Gun Control & RKBA

Starboard Tack

(11,181 posts)

120. Addressed it? Are you serious? It's an absurd analogy.

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 04:40 PM

Jan 2012

Fire extinguishers are designed to put out fires to save property and/or lives. Handguns are designed to injure or kill humans. You may use them for target practice or hunting or hammering in nails, but it doesn't change what they are designed and made for. Calling a handgun a tool of self defense is exactly the same as calling a nuclear arsenal a tool of national defense. Both concepts are bogus.

Defensive tools are shields, helmets and body armor. Even pepper spray is an offensive weapon, but it won't kill or maim. Anyone who carries a handgun for purported self defense is, or should be, prepared to kill or maim. Nobody carries a fire extinguisher for that purpose. You're really clutching at very thin straws with that kind of analogy.

Anyway, have a Happy New Year. May it be safe, healthy and prosperous.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

187 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Guns in Public, and Out of Sight [View all] alp227 Dec 2011 OP

So refreshing and reassuring to know only the good guys carry guns, isn't it? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #1

the suicides would have happened anyway gejohnston Dec 2011 #3

Oh, come on GE Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #5

I accept the National Academy of Science gejohnston Dec 2011 #10

I wonder if there should be a limit as to how many times the same false... DanTex Dec 2011 #41

I wonder if there should be a limit as to how many times the false gejohnston Dec 2011 #44

I wonder... discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2011 #45

No, it's refreshing to know that not ONLY the bad guys can carry guns. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #23

Thank you for the confirmation of all my points. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #27

Thanks for ignoring all of mine. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #31

Which ones did I ignore? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #34

These: Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #36

OK if you really want my responses Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #39

Why it is refreshing. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #40

Only three choices? That explains a lot. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #46

Judo is a physical contest of strength. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #48

I guess you don't know much about Judo and Jujitsu Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #52

Have you ever trained in the martial arts? rrneck Dec 2011 #53

Studied some Judo at police college and later I did some Karate training. No belts or special PJs. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #55

The point is rrneck Dec 2011 #57

I disagree. I've never trained in a dojo. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #60

Nope. rrneck Dec 2011 #62

Nah, thugs are the laziest. That's why they are thugs. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #66

It didn't take you long to condradict yourself. rrneck Dec 2011 #68

I see you still have your sense of humor Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #76

So which is it? rrneck Dec 2011 #78

Training for a black belt is difficult. Takes dedication, determination and time. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #80

Bullshit. rrneck Dec 2011 #82

No bullshit, I'm relating real life experience. Nothing Hollywood about it. No contradictions. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #86

Just because you may have seen it rrneck Dec 2011 #88

Whoa! I'm not talking public policy, but personal choices. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #90

The bigger they come the harder they hit. rrneck Dec 2011 #91

I agree 100% with every word. How about that? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #92

Holy fuck! rrneck Dec 2011 #95

For the first time, we are in agreement! n/t DWC Dec 2011 #104

This message was self-deleted by its author rrneck Dec 2011 #67

If you believe that..... We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #181

Nothing is 100% guaranteed to work in a SD situation. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #182

Actually, I know a fair amount about Judo. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #54

I'm not denying that a gun is more effective than a martial art. So is a bomb. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #58

Wrong rrneck Dec 2011 #61

I respectfully disagree. Have a great 2012 :toast: Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #74

So we are back again to this: Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #69

"That's why police officers carry firearms." Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #73

I think you are stretching. Atypical Liberal Jan 2012 #180

What if there is more than one assailant? nt hack89 Dec 2011 #71

What if there's a whole army? Sometimes you're just fucked Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #72

Then there are likely situations where a gun is the best answer. nt hack89 Dec 2011 #75

I doubt they are likely. I doubt any situation is likely. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #77

You misread the post. ManiacJoe Dec 2011 #79

He said "Then there are likely situations where a gun is the best answer" Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #81

I take that sentence to mean that it is likely such situations exist, not petronius Dec 2011 #89

Then, he should have said Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #94

His construction was fine; in your rush to disagree, you simply misread it petronius Dec 2011 #99

Mistake, moi? No, no, no. His construction was not OK Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #100

So people never get attacked by two or more people at the same time? hack89 Dec 2011 #83

There is a big difference between "never" and "likely" Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #84

So the odds are somewhere between likely and never. hack89 Dec 2011 #85

That was always my position Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #87

