BF2S Forums National Defense Authorization Act of 2012

Macbeth wrote:

Second, not everyone brain freezes during dangerous situations.

Almost everyone and it would be unwise for people to count themselves among those who respond instantly.

Macbeth wrote:

All of your martial arts training is worth nothing if you are A. overpowered B. out numbered. Like I said before if a 120 lb. female was home alone unarmed but was an expert in Brazilian jujitsu and she was attacked by a 250 lb home intruder how will her self defense training help her? It wouldn't.

It goes a long way. Now, the chances of your 120 lb female putting up a fight against a 250 lb home intruder are probably none. Then again, most home intruders won't look like overeem. Any other case, she'll stand a fair chance.

There are martial arts that train on being outnumbered as well, like krav maga.

Macbeth wrote:

No way shifty weights 130. A 110 tops.

:S wut

Last edited by Shocking (2012-01-04 14:39:44)

I wasn't talking specifically about gun related deaths, but crime & injuries as well. Those instances have to be more common than in a country where firearms are illegal. 1+1=2 kind of thing.

Jay wrote:

So everyone should be forced to take a martial arts class and put themselves in mortal danger (because you're assuming the attacker has no training) rather than dealing with the occasional shooting death?

Not forced to at all but if safety is your issue I'd highly recommend it over buying a glock.

Shocking wrote:

Not forced to at all but if safety is your issue I'd highly recommend it over buying a glock.

Then you're a nitwit. Have you ever even fired a gun? Simplest thing in the world and the ultimate equalizer between human beings. Your society has reverted to feudalism where only the knights and lords were allowed to possess weapons. Tools.

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

    Heart disease: 616,067
    Cancer: 562,875
    Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 135,952
    Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 127,924
    Accidents (unintentional injuries): 123,706
    Alzheimer's disease: 74,632
    Diabetes: 71,382
    Influenza and Pneumonia: 52,717
    Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 46,448
    Septicemia: 34,828(http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm)
10,100 homicides committed using firearms(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violen

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-01-04 14:55:51)

Dilbert_X wrote:

Death from disease in old age is inevitable.

Premature death or injury because some nutball decides to go on a shooting spree is entirely avoidable.

I don't see the problem in taking reasonable steps to minimise this, for example an efficient system to prevent every street hood and convicted felon having easy access to guns and taking guns which are excessively dangerous in the wrong hands or clearly not for self-defence or sport out of circulation.

I'm not arguing against have some gun control. A few days ago we were in agreement about holes in the system in the gun thread. Shocker on the other hand is on a full scale offensive against gun ownership period.

I don't understand your logic which seems to be because you think you're sufficiently trustworthy to own a weapon that means everyone else is guaranteed safe too.

Your logic seems to be give every five year old a gun and don't worry about the obvious consequences.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-01-04 15:00:59)

Jay wrote:

Shocking wrote:

Not forced to at all but if safety is your issue I'd highly recommend it over buying a glock.

Then you're a nitwit. Have you ever even fired a gun? Simplest thing in the world and the ultimate equalizer between human beings. Your society has reverted to feudalism where only the knights and lords were allowed to possess weapons. Tools.

I have and yes it's simple.

Though do you see yourself being given the time to draw in any situation other than home invasion? I don't. Knowing how to handle yourself is very useful if you're concerned about personal safety. If you feel the need to carry a gun around with you 24/7 you might as well learn how to fight properly.

I'm perfectly fine with my state monopoly on violence, it actually makes me feel more safe.

Macbeth wrote:

Hint: it's less than our automobile and knife injuries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots

Almost every riot in the US has incidence of gunshot injury or reports of them. Want me to tell you how many gun related crimes are committed during riots here? Almost none, if ever.

Want me to cite how many gun related injuries and deaths occur in other western countries, or how much % of the aforementioned is gun related?

You're right up there with Mexico, Colombia, south Africa and some ex-soviet countries when it comes to gun violence. Nice stats, sure is "relatively" safe in the US concerning gun crime if you compare yourself to the backwards places in the world. Honestly, stop even trying to justify it with stats.

