Do you feel safer with a gun, or without?

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i feel scared when i see a gunt

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

Lol...

But what if I said you could use these condoms that really increased your risk of STDs...but also slightly increased your chance of a 3some with 2 super models. Would you do it?

The rate of STD's is alarming. Does that mean I should not have a dick? Of course not. I just use my dick responsibly.
End of debate.

 

[mattf 5,000+ posts]

Lol...
But what if I said you could use these condoms that really increased your risk of STDs...but also slightly increased your chance of a 3some with 2 super models. Would you do it?

What do you think about the car thing? Are you going to stop driving?

 

[dvrmstrng 5,000+ posts]

We dont need to train them. Video games already do it. Give a rifle to any counter strike player and he'll put a few rounds through the head of a silhoutte, lol

never shot a gun in my life before....until the other weekend...

played a good amount of video games since i was born (20 now)

and on my first shot of my life i was centimeters from a bullseye....so yeah i can attest to that

 

[WhoSayWho? 5,000+ posts]

Lol...
But what if I said you could use these condoms that really increased your risk of STDs...but also slightly increased your chance of a 3some with 2 super models. Would you do it?

I will have to tell you later. My wife is in the room.

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

Fixed it for you...

Blah..blah..blah... I don't listen to anyone, believe in anyone, or challenge my opinions...blah, blah, blah.

So how do you form your opinions...gut feeling? That seems like a better idea.

As I said..no anti-gun conspiracy. These are the simple numbers as reported by the police, and tallied by the CDC (I believe) over the past few years.

Of course the specific risk was only valid at the time of final collection of data, and changes. But this is over several years. So a good sample size, and length of time.

Would you rather believe the guy that looked at a building and said he FELT it was 100 ft tall, or the guy who measured it?

I agree man..don't be gullible. Look over the studies...and FIND SOMETHING ACTUALLY WRONG WITH THEM. The tell me that...not just because you don't like what they say.

As to the studies...they go through the most stingent possible review process. There is no other system like it. It is not a published article in a magazine. As scientists...you have to submit an article. It goes RANDOMLY to other scientists in the field, and annoymously. Those people could be anti- or pro- gun. There would be no way to bias that. They review the article for inconsistencies, errors, bias, etc. This is NOT people's opinions. This is just raw statistically history of WHAT has ACTUALLY happened. You can go review the history yourself, you can look at the raw numbers yourself as reported from multiple sources.

These scientists are paid yes by federal funded grants...and yes you need to publish...but it would not matter if they published GUNS are great or bad. Still published, still funded. The funding, again is a huge collection of multiple scientists with a full range of views on things like guns.

Now...if you just want to believe what you believe...again..put the blinders back on. If you want to actually READ the study you say is junk...then tell me why it is junk...by all means.

Otherwise there is NO point with you, you have no interest in a rational debate, your head is too far burried in the sand.

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

No it is a good point man. The point though is of course there are risks in life, but wouldn't you reduce them if you can?

But the analogy would be you drive a car that protects you from say car jacking (which happens 1 out of 100 times you drive your car) but it spontaneously blows up 43 out of 100 times you drive it. Would that risk trade off be worth it to you?

What do you think about the car thing? Are you going to stop driving?

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

LMAO....so true. All I know is if I did do it... I would have to carry a gun to protect me from my wife. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

I will have to tell you later. My wife is in the room.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

I'm more scared of going outside.. its cold and windy as a mf.

 

[blackgeltabs 5,000+ posts]

I love guns especially my AR-10

 

[WhoSayWho? 5,000+ posts]

True story. this morning I was behind an old beat up van that had a part of a tree for a bumper. It also had four American flag stickers AND three Confederate flag stickers (mixed signals here, but 4 to 3 says he is glad to be part of the Union). He also had many USMC stickers.

And my favorite, he had a sign in the window that announced:

Private Property

No Tresspassing

I guess he though people thought people would confuse his van as being an official gov't vehicle, I don't know.

So, what is my point? I don't know exactly how much greater this guy's chances are of suffering a self inflicted gun wound are as opposed to my own. But I think they are greater than 43 - 1.

 

[mattf 5,000+ posts]

No it is a good point man. The point though is of course there are risks in life, but wouldn't you reduce them if you can?
But the analogy would be you drive a car that protects you from say car jacking (which happens 1 out of 100 times you drive your car) but it spontaneously blows up 43 out of 100 times you drive it. Would that risk trade off be worth it to you?

I'd say driving is a very big risk. You can reduce that risk greatly, so why don't you?

 

[ntense702 10+ year member]

I feel safe knowing I have a gun for protection just in case god forbid I ever have to use it, I keep it unloaded in the holster with a loaded clip beside it with the safety on, you never know in this day and age what might happen, though chances are unlikely anything will ever happen you still don't know. I honestly had some friends back in teenage heydays that were (no joke) doing armed home invasions, they ruthlessly robbed several people and even ***** a woman in the process, they would knock on doors at prospective homes and cover up the peep hole, instantly after the door would be opened they'd bust on in and the rest is self explanatory, so I for one know what people are capable of and don't underestimate what could happen at my own residence or anyone elses.

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

Missing the point man. It is about benefit - risk ratio.

The argument was that having a gun at home makes you safer as it protects you. But I am trying to show it increases the risk, not decreases the risk.

So if driving was 43x more dangerous then walking, and most people believed driving was safer then walking, I would be arguing the same thing.

Yes I could reduce my overall risk by not driving. BUT I LIKE DRIVING, so I accept that risk.

I have no problem as I have stated, if people say I LIKE GUNS...go crazy man, have as many as you want...keep them where you want...no argument from me. You are accepting the increased risk cause you like guns. Just don't tell me it makes you safer, it doesn't.

I'd say driving is a very big risk. You can reduce that risk greatly, so why don't you?

 

[CanadianDream 10+ year member]

The don't underestimate the risk of injuring yourself/family with your own gun. It is much greater then the risk of home invasion, etc.

so I for one know what people are capable of and don't underestimate what could happen at my own residence or anyone elses.

Again, if you just like the gun..accept the increased risk...don't care. Go nuts.