Armed March to DC on 4th July

adamb1888

thats just looking for trouble

Promac

Manic Moran wrote: »

Actually, that's not quite true. Although it's their job, it is not their responsibility. Try suing the Gardaí for failing in their responsibility protect you when you are assaulted. The only person truly responsible for your safety is you (or your guardian/parent). Regardless about Ireland, this is set law in the US, they have no duty to protect you, the individual. The yellow tape around crime scenes is indicative of the fact that the police failed in their job to protect, otherwise there wouldn't have been a crime scene to tape off to begin with. They do their best, and after the event they track down and help bring to justice offenders when they fail to prevent. This, however, doesn't do the offended party much good at the time.
NTM

You seem like a reasonable guy but you're not looking at your own argument with open eyes. There's a huge overtone of defending guns no matter what and searching for a suitable argument to do so. It's very similar to the religious peoples' arguments. They already believe in god and they need a suitable argument to justify it. You already own and enjoy guns and need justification for them to be freely available. And you're arguing against a complete ban on guns when I haven't actually seen anyone here put that forward as a possibility. "Working" guns and police guns are fine in my opinion. Even necessary as a deterrent sometimes.

The problem I, and the huge amounts of people like me, have with the system in America is that any ould maniac can go down to the gunshop and get an Armalite automatic weapon with any number of extended mags and ammo to fill them. There are all sorts of mods and attachments you can get to make that Armalite a far more efficient weapon too. Sights and rails and stocks and whatever. All designed to make that weapon better at killing people. There's no justification for that. You can argue that you need a gun for protection. Let's say we both accept that a concealed carry is sometimes necessary for protection and compare that with the fully pimped out AR15. No-one needs that for home defence or hunting and you are not, under any circumstances, gonna carry that around with you as protection - the gun alone would be grounds for someone to rob you.

You and I (and everyone else) know that you're not interested in having a gun for protection. It's a toy to look at and play with and pose with. The people who pimp out their AR15s are proud of them. It's their prized possession and they show them off to each-other. That's got nothing to do with defence or utility. It's just a d1ck slinging contest. These people are putting drum magazines and bipods on them and they hang out at the gun range in camo gear and boots and tactical sunglasses pretending they're all bad-a$$. I know some of them and they're ridiculous.

But whatever, it doesn't affect me because I live in a sane country and I've said pretty much everything I have to say on this one so good luck to you in your little fort there.

MadsL

I support the right of someone to own a firearm because I personally know someone who defended herself in her own bed from a rape attempt, shooting the guy three times whilst he was on top of her. He survived.

She is neither stupid, nor a hillbilly, nor irresponsible nor rabid. Unsuprisingly, she still owns a gun. There are millions of American women just like her who also own guns for such a terrible, if rare, incident.

The gun control posters on here are so afraid of rational reasons like this to own a gun that they parody and insult millions of safe sensible gun owners. And are afraid to accept that these people are simply normal ordinary people. Cartoons are easier to argue with.

JD DABA

What caliber stopped said rapist/vampire ?

MadsL

JD DABA wrote: »

What caliber stopped said rapist/vampire ?

Vampire? More nonsense.

He got two .22 slugs in the chest, one in the ass. Passed out on the lawn as a package for the cops.

JD DABA

There we go then, a .22 is sufficient for home defense.

Witcher

JD DABA wrote: »

There we go then, a .22 is sufficient for home defense.

At point blank range...and the guy was still alive even after that...well enough to make it back outside. .22 is insufficient for home defence, I wouldn't stake my life on it.

JD DABA

Blay wrote: »

At point blank range...and the guy was still alive even after that...well enough to make it back outside. .22 is insufficient for home defence, I wouldn't stake my life on it.

It stopped the criminal.
Its capable of stopping a criminal.

If stopping a criminal is the definition of sufficient home defense.
Then the 22 satisfied this criteria.

Witcher

JD DABA wrote: »

It stopped the criminal.
Its capable of stopping a criminal.

If stopping a criminal is the definition of sufficient home defense.
Then the 22 satisfied this criteria.

He was still alive and capable of exiting the house..I don't consider that 'stopping' a criminal.

My definition of 'stopping' the individual in that situation would be him lying dead on the bedroom floor. Consider if it was your wife in that situation..would you be happy with the guy being well enough to walk away?

