PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gun Control Debates
     Is EMyers afraid to answer a q

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

EMyers is all about telling people how a gun wonít help people will defend themselves should they encounter a dangerous situation.  In another thread he asked me what I would do in the fantasy situation of encountering 6 armed men on the street.  I answered and asked this question in return.  For some reason he wonít answer in that thread.

It is two AM and you awaken to hear your front door being kicked in.  Two men armed with a shotgun and 9mm pistol are seconds away from bursting in.  What do you do?

E has said in several places that he will defend himself but wonít need a gun to do it.  So I want him to answer how he will handle this situation, a situation very similar to all the recent news stories I have published to the forum.

So come on E, tell us what you will do about the above situation.

 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 10:34 AM on May 3, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hmmmm, you asked that question last night and I've been at work and have only had time to answer a couple of questions.  Guess I've been really ducking you... :P  As for my "fantasy" situation, it was nearly the same as the "real-life" situations you kept using to make your point.   If it was so far fetched, why are you using them?

Anyhow, on to your question.  My house has a single point of entry to get to the second floor.  Obviously the first thing I would do is call 911 (police dept is about 4 minutes away).  Since my wife is always on call there is a cell phone upstairs in case the phone lines are dead.  Anyone coming up the stairs is either going to have to come up shooting or will be coming up to a blind intersection at the top of the stairs.  I have a myriad of options that they will enjoy meeting if they try to gain the second level (word of warning for anyone who likes their bedrooms on the lower levels, high ground is always easier to defend).  Also, due to the way my stairwell is constructed, they will be coming up single file (or with very little room to maneuver if they try to squeeze up together) so I really don't care how many are trying to come up (unless they are willing to shoot through their partners to get to me).  In any case they will quickly find out how to head back down the stairwell, most likely not under their own power.  Now perhaps my methods aren't very high tech, but nothing I use will ever misfire and kill some innocent child.  I have nothing that can pierce a wall and harm some innocent bystander in another house.  However I can seriously mess up somebody's day who tries to put a foot down on the level my children sleep on.  But what if they come up shooting you ask?  I obviously wouldn't be able to shoot back without putting myself in harm's way anyhow.  Now perhaps you've set your house up with armored walls and murder holes, but I just don't have the money or inkling to do that sort of thing.  And before we get to your "what if they've cut your phone lines AND have some sort of cell jamming device in their van, etc., etc." let's just wonder for a moment what the chance are of that.  You can't cover every possible event (not and still lead a life).  I mean, what if they come up in full kevlar and have bullet proof shields.  The nice thing about my stuff is that I wouldn't have to worry about those things.  But obviously this is not something the average person would ever have to deal with.  You can't live your life in a constant state of fear.

And next time, how about you give your question more than 24 hours to rot before you start accusing people of avoiding it.  Not all of us have the luxury of sitting around on a computer all day.  Some people actually work or go on vacations or something.  Sheesh.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 6:02 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
malignantpoodle

|      |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Man, I thought you were going to say that you'd use Hung Gar 5 animal boxing kung fu with emphasis on Tiger-Crane techniques.



Seriously though, I don't think EMyers is all that bad.  While I completely disagree with his perspective on the issue of guns, I have to say he does a pretty good job of keeping his cool especially on a forum where he is the very small minority.

(Edited by malignantpoodle 5/3/2007 at 6:14 PM).
 


Posts: 17 | Posted: 6:13 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

HEY!  DID YOU JUST CALL ME SMALL!?!?!?





-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 6:18 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I really donít know how many attackers, on average, you will encounter on the street.  Home invasions still make local news on occasion.  In general other self defense stories like defending yourself on the street donít make the news.  I doubt there are a lot of 5-man mugging crews on the street however, as that probably would attract attention.

Of all the home invasion stories I posted, I only posted two with 4 or more attackers.  Of the home invasion stories that make the news, at least half are two attackers.  So I asked you about a real situation, not fantasy.

