Gun Control & RKBA

Loudly

(2,436 posts)

8. In some of those stories, the home invasion was perpetrated to steal guns.

Reply to AnotherMcIntosh (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:17 PM

Jan 2013

So if they were both the motive for the crime and at the same incapable of being used against the criminal, how do they promote home security?

And in other stories the perpetrator brought their own gun. They were emboldened to commit the crime because of the gun in their possession.

So how does the proliferation of guns in the hands of the public promote home security when their abundance makes them more available to criminals?

Such "honest discussion" suffers from a clearly pro-gun bias.

Weed out the stories in which the presence of a gun carries the guilt of causation, and let's see what really remains.

NONE of which, by the way, would be a Second Amendment argument, no matter how good it feels.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

112 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can those who recognize that firearms may be needed for home defense be legitimately called gun nuts [View all] AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 OP

No but I highly doubt you are going to have to face down 30 doc03 Jan 2013 #1

I hunt - there are feral dogs iiibbb Jan 2013 #17

You mean a 9MM handgun? I would rather have a shotgun or a rifle doc03 Jan 2013 #19

Cost LibertarianMI Jan 2013 #22

A reasonable situation offered... and rejected. iiibbb Jan 2013 #24

Who said you can't have a 9mm? Get it registered that's all. Don't call me doc03 Jan 2013 #69

I have a concealed carry permit... I am registered and vetted by the state. iiibbb Jan 2013 #94

Where do you live where it is illegal to hunt with a semi-auto? Jenoch Jan 2013 #106

So you're a 45 guy huh? Rocks are faster and more effective than a 124gr 9mm? ileus Jan 2013 #34

It is also amusing that a gun grabber is sinking into the classic 9mm is a wuss round debate. iiibbb Jan 2013 #37

I'd like to think that firearms aren't necessary for protection madokie Jan 2013 #2

I find your view refreshing as in recent days here on DU ... spin Jan 2013 #18

x2 AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #35

There are alternatives to guns, you know democrat in Tallahassee Jan 2013 #3

How is a home security system Jenoch Jan 2013 #4

A home alarm system can wake you up and allow to to get your firearm. ... spin Jan 2013 #27

You're in Florida... you know that Huricanes can knock out power for weeks.... right? iiibbb Jan 2013 #44

The very best protection is run and hide. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #5

Not that I am taking a side vs gun or no gun, but R. Daneel Olivaw Jan 2013 #6

You're right. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #7

making a harder target is step two gejohnston Jan 2013 #10

Good point. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #16

Run and hide? LibertarianMI Jan 2013 #23

If you're at risk, you didn't hide very well. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #81

How many hardened safe rooms for not-wealthy citizens are you willing to finance? blue burro Jan 2013 #111

What hardened safe room? Speck Tater Jan 2013 #112

That is the best tactic but I will make two suggestions . ... spin Jan 2013 #38

I do like your suggestions. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #82

Hide and hope not to die isn't a plan of protection. ileus Jan 2013 #41

Good points. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #84

Run and hide works for me... I avoid conflict first.... but the gun is for conflicts that follow me. iiibbb Jan 2013 #46

Makes sense Speck Tater Jan 2013 #85

There is no one size fits all prescription iiibbb Jan 2013 #99

My first choice would be to live in a world where shit never happens. Speck Tater Jan 2013 #109

In some of those stories, the home invasion was perpetrated to steal guns. Loudly Jan 2013 #8

if the goal was to steal guns, gejohnston Jan 2013 #9

OK so they were there to steal anything of value. Loudly Jan 2013 #11

I only know what the various criminologists say gejohnston Jan 2013 #12

You say that you don't understand how any of this discussion is related to the Second Amendment? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #14

That's an opinion, but that's not what the 2nd amendment says. DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #20

Right, I often compare Heller to Plessey v. Ferguson. Loudly Jan 2013 #28

I fail to see how the two are alike gejohnston Jan 2013 #30

I see Heller in exactly the opposite way. Loudly Jan 2013 #33

SharesUnited? Are you still here? Straw Man Jan 2013 #92

Please pipoman Jan 2013 #90

If they are breaking in to steal guns sarisataka Jan 2013 #26

You just pointed out how foolish it is for the media to publish the names of gun owners. (n/t) spin Jan 2013 #42

