57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
Ceili
 
  3  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 08:51 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Less than have been killed with bullets, I'm sure.
0 Replies
 
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 08:58 pm
I said american style gangland killings have increased our gun deaths. As of yet, very few Canadians have been killed by bombs in our cities but when they do I'll be sure to inform the NRA. Not that they'll give a damn for these victims either, unless of course they were card carrying, due paying member of the club.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 10:44 pm
@Ceili,
Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You don't see a problem with him buying a gun?
I said that; I don 't.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Granted my brother isn't a lunatic...
That 's a good thing.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
well I guess time will only tell, but I find it ridiculous he was able to buy a gun.
I cannot conceive of the reason
that u think its "ridiculous". Y is it "ridiculous" ?






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
No questions at all.
When people BUY things,
it is not the merchant 's business what he intends to DO with the merchandise.
It is the merchant 's business to know: "cash or charge ?"






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
In a foreign country.
Americans do not fear invasions by Canadians.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm not American, but I wouldn't want anybody, from far or away,
to have that kind of accessibility.
Meaning no disrespect,
your desires do not affect the rights of the parties to the sales transaction.
U can hardly expect any salesman to inquire:
"how will Ceili react to this purchase?
Will she approve?" and to be governed by the response.







Ceili wrote:
Quote:
This is exactly why Cho could by an arsenal.
There are no checks and balances.
In America, government was created subject to its being disabled
from doing certain things; some things were put beyond the reach of government, like gun possession.
One of the reasons for that is so we coud overthrow the government AGAIN,
as the Founders had just finished doing.
The American Revolution was a libertarian, freedom minded revolution.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm confused?
Apparently, about some things, not everything.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
How do you decide to deny man his liberty pre-massacre
but show no impulse to deny his access to a gun?
Dangerous lunatics shoud not be free; thay shoud be confined
and prevented from having access to the decent people.

No person who is free can possibly be prevented from acquiring guns, or anything else.
PROHIBITIONS DO NOT WORK.
Have u ever heard of anyone in the 1920s who coud not find a drink?
Do u know of anyone in America or Canada who CANNOT get marijuana if he wants it?







Ceili wrote:
Quote:
On one hand you say everyone should be armed, have access to weapons,
That is wise; guns are health insurance.







Ceili wrote:
Quote:
but on the other you say nutcases should be locked up.
Yes; is something rong with that?






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I think you're missing a step. The nutcases only seem to reveal themselves
after they've bought the gun, not before,
That is false; even before he came to America,
his family back in Korea knew that he was obviously very deranged.

The murderer of Rebecca Shaffer was grotesquely deranged,
very conspicuous, altho it is true that many people can be
crazy without showing it.







Ceili wrote:
Quote:
or in the rare case they when they have shown their nuttiness before they cut up a place of work...
They are defended to the high hilt to be allowed the right to buy
with out being fettered? Which is it?
It is that dangerous lunatics shoud be confined, after a fair judicial hearing
to ascertain whether thay are dangerous lunatics.

Incidentally, Ceili, if u were challenged to find anyone
who supported or "defended to the high hilt" or even to the low hilt,
any rights of conspicuous, dangerous lunatics to buy guns,
I am confident that u woud not be able to find anyone
in proof of your allegation. I have been quite interested
in freedom of self defense for many years, and I have NEVER
heard anyone say that about lunatics -- no one.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:

If I'm forced to live in a world with your preferred toys,
but I can't ask for a waiting period, a piece of id, a registry?
America is supposed to be a free country,
wherein no one is accountable to anyone else
for his free (constitutionally defended) choices,
except that dangerous lunatics shoud be confined.
I don't know how Canadians feel about freedom there.
I 've heard that liberty is subordinated to "good government".
That 's really your business, not mine.






Ceili wrote:
We all have to wait till one of you loses it and then you have the
balls to blame the non-violent people of the world.
Yes; that's true.
Until some citizen loses his mind,
he is fully entitled to the free exercise of his constitutional rights.
That 's the way it is.








Ceili wrote:
Quote:
We don't put guns or bullets in the hand of the insane,
but gun owners don't monitor or care who has access until after a deadly event.
I 'll stand on what I have already said.
No one has any authority to "monitor" anyone else's purchases of anything.









