Anyone carry "protection" when driving?
- Thread starter Lolvoguy
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Mykl
Whatever France is doing is working great for them, because you are drastically less likely to be murdered there.
What happened there recently really sucks, but there's no way it can be proven that adding more guns to the equation would have done anything to change the outcome.
*note* my argument is not "guns are bad!!! we shouldn't have them!!!" Guns are in the US to stay, and I really don't care.
I completely disagree. Adding more guns to the situation (arming the French police,as I heard on talk radio today that the French police are not armed) would've produced a totally different outcome. The French police would've wasted those scum-bags.
Whatever France is doing is working great for them, because you are drastically less likely to be murdered there.
What happened there recently really sucks, but there's no way it can be proven that adding more guns to the equation would have done anything to change the outcome.
*note* my argument is not "guns are bad!!! we shouldn't have them!!!" Guns are in the US to stay, and I really don't care.
I completely disagree. Adding more guns to the situation (arming the French police,as I heard on talk radio today that the French police are not armed) would've produced a totally different outcome. The French police would've wasted those scum-bags.
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
I completely disagree. Adding more guns to the situation (arming the French police,as I heard on talk radio today that the French police are not armed) would've produced a totally different outcome. The French police would've wasted those scum-bags.
You make a fair point.
But there's an ocean of difference between how a trained professional, like an armed police officer, handles this situation and how an amateur with a rifle on the third floor of an apartment building handles it.
I completely disagree. Adding more guns to the situation (arming the French police,as I heard on talk radio today that the French police are not armed) would've produced a totally different outcome. The French police would've wasted those scum-bags.
You make a fair point.
But there's an ocean of difference between how a trained professional, like an armed police officer, handles this situation and how an amateur with a rifle on the third floor of an apartment building handles it.
ocean of difference for some maybe... speak for yourself.
that's a large assumption by saying amateur you are placing on the entire argument. Like with this Paris thing on cnn with picture of person on ground with terrorist pointing AK at her head, you think she's thinking gee i hope only a trained professional is on the way I don't want some hunter or anybody capable of pulling a trigger to save my life?
And funny how this type of thinking is applied to firearms, but not automobiles.
to put faith solely in so-called "trained" people (and i can point to plenty of proof of bad cops, politicians, & armed service personnel) that only operate under orders by policitians and government is foolish and provides little deterrence to people with any kind of agenda to do whatever they want or think they can get away with. last week a guy on drugs in Baltimore walked into police station armed, and news article reported he was ordered by local gang to do it to test the station's security and response- this is in the fallout of the Ferguson riots and NYC cop shootings. so let's wait and see on that, if it were your town and your police station (where your protection is) is under attack you gonna just wait and watch, and vilify law abiding people with guns who want what cops and politicians are supposed to provide?
if people want to be second class citizens and weak that's there choice but don't impose it on people who can and prefer to protect themselves when there is a real threat and it is constantly happening.
another great example is the tatoo place in ferguson, which wasn't wrecked because owners and patrons got off their a$$ and protected it by standing in front and there was at least a balance of force- more so for the tatoo shop law abiding guys with AR's vs a bunch of... well i'll get banned if i tell it like it is... running around looting and causing damage. and awesome how the thread on here about ferguson got removed, would've been nice to read what was said... last i remember it was reported the National Guard there protected gov't buildings but obviously did nothing for commercial or regular folks and allowed a large group of criminals to run loose. great strategy keep putting your faith in gun control and the cops/gov't will protect me.
i go back to my statement: gun control... as in preventing law abiding citizens to own firearms in order to maintain a balance of power (not just a limited number of small arms where you can only have less than 10 rounds loaded)... is America's Maginot Line. most of you probably don't get the meaning of that. look up the history of that, how France gov't has the mindset of maintaining the Maginot line did exactly what it was intended to do [and was successful] because it prevented German ground forces from invading in a traditional sense, with the reality being they flew over in planes or simply circumvented the wall however and took the country quickly and France fell.
that's a large assumption by saying amateur you are placing on the entire argument. Like with this Paris thing on cnn with picture of person on ground with terrorist pointing AK at her head, you think she's thinking gee i hope only a trained professional is on the way I don't want some hunter or anybody capable of pulling a trigger to save my life?
And funny how this type of thinking is applied to firearms, but not automobiles.
to put faith solely in so-called "trained" people (and i can point to plenty of proof of bad cops, politicians, & armed service personnel) that only operate under orders by policitians and government is foolish and provides little deterrence to people with any kind of agenda to do whatever they want or think they can get away with. last week a guy on drugs in Baltimore walked into police station armed, and news article reported he was ordered by local gang to do it to test the station's security and response- this is in the fallout of the Ferguson riots and NYC cop shootings. so let's wait and see on that, if it were your town and your police station (where your protection is) is under attack you gonna just wait and watch, and vilify law abiding people with guns who want what cops and politicians are supposed to provide?
if people want to be second class citizens and weak that's there choice but don't impose it on people who can and prefer to protect themselves when there is a real threat and it is constantly happening.
