Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/13/14, 7:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. I've never seen any valid stats that indicate that any significant number of law abiding *civilian* citizens has faced down anyone trying to kill them. And by valid, I don't mean the pseudo studies conducted by firearms acolytes. |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime prevention or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes between family members. Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home. |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/15/2014 12:52 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime prevention or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes between family members. Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home. See? Some would argue that it works! :-) I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 5/15/2014 12:52 PM, jps wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime prevention or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes between family members. Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home. See? Some would argue that it works! :-) I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their families, their homes. I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very harshly. |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/16/14, 3:27 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/15/2014 12:52 PM, jps wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime prevention or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes between family members. Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home. See? Some would argue that it works! :-) I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their families, their homes. I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very harshly. I agree. I have a few firearms, and I was not even slightly inconvenienced in terms of restrictions, paperwork, or wait periods in purchasing them. |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/16/2014 3:27 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their families, their homes. I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very harshly. Reasonable. Many states (including my own) have such statutes on the books with more being added every year (like Maryland, New York, New Jersey). How about concealed carry permits? Does being able to defend yourself extend beyond your home in your view? |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/16/14, 4:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/16/2014 3:27 PM, jps wrote: On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their families, their homes. I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very harshly. Reasonable. Many states (including my own) have such statutes on the books with more being added every year (like Maryland, New York, New Jersey). How about concealed carry permits? Does being able to defend yourself extend beyond your home in your view? Under certain circumstances and, of course, if you fire that handgun and you miss and hit someone else, you face criminal charges and civil suits...no excuse that you were "defending yourself." |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/16/2014 3:27 PM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2014 13:02:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/15/2014 12:52 PM, jps wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2014 19:30:29 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 5/13/2014 5:15 PM, F*O*A*D wrote: On 5/13/14, 4:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 5/13/2014 3:31 PM, jps wrote: You don't leave running cars lying around the house, nor are they designed to kill things. They're what's called transportation, dummy. One of the design purposes of a gun is to prevent *being* killed. Another, of course, is to kill. uh huh. So, who's going to declare a truce and disarm first ... those who try to kill or those who are trying to prevent being killed? Those with guns who are trying to prevent being killed far outnumber those who actually kill. The vast majority of gun owners are law abiding and would only shoot someone as a last resort measure. Most gun related events in the home aren't related to crime prevention or bodily injury prevention but accidents or domestic disputes between family members. Prevention is among the least likely uses for guns in a home. See? Some would argue that it works! :-) I posed a question to you a week or so ago and don't know if you responded with an answer or not. Might have missed it. I asked what *your* position on guns is. Do you favor private ownership at all of handguns or are you an advocate to outlaw them entirely? I'm in favor of people being able to defend themselves, their families, their homes. I would, however, put stringent controls on the sale, ownership and transfer of weapons and treat those who misunderstand the law very harshly. So you have a gun(s). Yup, I knew it. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Totally freakin' legal | General | |||
Totally legal | General | |||
Sheriff Arpaio Defies Washington and Arrests Mexican Invaders andother Illegals | General | |||
Jobsite arrests of illegal aliens drop 50%, tough luck Americanworkers. | General | |||
Despite arrests, illegal immigrants remain free | General |