Ceili wrote:
Quote:
The NRA is the biggest lobbiest group in the United States.
The AARP, the labor unions, the NAACP and many other special interest groups are bigger than the NRA, but it has popular backing,
witness Clinton 's loss of BOTH houses of Congress after enactment
of the "assault weapons" ban and witness Gore 's loss of the Presidency which both he and Clinton have correctly attributed to gun owners, some of whom are represented by NRA.
We CARE about the right to defend our lives from predatory violence
of criminals, of animals and of government.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
They don't give a **** about the victim with a bullet in his head,
they care about the idiot standing over the blood fountain with the smoking gun.
U have it TURNED AROUND BACKWARD, Ceili.
We care about the victim and therefore we defend his right
to be ARMED in his defese from the idiot to whom u referred.
In America, we have the U.S. Labor Dept., which includes
its Occupational Safety and Health Administration whose function it is
to protect citizens' safety on-the-job, in their workplaces.
OSHA makes workplace safety rules.
Gun control is OSHA protection for violent criminals,
whom it protects from the defensive efforts of their victims.











Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm sorry I don't ever wish to carry a pound of death by my side.
U will be even SORRIER, if u ever NEED it.
If u or your child is ever violently attacked by man or beast,
u may wish to have the means to defend.

U remind me of Susan Gonzalez, of Florida.

There was a lady in Florida, Susan Gonzalez, who feared n detested guns.
She requested her husband not to have any guns in their house,
especially with their children there. One night, 2 criminals broke
down their front door. They entered her home, shot Mrs. Gonzalez twice,
and shot her husband as he lay harmlessly in his bed.

Franticly, she scrambled to get the OBJECT OF ABHORENCE:
her husband's 9 shot .22 caliber revolver.

She grabbed it up and killed one of the criminals.
The other fled, after she shot him too.
Altho it is possible that the criminals might have allowed Mrs. Gonzalez' 5 children to live
(if they did not care that the children'd complain to the police and testify against them in court)
Mrs. G was not willing to confide the lives of her children to the discretion of the men
who shot both of their parents.

This attack was STOPPED by the presence of an UNLOCKED gun in the home.
Without it, the murders of the parents and children probably would
have continued until all the children were dead. That gun was the INSTRUMENT OF LIFE
for the Gonzalez family.

After hospitalization, the Gonzalez recovered from their wounds.
She became a public speaker in support of the right to keep and bear arms,
and takes her .38 Taurus revolver everywhere with her.

Wise is he who learns from his mistakes, but wiser is he
who learns from the mistakes of others.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Don't blame me when one of your brethren goes postal.
I wish you would all finish each other off, leave the rest of us in peace.
In America, we refuse to accomodate u; I don't know
whether thay will submit to your wishes in Canadia.





David
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Mon 2 Nov, 2009 11:33 pm
Freedom. It's a funny word. Means different things to different people, in different places. The freest country I've ever been in was India, but I digress.
Americans register dogs, cars, children, marriage, births, deaths...
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above, and how does it affect your freedom?
I'm glad the lady now protitutes her self for your cause.. great, but maybe if she'd had a better lock or door, maybe a security system, nobody would have gotten shot, dead or hurt.
I can't be bothered to go over the minutiae in all my posts. It bores me, however dissect the post if you must. It won't change my mind.
I don't like guns - that ain't gunna change.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 02:09 am
@Ceili,
I read your profile.
U r a nice writer, more poetic than I am.

I was hoping that u 'd more fully comment on the Susan Gonzalez incident
because I 'd like to know your thinking about it; I 've had a lifetime
interest in human psychology.

Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Freedom. It's a funny word.
Means different things to different people, in different places.
In this context, in America,
I have political and economic freedom in mind.
Personal freedom and the domestic power of government
are INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL. The Bill of Rights protects
freedom in America by crippling government (as a condition of its existence) 37 different ways.





Ceili wrote:
Quote:
The freest country I've ever been in was India, but I digress.
I was there for a week or 2 in January 1984.
I did not notice differences of freedom, but I was not on the lookout for them.
I noticed that it makes a big impression on them when u give them cash.
One of them fainted.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Americans register dogs, cars, children, marriage, births, deaths...
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above,
and how does it affect your freedom?
None of those are enshrined in the Supreme Law of the Land,
as IS the right to keep and bear arms.
It is an immunity from government interference,
e.g., no government in America has jurisdiction to make u get to Church on time.