It is nice you live 4 minutes away from the police station, but that does not mean the police are 4 minutes away.  Around here you will likely spend some time on hold, and then spend a good 30 seconds explaining where you are and what you need.  And the police may well be somewhere else than the station house.  I doubt the cops will arrive quick enough to save your life if your attackers intend you harm, and who breaks in at night intending you good?

Around here if they are not on a call, you see them parked outside all-night restaurants.

It is good that you have a choke point, I am guessing you intend to deal with the first guy up the stairs with a knife/sword/club.  If you can get the element of surprise on him, that may work.  If the first attacker is high on drugs, you will have to actually incapacitate him.  A single club blow or simple cut wonít drop a person, you will have to repeat a few times.  During that time either this guy or the guy behind him is likely to get a good shot in on you, as you are at the top of the stairway will probably loom tall.  The lead guy and the guy(s) behind him might take to shooting up your house if you retreat.  

What you have is not bad, but you are still bringing a knife to a gun fight and the odds on that are not good.

I donít have a two story house, I donít have bedroom doors that allow me to sneak up on intruders, and I donít know how long the cops will take to respond.  Some nights are busy for them, some nights are slow.  If it takes the cops five minutes to get there, it wonít matter anyway.

For my house, I have re-enforced the door jams and hinges to buy us the time we need to get the quick access safe open.  We donít have a phone in the bedroom and we wonít leave the bedroom side of the house to get to it.

Once I have my (shoulder fired) firearm, there is one (wide) doorway to the bedroom side of the house.  If the bad guys get in the house before I get to the front door, I will make my stand there.  They will come into a large empty space, I will be behind a doorway with effective firepower, the ability to retreat a little deeper but still cover the doorway.  I can shoot in the direction of the bad guys and my family will all be behind me.

If I get to the front door before they get in, they will start dropping on the porch, I wonít wait for the door to go down.

My ammunition is designed to quickly fragment and not penetrate, and I have enough ammo to not worry about running out.  Our house is brick and we live in a brick house neighborhood.  Most of the directions I might need to shoot in are backed by my own brick walls.  If shooting through the front door, there is a brick wall backstop.

Because of our preparation we donít live in fear.  Two groups of people donít live in sleep well at nigh.  Those too ignorant to appreciate a danger and those prepared for it.  With our preparation, we sleep soundly.  Chance favors the prepared.

 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 8:10 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
qednick

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I have to say he does a pretty good job of keeping his cool especially on a forum where he is the very small minority.


I'll wager there's doughnuts half stuck in his walls from when he's lost it before regaining his composure...

...nah, seriously though, I concur. We may not agree on how to tackle gun crime but Emyers you're OK in my book because you at least have some reasoning behind your opinions. A lot of anti-gunners I've come across have the opinions but have no explanation as to why they feel that way other than biased statistics.


 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 8:15 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

People only get credit in my book for facts and rational thought.  So E only gets 60% in my opinion.

Pro gun people often make me mad.  I will go into debates with facts and logic, and a bunch of progun airheads will move in with opinions and BS, allowing the focus to move from the facts.

Gun control people have a little excuse to be short on facts because there are so few for them to find.  Pro 2A people have NO excuse to be short on facts
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 8:27 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
qednick

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Nobody ever said they agree with him kindrox and nobody scored 100% - rather the praise is for sticking with the debate - many anti-gunners don't - especially when outnumbered.

There's no point in trying to argue your case when the person you're arguing your case to walks away, which E hasn't done yet. So I give him 65%. The extra 5% is for being a glutton for punishment.
 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 8:52 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The really funny thing is that people keep complaining that I'm telling them how to live or arguing for banning weapons which I've never, ever done.  In fact every time I ask people to point to a post where I've proposed the banning of firearms, my post gets ignored (probably because they can't find any).  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:47 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Gun control always seems to boil down to keeping the honest public from having guns.  I love how the Brady bunch is only for "reasonable" gun control, but there has never been a gun control law they thought unreasonable, and they are in hysterics about the possibility of anyone able to legally own a gun in Washington DC.  Their BS about "reasonable" gun control is just to reel in the suckers.

