Dildos descend on UT Austin in 'Cocks Not Glocks' protest of guns on campus - Polidicks

[QUOTE=RB33;50952998]I'm done now. You don't agree with me, think i'm ignorant and whatever else. Nothing will come out of this, so let's end it. I said my points, that's enough.[/QUOTE] Wrong again. We know that you are ignorant because you haven't shown a single real bit of empirical data to back up anything you've said. We know that you are ignorant because your arguments are based entirely on emotion or made up fantasy scenarios, and are logically inconsistent [i]with themselves[/i], let alone the empirical data that outright contradicts what you are saying. This is literally burying your head in the sand and shouting lalalalala I can't year you.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50953010]Wrong again. We know that you are ignorant because you haven't shown a single real bit of empirical data to back up anything you've said. We know that you are ignorant because your arguments are based entirely on emotion or made up fantasy scenarios, and are logically inconsistent [i]with themselves[/i], let alone the empirical data that outright contradicts what you are saying. This is literally burying your head in the sand and shouting lalalalala I can't year you.[/QUOTE] Give it a rest now, it's nothing to keep arguing about. I tried to paint a possible scenario with my common sense, I wasn't trying to prove some theory. Only what I myself saw as likely if it would become widespread without limitations. You proved me wrong but I still don't believe that a system can really be perfect. There is nothing more to say now.

[QUOTE=RB33;50953049]Give it a rest now, it's nothing to keep arguing about. I tried to paint a possible scenario with my common sense, I wasn't trying to prove some theory. Only what I myself saw as likely if it would become widespread without limitations. You proved me wrong but I still don't believe that a system can really be perfect. There is nothing more to say now.[/QUOTE] "Common sense" is nonsensical when it's contrary to data and not even tangentially connected to, let alone grounded in reality. You are actively stupid if you think otherwise. Even now, you persist with ridiculous equivocations. "You proved me wrong, but I still don't believe a system can be perfect." The hell does this even mean? You admit you are wrong, but want to continue arguing? So you're literally admitting to threadshitting now?

[QUOTE=RB33;50953049]Give it a rest now, it's nothing to keep arguing about. I tried to paint a possible scenario with my common sense, I wasn't trying to prove some theory. Only what I myself saw as likely if it would become widespread without limitations. You proved me wrong but I still don't believe that a system can really be perfect. There is nothing more to say now.[/QUOTE] Once more, the status quo you fear has occurred yet the result of it hasnt. Your fears are baseless, your "common sense" does not mesh with reality, and you've provided no evidence to any of your claims. You're arguing pure emotion.