So we simply leave it up to each person whether to carry or not hack89 Dec 2011 #93

Of course, it should be an individual choice. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #102

I used my gun once hack89 Dec 2011 #96

No I acknowledge that. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #97

But I had to escalate hack89 Dec 2011 #98

Well, it could be said that your car was at their mercy Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #101

No - they approached me when I asked them to leave my car alone. hack89 Dec 2011 #103

Hold on there. Me give criminals a free reign? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #106

Disarm the criminals first then we can discuss my guns. hack89 Dec 2011 #107

I don't want to disarm anyone, not even the criminals. I definitely don't want to discuss your guns. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #109

But since those people who legally carry in public represent no real threat to you hack89 Dec 2011 #110

I'll decide what I concentrate on, thank you Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #111

None of your post disproves that strength and fitness is required. n/t PavePusher Dec 2011 #112

I'm not trying to disprove anything Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #113

May I ask what your actual martial arts experience level is? PavePusher Jan 2012 #114

I don't need to carry a spare tire on my person..... PavePusher Jan 2012 #115

LOL The old fire extinguisher is like a gun phallacy. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #116

I wasn't making a comparisom, I was debunking your attempt to. PavePusher Jan 2012 #117

Ah, yes, a pint of Boddies would go down very nicely. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #118

Yet you've never directly addressed it.. X_Digger Jan 2012 #119

Addressed it? Are you serious? It's an absurd analogy. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #120

Another BS dodge. (As I expected.) n/t X_Digger Jan 2012 #127

Where is the dodge? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #128

You can't even accept the question, can you? X_Digger Jan 2012 #130

OK. Let's see. Easy questions. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #134

It is simply inconcievable to you, isn't it... beevul Jan 2012 #135

And that script will probably continue to be played out. Nothing new about your response. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #136

Kindly keep your words out of my mouth, thanks. beevul Jan 2012 #148

OK, you don't carry a gun Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #149

Yes, it is my decision. beevul Jan 2012 #150

Well, you are wrong, I agree with you. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #162

Do you now? beevul Jan 2012 #165

Patience. Let them speak for themselves. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #167

Its nobodys job to back up your claims except yours. N/T beevul Jan 2012 #169

Non sequitur (it does not follow). X_Digger Jan 2012 #137

Crime occurs in most places where there are people. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #139

So your whines about 'everywhere they go' is specious. X_Digger Jan 2012 #140

"whines"? Pointing out absurdity is whining? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #141

You've given no logical response that would lead one to 'absurd'. X_Digger Jan 2012 #142

Sanity is not about winning. I'm not in a contest. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #147

Sanity is also not about repeating an unproven assertion, in the hopes it becomes accepted truth. beevul Jan 2012 #151

I don't know Beevul. What do you think? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #159

And you're doing it again. beevul Jan 2012 #161

'compulsive behavior'?!? By what measure, backed up by the DSM? X_Digger Jan 2012 #157

Are you OK leaving home without your gun? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #160

Who has done that? beevul Jan 2012 #163

You know I can't do that as it would be a call out. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #164

*snork* beevul Jan 2012 #168

If you hadn't noticed, I posted a new thread Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #170

What do you mean "own up"? nt rrneck Jan 2012 #178

Link to a thread, rather than a single post. X_Digger Jan 2012 #171

If I'm wrong I'll be delighted Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #172

Correct, you don't need to back up your assertions. X_Digger Jan 2012 #177

Which assertions do I need to back up? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #186

"those who have stated that they will go nowhere without being armed." X_Digger Jan 2012 #187

I do it all the time. Just log in and use the search function. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #179

'Compulsively' has a meaning, ya know. X_Digger Jan 2012 #166

Mental illness? WTF are you talking about? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #173

Nice dodge. X_Digger Jan 2012 #176

That would appear to be a thinly veiled personal attack. beevul Jan 2012 #154

"But I won't alert, because posts and themes like it Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #156

"That would appear to be a thinly veiled personal attack" Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #174

Goof grief do I really have to spell it out? beevul Jan 2012 #175

Again with the silly "guns are designed to injure or kill humans"........... Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #129

You may delude yourself all you like. Doesn't change the facts. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #133

Why am I not surprised that you dodge again? Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #143

No dodges. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #146

"You were in a spot that you put yourself in to start with." Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #152

It's so refreshing and reassuring to know only the good guys use laptops, isn't it? SteveW Dec 2011 #30

