Who here doesn't feel the need to own a gun

[HoosierBoy]

Lived a relatively peaceful life up here in CT. Probably be a different situation had their been a superflous amount of felonies about.

I'm fine with martial arts and a knife for the time being, but if worse comes to worst, then I won't hesitate to purchase that gat.

I do not share in oganrichu's applause; "superflous" means "unnecessary", not "abundant".

[Pauly-Walnuts]

Strong ignorance in this thread. I have 3 situations where a gun would have been nice in my life (besides military duty). One day you'll get mugged, assualted or burgalrized and you'll think **** I need a gun. Think your a bunch of tough guys that lift weights? Well as I found out 7 on 1 and you aint ****!

PS, if a guy wants to rob a house and sees me carry in a gun/guns will he chose my house that night? I'm guessing not! Now if you truly think you do not need a gun put a sign on your lawn stating you are anti gun and that your house is a gun free zone. Let me know how it pans out for ya, tough guy!

[Organichu]

*bow*

[Pauly-Walnuts]

This!

http://mksviews.files.wordpress.com/...d_neighbor.jpg

[gjohnson5]

This!

http://mksviews.files.wordpress.com/...d_neighbor.jpg

Strong ignorance indeed

[nutsy54]

Why would anyone want to take my life if I give them what they want?

Since neither of us is a violent felon, we really can't put ourselves in their mindset.

But many people, every day, suffer at the hands of a criminal who "promised" to be nice, if they just did as they were told. Turns out that violent felons are also capable of lying... And plenty more never even provide the option.

It is truly disturbing that you would prefer to let the scum of the earth take whatever they want (including your health or life), then walk away so he could do the same thing to someone else, then someone else, then someone else...

It's even more disturbing that you find it "hilarious" that anyone would actually wish to challenge and stop a crime in progress.

But, it is your life, and your choice. As long as you don't advocate forcing that choice onto me, we're all set

[twentyfourseven]

Why would anyone want to take my life if I give them what they want?

LOL

please let me see you on the streets one night so i can rob your ass

[HoosierBoy]

Even cops get killed on a daily basis when dealing with criminals on the street. Are you recommending the average civilian to pull out a gun when getting mugged?

You're right. Cops are born with an ability to use a firearm that the "average civilian" can never hope to replicate.

[nutsy54]

If I didn't need a gun , noone does

Huh? Are you actually trying to say that because you have never been a crime victim, that no other law abiding citizen has ever been a crime victim?

By that logic, if your home has never burned down, then I guess we don't need fire departments. And if you have never been in a car accident, then we can eliminate all seatbelts and airbags.

[nutsy54]

Even cops get killed on a daily basis when dealing with criminals on the street. Are you recommending the average civilian to pull out a gun when getting mugged?

Does every cop who draws his weapon end up dead? Or do the vast majority of such incidents actually result in a live cop and handcuffed criminal? I'm seriously losing track of all the "reasons" which have no connection with common sense.

Race car drivers also die on the track - I guess we just proved nobody should own an automobile.

[nutsy54]

LOL that URL didn't say she felt the Freedom of speech should be limited.

She very clearly believes that a state or city can over-ride Rights and protections spelled out in the Constitution.

If you believe a local law can shred one Amendment, certainly it can destroy the others as well...

[nutsy54]

Strong ignorance indeed

What's Ignorant?

Would most criminals attack (a) an armed man willing and able to defend himself, or (b) a passive, defenseless victim willing to hand over anything?

[nutsy54]

The responsibility for her murder should fall directly on whichever one of her "friends" loaned her a bike and told her it was safe to ride home from Howlin Wolf alone at 1:30 a.m.

Holy Hell.

Most people would place responsibility for her murder... ON THE VIOLENT FELON WHO MURDERED HER!

[MrGuitar]

Why is it that Americans, the most greedy people on this earth that tend to want everything, always argue whether or not a gun is a "need"?

[mjfan12]

I don't, because owning weapons for self-defense is forbidden in my religion (unless of course a job requires it, like in the case of policemen).

u serial brah?

my religion emphesizes justice and that includes self defense, even lethal force if the situation is justified.

[Vitalshok44]

A gun wouldn't have helped her.
She's been drinking at a very well known New Orleans club "The Howling Wolf" (that looks more like a hut)
And her friend gives her a bike????

So she would have been able to save herself from her attackers drunk?
All she needed was a gun?

Unfortunately New Orleans was and sounds like still is all about who you know
Sounds like someone wanted her dead....

lulz ^^^^^^^^^^^

allow me to use the gjohnson5 logic construct, you didn't send $20 to a starving orphan in Africa, you just killed a starving orphan in Africa.