I'm not going to bother keeping your garbage in PMs. If you have something to say, be an adult and cry about it in public. [QUOTE=RB33]I'm not. Stop arguing, I won't reply to it anymore. Just let it rest now.[/QUOTE] Why let it rest? So you can bury your head in the sand and continue pretending you aren't being a flipping moron? If you want to have a rational discussion, fine. I'd love to have one, and so would several other people in this thread. The problem is that you aren't being rational or logical. I don't have the time, let alone desire, to coddle you and pretend that your ignorant garbage is anything other than what it is. The truth is not always pleasant. It's not our problem that you are incapable of comprehending that reality is oftentimes one hell of a bitch. There's no room to agree to disagree when you are posting outright falsehoods, and made up fairy tales. You are measurably and demonstrably wrong on nearly all counts. You can accept that, or you can't. I really don't care one way or the other, but you shouldn't expect me, or anyone else, to not call you on it because it hurts your feelings or whatever other made up, arbitrary, bullshit excuse you want to peddle. As long as you keep spouting horseshit, someone is going to call you out on it. You want to stop being called out? Stop posting dumb shit. Those are your options. It's really that simple.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50945562]Except there's nothing that says, conclusively, that CCWs increases violent crime and [I]that doesn't even make sense anyway.[/I] So criminals are committing more crimes because more people have guns? Ridiculous, all it shows is that at best people are responding to a preexisting condition, crime, and then they start counting from there. [editline]25th August 2016[/editline] So wait if the presence of CCWs in the area increases violent crime then it's safe to assume the risk of a mugger being violent is increased so it's actually more likely you will die. Quite honestly using the argument you've presented means that in that situation it's best to rightfully blow the cocksucker away because he's [I]probably[/I] going to kill you anyway.[/QUOTE] Well, you can try blowing the cocksucker away, but if he's already got a gun or knife on you then more likely than not he'll kill you instead. The mugger may also kill you if they figure out you're armed. Generally speaking, carrying a gun makes it a lot more likely [i]someone[/I] is going to die in a mugging scenario, and that tends to be the victim rather than the mugger because it's difficult to outdraw a guy already aiming a gun at your chest.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;50954481]Generally speaking, carrying a gun makes it a lot more likely [i]someone[/I] is going to die in a mugging scenario, and that tends to be the victim rather than the mugger because it's difficult to outdraw a guy already aiming a gun at your chest.[/QUOTE] Crime stats correlate with the former, but not the latter. There's plenty of time to draw on someone with sleight of hand as you reach for a wallet. Most people aren't expecting it. There's tons of security footage floating around of people in convenience stores doing exactly that. It's a personal moral decision as to whether or not you believe criminals getting hurt and/or killed is a problem. America as a collective feels that it's acceptable to exchange substantial amounts of criminal lives in exchange for a few innocents. There's not really any universally applicable answer.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50954585]Crime stats correlate with the former, but not the latter. There's plenty of time to draw on someone with sleight of hand as you reach for a wallet. Most people aren't expecting it. There's tons of security footage floating around of people in convenience stores doing exactly that. It's a personal moral decision as to whether or not you believe criminals getting hurt and/or killed is a problem. America as a collective feels that it's acceptable to exchange substantial amounts of criminal lives in exchange for a few innocents. There's not really any universally applicable answer.[/QUOTE] I have no objection to killing muggers if it may save the life of the person they are attacking, but studies suggest that carrying a gun makes you at least 4 times as likely to be shot as not carrying a gun if someone tries to rob you. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/#!po=0.342466[/url] Individual instances of ccw holders successfully defending themselves does not override the fact you are statistically much more likely to be killed during a mugging attempt if you carry a gun.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;50954732]I have no objection to killing muggers if it may save the life of the person they are attacking, but studies suggest that carrying a gun makes you at least 4 times as likely to be shot as not carrying a gun if someone tries to rob you. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/#!po=0.342466[/url] Individual instances of ccw holders successfully defending themselves does not override the fact you are statistically much more likely to be killed during a mugging attempt if you carry a gun.[/QUOTE] What if I told you that's a risk I'm willing to take? Because first off I don't believe that - and second off even if it was true I'd rather have control over my own fate. If it's obviously not a good idea to draw, I'm not gonna do it. Lemme clarify I'm not dismissing your statistics but I don't think carrying a gun alone makes you more likely to get shot. I think going for a gun when you're at a disadvantage makes you more likely to get shot, which skews statistics if they aren't examined deeply enough.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50954808]What if I told you that's a risk I'm willing to take? Because first off I don't believe that - and second off even if it was true I'd rather have control over my own fate. If it's obviously not a good idea to draw, I'm not gonna do it. Lemme clarify I'm not dismissing your statistics but I don't think carrying a gun alone makes you more likely to get shot. I think going for a gun when you're at a disadvantage makes you more likely to get shot, which skews statistics if they aren't examined deeply enough.[/QUOTE] The robber working out you have a gun may also get you shot, even if no attempt is made to draw. Study cites a few other possible reasons for the difference, for example carrying a gun may result in overconfidence and getting into situations that you wouldn't otherwise enter. Consider that the robber initiates the situation, they very likely have you at a disadvantage regardless of being armed. But at the end of the day, your choice, either way I wish you luck.

Yeah, the issue is that those stats are really hard to get a valid control group for. It's not that they are wrong, it's that there's so much nebulous material in the surrounding context that you can't get to causation instead of merely being stuck on correlation. Off the top of my head: -people with guns may be more aggressive, or confident, and wind up in situations they otherwise wouldn't -they may handle situations poorly (there could be multiple distinct subgroups as well, with one group skewing the net results of the rest) -they live in areas where violent events are more likely to occur -they flaunt their gun (inadvertently or otherwise), making them a target. There's a million reasons why that correlation could exist. In all likelihood it's probably a hodge-podge of poor decision making, poor training, and environmental circumstances.