.22 is in no way sufficient for home defence..the gun in this case was likely right to his chest when it was fired and he still survived. Rare that you'll hear of people keeping them for defence in the US, they just haven't got the stopping power required.

This is your life and wellbeing on the line here and probably that of your wife and children too. Do these mean that little to you that you would arm yourself with one of the most anaemic rounds available?

crybaby

I have watched videos of people like this walking around parks with their assault rifles on their shoulders causing needless panic and worry amongst people just to show off their rights.

What a bunch of knobs, they live in one of the most gun friendly nations in the world yet they love to act like they live in some oppressed regime.

JD DABA

Blay wrote: »

He was still alive and capable of exiting the house..I don't consider that 'stopping' a criminal.

My definition of 'stopping' the individual in that situation would be him lying dead on the bedroom floor. Consider if it was your wife in that situation..would you be happy with the guy being well enough to walk away?

.22 is in no way sufficient for home defence..the gun in this case was likely right to his chest when it was fired and he still survived. Rare that you'll hear of people keeping them for defence in the US, they just haven't got the stopping power required.

Being capable of leaving the house and being capable of continuing an assault are very different. Its probable that someone with just one 22 bouncing around inside them wont be putting up a fight for long. And will be very eager to leave.

It wouldn't really be about how happy I was with his condition, thats for the police.

Because they may be less used doesn't mean the situation shouldn't be changed.
Much like saying most people drink 5 pints in a night, doesn't mean they might be better off just with 3.

WilyCoyote

The gun lobby mob should be given a shot of their own medicine.

Witcher

JD DABA wrote: »

Being capable of leaving the house and being capable of continuing an assault are very different. Its probable that someone with just one 22 bouncing around inside them wont be putting up a fight for long. And will be very eager to leave.

It wouldn't really be about how happy I was with his condition, thats for the police.

Because they may be less used doesn't mean the situation shouldn't be changed.
Much like saying most people drink 5 pints in a night, doesn't mean they might be better off just with 3.

So if it was your life on the line and that of your wife and children you would arm youself with one of the weakest calibres out there and hope things go your way on the day?

JD DABA

Blay wrote: »

So if it was your life on the line and that of your wife and children you would arm youself with one of the weakest calibres out there and hope things go your way on the day?

Ideally the decision would have been taken in legislation for me.

Knowing this to be the case and having a somewhat pessimistic cautious foresight I might have some blunt object or knife .... just for the rare case that the burning sensation of a couple of pieces of red hot metal cutting into said baddies chest or pelvis* wasn't sufficient to make him lose his boner and leave him with little spare time that day.

* (Along with the blood loss, shock, damage to his nervous system and fear about whether or not he's going to die too)

The number of lives saved overall throughout the country as a whole from the removal of higher calibers and higher capacity weapons would be the benefit for enduring the unlikely scenario that a higher caliber would achieve anything much different in the case. (other than a sense of personal vengeance)

Id also have the benefit of knowing that if the rare event of being shot should happen to me while Im out in my day to day business, that I'd have a fighting chance as 50AE or 44 calibers aren't around any more. That would go for any wife and kids too.

murraykil

"Sitting back there listening to this, I've gotta tell you that it just amazes me. My father was an expert in the founding of our country, and knowing what I know about the Bill of Rights, - it just - it just - friggin' amazes me that this even up for discussion! Enough said about that. OK."

"I grew up in a house with no guns, my father was not 'Bubba Hunter' uh - in fact he gave up fishing because he didn't like to clean fish - OK - When I grew up and moved out on my own I was given a gun by a friend, for self protection, - I was taught how to use it and knew how to use it correctly, and I carried it my purse. I lived in the country by myself - OK - "

"Somewhere along the line I made one of my stupidest decisions- I was afraid that - if - somebody caught me with the gun in my purse, I could lose my license to practice, lose my ability to make a living. So I took the gun out of my purse and I left it in my car - which the laws in my state are kinda wishy- washy on - and I thought, 'Heck, if I needed it, it's probably going to be when I'm out on the road - in the middle of nowhere and, you know, my car's broke down or something - "

"Everybody in here knows, I think, what happened in Luby's - but, in a nutshell - uh - ya know, we all think - and I know you do - (indicating a committee member), we all think that crime happens when you're walking down a dark alley- I've never been involved in any crimes - that's never happened in my life - I was with my parents - AT NOON, on a bright sunny day, in Luby's, with a hundred and forty other people, OK. In a town that's not a high crime town."

