Surge in Gun Owners Crowd Ranges.

[Seth]

In just any aspect of life human beings are assumed not to be competent to do anything that may endanger other people or their own until they prove otherwise, in other words presumed incompetence. Whether its practice medicine, drive a car,fly an aircraft, possess a gun etc.

So may we then presume that if an individual meets the certification standards for carrying a concealed handgun set by the government that you have no objection to such certified persons doing so, any more than you would object to a licensed pilot flying your airliner or a licensed bus driver driving the bus you're riding on?

Glad to hear it. Now you can shut the fuck up about legal, licensed concealed carry.

I can guarantee the number of law abiding citizens in any place to Earth is going to be extremely close to zero, in safer areas people may be better at not getting caught but everyone breaks the law its just a case of how seriously

This is an example of the fallacy of composition.

Just because individual X may have the properties A, B, and C does not mean that all X have the properties A, B, and C.

[MrJonno]

So may we then presume that if an individual meets the certification standards for carrying a concealed handgun set by the government that you have no objection to such certified persons doing so, any more than you would object to a licensed pilot flying your airliner or a licensed bus driver driving the bus you're riding on?

As long as the certification standard includes a need to use the weapon (which is British and most sane countries requirement for gun certification)

[Seth]

So may we then presume that if an individual meets the certification standards for carrying a concealed handgun set by the government that you have no objection to such certified persons doing so, any more than you would object to a licensed pilot flying your airliner or a licensed bus driver driving the bus you're riding on?

As long as the certification standard includes a need to use the weapon (which is British and most sane countries requirement for gun certification)

The person who "needs" to use a weapon is the person who is under violent attack that threatens his or her life, health and safety.

Since crime is entirely unpredictable and can strike literally anyone at any time, anywhere (even in your fear-filled living room Jonno my boy), everyone "needs" to be armed for legitimate self defense. That's precisely what all 40 "shall issue" states have carefully and prudently concluded after decades of debate and experimentation that shows that arming law-abiding citizens does not INCREASE crime rates one tiny bit, even if we buy the proposition that it does not do much to suppress crime overall, and that's precisely why they have amended their laws to REQUIRE law enforcement and the courts to respect the fundamental RIGHT of each and every individual person to be armed for self-defense.

So once again you've just shot yourself in the metaphorical foot and should shut the fuck up about the subject.

[MrJonno]

The person who "needs" to use a weapon is the person who is under violent attack that threatens his or her life, health and safety.

Since crime is entirely unpredictable and can strike literally anyone at any time, anywhere (even in your fear-filled living room Jonno my boy), everyone "needs" to be armed for legitimate self defense. That's precisely what all 40 "shall issue" states have carefully and prudently concluded after decades of debate and experimentation that shows that arming law-abiding citizens does not INCREASE crime rates one tiny bit, even if we buy the proposition that it does not do much to suppress crime overall, and that's precisely why they have amended their laws to REQUIRE law enforcement and the courts to respect the fundamental RIGHT of each and every individual person to be armed for self-defense.

So once again you've just shot yourself in the metaphorical foot and should shut the fuck up about the subject.

Crime is very predictable, typically there will be about 8-10 murders this week in my country and about the same next week which about the same who will win the lottery jackpot. There will be a lot more in your country. Best thing I can do is to ensure society keeps it that way. It's all about statistics and probabilities in the end. You don't seriously think society exists for your personal benefit

The concept of a law abiding citizen is about as grounded in reality as fairies at the bottom of my garden. I don't how if fairies are safer or not without a AK47 its not a particularly useful question

You don't have fundamental rights period to anything including self defence, society as a whole may think its beneficial to allow limited self defence but that's it

[Seth]

The person who "needs" to use a weapon is the person who is under violent attack that threatens his or her life, health and safety.

Since crime is entirely unpredictable and can strike literally anyone at any time, anywhere (even in your fear-filled living room Jonno my boy), everyone "needs" to be armed for legitimate self defense. That's precisely what all 40 "shall issue" states have carefully and prudently concluded after decades of debate and experimentation that shows that arming law-abiding citizens does not INCREASE crime rates one tiny bit, even if we buy the proposition that it does not do much to suppress crime overall, and that's precisely why they have amended their laws to REQUIRE law enforcement and the courts to respect the fundamental RIGHT of each and every individual person to be armed for self-defense.

So once again you've just shot yourself in the metaphorical foot and should shut the fuck up about the subject.