When I was at San Francisco State University, half of the time I was in the bus and looked downward I saw the clip of a pocketknife sticking out of a dude's pocket. I always had my own knife, and didn't immediately get into a duel with the other guy just because he was carrying as well. According to RB33 we were all supposed to be dead and the streets running with blood... Just because we have weapons doesn't mean we're gonna kill each other for no reason.

[QUOTE=AlexConnor;50954481]Well, you can try blowing the cocksucker away, but if he's already got a gun or knife on you then more likely than not he'll kill you instead. The mugger may also kill you if they figure out you're armed.[/QUOTE]I don't see why, if I'm armed and they know I'm armed it means they're entering into a deliberately difficult situation willfully. Muggers tend to be ambush predators because the act follows a basic rule in any conflict: surprise is a wonderful advantage. Sometimes muggers won't act if you engage them in conversation or directly approach them, these are psychological tactics that put them on the defensive and eliminate their chief advantage. [QUOTE]Generally speaking, carrying a gun makes it a lot more likely [i]someone[/I] is going to die in a mugging scenario, and that tends to be the victim rather than the mugger because it's difficult to outdraw a guy already aiming a gun at your chest.[/QUOTE]Assuming he's drawn and demanding I pay, or that he even has a gun, he could very well be a crackhead with a knife. Aside from that this guy says something I think you need to see:[QUOTE=ColdAsRice;50958320]When I was at San Francisco State University, half of the time I was in the bus and looked downward I saw the clip of a pocketknife sticking out of a dude's pocket. I always had my own knife, and didn't immediately get into a duel with the other guy just because he was carrying as well. According to RB33 we were all supposed to be dead and the streets running with blood... Just because we have weapons doesn't mean we're gonna kill each other for no reason.[/QUOTE] See, most people forget that criminals are people and like most people they'll prefer the path of least resistance and generally eschew armed conflict. As a gun owner and somebody heavily vested in preparedness and taking personal responsibility for you own life I can say I'm not one to seek conflict either. Anyone who's willingly looking for a fight is either high, crazy, or stupid, when it comes down to the actual tango [I]most[/I] people lose their nerve because it's actually really dangerous and really scary! Those left over are dangerous to begin with, but fortunately we don't live in a society where the aggressive junkie and his insane close cousin are the status quo on the mean streets of America. Instead we have a bunch of people who are either desperate and made a bad call or simply lazy and don't want a real job as our quintessential "bad guys." Just looking like you know how to use a gun and drawing one is [I]probably[/I] going to scare away all but the most dedicated and those that remain are the stupid few who are willfully trying to fight an armed person. They wind up in the defensive handgun statistics, I think everyone else who runs isn't and won't ever be counted unless somebody says to the cops, "yeah I was scared and pointed a gun at somebody." Definitely not a smart idea given the way gun owners are demonized in the country and how fucked up our criminal justice system is, I don't think anyone with a good head on their shoulders reports all of these non-lethal but still armed encounters. Running gun battles in the streets started because two armed people got into an argument over sports is not and will never be a common occurrence because one fundamental rule remains: guns can kill and people don't like getting shot. That goes back to the adage, "an armed society is a polite society," and while I don't think handing guns out willy nilly to every tom, dick, and harry is a good idea I'm not going to say more armed, trained people is a bad thing. On the contrary I fully endorse and support people at-risk for violence and crime to arm themselves and get serious about self-defense because reality is not our friend and it's full of terrible people who do cruel things.