another great example is the tatoo place in ferguson, which wasn't wrecked because owners and patrons got off their a$$ and protected it by standing in front and there was at least a balance of force- more so for the tatoo shop law abiding guys with AR's vs a bunch of... well i'll get banned if i tell it like it is... running around looting and causing damage. and awesome how the thread on here about ferguson got removed, would've been nice to read what was said... last i remember it was reported the National Guard there protected gov't buildings but obviously did nothing for commercial or regular folks and allowed a large group of criminals to run loose. great strategy keep putting your faith in gun control and the cops/gov't will protect me.
i go back to my statement: gun control... as in preventing law abiding citizens to own firearms in order to maintain a balance of power (not just a limited number of small arms where you can only have less than 10 rounds loaded)... is America's Maginot Line. most of you probably don't get the meaning of that. look up the history of that, how France gov't has the mindset of maintaining the Maginot line did exactly what it was intended to do [and was successful] because it prevented German ground forces from invading in a traditional sense, with the reality being they flew over in planes or simply circumvented the wall however and took the country quickly and France fell.
Last edited:
point is, OP said carry protection while driving he had problems with motorcyclist being aggressive or a threat, and mentioned getting camera as protection/deterrence. People say you drive a # ton weapon so just drive away.
i point to NYC motorcycle gang proving the problem with that thinking.
thread evolves to gun ownership this and that,
i keep trying to indicate why [liberal] notion of gun control is bad and point to current and past events proving why... mostly because i'm ticked at current situation in Paris...
before OP drives to deli (wherever he lives) to get a lunch sandwich and there happens to be terrorists held up in there... i don't know maybe they are on the run because they went after folks in the area that released a cartoon in poor taste and disrespect of their religion, or released a movie depicting assassination of some country's president/dictator. If someone within the US puts a cartoon on their facebook page depicting assassination of our president that should be ok right? OP may be a decent respectful guy i don't want to see anything bad to him. it upsets me how people are discouraged/oppressed by bad gun control laws and a large portion if not the majority of people in this country are taking it in the wrong direction on the issue. I parallel it to the rise of Nazi/facism of 1920's Germany.
i'm trying to get a general point across, this is general & off topic. nothing directed at you or any user here specifically, just going off tidbits and impressions i got from reading what was previously said. i don't know u and certainly don't consider you second class... but i would argue any person who cries about outlawing weapons because they don't like/fear them and can't protect themself then imposes that view on others but not be accountable for the consequences... should be labeled something other than [first class] US citizen,,, maybe not even citizen? with the way things are and people's morals and rational thinking these days, what is the definition of citizen? what is the definition of nation?
nothing said here is overtly political other than using the l word and gun control. everything has been principle, fact of law, and take on current events. so no reason to delete this thread right?
i point to NYC motorcycle gang proving the problem with that thinking.
thread evolves to gun ownership this and that,
i keep trying to indicate why [liberal] notion of gun control is bad and point to current and past events proving why... mostly because i'm ticked at current situation in Paris...
before OP drives to deli (wherever he lives) to get a lunch sandwich and there happens to be terrorists held up in there... i don't know maybe they are on the run because they went after folks in the area that released a cartoon in poor taste and disrespect of their religion, or released a movie depicting assassination of some country's president/dictator. If someone within the US puts a cartoon on their facebook page depicting assassination of our president that should be ok right? OP may be a decent respectful guy i don't want to see anything bad to him. it upsets me how people are discouraged/oppressed by bad gun control laws and a large portion if not the majority of people in this country are taking it in the wrong direction on the issue. I parallel it to the rise of Nazi/facism of 1920's Germany.
i'm trying to get a general point across, this is general & off topic. nothing directed at you or any user here specifically, just going off tidbits and impressions i got from reading what was previously said. i don't know u and certainly don't consider you second class... but i would argue any person who cries about outlawing weapons because they don't like/fear them and can't protect themself then imposes that view on others but not be accountable for the consequences... should be labeled something other than [first class] US citizen,,, maybe not even citizen? with the way things are and people's morals and rational thinking these days, what is the definition of citizen? what is the definition of nation?
nothing said here is overtly political other than using the l word and gun control. everything has been principle, fact of law, and take on current events. so no reason to delete this thread right?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 1 FMF
i keep trying to indicate why [liberal] notion of gun control is bad and point to current and past events proving why... mostly because i'm ticked at current situation in Paris...
Yeah, but you're not really looking at the big picture, just one instance. What happened in France is an extremely isolated anomaly. It would be absolutely foolish of them to make broad sweeping changes to their gun control laws in reaction to this single instance, particularly when they have achieved one of the lowest rates of violent death of any country at any other point in history.
i keep trying to indicate why [liberal] notion of gun control is bad and point to current and past events proving why... mostly because i'm ticked at current situation in Paris...
