Texting, then assulting ex cop, during movie equals death.

[Azuremen]

If I knew my friend carried a gun, I would treat them very differently. It means, to me, firstly, that they're paranoid. The odds of being attacked at any moment are relatively low, and can be lowered by using common sense. Secondly, they could be engaged in illegal activity or something else which is dangerous and I don't want to get involved with. Second is probably not true, but still slightly possible. The first point stands. If you carry a gun around, you worry way too much. There is such a thing as being too prepared. anyway, if you have to carry a gun around someplace, and you're not paranoid, then I don't know what to say. That place must be pretty messed up if there are people getting assaulted left and right and you fear for your life on every street.

Honestly, it sounds like you are the paranoid one if you'd make such assumptions from finding out a friend carried.

And if you think carrying is worrying too much, why bother with special insurance types, like for uninsured motorists? Not very likely I'm going to be struck by a driver with no insurance. Similar for ice damage insurance on homes, flood insurance, etc. Or you know, the stab resistant uniforms for schools I've seen for sale in the UK, because it seems like being stabbed is fairly comparable to being shot when talking about the UK versus the US, but knives are honestly much easier to use in an alley or dark bar without attracting a lot of attention.

The only reason guns add fear to the mix is because people don't understand them, or the culture. You just blanket them in with violent behavior, illegal activity, and paranoia despite having little real world information to work from.

 

[McLaren]

Likelihood that I'll be carrying my gun and will have time to draw it? Maybe not quite so high. Likelihood that carrying a gun will disturb, intimidate, or otherwise alienate people? 100%. People don't like guns.

(fictional show, real world messages)

So a gun will always disturb, intimidate & alienate people, every time, all the time? Let's start showing some evidence behind that, then.

Oh wait, I know that's not true from my own personal experience, as I have never felt intimidated, disturbed or the need to alienate the friends I know who carry on a regular basis. In fact, I actually feel safer knowing they have gone through the required classes to have their CHLs, & know how to properly handle their weapons seeing as I don't have a CHL myself. So I guess it's not 100%. Your other posts just reeks of paranoia & zero knowledge of gun ownership. The fact you'd completely change the way you'd treat someone if they started carrying says it all.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Roughly speaking (and I am only going by Wiki, because it's quick and easy, because you're right, I don't care that much), gun ownership in CA was 21%, and 31% in AZ... and 6% in the UK. So forgive me, but that still sounds like quite a bit in California. And I say again, I'm not just considering actual ownership, it's about culture - you don't have to own a gun to live in fear/safety of one.

Problem with that is yes 21% to 6% seems big, until you put it into an actual context of population. The UK has about 4 million gun owners and CA has about 7.5 million. This places things in a greater understanding that in one of the most populous states the majority of people don't know nor should worry about guns (considering the number is law abiding citizens), all that more than UK citizens. Also what to you is this culture that has or should have people in fear of guns?

It's a 12,000 word document, not including looking up what the laws and legislation actually mean, yeah like I said I don't care that much. As for foaming uninterested, incoherent, ego inflating trolling.. sorry you felt you had to state this opinion. I'll refrain from stating my perceived opinion on your posting style.

Go ahead and tell me my style of posting, I told you that is what it seemed like you might being doing since the internet is full of people that don't care for a subject but post or say something either way. They do so and it isn't anywhere close to being correct, and it's mostly done to get a rise out of those that actually do. Thus called trolling or flaming, I'm not saying you are absolutely doing this, but rather giving you the chance to inform us of why you're even talking about this if you don't care too much. Rather instead of informing, you rather say "well I could be mean and say something, but I wont". I'm sure anything you say about my posting style (whatever that is) will hurt me so...

Also what 12,000 word document. You can easily look up CCW info at the NRA website among other laws like what state bans what guns and it's not a long read. There is more then one official area to find accurate info obviously, so what document exactly are you referring to?

Again, I did not even attempt to generalise, I spoke from individual experience - therefore I wouldn't necessarily expect your experience to reflect mine. My friend was was kicked to the ground and kicked in the head, and another guy was punching me in the head in order to try and do the same to me, did I feel I was in physical danger? Yeah I should say so, the guy even threatened to 'cut' me, though I never saw a blade. Blood was spilled on both sides. It's reasonably conceivable that if either party had a gun it would have been used - in the context of a thread about a guy who was shot dead for throwing popcorn, it doesn't seem that inconceivable to me?

