Descent BB

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

   Descent BB Forum Index > Ethics and Commentary > Anti Gun Nuts, take note Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:47 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

An interesting collection of pro-gun propaganda which hinges on the proposition that guns ownership makes the general population safer rather than the opposite...

http://www.reasonorforce.com/

I particularly enjoyed the bit about Australia where it's shown that despite their gun control laws, crime has increased, and the gun homicide rate hasn't fallen at all. There's a video about England as well, where apparently now that they have gun control, the formerly truncheon-carrying police are now forced to carry guns due to the harsh reality that when owning guns is against the law, only criminals have guns...The Brits interviewed all had one thing to say to their American counterparts - don't let them take away YOUR guns or you'll regret it.

Food for thought...

http://www.reasonorforce.com/2010/09/why-i-carry-gun.html
an interesting analysis of force equalizers. The comments are precious too Smile

Aforementioned video about England:
http://www.reasonorforce.com/2010/08/england-gun-ban-update.html

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
d3jake
Ace




PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 2:45 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

When you outlaw firearms, only the outlaws will have firearms.

Not exactly rocket science. If the likelihood of whoever you're trying to rob has a gun goes up, perhaps you'll be less apt to attempt it.

_________________
"You don't need a deity floating among high with a huge fucking bat to understand the difference between right and wrong." -MD-2389
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 3:25 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

The problem with the concept of gun control is that it is a number of centuries too late. There are already millions of guns out there; instead of trying to get rid of them all, they should focus on taking advantage of the benefits that can be gained by having gun owners around while minimizing the risks and dangers to society that guns can bring.

Gun control today ultimately only takes power out of the hands of honest people and hands it directly to criminals on a silver platter.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 5:27 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Krom is right in the sense that it's too late to have any kind of serious gun control. Aren't there something like 300 million guns in America?

I'm completely done when it comes to arguing about gun control. But I'm curious Krom, what are some of the benefits of an armed society? We have just as much crime (if not more) than the rest of the world, so what have guns brought to our lives?
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 7:33 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Having visited a couple other countries myself, I can tell you that the idea that the US has a high crime rate compared to most countries is complete bullshit. Rather; the high reported crime rate in America is a result of the incredibly large, well equipped, organized and powerful police force and justice system. America doesn't even rate particularly high in violent crime compared to a lot of other countries officially.

What America does have is the highest official punishment rate of the world, but doesn't really stand out on actual crime rates (which have been declining for decades).

nationmaster.com wrote:
Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.


As for the benefits... Why is it that crazed gunmen don't attack police department or other law enforcement center and instead target school campuses or other public spaces? If you argue on the shock value, a police department falling victim to such a heinous crime would be much more shocking and disturbing than a school or other public places. It would impact peoples confidence that the police would be able to help and protect them when needed and it would also destroy the polices own confidence and ability to trust the public. The reason they don't target law enforcement is because even a crazed suicidal gunman won't willingly march into death.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:08 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Did Arnold Schwartzenegger kill like 17 cops in 1984 or something?

oh...and you really didn't give a benefit. just more or less where the target rich environments are.
Skyalmian
Hotshot




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:59 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bunyip, these (the posters scattered about within) are quite awesome too. And they're next to impossible to argue with. They make great desktops as well, the ones sized for it, anyway. Twisted Evil
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:41 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Skyalmian: I ran across some posters from the same group on Stumbleupon and while I didn't share them here, I thoroughly enjoyed them Smile Thanks for that link.

Zuruck wrote:
what are some of the benefits of an armed society?


The strong cannot tyrannize the weak. It turns out using a gun to defend yourself is safer than not resisting. Apparently robbers, rapists, hooligans and so forth are also much likely to attack the defenseless.

Self defense is an inherent corollary to those "inalienable rights" which you might have heard about somewhere, sometime. Or not.

An armed society places an inherent limit on the powers of government.

Something like 200 million people have been murdered by t heir own governments in this century alone. The usual first step is disarmament of the public.

In my opinion, those are the TRUE benefits of an armed society, and I think just about every other benefit is derivative. I may be wrong - there may be other primary benefits that I'm missing - some might argue the following, for example:

An armed society is a polite society.

