birdog1960 Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I think what he is saying is that without a weapon, what would you do if someone(s) tried to ransack let's say the antique store you owned? I'm not saying the smart thing to do would be to start shooting at a mob but there certainly are circumstances where a weapon would come in handy. i have a shotgun and would use it for protection of my home/business if it came to that. but i'd have a better chance against a mob if handguns were illegal. but as chilcot said there is almost no gun culture in britain. uconn 's posted implied that there was some huge portion of the population clamoring for guns. btw, i think the best bet is to live outside cities, preferably rurally (where people use shotguns what they were meant for). not practical to many but probably the safest course.
Rob's House Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I think what he is saying is that without a weapon, what would you do if someone(s) tried to ransack let's say the antique store you owned? I'm not saying the smart thing to do would be to start shooting at a mob but there certainly are circumstances where a weapon would come in handy. We have a winner  I don't think you're interpreting it correctly.  But I don't know what the correct interpretation is. I suspect there simply isn't one. You're retarded  i have a shotgun and would use it for protection of my home/business if it came to that. but i'd have a better chance against a mob if handguns were illegal. but as chilcot said there is almost no gun culture in britain. uconn 's posted implied that there was some huge portion of the population clamoring for guns. btw, i think the best bet is to live outside cities, preferably rurally (where people use shotguns what they were meant for). not practical to many but probably the safest course. I would use mine too. Sometimes you surprise me.
chicot Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 I think what he is saying is that without a weapon, what would you do if someone(s) tried to ransack let's say the antique store you owned? I'm not saying the smart thing to do would be to start shooting at a mob but there certainly are circumstances where a weapon would come in handy. Â If you had a gun and the mob were armed with baseball bats then yes that would help. However, if the mob were also armed with guns I'm not sure your situation would be any better.
Rob's House Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 If you had a gun and the mob were armed with baseball bats then yes that would help. However, if the mob were also armed with guns I'm not sure your situation would be any better. You're assumption that all the rooters would also be armed is unfounded
birdog1960 Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 You're assumption that all the rooters would also be armed is unfounded they'd be much more likely to be carrying guns in new york or philly than london or manchester
chicot Posted August 10, 2011 Posted August 10, 2011 You're assumption that all the rooters would also be armed is unfounded  If they had easy access to firearms and they knew that shopkeepers were likely to be armed you don't think they would be?
UConn James Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 i have a shotgun and would use it for protection of my home/business if it came to that. but i'd have a better chance against a mob if handguns were illegal. but as chilcot said there is almost no gun culture in britain. uconn 's posted implied that there was some huge portion of the population clamoring for guns. btw, i think the best bet is to live outside cities, preferably rurally (where people use shotguns what they were meant for). not practical to many but probably the safest course. Â There ain't. They've been told to believe that CCTV cameras and mostly unarmed bobbies provide security. I guess the rioters didn't get that memo. Maybe this changes some attitudes. Probably not. Â But make no mistake, those images are what an unarmed society looks like --- people hiding in their homes and hoping they're not set on fire while the police are over-matched and afraid to give punks what for. Â Off topic, but Canada is likely to legalize long guns in the fall.
birdog1960 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 There ain't. They've been told to believe that CCTV cameras and mostly unarmed bobbies provide security. I guess the rioters didn't get that memo. Maybe this changes some attitudes. Probably not. Â But make no mistake, those images are what an unarmed society looks like --- people hiding in their homes and hoping they're not set on fire while the police are over-matched and afraid to give punks what for. Â Off topic, but Canada is likely to legalize long guns in the fall. last i heard, 4 died in the riots. wanna speculate how many would have died in us cities from riots of the same scale?
3rdnlng Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 last i heard, 4 died in the riots. wanna speculate how many would have died in us cities from riots of the same scale? Â The issue here is how many of the rioters vs. how many of the victims? Cold & callous you might say, well there are consequences in life (and death).
birdog1960 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 The issue here is how many of the rioters vs. how many of the victims? Cold & callous you might say, well there are consequences in life (and death). isolating victims alone, i'd bet on amny more than 4.
