1 woman & her purse vs. 3 violent men...no one has a gun...poor woman...

[martybegan]

The point has to do with the ludicrous mentality that the way to fight a fire is to douse it with gasoline.

The way you stop a violent criminal is to carry and use a gun effectively...most of the time this means no shots are fired and the criminal is driven off...1.4 million times a year on average...

Of course, because the best answer to violence is .... more violence!
We humans figured that out a long time ago.

Damn, that was the best idea we ever had. Look how it's worked out through history. I tell ya we're fuckin' geniuses.

The answer to violence can be controlled limited violence in return.

Do police officers apprehend suspects with a big hug and candy?

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

again with the limited mag thing. Your brain is like a single function computer stuck on "post stupid stuff"

 

[Brain357]

The point has to do with the ludicrous mentality that the way to fight a fire is to douse it with gasoline.

The way you stop a violent criminal is to carry and use a gun effectively...most of the time this means no shots are fired and the criminal is driven off...1.4 million times a year on average...

Of course, because the best answer to violence is .... more violence!
We humans figured that out a long time ago.

Damn, that was the best idea we ever had. Look how it's worked out through history. I tell ya we're fuckin' geniuses.

The answer to violence can be controlled limited violence in return.

Do police officers apprehend suspects with a big hug and candy?

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

again with the limited mag thing. Your brain is like a single function computer stuck on "post stupid stuff"

So you didn't mean that part about limited? You hear of anyone ever needing a hi cap mag for defense yet?

 

[martybegan]

The way you stop a violent criminal is to carry and use a gun effectively...most of the time this means no shots are fired and the criminal is driven off...1.4 million times a year on average...

Of course, because the best answer to violence is .... more violence!
We humans figured that out a long time ago.

Damn, that was the best idea we ever had. Look how it's worked out through history. I tell ya we're fuckin' geniuses.

The answer to violence can be controlled limited violence in return.

Do police officers apprehend suspects with a big hug and candy?

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

again with the limited mag thing. Your brain is like a single function computer stuck on "post stupid stuff"

So you didn't mean that part about limited? You hear of anyone ever needing a hi cap mag for defense yet?

I don't need my 4th amendment rights at this moment, doesn't mean I won't need them in the future. And again, rights are not about "need".

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

All this guns are the answer to everything stuff reminds me of the time Homer Simpson got a gun.

Guns, like hammers, are tools with a specific purpose. The hammer to drive spikes into wood... Guns to kill human beings that threaten the innocent, and beasts so they can sustain life.

These are serious matters, suited for serious people... matters poorly suited for the constituents of anti-social fiction.

LOL! Socialists... D'OH!

You should've stopped with the bolded.

Why?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

ROFLMNAO! Why would one want to limit the number of chances it has to destroy that which threatens it without reloading?

Don't tell me you're one of those people who 'believe' that 'NO ONE NEEDS 2 rounds!'

Come on down and I'll take ya out for some Boar boring, set ya on the trail and give you a breech sgl Brl12 Gg.

When that 700lb boar charges your ass, you'll come to understand the fatal flaw in your reasoning... well, almost immediately. The next thing you'll realize is the natural process wherein hormonal reactions to certain death, evacuate the bowls, so as to lighten the load for speedier exists, the third is how cool it is that you're not feeling any pain as that boar tears your lower appendages to shreds... It's a whole thing.

But it's a lesson in time compression that you'll never forget... that's for dam' sure.

 

[2aguy]

Yes they are wrong. They are just surveys. If those were accurate we would have lots of dead criminals. We do not.

Do you know why we don't have more dead criminals...because normal, law abiding people do not want to take another human life if they can avoid it...so when the criminal leaves them alone...they don't proceed to shoot them...it is only in the deranged dreams of gun grabbers where every gun owner wants to go out and bag a criminal...

Normal people just want to be left alone...

 

[Brain357]

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

ROFLMNAO! Why would one want to limit the number of chances it has to destroy that which threatens it without reloading?

Don't tell me you're one of those people who 'believe' that 'NO ONE NEEDS 2 rounds!'

Because only mass shooters and criminals are firing that much. Bullets going all over is a danger to everyone. Defense shouldn't be spraying bullets everywhere. If you can't defend yourself with a 10 rd mag you shouldn't have a gun.

 

[2aguy]

How many of those rape victims had guns on them when they were raped?

Without knowing that your point is meaningless as usual.

Women for the last decades have been the smallest group to own guns...that is changing and as it changes you will see more rapes stopped...

 

[2aguy]

Damn, that was the best idea we ever had. Look how it's worked out through history. I tell ya we're fuckin' geniuses.

Yes, all the violent bad people...the ones who murdered 10 of millions of people stopped after they had a good talking to...same with gang bangers, rapists and mass shooters...

Just sit them down and explain to them that violence isn't the solution...and we will have no more crime...ever...

 

[Brain357]

Yes they are wrong. They are just surveys. If those were accurate we would have lots of dead criminals. We do not.

Do you know why we don't have more dead criminals...because normal, law abiding people do not want to take another human life if they can avoid it...so when the criminal leaves them alone...they don't proceed to shoot them...it is only in the deranged dreams of gun grabbers where every gun owner wants to go out and bag a criminal...

Normal people just want to be left alone...

I've read a lot of actual events and they often end with a dead criminal. I've also shown you a study where there is a dead criminal about 30 percent of the time.

 

[2aguy]

So you didn't mean that part about limited? You hear of anyone ever needing a hi cap mag for defense yet?

