Would-be robber shot and killed by intended victim in west Houston, police say

[AndyS]

72. Oh Jesus fucking Christ this is so fucking tedious.

I don't like doing cut n paste but you cram so much deflection and red herring into one post there's no other way to deal with it.

What I've written is that people's life experiences and physical attributes impact the statistical odds of a successful defensive encounter. You initially had difficulty accepting that statistics don't predict an individual's odds of success, but you did accept that in post #56 where you wrote:
but under most circumstances you have arguably a better possibility of success than the hypothetical 95 year old woman

You wrote this in response to the statistical fact that people with guns are more likely to be shot. You changed the goal post from the population at large and the danger of having guns to a specific hypothetical that you made up to fit your point of view. We've discussed this yet you do it again.

Now, given that we've accepted that different people, with different levels of experience, training, life skills, athleticism, etc, will have different odds of successfully defending themselves, why would you then regress to your previous position in post #58?

Who is 'we'? Got a mouse in your pocket? I acquiesced to the proposition that given your hypothetical you might be more successful than a 95 year old woman. You're still straying from the fact that people who have guns are more likely to be shot.

You're trying to make your argument while avoiding hypothetical scenarios but given the rarity of gun violence and even rarer defensive gun uses, hypotheticals are a necessary evil. I've only personally been involved in one defensive gun use and I am unlikely to ever be in that same situation, or even a remotely similar situation, ever again.

Well, yeah, no shit. If you want to share that one event (not that I doubt you but context means a lot) we can talk about THAT but it still falls outside the fact that people who have guns are more likely to be shot.

We talk about hypothetical situations we can envision but they're based off real scenarios that can and do happen, like the ATM robbery, or the active shooter at the mall, or the home invasion. Despite the extremely low chance I will ever encounter something like one of those scenarios, they're still far more likely than encountering a similar scenario to what I faced in the previously mentioned defensive gun use and yet that actually happened.

Yes extremely rare that guns are used in self defense. I've been trying to make this point. Guns rarely help a situation and are proven to make most of them worse. Guns do not make you safer at home or in public. As for the ATM incident the fact still remains that it is safer to capitulate to the robber than to resist. I've given you proof that you are 4x more likely to be injured resisting and 5x more likely if you use a gun to resist. Why is this hard to grasp?

I had thought we'd gotten past the herky jerky goal post moving but apparently you missed the memo about guns not making you safe. I'll say again, playing these odds is a losing game for the gun owner. Please don't bet the rent money (or your life) on odds like this!

Once more: you are more likely to be shot if you have a gun. Guns do not make you safer at home or in public.