So you might not be for banning guns, but the Brady bunch will use you for all your worth, then toss you under the bus when your time is due.
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 10:05 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Not all guns will shoot through walls and hit innocent by standers further away.  Hand guns have a very limited range and in reality aren't the best option for close range defense.  A shotgun with number 4 rounds is a good option for home defense, easy to shoot an intruder and not miss and won't pick off innocent by standers as the shot doesn't travel far.
Saying that, here in Australia, we can't shoot an intruder as the law isn't on our side.  Look and learn from our lesson, once they start enacting gun laws then they start taking away your right to defend yourself in any manner.  Most of the tactics that EMyers has implemented to protect his house, if ever need be, would get you jail time over here.  Eg:  If you keep a police batton next to your bed and use it on an intruder then you can get charged for pre meditated assault.  A friend of mine hit an intruder with his sons hockey stick and when he filled in the police report the officer was kind enough to change the wording to say that his son had played with the club that day and left it lying around so he just picked it up otherwise he would have been charged for keeping that hockey stick next to his bed.
Also, what happens if you are an elderly person????  How would you defend yourself then???  Elderly people get targeted all the time over here and some have died from the traumatic experience even though the intruders didn't "mean" to kill them so the intruders only get charged with 2nd degree manslaughter.  Some widowed elderly grandmothers have also been raped by intruders.  Heres and eg for malignantpoodle because you mentioned martial arts.  If you get a black belt in martial arts over here you are supposed to be registered and carry a warning card which you must display and verbally warn an attacker 3 times before you proceed to defend yourself.
After all that, your insurance company over here won't pay a claim if you failed to secure you personal belongings.  So, if you didn't lock your front door and someone came in and stole some things and bashed you as you tried to stop them then no insurance claim for you because you didn't lock your front door.  Same with your car, don't lock it or leave the keys inside the car the no insurance claim.  You become the victim again and again and criminals have easy targets and laws that won't punish them.
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 10:47 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I believe in gun regulation and registration.  After all, we regulate what type of cars are on the road and who can drive them.  We require that a car be registered.  I do not believe the average man on the street needs a mag coupler, a flash suppressor, or an M2.  I think a few too many people have watched "Red Dawn" a few too many times.  I think there are better ways to handle conflict than seeing how many holes you can put in somebody.  I think people carry guns when they are prepared to use guns; I think they draw guns when they've decided to use their guns; and I think they aim their guns when they've chosen who they intend to kill.  I think guns are for offense and not for defense.  I've never, ever seen anyone deflect a bullet with their pearl-grip handle and until you can pull it off don't hand me your "it's for protection" line of bologna.  I'm not hungry and I don't want to make a sandwich.  I think the ability to own and operate a firearm that will allow you to kill multiple people without ever coming into close proximity with them should be at least as regulated as the ability to own and operate an automobile (and based on the ability of most American's to drive, that should be considerably harder than it is already).

