Do guns make us more safe?

[Lazaran]

•
TrailerTrash aka KiotiUgly aka ??? lies about having multiple alts, won’t answer a straightforward hypothetical about if they would comply with the law (be a law abiding citizen) if “guns” were banned, and sea lions constantly about “solutions” to the gun violence problem in America.

TrailerTrash aka KiotiUgly aka ??? is a Deplorable POS.

*nods*

 

[Fuzzy1975]

•
TrailerTrash aka KiotiUgly aka ??? lies about having multiple alts, won’t answer a straightforward hypothetical about if they would comply with the law (be a law abiding citizen) if “guns” were banned, and sea lions constantly about “solutions” to the gun violence problem in America.

TrailerTrash aka KiotiUgly aka ??? is a Deplorable POS.

*nods*

I'm guessing his eye colour is brown.

 

[TrailerHitch]

You already proved you have no idea what average means, you don't need to continue to do so.

You just threatened to encourage gun enthusiasts to shoot and kill and injure more people to show what a problem they can be. You use your votes and probably financial support for candidates in the gun lobby's pocket who push legislation that makes guns easier to get and more plentiful. That agenda has lead to more fun violence and deaths than ever - and that's on you. I go to class and practice putting my life on the line to protect and shield those kids who are getting shot and killed regularly because of the guns you work so hard to make available and in the hands of people who should never have them. You're a huge problem and lying to yourself more about it doesn't make it any better.

Blah, blah, blah...You just falsely profiled me. Nice work leftist propagandist.

 

[TomTeacher19]

Blah, blah, blah...You just falsely profiled me. Nice work leftist propagandist.

Profiled you from your own statements and claims and how they operate in this real world. Sorry, but you did this with your own propaganda and allegiance to the guns.

 

[TrailerHitch]

So yes I can bitch about that. I also notice how you just fucking run from the kids getting shot...

What in the flying fuck is your delusional mind talking about here? How do you even have the tiny canadian nuts to post that this is anything I ever said

 

[Fuzzy1975]

What in the flying fuck is your delusional mind talking about here? How do you even have the tiny canadian nuts to post that this is anything I ever said

You have never said, that is the point. Just like you have never said you'd obey the law if 2A changed. Afraid to go on the record?

 

[TrailerHitch]

Profiled you from your own statements and claims and how they operate in this real world. Sorry, but you did this with your own propaganda and allegiance to the guns.

The real world is the police can't be everywhere, especially out in the middle of nowhere in the rural. Secondly as the Supreme Court ruled the police have no obligation to protect citizens from crime. Thirdly since it is well within my rights to use a gun to protect myself an my loved ones if necessary I will carry a gun whenever I choose to.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Secondly as the Supreme Court ruled the police have no obligation to protect citizens from crime.

You've posted this a few times now, where is the citation to back this up? There had to be a case, and while I don't follow everything that Scotus does. I'm truly not aware of any such ruling.

 

[TrailerHitch]

You have never said, that is the point. Just like you have never said you'd obey the law if 2A changed. Afraid to go on the record?

If I find myself armed and in a situation where I can use my pistol to protect innocent lives I just might do that. Obviously I will not go up against multiple hostiles armed with heavier firepower than me.

Afraid to go on the record to support your idiotic premise? Not afraid at all, I just don't see the point in answering a question about our laws from a meddling canadian, especially a hypothetical one.

 

[TrailerHitch]

You've posted this a few times now, where is the citation to back this up? There had to be a case, and while I don't follow everything that Scotus does. I'm truly not aware of any such ruling.

In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens.

Happy now?

 

[TomTeacher19]

The real world is the police can't be everywhere, especially out in the middle of nowhere in the rural. Secondly as the Supreme Court ruled the police have no obligation to protect citizens from crime. Thirdly since it is well within my rights to use a gun to protect myself an my loved ones if necessary I will carry a gun whenever I choose to.

The real world is also that you aren't part of a well regulated militia so the second amendment truly has nothing to do with you. The real world is also that every time you vote for politicians in the gun lobby pockets you are supporting all their laws that have made it easier for anyone, including criminals and the mentally ill, to get their hands on guns and therefore you are responsible morally and ethically for all the consequences of those, including about once a week where one of them goes into a school and shoots children. The real world is also that when you work so hard to defend and support your rights to have those guns you also support millions of irresponsible gun owners who aren't criminals or mentally ill but whose gun ownership still leads to violence and death (you're more likely to be shot in an accident at home than by a "good guy with a gun") and once again, you're responsible for all of those. You can - and based on all evidence will - keep lying to yourself and anyone else who will listen but you aren't doing anything positive or safer or good for anyone by supporting guns. You're increasing gun violence and gun deaths constantly whether you literally pull the trigger or not. That's the real world.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens.

Happy now?