[QUOTE=ColdAsRice;50958320]When I was at San Francisco State University, half of the time I was in the bus and looked downward I saw the clip of a pocketknife sticking out of a dude's pocket. I always had my own knife, and didn't immediately get into a duel with the other guy just because he was carrying as well. According to RB33 we were all supposed to be dead and the streets running with blood... Just because we have weapons doesn't mean we're gonna kill each other for no reason.[/QUOTE] People in this thread are purely ridiculous and just make up a bunch of shit I said. If you read exactly what I said, you would see that I haven't said that. Stop imagining reading something else than what I actually wrote. I have never said everyone is killing each other or is even ever going to. Only that people hurting each other will increase with more people being armed, nothing else. That's the last thing I will say now.

[QUOTE=RB33;50961026]People in this thread are purely ridiculous and just make up a bunch of shit I said. If you read exactly what I said, you would see that I haven't said that. Stop imagining reading something else than what I actually wrote. I have never said everyone is killing each other or is even ever going to. Only that people hurting each other will increase with more people being armed, nothing else. That's the last thing I will say now.[/QUOTE] Mate, you literally [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1532020&p=50949224&viewfull=1#post50949224]talked about hypothetical situations with CCWers getting into shootouts over nothing. In the same post where you claimed criminals rarely shoot people without a real reason.[/url] Then went on to elaborate on it in subsequent posts. You still haven't shown any proof of your claims, despite repeatedly being asked to do so. Have some dignity and at least own up to the fact that you said some fucking retarded things.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50961069]Mate, you literally [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1532020&p=50949224&viewfull=1#post50949224]talked about hypothetical situations with CCWers getting into shootouts over nothing. In the same post where you claimed criminals rarely shoot people without a real reason.[/url] Then went on to elaborate on it in subsequent posts. You still haven't shown any proof of your claims, despite repeatedly being asked to do so. Have some dignity and at least own up to the fact that you said some fucking retarded things.[/QUOTE] If you think saying bad people with guns will shoot other people is retarded, go ahead. But that was literally my point the entire time. My dignity would be completely destroyed if I agreed to bad people always being law abiding citizens that never gets into any fights, which seems to be what the people in this thread have been saying the entire time. I can't agree with something like that, the risk for something bad happening will always be there. It's just foolish to ignore that it could ever become a problem.

So do you have any proof, or are you just going to keep peddling your worthless feelings based on whatever wild west fantasies you apparently have in your head?

[QUOTE=RB33;50961192]If you think saying bad people with guns will shoot other people is retarded, go ahead. But that was literally my point the entire time. My dignity would be completely destroyed if I agreed to bad people always being law abiding citizens that never gets into any fights, which seems to be what the people in this thread have been saying the entire time. I can't agree with something like that, the risk for something bad happening will always be there. It's just foolish to ignore that it could ever become a problem.[/QUOTE]If you're so concerned with "bad people" and are upset that people aren't focusing on just that then [I]why did you lump everyone else in with them when you made your posts?[/I] Several posts, including the one linked, has you claiming that as soon as the gun leaves the home it contributes to the great ~gun fight potential~ sum and once we exceed a certain threshold something [I]will[/I] happen. You said this. You're either being completely ridiculous right now or you suck at conveying a point, and you seem to be oscillating between "it's going to happen, eventually it will!" and [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1532020&p=50952962&viewfull=1#post50952962]when asked to clarify[/url] you claim everyone's safety is squarely the responsibility of the police force. [url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9108468254125174344&q=warren-v-district-of-columbia&hl=en&as_sdt=2006]They do not have a duty to protect anyone[/url] so your argument that people should rely on the police rather than protect themselves is naive at best or simply dangerously ignorant of the facts at the worst.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50961240]So do you have any proof, or are you just going to keep peddling your worthless feelings based on whatever wild west fantasies you apparently have in your head?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34996604[/url] Bad people who shoot people exist in America, do I really need to prove that to you? I'm out now. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50961249]If you're so concerned with "bad people" and are upset that people aren't focusing on just that then [I]why did you lump everyone else in with them when you made your posts?[/I] Several posts, including the one linked, has you claiming that as soon as the gun leaves the home it contributes to the great ~gun fight potential~ sum and once we exceed a certain threshold something [I]will[/I] happen. You said this. You're either being completely ridiculous right now or you suck at conveying a point, and you seem to be oscillating between "it's going to happen, eventually it will!" and [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1532020&p=50952962&viewfull=1#post50952962]when asked to clarify[/url] you claim everyone's safety is squarely the responsibility of the police force. [url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9108468254125174344&q=warren-v-district-of-columbia&hl=en&as_sdt=2006]They do not have a duty to protect anyone[/url] so your argument that people should rely on the police rather than protect themselves is naive at best or simply dangerously ignorant of the facts at the worst.[/QUOTE] I guess I suck at conveying points, it's nothing new. Non-native language and strange ways of explaining them. It does contribute to the "gun fight potential" since some of those guns belong to these bad people. Bad people as in not being able to keep from using them in unreasonable illegal situations. The police in America having low standards and a lack of reponsilibity is a problem you should aim to fix. More guns should never be the alternative to that, fix the police instead. Go ahead and carry your guns until the day they are fixed if you really feel safer. What i'm taking issue to here in all this is the trust you have in guns and the people using them. Is there anywhere else in the world you would see that kind of attitude?