I mean, if you like politeness, this is a benefit, no? Personally I think this bit is silly - but I threw it in here for a bit of comic relief.

------------------------------

That being said, I am not against sensible, common sense, realistic gun-control measures which are put into place on their own merits, rather than as a wedge to open the door to further, more sweeping gun control laws. Banning armor piercing bullets is an example of GOOD gun control, for example. Another is the strict regulation of fully automatic weapons. The problem, of course, is that nobody trusts the gun control lobby to stop at realistic, common sense - with good reason. They've repeatedly stated their intention to use each victory they achieve as a stepping stone to a total lockdown.

There are alternatives, however. For example, I've often thought that there are benefits to a Heinlein-esque society where citizenship must be earned through service - with the right to keep and bear arms as well as the franchise included as a benefit or privilege of such citizenship.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:06 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bunyip wrote:
There are alternatives, however. For example, I've often thought that there are benefits to a Heinlein-esque society where citizenship must be earned through service - with the right to keep and bear arms as well as the franchise included as a benefit or privilege of such citizenship.

Hrm. "Starship Troopers" by Paul Verhoeven.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:37 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Anything that sets up a ruling class is ultimately doomed to failure.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 1:45 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Don't get me started... "Starship Troopers" is one of my favorite books of all time - despite a certain Utopian tone and rigidity of thought. Verhoeven didn't even bother to read most of the book despite making the so-called film adaptation. The Starship Troopers title and plot was pretty much cynically tacked onto an existing concept...which was a rip off of the Alien franchise... The political philosophy as outlined in the movie was at best a caricature, if not an outright satire of the more sensible ideas espoused in the book.

It was a clever movie however, despite being in many ways completely opposite of what was written by RAH. I confess to enjoying it (for what it was) despite my disappointment. Would you like to know more?

Anything that sets up a closed ruling class is indeed doomed to failure. The jury is still out on whether a system with an optional franchise (which must be EARNED) would also fail - or perhaps promote a little more respect for the system itself?

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Neo
[deleted]




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 3:09 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

@z

lol... who argues about gun control? The solution is obvious. I wrote an essay against gun control when I was in high school. ^_~

Krom wrote:
Anything that sets up a ruling class is ultimately doomed to failure.


Apparently Krom has been eating his Wheaties. 9_6

Assault Weapons: Behind the Propaganda
Spidey
Hotshot




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 5:25 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bunyip wrote:
An armed society is a polite society.


We have a very rude society…so I’m pretty sure that one is false.

_________________
Better to be pissed off, than to be pissed on.
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 6:27 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Thanks for your answers Bun. Krom clearly had no desire to actually say what he thought the benefits are.

I actually laughed at your comment about the strong not tyrannizing the weak. Not so much by guns these days, but by economics. I understand what you're saying about defending yourself, but what did you think about that Texas man that shot the guys robbing his neighbors house? He wasn't saving his neighbors from death, and I think we can all certainly agree that the punishment for burglary is not death in most states (It probably is in Texas). Do you think the man had the legal right to shoot the burglars?

I don't know about the the powers of the government being limited. It seems like today you can be arrested for anything or for whatever reason the cop makes up. If it comes down to an individual versus the government, I really don't think the individual is going to win, ever.
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 7:39 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bad guys don't go shooting up police stations because they aren't like the terminator: they will die when they catch the inevitable and swift return fire. Sure it isn't much of a benefit, but a crazed gunman will think twice about storming some place that is likely to shoot back. My thinking is along the same lines as Bun mostly.