Anyhow, yes you're right, on the subject of US gun control I'm not that bothered or educated. However, it does appear to me that citizens of the US live in much more of a gun culture than those in the UK. This is the original point I made, sorry if you disagree.

Sure it doesn't seem inconceivable on a very small scale not the large sweeping scale you put forth or seemed to imply hence me calling it a generalization. If you don't understand where I'm coming from, or finding these notions in your context just say so. In your story you would have probably been justified in killing that person especially if a blade came into use, though I'm not a legal expert. I don't see the issue of a gun being used to defend yourself especially if some is attacking you.

The reason I disagree is once again, the number of guns -though high- in the US is hard to quantify due to culture, I don't own my guns because of the culture or movies or other such promotion. The same goes for others obviously. I understand guns because it's my responsibility to do so as an owner not because of culture...

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Honestly, it sounds like you are the paranoid one if you'd make such assumptions from finding out a friend carried.

And if you think carrying is worrying too much, why bother with special insurance types, like for uninsured motorists? Not very likely I'm going to be struck by a driver with no insurance. Similar for ice damage insurance on homes, flood insurance, etc. Or you know, the stab resistant uniforms for schools I've seen for sale in the UK, because it seems like being stabbed is fairly comparable to being shot when talking about the UK versus the US, but knives are honestly much easier to use in an alley or dark bar without attracting a lot of attention.

The only reason guns add fear to the mix is because people don't understand them, or the culture. You just blanket them in with violent behavior, illegal activity, and paranoia despite having little real world information to work from.

I have very basic insurance. Sure, people don't understand guns or their culture, but that's exactly the point. The only developed nation with an obsession with guns is America. That says that either America is less safe or people are paranoid. So I assume that the person with the gun is responsible, legal, and mentally stable? If you need guns all the time, then there's something fundamentally wrong. I would argue that there's something fundamentally wrong with the politics, rather than the crime. When people argue about guns, the NRA gets press, and benefits, as people buy more guns.

As for insurance, I see the comparison and see it as totally reasonable. but telling the guy who dented your car it's okay because you have insurance is very different from telling your attacker that you have a gun. As much as you gun defenders refuse to admit, guns have a stigma and a deadliness about them that disturbs people. Fact: most people don't like the idea of killing a person. No matter how evil they are. I'm not a religious man, but even I think that criminal should be rehabilitated rather than killed. If someone tries to mug you, does he deserve to die? If carrying a gun is really that necessary in America, then I give up. It if's that bad, everyone needs a gun and training, and body armour, and a full complement of weapons. Clearly, everyone wants to kill you and it's your job to protect yourself by killing people.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Well, I was going to respond, and then I got to this..

Sure it doesn't seem inconceivable on a very small scale not the large sweeping scale you put forth

Okay, yawn. You're seeing my words and making up something to argue against. I say I you see large sweeping scale. There was little enough point in this discussion in the first place.

 

[Azuremen]

The only developed nation with an obsession with guns in America. That says that either America is less safe or people are paranoid. If you need guns all the time, then there's something fundamentally wrong. I would argue that there's something fundamentally wrong with the politics,rather than the crime. When people argue about guns, the NRA gets press, and benefits, as people buy more guns.

I take it you've never handled guns, nor been around them much, but you couldn't be making more absurd conclusions from your personal feelings and lack of understanding.

Guns are fun. I grew up shooting guns, but I currently own none. Nearly everyone I know that owns guns is anything but paranoid, they just like them. Am I paranoid because I have a lock on my home? Is a lock a sign of societal problems and politics?

As for insurance, I see the comparison and see it as totally reasonable. but telling the guy who dented your car it;s okay because you have insurance is very different from telling your attacker that you have a gun. As much as you gun defenders refuse to admit, guns have a stigma and a deadliness about them that disturbs people. Fact: most people don't like the idea of killing a person. No matter how evil they are. I'm not a religious man, but even I think that criminal should be rehabilitated rather than killed. If someone tries to mug you, does he deserve to die? If carrying a gun is really that necessary in America, then I give up. It if's that bad, everyone needs a gun and training, and body armour, and a full complement of weapons. Clearly, everyone wants to kill you and it's your job to protect yourself by killing people.

