Gun Control & RKBA

beevul

(12,194 posts)

148. "Why no response to this?"

Reply to guillaumeb (Reply #144)

Sun Jul 24, 2016, 03:26 PM

Jul 2016

Why no response to this?

Because it has no bearing on our rights, one way or the other.

Your reframing of typical NRA talking points is contradicted by what actually happens in most shooting situations.

What happens in "most shooting situations", and how come only situations where shots are fired are good enough for you anti-gunners?

What the poster you were responding to said, the jist of it:

You are the first line.

You can call that an nra talking point until you're blue in the face, but it wont stop that simple statement from being factual. "You are the first line", is a fact, regardless of what you label it, or how uncomfortable it makes you feel.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

183 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How to stop gun proliferation in the US [View all] discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 OP

So just accept that 30,000 people will die from gun violence guillaumeb Jul 2016 #1

Thanks for responding discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #2

If I got a brain tumor, I'd take some pretty goddamned agressive therapy... ret5hd Jul 2016 #4

yes, but the vast majority of them would gejohnston Jul 2016 #6

And a tumor or a murder is a problem discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #13

Japan's suicides prefer rope and high places. And its rate is far greater than ours. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #140

Hopefully we can cut that way down Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #3

Both ideas would help immensely. Good ideas. eom guillaumeb Jul 2016 #10

ending the drug war will do wonders, gejohnston Jul 2016 #5

The so-called drug war IS a failure. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #11

why do so many gun owners feel this need to claim they have guns for personal protection? gejohnston Jul 2016 #38

I've noticed that gun control proponents TeddyR Jul 2016 #41

Two points: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #51

That sounds like a "Red Dawn" fantasy scenario. gejohnston Jul 2016 #74

First, your alternate reality scenario in Orlando guillaumeb Jul 2016 #99

no, it is based on local reports and what witnesses described. gejohnston Jul 2016 #149

"Red Dawn?" How about good sense dawning? Until police arrive, YOU ARE the first line of defense. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #142

What I also said was.......... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #144

"Why no response to this?" beevul Jul 2016 #148

Can you link to the "NRA talking points" list Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #151

Theres a whole lot of this going on... beevul Jul 2016 #152

Sorry, but you persist with your misunderstanding... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #160

You state that, in your view, the chief reason for carrying is self defense. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #163

Error in this... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #167

Great, we agree on one thing. Let us try for another. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #169

The same. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #178

What methods would be used? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #179

Who knows? Fertilizer bombs, lack powder bombs, vehicles, arson w/ accelerant, machete... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #180

People are creative discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #181

My firearms are EXACTLY like that: The Green Manalishi Jul 2016 #121

Gandhi and MLK would agree. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #143

Suicides and accidents aren't gun violence Press Virginia Jul 2016 #8

Is this an attempt to minimize the violence that is caused by guns? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #12

Only if you change the definition of the word violence Press Virginia Jul 2016 #14

And so, in the spirirt of your reply: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #15

So we're abandoning the actual English language now? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #17

You might be abandoning the language: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #21

Again with the WHO? I guess an actual dictionary Press Virginia Jul 2016 #23

Two citations to support my contention vs. none for you. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #25

Two citations from the WHO, which has redefined Press Virginia Jul 2016 #26

Your citations do not refute mine. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #33

Only if you believe the WHO to be an authority Press Virginia Jul 2016 #35

Do you think that suicides go away if guns are banned? TeddyR Jul 2016 #42

Blaming the guns is just a means to ignore the real problem Press Virginia Jul 2016 #49

Nice deflection. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #53

How does one use force or threat of force in an intentionally voluntary act? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #57

Here is what I said: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #59

Suicide is a voluntary intentional act. Violence is the use of force or threat of force Press Virginia Jul 2016 #61

Apparently you have convinced yourself. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #62

Actually the 300+yr old standard definition of the words, in the English language, convinced me Press Virginia Jul 2016 #63

