Obama wants to bust your balls, and heads for renewing the assault weapons ban - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Protocol7;37128066]Maybe because, woah, we have more people than Australia! Is that always the case? The Columbine killers had illegal weapons.[/QUOTE] No, it's not always the case. But if I have to release my right to defend myself with a firearm to live in this country, but also have a far lower chance of encountering anyone who even legally owns a firearm, I'll take that chance.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128072]so you're saying that in a dark cinema with loads of people in, where it's very hard to work out where someone is, and everyone is running around and screaming, they would have instantly shot this guy who was shooting? no.[/QUOTE] You're right, because there could be difficulty in seeing the guy shooting at the front of the room they shouldn't have any chance of defending themselves.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128079][url]http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita[/url] The graph won't load properly for me right now, but Australia is ranked at number 18, while the US isn't even in the top 37(which is all it displays).[/QUOTE] those are from 2006. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#Australia[/url] these are from 2012.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128072]so you're saying that in a dark cinema with loads of people in, where it's very hard to work out where someone is, and everyone is running around and screaming, they would have instantly shot this guy who was shooting? no.[/QUOTE] It's not like people are going to be standing around the guy shooting his gun at people. People would be running away giving anyone with a gun a clear shot at their assailant. Even if Holmes got shot AT he would stop firing and take cover which could save many lives. Ever heard of suppressing fire? People tend to not like being in the way of bullets.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128072]so you're saying that in a dark cinema with loads of people in, where it's very hard to work out where someone is, and everyone is running around and screaming, they would have instantly shot this guy who was shooting? no.[/QUOTE] How do you know? Since theorycrafting is apparently fair game, if there were at least 3 or so CCWs in that theater, there's a good chance someone would have shot him. Theater's aren't pitch black and it's pretty obvious to see who's shooting and where they are.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128086]No, it's not always the case. But if I have to release my right to defend myself with a firearm to live in this country, but also have a far lower chance of encountering anyone who even legally owns a firearm, I'll take that chance.[/QUOTE] Why would you be afraid of the average gun owner? This just comes across as an illogical fear of all guns. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128108]those are from 2006. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#Australia[/url] these are from 2012.[/QUOTE] Actually it's 2011, but there is a link to 2006 statistics on the page.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128086]but also have a far lower chance of encountering anyone who even legally owns a firearm, I'll take that chance.[/QUOTE] Wow

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128096]You're right, because there could be difficulty in seeing the guy shooting at the front of the room they shouldn't have any chance of defending themselves.[/QUOTE] yes, because he was standing on a podium, and everyone was sitting in their seats. this argument is always wheeled out, but there's no saying that he would have been stopped, and there is nothing to say that more people would have lived

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128116]Why would you be afraid of the average gun owner? This just comes across as an illogical fear of all guns.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Sigmund Freud]A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.[/QUOTE] :v:

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128100]Firearms are a problem in their own right. It's true that the government should try to prevent crimes in general, and if they believe that regulating weapons will help and you don't agree to that you can just go ahead and try to get involved in politics instead of just arguing on a forum.[/QUOTE] Regulating weapons isn't preventing crimes. It's simply reducing the possibility that a legal gun owner could do something in a situation when someone unloads on them.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128116]Why would you be afraid of the average gun owner? This just comes across as an illogical fear of all guns. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] Actually it's 2011, but there is a link to 2006 statistics on the page.[/QUOTE] either way, that study is from 2012. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=dogmachines;37128116]Why would you be afraid of the average gun owner? This just comes across as an illogical fear of all guns. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] Actually it's 2011, but there is a link to 2006 statistics on the page.[/QUOTE] You are incorrectly reading into my words. I'm saying that the chance I'll even encounter guns is lower, thus the chance that I will be attacked by someone with a gun is even lower still.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128143]yes, because he was standing on a podium, and everyone was sitting in their seats. this argument is always wheeled out, but there's no saying that he would have been stopped, and there is nothing to say that more people would have lived[/QUOTE] Have you ever been a theater before a movie? It's quite easy to see somebody standing in the front, especially because the lights aren't fully dimmed until just before the movie.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128143]yes, because he was standing on a podium, and everyone was sitting in their seats. this argument is always wheeled out, but there's no saying that he would have been stopped, and there is nothing to say that more people would have lived[/QUOTE] He was standing on a podium as soon as he started shooting.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128157]either way, that study is from 2012. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] You are incorrectly reading into my words. I'm saying that the chance I'll even encounter guns is lower, thus the chance that I will be attacked by someone with a gun is even lower still.[/QUOTE] 2012 isn't over yet, the statistics are hardly in. 2011 is the last year with complete statistics.

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128179]Well you are 10 persons, I'm not saying that he wouldn't be able to kill anyone, he would probably be able to kill quite a few. But a person with a gun would probably have a lot better chance of killing everyone in the room.[/QUOTE] Throw chairs at him then, why does the weapon make a difference on the effectiveness of chairs?

