Texas Church Shooting
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-11-2017, 12:29 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:18 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 12:10 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  The shooter did not use a "military grade weapon". He used a Ruger AR-556 which is a variation on the AR-15 which is a semi-automatic civilian rifle, and not "military grade".
How do we define "military grade"?

Really??

You don't know the difference????


I thought you claimed to be the big badassed Navy warrior.....


If you truly don't know the differences between a fully MILSPEC weapon and it's civilian counterpart, that sorta makes that claim suspect....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 12:33 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
Okay, that's one that doesn't have a clue.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
08-11-2017, 12:40 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 11:58 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 11:57 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Are you asking me specifically or generally? I'm also curious if you think police using their guns to save people from attackers isn't a form of defence. Or what your definition of defence even is as it doesn't seem to be the dictionary one.

People who say they would defend themselves with a gun never explain how they would do that. NEVER.
Yes they do, you can find hundreds of examples if you look hard enough. Or like at all, for that matter. But allow me.

I do not own or carry a gun currently. However I used to work a job with a high likelihood that I would face violence in a community with the same issue. As such I carried a Colt 1911 chambered in .45 along with 2 additional magazines. I am alive today because of that gun and I know that to be a goddamn fact.

I had to unholster it exactly once, and I never had to point it at anyone, or threaten to kill anyone. Simply having it on my person was generally enough to dissuade people from violence because, hope this doesn't blow your mind but, the vast majority of people looking to engage in violent crime for their own benefit don't really start their day with a fervent hope to be involved in a gun fight where they could be harmed.
I only had to unholster it once when some jackass woman came into my job and started threatening a girl I worked with with a broken bottle. Simply producing the firearm was enough to deescalate the situation, and everyone walked away unharmed which was likely not the outcome if I hadn't. There were a handful of times where simply informing people that I was armed was enough to prevent them from getting violent.

Pulling the trigger is the LAST resort, and because people generally aren't psychopaths, not something that most people ever want to have to do. The man who stopped the Texas shooter from likely doing more damage than he had said him self that he is going to need counselling. There are more ways to defend yourself with a gun than shooting any thing that pops up like you are playing duck hunt.

So how do I defend myself with a gun? Done it a dozen times or so and never even pointed the thing at a person. Hell I never even took the safety off the goddamn thing.

Now I asked you before and you didn't answer but when you call the cops because someone is a attacking you when they show up are you going to berate them from showing up with guns to "answer violence with violence" are are you gonna be glad to see them?

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
08-11-2017, 12:42 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:40 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 11:58 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  People who say they would defend themselves with a gun never explain how they would do that. NEVER.
Yes they do, you can find hundreds of examples if you look hard enough. Or like at all, for that matter. But allow me.

I do not own or carry a gun currently. However I used to work a job with a high likelihood that I would face violence in a community with the same issue. As such I carried a Colt 1911 chambered in .45 along with 2 additional magazines. I am alive today because of that gun and I know that to be a goddamn fact.

I had to unholster it exactly once, and I never had to point it at anyone, or threaten to kill anyone. Simply having it on my person was generally enough to dissuade people from violence because, hope this doesn't blow your mind but, the vast majority of people looking to engage in violent crime for their own benefit don't really start their day with a fervent hope to be involved in a gun fight where they could be harmed.
I only had to unholster it once when some jackass woman came into my job and started threatening a girl I worked with with a broken bottle. Simply producing the firearm was enough to deescalate the situation, and everyone walked away unharmed which was likely not the outcome if I hadn't. There were a handful of times where simply informing people that I was armed was enough to prevent them from getting violent.

Pulling the trigger is the LAST resort, and because people generally aren't psychopaths, not something that most people ever want to have to do. The man who stopped the Texas shooter from likely doing more damage than he had said him self that he is going to need counselling. There are more ways to defend yourself with a gun than shooting any thing that pops up like you are playing duck hunt.

So how do I defend myself with a gun? Done it a dozen times or so and never even pointed the thing at a person. Hell I never even took the safety off the goddamn thing.

Now I asked you before and you didn't answer but when you call the cops because someone is a attacking you when they show up are you going to berate them from showing up with guns to "answer violence with violence" are are you gonna be glad to see them?
That's not defence, that's reciprocal violence.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 01:16 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
Let's play that defend yourself scenario through for a moment. Let's take the recent shootout in Vegas. It was dark, it was crowded and the gunman sat on the 30th floor or something. People hear salvos, but don't know from where they're coming. So, imagine, if these people would have been packing, what would have happened. They spot someone waving a gun in all that chaos. Another good guy obviously, but would they know. Would they even consider, being under fire the whole time? What would the police do, if they spot dozens of people waving guns?

That's a consideration I'm constantly missing in all these discussion about good guys with guns stopping bad guys with guns.

[Image: Labrador%20and%20Title.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 01:22 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:42 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 12:40 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Yes they do, you can find hundreds of examples if you look hard enough. Or like at all, for that matter. But allow me.

I do not own or carry a gun currently. However I used to work a job with a high likelihood that I would face violence in a community with the same issue. As such I carried a Colt 1911 chambered in .45 along with 2 additional magazines. I am alive today because of that gun and I know that to be a goddamn fact.

