Political Crossfire Forums

[superskippy]

While I would feel safer for sure, what would disturb me a little and make me feela little less comfortable is the knowledge that if you get someone angry and they go over the edge you are certain they are armed, or if a fight gets out of control they are armed, etc etc.

[Lucky Luke]

superskippy wrote: While I would feel safer for sure, what would disturb me a little and make me feela little less comfortable is the knowledge that if you get someone angry and they go over the edge you are certain they are armed, or if a fight gets out of control they are armed, etc etc.

The feeling of safety would be replaced quickly by a stronger feeling of paranoia.

:-D
:-D

[lilwolf]

Lucky Luke wrote: superskippy wrote: While I would feel safer for sure, what would disturb me a little and make me feela little less comfortable is the knowledge that if you get someone angry and they go over the edge you are certain they are armed, or if a fight gets out of control they are armed, etc etc.

The feeling of safety would be replaced quickly by a stronger feeling of paranoia.

:-D
:-D


Sure it would, can you prove it? :rotf: :rotf:

[Adam Baum]

A mistake on my part is I did not annunciate it properly, I was thinking better police, but I typed better equipment.

We need police officers who would want to go out there and stop crime, not those lazy cops that only arrest kids on their bikes on the sidewalks. Give police a raise every time they capture a crazy gunman and see if that dosen't slow crime down a bit. And when all of the crime is taken care of... well, we can just hold off on any further comments until all of crime is under control.

[airo]

No. There's some people in the world who don't need to own firearms.

That said, i'm not a big fan of detering crime. I am, however, a fan of punishing it. Whether justice comes in the form of 124 grains of lead and copper, or years behind bars, i care little.

[Thrilla]

I voted yes... of course :wink:

but i have to say.. arguing what would happen if everyone is armed is as fruitless as arguing what would happen if everyone was disarmed.
neither will ever happen.

[britboy]

Thrilla wrote: I voted yes... of course :wink:

but i have to say.. arguing what would happen if everyone is armed is as fruitless as arguing what would happen if everyone was disarmed.
neither will ever happen.

If a technology was invented in the future that made guns useless it could happen. I don't know -- some kind of 1mm thick body armour that was hard enough to shatter bullets hitting it or something.

This is the only way we'll ever see disarnament -- when no-one gets any advantage from actually having the weapon so why bother!

[airo]

britboy wrote: Thrilla wrote: I voted yes... of course :wink:

but i have to say.. arguing what would happen if everyone is armed is as fruitless as arguing what would happen if everyone was disarmed.
neither will ever happen.

If a technology was invented in the future that made guns useless it could happen. I don't know -- some kind of 1mm thick body armour that was hard enough to shatter bullets hitting it or something.

This is the only way we'll ever see disarnament -- when no-one gets any advantage from actually having the weapon so why bother!

Actually, they'll just make new guns.

You ARE aware that this has been happening for thousands of years, right? In fact, part of the reason guns came into existance was because of the development of armor, albeit a minor one.

It's a form of evolution. Group A makes a weapon. Group B makes a counter to said weapon. Group A makes a new weapon to defeat the counter. Ad nauseum.

[Malcolm Kyle]

Aereus wrote: Would you feel safer if everyone was armed? I know I would. How many robbers would be able to rob a bank if everyone in the bank had a gun? How many hijackings would succeed if everyone on the plane had a taser gun? This is common sense, folks. The government cannot always be there to protect us, and by disabling law abiding citizens from having full protection, criminals are actually being enabled.

Thoughts?

Fully Agree.

[Lucky Luke]

lilwolf wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: superskippy wrote: While I would feel safer for sure, what would disturb me a little and make me feela little less comfortable is the knowledge that if you get someone angry and they go over the edge you are certain they are armed, or if a fight gets out of control they are armed, etc etc.

The feeling of safety would be replaced quickly by a stronger feeling of paranoia.

:-D
:-D


Sure it would, can you prove it? :rotf: :rotf:

Self defence is a very big issue in America's gun country, it isn't here. We live our lives without fear and unarmed.

:-D
:-D

[lilwolf]

Lucky Luke wrote: lilwolf wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: superskippy wrote: While I would feel safer for sure, what would disturb me a little and make me feela little less comfortable is the knowledge that if you get someone angry and they go over the edge you are certain they are armed, or if a fight gets out of control they are armed, etc etc.

The feeling of safety would be replaced quickly by a stronger feeling of paranoia.

:-D
:-D


Sure it would, can you prove it? :rotf: :rotf:

Self defence is a very big issue in America's gun country, it isn't here. We live our lives without fear and unarmed.

:-D
:-D

And depend upon unarmed hobbie bobbies to come to your rescue.....I hope the rock house at the end of the yellow brick road holds out for you.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Lucky Luke]

lilwolf wrote:

And depend upon unarmed hobbie bobbies to come to your rescue.....I hope the rock house at the end of the yellow brick road holds out for you.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

As much as you do Lilwolf, our unarmed police is doing as good a job as yours and our murder rate is much, much lower Lilwolf.
No fear, no paranoia, no guns, my front door is unlock and I'll sleep like a baby.
:-D
:-D

[lilwolf]

Lucky Luke wrote: lilwolf wrote:

And depend upon unarmed hobbie bobbies to come to your rescue.....I hope the rock house at the end of the yellow brick road holds out for you.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

As much as you do Lilwolf, our unarmed police is doing as good a job as yours and our murder rate is much, much lower Lilwolf.
No fear, no paranoia, no guns, my front door is unlock and I'll sleep like a baby.
:-D
:-D

Waht ever LL......whatever. :rotf: :rotf:

[Æ]

Lucky Luke wrote: lilwolf wrote:

And depend upon unarmed hobbie bobbies to come to your rescue.....I hope the rock house at the end of the yellow brick road holds out for you.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

As much as you do Lilwolf, our unarmed police is doing as good a job as yours and our murder rate is much, much lower Lilwolf.
No fear, no paranoia, no guns, my front door is unlock and I'll sleep like a baby.
:-D
:-D
Paranoia has its positive qualities. :-D

[Adam Baum]

Nolethal weapons given to the public may be better. My compnay use to give us all stun guns but now the crime rate lowered so much we don't need them anymore. If everyone has a way of protecting themselves from danger and preventing the attacker from being killed, then crime may just go down. Being a hunter my self I am a good shot, so I don't wory much when I carry my Glock with me. In case you don't know, NYC is not the safest city in the world, and that's where my office is.

