Re: Never forget...

[Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org>]

Your problem is that you are argumentative and plain stupid. Why? Because 
you refuse to acknowledge reasonable arguments as reasonable. For 
everything there are pros and cons. You see more pros on the other side 
and that's fine, but you refuse to see pros on my side.

Then, you go back a few feet and argue for the sake of argument with silly 
deductions that just because people die in car accidents, guns are not 
built to kill. Completely different arguments.

Do more people die in car accidents? Yes.
Are cars built as weapons of death? No.
Is the fact guns are built to kill to take away from them being safe? No.
Is the fact they are built to kill makes them more dangerous? No. Humans 
use guns
Is the fact they are built to kill makes them more likely to be used than 
not used? Yes.

Malice vs. mistake. Big difference there.

We can discuss many different issues, but if you keep confusing them all 
and discuss in the irrelevant fashion of a troll with the tricks of 
sounding serious, I will disregard.

Unless - we declare the whole discussion silly, then I am game, but 
excpect to hear about rubber ducks.



On Thu, 13 Sep 2007, Brian Loe wrote:

> On 9/12/07, Gadi Evron <ge () linuxbox org> wrote:
>
> > > > Let's be honest:
> > > > 1. Guns are dangerous.
> > >
> > > As are pools - and especially five gallon buckets.
> >
> > Irrelevant argument. Pools are not weapons.
>
> Cars are dangerous, and can be used as weapons - as can pools and buckets.
>
> NO weapon is inherently dangerous. A gun setting on your coffee table
> is not going to hurt anyone. A pool, sitting in your back yard, is
> another story.
>
>
> > > > 2. They won't likely help me defend myself in most cases I may encounter.
> > >
> > > I have to vehemently disagree. Someone very close to me has used hers
> > > in defense of herself, and possibly her children. I've used mine in
> > > defense of home. No shots fired in any case (well, not into anyone
> > > anyway).
> >
> > Most cases I encounter would potentially be while driving a car or being
> > bombed to bits. Then of course, a gun may help in many ways, but one
> > things they ALWAYS do is ESCALATE the situation.
>
> By law, in this state, you can not escalate the level of force. If you
> are threatened with fists you must defend yourself with fists. If you
> are threatened with a knife, shoot him.
>
> In other words, you're using a gun to defend yourself, one must
> presume the situation has already been escalated to the point that you
> may need to take a life to save your own or a loved one's.
>
> No, a firearm isn't likely to be helpful in a bombing attack. I've
> heard several stories, however, of a private firearm being used to
> stop terrorist attacks on buses and at schools in Israel. They may be
> "old" stories now, I guess the terrorists are only about bomb vests
> and rockets these days... and why not, they have an endless supply of
> them!
>
>
>
> > > > 4. If I forget my gun somewhere, GOTO 3.
> > >
> > > I can't think of how I might do this, but its good that you know your limits.
> >
> > I walked around with a carry-bag for a gun for a while.
>
> I carry in a holster attached to my belt, generally. I've used fanny
> packs before, but they're a PIA because I wouldn't take it off. Still,
> can't think of a way that I might forget the gun somewhere - I'm not
> pulling it out unless I think I'll have to shoot it (and pulling it
> out in any other situation is against the law)
>
> > > > 5. If kids find it, GOTO 3.
> > >
> > > My kids know where they are.
> >
> > I don't have kids. The gun is an added risk.
>
> Different view - not having a gun is a risk. I want my children to
> have the same opportunity to defend themselves as I have. More so,
> even...
>
> > > > 6. If an accident happens, GOTO 3.
> > >
> > > Accidents happen all the time, doesn't require a gun and not having
> > > one doesn't prevent them from happening. You have to be responsible...
> >
> > Irrelevant argument. Guns you can't swim in.
>
> If the gun is never picked up, removed from the holster, etc., no
> accident can happen with it. You're trying to qualify the limits of
> the argument after you've made these blanket statements that are
> otherwise indefensible. I suppose if we confine the discussion to just
> your opinions you'll win the day, but I'll just bow out now instead.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.