Having said all that, if you can pass a test (including vision) and pay your registration then I believe you have the right to a weapon as long as you don't intend to bring it on to my property.  I think that if you can't prove that you know how to handle a gun, can't hit the broadside of a barn or can't see the broadside of the barn you are trying to hit, then you shouldn't have access to one (anymore than you should be able to drive).  I think if your kid manages to get your gun and take it to school that you should be held responsible for it.  I think that if you are going to carry a gun, it should be in plain site where everyone can see it (maybe that's just my Arizona upbringing).  I think that if you've had brushes with the law, have mental instability, or have anger management problems, a fully loaded weapon in your car when someone change langes in front of you is a recipe for disaster.  I think that the average person has absolutely no need for a gun (which does not trump his rights under the second amendment).  I think incidents like Waco do not prove that alot of guns sitting around with nobody to shoot them do any harm, nor do they prove that people can't do harm to others without guns, but they do underline how much damage can be done by idiots WITH guns.  I don't believe the average person (without three arms) needs more than two guns.  I don't think the average person needs 15 or more round magazines.  I don't believe we should outright ban guns anymore than we should throw preachers in jail for reading the bible from their own pulpits (as has happened in other countries, and is probably coming soon to a state near you).  I just think we should be at least as careful who we give 'em to as we do our vehicles.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:48 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well said EMyers but again we fall into the trap of who decides for who???  You say about other drivers on the road but maybe your own driving has upset other drivers as well.  You feel that people don't need more than 2 guns, what about sporting shooters who shoot in different codes of shooting???  Saying that the average person has no need for a gun is only your own point of view.  How would you feel if someone came to you and said you don't have a need for a two storey house???? Gun regulation and registration is just a fallacy as is vehicle registration.  I'm sure you will have seen vehicles driving around that aren't road worthy or safe and how do you know that the driver of that vehicle holds a current drivers licence??? You don't beleive in high capacity magazines, what about high performance vehicles???As for carrying guns around, I would hate to have to carry a gun around just to ensure my own personal safety, I would rather migrate elsewhere than have to live like that.  
Our opinions are irrelevant and our way of life may not be another persons way of life.  We don't need regulation to procreate and that requires a lot more responsibilty than any gun or car ever would.  The mere fact that you have the choice to make is what is important, once that choice is gone then you give up your freedom.
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 11:50 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I thought car registration was about collecting taxes, not some safety issue.  And I donít need a license to actually buy a car, and you donít need a license to drive a car on your own property.  You only need a license to drive in public, which is in line with most states and taking guns in public.  So your analogy is not quite what you intend.

It is interesting that you are sticking with guns not useful for defense.  I have posted many recent news stories to the exact contrary.  My own mother used a gun defensively twice.  I get the feeling that you have a mental bock in regards to the truth of this matter.

Well we found an issue to half-agree on.  I believe people should be allowed to carry open.  I think it should be considered normal.  But I would not make it a requirement, at least for women.  I would prefer it for myself but my wife is petite and I would prefer she keep the element of surprise considering her lack of physical strength compared to a man.

I think the reason that actually reasonable gun control does not get anywhere is because the gun control lobby is just a front for the gun grabbing lobby.  If the gun control advocates came out and recognized the 2nd and then said lets work together to make laws that donít limit a single honest citizen, but put real road blocks on people not qualified, it would happen.

I support requiring background checks for private gun sales, I support requiring all court records going into the background check system, I support bans on things like fingerprint resistance guns, pistol bullets designed to penetrate vests, training for CHL licenses, and LONG prison terms.  But until the gun control advocates recognize my right, I wonít support anything but the bare minimum because I know these are all tools they are using to destroy my right.

 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 11:59 PM on May 3, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You don't beleive in high capacity magazines, what about high performance vehicles???

Same thing.  There is no need for a vehicle (other than emergency vehicles) to go over the speed limit.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:47 AM on May 4, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I support requiring background checks for private gun sales, I support requiring all court records going into the background check system, I support bans on things like fingerprint resistance guns, pistol bullets designed to penetrate vests, training for CHL licenses, and LONG prison terms.  But until the gun control advocates recognize my right, I wonít support anything but the bare minimum because I know these are all tools they are using to destroy my right.


I concur, and I can't fault your opinion.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:50 AM on May 4, 2007 | IP
qednick

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually, there's another big difference between firearms and vehicles. Owning firearms is a right under the constitution, driving a vehicle is a privilege.

kindrox, are you in Texas? I sent you a PM last night.
 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 09:35 AM on May 4, 2007 | IP
qednick

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

WBPV253, is crime noticably worse in Oz now than it was 10 years ago? Did you watch that BBC TV show  I posted on the other thread?
 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 09:38 AM on May 4, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

To Emyers,
What should a elderly person do should they encounter a mugger much bigger then them?