Thanks for the citations, but, what the summations say, vs what your claiming don't jive. These are very specific cases where the Police were not found guilty of failing to provide due process. It doesn't mean they don't have to enforce the laws, or prevent crime if they see it, or are call to respond.

In Deshaney, "Since Joshua DeShaney was not in the custody of the DSS, the DSS was not required to protect him from harm. In reaching this conclusion, the court opinion relied heavily on its precedents in Estelle v. Gamble and Youngberg v. Romeo"

Castle Rock is a bit different; The Court's majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia held that enforcement of the restraining order was not mandatory under Colorado law;

Why, was because the wife had not requested enforcement under previous times where the ex husband had also broken the order.

Justice David Souter wrote a concurring opinion, using the reasoning that enforcement of a restraining order is a process, not the interest protected by the process, and that there is not due process protection for processes.

I can follow Souter's logic a bit better than Scalia's, but I disagree with the verdict. It's a shit stance to take.

 

[goodgirl29]

Did I call you one? Obviously not. But you start chirping the old song and dance like Hitch does, and you'll be called the same.

Oh here comes the "fear factor'.

Irrelevant point when the discussion is around (for the most part) white males, taking high power large capacity magazines to schools and shooting innocent children to death. Or did you miss that little statement I made in the reply to Hitch?

Yes, given the access to high capacity mags, and bump stocks and weapons who purpose of design was to efficiently kill people that the average American can buy, without even a basic safety course on firearms. It's becoming pretty common place.

Ever been shot at? Ever had to shoot at someone, or even point a firearm when in danger? Guess what,it's not like the movies. Why do you think the trained professionals practice so much? The last person I ever want to be near, if a threat happens is you. An untrained armed scared person.

i'm done here. can't talk common sense to quite a few on this board. Keep on assuming you know anything about me, my training, background and life experiences. good day! happy name-calling!

 

[Fuzzy1975]

i'm done here. can't talk common sense to quite a few on this board. Keep on assuming you know anything about me, my training, background and life experiences. good day! happy name-calling!

What you call common sense and what I call common sense are two widely different things. You keep on believing what you wish. It might be the death of you. You're never going to convince me I need to be armed to be safe. Sorry, but that just isn't true!!!

 

[TrailerHitch]

The real world is also that you aren't part of a well regulated militia so the second amendment truly has nothing to do with you. The real world is also that every time you vote for politicians in the gun lobby pockets you are supporting all their laws that have made it easier for anyone, including criminals and the mentally ill, to get their hands on guns and therefore you are responsible morally and ethically for all the consequences of those, including about once a week where one of them goes into a school and shoots children. The real world is also that when you work so hard to defend and support your rights to have those guns you also support millions of irresponsible gun owners who aren't criminals or mentally ill but whose gun ownership still leads to violence and death (you're more likely to be shot in an accident at home than by a "good guy with a gun") and once again, you're responsible for all of those. You can - and based on all evidence will - keep lying to yourself and anyone else who will listen but you aren't doing anything positive or safer or good for anyone by supporting guns. You're increasing gun violence and gun deaths constantly whether you literally pull the trigger or not. That's the real world.

What ever you say Dad. Who the FUCK are you to point fingers at me? Your profession right now is convincing little boys and little girls to get medically altered to change sex. Kids as young as Kindergarten age are being propagandized this way. So take your moral ground and shove it up your hypocritical ass. As for transgenders, my opinion is at 18 years old if you want to change sexes rock on, Before that, not a chance. Act like what ever sex you wish until you turn 18, but no medical intervention.

 

[Chobham]

The real world is also that you aren't part of a well regulated militia so the second amendment truly has nothing to do with you. The real world is also that every time you vote for politicians in the gun lobby pockets you are supporting all their laws that have made it easier for anyone, including criminals and the mentally ill, to get their hands on guns and therefore you are responsible morally and ethically for all the consequences of those, including about once a week where one of them goes into a school and shoots children. The real world is also that when you work so hard to defend and support your rights to have those guns you also support millions of irresponsible gun owners who aren't criminals or mentally ill but whose gun ownership still leads to violence and death (you're more likely to be shot in an accident at home than by a "good guy with a gun") and once again, you're responsible for all of those. You can - and based on all evidence will - keep lying to yourself and anyone else who will listen but you aren't doing anything positive or safer or good for anyone by supporting guns. You're increasing gun violence and gun deaths constantly whether you literally pull the trigger or not. That's the real world.

And exactly WHAT is the 'well regulated militia?'

 

[RoryN]

i'm done here.

That's a shame - we were enjoying watching you crash and burn over and over. Be well.

 

[TrailerHitch]

Thanks for the citations, but, what the summations say, vs what your claiming don't jive. These are very specific cases where the Police were not found guilty of failing to provide due process. It doesn't mean they don't have to enforce the laws, or prevent crime if they see it, or are call to respond.