"This guy - . drives through the window - . and starts shooting - This guy has got no history - nothing." "Well, my father and I immediatly put the table up in front of us and we all got down behind it, and I - ya know your first opinion is - is this guy robbing this place - what's the deal - what's - what's going on, and then you're realizing that all he's doing is simply shooting people."

"As he was working his way toward us, I reached for my purse, thinking - Hah! - I've got this son of a gun - OK? Now, understand, I know what a lot of people think, - they think, - 'Oh, my God, then you would have had a gunfight and then more people would have been killed.' Unhunh, no, - I was down on the floor - this guy is standing up - everybody else is down on the floor - I had a perfect shot at him - it would have been clear, I had a place to prop my hand - the guy was not even aware of what we were doing - I'm not saying that I could have saved anybody in there, but I would have had a chance - that's all I'm saying is that I would have had a chance - " "My gun wasn't even in my purse - it was a hundred feet away in my car!"

"My father was saying, 'I gotta do something!, I gotta do something! This guy's going to kill everyone in here!' So I wasn't able to hold him down and when my father thought he had a chance - he went at the guy! The guy turned, shot him in the chest and my dad went down."

"Shortly - it made the guy change directions and he went off to my left. Shortly after that somebody broke out a window in back and I saw a chance to get out - I grabbed my mother and tried to get her up - hoped she was following me - and I grew wings on my feet. As it turned out, my mother crawled over to my father and stayed with him - and this - I'm trying to think of a civil word to use - this person - uh - eventually came around and shot her also - OK"

"Let me make a point here, in case this isn't becoming extremely clear. My state has gun control laws. It did not keep Hennard from coming in and killing everybody! What it did do, was keep me from protecting my family! That's the only thing that cotton pickin' law did! OK! Understand that! That's - that's so important!"

"Am I allowed to use a little theatrics - May I stand up?" Chairman replies "Go right ahead".

"Nobody thinks about this, but just imagine this, because I thought of this, I think about this occasionally now, I'm not a paranoid person, - I still live in the country, I - go about my business and have fun. But this has, needless to say, become an issue for me."

"There is zero - there is no security out there to speak of at all. It's a bright sunny day out there - now - what if one of those guys out there (indicating the hearing room entryway) walked in here with a pistol - an automatic - and he started blasting. Well there's only a couple of doors and let me tell you, you can't get out that door that quick before he can mow down a lot of people. Now what if he walks over here (toward a committe member) and he's got that gun pointed right at you? Don't you hope that that lady right there, (pointing to another committee member) has a revolver in her purse and knows how to use it and@%$&# (unintelligible)? Committeeman replies "No." "You don't hope that? You'd rather be dropped dead?" Committeeman, "If she tries to shoot him, someone on the other side of me would be hit"

Conversation that follows is a distinctive "I would" from the audience among many other voices until the Chairman announces "Excuse me, Ma'am, your point has been made," interrupted by an "I agree with you!" from the audience.

Dr. Gratia, "That's basically it, let me, - let me make one last - uh - little bit - OK - let's forget that scenario - You have a twenty- one year old daughter - this will the last little thing I want to say - she drives to college everyday on backroads - we have a lot of those in Texas, I'm sure you have quite a few here - she has some car trouble - and it's on one of those roads where somebody drives by every five minutes - she is at the mercy of whoever happens to drive by next! OK - now - 'Bubba' drives up behind her - I hope nobody in here is named 'Bubba' - drives up behind her in a pick- up truck - and he gets out with a baseball bat - a big old knife in his pocket - gets out with a baseball bat and starts bashing her windshield in. Now - your twenty- one year old daughter is your only daughter. Would you like for her to have a gun in her car? That's all I have to say - do you have any questions?"

The testimony of Dr. Gratia in favor of Missouri's HB-1720, a bill that would allow citizens of Missouri to obtain a permit to carry a firearm concealed on or about their person.

seantorious

c_man wrote: »

Yes, the tens of millions of gun owing Americans are all mad for shooting up their local schools. You tell 'em.

Good lord, the sheer venom and insults thrown at gun owners in debates just fuels the hysteria around the issue.