If someone thinks a persona is armed, they are far less likely to pop him in the face. An armed society is a polite society.

You are drawing extreme conclusions based on a very limited experience. Guns have a stigma to certain people, just like premarital sex and homosexuality have a stigma to certain people. Or red heads, or blacks. The stigma is built from ignorance and misunderstanding, which you have repeatedly been apt to demonstrate.

@MatskiMonk - Many of us saw what you said as sweeping statements. You made it out that you and people you know would be dead if guns were less restricted in the UK, while discussing the topic of violence and gun culture. I guess you more meant purely anecdotal and limited context of yourself, but that has no relevance in a discussion of this nature. It also suggests you feel you and your friends are just more prone to violence than those of us in the US, as I've yet to get shot or shoot someone, or even seen a firearm pulled in a confrontation like you were alluding.

 

[Exorcet]

If you need guns all the time, then there's something fundamentally wrong.

Yes. Does carrying imply there is a need or a feeling of need though? Not necessarily.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Many of us saw what you said as sweeping statements. You made it out that you and people you know would be dead if guns were less restricted in the UK, while discussing the topic of violence and gun culture. I guess you more meant purely anecdotal and limited context of yourself, but that has no relevance in a discussion of this nature. It also suggests you feel you and your friends are just more prone to violence than those of us in the US, as I've yet to get shot or shoot someone, or even seen a firearm pulled in a confrontation like you were alluding.

The statement I made that was a sweeping generalisation according to LMS

I'm pretty sure if guns were as legal and prevelant over here as they are over there, I would either be dead myself, or would have taken another human life by now - as it is now, neither is true, and I'm much more comfortable about that.

Seems, you've already made up your own mind what I meant however.

edit: I realise I didn't state the scenario in my original post, but I didn't feel the need as I wasn't attempting to speak on behalf of the nation.

 

[Danoff]

The only developed nation with an obsession with guns is America. That says that either America is less safe or people are paranoid.

D - none of the above. It's because Americans are pre-occupied with personal responsibility.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well, I was going to respond, and then I got to this..



Okay, yawn. You're seeing my words and making up something to argue against. I say I you see large sweeping scale. There was little enough point in this discussion in the first place.

Then why the hell join, if your going to try and be argumentitive and defend a user who is also doing so even more greatly. Yet then back peddle and try to save face with what I quoted, I ask again and wait for a true response, why join in? You knew how it'd unfold, someone would disagree and vehemently argue the point as evidence to mister_dog. So to me (it's subjective so do get emotionally stuck on it) you thought you'd add your two sense argue and somehow come away changing minds, or you were bored and didn't really want to contribute. Since your statements are only echoes of what was already said and largely disproved or ethically under-argued

 

[a6m5]

If I was living in UK and my friend carried around illegal firearms, yeah, it would be different. I live in the States, and if my friend was carrying concealed firearm legally, I'd feel pretty good about it.

The statement I made that was a sweeping generalisation according to LMS

I also misunderstood your post originally, but thought your clarified it promptly. 👍

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I take it you've never handled guns, nor been around them much, but you couldn't be making more absurd conclusions from your personal feelings and lack of understanding.

Guns are fun. I grew up shooting guns, but I currently own none. Nearly everyone I know that owns guns is anything but paranoid, they just like them. Am I paranoid because I have a lock on my home? Is a lock a sign of societal problems and politics?

In fact, I love shooting. If I have one regret right now, it's that I didn't join my high school rifle team, as I'm a decent shot and it's great fun to shoot a target. I love shooting for fun, but as I said, if you need a gun for security, something's wrong. I trust the police.

If someone thinks a persona is armed, they are far less likely to pop him in the face. An armed society is a polite society.

You are drawing extreme conclusions based on a very limited experience. Guns have a stigma to certain people, just like premarital sex and homosexuality have a stigma to certain people. Or red heads, or blacks. The stigma is built from ignorance and misunderstanding, which you have repeatedly been apt to demonstrate.

I love shooting. I enjoy guns, the engineering behind them is great and they're great fun. But they're also very very deadly. Handguns are one of the few inventions in our society made solely for injuring people. Do you carry a gun around all the time? I'd like to know, and if so, why.