Government shoud be blind and ignorant of whether u attend Church
and Government shoud be blind and ignorant of whether u have guns.










Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm glad the lady now protitutes her self for your cause.. great,
but maybe if she'd had a better lock or door, maybe a security system,
nobody would have gotten shot, dead or hurt.
Then the BAD GUYS woud still be around to threaten the decent people.
U abuse the word "prostitutes" because that means improper use,
which is true only from the perspective of the evil ones, such as those she shot.
U choose sides favoring evil, Ceili.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I can't be bothered to go over the minutiae in all my posts.
That is because your error has been revealed to u
and u have no answer to justify it.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
It bores me, however dissect the post if you must.
It won't change my mind.
I don't like guns - that ain't gunna change.
It woud not be boring, if a predatory emergency arose. That woud adrenalate u.
I hope that u 'd be able to handle it at least as successfully as Susan Gonzalez did.

Out of curiousity, I wonder how u 'd act,
if an emergency occurred in your life requiring u to actively defend
yourself, your child, or your favorite person, and u found a gun
lying within arm's reach. Woud u leave it there, undisturbed,
and commit your life into the discretion of predatory violence,
e.g., like the Charlie Manson gang with Sharon Tate, or woud u use it to control the situation?

I don 't know your mind well enuf to imagine what your choice woud be.

Now let us suppose that u 'd leave the gun alone, not harming nor threatening the bad guy.

HOW woud that differ from another emergency wherein a fire broke out in your home,
and u had an extinguisher near by? Woud u also leave that unattended?

If not, then Y the difference?
Is it to protect the bad guy ?





David
Ceili
 
  3  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:17 am
@OmSigDAVID,
I have no idea how you guys do all that funky, quote, in quote, in quote stuff, so bear with me. . . . .


Quote:
Americans register dogs, cars, children, marriage, births, deaths...
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above,
and how does it affect your freedom?

None of those are enshrined in the Supreme Law of the Land,
as IS the right to keep and bear arms.




For the love of pete... Are you serious. Maybe that is the problem, the Supreme Law of the Land, whatever that is... I feel like I should say that in a really loud voice, like James Earl Jones. I digress. The Supreme Law of the Land does not enshrine birth or death. Huh? I'm not sure whether to be frightened or relieved.
Marriage I will get to...
Life is the issue. Guns have a terrible tendency to end it.
I'm sorry I used the word prostitute. But.. I kinda feel that way about violence. Just because you become a believer doesn't make it right. If they'd installed better doors, windows an alarm system, maybe even a cheap motion sensor light, she might never have had to change her heart.
You advocate being prepared, but aside from a gun, what other options do you suggest. I gave you these examples earlier, and even though you stripped my whole post apart, you managed to ignore this point.
On other posts, I've told you before that I no matter how prepared you are, the element of surprise can overtake even the most seasoned veteran. It sadly happens all too frequently. We hear of police officer killed in the line of duty, these are well trained individuals. They are armed, they have all the tools and yet it happens. Why?
Because they've become too reliant on the gun. They think like you do David. That a gun will save you in every aggressive situation. It won't.
A gun is a tool. But the best thing a person can do in any situation is run, duck, get out of the way, hide, call for help. You want enough space between you and the assailant. Maybe then you can think. This is an excerpt on the Fight or Flight syndrome.

Quote:
http://www.fighttimes.com/magazine/magazine.asp?article=1208 As the blood flow is diverted, the hands can become numb and with the added adrenaline that is now being pumped throughout the body, fine and complex motor skills are lost. Simple actions such as reloading a firearm or the handling of an impact weapon become difficult. The term tunnel vision is also a side effect from the diversion of blood. Peripheral vision and auditory senses can be reduced or completely lost. Often when people are questioned after a deadly situation, they cannot describe anything other than the threat directly in front of them and cannot remember any dialog. Other effects that maybe encountered are: loss of near vision, loss of night vision, loss of depth perception, inability to focus, inability to process information, loss of memory and the inability to make rational decisions.