Standard definition? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #64

Now look up suicide...see if you can figure out how you force a voluntary act Press Virginia Jul 2016 #65

Please reread the response. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #68

I don't see where you've provided the Oxford definition for suicide Press Virginia Jul 2016 #73

As I pointed out, I used the CDC definition. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #97

IOWs, you abandoned the 300 year old standard English definition to embrace Press Virginia Jul 2016 #98

No. What is happening here is that gun owners feel the need to minimize guillaumeb Jul 2016 #104

Because violence and suicide are completely different things Press Virginia Jul 2016 #106

How about asking whether the choice people may make to kill themselves with a gun jmg257 Jul 2016 #56

its their life and their choice. Calling it violence is a dishonest means to inflate Press Virginia Jul 2016 #60

Yep, done on purpose Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #67

Is a hanging rope violence? Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #27

According to the WHO it is Press Virginia Jul 2016 #29

Suicide is violence directed against the self. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #30

So hanging isn't violence? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #36

Thats the key question. beevul Jul 2016 #46

Maybe the World Health Organization should clear the matter up Press Virginia Jul 2016 #48

Who'd thunk the notion of violence was so goddam tactile & stylish? Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #145

Do guns really cause violence? ileus Jul 2016 #79

Of course they do discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #87

My guns must all be defective Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #88

All my guns are peace loving pacifist... ileus Jul 2016 #89

You could have just said "gun control or nothing". beevul Jul 2016 #16

I say "all of the above". guillaumeb Jul 2016 #18

Don't get me wrong... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #22

All true. But a gun does make violence easier. Especially mass killings. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #24

Rare for now Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #28

And I repeat myself, at the risk of seeming rude: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #31

So why the big call to ban rifles? Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #40

All rifles or certain types? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #54

Considering even experts miss Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #66

When hunting ducks, if you miss the first shot, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #69

I do not hunt Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #71

The "it can/will never happen" argument has been used guillaumeb Jul 2016 #95

So what is your big plan? You must have one then. Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #110

Australia is not a police state. Neither is Canada. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #118

Those other countries did not have our numbers of weapons Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #124

That is laughable. benEzra Jul 2016 #171

What is not laughable is 30,000 gun deaths each year. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #172

Less than 200 murders/year involve "assault weapons". Not 30,000. benEzra Jul 2016 #173

Off target/point. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #174

You were the one who proposed a ridiculous capacity limit benEzra Jul 2016 #182

I need the same number of bullets as any member of the President's security detail Press Virginia Jul 2016 #86

"...why would you need a rifle with a capacity of more than 2-3 bullets? " beevul Jul 2016 #77

No. It might speak to a gun owner's psychological desire, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #100

Thankfully, we live in a society where there is no 'department of needs'... beevul Jul 2016 #136

Is gun ownership a matter of desire? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #141

Its a choice. beevul Jul 2016 #147

But in choosing, are gun owners contributing, even unintentionally, guillaumeb Jul 2016 #153

As usual, thats the WRONG question. beevul Jul 2016 #154

No, the answer to the question is the problem for you. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #155

How about you stick to the topic that you set - gun OWNERSHIP. beevul Jul 2016 #156

As long as you mentioned it....... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #161

My pleasure. beevul Jul 2016 #183

Have you even been in the same location where someone was shooting a gun Press Virginia Jul 2016 #85

I have owned and shot guns. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #101

Absolutely. Which makes me wonder why you would think now more than 3 rounds Press Virginia Jul 2016 #102

If you need more than three rounds in a room guillaumeb Jul 2016 #105

Really, Dirty Harry? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #107

No need to be Dirty Harry with a shotgun. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #109

I see you've never heard of a home invasion or multi person burglaries Press Virginia Jul 2016 #113

Are you prepared for nuclear war? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #119

Has a nuclear war ever broken into a home or attempted to rape anyone? Press Virginia Jul 2016 #125

Shotguns, etc. Straw Man Jul 2016 #157

You're asking this of someone who likely favors the MA AG plan... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #158