[QUOTE=RB33;50961276]What i'm taking issue to here in all this is the trust you have in guns and the people using them. Is there anywhere else in the world you would see that kind of attitude?[/QUOTE] You still haven't shown that that trust is misplaced. Most crime rates among CCW holders are lower than crime rates among the police, often by a factor of 10 or more. So... how is banning guns constructive if people with them legally aren't committing massive amounts of crime, and are stopping a fair amount of it?

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50961384]You still haven't shown that that trust is misplaced. Most crime rates among CCW holders are lower than crime rates among the police, often by a factor of 10 or more. So... how is banning guns constructive if people with them legally aren't committing massive amounts of crime, and are stopping a fair amount of it?[/QUOTE] I will ask you one final question, do you think that if bad people gained access to legally carry their guns in public, that they would not commit crimes?

[QUOTE=RB33;50961420]I will ask you one final question, do you think that if bad people gained access to legally carry their guns in public, that they would not commit crimes?[/QUOTE] Are you talking about criminals or people with shitty personalities?

[QUOTE=RB33;50961276]I guess I suck at conveying points, it's nothing new. Non-native language and strange ways of explaining them. It does contribute to the "gun fight potential" since some of those guns belong to these bad people. Bad people as in not being able to keep from using them in unreasonable illegal situations.[/QUOTE]Fine, fair enough but are you talking about criminals or...? Straight up since 1986 we've been becoming more and more conceal-carry friendly as a country, before that people carried guns anyway. Simultaneously there was a shift in legislation cracking down on being armed in public that made it illegal (war on drugs/being tough on crime bullshit) which made people who liked the option push for making it legal. Legality of carrying in public is not a concern, but what should concern you is the consequences of the law penalizing that. If you were worried about violence before expect more to come after, there is [I]no[/I] incentive for somebody defending themselves to let a criminal live and call the cops so it's not unreasonable to imagine some people will execute muggers and rapists on the spot. Do you want vigilantism? That's what you're going to get. [QUOTE]The police in America having low standards and a lack of reponsilibity is a problem you should aim to fix.[/QUOTE]Except you can't just [I]fix[/I] that without changing the entire criminal justice system from top to bottom, and yeah I think we should do that but it's neither easy nor attractive for anyone to start. Even if we did start it would take several decades and that's assuming it even gets better, part of the reason why our shit's all fucked up is because we had a "good idea" and actually made things worse. Much worse. So much worse it's fueled violence on two continents, caused our cities to rot from the inside out, made several government agencies so fucking over the top that they step on people's rights far too often, [I]and[/I] the problem it was supposed to fix only got worse. That's our country, that's what you're saying we should trust. [QUOTE]More guns should never be the alternative to that, fix the police instead. Go ahead and carry your guns until the day they are fixed if you really feel safer.[/QUOTE]We're not inherently safer as a society if we all carry guns though, the dangers we're protecting ourselves from [I]still exist[/I] which means that we still have a problem. Self-defense is not a solution, it's a reaction, calling it a solution is (to go back to the car analogy) akin to saying, "I don't need brakes, I have a seatbelt." [QUOTE]What i'm taking issue to here in all this is the trust you have in guns and the people using them. Is there anywhere else in the world you would see that kind of attitude?[/QUOTE]No, and it's plainly obvious given the state of affairs in the rest of the world. We have our problems yes, but I look at European laws and overreach by the government and I wonder if you learned anything from past failures. Even if I didn't trust most gun owners there's a layer of necessity to keeping them armed, I'll briefly explain why this right to firearms is important that goes well beyond what we've been talking about: Unlike Europe over here there is a very real danger of armed insurrection, we're a brimming pot of anger right now and the government is [I]terrified[/I] because there is absolutely no good way they can deal with it once it spills. Every single agency is walking on eggshells because there's been a sharp rise in anti-government militias in the past decade, that is super serious shit. Part of the reason why we're here is because our government truly does deserve this level of raw hatred and vicious scrutiny, it's reaping what it's sown. (remember PRISM?) I think if other countries had our attitude you wouldn't see the likes of North Korea, we wouldn't put up with [I]any[/I] of that shit; we have it really goddamn good and we're still mad as hell. There's been a lot of abuse of power and people are showing signs of being sick of it, we're not quite on the [I]edge[/I] but it's worrying how close we've gotten. I really, really hope nothing bad comes out of all this anger but I don't want anyone to lay down their arms because the crossroads we're at need to be negotiated on equal terms with the state, it's just how it has to be. So trust? Trust is irrelevant at this point, this is the whole reason why we actually have guns in the first place.