I don't mean it that way, I just mean I don't care at all. If Americans want guns so badly fine, but don't stand gormlessly on tv going "How could this have happened?" the next time theres a shooting. You all have guns and they do have a limited range of household uses.

Manic Moran

Promac wrote: »

And you're arguing against a complete ban on guns when I haven't actually seen anyone here put that forward as a possibility. "Working" guns and police guns are fine in my opinion. Even necessary as a deterrent sometimes.

No, I think you're still missing my point. If one believes that one has the right to take all necessary force, to include lethal if appropriate, in order to preserve your own security, there is little moral argument for prohibiting people from having the tools to exercise this.

The argument has become statistical. "Since we believe that the likelihood that you will need to use lethal force is very slim, in the interests of the greater communal good, we will keep you from doing so. Most of you will be fine." At what stage does the interest of society override the rights of the individual? The US perspective leans heavily towards individual responsibility and control.

The problem I, and the huge amounts of people like me, have with the system in America is that any ould maniac can go down to the gunshop and get an Armalite automatic weapon with any number of extended mags and ammo to fill them. There are all sorts of mods and attachments you can get to make that Armalite a far more efficient weapon too. Sights and rails and stocks and whatever. All designed to make that weapon better at killing people. There's no justification for that. You can argue that you need a gun for protection. Let's say we both accept that a concealed carry is sometimes necessary for protection and compare that with the fully pimped out AR15. No-one needs that for home defence or hunting and you are not, under any circumstances, gonna carry that around with you as protection - the gun alone would be grounds for someone to rob you.

It may surprise you to learn, then, that the AR (not automatic, by the way, that's restricted) is considered now by experts to be the best weapon for the home. Not the shotgun, not the pistol. Vice President Biden's comments on the preference for a shotgun drew derision from those that actually know about these things. A controllable, light, accurate weapon which won't go through the plasterboard or drywall which is the dominant construction material around these parts of you happen to miss. Yes, they have attachments which make it better at killing people. That's it's job. You can fit it with a torch so you can identify what you are shooting at, and sights and grips to help you hit it once you decide it needs to be shot. . Better than sending inaccurate shots from a pistol or shotgun. I presume you would agree that this is better than shooting iron sights in the dark. The only three reasons for using anything other than an AR or similar at home are either you are uncomfortable with the weapon, being physically unable to handle a ride, or (as in my case) it doesn't fit in your quick-release safe. And while you're at it, that one rifle is good for a number of roles, you don't need to buy another to go varminting, for example.

You and I (and everyone else) know that you're not interested in having a gun for protection. It's a toy to look at and play with and pose with. The people who pimp out their AR15s are proud of them. It's their prized possession and they show them off to each-other. That's got nothing to do with defence or utility. It's just a d1ck slinging contest. These people are putting drum magazines and bipods on them and they hang out at the gun range in camo gear and boots and tactical sunglasses pretending they're all bad-a$$. I know some of them and they're ridiculous.

I do not presume to know your motivation and take exception to your presuming mine. One can learn a fair bit from seeing other people's setups. And, yes, I take pride in my firearms as being quality pieces, no less than my car or a piece of art. I don't buy cheap junk. Are there the ego types who wear camo at the range? Yes. I cringe a little at them too. But, as long as they shoot safely, they could be wearing pink tutus for all I care. They have their kicks, I have mine.

But whatever, it doesn't affect me because I live in a sane country and I've said pretty much everything I have to say on this one so good luck to you in your little fort there.

Ah, finishing off with a little ad hominem. How nice. For the record, I've a two story terraced house made of wood and drywall. Not very fortified.

FTA69

dj jarvis wrote: »

i understand the use for working guns , as i have said , im talking about gun ownership in the US , ya know , the place where the demo is going to be,
where the vast majority of guns are kept for safety and security AKA kill buglers and black people .

Absolute strawmanning as usual. Let's rehash the debate a second;

1) A different poster said all guns are bad and used for violent purposes
2) I said that was b*llocks and guns have legitimate uses in Irish society
3) You start accusing me of promoting a "gun utopia", misquoting me in general and debunking arguments I never made.

and we have a winner ;-)

Bar an outstanding ability to criticise non-existant points I don't see you "winning" anything. If you want to criticise gun ownership in America then do so, just don't include me in it because all I was doing was defending the right of people in Ireland to own a gun if they have a necessary purpose for owning it.

