"Gun town U.S.A." Not a murder in 25 years!!!

to be fully honest, there's really no way to answer your questions fully because you simply are incapable of stepping out of your own mindset and understanding why debating this issue is as a socio/political one instead of a product for sale being abused by some owners is next to impossible for the people you're debating. you make the assumptions, we can't figure out why the assumptions are there or why you can't shake loose of them, then everyone gets all uppity and mad and nothing is ever really discussed. it's pretty useless, really.

gun ownership over here.........social breakdowns over here. two entirely difference topics.

 

de-ja-vu

 

well, hell, it's such a bummer. it's like we're talking two entirely different languages. and the ones who get the most vehement about the topic are the ones that come out to argue. it's an issue i felt comfortable speaking on because i am a gun owner and i have some experience with it and what the mindset of a gun owner in america is.

as for topics such as urban renewal, job creation, health care, creating hope and a sense that a person can change their life for the better, all i have is "get the hell outta there." because that's what i did. i did it broke, i did it alone. i jumped outta the safety net. i don't understand economics, social programs, poitics, etc. i can't really wrap my head around it. i don't feel comfortable talking on those points. to me, they're utterly seperated from gun ownership. rather like expecting me to know how to treat or cure diabetes by addressing a diabetics unhealing wounds. putting a bandaid on it isn't really gonna help, right?

 

Because those events can happen, and it doesn't need to be a psycho, most killers, robbers, ect are completley normal, logical and sane people. But you can very well use a multitude of other weapons for that, a gun is just the most obvious choice. You can also use a gun as both a tool for hunting and as an instrument of sport. Almost 1/3 of the people in this country own guns, and most of these people actually use them too, but 1/3 of homes in our country aren't being broken into every year. You fail to appreciate that most people with a gun don't have guns for the "god damn government" or wanting to shoot people that come near us, but out of hunting or sport. Shootings guns just for the act of shooting them actually is quite fun

But you fail to appreciate the degreee in which individualism has shaped American society and culture back from the 1700's, and this inculdes the ultimate right to defend both yourself and your house with what includes lethal force if need be. Hence why guns are always a political issue.

 

i suppose we'd need to get a better grasp on balbus' mindset about guns in order to talk to read his posts and "questions" more appropriately. but i think is is truly an apples and oranges argument. though we both speak english, we don't think english, you know? his questions regarding the usage of fear to sell guns overemphasizes the NEED for fear to sell guns. we're not afraid of guns or we wouldn't buy them in the first place. i lived most of my life without ever seeing a gun. no one i knew kept one in the house, ever. and that's in military households. they just weren't thought of much. it's very much the same now, except i hunt and like to shoot a gun. we've got loads of painball guns and a couple of bows that we keep from the children as much as we keep the knives from them...which is to say, where they just plain can't hurt themselves with them. it's just not that big of a deal.

 

Indeed, I was never around guns either, I lived in a pretty shitty area until I was 6, but then I've spent the rest of my life in a very quiet, nice, basically crime free suburb and I still love guns for the sport as well as guns themselves for collecting. On Balbus's side though, living in Britain, it's mind boggling to think of a place where most of the police normally don't even have guns on them. Like that just wouldn't work here.

 

yeah, i imagine it's extremely frustrating trying to penetrate the minds of assorted groups of people so far away and effected by such a different history. and the only reason it wouldn't work here is because it is simply far to late for that. not that it might not be better, just that we've sped right over that bridge and blew it up and danced around the bonfire of it's remains.

 

Actually you are the only one doing name calling and avoiding the questions, anyone who has done any actual debating knows name calling is a logical fallacy and is one of the first refuges of those with failing arguments.

As for avoiding questions; You asked this question:

In which you make the parenthetical statement: “which in the US has historically and culturally been born out of fear of others” which I have pointed out repeatedly, there is no basis for and thus is meaningless. Thus it should have left it out of the question.

Second, I know what I think is a “healthy society” is but it is your statement not mine and so to have a meaningful discussion YOU need to define it so we know what YOU mean by it. (debating 101 – define your terms)

So please answer the question by tell us what you mean by a “healthy society”.

Also please stop with the name calling, it’s just a waste of time both yours and mine.

 

to truly penetrate someone elses mind,one must first open theirs.

and that seems to be the root of the problem here..

 

Why should I read your posts when you don't seem to read them yourself?

Here I've high-lighted some words you might like to reread:

All these words make this statement highly subjective and basically meaningless.

Seems? To who? Doesn't seem that way to me!

Many? How many? 5, 10, 100, 1,000, 10,000 or millions and who did the counting and how was it done?

You see you keeping throwing out statements like this and think that they prove your points but the only thing that they prove is; this is what you believe and I think most of us already know what you believe!

Last, I've offered to discuss the possible causes with you but you, the anti-gun person, refuse. Which refutes the above statement and in fact makes it seem like it's the anti-gun people that want to ignore the possible causes and not the pro-gun people.

 

You seem to have a very limited concept of what’s political.

If guns are taken away from the people in the USA for the “political” reasons you put forth, that also means that at the same time, for “political” reasons, people who have guns for any other reason hunting, collecting, etc. will also have their guns taken away. So that makes hunting, collecting, etc. valid political reasons for discussing gun ownership.

 

What can I say?

Do you really believe that how many times a person has posted in the politics forum validates or invalidates what he has to say?

To be honest if what you’ve posted in this thread is any sample of what is generally posted in the political forum, I’d have to say not posting here more often could be taken as high praise indeed.

 

Now for taking things out of context this is what HHB said:

This is what you said he said:

I’ve high-lighted the words you quoted from HHB’s post. Except for you, almost any one reading the two posts can easily see that you have taken HHB’s words out of context and have badly misquoted him and twisted his words to try and prove your point. So….

Yes, I do know. No, I’m not just being clever.

Trying to be clever, I leave that to you.

Perhaps, it’s time you stopped wasting everybody else’s time?

 

Fear of criminals?
Yeah.
Fear of invasion?
Maybe.
The others? Pffftt!
Fear of "opposing political views"? Pull-EASE!!!
Fear of other "social classes"?
.........When you're poor, or want to save money on housing, you live all over the place, with all sorts of people. Amazingly enough, we don't "arm ourselves to the teeth" in anticipation of getting into an argument with our neighbors over Beer & B-B-Q in our backyards. We don't carry concealed weapons just in case someone at the office disagrees with our "opposing political views."

Cripes!

Actually, YOU evaded HIS question.

The OPer posted about a town that required each and every citizen to be ARMED, and has had NO murders since then.

That's a Fact, Jack.

Not only that, but where they started out with a population of 5,232, they have grown, significantly, to a popultion of 28,189.

Oh, and their "other" crime rates? Have also dropped.

Now.

OWB and i would like to see you produce anything showing that completely banning guns has made at least that much difference in the murder rates, the overall crime stats, AND Population Growth, for ANY PLACE on God's green earth.

Otherwise, you ARE just talking about some utopian society that you somehow imagine exists somewhere here on the planet.

Huh? He tries to ask for something to compare what he's already read (and knows to be a fact), with ~ the other side of the coin. i mean, weren't you the one harping on providing some facts?

Okay, yet AGAIN,

PLEASE provide something we can compare to the OP.

Man, i hope that's clear enough...)

Where do you get off saying ANY of that???

Gun Control is in the hands of our government, right now. In fact, if i'm not mistaken, it either IS, or will soon BE, coming up for vote.

This vote DIRECTLY affects our Bill of Rights, which is Political in nature, and could have the effect of making the government braver, to the point that they just might start monkeying around with our Constitution. (Honestly, to say that GC isn't Political...)

And then to accuse him of advertising and/or trying to SELL guns, because of his views on them?!?

SHAME ON YOU! THAT, pal, was a low blow.

And we keep telling you that we see some of the societal problems as a PRODUCT of GC. Not to speak of the fact that all a discussion of that type would do is get all tangled up with other "societal problems," that need to be addressed, also.

But not in a thread about Gun Control, for crying out loud.

{This is why i say you and Ari get into threads and "wrap them around the axle." When you keep asking the same question, sometimes with a little different wording, it's annoying. It's like you're giving us a test, and there's only ONE "right" answer.}

Hey, if you want to discuss one particular aspect of it, in depth,

might i suggest starting your own thread?