How many are attacked by 4 or more...... guillaumeb Jul 2016 #162

How many attacked by 4 or more is enough? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #164

Your side brought up the "four or more" argument. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #165

re: "...the "four or more" argument." discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #166

Three does seem to be a more common number. Straw Man Jul 2016 #168

More on home invasions: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #170

And even more. Straw Man Jul 2016 #175

Both types of occurences are extremely rare. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #176

Right. Straw Man Jul 2016 #177

IIRC I read where one person broke in... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #111

Oh commmme onnnn. Next you'll tell us this happens to trained professionals too Press Virginia Jul 2016 #114

Professionals???? No never! discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #115

Ha Press Virginia Jul 2016 #116

After guns are banned... beevul Jul 2016 #45

What are the chances for any one person to be killed by a terrorist in the US? guillaumeb Jul 2016 #55

Explain to me how the answer is relevant... beevul Jul 2016 #72

Because this is your post that I responded to: guillaumeb Jul 2016 #96

Yes it is. And this is how you responded... beevul Jul 2016 #135

There is a more bad blood in the world than you can possibly imagine discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #32

True, but a gun makes committing violence easier. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #34

"True, but..." discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #37

I enjoy your posts TeddyR Jul 2016 #43

I second TeddyR's remarks. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #146

Sure, YOU say it, but where is the focus of the gun control movement? beevul Jul 2016 #47

I have never stated that all, or most gun owners commit violence. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #58

So you must admit Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #70

You stating it, was never necessary. beevul Jul 2016 #75

I don't consider suicide to be violence, which 2/3rd's of that 30,000 are. n/t Waldorf Jul 2016 #39

That is your personal opinion. guillaumeb Jul 2016 #52

About 42,000 people will die of pancreatic cancer... Jerry442 Jul 2016 #7

I wouldn't be gleeful about it either, my wife has cancer discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #19

drug war: ban jonno99 Jul 2016 #9

bans no...help yes! discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #20

Exactly! Jailing non-violent offenders is just nuts imho. Work programs, jonno99 Jul 2016 #44

"Its time to end the war on drugs and spend that money helping those with addiction problems." pablo_marmol Jul 2016 #50

So we just smile and accept murder and mayhem on an industrial scale. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #76

OTOH pursuing useful solutions to violence might be an idea discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #78

You could focus on non-gun methodology. beevul Jul 2016 #80

I am not anti-gun. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #81

Did someone say they couldn't be? beevul Jul 2016 #82

guns are highly regulated gejohnston Jul 2016 #83

Dairy products are more regulated than cars, and both Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #93

So 20,000 plus state and federal laws mean what? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #94

The Brookings Institute Debunked Tha NRA claim in 2002. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #128

"that work" being the operative words discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #131

I fixed it, thanks, and the claim is still wrong. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #132

I appreciate the correction discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #133

complete bullshit gejohnston Jul 2016 #150

I appologize for mistaking you for an anti-gunner. beevul Jul 2016 #84

Be surprised if you get an answer Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #90

Well, I also expect, any day now... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #91

There absolute illogical argument that registration is anti-gun Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #92

And how many on DU are calling for the oneshooter Jul 2016 #108

That has nolthing to do with this discussion. Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #122

Yes it does, you just do not like it Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #127

Your aim is a straw man. DU members do not pass legislation Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #129

Not to be contrary but... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #112

Not without law. oneshooter Jul 2016 #117

Not with the law either discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #120

I do not have to register my car to OWN it Duckhunter935 Jul 2016 #126

Thats like...your opinion man. beevul Jul 2016 #134

Do you still claim you aren't anti-gun? N/T beevul Jul 2016 #137

It is a fact nit a claim Agnosticsherbet Jul 2016 #138

No, its a claim, with lots of proof contradicting it. beevul Jul 2016 #139

In the end, everyone dies. JonathanRackham Jul 2016 #103

Maybe, but there are priorities discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #123

!!! pablo_marmol Jul 2016 #130

make it a red shirt beergood Jul 2016 #159