But then I get to mock. Loudly Jan 2013 #45

Which is like saying that having your name in a phone book ... spin Jan 2013 #48

Did you even bother to read any of these stories? DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #13

All the headlines and links are related to the lead sentence: AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #15

#5 backwoodsbob Jan 2013 #21

Yes Swamplizard, I do agree with your statement! DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #56

OK. Let's be a bit more specific. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #25

You left out the George Zimmerman incident! DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #31

Wow! I missed the part of that story where there was a home invasion, tell us more? DonP Jan 2013 #39

Z wasn't in his home or business. N/T GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #47

Zimmerman was a self proclaimed neighborhood watch capt. DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #63

actually none of that is true gejohnston Jan 2013 #65

What does that have to do with home invasions? N/T GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #75

All good examples. The link that you provided, of course, leads to many more. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #40

I agree, there are times when having a gun for self defense is the right choice. DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #59

"Let's not pervert the issue with foolish terms like gun-nuts" - why the fuck not? Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #55

The word Gun-nut has no specific meaning nor rational criteria, let's use more specific terminology DrewFlorida Jan 2013 #62

since guns are regulated gejohnston Jan 2013 #64

Demonstrably false, actually.. pipoman Jan 2013 #91

You're not from around here are you....don't you know guns kill people? ileus Jan 2013 #29

home invasion, home invasion! mike_c Jan 2013 #32

Cat commandos.. Lizzie Poppet Jan 2013 #36

Don't underestimate the value of deterrence Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #43

Welcome to DU. Good post. (n/t) spin Jan 2013 #49

x2 n/t AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #50

I understand and support those who want guns for home defense. The gun nuts are .... Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #51

Maybe there are some who "refuse to be part of the solution" because they see name-calling and AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #52

Being part of the solution has nothing to do with what happens at this cesspool. Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #53

first we all have to agree what an assault weapon is gejohnston Jan 2013 #54

If you want to go all technical I'll make it simple. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #57

under CT and NJ law, gejohnston Jan 2013 #60

so you would call my Grandfathers M92 Winchester a "assault rifle"? oneshooter Jan 2013 #61

It could have been called as "assault rifle" by these individuals: AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #66

No, if you want to nit pick I'll just go for a much more complete ban. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #71

Until now, the M-1 Garand has never been included within a statutory definition of "assault weapon" AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #58

Other countries have managed to allow people who really are competitive shooters Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #72

their laws are not as strict as DiFi's bill either. gejohnston Jan 2013 #74

When only the elites* have a right to be armed (and they will) with whatever their private security Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #67

Those who beat their swords into plowshares blue burro Jan 2013 #68

As a long time progressive Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #70

Oh I think a ban on semi auto weapons would have to cover all civilian use Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #73

cops going back to revolvers? gejohnston Jan 2013 #76

Except you and I both know Feinstein and Bloomberg and other millionaires Cynicus Emeritus Jan 2013 #79

A potential "apology from the overly emotional but non critical thinking anti-gun nuts"? AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #80

All for ME none for THEE 4Q2u2 Jan 2013 #108

Yes bowens43 Jan 2013 #77

No, because the only reason they are necessary... TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #78

You say, "The rest of the civilised world manages perfectly well." Switzerland. AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #83

They also have some fairly draconian laws, regarding... TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #88

have to ask a Swiss lawyer that one gejohnston Jan 2013 #89

Common law. Just like the civilised world has. TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #95

define civilized gejohnston Jan 2013 #96

Firearms are a legitimate option for home defense. Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #86

what's the difference between a six round revolver gejohnston Jan 2013 #87

OK, I'll play. Straw Man Jan 2013 #93

Reloading. Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #97

would you ban speed loaders? gejohnston Jan 2013 #98

Probably. Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #100

No you wouldn't. (1) You're not the President, a Governor, or anyone else in a position of authority AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #101

You don't actually know that, but I was implying the subjunctive. Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #104

there is no legitimate public safety arguement to ban them gejohnston Jan 2013 #102

So why did you ask the question? Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #105

appeal to emotion and bloody shirt waving gejohnston Jan 2013 #107

I'm a great fan of Samuel Johnson Starboard Tack Jan 2013 #110

Nah iiibbb Jan 2013 #103