe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The ubiquity of guns in America is the reason our police officers have to treat urban streets like a goddamn war zone.

Also, the "I NEED a gun for protection" argument is bullshit. You're not an assassination target, and the hypothetical burglar you're worried about just wants your flat screen. By all means, use anecdotal evidence about the times when it was helpful for someone to own a gun. Just know that for every 1 story like that, there's 10 tragic stories that begin the same way.

So, you're saying I should just give them my flat screen TV, which I waited in line for all Black Friday for?

Well, fuck you buddy.

Murica

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by Misto [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So, you're saying I should just give them my flat screen TV, which I waited in line for all Black Friday for?

Well, fuck you buddy.

Murica

But Tyrone is more oppressed than you, therefore he deserves it.

[LulzSect]

When you're hours away from state police, being armed is a matter of personal safety in remote areas.

[LulzSect]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[GradnerLives]

Canada reporting in. Happy to say I've only ever seen one gun that wasn't on a cop while living in the largest city in the country. I've lived in the worst neighbourhoods pre-gentrification and never shy'd away from walking around at night. There are no areas of my city that I'd be hesitant to walk through, even alone/with valuables/at any time of day.

I've had violence threatened to me a fair number of times for sure, but I'm an okay runner and a pretty good talker so I can't say I've ever even been in a fight. If I ever was, I'd definitely be at risk of a good ass whooping but there's a pretty small chance that it would ever escalate beyond that, regardless of who I'm dealing with. Running and Talking don't do as much good when dealing with an armed assailant, though.

I don't agree that guns are the root cause of the violent crime problem in the states. A greater degree of racial inequity, history of violent means to political ends and inherent ubercapitalist "Self over others" mentality and a criminal justice system that seems more interested in punishment than rehabilitation could all certainly have a greater effect on the situation, but mass gun ownership doesn't help with any of those points. It only serves to protect the prepared few, placate the larger body of unprepared/untrained masses with the illusion of safety, and legally arm criminals to make their job a whole lot easier.

Who knew that NOT making it a right to take up guns to protect us from the king of england and just letting him have his way would get us all this free healthcare, greater prosperity/wealth in all but the absolute highest percentile income brackets, more stable banking system, a 17x lower chance of being raped, 3x less chance of being shot and all this great poutine.

Just saying.

Pras the duke.