[airo]

Aereus wrote: Lucky Luke wrote: lilwolf wrote:

And depend upon unarmed hobbie bobbies to come to your rescue.....I hope the rock house at the end of the yellow brick road holds out for you.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

As much as you do Lilwolf, our unarmed police is doing as good a job as yours and our murder rate is much, much lower Lilwolf.
No fear, no paranoia, no guns, my front door is unlock and I'll sleep like a baby.
:-D
:-D
Paranoia has its positive qualities. :-D

Who's paranoid?

There's a major problem here... it's that there's many people in this thread who cannot distinguish between paranoid, and prepared. Furthermore, i really doubt they even know the difference.

[britboy]

Adam Baum wrote: Nolethal weapons given to the public may be better. My compnay use to give us all stun guns but now the crime rate lowered so much we don't need them anymore. If everyone has a way of protecting themselves from danger and preventing the attacker from being killed, then crime may just go down. Being a hunter my self I am a good shot, so I don't wory much when I carry my Glock with me. In case you don't know, NYC is not the safest city in the world, and that's where my office is.

I'm probably wrong here but I thought it was illegal to carry a Glock around with you in NYC ?? Or am I mistaken?

[lilwolf]

britboy wrote: Adam Baum wrote: Nolethal weapons given to the public may be better. My compnay use to give us all stun guns but now the crime rate lowered so much we don't need them anymore. If everyone has a way of protecting themselves from danger and preventing the attacker from being killed, then crime may just go down. Being a hunter my self I am a good shot, so I don't wory much when I carry my Glock with me. In case you don't know, NYC is not the safest city in the world, and that's where my office is.

I'm probably wrong here but I thought it was illegal to carry a Glock around with you in NYC ?? Or am I mistaken?

No you can have a CCW in New york but it is up to the police or sferiff.

CCW LIMITS
May police limit carrying concealed handguns? Yes

State law allows police chiefs and state sheriffs to prohibit people from carrying concealed weapons (CCW) in public. Police chiefs and state sheriffs ?may issue" permits that allow people to carry concealed weapons in public if police believe it is in the interest of public safety. No training is required in the legal or safe use of weapons to obtain the CCW permit.

Thsi is from the following site:
http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=ny#ccw



I know it's from the BS brady site but this way no one could accuse me of lieing or being bias.

[Lucky Luke]

Adam Baum wrote: Nolethal weapons given to the public may be better. My compnay use to give us all stun guns but now the crime rate lowered so much we don't need them anymore. If everyone has a way of protecting themselves from danger and preventing the attacker from being killed, then crime may just go down. Being a hunter my self I am a good shot, so I don't wory much when I carry my Glock with me. In case you don't know, NYC is not the safest city in the world, and that's where my office is.

The safest city in America is certainly not the safest city of the world Adam Baum.

New York City is a great example for the world to follow for curbing violent crimes, it's zero tolerance is talked about and copied here. Yet it's murder rate is still far from the murder rate level of other major cities in the rest of the western democratic world:

Quote: New York’s murder rate per person: 6.9 per 100,000, making it it the safest large city in America

London’s murder rate per person: 2.4 per 100,000
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1424319,00.html

Glasgow, Scotland's second city is in fact the murder capital of Western Europe, it's murder rate is under 6 per 100,000!

This is what America has to know Adam Baum in order to understand that tough gun control laws all over the union are the only answer. The sad truth is that the lives of your office workers would be safer in the murder capital of Western Europe than in the safest large city of America.

:-D
:-D

[airo]

Lucky Luke wrote: Adam Baum wrote: Nolethal weapons given to the public may be better. My compnay use to give us all stun guns but now the crime rate lowered so much we don't need them anymore. If everyone has a way of protecting themselves from danger and preventing the attacker from being killed, then crime may just go down. Being a hunter my self I am a good shot, so I don't wory much when I carry my Glock with me. In case you don't know, NYC is not the safest city in the world, and that's where my office is.

The safest city in America is certainly not the safest city of the world Adam Baum.

New York City is a great example for the world to follow for curbing violent crimes, it's zero tolerance is talked about and copied here. Yet it's murder rate is still far from the murder rate level of other major cities in the rest of the western democratic world:

Quote: New York’s murder rate per person: 6.9 per 100,000, making it it the safest large city in America

London’s murder rate per person: 2.4 per 100,000
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1424319,00.html

Glasgow, Scotland's second city is in fact the murder capital of Western Europe, it's murder rate is under 6 per 100,000!

This is what America has to know Adam Baum in order to understand that tough gun control laws all over the union are the only answer. The sad truth is that the lives of your office workers would be safer in the murder capital of Western Europe than in the safest large city of America.

:-D
:-D

Because, you know, guns, being the demonic little inanimate objects they are, compel their owners to kill.

There can be NO other reason for murder than the weapon used... right lucky?! I saw we get rid of them all!