Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Gun Poll [Velocibuddha] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What an excellent analogy.

Get back to me when rock walls can drive into your neighborhood and threaten your wife and children.
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:

Get back to me when rock walls can drive into your neighborhood and threaten your wife and children.


That may be more likely, as I live in earthquake country ;). There simply is no threat (which is already miniscule) that would not be increased by having a loaded gun around. Nothing said in all of these threads has changed that basic fact.
Last edited by: oldandslow: Feb 16, 18 10:50
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BLeP wrote:
Given that I find it more likely that an armed guard would accidentally shoot a kid than a shooter would show up then yes, I will roll the dice.

And I don't have a gun in my home because I find the likelihood of a gunman coming into my house to be extremely unlikely and again, the likelihood of that gun somehow being mishandled and someone being shot is higher.

So I guess I will continue to roll the dice.

Armed guards are already at many schools, banks, mass transit terminals, and other locations. How many "accidental shootings" can you document from those locations?
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Given that I find it more likely that an armed guard would accidentally shoot a kid than a shooter would show up then yes, I will roll the dice.

And I don't have a gun in my home because I find the likelihood of a gunman coming into my house to be extremely unlikely and again, the likelihood of that gun somehow being mishandled and someone being shot is higher.

So I guess I will continue to roll the dice.


Armed guards are already at many schools, banks, mass transit terminals, and other locations. How many "accidental shootings" can you document from those locations?

Keep reading. I clarified that accidental shootings are extremely rare. Even more rare? Break in killings.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [Harbinger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Harbinger wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Do you live in a rough neighbourhood?

If so, you'd probably be better off moving to a better neighbourhood.

I don't. Quite the opposite. I live in a large, beautiful house, on a lake, with all the lake toys.

Quote:
Carry on with your gun for "protection". I will carry on without one.

At the end of our lives we'll both likely have never needed one.

Seems reasonable. And I hope neither of us needs/uses deadly protection. Actually, I have needed it as I have been attacked while on a pre-dawn run. I was very fortunate to evade them (I think they were spaced out on drugs) and would have preferred to have a weapon to defend myself.

So you evaded them without a weapon but you would have felt better potentially killing people you evaded?

I don't believe that is what you mean but my point is, you evaded them and did not "need" a weapon.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [rick_pcfl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
rick_pcfl wrote:
What an excellent analogy.

Get back to me when rock walls can drive into your neighborhood and threaten your wife and children.

I have been thinking about this.

1) Sometimes having rock climbing skills can be helpful. Rock-climbing skills HAVE saved my life.
But ......
I probably wouldn’t have been in those situations in the first place if I wasn’t a rock climber.
2) Many people do die in incidents involving climbable cliffs. (Most cliffs are in fact climbable). But that doesn’t mean more rock-climbing skills would reduce the number of falling deaths.
Definitely the opposite is true.
3) Heights and violence are both things that people have an irrational fear of. AND yet people are ALSO irrationally drawn towards heights and violence.
4) People who are drawn towards violence will often be drawn towards guns. (That’s a bad sign)
People who are drawn towards heights will be drawn towards rock-climbing.
(Also a bad sign I suppose).

Different?
It seems that gun violence is often imposed upon completely random people. This is a difference. (I have suppose buses sometimes drive off cliffs).

But it is gun advocates themselves, that argue that “randomness” is actually an emotionally charged exception. That most gun deaths are suicides, gang related or domestic things.

So actually I think the analogy fits better than I initially realized.

Rock climbing is fine.
Gun-ownership is fine.

A person who argues that either activity increases ones overall safety is a nut-case.
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [TheRef65] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheRef65 wrote:
Harbinger wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Do you live in a rough neighbourhood?

If so, you'd probably be better off moving to a better neighbourhood.

I don't. Quite the opposite. I live in a large, beautiful house, on a lake, with all the lake toys.

Quote:
Carry on with your gun for "protection". I will carry on without one.

At the end of our lives we'll both likely have never needed one.

Seems reasonable. And I hope neither of us needs/uses deadly protection. Actually, I have needed it as I have been attacked while on a pre-dawn run. I was very fortunate to evade them (I think they were spaced out on drugs) and would have preferred to have a weapon to defend myself.


So you evaded them without a weapon but you would have felt better potentially killing people you evaded?

I don't believe that is what you mean but my point is, you evaded them and did not "need" a weapon.

Yes, I evaded them primarily because I hunt and know what gives away presence. I stayed in the pitch black shadows crouched behind a large tree. Now if my wife had been running with me, I doubt she could have held her position and yes, in that instance (like in my home) I would have preferred to have a weapon.
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [Velocibuddha] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Velocibuddha wrote:
Practicing driving race cars is rational protection for how to handle a car in normal situations

Pardon me for taking merely a snippet out of your post, but, taking a race driving course is absolutely rational protection for how to handle a car in normal situations. I truly wish more people would give it a shot because most people have no idea how to drive. None.

I started racing a few years ago. I took courses out at Road America in Elkhart Lake, WI. I had certified race instructors teaching me. One of the first things you learn is how a car handles. You learn when to accelerate and when to brake. More importantly, you lean when NOT to brake. I could not believe how much better a road driver I became. This is especially true here in God's Country when the white fluffy stuff falls to the ground. All you need to do to go out after a snow storm and see the hundreds of cars in the ditch. It is because people do not understand how the vehicle operates, when to brake, when not to, when to accelerate, etc. If more people took race course lessons, there would be far, far fewer accidents.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Gun Poll [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
Velocibuddha wrote:

Practicing driving race cars is rational protection for how to handle a car in normal situations


Pardon me for taking merely a snippet out of your post, but, taking a race driving course is absolutely rational protection for how to handle a car in normal situations. I truly wish more people would give it a shot because most people have no idea how to drive. None.

I started racing a few years ago. I took courses out at Road America in Elkhart Lake, WI. I had certified race instructors teaching me. One of the first things you learn is how a car handles. You learn when to accelerate and when to brake. More importantly, you lean when NOT to brake. I could not believe how much better a road driver I became. This is especially true here in God's Country when the white fluffy stuff falls to the ground. All you need to do to go out after a snow storm and see the hundreds of cars in the ditch. It is because people do not understand how the vehicle operates, when to brake, when not to, when to accelerate, etc. If more people took race course lessons, there would be far, far fewer accidents.

I was about to say this too. Performance driving classes are all about learning to handle a car at the limits of its traction and past those limits in a safe environment. People get in stupid accidents (like all those cars in the ditch off I-57 on my drive to Chicago last weekend) because they don't know how to handle their vehicle when it loses traction, and panic. Not analogous to skydiving and air crashes, etc.
Quote Reply

Prev Next