[nutsy54]

Why is it that Americans, the most greedy people on this earth that tend to want everything, always argue whether or not a gun is a "need"?

Not really sure what that wildly irrelevant insult has to do with discussions of self defense and personal freedoms...

By the way, for the "greediest" people on earth, we're also documented as the most charitable and giving.

How does that apply to handgun ownership?

[MrGuitar]

Not really sure what that wildly irrelevant insult has to do with discussions of self defense and personal freedoms...

By the way, for the "greediest" people on earth, we're also documented as the most charitable and giving.

How does that apply to handgun ownership?

The way we think about guns is far different than the way we think of ownership of other items. Most Americans will recognize that a want justifies ownership of something. For some reason, many people think of guns as something that must be proven as needed in order to own one. Well what if I just want one just like I want all my other stuff? If this was a society based on needs, we wouldnt have much of anything. And besides, even if gun ownership was a case of "do I really need this in order to justify owning it", its not up to other people to determine what I need.

btw, no one is trying to offend you. relax a bit.

[nutsy54]

The way we think about guns is far different than the way we think of ownership of other items. Most Americans will recognize that a want justifies ownership of something. For some reason, many people think of guns as something that must be proven as needed in order to own one.

Because the gun Haters tend to be terrified of a piece of metal - to the point they'll assume that every law abiding citizen will suddenly turn into a rampaging murderer right after swiping his credit card for a new gun. Same goes for any sane gun owner who steps on school property - instant psychotic murderer...

It doesn't make sense because gun hatred isn't based on making sense. It's all emotions, opinions, and baseless assumptions.

[gjohnson5]

Huh? Are you actually trying to say that because you have never been a crime victim, that no other law abiding citizen has ever been a crime victim?

By that logic, if your home has never burned down, then I guess we don't need fire departments. And if you have never been in a car accident, then we can eliminate all seatbelts and airbags.

To be honest I have never needed the fire department or airbags either. I tend not to fasten my seatbelt either because I know how to maintenance my vehicle as well as drive it.

[nutsy54]

To be honest I have never needed the fire department or airbags either. I tend not to fasten my seatbelt either because I know how to maintenance my vehicle as well as drive it.

And lucky for you, every other driver on the road is also 100% sober and competent behind the wheel.

But, it is definitely great to hear that there has never been a fire in any house in your city.

Thanks for proving there's no more reason to respond to your posts.

[gjohnson5]

What's Ignorant?

Would most criminals attack (a) an armed man willing and able to defend himself, or (b) a passive, defenseless victim willing to hand over anything?

The problem with that logic is that once you give them your money ,more then likely they are going to shoot you anyway.
Best thing you can do is avoid the situation entirely by not riding a bicycle through Florida / Desire housing area of the Ninth Ward in New Orleans at 2:00am in the morning

[MrGuitar]

I tend not to fasten my seatbelt either because I know how to maintenance my vehicle as well as drive it.

Is this a joke?

[gjohnson5]

Is this a joke?

nope

[LunicaAshes]

To be honest I have never needed the fire department or airbags either. I tend not to fasten my seatbelt either because I know how to maintenance my vehicle as well as drive it.

...Since there are never accidents in which only one person is at fault (or none.)

[nutsy54]

...Since there are never accidents in which only one person is at fault (or none.)

And all crimes are the victim's fault...

What a blissful world he must live in

[gjohnson5]

...Since there are never accidents in which only one person is at fault (or none.)

??????

This is OT but generally when 2 people get into an accident 1 person IS named at fault for insurance purposes.....

[markymark69]

What's Ignorant?

Would most criminals attack (a) an armed man willing and able to defend himself, or (b) a passive, defenseless victim willing to hand over anything?

How do the criminals tell the difference between A & B?

You make the classic mistake that most citizens make: That guns are a deterrent. Guns are no more of a deterrent than minimum mandatory laws.

Guns are a tool to defend yourself. Nothing more...nothing less.

[nutsy54]

??????

This is OT but generally when 2 people get into an accident 1 person IS named at fault for insurance purposes.....

Right. But you implied that since you drive safely and maintain your car, you'll never be in an accident (and therefore don't need to worry about a seatbelt). Clearly, you believe that an accident could only happen if you are at fault, while ignoring that a drunk, distracted, or stupid driver could just as easily plow into you, through no fault of your own.

Kind of like thinking that no criminal act could ever occur unless you do something to cause it, thus believing you are completely immune to any incident in which the ability to defend yourself would become critical.

[LunicaAshes]

??????

This is OT but generally when 2 people get into an accident 1 person IS named at fault for insurance purposes.....

Exactly. It's called sarcasm.

My point was this - how does your ability to maintain and drive your car have anything to do with whether or not you need air bags or seat belts.