You could say 'the risk is still small enough for me to disregard the legality issue' but it's absolute horseshit that the legality of the guns has no effect on crime involving firearms whatsoever. Not 'barely any' either.

Last edited by Shocking (2012-01-04 15:08:48)

I can't believe so many of you accept the logic that everyone in america is sufficently trustworthy to possess a weapon.

Oh and

You never replied to:

Shocking wrote:

I don't see why civilians should have them.

Hunting? Only a third of the U.S. is anywhere near as densely populated as the U.K. Hunting deer goes beyond a pastime hobby and in down times people make living/subsist on hunting.

That criminals would get their hands on guns regardless of their legality may be true, but at the same time it makes it much harder for them to get them in the first place. Making guns illegal altogether also makes it much easier for law enforcement to track gun dealership as you know where to look. So: the criminals have less guns, the public has no guns and I guarantee that gun-related crimes, injuries&deaths will recede.

Again I have to refer you to my gun deaths stats. Going full draco and clamping down on everyone in order to try to prevent 30,000 deaths a year is silly. If you want to stop people from dying you should be advocating for mandatory engine sizes to be stuck at 4 cylinders. More people die in this country in auto accidents and because of speeding every year than due to guns. 37,000 deaths per year due to auto accidents. Should we collectively punish everyone by forcing them to use small engines because 0.000110737% of our population die in auto accidents? No that is a ridiculous over reaction.

btw

Macbeth wrote:

Facts are inconvenient. Feelings are more important.

In our country not others. I'm starting to suspect you don't have those numbers available and am just talking out of your ass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence

Skip down to homicide graph.

If you want to compare wether or not your gun laws influence gun crime you have to compare yourself to countries which have illegalised the possession of firearms.

That's what I'm doing.

Yet somehow, the only numbers that count are those from the US?

wat?

Last edited by Shocking (2012-01-04 15:20:39)

Shocking wrote:

That's not the picture I'm trying to paint, either. I know the US is safe. (the incidences involving gun crime in riots were right from looking at the riots in the wiki list and searching for the word "gunshot" or "gun") I'm just pointing out why I feel firearm ownership doesn't make sense. I don't feel it adds any safety to the society whatsoever, I don't see the necessity for them either.

It's not about society as a whole, it's about safety as an individual. Are you an individual person or are you a group of people? Do you value your life more than you value the lives of others? Why wouldn't you? I'm not saying that people should go around taking the lives of other people, I'm saying that you as a singular person should have the ability to defend yourself. Taking a martial arts class is not realistic. Owning a $50 hand gun is.

You're making the exact same arguments that the nobility of Europe made against the crossbow when it was invented. The pope made it illegal because it equalized the battlefield between the nobility on horseback and the peasant who was supposed to stand there and let the lord kill him for sport.

Shocking wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Facts are inconvenient. Feelings are more important.

In our country not others. I'm starting to suspect you don't have those numbers available and am just talking out of your ass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence

Skip down to homicide.

That's nice wikiwarrioring but the link you provided only shows gun deaths (a number I supplied in my first retort btw). You still haven't produced a gun injury number.

If you want to compare wether or not your gun laws influence gun crime you have to compare yourself to countries which have illegalised the possession of firearms.

That's what I'm doing.

I will argue that when you provide the gun injury numbers.

Yet somehow, the only numbers that count are those from the US?

wat?

Since you cannot provide the gun injury numbers, you look like you are talking out of your ass. Provide the U.S. gun injury numbers (5th time i'm asking here) and I will debate the other things. Since you cannot cite a simple number I seriously doubt you know what you are talking about. Hence why I'm riding you so hard.

Last edited by Macbeth (2012-01-04 15:26:33)

Shocking wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Hunting? Only a third of the U.S. is anywhere near as densely populated as the U.K. Hunting deer goes beyond a pastime hobby and in down times people make living/subsist on hunting.

Well then your whole thing tirade falls apart right there ^ then.


You would be better off arguing for better reasonable gun control than arguing totally against gun ownership.

Where did I make an argument against the ownership of hunting rifles? It didn't even factor in my mind when I was writing about the legality of guns in the US.

Hunting rifles aren't guns?!