Mr Freeze

Imagine if you threw a few bangers into that crowd when they were marching....they'd wipe themselves out, along with you.

JD DABA

If a random testimonial has taught me anything its that everybody must be armed at all times.

then there was the time my whole town was bummed and killed for want of a simple grenade launcher....learn from my story.

Boogietime

JD DABA wrote: »

If a random testimonial has taught me anything its that everybody must be armed at all times.

then there was the time my whole town was bummed and killed for want of a simple grenade launcher....learn from my story.

Good thing we have garda in here, then.

hatrickpatrick

dj jarvis wrote: »

Absolute strawmanning as usual. Let's rehash the debate a second;

1) A different poster said all guns are bad and used for violent purposes
2) I said that was b*llocks and guns have legitimate uses in Irish society
3) You start accusing me of promoting a "gun utopia", misquoting me in general and debunking arguments I never made.




Bar an outstanding ability to criticise non-existant points I don't see you "winning" anything. If you want to criticise gun ownership in America then do so, just don't include me in it because all I was doing was defending the right of people in Ireland to own a gun if they have a necessary purpose for owning it.

The problem is you can already own a gun for hunting in Ireland. You're suggesting the use of guns against people for defence, and the simple fact is that a lot of people simply don't believe that lethal force is acceptable. In America, apparently, the majority do believe it's acceptable. That's the difference.

hatrickpatrick

Blay wrote: »

He was still alive and capable of exiting the house..I don't consider that 'stopping' a criminal.

My definition of 'stopping' the individual in that situation would be him lying dead on the bedroom floor. Consider if it was your wife in that situation..would you be happy with the guy being well enough to walk away?

Yes, because I don't believe taking a human being's life is ever acceptable, period. The majority of the people in this country seem to agree largely with that principle.

Plazaman

Armed march on 4th July. The Simpsons episode comes to mind where all the guns are discharging left right and centre.. "Sorry that was me", "Ooops, my bad".

Prediction : 11 year old sets of a firecracker, 4,212 shot.

FTA69

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Yes, because I don't believe taking a human being's life is ever acceptable, period. The majority of the people in this country seem to agree largely with that principle.

I'm not sure they do. If you asked most people in Ireland what they would do if confronted with an intruder in their family home you'd probably get a pretty uniform answer.

hatrickpatrick

FTA69 wrote: »

I'm not sure they do. If you asked most people in Ireland what they would do if confronted with an intruder in their family home you'd probably get a pretty uniform answer.

I'd beat the sh!t out of them and try to knock them out and then have them arrested, but I would never kill another human for any reason unless there was literally no other possible way of not getting killed myself, and I think you'd find a lot of people would say the same.

FTA69

Unfortunately you usually can't quantify the harm you would inflict on someone in that situation. Fights aren't proportional encounters whereupon you would only do a certain thing. If you bash someone over the head with a golf club you could easily kill them outright. If you knew someone was in your house and was close to your kids you haven't a clue what you'd do. Some people would be paralysed by fear, others may flip out and bash someone to death.

What if the first thing you grabbed was a knife?

I'm not really in favour of making handguns and such available, I think the gun laws we have in Ireland are reasonable enough. I know any guns I ever had access to were strictly for hunting, recreation or practical farm work. However, in the event of feeling threatened or if I was the subject of an invasion I can't honestly say that I wouldn't have gone for the gun safe.

And I don't think that many people in that situation would disagree.

Witcher

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Yes, because I don't believe taking a human being's life is ever acceptable, period. The majority of the people in this country seem to agree largely with that principle.

It would be interesting to see how your principles would hold up if it was your wife being raped or your children's lives threatened.

You don't know you would do in that situation so don't pretend you'd value the guys life as much as your wife or child's.

FTA69 wrote: »

I'm not really in favour of making handguns and such available, I think the gun laws we have in Ireland are reasonable enough.

Pistols are available in Ireland already:)

listermint

Blay wrote: »

It would be interesting to see how your principles would hold up if it was your wife being raped or your children's lives threatened.

I see, just like in the movies...

Witcher

listermint wrote: »

I see, just like in the movies...

Or reality...if you read Madsl's post.