General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (darkangel218) on Thu Dec 3, 2015, 05:17 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)There are ways to defend yourself other than guns.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)And armed. ( with a knife, in my situation). You would have to be close to the person to pepper spray them. That won't work in a home invasion.
And no, it wasn't legal.
On edit, I carry both a firearm and a pepper spray.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)"...those with firearms were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot than those who did not carry"
http://www.examiner.com/article/possessing-a-gun-makes-you-less-safe-not-more-safe
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Very minimal. Then you have to extrapolate how many rapists carry guns in her case. Then the chances she would get shot are reduced more.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)Still minimal in her case.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Academics such as John Lott and Gary Kleck have long claimed that more firearms reduce crime. But is this really the case? Stripped of machismo bluster, this is at heart a testable claim that merely requires sturdy epidemiological analysis. And this was precisely what Prof Charles Branas and his colleagues at the University of Pennsylvania examined in their 2009 paper investigating the link between gun possession and gun assault. They compared 677 cases in which people were injured in a shooting incident with 684 people living in the same area that had not suffered a gun injury. The researchers matched these "controls" for age, race and gender. They found that those with firearms were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot than those who did not carry, utterly belying this oft repeated mantra.
The only reasonable criticism of this finding is "correlation not causation" the argument that people who carry are more likely to live and work in dangerous situations - they may be more vulnerable due to other factors.
Disclosure: I have a couple of guns, but I think that being a gun nut is unhealthy on a number of levels.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)I'm not a gun advocate but do own 2, a rifle and a shotgun. No hand guns.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)Do you have the stats on that?
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)In a 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study, he pointed out that there is a better chance that the gun meant for protection will be used in domestic violence, suicide or to injure a child.
"Believe me when I tell you this. The victims are not the bad guys. It's usually someone that the owner of the gun cares about," he said. "My research showed that a gun owner was 43 times more likely to shoot and kill a family member than that he'd shoot and kill anybody else."
We know that too many young people accidentally get their hands on guns. Here's a sampling from the past two months:
■ On April, 30, a 5-year-old Kentucky boy killed his 2-year-old sister with a child-sized rifle he got for his birthday.
■ On April, 22, an 11-year-old Delaware boy shot his 7-year-old brother with a 9 mm handgun they found in a home.
■ In March, a 12-year-old Florida boy shot and killed his 16-year-old brother in their home. That shooting came a week after a 4-year-old Orlando boy shot himself in the face in a condominium where he lived.
It would be easy to cite negligence on the gun owner's part for not locking these weapons up. But I still remember what I was told when I purchased my first gun. The seller advised me to keep the gun loaded and in a place I could easily retrieve it if needed.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)How do you feel about what that poster said to me though??
virginia mountainman
(5,046 posts)They are speaking before they think.it is the only thing I can think of.
I have a feeling we are doomed this election year, all this talk of cofiscation, it the false-consensus effect in motion.
They really belive they are mainstream with that crap they are shoveling. They are in for a very rude awakning.
I am sorry in there rush too disarm us, that they simply don't care who they hurt.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)For context, this is one of the most recent replies I received so far, telling me that I "bloodlust" because k said that I would defend myself if attacked again
[IMG]
[/IMG]
beevul
(12,194 posts)Its that disgusting...No...its worse.
Truly vomit worthy.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)All I said was that I "disagreed with their POV, and that as a rape victim I will defend myself in the future and won't let it happen again."
That earned me a " bloodlust " emblema.
This is so sick
merrily
(45,251 posts)Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I too am very sorry for what has happened to you and understand your viewpoint on gun ownership. We may not completely agree on the topic, however we may not completely disagree.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)I always thought it was spelled defense?
SwissTony
(2,560 posts)justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)it's a dead giveaway.
petronius
(26,696 posts)of American English. Probably because I've watched too many football games...

ileus
(15,396 posts)with a firearm....
Help keep a progressive stance on the 2A.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)It just won't happen.