Guns, Guns Everywhere

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Formless
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4144
Joined: 2008-11-10 08:59pm
Location: the beginning and end of the Present

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by Formless »

Metahive wrote:Worse, what if he had discovered it and stolen the gun along with my wallet?
Preeetty sure preventing that is the big reason to carry concealed (well, and there are social/legal reasons to keep your weapon hidden). The attacker has to find it on you first before they can take it away.
Jub wrote:That presumes that your mugger or the person assaulting you wants to harm or kill you, and that isn't always the case. A knife, just like a gun, can be shown to get you to give up your goods without a struggle.
No, that pretty much is the case, if you are foolish enough to provoke them by fighting. Read the article from No Nonsense Self Defense. If you do not comply they will cut or stab you. They will place the knife in a position where they can immediately attack if you do not comply, like at your neck the way Metahive's attacker did. You avoid those situations by being aware, knowing how to recognize different levels of alertness in yourself, and knowing which situations are more and less dangerous, like being out at night in a bad neighborhood vs being in the park in the suburbs in the middle of the day with lots of people around. For example. But trusting that simply because your attacker has something other than a gun means you can overpower them is foolhardy and defies known facts about criminal attackers, and knives. Like guns, they aren't limited by the strength of the wielder, but by the sharpness of the edge. Its a highly time tested technology in its own right. It predates recorded history even.

And this doesn't nullify the use of weapons for self defense, because there isn't always an option to retreat or avoid confrontations. I know people who have been in these situations, and their stories back this up. For instance, someone I know was on two occasions blocked by would be assailants on/near roads, using their vehicles as a means of preventing escape. This person twice brandished weapons to deter his/her would be attackers from following through on their attempts to assault them (and bear with me, for confidentiality's sake that's all the detail I will go into, and gender ambiguity is intentional).
Even if a person with a knife does want to harm you, he's still within your reach and that gives you a better chance to respond than if the same attack was carried out with a shooter pumping rounds into you from a few feet away. If a person wants you dead from ambush that have options either way, but one gives you a slightly better chance to reply.
Read the articles, jerk. I will not debunk this again. An unarmed victim against an attacker with a knife is virtually defenseless, because the blade can cut through all of your defenses. There are no hit points protecting you like in a video game. The best you can hope for is a minimal hospital bill for stitches, it is NOT a fight. Similarly, a gun wielding mugger also has to come within reach so you can hand off the loot, but you absolutely should comply and call the cops afterward because their finger will be on the trigger. Self defense in these situations are not what concealed carriers keep a gun around for, because they aren't stupid like you are and understand that its not worth their life to fight that particular kind of attacker. On the other hand, someone like a home invader or a convienience store robber don't necessarily have such an unfair advantage, but are still dangerous enough a weapon can be useful for the victim.
I already did, I just failed at quotes so I'll ghetto edit it in here.
My apologies, you did indeed fail at quoting and I didn't notice. Carry on.
"Still, I would love to see human beings, and their constituent organ systems, trivialized and commercialized to the same extent as damn iPods and other crappy consumer products. It would be absolutely horrific, yet so wonderful." — Shroom Man 777
"To Err is Human; to Arrr is Pirate." — Skallagrim
“I would suggest "Schmuckulating", which is what Futurists do and, by extension, what they are." — Commenter "Rayneau"
The Magic Eight Ball Conspiracy.
User avatar
Napoleon the Clown
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2007-05-05 02:54pm
Location: Minneso'a

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by Napoleon the Clown »

I normally stay the hell away from these debates, but I wonder about something: For the pro-guns as self-defense people, do you have statistics that show that people who carry a gun have better outcomes? I'm aware that areas that allow concealed carry have shown reduced crime rates, but if you're going to say that a gun will improve your odds in a mugging, you'd better have statistics to prove that the dudes with guns have a lower rate of injury/death when getting mugged.


Here's an idea, supported by self-defense instructors all over: If you do find yourself getting mugged, just give up your wallet or whatever. If all the person is after is money and jewelry, hand it over. Even if you can take them down, lethally or otherwise, you're gonna still have to take even more time out of your schedule to show that your use of force was justified. Even more so if you shoot the mugger. Even in SYG states they will investigate to see what was going on when you pulled a gun and fired. And there's that bit about the psychological effects of killing someone.

Now, if the person DOES actively wish to harm you, I can see justification for having a gun. If they have a knife and you do manage to avoid getting disabled before having the chance to protect yourself, that could be the difference between life and death. But someone simply holding you at knife point and demanding you hand over your valuables? It likely won't improve things to go for a gun.


None of this is to say I'm opposed to gun ownership, or even concealed carry. Making sure the people who own guns, and especially those who carry them, not only know how to safely handle a firearm but will actually do what their training tells them to do is the important part.

Regarding gun safes: Those are also to keep people who don't know how to handle the firearm safely from getting their hands on the gun. I'm sure we've all seen the news stories about Little Timmy getting his parents' gun and accidentally blowing away a sibling, friend, or himself. There will be kids that don't listen when you tell them "Do not touch this."