Also not to long ago three robbers attempted to rob a pon shop. they  came in shooting. the only reasion that the works weren't killed was that there was a gun every 5" behind the counter, and the owner opened fire with one of them causing the robbers to flee.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 10:36 PM on May 4, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Huh?  I don't even know what "the works weren't killed" means.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 09:22 AM on May 5, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I think SilverStar meant "the workers weren't killed".  Its just an eg showing that guns do save peoples lives.
"There is no need for a vehicle (other than emergency vehicles) to go over the speed limit."  Come on Emyers thats just plain childish saying that.  I'm sure you have gone over the speed limit whilst driving....And again you say "no need" which is only your point of view.  If someone else were to encroach on you lifestyle by saying you don't need this or that then that would make you angry.  
qednick...  crime over here feels no different before or after our gun laws were tightened 10 years ago.  People are soft targets over here and a criminal needn't worry about paying for his life for a crime that he/she has committed.  There is no death penalty over here and most politicians are disgusted at the thought of bringing back the death penalty.  Like EMyers they say there is no need for the death penalty.  Most criminals can be rehabilitated in the right conditions.  Meanwhile crime persists and police do what they can to restore and maintain order just like most other societies around the world.
Its ironic that we try to make our cars and houses more secure by putting alarms and other preventetive measures in yet we leave ourselves exposed.  A firearm makes all men equal, gone are the days of the strong shall prey on the weak.  Maybe thats why politicians are so keen to get rid of guns, after that they become the strong!!!!
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 03:46 AM on May 7, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"There is no need for a vehicle (other than emergency vehicles) to go over the speed limit."  Come on Emyers thats just plain childish saying that.

Why?  If it is illegal to go more than 75 mph, what is the point of making one that can go faster than that?  At least for sale in the United States?  Heck, I'm all for wireless governors that would get these idiots to slow down in residential and school areas.  What, in your point of view, requires you to be able to drive a car capable of 135 mph (or more) in a school zone?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:17 PM on May 7, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am getting ready to inspect my revolver now.
 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 8:37 PM on May 7, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You are right EMyers, it is illegal to speed but that doesn't mean that people don't speed.  Just like its illegal to kill but people still do it.  As for high performance vehicles, 135 mph in a V8 Mustang is the same as 135 mph in a 4 cylinder sedan.  Yes its more tempting to speed with all the extra horsepower but it comes down to the driver.  You see it comes down to your freedom of choice, freedom to choose how to live.  Your view of freedom is to have more laws, have governors restricting speed on vehicles and God knows what else.  Why not just have everyone escorted by a police officer 24 / 7????  You take away the responsibility of an individual and look to blame a gun or a car or drugs or violent video games or something else.  You might as well tell the police to return all the money they have charged speeding drivers and bill GM because its their fault for making fast cars.
Your attempt to make the world a safer place is honourable but not by taking away freedom from people who deserve it and then making guilty people not responsible for their actions.
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 9:07 PM on May 7, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So, freedom in your mind is the ability to blow through a school zone at 100 mph if you so choose?  Seriously?  What if freedom, to me, means the ability to rape your women and blow away all your children?  As long as I'm willing to do the time, of course.  Why should you inhibit my freedom?  Who is seriously being inhibited by the inability to break the law?  Why do they "deserve" to be able to break the law?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:26 PM on May 7, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Exactly EMyers, people don't deserve to break the law but how do you prevent it???  If we were robots we could be preprogrammed to not break any laws but thats science fiction isn't it????  We have the ability to choose and yes some people choose very poorly.  More and more laws will not make it safer it will just make it unbearable for the majority of good people out there.  Afterall it is a democracy and majority rules.  Remember back in the school days when the whole class was kept in because of one naughty child who didn't own up to it???  Thats the same as your recommendations.  I can't have a gun because someone else killed somebody with a gun, I didn't do anything wrong.  Or I can't have a gun because EMyers says there is no need for me to have a gun.  It isn't fair that you dictate to others and it costs me my freedom to choose which you took away.  The law states "innocent until proven guilty" yet you judge society to be guilty by proxy.  It sounds like the Tom Cruise movie, you are guilty for the future crime...
Look at it this way EMyers, millions of dollars are spent on monitoring the skies for possible earth bound objects.  At best we could give a warning to an area that may be in harms way.  We have no way of stopping it or preventing it and history shows us that objects do strike the planet in cycles of tens of thousands to millions of years.  It is something that we can't do anything about yet we spend money on it.  The same with your theories, spend millions and millions of dollars to try to prevent people from committing crimes which is something that can never be prevented.  Spend those millions on something more usefull like education or poverty and you will inadvertently reduce crime.
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 12:14 AM on May 8, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So you're saying that people commit crimes because they are either poor or stupid?