Yeah, but you're not really looking at the big picture, just one instance. What happened in France is an extremely isolated anomaly. It would be absolutely foolish of them to make broad sweeping changes to their gun control laws in reaction to this single instance, particularly when they have achieved one of the lowest rates of violent death of any country at any other point in history.
Originally Posted By: Lolvoguy
I proceeded to lay on my horn
Don't do this to the bikers .. they are then obligated to try to kick your arse.
I proceeded to lay on my horn
Don't do this to the bikers .. they are then obligated to try to kick your arse.
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
Latest report is that the two Gunmen are dead, but their hostage was unharmed
Not sure what happened at the Kosher grocery store, seems a gunman was killed there also, but I'm not sure of the connection.
Sorry, wrong thread.
Strange that I can edit the post, but NOT delete it?
Not sure what happened at the Kosher grocery store, seems a gunman was killed there also, but I'm not sure of the connection.
Sorry, wrong thread.
Strange that I can edit the post, but NOT delete it?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other. You can even kill with your bare hands. It's not a weapons issue so much as a short tempered barbaric people issue.
As with any arms race, when one side gets a new weapon you need to be on a level playing field with them because crossbows cannot defend against AR's..
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other. You can even kill with your bare hands. It's not a weapons issue so much as a short tempered barbaric people issue.
As with any arms race, when one side gets a new weapon you need to be on a level playing field with them because crossbows cannot defend against AR's..
Originally Posted By: Olas
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other. You can even kill with your bare hands. It's not a weapons issue so much as a short tempered barbaric people issue.
As with any arms race, when one side gets a new weapon you need to be on a level playing field with them because crossbows cannot defend against AR's..
I'm not supporting the post you're quoting, because I assumed that was a sarcastic comment due to how obviously absurd it seemed to be.
But you have to at least admit that it's significantly easier to kill with a gun than it is with a knife or a bat. This is a statement that can be used both in support of gun and against guns, depending on your perspective.
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other. You can even kill with your bare hands. It's not a weapons issue so much as a short tempered barbaric people issue.
As with any arms race, when one side gets a new weapon you need to be on a level playing field with them because crossbows cannot defend against AR's..
I'm not supporting the post you're quoting, because I assumed that was a sarcastic comment due to how obviously absurd it seemed to be.
But you have to at least admit that it's significantly easier to kill with a gun than it is with a knife or a bat. This is a statement that can be used both in support of gun and against guns, depending on your perspective.
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
How is that gonna' work again?
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
How is that gonna' work again?
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
France is the perfect example of how that works.
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
France is the perfect example of how that works.
Originally Posted By: Lolvoguy
and no, I don't mean the birth control kind either
...
That's the only protection I need...
and no, I don't mean the birth control kind either
...
That's the only protection I need...
Originally Posted By: jcwit
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
France is the perfect example of how that works.
France has more guns per capita that just about any other country in Europe.
even more PC than Canada.
And those are registered weapons, believe me there are many, many more un-registered.
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
France is the perfect example of how that works.
France has more guns per capita that just about any other country in Europe.
even more PC than Canada.
And those are registered weapons, believe me there are many, many more un-registered.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: andrewp1998
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
I'm not a gun-nut or anything, but that's just not practical nor realistic...
Originally Posted By: Olas
...
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other...
C'mon dude, that's B.S. too. Compare U.S. murder rates with yours. Yeah, people will always kill each other but guns make it a [censored] lot easier and convenient to do. Anyone that thinks ease of access to firearms in society doesn't significantly increase homicide rates is lying or ignorant. Guns are not the only factor here, but they certainly are one of the biggest...
Take all the GUNS away and arm only the police and 99% of the killing will stop.. Its a no brainer !
I'm not a gun-nut or anything, but that's just not practical nor realistic...
Originally Posted By: Olas
...
Killing doesn't happen because guns, killing happens because people. Take away their guns and they'll use knives, bats, crossbows, pits full of punjji sticks, booby-traps and other methods to kill each other...
C'mon dude, that's B.S. too. Compare U.S. murder rates with yours. Yeah, people will always kill each other but guns make it a [censored] lot easier and convenient to do. Anyone that thinks ease of access to firearms in society doesn't significantly increase homicide rates is lying or ignorant. Guns are not the only factor here, but they certainly are one of the biggest...
Originally Posted By: Mykl
Yeah, compared to any country that is not the United States the French aren't lacking for guns. Germany is right there with them.
I don't think France has nearly the numbers or wide array of firearms as we do in the U.S. I think Croatia might be a better example where firearms ownership (both legal and illegal by otherwise law abiding, peaceful citizens who have large stashes of weapons hidden around their homes) is widespread yet the crime and murder rates are generally low...
Yeah, compared to any country that is not the United States the French aren't lacking for guns. Germany is right there with them.
I don't think France has nearly the numbers or wide array of firearms as we do in the U.S. I think Croatia might be a better example where firearms ownership (both legal and illegal by otherwise law abiding, peaceful citizens who have large stashes of weapons hidden around their homes) is widespread yet the crime and murder rates are generally low...
- Status