What do laptops and carry permits have to do with anything? Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #35

Uh, like the good, bad and the ugly use just about everything you use?... SteveW Dec 2011 #37

I don't want to expand NICS or any other testing, except individual reality testing Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #38

Why don't you want to expand NICS? What were Bloomie's whiny videos about if not that? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #42

I prefer self control to government control. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #47

"Don't you see how extremists always fuck things up for everyone else?" ellisonz Jan 2012 #121

How would you go about that? Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #123

I'm going to... ellisonz Jan 2012 #124

Then DO something. Support President Obama's proposals, for starters: friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #125

It's not my lobby standing in the way of that. ellisonz Jan 2012 #126

Missed the reference to MAIG and the VPC, I take it? friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #131

You crack me up sometimes... ellisonz Jan 2012 #132

Can't help it- I took your claim to want effective gun control at face value. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #138

Who gets to make that choice? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #49

Well, that's my point. Thanks again. Individuals make the choice. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #51

Individuals make the choice - as long as government doesn't get in the way. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #56

So the whole "gun show loophole" is really a fiction to you? SteveW Dec 2011 #59

No it isn't a fiction. More of a red herring. Starboard Tack Dec 2011 #63

Your choices are irrelevent to me... SteveW Dec 2011 #64

"What makes you so special that these violent criminal pose a threat to you." Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #144

What do you mean by "prescious"? I'm not familiar with that word. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #145

Good job catching a misspelling. Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #155

Again, I'm not in this for wins or losses. Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #158

"Gun crime is a direct consequence of gun proliferation." Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #153

Sounds like you are agreeing with me Starboard Tack Jan 2012 #183

The number of guns in the US has risen, while gun violence has declined. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #184

Look at the last 20 years.. X_Digger Jan 2012 #185

No one said they were nonexistant gejohnston Dec 2011 #2

A seemingly important part of the quoted story: ManiacJoe Dec 2011 #4

Really good argument for more user fees to pay for background checks and record maintenance... ellisonz Dec 2011 #6

did the state tell the county? gejohnston Dec 2011 #8

This message was self-deleted by its author ellisonz Dec 2011 #11

No, he's CALLING for due diligence. Straw Man Dec 2011 #12

You're right. I misread amid the sloppy grammar. ellisonz Dec 2011 #13

Looks like this is the problem safeinOhio Dec 2011 #14

Can we have this "user tax" on voting and publishing too? PavePusher Dec 2011 #15

We already have it. safeinOhio Dec 2011 #17

So we should have fees required to carry a book or speak in public, and to vote. PavePusher Dec 2011 #20

Yep. If we need to worry about some idiot safeinOhio Dec 2011 #24

Ummm, strawman, much? PavePusher Dec 2011 #25

If you spot it, safeinOhio Dec 2011 #26

You're my new favorite practicer of the absurd. ellisonz Jan 2012 #122

Paying for the paperwork DissedByBush Dec 2011 #22

Or a good argument for just doing away with the requirement altogether. Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #28

No, not a good argument. Here's why... SteveW Dec 2011 #32

Sounds like N.C. may have a communication problem between law enforcement.... PavePusher Dec 2011 #7

The only accurate comparison would be safeinOhio Dec 2011 #16

Why exclude non-qualifiers? Atypical Liberal Dec 2011 #29

The article admits that there are crimes prevented by those who legally carry concealed... spin Dec 2011 #9

Hard for NYT "to track [gun self-defense] episodes." Esp. if they neither try... SteveW Dec 2011 #65

Yeah, 'cause a guy who'd shoot a man in the back would NEVER Union Scribe Dec 2011 #18

Sounds like an argument for open carry. ileus Dec 2011 #19

NYT had to go back two years to find a supporting story? JustABozoOnThisBus Dec 2011 #21

This is the NYT's warm place to relieve itself of solid waste... SteveW Dec 2011 #33

"All the news that fits" discntnt_irny_srcsm Dec 2011 #43

There's Always Fox "News"........ (n/t) Paladin Dec 2011 #105

Gosh, Paladin, do you watch that stuff? I don't. nt SteveW Dec 2011 #108

clear your cookies if you hit a paywall since NY Times gives 20 free articles per session alp227 Dec 2011 #70

An out of state permitted person would still have to follow all the laws of the other state. aikoaiko Dec 2011 #50