3rdnlng Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 isolating victims alone, i'd bet on amny more than 4. Â So, what's a rioter's life worth vs. a victim's life? Can you quantify?
birdog1960 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 So, what's a rioter's life worth vs. a victim's life? Can you quantify? what? what does relative value have to do with this? the absolute value (yes some things like life and death are absolutes) of 1 extra victims life is signifcant. i'm saying there would likely be many more than 1 additional victim fatality in the us under similar circumstances. do you disagree? would it not be desirable to minimize victim fatalities as a primary goal in such a situation?
Jim in Anchorage Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 if i'm interpreting this correctly you're saying i'd miss coming here for s#$ts and giggles (as opposed to someone threatening my ability to do my occupation like gun control laws would to a, i don't know really?, flea market gun seller?). yeah, i'd miss it. if i argued like this with my neighbors/colleagues they'd just walk away and avoid me at all costs in the future (even the liberals). i like a good yelling match and this is a good place to find one. You might try your lame arguments with the Korean shopkeepers who successfully defended their stores during the LA riots after the cops turned tail and ran. Oh thats right a rioter might get hurt. Surly that fellow with the 5 gal gas can and a lighter is just upset over rising Collage costs.
Booster4324 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 You might try your lame arguments with the Korean shopkeepers who successfully defended their stores during the LA riots after the cops turned tail and ran. Oh thats right a rioter might get hurt. Surly that fellow with the 5 gal gas can and a lighter is just upset over rising Collage costs. Â A Collage can be pretty cheap if you plan it right...
Heels20X6 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 I think this journalist sums up my thoughts on the matter.  http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/08/10/a-senseless-display  The issue here is how many of the rioters vs. how many of the victims? Cold & callous you might say, well there are consequences in life (and death).  Three of the victims were British-born Muslim men trying to protect their store. They were run over.  http://ca.news.yahoo.com/father-too-save-dying-son-uk-riots-160532753.html
birdog1960 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) You might try your lame arguments with the Korean shopkeepers who successfully defended their stores during the LA riots after the cops turned tail and ran. Oh thats right a rioter might get hurt. Surly that fellow with the 5 gal gas can and a lighter is just upset over rising Collage costs. i think i'd ask for a refund from your collage. and why not attack the actual argument rather than going on a tangent. shouldn't preventing loss of innocent life be primary with property secondary? and in which system would less innocent life be lost?  I think this journalist sums up my thoughts on the matter.  http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/08/10/a-senseless-display  ok so he's defined the problem (arguing against himself that it's not social problems yet it is socialist propaganda). where's his solution? Edited August 11, 2011 by birdog1960
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 last i heard, 4 died in the riots. wanna speculate how many would have died in us cities from riots of the same scale? Devils advocate....In the US it might not get to this scale because police and responsible citizens can defend themselves
birdog1960 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Devils advocate....In the US it might not get to this scale because police and responsible citizens can defend themselves might not but history says it can and likely will again. been thinking about the solution and since you are openly playing devils advocate so will i. how bout orwell's soma model. devise and distribute a drug to make the underclass numb and passive. many go looking for a state of numbness now. in a way were already doing this (with limited success) with the availability of street drugs, alcohol and the ever increasing array of mindless activities like ipods, video games, tv etc. just step it up a notch and do it better.
LeviF Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 might not but history says it can and likely will again. been thinking about the solution and since you are openly playing devils advocate so will i. how bout orwell's soma model. devise and distribute a drug to make the underclass numb and passive. many go looking for a state of numbness now. in a way were already doing this (with limited success) with the availability of street drugs, alcohol and the ever increasing array of mindless activities like ipods, video games, tv etc. just step it up a notch and do it better. Or we could just legalize weed already.
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 might not but history says it can and likely will again. been thinking about the solution and since you are openly playing devils advocate so will i. how bout orwell's soma model. devise and distribute a drug to make the underclass numb and passive. many go looking for a state of numbness now. in a way were already doing this (with limited success) with the availability of street drugs, alcohol and the ever increasing array of mindless activities like ipods, video games, tv etc. just step it up a notch and do it better. I may have "somatosed" myself a few too many times, was that orwell or Huxoly? I think the book was something like "A brave new future" possibly? I'm sure someone will chime in
Recommended Posts