As for the burglars, they took the risk when they broke in even if they hadn't thought it through. Just because nobody is home doesn't mean the neighbors are going to sit by and let them ransack the place, because next time it could be their house. Absolutely the man has a legal right to protect his neighborhood from burglars.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:33 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

I guess my question was more to the extent. You aren't put to death for committing burglary, but you've just said that it was ok for him to do that. Good lord, I'll think twice about stealing a pack of gum with you next to me, I might get my throat cut or something. Yikes
Ferno
BDSM Fanatic




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:51 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Zuruck wrote:
I guess my question was more to the extent. You aren't put to death for committing burglary, but you've just said that it was ok for him to do that. Good lord, I'll think twice about stealing a pack of gum with you next to me, I might get my throat cut or something. Yikes


Zur: do you know the difference between petty theft and burglary?
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Mon Dec 06, 2010 8:58 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Yes I do. In Krom's world, you can be put to death for burglary. Petty theft is punishable by a mere slash wound.
Hattrick
Hog Whisperer




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:02 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

If someone breaks into our house, I am not going to take the time to ask if they are just going to take a few items or are they there to hurt my family. They will be met with the business end of my 20 gauge shotgun.
What happens next is entirely up to them. If the comply and lay down, I call the police and they are arrested for B&E and attempted burglary. If the run off, I call the police and decribe them fully. If they advance on me or start to pull some sort of weapon, then they cease to exist. I will have no problem shooting someone who poses a threat to my family.

I will tell you this though. The smallest, cheapest of my possesions is worth more to me than the life of some piece of shit criminal. Does that mean I will shoot him for that possesion? No, but the above scenario will be put into action and his actions will dictate how that scenario ends.

_________________
I was born ok the first time!
wisdom comes with age. Sometimes age comes alone.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 12:47 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Wow I wrote out a big long post and apparently didn't submit it...

Zuruck:

Re: economics & etc - If you're scared of the right wing capitalists, you should be absolutely TERRIFIED of the transnational progressives.

Re: Texas Neighbor - It would depend on the situation but if there was no imminent threat of bodily harm to someone there is no excuse. I disagree with Krom. If it was only property, that's what homeowner's insurance is for. While those scumbags probably deserved an ass whipping, the facts of the case as I know them indicate that the shooter got away with murder. (While emotionally I agree - they got what was coming to them...)

Re: Government powers - Individuals can make a difference, but if you think about it that's not really what I was referring to. Nobody wants a Civil War. Just as a thought exercise - which is a more likely scenario: Once a weapons ban is in place the government will A) be responsible and considerate of individual rights and liberties or B) do whatever it wants with no fear of being taken to task?

I'm sure you voted for "responsible and considerate", probably due to the excellent worldwide record of governments respecting the rights and liberties of their citizens - over 200 million slain by their own governments in this century alone!

Hattrick: BRAVO - My sentiments exactly. Anyone who invades my house while I occupy it has declared themselves willfully indifferent to my continued survival and well-being. Imagine my indifference to THEIRS....

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 3:31 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

That's fine and dandy Hattrick except the burglars in question were in an empty house. I get what you're saying about defending yourself, that's not the issue here. The issue for me is people, like the guy in Texas, that took the law into his own hands because he felt like it.

I know these debates are fruitless because there is no way to feasibly get guns out of society. But it's the mentality that I'm seeing here that bothers me, you guys seem to think that for any crime killing the perpetrator is an acceptable option. You have the right to defend yourself by any means necessary, I agree with that. But I don't believe you have the right to defend your bicycle by any means necessary.

From what I can tell, you guys are all adults. But the lack of moral equivalence that you all seem to share is just downright scary and disgusting. Stealing a necklace from an empty house and murdering someone are completely different, that's why the punishments are also incredibly different. Leaving the general public to decide the fate of someone is way too dangerous.
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 4:05 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

The two burglars in that incident were convicted criminals in their country of origin, illegal immigrants in Texas, and members of an organized burglary ring. They were definitely dangerous. And it isn't like this guy set up shop in his upstairs window and spent 10 minutes spying them through a scope on a rifle before precisely blowing their brains out. He saw them leaving, panicked, ran out his front door and shot them with a shotgun while they were running through his yard. It is debatable if they would have successfully escaped the police or not, but there is no question at all that they would have gone on to burglarize again.

Would I do the same thing in his position? I really don't know, in panic situations in the past I became a robot; I performed whatever action my instincts told me to do without hesitation or even thought. If I was witnessing a burglary and it produced that same state of mind, I could do just about anything.

In a more practical state of mind I probably would not because I live two blocks from the police department. It would take a miracle for two burglars to escape this neighborhood with their haul and if they could pull it off then they deserve it.