MatskiMonk[/USER] - Many of us saw what you said as sweeping statements. You made it out that you and people you know would be dead if guns were less restricted in the UK, while discussing the topic of violence and gun culture. I guess you more meant purely anecdotal and limited context of yourself, but that has no relevance in a discussion of this nature. It also suggests you feel you and your friends are just more prone to violence than those of us in the US, as I've yet to get shot or shoot someone, or even seen a firearm pulled in a confrontation like you were alluding.

No, guns would not make the UK or US less or more deadly. However, as I said, there's a stigma to them, admit it or not. People love the idea of guns because it means power, but are afraid of people with real guns for the same reason. I feel that guns are necessary in a situation like a war. I wouldn't take a handgun to a cinema, would you? It's just unnecessary. What needs to be done in America is not tougher laws on people who have guns, but rather much tougher background and psychological tests on people who buy guns now. People who might use a gun in anger or revenge need to be disallowed the privilege to buy a firearm, while people who will use it for self defense or hunting should naturally be allowed the weapon. I'm not in favour of outlawing guns fully, merely much stricter background checks and licenses to prove that the gun owner is responsible, sane, and will not allow others to use the gun for their purposes. As we see here, many gun owners are very sensible and responsible and could save lives in the right situation. Yes, Danoff and Azuremen, if I was in a cinema and a gunman appeared, I'd let you two shoot him instead of carrying a gun myself. But I think that's so unlikely that I'm willing to risk death by not carrying a gun.

 

[Azuremen]

D - none of the above. It's because Americans are pre-occupied with personal responsibility.

I feel like the UK is pre-occupied with the opposite of this.

 

[BobK]

The only developed nation with an obsession with guns is America.

Where did you get this "America is obsessed with guns" from anyway? I'm an American, and I'm certainly not obsessed with guns. Neither is anybody that I know personally either, as far as I know. Yes I know people who own guns, in fact I've handled and fired a few myself, but that's hardly an obsession. It sounds like you'd say that someone who owns for example a chain saw and has invested the time into learning how to use it properly and safely is obsessed with chain saws.

As for insurance, I see the comparison and see it as totally reasonable. but telling the guy who dented your car it's okay because you have insurance is very different from telling your attacker that you have a gun.

Then you have totally missed the point of the insurance comparison.

Fact: most people don't like the idea of killing a person. No matter how evil they are. I'm not a religious man, but even I think that criminal should be rehabilitated rather than killed.

I don't like the idea of killing people either, but some people just need killing. Say some big dude has just raped your mother and your sister, and is coming to rape you. I'd say he deserves killing. You would, I presume, turn the other cheek?

If someone tries to mug you, does he deserve to die?

If it's me he's mugging, you bet your ass he does.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

I feel like the UK is pre-occupied with the opposite of this.

I'm sorry I don't carry a gun, as I'm clearly very irresponsible and am just asking for trouble by not being armed. Do you carry a gun everywhere you go?

 

[Azuremen]

In fact, I love shooting. If I have one regret right now, it's that I didn't join my high school rifle team, as I'm a decent shot and it's great fun to shoot a target. I love shooting for fun, but as I said, if you need a gun for security, something's wrong. I trust the police.

Well that is idealistic of you, and they aren't much good in most emergency situations due to response times.

The reason to have a gun for security is because it levels situations, as many have explained. I'm not a small guy but by no means do I want to trade blows with a big dude and test my hand to hand combat skills if he decides to invade my home.

I love shooting. I enjoy guns, the engineering behind them is great and they're great fun. But they're also very very deadly. Handguns are one of the few inventions in our society made solely for injuring people. Do you carry a gun around all the time? I'd like to know, and if so, why.

No, I do not. Mostly because I'm not legally allowed for another year as a result of being excessively drunk in California and having my ass handed to me by the local police who, apparently, treat drunk nerds like high dangerous criminals (you should have seen the bruising left on me after they felt punching me was needed because I fell over and held onto one of them) and prior to that, because universities typically won't allow firearms to be carried on campus.

Oh, and effectively being assaulted by Anaheim's finest certainly reduced my trust in them, as who needs six men to escort a 180 pound guy out of building is beyond me.

