Armed citizens

  • Thread starter Thread starter Black_Jaque
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
fighting fat:
Britain banned handguns 15 years ago after the shootings at Dunblane primary school, we haven’t become a dictatorship, nor are we at the mercy of gun-toting gangs.
Click to expand...
England fixed the statistics to support their preconceived notion that gun ownership causes crime.

A crime in England is only counted as a crime if a conviction is won in court. All those thefts, stranglings, break-ins, death threats, exortions, and so on don’t count as crimes unless the perps are caught and brought to justice.

Moreover, they are far less likely to be caught if folks continue to not carry guns. The (real) statistics show that neighbourhoods where folks carry guns, have lower crime rates than neighbourhoods where folks do not carry guns.
 
Hehe…someone mentioned above about callling 911 doesn’t stop a crime…if there are people like that believe it does, they’ve been watching Dora the Explorer a little too much.

‘Swiper no swiping"
‘Swiper no swiping’
Swiper no swiping’

Mugger(approaching with a gun drawn)

You can’t say
911
911
911
(like saying mugger no mugging)

and he just says ‘Oh, Man!’ and walks away…
 
Ani_Ibi said:
When those folks cannot carry weapons. But that does not apply in the countries were are talking about. Folks can carry weapons in our countries.
Click to expand...
Ah, but when one says that by carrying a weapon, your intention is to kill – then that same persom must admit that by practicing martial arts, his intention is to maim and kill. No?😛
 
jc-servant said:
Actually, getting a concealed handgun license (CHL) is not more restrictive in TX than becoming a licensed police officer. I think that is an urban myth that has been promoted by some gun rights folks and which IMO diminishes the hard work of individuals who become officers. (I was an attorney for TX DPS which issues the CHL before I changed to a federal agency.)

The CHL requires an application, a relatively inexpensive fee, a 10-15 hour course that includes a test where you shoot for proficiency, eligibility to buy a handgun and not much else. There are fee reductions available for the “indigent,” and senior citizens. Most of our cities don’t even require gun registration, so no one knows if you have one or 50 at your home unless you bought them in Texas and the state registration occurred at the time of purchase.

Becoming an officer requires an academy that lasts significantly longer (many months) and at a much higher cost to the individual who seeks to get certified before getting hired on by a department. Many officers take the required classes at a junior college on their own for a year or two and then apply to agencies. The larger cities and the state run their own academies that certify their officers, but the small towns want to hire someone who has completed school. Both situations require a background check.
Click to expand...
Thank you for what you do. It was actually something I heard on a radio talk show; the host I think has his permit and made the comment. Kind of hoped that his comments were not the case!
 
Sir_Knight said:
All I’m saying is that in America, every state that has introduced laws allowing citizens to own and carry guns has seen a drastic reduction in violent crime. In another thread on this board I supplied a couple of dozen stats along with references supporting those statements. I’ve also provided stats showing that states which restrict gun ownership have a higher rate of violent crime compared to those states that do not restrict gun ownership. I posted this within the past month or so on another thread of you wish to look them up and verify the stats for yourself if you doubt my comments.

As to what it would mean to England, I can not foresee the future but can only tell you what has happened here in the past.
Click to expand...
FightingFat, Australia banned all guns outright because of a small-scale Virginia Tech (I think a handful of people died in the Aussie incident). Their crime rate shot straight up after the ban because - guess what? Only the criminals has guns.

There’s also another old quote which we need to take to heart:
“Politicians prefer unarmed peasants”
 
searching06 said:
FightingFat, Australia banned all guns outright because of a small-scale Virginia Tech (I think a handful of people died in the Aussie incident). Their crime rate shot straight up after the ban because - guess what? Only the criminals has guns.

There’s also another old quote which we need to take to heart:
“Politicians prefer unarmed peasants”
Click to expand...
Isn’t it interesting that those who are most active in telling us what we should do and not do are from England, Canada, and the odd Australian?😛
 
vern_humphrey said:
Ah, but when one says that by carrying a weapon, your intention is to kill – then that same persom must admit that by practicing martial arts, his intention is to maim and kill. No?😛
Click to expand...
Yes. But not maim. Simply kill. To not be prepared to do so is very dangerous. The only difference I make between carrying a gun and practising a martials art, is that carrying a gun is safer and more effective.

Some folks like to think that martial arts are more peaceful. I do not agree with this at all.

As I have said before on this thread, the origins of martial arts were (1) to control the opponent long enough so that he/she could be tortured for information and then killed or (2) to kill him/her on the first blow so he/she could not get up again to pose a further threat.

None of this is peaceful.

Paradoxically being prepared to use deadly force often results in a more peaceful life. At least I have found this to be true. My ego is not all caught up in trying to make political points.

I am sure I am not saying anything that you do not know already.
 
Sir_Knight said:
I earned a green belt back in the late 1970’s and haven’t done much with it since while she is an active second degree black belt.

They don’t start hitting you for real until you are a brown belt. But fair enough.
Click to expand...
 
Ani_Ibi said:
The only difference I make between carrying a gun and practising a martials art, is that carrying a gun is safer and more effective.
Click to expand...
LOL! No it’s not! What nonsense!! Most people I know who train, train for fun, to gain confidence. They are the sort of people who meet their mates down the pub and say “Oh yeah, at karate last night so and so broke two boards with his bare hands” and never get any whare near a real fight. Some people have been harressed or bullied and use MA training to gain the confidence to go out of their house again.

Training a MA doesn’t turn you into some lethal killing machine. If you train really hard and realistically for a long time, it might improove the odds if you ever get into a fight. For self defense, you would always expect to strike and run away.

A small minority get into sport fighting and take their training to a whole new level.
Ani_Ibi said:
Some folks like to think that martial arts are more peaceful. I do not agree with this at all.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the Taoist Tai Chi Society 😃
Ani_Ibi said:
As I have said before on this thread, the origins of martial arts were (1) to control the opponent long enough so that he/she could be tortured for information and then killed or (2) to kill him/her on the first blow so he/she could not get up again to pose a further threat.

None of this is peaceful.
Click to expand...
“The origins of martial arts” ??? Martial Arts is a generic term that covers a huge range of fighting styles. The origins of martial arts were MARTIAL!! Dragon Style Kung Fu- brutal and direct, was invented to be used by the Emperor’s body gaurds, Wing Chun Kung Fu- skill over power, was said to have been invented by a woman to overcome male agressors, Karate and Kabudo were systems of fighting using no weapons (kara-te) or farm implements after weapons were outlawed.
Ani_Ibi said:
Paradoxically being prepared to use deadly force often results in a more peaceful life.
Click to expand...
:bigyikes:

Paradox is right!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top