Renegade Public Forums
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Gun control
Re: Gun control [message #337498 is a reply to message #337389] Wed, 25 June 2008 17:47 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
NukeIt15 is currently offline  NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma:
Colonel
warranto

Crime involving guns in America has not become non-existant by both sides holding weapons.


Crime will never become non-existent. There is always that element which wishes to subvert or circumvent the rules of society in order to advance itself, no matter who gets hurt along the way.

The largest flaw in this bit of your post has to do with generalization. You simply cannot take the crime statistics for the US as a whole as you can for some other countries. Because of how the US is organized, gun laws vary greatly from state to state and even from city to city. However, the consistent fact is that in those areas where private ownership of guns- especially handguns- is severely restricted or banned, the crime rate is higher in comparison with areas that have no such restrictions. Yes, when set against the entire US population, there are a lot of registered gun owners. However, most of these people are not living in the areas that have the highest crime; likewise, the highest concentrations of violent crime involving illegally owned weapons tend to occur in those places which don't have very many legal gun owners. There's a pattern here somewhere, and I'm not at all convinced that enough people are seeing it- which is a terrible shame for folks living in Trenton, Camden, NYC, Washington DC, Chicago, and other hotspots.

Quote:

But there is no MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)-mentality going on here. Rather the opposite happens. It ensures the gun will be fired. Much of the time the gun is used for purposes of intimidation with no intent of being fired.


Guns are very effective intimidation- when the person they are pointed at has no gun of their own. You are correct here; when one person with a weapon sees that the other also has a weapon, there is a much higher chance that one or the other will fire. There is an unspoken assumption on the part of either party that the other must be willing to use the weapon they possess; otherwise they wouldn't have brought it along. Whether that weapon is a gun or a knife, the threat response changes drastically when the victim is also armed- rather than trying to reason with the attacker or escape, the would-be victim instead fights back. The presence of a second weapon changes everything- the playing field is leveled, and whether or not the other will be intimidated is entirely dependent on their personality after this happens. This is a good thing, if only because the vast majority of crime is committed by cowardly people (the fact that they attack those who they believe to be unarmed testifies to their cowardice) who are far more likely to be intimidated by the presence of a gun. They don't want to die; they want a pushover- and that pushover just pushed back.

Quote:

If it is fired, it better be to kill because the criminal you just fired at WILL fire back.


Any handgun defense course will teach you that there are only two targets worth shooting for- center of mass, or the head. Center of mass because, if you are using a larger caliber weapon (in practice, pretty much anything bigger or punchier than a .380 ACP), there is a very good chance that a CoM shot will put your target on the ground unless they are either Superman or so whacked out on drugs that they keep coming anyway. Head, because as we all know there is absolutely no chance of the criminal firing back if they are dead. The standard FBI/law enforcement training target lacks arms and legs for exactly this reason: a nonlethal shot is an ideal, not a reality.

Quote:

If the criminal was going to shoot regardless, then holding a weapon would do nothing to deter the person.


Simply holding it? No, that won't do shit. That's not the point. If you have a weapon, and you have the shot, use it, or there's no damn point to having brought it out in the first place. If the bad guy has already drawn or is about to draw on you, your imperative is to get your weapon out and fire it before they do the same. Your chances of survival go way down if they've already drawn theirs, but they cease to exist if you don't try.

Quote:

The best scenario to come out of this is that producing the weapon causes a would-be shooter to back off.


...which is to say that the next best thing would be that you kill the criminal and survive, the next best under that being that you are injured and the criminal is either gone or dead, and beneath that are the worst-case scenarios in which the criminal comes out on top and you have either been driven off, injured, or killed. We all know what the best-case scenario is. The best chance of attaining it- or any positive outcome at all- lies in being armed.

Quote:

The point being that the existence of a gun is more likely to intensify than defuse a situation.


The presence of a gun does not cause a crisis situation to escalate; that escalation is exactly what calls for the guns presence. If you have a need for the gun in the first place, the time for peaceful resolution has come and gone already. This is the situation in which, if you don't have a gun, you sure as hell wish you did. That type of crisis can happen whether you have it or not, and it is far, far better for your chances of survival to have it.


"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine

Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Palin speech...your impressions...
Next Topic: Election 08
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Nov 12 03:35:58 MST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02475 seconds