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 5:30 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Zuruck wrote:
From what I can tell, you guys are all adults. But the lack of moral equivalence that you all seem to share is just downright scary and disgusting. Stealing a necklace from an empty house and murdering someone are completely different, that's why the punishments are also incredibly different. Leaving the general public to decide the fate of someone is way too dangerous.


Zuruck: Umm... If you're including me (or Hattrick) in "you guys" you either did not read what we had to say, or misunderstood it... However, if your issue is with the contention that an invader in our homes who moves toward us or goes for a weapon after being ordered to halt will be shot - you're the crazy one.

Krom: - In that particular case, I believe the perps were shot in the back - and only entered the shooter's yard when called over by him. It was a big controversy as I recall.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:36 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Bunyip wrote:
(While emotionally I agree - they got what was coming to them...)


Zuruck wrote:
You have the right to defend yourself by any means necessary, I agree with that


Do you even realize what you post or what dude? I think that's the second or third time I've said that defending yourself or your family is not the issue. No one in their right mind would be against that. I'm against the vigilante justice that so many people, including here on this board, believe to be just fine. Just because the cops may not catch the criminals doesn't mean they deserve to be killed.

In my opinion, the man in Texas should have been arrested for murder. He was not being victimized. He was on the phone with 911, was being told to stay in the house, but instead he went outside and shot them in the back as they were trying to get away. Neither of the two burglars were armed. But instead, people felt like what the man did was ok and he didn't even face a single charge.

So, in the spirit of what brought us to this point, do you guys think that the possessing of a gun by this old man was a benefit to society?
Grendel
Ninja Admin




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:15 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Zuruck wrote:
So, in the spirit of what brought us to this point, do you guys think that the possessing of a gun by this old man was a benefit to society?

Saved the taxpayers a shitload of money and made the world a safer place.

_________________
Borders? I have never seen one. But I have heard they exist in the minds of some people. -- Thor Heyerdahl
Durch einen Stich bereits geschafft, erschlafft und ohne Saft und Kraft! -- Donald, examining a Deflator Dextrospirillus
Krom
DBB Admin




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:59 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

I'm not sure about where you live Zuruck or what you think of your neighbors, but where I live if you asked most people they would probably agree with the idea "My neighborhood is an extension of my home.".

_________________
(19:11) [D3k]Gooberman: pffft, I didnt get owned baal, you just got 60 lucky fusion shots
Ferno
BDSM Fanatic




PostPosted: Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:44 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Zuruck:

let me put it to you this way. Until you're actually involved in these kinds of situations, you won't ever truly understand.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 7:59 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Grendel wrote:
Saved the taxpayers a shitload of money and made the world a safer place.


Don't know about the saving the taxpayer's money - there was a grand jury convened for one thing...but he certainly made the world a safer place...Anyone who is willing to enter a home for dishonest purposes has shown that they are willing to use force on any occupants and are therefore a threat to society. In my opinion, if he was bound and determined to shoot them, he probably should have just shot them in the legs though.

Zuruck wrote:
Bunyip wrote:
(While emotionally I agree - they got what was coming to them...)


Zuruck wrote:
You have the right to defend yourself by any means necessary, I agree with that


Do you even realize what you post or what dude?


2 quick points:

A: If you play in traffic, sooner or you're gonna get run over. Every time they burglarized a house they were rolling the dice. They came up craps that last time. Live by the sword, die by the sword and all that.

B: Experiencing an emotional satisfaction at the burglar's downfall is a far cry from condoning the actions taken. We all know that the limbic system operates on a far more...savage and primeval level than our upper-level consciousness.

The fact of the matter is that the implication that someone lacks morals (or moral equivalence whatever that may mean) is insulting. I'm sure you get mad when someone cuts you off in traffic. If they were to then get in a wreck immediately afterward I'm sure you'd feel a certain savage satisfaction, while of course recognizing that the consequence (however fitting), far outweighed the offense. You might even stop to attempt to render aid. Are you thereby immoral for feeling that flash of satisfaction?