Crime is very predictable, typically there will be about 8-10 murders this week in my country and about the same next week which about the same who will win the lottery jackpot. There will be a lot more in your country. Best thing I can do is to ensure society keeps it that way. It's all about statistics and probabilities in the end.

Really? So tell us exactly where, when and to whom the next 8-10 murders will take place. Names, addresses, locations of the murder, method of killing, identity of the perpetrator, and all other relevant "predictable" information.

Sheesh.

You don't seriously think society exists for your personal benefit

Of course not. That's why I carry a gun, so that I can take care of my defensive needs myself, without relying on society to do something it's utterly incapable of and unwilling to do in the first place.

You don't have fundamental rights period to anything including self defence, society as a whole may think its beneficial to allow limited self defence but that's it

If you think not, then I challenge you try and come take my guns away yourself. Then you'll find out whether I have a fundamental right of self defense or not...though that information will not do you any good for the few seconds you have to consider the error of your reasoning before the red stuff all leaks out and you become an inanimate and useless lump of decaying meat.

[MrJonno]

If you think not, then I challenge you try and come take my guns away yourself. Then you'll find out whether I have a fundamental right of self defense or not...though that information will not do you any good for the few seconds you have to consider the error of your reasoning before the red stuff all leaks out and you become an inanimate and useless lump of decaying meat.

And those sort of psychopathic thinking is exactly why we don't allow 'law abiding citizens' near guns

[Collector1337]

If you think not, then I challenge you try and come take my guns away yourself. Then you'll find out whether I have a fundamental right of self defense or not...though that information will not do you any good for the few seconds you have to consider the error of your reasoning before the red stuff all leaks out and you become an inanimate and useless lump of decaying meat.

And those sort of psychopathic thinking is exactly why we don't allow 'law abiding citizens' near guns

Defending yourself is not psychotic. You are utterly ridiculous to the highest proportions.

Letting yourself be killed on the other hand... now that's insane.

Humans as a species are doomed if we are all like jonno where our survival instinct seems to have vanished.

Although, I suspect that if he was ever in a situation, where say there are multiple attackers and he manages to get a hold of one of their guns, and is left with a, pull the trigger or die, situation. His survival instinct would kick in and he would save his own life. When it comes to brass tax, he would save his own life and quickly forget about his high and mighty liberal utopian ideals.

[Seth]

If you think not, then I challenge you try and come take my guns away yourself. Then you'll find out whether I have a fundamental right of self defense or not...though that information will not do you any good for the few seconds you have to consider the error of your reasoning before the red stuff all leaks out and you become an inanimate and useless lump of decaying meat.

And those sort of psychopathic thinking is exactly why we don't allow 'law abiding citizens' near guns

Defending yourself is not psychotic. You are utterly ridiculous to the highest proportions.

Letting yourself be killed on the other hand... now that's insane.

Humans as a species are doomed if we are all like jonno where our survival instinct seems to have vanished.

Although, I suspect that if he was ever in a situation, where say there are multiple attackers and he manages to get a hold of one of their guns, and is left with a, pull the trigger or die, situation. His survival instinct would kick in and he would save his own life. When it comes to brass tax, he would save his own life and quickly forget about his high and mighty liberal utopian ideals.

I like to make it more pointed because many people are willing to sacrifice their OWN lives for a principle of pacifism. The real question is whether they are willing to sacrifice SOMEONE ELSE'S life, in particular their loved ones, to a pacifistic principle.

So I always challenge peaceniks like Jonno with the following scenario: Suppose that invaders have broken into your home and taken you, your wife and your 10 year old daughter prisoner. The attackers proceed to rape your wife in front of you and then slowly torture her to death. During this period of time you are able to slip your restraints and can easily pick up a machine gun that the thugs have carelessly left beside you and kill them all in an instant. Then the thugs strip down your 10 year old daughter and prepare to rape and torture her too.

What do you do? Do sit on your principle that there are no "law abiding citizens" and therefore the law which forbids you to have possession of a machine gun, or indeed any firearm, or indeed any "deadly weapon" (as is the case in the UK) obligates you to sit there and watch your daughter being raped and tortured because it would be a crime for you to pick up the machine gun and shoot the thugs?

Or do you pick up the machine gun, shoot the thugs and repudiate your firmly-held belief that no citizen should be permitted to possess a firearm and only the police can be authorized to save your daughter from a horrific and agonizing death...and they don't even know you've been taken prisoner and are not on the way?