You can see why I don't trust most people participating in a shootout.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 05:07 am
@Ceili,
Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I have no idea how you guys do all that funky, quote, in quote, in quote stuff, so bear with me. . . . .
OK




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Americans register dogs, cars, children, marriage, births, deaths...
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above,
and how does it affect your freedom?
David wrote:
Quote:

None of those are enshrined in the Supreme Law of the Land,
as IS the right to keep and bear arms.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
For the love of pete... Are you serious.
I am serious, regardless of Pete 's emotions.


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Maybe that is the problem,
the Supreme Law of the Land, whatever that is...
It is the US Constitution, which CONSTITUTES government in America.


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I feel like I should say that in a really loud voice, like James Earl Jones. I digress.
The Supreme Law of the Land does not enshrine birth or death. Huh?
Right. It does not have much to say about those.





Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm not sure whether to be frightened or relieved.
Marriage I will get to...
It says nothing on that subject, so far as I remember.




Quote:
Life is the issue. Guns have a terrible tendency to end it.
It is not "terrible" when the life ended is that of the aggressor, who is ended by his victim,
altho different victims can be affected differently.
It is a matter of their personal psychology.




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm sorry I used the word prostitute. But.. I kinda feel that way about violence.
I don 't mean to be glib nor flippant, but that is how Susan Gonzalez also felt
until the bad guys shot her twice and she needed to scramble,
to LUNGE for the FOUNTAIN OF LIFE: her husband's .22 caliber revolver.
She changed her mind after that moment.
If u are ever in the same situation,
will YOU change your mind or not? I wonder. . . I wonder.




Quote:
Just because you become a believer doesn't make it right.
How is that relevant to her right to bear arms ?


Quote:
If they'd installed better doors, windows an alarm system,
maybe even a cheap motion sensor light, she might never have had to change her heart.
How is this speculation significant? I don 't get the point.




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You advocate being prepared, but aside from a gun,
what other options do you suggest.
As I said, dangerous predators shoud be prevented from having access to the decent people.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I gave you these examples earlier,
and even though you stripped my whole post apart,
you managed to ignore this point.
In addition to what I have already posted, I also wish to repeal all anti-drug laws.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
On other posts, I've told you before that I no matter how prepared you are,
the element of surprise can overtake even the most seasoned veteran.
It sadly happens all too frequently.
This is true. We can only do our best.
Thay caught us off guard on Pearl Harbor Day and on 9/11.






Ceili wrote:
Quote:
We hear of police officer killed in the line of duty, these are well
trained individuals. They are armed, they have all the tools and
yet it happens. Why?
Sometimes it has just been bad luck.
Sometimes thay have been asleep on guard duty and taken out while sleeping.
Many jobs are not 100% safe, e.g. a cab driver.








Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Because they've become too reliant on the gun.
How do u know that thay did not agree with YOU ??
Some of them do.








Ceili wrote:
Quote:
They think like you do David. That a gun will save you in every
aggressive situation. It won't.
U have evidence that thay think this ??








Ceili wrote:
Quote:
A gun is a tool. But the best thing a person can do in any situation is run,
duck, get out of the way, hide, call for help.
Are u just guessing at that?
Is that what Kitty Genovese shoud have done? (She DID those things.)
I wish she 'd had a revolver.

In 2005, I had abdominal surgery. In the hospital I was so enfeebled
that I coud not even walk. I coud barely walk when I left and went home.
I was not so agile as to do all of those things
that u recommend, jumping around like that.





Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You want enough space between you and the assailant.
Maybe then you can think.
Ideally, 1000s and 1000s of miles.



Ceili wrote:
Quote:
This is an excerpt on the Fight or Flight syndrome.


Quote:
http://www.fighttimes.com/magazine/magazine.asp?article=1208 As the blood flow is diverted, the hands can become numb and with the added adrenaline that is now being pumped throughout the body, fine and complex motor skills are lost. Simple actions such as reloading a firearm or the handling of an impact weapon become difficult. The term tunnel vision is also a side effect from the diversion of blood. Peripheral vision and auditory senses can be reduced or completely lost. Often when people are questioned after a deadly situation, they cannot describe anything other than the threat directly in front of them and cannot remember any dialog. Other effects that maybe encountered are: loss of near vision, loss of night vision, loss of depth perception, inability to focus, inability to process information, loss of memory and the inability to make rational decisions.
Those are the reasons that plenty of tactical practice is helpful; build muscle memory.