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Hattrick
Hog Whisperer




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:09 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

Ferno wrote:
Zuruck:

let me put it to you this way. Until you're actually involved in these kinds of situations, you won't ever truly understand.


Dead on.

I was fortunate in the situation I was involved with that the criminal that we Apprehended was unarmed and unwilling to push his luck. He immediately threw his arms up and we led him back up to the neighbors house to wait for the police. Hi accomplice had hidden in the neighbors attic and did not come down until the K9 officer threatened to send his dog up after him.

The adreniline, that was rushing through me made the whole incident intense and surrealistic. I literally broke out into shakes everytime I thought about it for the next week or so.
I do not ever want to be put into the situation where I actually have to shoot someone, but I guess that will be the criminals call not mine.

_________________
I was born ok the first time!
wisdom comes with age. Sometimes age comes alone.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:12 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

when you say "abducted" do you mean "apprehended" or did you actually get charged with kidnapping?

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Hattrick
Hog Whisperer




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:13 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

oops, ya apprehended. Changed that. Thanks Bun

_________________
I was born ok the first time!
wisdom comes with age. Sometimes age comes alone.
Bunyip
DBB Staff




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:50 am View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

lol it was much more interesting the other way.

_________________
BELIEVE NOTHING, no matter where you read it, or who has said it,
not even if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason
and your own common sense. - GAUTAMA BUDDHA
Zuruck
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 12:46 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

I guess that's the difference between me and you Bun. Other people's suffering doesn't make me the slightest bit happy or smug.

Can't say I'm exactly surprised by all the keyboard Clint Eastwood's here, but no where in any of these posts did it show where a gun benefited society. The old man didnt save taxpayer money or make the world a safer place. But of course, I should remember that he is from Texas and people are just fucking nuts down there.
Neo
[deleted]




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 12:56 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

@z

Since when is this a debate? You should apply the same "moral compass" to random people on the internet, but turn up the voltage. ^_~

Looks like Hattrick and Bunyip have the right idea, but not the right reason. Hat, you got half of it backwards. The criminal is worth much more than some cheap trinket... it makes it easier to do the right thing when you consider this.

@fern

Unless you understand the point Zuruck is trying to make, you can't say that he doesn't understand something.
d3jake
Ace




PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 4:33 pm View user's profile Reply with quote Send private message

I'm forced to agree with part of what Zuruck is saying:
For burgulary of someone else's house, killing someone is a bit... steep of a punishment. In my opinion a swift clubbing to subdue the fellow until police arrive would be in order, but not a killing.

I will answer the question of how arming folks is a benefit for a society.
I'll add in a qualifer of assuming folks are properly raised\educated about firearms and not just throwing them by the buckets into crowds.

Let's set up a hypothetical situation: We have a robber standing along some street. This person has robbed folks previously, and is looking for the "next score". A person walks past; mid twenties, light build, and has a rather expensive brand of jacket on. Let's say that the chance that this person has pepper-spray\a knife\a gun is low. What are the odds that the robber will decide to victimize this individual? Rather high, I would say.

Let's run this situation again, but instead let's say that the odds of this person carrying a firearm are high. Wouldn't the robber be more hesitant to attempt to victimize the individual?

The extreme example is the fellow in Texas. If there was a chance that while robbing a house that you knew was empty, you were going to get blown away, wouldn't you rethink the decision to break into the house?

The police station example: Why don't gunmen (unless there's some serious chemical embalance going on) charge into a police station? Well, the odds of someone who is armed is considerably higher within the building.

In all examples, it's about deterrance. The Texas case is an extreme example of this, and perhaps over-the-top. If the odds that you're going to get shot increase while commiting a given illegal act, shouldn't it have a smaller appeal?

Sadly, then we have to worry about abuse, and the fact that if you fatally kill someone when acting with ill intent, and are caught\tried\sent to prison, it's still after the fact...

_________________
"You don't need a deity floating among high with a huge fucking bat to understand the difference between right and wrong." -MD-2389
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Jump to:  
   Descent BB Forum Index > Ethics and Commentary > Anti Gun Nuts, take note

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Image hosting by postimage.org Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group