Let’s ease back on the hyperbole stick, folks. Thanks for keeping what could be an emotive argument as a calm discussion and mature exchange of opinions.
Also, this, by way of satire, or possibly utter sincerity:
1 Like
lol
Hopefully, completely sincere. GUNNNNNNNNNNNNZZZZZZZZZ AND DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE!!
My question is what would a gun ban actually do? It won’t get rid of weapons from people sufficiently determined.
And it’ll make it so that law abiding citizens are less secure because they LOSE options to defend themselves.
The issue isn’t guns the weapon, it’s people who don’t bother getting training about the weapons.
1 Like
na it is lol
2 Likes
4 Likes
Are there any useful stats about how many people actually successfully defend themselves using guns? I’m googling…and I found this:
“A new paper from the Violence Policy Center states that “for the five-year period 2007 through 2011, the total number of self-protective behaviors involving a firearm by victims of attempted or completed violent crimes or property crimes totaled only 338,700.” That comes to an annual average of 67,740 — not nothing, but nowhere near the N.R.A.’s 2 million or 2.5 million.”
https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/takingnote/2013/04/15/defensive-gun-use/?referer=
That was more than I expected.
2 Likes
For the record: in any debates I’ll take I’m going to try to understand the perspective behind it.
All depends on how the metric is defined. I personally don’t carry due to California being insane on gun laws.
BUT! My issue always is “if a person is committed to causing harm they will find a way”
An article on a CDC study about gun violence
Of worthwhile note: the majority of firearms deaths are suicides. Not homicides.
My issue is TRAINING and KNOWLEDGE. If people understand a firearm, know how it works then most of the fear factor goes away.(I learned to shoot a BB gun at 3 and most of my family discussions I have about gun control lead to my mother explaining that gun control does not mean being accurate with my shot grouping.
For example a suppressor doesn’t make a gun silent like the movies would have you believe.
Source: https://youtu.be/36sZgNPlVM4
A bump stock makes it easier to fire quickly, yes. But if you train you can actually shoot just as quickly.
Source for claim: https://youtu.be/k1nqRcAsZAE
And as a side question for anyone who feels guns should be banned in the US, do you feel that the United States has a police brutality problem?(feel free to pm me over that if you wish)
1 Like
Well, I don’t believe guns should be banned entirely, but I’ll still bite. Yes, without a doubt there is a police brutality and/or overreach problem in the US
2 Likes
But if police are the violent individuals like many portray them to be or claim they are, why would you make it so that people have to rely on the “overreaching and brutal” police force.
nothing is without doubt. Skepticism keeps people honest.
i ask this BECAUSE I had to receive security/law enforcement training while I was in the navy.
So even if a law enforcement officer does kill he has to go through the justice system same as anyone else.
So I have a very different perspective and background than you.
That doesn’t mean one of us is wrong but it means there’s no “of course” or “without a doubt”
Don’t assume any agreement. After all I’d LIKE to find evidence compelling enough to change my mind. After all isn’t that how we learn?
2 Likes
Haven’t laughed this hard in a long time
1 Like
I didn’t see a joke in there.
Mocking is fine. But to mock on assumptions does us both a disservice.
What experience do you have with law enforcement or the legalities involved with discharging a firearm in the line of duty?
Yes cover ups can and do happen and when they come to light the individuals do face legal action then. Just as officers who DONT cover up have to face legal action.
1 Like
Briefly, police misconduct is handled by internal affairs. Regardless of your opinion of any given IA department, it is not the same as the normal investigative process.
As for police brutality… Regardless of whether the police are, “violent individuals”, the bodies remain. If you wish to refer to them as violent or great heroes, doesn’t change that.
4 Likes
I have none, but that doesn’t change the fact that many cops over the years have gotten away with essentially being the judge, jury and executioner of unarmed people all across America, and other parts of the world
I don’t see an issue with this, ask, tell, make.
Bodies don’t bother me because if you present a threat then they have to act to keep you from harming others. Better to be judged for acting than to watch innocents die.
Were they tried in a court of law? Did they have to face internal affairs?
The investigation isn’t that far different from other investigations
Not very often, actually. In extreme circumstances maybe
The times they aren’t I’m betting fall under “justifications for deadly force”
If I recall correctly, one officer wasn’t brought to court after shooting an unarmed man fleeing the scene. An officer didn’t face trial after opening fire on a man who went to get his ID from the car after the officer explicitly asked him to. If that’s justified, then what’s not?
I’m unsure what you mean by, “ask, tell, make.”, but to be clear if you don’t see a problem with this, where do you draw the line? Police are consistently killing over a thousand people a year. Is two thousand too many? Three? Ten? Is just outright, police killing is acceptable? We’ve reached a point where police killing makes up a significant portion of the total number of killings in this country, for my part I can’t call that acceptable.
Please, bring names. Let’s make this specific. I’m asking for you to prove me wrong as a rule rather than as an exception.
Phillando Castile was potentially the ID guy if it’s from this last year and the officer was charged. Meaning he went to trial like anyone else.
Whether or not you agree with that ruling, he was judged by a jury of his peers the same as either of us. I’m not saying officer involved shooting don’t happen or that they’re morally right, but they DO still have the legal repercussions to face. It isn’t “Scott free”
Eric Garner: Put in illegal choke hold by the NYPD, video evidence and coroner’s report stating the choke hold was directly linked to his later death. Failure to indict.
Patrick Harmon: Shot by Salt Lake City PD while running away. Video evidence showed he was gunning away. Use of force found justified, no charges brought against the officer.
Terence Crutcher: Video evidence of hands above the head, shot and killed by officer, officer was acquited
The ID case I was thinking of, the officer was fired but not charged.