Spend those millions on something more usefull like education or poverty and you will inadvertently reduce crime.

I know of a lot of things that are illegal to own even though I, personally, haven't done anything harmful with them.  I can't own a nuclear weapon.  I can't own anthrax.  I can't own cocaine.  I can't carry (at least in Phoenix) a claymore or a pair of nunchukas.  I've got no criminal record, yet there are a plethora of things I can't own or carry regardless of whether or not I've ever hurt anyone with these things.  You can throw guns into the mix.  I should either be allowed to own all these things because I am not a criminal or you must admit that there are things that I logically don't need and you are willing to put restrictions on what your next door neighbor has in his backyard.  (Heck, last place I lived I couldn't even put up a basketball hoop in my front yard without breaking the local HOA)


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:56 AM on May 8, 2007 | IP
qednick

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But your right to those things is not guaranteed by the constitution - the highest law in the land and the bounds by which all other laws must fall within. Also, I'm not sure that nuclear weapons or anthrax would fall into the scope of "arms" for self-defense and/or 2nd amendment purposes.

Yes you could throw guns into the mix but that would be unconstitutional. Who are you to take away other's constitutional rights just because you find one or more parts of the constitution inconvenient?

(Edited by qednick 5/8/2007 at 12:54 PM).
 


Posts: 34 | Posted: 12:52 PM on May 8, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

WBPV253 I am sorry but you need to stop arguing on the gun control subject.  Your posts don't seem to have much in the way of coherent points and just generally add noise to a discussion.

You won't get anywere with E no matter what argument you make because he does not believe in defending himself at the increased risk of harming others.

Out of curiosity E, what vehicles does your family drive?
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 5:04 PM on May 8, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Fords (although not Crown Vics or Pintos, they tend to blow up).


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:11 PM on May 8, 2007 | IP
WBPV253

|     |       Report Post



Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Why is that Kindrox????  You sound just EMyers by telling people what to do... Whats a coherent point to you??? You started this thread by targeting EMyers, is that your attempt at a discussion for the gun control subject???
 


Posts: 16 | Posted: 8:19 PM on May 8, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

E I should have been more specific, does your family drive any SUVs?
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 08:31 AM on May 9, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

EMYERS stands on his beliefs and no one can really change it.But he will not try to take our rights away because he said he will not bother too and wont vote it away.


 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 4:50 PM on May 9, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes, at least one person in my family drives an SUV (having kids and the inability to spend 50+ bucks every week due to it's lovely gas mileage, I tend to drive something a little less likely to impress the neighbors).  I assume this question is leading up to something.

And no, I won't vote to overturn the second amendment.  I just don't see anything wrong with registering who owns what gun or having sane limits on how big an armory the average citizen needs to own.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 5:44 PM on May 9, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

E, am I correct that you won't have a gun for defense because you won't defend (with a gun) at the increased risk of harming others?

SUV owners who don't like guns because they believe guns are to likely to harm others gives me a chuckle.  

I am sure your family members does not intend to harm anyone with your SUV, but accidents happen right?  

If that happens, your SUV is murder on wheels.

The goverment reports that in SUV-car crashes, for every one occupant death in a SUV there are (on average) four deaths in the passenger car.

It seems to me that you won't have a gun because it might have a negative impact on others.  But your family drives an SUV which poses a significant increased risk to other drivers.

 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 08:53 AM on May 10, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No, I won't have a gun because if I'm not at home when someone breaks into my house I've just put more guns back into the hands of criminals.  Story on the news last night was talking about how thieves think they've hit the jackpot when they find firearms in a house.  I know already that you don't want to hear the statistics, so I'm not going to repeat them again, but my FAMILY's safety is the reason I don't have firearms in my house.

As for the SUVs, I have family members that own guns as well, they just don't bring them into my house.  Plus, it depends on the SUV.