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You can see why I don't trust most people participating in a shootout.
Years ago, someone shot at me, as I was driving home from my girlfriend's house around 1 a.m.;
shot out my driver's side window. When thay saw my .44 stainless steel mirror revolver, I heard a scream,
whereupon thay drove away abruptly. (Thay must have had somewhere else to go.)
With all respect, at that time, during this event,
we were not pondering whether Ceili trusts us or not.

The bottom line is this:
every predatory event is a contest of power.
Shoud a potential victim PREPARE himself to possess dominant power ?
As Groucho Marx used to say: "U bet your life."



David
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 01:23 pm
@Ceili,
Ceili wrote:
Freedom. It's a funny word. Means different things to different people, in different places. The freest country I've ever been in was India, but I digress.


Actually America is the only free country on the planet. Other countries either never had the right to have guns, or they repealed the right.




Ceili wrote:
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above, and how does it affect your freedom?


Gun registration is used as a tool to violate our right to have guns.

When the government decides to go violate people's right to have guns, they use registration lists to find gun owners.




Ceili wrote:
but maybe if she'd had a better lock or door, maybe a security system, nobody would have gotten shot, dead or hurt.


How exactly would that have prevented her from being attacked in a public place?




Ceili wrote:
I can't be bothered to go over the minutiae in all my posts. It bores me, however dissect the post if you must. It won't change my mind.
I don't like guns - that ain't gunna change.


So there is no point in showing that you are factually incorrect?
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 01:29 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Actually America is the only free country on the planet


hopefully comrade obama can soon rectify that position

hail the revolution
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 01:40 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Ceili wrote:
Freedom. It's a funny word. Means different things to different people, in different places. The freest country I've ever been in was India, but I digress.


Actually America is the only free country on the planet. Other countries either never had the right to have guns, or they repealed the right.

This is a case of American arrogance, I'm going to hazzard a guess and guess you don't travel much


Ceili wrote:
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above, and how does it affect your freedom?


Gun registration is used as a tool to violate our right to have guns.

When the government decides to go violate people's right to have guns, they use registration lists to find gun owners.


Yup, the government can find you. Hurray. I guess you're not so free after all.

Ceili wrote:
but maybe if she'd had a better lock or door, maybe a security system, nobody would have gotten shot, dead or hurt.


How exactly would that have prevented her from being attacked in a public place?


In the example given by David, the victim and her family were attcked while their were sleeping in their beds, I wouldn't imagine this was a public place.




Ceili wrote:
I can't be bothered to go over the minutiae in all my posts. It bores me, however dissect the post if you must. It won't change my mind.
I don't like guns - that ain't gunna change.


So there is no point in showing that you are factually incorrect?

What facts have I been wrong about, what facts have you presented. So far, there have been a lot of opinions, very little concrete info.
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 02:04 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
You are ducking my question. Assume illegals are not being deported. Should sellers be free to sell guns to an illegal Saudi?
Francis
 
  3  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 02:07 pm
Oralloy wrote:
Actually America is the only free country on the planet.


I can't even imagine a sensible person would utter such uninformed, to say the least, statement..

Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 02:30 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Americans register dogs, cars, children, marriage, births, deaths...
How does registering your gun differ from any of the above,
and how does it affect your freedom?
David wrote:
Quote:

None of those are enshrined in the Supreme Law of the Land,
as IS the right to keep and bear arms.


Didn't answer the question, doesn't explain how your freedom is affected. I think everybody in the world realize that it is enshrine in your constitution.
Ceili wrote:
Quote:
For the love of pete... Are you serious.
I am serious, regardless of Pete 's emotions.



Quote:
Life is the issue. Guns have a terrible tendency to end it.
It is not "terrible" when the life ended is that of the aggressor, who is ended by his victim,
altho different victims can be affected differently.
It is a matter of their personal psychology.
So at a moments notice, you become judge and jury. You can take the life of another, regardless of whether or not your perception could be wrong. Lets face it, most people are killed by friends or family. Maybe then you can judge the offender. I don't ever want that power, and since I don't know anybody who has every been attacked or shot at by a stranger... I'm not sure I want to spend my life, before or after, thinking about a life I've taken. Sorry, about the opinion, but I'm entitled. Just as you are.