No, guns would not make the UK or US less or more deadly. However, as I said, there's a stigma to them, admit it or not. People love the idea of guns because it means power, but are afraid of people with real guns for the same reason. I feel that guns are necessary in a situation like a cinema. I wouldn't take a handgun to a cinema, would you? It's just unnecessary. What needs to b done in America is not tougher laws on people who have guns, but rather much tougher background ad psychological tests on people who buy guns now.People who might use a gun in anger or revenge need to be disallowed the privilege to buy a firearm, while people who will use it for self defense or u\hunting should naturally be allowed the weapon. I'm not in favour of outlawing guns fully, merely much stricter background checks and licenses to prove that the gun owner is responsible, sane, and will not allow others to use the gun for their purposes.

Once I can carry again, I will take a gun with me to any situation I legally can. That would include a theater. Not because I feel I'd need it but in case I do, much how I don't feel I need my seat belt but I wear it anyhow just in case.

As for your feels good background check, it isn't exactly easy to run a full psych profile on someone, and fairly easy to answer all the questions correctly.

I'm sorry I don't carry a gun, as I'm clearly very irresponsible and am just asking for trouble by not being armed. Do you carry a gun everywhere you go?

See above. And I more meant in general, with regards to employment rights, traffic cameras, CCTV, mindsets about healthcare, return policies on products, etc.

 

[mister dog]

Then why the hell join, if your going to try and be argumentitive and defend a user who is also doing so even more greatly. Yet then back peddle and try to save face with what I quoted, I ask again and wait for a true response, why join in? You knew how it'd unfold, someone would disagree and vehemently argue the point as evidence to mister_dog. So to me (it's subjective so do get emotionally stuck on it) you thought you'd add your two sense argue and somehow come away changing minds, or you were bored and didn't really want to contribute. Since your statements are only echoes of what was already said and largely disproved or ethically under-argued

I hear my name?

Anyway; seeing there are 2 simultaneous threads about this matter; i'll just quote myself and post this here in a Jerry Springer kind of finishing tought:

reading all the posts here from our American friends, I can only conclude there is a HUGE difference in mindset between them and us Europeans regarding this matter.
I respect it though as it is circumstantial to the societies we were raised in. Europe chose to prevent guns all together, whilst you folk across the ocean were raised in a situation where you are surrounded by them in daily life for good and for worse, and seeing that this is the case over there; you basically want a gun yourself to not be a sitting duck compared to the rest.

It's really a fundamental difference in mindset between the 2 continents, but I understand where you are coming from, If i would live there i bet i would get one also seeing that so much people have them. Over here this is not necessary (and for us not something we need to worry about), so i hope you can understand the European mindset also that we don't want them

Note; not ALL europeans and ALL Europeans, but a majority.
Now if you'll excuse me gentlemen i'll go drink some fine Belgian beers and do some hotlapping for the night.

 

[Beeblebrox237]

Where did you get this "America is obsessed with guns" from anyway?

Alright, America is more accepting of killing people than other nations are.Happy?

I don't like the idea of killing people either, but some people just need killing. Say some big dude has just raped your mother and your sister, and is coming to rape you. I'd say he deserves killing. You would, I presume, turn the other cheek?

I'm sorry, is human life that valueless to you? This guy is scum, clearly, but I would give him a second chance.

If it's me he's mugging, you bet your ass he does.

Well that is idealistic of you, and they aren't much good in most emergency situations due to response times.

The reason to have a gun for security is because it levels situations, as many have explained. I'm not a small guy but by no means do I want to trade blows with a big dude and test my hand to hand combat skills if he decides to invade my home.
What's this? You have a gun because you don't trust he local law enforcement to protect you?

Sounds like the police suck where you live. If I call 999, I trust the police to come save my life.

No, I do not. Mostly because I'm not legally allowed for another year as a result of being excessively drunk in California and having my ass handed to me by the local police who, apparently, treat drunk nerds like high dangerous criminals (you should have seen the bruising left on me after they felt punching me was needed because I fell over and held onto one of them) and prior to that, because universities typically won't allow firearms to be carried on campus.