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128157] You are incorrectly reading into my words.[/QUOTE] Uh, no we aren't. You said [quote]but also have a far lower chance of encountering anyone who even legally owns a firearm, I'll take that chance.[/quote] That seriously shouts "I don't like guns at all". I can understand that it's not what you mean, but a lot of people are going to get tripped up by the wording.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128143]yes, because he was standing on a podium, and everyone was sitting in their seats. this argument is always wheeled out, but there's no saying that he would have been stopped, and there is nothing to say that more people would have lived[/QUOTE] There's a chance he could be stopped and people be saved. When nobody else is armed that chance is pretty much zero.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128157]either way, that study is from 2012. [editline]7th August 2012[/editline] You are incorrectly reading into my words. I'm saying that the chance I'll even encounter guns is lower, thus the chance that I will be attacked by someone with a gun is even lower still.[/QUOTE] Even so, in the off chance that you do get attacked but someone with a gun wouldn't it be nice to fire back and hopefully take him down before he can hurt you or someone else? Or are you basically saying you're scared of loud noises and you're too pussy to defend your OWN LIFE.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128184]2012 isn't over yet, the statistics are hardly in. 2011 is the last year with complete statistics.[/QUOTE] the study isn't of 2012. it's from 2012, done by the UNODC if you're honestly saying that they did an incomplete study, take it up with the united nations

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;37128197]Uh, no we aren't. You said That seriously shouts "I don't like guns at all". I can understand that it's not what you mean, but a lot of people are going to get tripped up by the wording.[/QUOTE] Okay, but that isn't what I meant. So you are incorrectly reading into my words.

[QUOTE=dogmachines;37128201]There's a chance he could be stopped and people be saved. When nobody else is armed that chance is pretty much zero.[/QUOTE] Even a small chance is better than no chance. That's why I'm going to apply for a CCW when I'm 21. I totally agree with you.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37127832] Outstanding, you've ascertained that someone with a weapon has an advantage over someone without a weapon in terms of some childish MY IMAGINARY FRIEND CAN BEAT YOUR IMAGINARY FRIEND scenario.[/QUOTE] I dunno bro, I heard an argument one time that the way to defend yourself against someone who can kill you from a distance is to bumrush them because their weapon isn't as "practical" as your bare hands. It went something like [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37126907]I would rather have nothing, because I have no exceptional training with a bow and arrow, he's probably better at it than me, and all I'd do if I had to try and stop him, is drop the bow and arrow and try and run at him, because wielding a bow and arrow is actually fucking impractical if you're using one that actually have the force to kill someone [/QUOTE] though I may have neglected to mention it was the most shit the bed idiotic thing ever put in words.

[QUOTE=reedbo;37128213]Even so, in the off chance that you do get attacked but someone with a gun wouldn't it be nice to fire back and hopefully take him down before he can hurt you or someone else? Or are you basically saying you're scared of loud noises and you're too pussy to defend your OWN LIFE.[/QUOTE] good lord do you get off being so macho and bravado GUNS HOORAH TOO PUSSY TO DEFEND YOUR OWN LIFE read my words again. I'll sooner live somewhere where guns are illegal, where it is unbelievably unlikely I'll be shot, than a place where I feel I need a firearm to successfully defend myself.

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128228]If someone has a gun pointed at you wont be able to do anything.[/QUOTE] That is if you didn't have your own gun. Are you guys seriously insisting that it's better to have an unfair fight because guns are dangerous?

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128228]If someone has a gun pointed at you wont be able to do anything.[/QUOTE] You could point [i]your[/i] gun at them to force a cease fire. :v:

[QUOTE=FZE;37128246]I dunno bro, I heard an argument one time that the way to defend yourself against someone who can kill you from a distance is to bumrush them because their weapon isn't as "practical" as your bare hands. It went something like though I may have neglected to mention it was the most shit the bed idiotic thing ever put in words.[/QUOTE] ever tried to fire a bow bro sorry if you're using legolas from lord of the rings as a reference for how easy it is to kill people with them AND THEN HE SLID DOWN A SHIELD IN A SHOPPING CENTRE AND PUT 3 ARROWS THROUGH HEADS

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128244]What would you use if you aren't armed and the only thing around you is a chair?[/QUOTE] I'd probably throw the chair too, not that it'd do any good, would only delay the inevitable. Would much rather be carrying my 1911 so I can throw a bullet at him instead.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;37128248]good lord do you get off being so macho and bravado GUNS HOORAH TOO PUSSY TO DEFEND YOUR OWN LIFE read my words again. I'll sooner live somewhere where guns are illegal, where it is unbelievably unlikely I'll be shot, than a place where I feel I need a firearm to successfully defend myself.[/QUOTE] If someone starts shooting at you with a gun and you don't have one you're most likely dead. If you did have a gun there's a chance that you would still be alive. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR8Zi2whXVA[/url] Please watch (haha) this and then tell me that if this man hadn't have had a gun he would be alive.

[QUOTE=Kartoffel;37128254]You could point [i]your[/i] gun at them to force a cease fire. :v:[/QUOTE] And then you both pull out shovels and dig your trenches.

[QUOTE=Lolkork;37128228]If someone has a gun pointed at you wont be able to do anything.[/QUOTE] I've seen a lot of comments like this, and I'd just like to clear something up. Having a weapon for self defense does not mean you confront every threat with it. If somebody clearly has the upper hand, such as when they confront you out of nowhere on the street, then you don't pull the gun because you have common sense. When you hear somebody break through your window in the middle of the night, you use the weapon to defend yourself if the person is armed or you fear for your life, even then you probably shouldn't look for the fight, just call the police if possible and hold your position. If you witness a crime, then you don't go after the perpetrator guns blazing. You pull the gun and tell him to drop his weapon, then wait for the police. If he runs, let him go. Having a weapon just means you have the option to defend yourself if necessary.