I had to unholster it exactly once, and I never had to point it at anyone, or threaten to kill anyone. Simply having it on my person was generally enough to dissuade people from violence because, hope this doesn't blow your mind but, the vast majority of people looking to engage in violent crime for their own benefit don't really start their day with a fervent hope to be involved in a gun fight where they could be harmed.
I only had to unholster it once when some jackass woman came into my job and started threatening a girl I worked with with a broken bottle. Simply producing the firearm was enough to deescalate the situation, and everyone walked away unharmed which was likely not the outcome if I hadn't. There were a handful of times where simply informing people that I was armed was enough to prevent them from getting violent.

Pulling the trigger is the LAST resort, and because people generally aren't psychopaths, not something that most people ever want to have to do. The man who stopped the Texas shooter from likely doing more damage than he had said him self that he is going to need counselling. There are more ways to defend yourself with a gun than shooting any thing that pops up like you are playing duck hunt.

So how do I defend myself with a gun? Done it a dozen times or so and never even pointed the thing at a person. Hell I never even took the safety off the goddamn thing.

Now I asked you before and you didn't answer but when you call the cops because someone is a attacking you when they show up are you going to berate them from showing up with guns to "answer violence with violence" are are you gonna be glad to see them?
That's not defence, that's reciprocal violence.

Now you're just being silly. (1) Reciprocal violence is a form of defense. (2) WhiskeyDebates stated very clearly that he never actually fired his gun in any of these incidents. There was no violence at all. But the mere threat of violence was an effective defense, and in fact prevented any actual violence. If you're going to claim that this wasn't defense, you're just making up your own definitions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Grasshopper's post
08-11-2017, 01:46 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 01:22 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 12:42 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  That's not defence, that's reciprocal violence.

Now you're just being silly. (1) Reciprocal violence is a form of defense. (2) WhiskeyDebates stated very clearly that he never actually fired his gun in any of these incidents. There was no violence at all. But the mere threat of violence was an effective defense, and in fact prevented any actual violence. If you're going to claim that this wasn't defense, you're just making up your own definitions.
If that makes you happy.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-11-2017, 02:37 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world...ional.html

tl;dr

Quote:Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process.

Quote:More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis:

Quote:And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries.

Quote:The United States is one of only three countries, along with Mexico and Guatemala, that begin with the opposite assumption: that people have an inherent right to own guns.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
08-11-2017, 03:58 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
(08-11-2017 12:42 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(08-11-2017 12:40 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Yes they do, you can find hundreds of examples if you look hard enough. Or like at all, for that matter. But allow me.

I do not own or carry a gun currently. However I used to work a job with a high likelihood that I would face violence in a community with the same issue. As such I carried a Colt 1911 chambered in .45 along with 2 additional magazines. I am alive today because of that gun and I know that to be a goddamn fact.

I had to unholster it exactly once, and I never had to point it at anyone, or threaten to kill anyone. Simply having it on my person was generally enough to dissuade people from violence because, hope this doesn't blow your mind but, the vast majority of people looking to engage in violent crime for their own benefit don't really start their day with a fervent hope to be involved in a gun fight where they could be harmed.
I only had to unholster it once when some jackass woman came into my job and started threatening a girl I worked with with a broken bottle. Simply producing the firearm was enough to deescalate the situation, and everyone walked away unharmed which was likely not the outcome if I hadn't. There were a handful of times where simply informing people that I was armed was enough to prevent them from getting violent.

Pulling the trigger is the LAST resort, and because people generally aren't psychopaths, not something that most people ever want to have to do. The man who stopped the Texas shooter from likely doing more damage than he had said him self that he is going to need counselling. There are more ways to defend yourself with a gun than shooting any thing that pops up like you are playing duck hunt.

So how do I defend myself with a gun? Done it a dozen times or so and never even pointed the thing at a person. Hell I never even took the safety off the goddamn thing.

Now I asked you before and you didn't answer but when you call the cops because someone is a attacking you when they show up are you going to berate them from showing up with guns to "answer violence with violence" are are you gonna be glad to see them?
That's not defence, that's reciprocal violence.

That's not an argument, nor is it an answer to the question I've asked you multiple times, it's you being evasive and trying to argue from your own personal set of definitions. Lets look at some actual definitions.

de·fense
dəˈfens,ˈdēˌfens/Submit
noun
1.
the action of defending from or resisting attack.

vi·o·lence
ˈvī(ə)ləns/Submit
noun
behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

At no point in anything I said did I engage in any behaviour involving physical force at all, let alone with intent to cause harm or death, and the actions I took (drawing my firearm or stating that I had one) defended other people and myself from attack (the example of the lady wielding a broken bottle at another lady).

So no you are just factually and demonstrably wrong. This is why I called your comment a nonsensical deepity because i's nonsense that means nothing unless your using your own special definition of words. My own experiences using guns to defuse violent situations without harming anyone makes your statement nonsense, it's just not an accurate picture of reality. There are valid, both morally and legally, applications of force just as their are invalid uses of force, and when your bias forces you to lump all uses of force into one category to maintain your narrative its just plain dishonest.

It is called self-defence for a reason. So yes mate, under the definition of the words you DO defend yourself with a gun.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
08-11-2017, 04:20 PM
RE: Texas Church Shooting
"I'll kill you more than you can kill me!" Logic?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: