{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
작성자: C-Sentinel
7/14/2016 3:31:37 PM
57
"The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"
I think Dallas has proved this all but true.
As a native Texan, yeah, I like my guns. It's not unnatural to see someone walking around with a weapon considering this is an open carry state.
Yeah, it's great to own a weapon for self-defense, but a weapon you purchased for self-defense isn't going to stop a mass shooting from breaking out.
At Dallas, the the victims were officers. Every person who was targeted had a gun. Did that stop the shooter? No. It didn't.
Hell, this isn't even about "the good guys" having guns. In a public situation nobody knows [b]who the good guys are[/b].
If gun fire breaks out in a crowd of people, and 10 people draw their weapon, not only could the "good guys" target each other, it also makes the police officers (the [b]official[/b] good guys) jobs harder. They don't know who is just exercising the 2nd amendment and who is commiting a massacre.
The Dallas Police Chief said it himself; its hard to do their jobs when 30 people in the crowd have AR-15s slung over their shoulders.
The point of this post isn't to push gun control, but America has a gun violence problem that needs to be fixed, and Dallas proved that "more guns" isn't the answer.
[spoiler]Please keep any discussion civilized[/spoiler]
English
#Offtopic
-
Dallas didn't prove that. It proved that a shooter in a defensible position can do a lot of damage. To even try that you'd have to be mentally unstable and/or suicidal. The good guys with guns doesn't come into play here as they were already there in the form of law enforcement. There is little to no reason for a civilian to take on the shooter unless they were cornered by him. There's a big difference between this incident and one taking place we're law enforcement isn't present.
-
Not a gun violence problem. It's a culture problem. It's a media problem. It's a people problem. Wasn't too long ago everybody had guns hanging in their trucks and a gun cabinet not a gun safe. What's changed? Not the guns.
-
1 답변[quote]In a public situation nobody knows [b]who the good guys are[/b].[/quote] Wouldn't it be great if all the "good guys" had some form of identification to help the general public know that they are there to protect the innocent? Like, I dunno, a [i]uniform[/i] or a [i]badge[/i]?
-
1 답변lol clearly you don't know the power of the most elegant and strong weapon man's ever created, the Japanese Katana. That's 1000 layers of folded steel forged by only the grandest masters of smithing. Fast, silent and deadly, unbreakable like the will of its holder. A simple, loud, clumsy gun is no match for such a graceful artifact. If any brute tried to point a gun at me, he'd be swiftly cut down. I'd close the distance as he fumbled with the trigger, dodging his every simpleton shot, and then as I came into range his eyes would register true fear for one sweet moment as he seems my hand flash to my katana and sweep the blade out in one lightning motion, eviscerating him. Nothing personal, kid. Pic related, me and my beautiful wifekatana, Dya-Moko.
-
1 답변
-
작성자: Trestero 7/15/2016 10:24:20 PMI think guns are a good demonstration of just how -blam!-ed we are. The vast majority of war weaponry in the modern day is powerful to the point that you can't effectively fight it without having your own, and in the rush to protect one's self from that danger everybody ends up being a potential threat to each other. That's not good. If one country with nukes enters a major war against another government, we're essentially -blam!-ed all over the world.
-
7 답변Noone said anythings garenteed but many mass shooters have been stopped by ccw carrriers.thays just a fact [spoiler]You lose again anti gun asshole[/spoiler]
-
11 답변
-
1 답변
-
Hasty generalization fallacy. You have a military trained guy with a rifle taking shots at police (and as far as people at the time know, them too) from an unknown, elevated position. This would not be dissimilar from dealing with a sniper. The only play is to run for cover if you cant even tell where its coming from. This one incident is not an "aha!" For one side or the other. Plenty of mass shootings and violent crimes have been stopped or mitigated by armed intervention by civilians, off duty cops, or on duty cops with guns.
-
1 답변
-
1 답변
-
1 답변They didn't even kill the guy with a gun they killed him with a bomb inside a college.
-
8 답변Ok, neo-fascist "The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently." - Friedrich Nietzsche. "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials" - George Mason [quote]"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." [/quote] - Thomas Jefferson https://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/laws-forbid-carrying-armsquotation [quote]"The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press. [/quote] - Thomas Jefferson http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/thomas-jefferson/letters-of-thomas-jefferson/jefl278.php [quote]"The Constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87)[/quote] https://www.crimesolutions.gov/ProgramDetails.aspx?ID=413 Effective violence reduction without a removal of rights and the advocacy of fascism The US had a 11.5m total arrests last year out of a population of 340m, both violent and nonviolent. That's a general crime rate, both violent and not, of 3,38% 3,382 per 100k (per capita) The UK had a violent crime rate of 10.625, after a 23% rise 10,560 per 100k (per capita) for just violent crime http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/2015-07-16 In short: the US has less crimes in proportion to its population than the UK has for just violent crime http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/ Concealed carry states have less violence, as should be common knowledge http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18319/priorities-for-research-to-reduce-the-threat-of-firearm-related-violence On page 26, you will see that firearms, as reported by the CDC, are used defensively 500k to 3m times a year, varying based on whether or not you count non-discharge but just brandishing as a defensive use http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent http://crimeresearch.org/2013/12/murder-and-homicide-rates-before-and-after-gun-bans/ Gun bans did shit to violence in Europe. The rates were already going down faster than a hooker for $20k and the bans did nothing to speed that up. For those who believe we will never use guns against a corrupt government: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946) Southern white men came to the aid of blacks against a corrupt police department in California. For those who believe that the 2nd was only meant for muskets: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belton_flintlock We had machineguns back in the day of the Fathers. Albeit primitive but machine guns nonetheless
-
5 답변
-
13 답변"The only way to stop a criminal from obtaining a gun is by banning guns." See how stupid that sounds?