In Deshaney, "Since Joshua DeShaney was not in the custody of the DSS, the DSS was not required to protect him from harm. In reaching this conclusion, the court opinion relied heavily on its precedents in Estelle v. Gamble and Youngberg v. Romeo"

Castle Rock is a bit different; The Court's majority opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia held that enforcement of the restraining order was not mandatory under Colorado law;

Why, was because the wife had not requested enforcement under previous times where the ex husband had also broken the order.

Justice David Souter wrote a concurring opinion, using the reasoning that enforcement of a restraining order is a process, not the interest protected by the process, and that there is not due process protection for processes.

I can follow Souter's logic a bit better than Scalia's, but I disagree with the verdict. It's a shit stance to take.

Both cases set precedent that the police are not responsible for protecting the public before a crime occurs. Yes it is that simple.

 

[TrailerHitch]

What you call common sense and what I call common sense are two widely different things. You keep on believing what you wish. It might be the death of you. You're never going to convince me I need to be armed to be safe. Sorry, but that just isn't true!!!

You see here is the biggest fallacy with your continued ranting, no law abiding gun owner gives a single fuck at all whether you choose to own a firearm, or decide to carry a firearm. That choice is yours as a free citizen of your own country. Honestly though, I prefer that a guy like you doesn't own or carry a gun.

 

[Bray123]

key part here is "some crazy in camo".... mentally unstable for whatever reason. show me a SANE, RATIONAL law-abiding gun owning citizen that has done the same....

Presumably in your world law-abiding citizens can shoot up the neighborhood. Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted of shooting a couple of skateboarders so that might count. He law-abidingly went to another state because he knew there was civil disturbance there, law-abidingly strolled with a bunch of guns into a riot, law-abidingly shot people. The police standing right behind him neither shot anybody else nor arrested him.

Leaving out the 'law-abiding' part because that's obviously self-defeating, I had some difficulty finding sane & rational shooters. All I could come up with were Republicans.


https://triblive.com/local/valley-n...man-pulled-gun-at-borough-republican-meeting/
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/form...resentatives-candidate-charged-shooting-spree
https://nypost.com/2023/02/09/lawyer-dead-after-mri-discharges-gun/
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/blaze-editor-shoots-self-foot/

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Both cases set precedent that the police are not responsible for protecting the public before a crime occurs. Yes it is that simple.

Both cases revolved around a very specific enforcement, Restraining Orders. The cases also do not imply police don't enforce them, only that if they fail to enforce them. You cannot sue them for liability. Police are covered by Qualified Immunity in these cases.

Kind of like if you're hit by a drunk driver, you can't sue the police, just the drunk driver. Or if a car breaking the speed limit hits you, you cannot sue the police for failing to stop the car, only the driver.

I suspect the Police are simply too busy to be able to take action where Restraining Orders are issued by the court. It would be a very heavy lift, requiring a increased investment in both equipment and vehicles and manpower, since the current levels of police enforcement is invested in other areas. Like gang shootings, or armed robbery, or mass shootings, or road rage shootings....

Perhaps if the Policed didn't have to be deployed preventing these types of major crimes, they could then guaranty law enforcement of RO's.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You see here is the biggest fallacy with your continued ranting, no law abiding gun owner gives a single fuck at all whether you choose to own a firearm, or decide to carry a firearm.

I am pointing out the why's. Remember I too carry firearms, and own them, and use them. But, and this is the difference between you and I. I use mine as tools for hunting, or on the very odd occasion now, target shooting. You state you carry yours to protect yourself. Why? What kind of society do you live in, that would require it's citizens to self police?

The only G 7 country to do so. Hell I could see if you lived in Haiti, or The Democratic Republic of the Congo. But the leading Economy of the world? Give me a fucking break!!

That choice is yours as a free citizen of your own country. Honestly though, I prefer that a guy like you doesn't own or carry a gun.

Yah, well I own a few,which is why you don't like me I guess.

 

[Buffalogurl]

https://www.wsaz.com/content/news/Teenager-saves-sisters-from-intruder-526277011.html
Here's a sample of a firearm employed in protecting 3 young girls from two thugs trying to break into their home.
And yes this happened in a G7 nation ( image that?) Now I will admit the one girl needs some range time ,but they weren’t robbed or raped, murdered or kidnapped......
I Have much, much more reports such as these......

 

[Dribble]

https://www.wsaz.com/content/news/Teenager-saves-sisters-from-intruder-526277011.html
Here's a sample of a firearm employed in protecting 3 young girls from two thugs trying to break into their home.
And yes this happened in a G7 nation ( image that?) Now I will admit the one girl needs some range time ,but they weren’t robbed or raped, murdered or kidnapped......
I Have much, much more reports such as these......

But this...is a single data point. A blip in society. And the data in analyses after analyses says SOCIETY is not safer. Understand the topic being discissed

 

[Buffalogurl]

But this...is a single data point. A blip in society. And the data in analyses after analyses says SOCIETY is not safer. Understand the topic being discissed

No it's not a single blip, this situation happens every day......