Regarding knife vs fist: Bruce Lee went on record stating that if he ever were to need to protect his life he'd take a gun over anything, from what I've heard. Formless is quite right about your odds against a knife when you have no weapon. Even if you have a knife against their knife you're probably gonna be going to the ER unless you're substantially faster than the attacker.
Sig images are for people who aren't fucking lazy.
User avatar
Kon_El
Jedi Knight
Posts: 631
Joined: 2002-07-07 12:52am

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by Kon_El »

Formless wrote: And this doesn't nullify the use of weapons for self defense, because there isn't always an option to retreat or avoid confrontations. I know people who have been in these situations, and their stories back this up. For instance, someone I know was on two occasions blocked by would be assailants on/near roads, using their vehicles as a means of preventing escape. This person twice brandished weapons to deter his/her would be attackers from following through on their attempts to assault them (and bear with me, for confidentiality's sake that's all the detail I will go into, and gender ambiguity is intentional).
Blocking the exit from apartment building stairs is quite popular as well. Several people I know have been mugged this way including myself. Those of us who were unarmed could do nothing. Those few who were carrying used their guns to either run off the muggers or had them lay down on the ground and wait for the police.
User avatar
TheFeniX
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4869
Joined: 2003-06-26 04:24pm
Location: Texas

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by TheFeniX »

Napoleon the Clown wrote:Here's an idea, supported by self-defense instructors all over: If you do find yourself getting mugged, just give up your wallet or whatever. If all the person is after is money and jewelry, hand it over. Even if you can take them down, lethally or otherwise, you're gonna still have to take even more time out of your schedule to show that your use of force was justified. Even more so if you shoot the mugger. Even in SYG states they will investigate to see what was going on when you pulled a gun and fired. And there's that bit about the psychological effects of killing someone.
If all they want is your wallet and you let them get into a position where they can get it: yes. What a lot of people forget is that planning for what happens after you've been accosted is like planning for what you'll do if, when crossing the street on foot, that car coming across decides to run the stop sign: poor planning.
It likely won't improve things to go for a gun.
You'd be surprised:
“Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January.

“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.
User avatar
ChaserGrey
Jedi Knight
Posts: 501
Joined: 2010-10-17 11:04pm

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by ChaserGrey »

Napoleon the Clown wrote:Regarding knife vs fist: Bruce Lee went on record stating that if he ever were to need to protect his life he'd take a gun over anything, from what I've heard. Formless is quite right about your odds against a knife when you have no weapon. Even if you have a knife against their knife you're probably gonna be going to the ER unless you're substantially faster than the attacker.
Old, sick ER joke: what do you call a knife fight participant who ends up in the ICU afterwards? The winner.
Lt. Brown, Mr. Grey, and Comrade Syeriy on Let's Play BARIS
User avatar
Napoleon the Clown
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2007-05-05 02:54pm
Location: Minneso'a

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by Napoleon the Clown »

TheFeniX wrote:
Napoleon the Clown wrote:Here's an idea, supported by self-defense instructors all over: If you do find yourself getting mugged, just give up your wallet or whatever. If all the person is after is money and jewelry, hand it over. Even if you can take them down, lethally or otherwise, you're gonna still have to take even more time out of your schedule to show that your use of force was justified. Even more so if you shoot the mugger. Even in SYG states they will investigate to see what was going on when you pulled a gun and fired. And there's that bit about the psychological effects of killing someone.
If all they want is your wallet and you let them get into a position where they can get it: yes. What a lot of people forget is that planning for what happens after you've been accosted is like planning for what you'll do if, when crossing the street on foot, that car coming across decides to run the stop sign: poor planning.
It likely won't improve things to go for a gun.
You'd be surprised:
“Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January.

“Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.
I noted that if they mean to do you harm having a way to defend yourself is beneficial.

As to the study, did it account for people who didn't try to fight back against simple muggings? That's what I wonder about. When people talk about using a gun if they get mugged. Having a gun will definitely end things faster than trying to deck the mugger, or knife the mugger. But that's not the issue I have. The issue I have is if trying to defend yourself with force increases or decreases the rate of injury.
Sig images are for people who aren't fucking lazy.
User avatar
Beowulf
The Patrician
Posts: 10621
Joined: 2002-07-04 01:18am
Location: 32ULV

Re: Guns, Guns Everywhere

Post by Beowulf »

Purple wrote:
TimothyC wrote:Purple, I have a fundamental question for you. Conceptually, should rules be "You can do what you want except X, Y, & Z" or should they be "You are allowed to do A, B, & C at our digression" ?
I can say that conceptually I don't really see a difference in these two other than wording. It's kind of like those half full - half empty questions. You still have half a glass of ale.
Only in a static situation. If the range of possibility increases, (to continue the analogy, the cup gets bigger) then what the rules cover remain the same. If the rules say that x,y&z are allowed, and all else is verboten, then even if d,e&f becomes possible, you can't do it, because it's not allowed. If the rules say that a, b, & c are banned, but everything else is good, and then d, e, &f become possible, then you can start doing d, e, & f.

Even in a static situation, having explicitly somethings as being forbidden, and the rest allowed may be preferable, as the range of possible may be so huge as to result in an allowed list being far too large to maintain in memory, resulting in a requirement to find out if you can do something, while the list of things forbidden would be much smaller, and therefore easier to remember.
"preemptive killing of cops might not be such a bad idea from a personal saftey[sic] standpoint..." --Keevan Colton
"There's a word for bias you can't see: Yours." -- William Saletan
Post Reply