Now, I'm not saying you're irresponsible, because I know you're a good guy and are very mature, but if you don't abide by the local laws, then you don't have my sympathy. I know you're a very responsible, intelligent man, but laws are laws.

Oh, and effectively being assaulted by Anaheim's finest certainly reduced my trust in them, as who needs six men to escort a 180 pound guy out of building is beyond me.

Once I can carry again, I will take a gun with me to any situation I legally can. That would include a theater. Not because I feel I'd need it but in case I do, much how I don't feel I need my seat belt but I wear it anyhow just in case.

As for your feels good background check, it isn't exactly easy to run a full psych profile on someone, and fairly easy to answer all the questions correctly.

So why is the NRA so against psychiatric testing? They're nuts. You aren't, but they are. I don't mind you having a gun, but I think laws should be put in place to make it very hard for a criminal to get a gun. It seems silly to take a gun tot he movies, what are the chances you'll need it and survive the attack?[/quote]

See above. And I more meant in general, with regards to employment rights, traffic cameras, CCTV, mindsets about healthcare, return policies on products, etc.

So why can anyone buy a gun legally in the US? It sounds like you and I agree fundamentally: The trained people should be allowed guns, the loonies should be locked up or at least not allowed weapons.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I hear my name?

Anyway; seeing there are 2 simultaneous threads about this matter; i'll just quote myself and post this here in a Jerry Springer kind of finishing tought:



Note; not ALL europeans and ALL Europeans, but a majority.
Now if you'll excuse me gentlemen i'll go drink some fine Belgian beers and do some hotlapping for the night.

Problem is that isn't right either, there aren't 200 millions + gun owners in the U.S. there are enough guns in legal U.S. hands to warrant such a statistic but that isn't a true world. Thus many people don't want a gun, don't feel they will ever be a sitting duck which is usually the case, and have a fear of guns because they look scary and the media sucks on the teet of such violent acts rather than telling the full story. The people you deal with here on GTP happen to be advocates but when you look, we're a small number compared to all of the forum and even smaller compared to what our nation seems to want.

 

[Azuremen]

So why can anyone buy a gun legally in the US? It sounds like you and I agree fundamentally: The trained people should be allowed guns, the loonies should be locked up or at least not allowed weapons.

Well, to start, anyone can't buy a gun legally in the US, so not sure where you got that. Further, who can buy what kind of gun also varies from state to state, as do the various laws regarding carrying. Famine has already explained this at length earlier in the thread though.

I don't disagree with a bit reason behind who can carry and purchase, but I do strongly disagree with your argument revolving around "stigma" and naive belief that guns are only a reflection of problems in society that could somehow be fixed. Exceptions will always exist, which is why people have door locks and insurance, and a gun is a type of insurance in my mind for those situations of when push comes to shove.

 

[Exorcet]

I'm sorry, is human life that valueless to you? This guy is scum, clearly, but I would give him a second chance.

Value of human life, let criminals do as they want, or stop them then and there?

Ideally yes, this person would be reformed, but what cost is that worth? The loss of rights for dozens of other people? Is the potential for harm greater than what you've already seen not even worth considering?

 

[Parker]

I'm sorry I don't carry a gun, as I'm clearly very irresponsible and am just asking for trouble by not being armed. Do you carry a gun everywhere you go?

Yep, every single place I go. Not just because I'm Law Enforcement and I'm required to act if I see something (and I definitely don't want to engage an active shooter with my fists) but because I like to be prepared just in case something ever does happen. I'll do whatever it takes to protect my wife, son and the public and carrying my firearm only helps me do that.

Also, claiming America is more accepting of killing people than other nations is quite frankly idiotic. To be clear, you're saying if you just witnessed your sister and mother being raped and the rapist is coming to have his way with you, you'd just let him do it? If you had a firearm in that scenario would you use it to protect yourself adn your family or would you "let the guy have a second chance" after he had his way with you? Genuinely curious.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Then why the hell join, if your going to try and be argumentitive and defend a user who is also doing so even more greatly. Yet then back peddle and try to save face with what I quoted, I ask again and wait for a true response, why join in? You knew how it'd unfold, someone would disagree and vehemently argue the point as evidence to mister_dog. So to me (it's subjective so do get emotionally stuck on it) you thought you'd add your two sense argue and somehow come away changing minds, or you were bored and didn't really want to contribute. Since your statements are only echoes of what was already said and largely disproved or ethically under-argued

Okay, even though it's 2:20am, for the sake of clarity, rather then trying to convince you of anything

I said

"I see the point you are getting at here, but also consider the flip side."