CARS WITH LOWEST DEATH RATES
RANK CAR TYPE DEATHS/MILLION VEHICLE

1 Chevrolet Astro Minivan 7
2 Infiniti G35 Luxury Car 11
2 BMW 7 Series Luxury Car 11
4 Toyota 4Runner SUV 13
5 Audi A4/S4 Quattro Sedan 14
5 Mercedes E Class Luxury Car 14
5 Toyota Highlander SUV 14
5 Mercedes M Class SUV 14
9 Toyota Sienna Minivan 17
9 Honda Odyssey Minivan 17
11 Lexus ES330 Luxury Car 18
11 Lexus RX330 SUV 18
11 Toyota Sequoia SUV 18
14 Honda Pilot SUV 19
14 BMW X5 9.6 19

Source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

6 SUVs are in the top 15 lowest death rates.  No trucks or motorcyles are in this list.  I'd rather have them in an SUV than a truck.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 6:47 PM on May 10, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Emyers its irrevelant how safe a car is there is always a risk of injury or death you only reduced it a bit because of safety features.
Everything you and I do involves risk of injury or death we just try our best to reduce our risk by taking precautions or taking action to avoid it.Its your personal decision that you dont want a gun in your house but its my personal decision when I want a gun in my house its as simple as that.Sure its a slight riskier than not owning a gun but if you base everything on that idea then get rid of all your knives and any chemicals you may have laying around in the house because of your risk of being stabbed or poisoned.But anyway,its your house and your life to decide what you want to do and have in your house and I will keep out of it but its the same thing for me too so you keep out too simple as that.
 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 8:46 PM on May 10, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

E proves my point.  SUVs are generally the safest vehicle choice.  I see an interesting anti-parallel between guns and SUVs.  SUVs are considered ďsafeĒ because the occupants are safer inside an SUV than they would have been in a car.  But nobody seems to ask who pays the cost of that safety, and the answer is the people in cars pay the cost.

Nothing comes for free.  SUV safety comes at the cost of people in cars.  By getting an SUV, you did not reduce the overall risk of harm, you shifted it to other people.

As for the risk of firearm theft, I certainly agree.  All of my guns (except for those we carry) are locked up in safes, and the handgun safe is rated TL30.  The guns we carry are of course on us, so they are not at of risk of being stolen in a burglary.
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 9:58 PM on May 10, 2007 | IP
quatin

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

And no, I won't vote to overturn the second amendment.  I just don't see anything wrong with registering who owns what gun or having sane limits on how big an armory the average citizen needs to own.


You've just made a contradictory statement here. The 2nd Amendment is also about being able to repel an organized armed force. How can you limit the armory of citizens and still expect them to win against a modern military? What limits are we talking about? If you think a mag coupler, flash suppressor and a MG is excessive, I have to assume that you think anti-aircraft and anti-armor weapons are also "excessive". Either the 2nd A applies individually or it applies collectively. You are not using the 2nd Amendment as it was written, but have restricted it for "self defense against the common criminal and hunting". As such, you do not support the 2nd A.
 


Posts: 86 | Posted: 6:06 PM on May 21, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Dont worry about Emyers,he is a slime ball lowlife with nothing to do other than to irritate everyone whenever he wants.
 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 6:22 PM on May 21, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

My, my, I go away for two weeks and you guys forget to put 99 down for his nap.  You know he gets cranky when he doesn't get his naptime in.  Now that schools out, I'm sure he'll have even more time to bless us with his intelligence.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:17 PM on May 29, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 8:17 PM on May 29, 2007 :
My, my, I go away for two weeks and you guys forget to invite me. †You know I get cranky when no one gives me the scoop about what happened. Now that high schools out, I'm sure I will have even more time to buy a good pistol.

Emyers,
You better hope God is with you the day I run into you at some intersection or at a public place because you never know how bad you will be smoked or burned.



 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 2:15 PM on June 4, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

A) God is with me very day
B) Not worried, I don't play with matches


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:19 PM on June 4, 2007 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

©†YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.