And if you'd do us the courtesy of reading our posts,

you wouldn't keep asking the same questions, that folks have been answering, all through this thread.

Welcome to our world, pal.

All of THAT was discussed in another thread.

Okay, so does this mean you're down with the conspiracy theory that the ultra-rich control the government?

And i've got to tell you...

YOU seem to have fallen for your own imaginary world,

where everyone only discusses what you'd like for them to, AND they have COMPLETE TRUST in whatever you say, without questioning YOUR sources, nor asking YOU for citations.

*********
Good Grief. Balbus, i presume that you know that some of us are starting our own Personal Forums, and it's to get away from just such trolling.

i have nothing against you ~ other than your constant derailment of threads over things that folks try to explain to you, but that i guess you just don't "get."

We're truly trying to share ourselves with you ~ as people, and as Americans,

and you're trying to get us to, what? Say certain things? i, for one, can't have to wEnder about it,

and considering the amount of time just posting this has taken me,

i also don't have the time.


Anyway, that is why i would rather that y'all not post in my forum, please.

Y'all can have yours, and anyone that wants can have HippieHillbilly's and mine.

In case y'all don't get it ~ THAT'S FLIPPIN' AMAZING!!!

EVERYONE has a gun, knows to use it, and that little town, on the north side of Atlanta,

HASN'T HAD A MURDER IN 25 YEARS??? :EEK:

i think they must be doing something right.

 

I'm curious.

Are there any statistics that actually demonstrate and reflect an increase in safety of persons by owning a gun?

I have yet to come across a decent statistic source that convinces me that guns are in fact 'safer', to support the less restrictions on gun control laws argument.

Guns are safe and cool. Children should have guns, and so should every impressionable person - especially automatic guns, for those are even cooler.

Every person deserves the infallible right to have as many guns as they want. That is how a society remains safe and betters itself.

The government knows nothing about guns or how safe it is to carry them when you go grocery shopping. The government is trying to take away my freedom if I don't have a gun to use. Fire arms are best left in the hands of individuals who are free and who can defend themselves from evil. People deserve all the freedoms a gun can bring.

 

We live and die as one, but power comes from the barrel of a gun.

 

I fail to see how a homeowner's handgun in a home invader situation can grant anybody any guaranteed sense of security. Especially if that other person is determined or has an equivalent weapon.

There are other weapons that are not lethal out there and security measures that are used to deter home invaders, rapists, car jackers or muggers that do not result in a kill.

I mean, if we were all walking around with handguns, are we any more safe than if we weren't?

Thing is, I can't even see how a gun would be used for anything but a kill. (Is there any other facultative reason for the existence of a gun?)

If we as a society wish to kill people, good or bad, as a collective and normative response to conflict we might as well all have guns and promise never to use them. I'd like to see just how well that theory of peace pans out.

What is that saying... "If safety is assured by owning a gun, the United States would be the safest place on earth..."

Hahaha. Yeah right.

 

If a person was truly concerned about a robbery in the middle of the night, they would have a security system that would trigger unwanted entry, or a button to quickly call emergency services in a situation like that.

I mean, if you were to do all that, have the police arriving while an intruder is still in your home, then I could see the reason for reaching for a gun to use on an intruder.

But you know, most people by-pass all safety and security measures and precautions simply because they can easily get a gun in the United States. And that's what they use to secure their home.

It's a shameful way of truly defending a person's property, life, and home with a gun under the pillow. It's pretty stupid, in fact to do that alone.

And I do not think that most people who own guns are evil, or use them with "ill intents", no.

I fundamentally disagree that there is any purpose to subjugate breaches of security (of self, property, etc) by possessing, owning and relying on a gun to control and execute a solution in a situation of conflict.

Gun owners present guns as the be-all-end-all upper-hand solution to a sudden and/or serious situation of conflict, and it's that attitude that I do have a HUGE problem with

 

the choice of M savage as a name makes me giggle.

and, the choice of a gun in many cases is because guns are MUCH cheaper than a decent security system

also people selling security systems are SUPER predatory with their profit margins, etc.

 

Alarm systems are proven to be one the most effective methods of deterring and intruder.