You see

"Argumentative"

I said

"I'm pretty sure if guns were as legal and prevelant over here as they are over there, I would either be dead myself, or would have taken another human life by now - as it is now, neither is true, and I'm much more comfortable about that."

to which Azuremen said

"So what you're saying is most UK citizens are just blood thirsty and have no self control?"

at which point I clarified

"I have had cause to use all means available to defend myself before, as has an attacker had cause to attempt to use all force available at his (and his friends) disposal. None of us managed to muster lethal force, a situation that I'm sure would have been different had guns been involved."

despite that.. you said

"...and this sweeping generalization is quite ignorant, because I guess most of us talking from the U.S should be dead people walking."

There was also some back and forth about numbers of guns. I don't want to get hung up over this, but in every case spoken about, there were more guns in US.

.. and despite my earlier clarification you still came back with

"Yet you make it sound as if the opposite should have happened. As if this would be the case if European nations like the UK had more access to guns as a pubic entity, people would widely shoot each other."

So I gave more detail

"Again, I did not even attempt to generalise, I spoke from individual experience - therefore I wouldn't necessarily expect your experience to reflect mine. My friend was was kicked to the ground and kicked in the head, and another guy was punching me in the head in order to try and do the same to me, did I feel I was in physical danger? Yeah I should say so, the guy even threatened to 'cut' me, though I never saw a blade. Blood was spilled on both sides. It's reasonably conceivable that if either party had a gun it would have been used - in the context of a thread about a guy who was shot dead for throwing popcorn, it doesn't seem that inconceivable to me?"

to which you said

"Sure it doesn't seem inconceivable on a very small scale not the large sweeping scale you put forth"

WHAT THE HELL LARGE SCALE DID I PUT FORTH?

All this because you thought I was defending a post, or a user I've not even quoted or mentioned.

without wanting to

"Back Pedal"

too much - despite finding it slightly ironic that the people that seem to be attacking my viewpoint that guns are ingrained in US society are US based gun owners, I'll conceed that I've got no idea how I reacted in a situation where I was mugged, guns aren't any more common in US society than they are in the UK, and despite the statistics the difference between 21% and 31% gun ownership is far greater than the difference between 6% and 21%.

 

[BobK]

[in the context of being mugged]

Sounds like the police suck where you live. If I call 999, I trust the police to come save my life.

Wait, let me get this straight -- where you live, if you're attacked by a mugger, all you have to do is say hang on, let me make a phone call, whip out the cellphone, dial 999/911/whatever, and presto! the cops are there instantly to foil the bad guy? And the muggers are so polite as to grant you the time to do this? Really?

 

[Famine]

Sounds like the police suck where you live. If I call 999, I trust the police to come save my life.

They're too busy shooting themselves to shoot criminals. And when they do shoot criminals, they're hauled over the coals for it.

However, bear in mind that UK policemen are trained in central locations to the same standards and they are the top and bottom of domestic law enforcement - whereas the US is a nightmarish broth of different jurisdictions, training and standards from town, through county and up to state (and let's not even get into Federal law enforcement).

I'd say, without insulting our colonial cousins' cops, that the guys behind 999 are largely more professional and cohesive than the ones you call 911 for. But they're not everywhere, all the time - the front line of defending your rights is you.

 

[McLaren]

I have very basic insurance. Sure, people don't understand guns or their culture, but that's exactly the point. The only developed nation with an obsession with guns is America. That says that either America is less safe or people are paranoid. So I assume that the person with the gun is responsible, legal, and mentally stable? If you need guns all the time, then there's something fundamentally wrong. I would argue that there's something fundamentally wrong with the politics, rather than the crime. When people argue about guns, the NRA gets press, and benefits, as people buy more guns.