[QUOTE=Tetsmega;50961478]Are you talking about criminals or people with shitty personalities?[/QUOTE] People willing to break the law if pushed by others with the result being a gun fight. Such people will exist and ignoring them would be dangerous. It's better to have guns in the hands of the police instead of possibly unsuitable civilians. The police have a responsibility to act, the civilians do not. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50961492]*Everything he said above*[/QUOTE] I understand the US is a place with high tension with distrust in the government and high regard of old rights. I wish it wouldn't have these problems. I as a European just don't see or understand the need to carry guns at a school. It would never be allowed here but there would be no need for it either.

[QUOTE=RB33;50961494]People willing to break the law if pushed by others with the result being a gun fight. Such people will exist and ignoring them would be dangerous. It's better to have guns in the hands of the police instead of possibly unsuitable civilians. The police have a responsibility to act, the civilians do not.[/QUOTE] Come on I gave you a binary choice here you could at least go with the 50-50 and not dance around the question. Criminal or shitty attitude people?

[b]RB33[/b] Sources. Evidence. FACTS. NEWS STORIES. EXAMPLES. [u][highlight][i][b]S O M E T H I N G.[/b][/i][/highlight][/u] [editline]28th August 2016[/editline] The burden of proof is on YOU. [highlight] YES. YOU.[/highlight] because you're saying shit contradictory to REALITY.

[QUOTE=RB33;50961494]People willing to break the law if pushed by others with the result being a gun fight. Such people will exist and ignoring them would be dangerous. It's better to have guns in the hands of the police instead of possibly unsuitable civilians.[/QUOTE] Again with vague references to magical gun fights that you strangely can't seem to find a source for. Unless you mean people protecting themselves with force, which is totally legal here. Just because you have a duty to retreat, even in your own home, even when cornered, doesn't mean we do. [QUOTE=RB33;50961494]The police have a responsibility to act, the civilians do not.[/QUOTE] False. You've been told, with sources, that this is false several times now. You aren't illiterate enough to keep pretending otherwise. Don't insult our intelligence by continuously glossing over this and restating the same tired bullshit. It's really quite pathetic the depths of denial that you are going to here. This is just another objective falsehood that you have pulled out of your ass, and insist on parading around like it has [i]any[/i] relevance.