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I'm sorry I used the word prostitute. But.. I kinda feel that way about violence.
I don 't mean to be glib nor flippant, but that is how Susan Gonzalez also felt
until the bad guys shot her twice and she needed to scramble,
to LUNGE for the FOUNTAIN OF LIFE: her husband's .22 caliber revolver.
She changed her mind after that moment.
If u are ever in the same situation,
will YOU change your mind or not? I wonder. . . I wonder.
We all wonder. Will we be the champ or the chump. Don't know. By the way I can shoot a gun, I have extremely good accuracy



Quote:
Just because you become a believer doesn't make it right.
How is that relevant to her right to bear arms ?
I dunno, you're the one who keeps bringing it up, I don't think answering violence with violence is always the best choice. She changed her mind and know preaches violence. She not advocating baking cakes is she. She goes on speaking tours telling people to use guns, good for her, I'm not interested.


Quote:
If they'd installed better doors, windows an alarm system,
maybe even a cheap motion sensor light, she might never have had to change her heart.
How is this speculation significant? I don 't get the point.
She was attacked in her bedroom Perhaps if she'd been smarter about personal security, this shooting would never have happened in the first place. But as I've said this several times before and you've ignored it, I'm led to believe that this is not a consideration in your life. The gun will solve all problems.




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You advocate being prepared, but aside from a gun,
what other options do you suggest.
As I said, dangerous predators shoud be prevented from having access to the decent people.
Using what methods aside from a gun? Any, any idea aside from fire power?


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
I gave you these examples earlier,
and even though you stripped my whole post apart,
you managed to ignore this point.
In addition to what I have already posted, I also wish to repeal all anti-drug laws.
What does that have to do with the price of rice in China?

Ceili wrote:
Quote:
On other posts, I've told you before that I no matter how prepared you are,
the element of surprise can overtake even the most seasoned veteran.
It sadly happens all too frequently.
This is true. We can only do our best.
Thay caught us off guard on Pearl Harbor Day and on 9/11.
Evade much, this is a real issue. Pearl Harbour???

Ceili wrote:
Quote:
We hear of police officer killed in the line of duty, these are well
trained individuals. They are armed, they have all the tools and
yet it happens. Why?
Sometimes it has just been bad luck.
Sometimes thay have been asleep on guard duty and taken out while sleeping.
Many jobs are not 100% safe, e.g. a cab driver.

Stick to the issue. I can list a hundred jobs more dangerous than a cop but ice road truckers don't use guns in day to day business, crab men don't use guns either. So, back to the police, they die on duty all too often. Asleep on the job? That's an ignorant position, it demeans what they do. Your interested in Psychology, why do fully trained officers outfitted with armour and guns, die all too frequently in the US? Is the opposition smarter, better prepared, do they have bigger or better guns, maybe, in some cases most probably. But, not always. So why? Because they become cocky? or lazy?
Ceili wrote:
Quote:
Because they've become too reliant on the gun.
How do u know that thay did not agree with YOU ??
Some of them do.
Yup.
Ceili wrote:
Quote:
They think like you do David. That a gun will save you in every
aggressive situation. It won't.
U have evidence that thay think this ??
You're right, I no more want you putting words in my mouth than you would want it. Suffice to say, unless you've got super human abilities, nothing will save you every time. There is always a percentage of failure. [color]







Ceili wrote:
[quote]A gun is a tool. But the best thing a person can do in any situation is run,
duck, get out of the way, hide, call for help.
Are u just guessing at that?
Is that what Kitty Genovese shoud have done? (She DID those things.)
I wish she 'd had a revolver.

In 2005, I had abdominal surgery. In the hospital I was so enfeebled
that I coud not even walk. I coud barely walk when I left and went home.
I was not so agile as to do all of those things
that u recommend, jumping around like that.
Not sure who Kitty is, what ever happen to I guessing wasn't pleasant. I'm assuming after a hospital stay you wouldn't be our doing a polka either, but there are many tactics to keeping a person alive other than a gun battle. Where both the aggressor and the defender can be killed.




Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You want enough space between you and the assailant.
Maybe then you can think.
Ideally, 1000s and 1000s of miles.
The more distance the better, most people can't aim properly - long distance shot are more difficult.


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
This is an excerpt on the Fight or Flight syndrome.


Quote:
http://www.fighttimes.com/magazine/magazine.asp?article=1208 As the blood flow is diverted, the hands can become numb and with the added adrenaline that is now being pumped throughout the body, fine and complex motor skills are lost. Simple actions such as reloading a firearm or the handling of an impact weapon become difficult. The term tunnel vision is also a side effect from the diversion of blood. Peripheral vision and auditory senses can be reduced or completely lost. Often when people are questioned after a deadly situation, they cannot describe anything other than the threat directly in front of them and cannot remember any dialog. Other effects that maybe encountered are: loss of near vision, loss of night vision, loss of depth perception, inability to focus, inability to process information, loss of memory and the inability to make rational decisions.
Those are the reasons that plenty of tactical practice is helpful; build muscle memory.


Ceili wrote:
Quote:
You can see why I don't trust most people participating in a shootout.
Years ago, someone shot at me, as I was driving home from my girlfriend's house around 1 a.m.;
shot out my driver's side window. When thay saw my .44 stainless steel mirror revolver, I heard a scream,
whereupon thay drove away abruptly. (Thay must have had somewhere else to go.)
With all respect, at that time, during this event,
we were not pondering whether Ceili trusts us or not.
Again, I'm here to give my opinion. If you don't wish to read it, fine, don't. I doesn't bother me one way or the other, but to engage me and then belittle me because I'm not the centre of the universe is hardly a fair argument.
The bottom line is this:
every predatory event is a contest of power.
Shoud a potential victim PREPARE himself to possess dominant power ?
As Groucho Marx used to say: "U bet your life."

Yup, but my contention is... unless absolutely necessary, a gun will probably cause more problem then solve. I'd rather not have the distraction, but it's impossible I know. There are gun lovers everywhere, peddling their wares, spit polishing their weapons enticing people with the power.

David
[/quote]
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:18 pm

I 've heard that Switzerland is also a free country.





David
Phoenix32890
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:28 pm
@Ceili,
Quote:
Not sure who Kitty is, what ever happen to I guessing wasn't pleasant.


Quote:
The case of Kitty Genovese is the most famous example of the so-called bystander effect. It is also the case that originally stimulated social psychological research in this area. Ms. Genovese was stabbed to death in 1964 by a serial rapist and murderer. According to newspaper accounts, the killing took place for at least a half an hour. The murderer attacked Ms. Genovese and stabbed her, but then fled the scene after attracting the attention of a neighbor. The killer then returned ten minutes later and finished the assault. Newspaper reports after Genovese's death claimed that 38 witnesses watched the stabbings and failed to intervene or even contact the police. This led to widespread public attention, and many editorials.

According to an article published in American Psychologist in 2007, the original story of Kitty Genovese's murder was exaggerated by the media. Specifically, there were not 38 eyewitnesses, the police were contacted at least once during the attack, and many of the bystanders that overheard the attack could not actually see the event. The authors of the article suggest that the story continues to be misrepresented in social psychology textbooks because it functions as a parable and serves as a dramatic example for students.[2]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

The case was taught in college social psychology classes.
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:37 pm
@Phoenix32890,
Ah yes, Thanks Phoenix I remember now. The infamous what if somebody had done something case....
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:44 pm
@Ceili,
Well then, you dismiss anything that doesn't support your viewpoint?
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:45 pm
@roger,
How so? I don't like guns. I'm not going to change my mind on that. Sorry. What have I dismissed?
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:51 pm
@Ceili,
Quote:
The infamous what if somebody had done something case....
sounds a little dismissive to me. Well, if there is only one point of view, it can't be important.
Ceili
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 Nov, 2009 03:54 pm
@roger,
I haven't dismissed this case or the victim. Isn't this how most people remember it? If someone had done something instead of being bystanders? I remember this from when I was a kid, it was a big deal.
Didn't realize I was being rude. Sorry.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 02/24/2025 at 04:25:20