As for insurance, I see the comparison and see it as totally reasonable. but telling the guy who dented your car it's okay because you have insurance is very different from telling your attacker that you have a gun. As much as you gun defenders refuse to admit, guns have a stigma and a deadliness about them that disturbs people. Fact: most people don't like the idea of killing a person. No matter how evil they are. I'm not a religious man, but even I think that criminal should be rehabilitated rather than killed. If someone tries to mug you, does he deserve to die? If carrying a gun is really that necessary in America, then I give up. It if's that bad, everyone needs a gun and training, and body armour, and a full complement of weapons. Clearly, everyone wants to kill you and it's your job to protect yourself by killing people.

Rubbish.

All I'm reading from you, post after post, is another excuse to continually take pot shots at the US like you've done in the past.

 

[Azuremen]

I'd say, without insulting our colonial cousins' cops, that the guys behind 999 are largely more professional and cohesive than the ones you call 911 for. But they're not everywhere, all the time - the front line of defending your rights is you.

They also have considerably less ground to cover, seeing how the UK is smaller than the states lining the West Coast in the US.

@Beeblebrox237 - Where I grew up, the nearest Police station was 15 miles away in a different county. Response times where, at best, around 20 minutes. If you had a home invasion and called 911 the moment is started, your body could very well be cold before someone showed up.

Rubbish.

All I'm reading from you, post after post, is another excuse to continually take pot shots at the US like you've done in the past.

I had hoped me raking him over the coals for his general attitude of "the US is stupid, UK number ONE!!!!!111" in the past would have made him reconsider his tactics, but alas.

 

[Zenith]

I think it's funny that the comment about Americans carrying guns because they care about personal responsibility was countered with "I trust the police!"

Yes, the police! My safety not my own responsibility, it's someone else's! We pay them a small wage. It's their responsibility to ensure that I can go through life without being attacked. They should have to shoot the muggers that attack me. How can you morally justify handing the responsibility to apply lethal force to protect your life to another equal when you refuse to do the same?

Truly the perfect response.

 

[Wolfe]

Honestly, I'd trust the average gun-carrying, well-adjusted civilian a little bit more than the police. Some dude with a gun might just like to have it handy. The police are trained to respond with theirs. Like the ex-cop in the incident from which this thread began.

To be clear, I don't fear for my own safety as much as the safety of my intimidating-looking yet super social 90lbs. dog. There are too many accounts of tragic encounters between law enforcement and family pets. Like Reeves, the quote is usually something along the lines of, "I was in fear of being attacked." My dog has a habit of jumping to lick your face.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Okay, even though it's 2:20am, for the sake of clarity, rather then trying to convince you of anything

I said


You see

I said



to which Azuremen said



at which point I clarified



despite that.. you said



There was also some back and forth about numbers of guns. I don't want to get hung up over this, but in every case spoken about, there were more guns in US.

.. and despite my earlier clarification you still came back with



So I gave more detail



to which you said



WHAT THE HELL LARGE SCALE DID I PUT FORTH?

All this because you thought I was defending a post, or a user I've not even quoted or mentioned.

without wanting to too much - despite finding it slightly ironic that the people that seem to be attacking my viewpoint that guns are ingrained in US society are US based gun owners, I'll conceed that I've got no idea how I reacted in a situation where I was mugged, guns aren't any more common in US society than they are in the UK, and despite the statistics the difference between 21% and 31% gun ownership is far greater than the difference between 6% and 21%.

I never saw nor paid attention to what Azure said, I saw your post didn't agree with it and put in my argument. You telling me what another users said is irrelevant because either way you still made it seem such. Instead of having what many would consider a generalization the first time around, why not be descriptive all the time instead of circling back when talking about obviously hot topic issues. Wouldn't that be more conducive to carrying a conversation forward instead of coming up with supposed accuses and claims that you didn't do something even though it reads otherwise?

Famine is based in the U.S.? A few others in this thread saying the opposite of you are also not U.S. based, I guess their hidden Americans. The irony is you grasping at straws and slowly eroding to this rather than just throwing your hands up sooner and giving up, you don't care, yet you keep going on, true irony.

As for the difference in numbers I'd say that is the only thing we agree on, California owns more guns than Arizona, but obviously per population ratio AZ has more. Either way there are plenty of regions in the U.S that do know nor care enough about guns to live in this supposed fear. The same mass of people that tend to vote for gun bans on national polls because they don't care and lack as much education on the subject as you, but hey they're ingrained on it