[QUOTE=RB33;50961494]People willing to break the law if pushed by others with the result being a gun fight. Such people will exist and ignoring them would be dangerous. It's better to have guns in the hands of the police instead of possibly unsuitable civilians. The police have a responsibility to act, the civilians do not. I understand the US is a place with high tension with distrust in the government and high regard of old rights. I wish it wouldn't have these problems. I as a European just don't see or understand the need to carry guns at a school. It would never be allowed here but there would be no need for it either.[/QUOTE] I am not aware of any country that actually has their police force bound by a duty to protect. Because it makes no sense in the legal framework that police would have a duty to protect anyone they have not restrained. The world is not as structured as people seem to believe it is. That is why murders and terrorist attacks can happen. The police are not all knowing, and they cannot be everywhere. If I'm faced with a situation were I can wait for the police, I will. But that time is not when someone is threatening my life directly. In an idealistic Utopian world there wouldn't be attacks, there wouldn't be theft, there wouldn't be anything illegal happening. That is not found in reality. Even in Europe attacks happen, rape happens, home invasions happen, robberies happen, murders happen, even mass murder by terrorist happen. To somehow hold that the police can be there in time to save you in naive. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting[/url] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_school_massacre[/url] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks[/url] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(Europe)[/url] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers[/url] Look at all those that happen where guns are not allowed. You live in a fantasy land if you think a tool is the sole cause of violence. [url]https://archive.fo/f4gbv[/url] Look at that nice list, in terms of fatalities from mass shootings the US is beat by 5 countries with restrictive firearms regulations. Those countries being Norway, Finland, Slovakia, Isreal, and Switzerland. Of course, this adjusted for population. That list is also only counting gun mass murders. It doesn't include mass murder via bombs or other means. So please do actual research and learn how the world actually functions.

[QUOTE=Tetsmega;50961567]Come on I gave you a binary choice here you could at least go with the 50-50 and not dance around the question. Criminal or shitty attitude people?[/QUOTE] Shitty attitude people who do criminal things. Why must it be either? [QUOTE=AaronM202;50961586]The burden of proof is on YOU. [highlight] YES. YOU.[/highlight] because you're saying shit contradictory to REALITY.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=RB33;50961276][url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34996604[/url] Bad people who shoot people exist in America, do I really need to prove that to you?[/QUOTE] Is this contrary to reality, because this is what I was claiming, bad people exist, they do bad stuff. You have choosen to ignore that possibilty because you choosen to believe people can't do anything wrong. Stop being stubborn and admit that people can do wrong. Or what kind of utopia, do you live in? [QUOTE=Zephyrs;50961591]Again with vague references to magical gun fights that you strangely can't seem to find a source for. Unless you mean people protecting themselves with force, which is totally legal here. Just because you have a duty to retreat, even in your own home, even when cornered, doesn't mean we do. False. You've been told, with sources, that this is false several times now. You aren't illiterate enough to keep pretending otherwise. Don't insult our intelligence by continuously glossing over this and restating the same tired bullshit. It's really quite pathetic the depths of denial that you are going to here. This is just another objective falsehood that you have pulled out of your ass, and insist on parading around like it has [i]any[/i] relevance.[/QUOTE] Why do we keep doing this? You can't you accept that we disagree about it? Do you deny that gunfights can happen? They are somehow impossible despite people having guns? I have never said they are common or everyone is likely to die or whatever, just that they can happen if 2 people with guns enter a fight with each other, do you deny that it can ever happen? Assume both two are in the wrong and draw their guns at the same time, 2 people both breaking the law. There isn't always a good guy. If the police technically don't have a responsilbility in the US, they should. But that wasn't even my point. I was referring to that the police have a responsility to their employer, the state to keep order. The civilian does not.

[QUOTE=RB33;50961627]Shitty attitude people who do criminal things. Why must it be either? Is this contrary to reality, because this what I was claiming, bad people exist, they do bad stuff. You have choosen to ignore that possibilty because you choosen to believe people can't do anything wrong. Stop being stubborn and admit that people can do wrong. Or what kind of utopia, do you live in?[/QUOTE] The data in your article isn't new or revolutionary. It talks about vague data points without going into the underlying issues that cause the data. More to the point, it is excessively opinionated and complains about budgetary decisions that are well beyond the scope of the data, and has numerous other problems with how the data is categorized. You've had this explained to you. You've ignored it. Repeatedly. At this point I'm just going to say that you are either objectively stupid, or a dedicated troll.