I'd like to hear Jonno's answer to this conundrum.

Every other "pacifist" I've ever encountered has their personal limit beyond which they will willingly use any force required to prevent the injury.

Which makes them particularly heinous hypocrites (like Nancy Pelosi, who despite trying very hard to ban handguns for the average citizen herself owns a handgun and has a DC concealed carry permit for it, something only bigwigs and politicians can get in DC) is that they seek to impose their asinine, idiotic and entirely irrational ideology on everyone else. It's an excellent example of the Special Pleading fallacy.

[MrJonno]

I'm not a pacifist but like farming, electrics, driving, plumbing, running the country, the law and 99% of most things I leave violence to the professionals

[Collector1337]

I'm not a pacifist but like farming, electrics, driving, plumbing, running the country, the law and 99% of most things I leave violence to the professionals

That addresses nothing Seth asked.

Unless you are saying yes, you would watch your wife and daughter get raped and tortured to death.

Because if that's not what you're saying, then you just gave a total non-answer.

A complete and utter dodge and deflection.

'Violence to the professionals?"

I haven't heard such stupid words spoken in a while.

[MrJonno]

I'm not a pacifist but like farming, electrics, driving, plumbing, running the country, the law and 99% of most things I leave violence to the professionals

That addresses nothing Seth asked.

Unless you are saying yes, you would watch your wife and daughter get raped and tortured to death.

Because if that's not what you're saying, then you just gave a total non-answer.

A complete and utter dodge and deflection.

'Violence to the professionals?"

I haven't heard such stupid words spoken in a while.

I would use whatever was avaliable to defend myself and others but realistically if someone wants you dead they will succeed so the your only real chance of surviving is to ensure you don't get into that situation in the first place. The best way of defending myself is to ensure anyone who has such fantasies of 'self defence' being locked up as quickly as possible

Being realistic the most likely person to kill my wife is my wife followed by me and vice versa (and that applies to anyone)

Gun's are much like giving everyone on an airliner an ejector seat. Sure in very rare circumstances having one could save a life if used responsibly but in reality its likely to get people killed very quickly as most people arent responsibility to be trusted with something that dangerous

[Collector1337]

I'm not a pacifist but like farming, electrics, driving, plumbing, running the country, the law and 99% of most things I leave violence to the professionals

That addresses nothing Seth asked.

Unless you are saying yes, you would watch your wife and daughter get raped and tortured to death.

Because if that's not what you're saying, then you just gave a total non-answer.

A complete and utter dodge and deflection.

'Violence to the professionals?"

I haven't heard such stupid words spoken in a while.

I would use whatever was avaliable to defend myself and others but realistically if someone wants you dead they will succeed so the your only real chance of surviving is to ensure you don't get into that situation in the first place. The best way of defending myself is to ensure anyone who has such fantasies of 'self defence' being locked up as quickly as possible

Being realistic the most likely person to kill my wife is my wife followed by me and vice versa (and that applies to anyone)

Gun's are much like giving everyone on an airliner an ejector seat. Sure in very rare circumstances having one could save a life if used responsibly but in reality its likely to get people killed very quickly as most people arent responsibility to be trusted with something that dangerous

You are full blown delusional.

You keep forgetting I have personally defended myself with a firearm. So, I should be locked up according to you?

[MrJonno]

You keep forgetting I have personally defended myself with a firearm. So, I should be locked up according to you?

I have no interest in your personal anecdotes or anyone else's, its a numbers game and in the end comes down to statistics. If having 'law abiding citizens' carrying around guns makes me less likely to be shot then great but it doesnt.

[Collector1337]

You keep forgetting I have personally defended myself with a firearm. So, I should be locked up according to you?

I have no interest in your personal anecdotes or anyone else's, its a numbers game and in the end comes down to statistics. If having 'law abiding citizens' carrying around guns makes me less likely to be shot then great but it doesnt.

No, it does not come down to statistics. That's insane.

When a group of street hooligans corner you, let me know how well your statistics save you.

[MrJonno]

No, it does not come down to statistics. That's insane.

When a group of street hooligans corner you, let me know how well your statistics save you.

Stats is exactly what it comes how likely are you to be cornered by a group of street hooligans

Through the operative word there is 'group', ifs guns are common then its a group of hooligans with guns and you might have one, if they arent then its going to hooligans with flicknives and you not having a gun either way you are fucked