Everyone who has ever had to use a gun to save a life or stop a violent criminal...because they did not know how many bullets they needed to end the attack...as in some criminals have absorbed 14-17 bullets....some hits to vital areas...and not stopped...so yes...every time someone defends themselves they need a standard magazine plus reloads...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Yes limited, like mag capacity should be.

ROFLMNAO! Why would one want to limit the number of chances it has to destroy that which threatens it without reloading?

Don't tell me you're one of those people who 'believe' that 'NO ONE NEEDS 2 rounds!'

Because only mass shooters and criminals are firing that much. Bullets going all over is a danger to everyone. Defense shouldn't be spraying bullets everywhere. If you can't defend yourself with a 10 rd mag you shouldn't have a gun.

ROFLMNAO!

So ... just to follow you're reasoning here.

You're telling me that you have certain knowledge, that there are "MASS-SHOOTERS" out there, which you KNOW TO BE USING HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES... for the specific purpose of MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE...

And YOUR SOLUTION is to limit the number of rounds that INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN LOAD?

What the "#UCK are YOU? Some sort of "MASS-SHOOTER" AGENT? Is it your job to spend your time in debate forums, protecting the interests of sociopaths intent on inflicting mayhem upon the innocent?


I mean seriously, do you truly feel that the product of socialism needs an edge, to the degree that you're prepared to SET THAT EDGE INTO LAW?

Or didn't you get the clue that the products of socialism are ALREADY USING THE EDGE THAT THE LAST BATCH OF LAWS LIMITING WHERE GUNS CAN BE, PROVIDED THEM?

LOL! You people are truly the Hallmark of contributors.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So you didn't mean that part about limited? You hear of anyone ever needing a hi cap mag for defense yet?

Everyone who has ever had to use a gun to save a life or stop a violent criminal...because they did not know how many bullets they needed to end the attack...as in some criminals have absorbed 14-17 bullets....some hits to vital areas...and not stopped...so yes...every time someone defends themselves they need a standard magazine plus reloads...

The standard answer when asked: How much ammo did you feel you needed to stop the guy that was shooting at you?" is... ALL OF IT!

 

[2aguy]

guns are the best way to stop rape...but it is interesting, though no surprise to me, that the anti gunners would rather see women raped than use guns to stop the rape...

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

So, we have to think that the anti gunners prefer the outcome of the woman being raped...since they do not want them stopping the rape with the most reliable means of stopping it...a gun....

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

How many of those rape victims had guns on them when they were raped?

Without knowing that your point is meaningless as usual.

Women for the last decades have been the smallest group to own guns...that is changing and as it changes you will see more rapes stopped...

Yes, that's true. of course the downside to stopping the rapes, is that such rarely gets reported. Because... there was no rape. Just a guy that crapped his pants, and a girl who called her dad to thank him for training her in the effective use of a firearm.

 

[2aguy]

ROFLMNAO!

So ... just to follow you're reasoning here.

You're telling me that you have certain knowledge, that there are "MASS-SHOOTERS" out there, which you KNOW TO BE USING HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES... for the specific purpose of MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE...

And YOUR SOLUTION is to limit the number of rounds that INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN LOAD?

What the "#UCK are YOU? Some sort of "MASS-SHOOTER" AGENT? Is it your job to spend your time in debate forums, protecting the interests of sociopaths intent on inflicting mayhem upon the innocent?


I mean seriously, do you truly feel that the product of socialism needs an edge, to the degree that you're prepared to SET THAT EDGE INTO LAW?

Or didn't you get the clue that the products of socialism are ALREADY USING THE EDGE THAT THE LAST BATCH OF LAWS LIMITING WHERE GUNS CAN BE, PROVIDED THEM?

LOL! You people are truly the Hallmark of contributors.

Excellent points....anti gunners really have problems seeing the world and relating to it as it actually is...

 

[martybegan]

How many of those rape victims had guns on them when they were raped?

Without knowing that your point is meaningless as usual.

Women for the last decades have been the smallest group to own guns...that is changing and as it changes you will see more rapes stopped...

Guns are the great equalizer, they can reduce the advantage men have in brute strength.

Remember the skills, reflexes, and mental acuity needed to use a firearm are gender neutral.

 

[2aguy]

More on stopping a rape with a gun...

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes, "Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

 

[AtticusF]

Well, another anti gunner victory...no one in this situation had a gun...so the woman was viciously beaten for her purse by three men....she didn't have a gun....neither did they....an anti gunner paradise....

the attack was,caught on video....it shows how vicious the attack was....

Trio of Black New York Men Beat Hispanic Woman in Robbery Attempt

The other two then swarm around her trying to pry her wrap around purse from her body as she lay helpless on the sidewalk. Two of them men drag her several feet by the purse strap.

"I just remember the whole attack, and for them leaving me, I remember them just dragging me, and then I started yelling for someone to help me," Reyes told CBS. "And then that's when I realized blood was coming from my face, but I didn't know where from my face."

The victim's father said that his daughter was traumatized by the attack.

"And her jeans were covered in blood and her sneakers were covered in blood," Jay Reyes said.

I can see that this is so much better...sure, she might have been killed, she might have been beaten into a coma...but it is better for society that she just take the beating...quietly, and without fuss, so that the anti gunners can feel safe....better 1000 innocent people be raped, robbed, brutally beaten or killed, than one criminal be shot....

Right?

Not likely women would have gotten to her gun, and very possible she would have been killed with it. Glad no one had a gun. Glad women survived.

 

[2aguy]

Here is a question you wouldn't expect to have to ask...why do you anti gunners prefer that a woman is brutally raped, rather than use a gun to stop that rape....that is what you believe...right?

I hope someone tries to answer this...that answer will be fascinating...