Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How much sympathy should be granted to a politically active crime victim?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Ya look at their gun laws. Mass shooting every week. Disgraceful that they WANT their toys instead of placing he safety of their citizen first.


    Whose safety?
    What about the elderly black male named McDonald who wanted to own a gun to protect himself against the thugs who repeatedly broke into his home. The Supreme Court agreed with his right to self defense in McDonald v Chicago.

    Did his life have value?
    It is estimated that there are between 100,000 and 2.5 million defensive gun uses every year. (I didn't link the reports as I felt that would result on the sources of the information rather than the accuracy of the information, which are 2 different things)
    Even if we accept that there are only 10,000 per year, don't those lives have value as well?
    That is more than the number of people murdered with handguns per year by the way.

    Gun crime is a problem, but you can't remove guns from the law abiding and expect gun crime to be affected. It may even increase due to the inability of the weak to defend themselves.
    Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

    Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      David Hogg is a troll, political opportunist, and antagonist of the worst sort. He seems to be pretty good at propaganda and the Big Lie. He deserves little to no respect for that, especially as it seems he wasn't even in the school during the shooting, and I doubt mere attendance there counts...
      Hog is a fascist. The truly sad aspect of that truth is he has absolutely no cognitive awareness of the ideology he is practicing or the useful idiot he truly is.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
        Whose safety?
        What about the elderly black male named McDonald who wanted to own a gun to protect himself against the thugs who repeatedly broke into his home. The Supreme Court agreed with his right to self defense in McDonald v Chicago.

        Did his life have value?
        It is estimated that there are between 100,000 and 2.5 million defensive gun uses every year. (I didn't link the reports as I felt that would result on the sources of the information rather than the accuracy of the information, which are 2 different things)
        Even if we accept that there are only 10,000 per year, don't those lives have value as well?
        That is more than the number of people murdered with handguns per year by the way.


        Gun crime is a problem, but you can't remove guns from the law abiding and expect gun crime to be affected. It may even increase due to the inability of the weak to defend themselves.
        Who wants to remove ALL guns?

        100,000 to 2.5 million. That is a laughable spread.

        More than 42% of the time, the victim took some action — maced the offender, yelled at the offender, struggled, ran away, or called the police. Victims used a gun in less than 1% of the incidents (127/14,145). In other words, actual self-defense gun use, even in our gun-rich country, is rare.

        It is sometimes claimed that guns are particularly beneficial to potentially weaker victims, such as women. Yet of the more than 300 sexual assaults reported in the surveys, the number of times women were able to use a gun to protect themselves was zero.

        Almost two-thirds of the people in the U.S. population live in homes without guns, and there is no evidence that the inhabitants of these homes are at greater risk of being robbed, injured or killed by criminals compared with citizens in homes with guns. Instead, the evidence is overwhelming that a gun in the home increases the likelihood not only that a household member will be shot accidentally, but also that someone in the home will die in a suicide or homicide.

        http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...730-story.html
        "Ask not what your country can do for you"

        Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

        you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
          Whose safety?
          What about the elderly black male named McDonald who wanted to own a gun to protect himself against the thugs who repeatedly broke into his home. The Supreme Court agreed with his right to self defense in McDonald v Chicago.

          Did his life have value?
          It is estimated that there are between 100,000 and 2.5 million defensive gun uses every year. (I didn't link the reports as I felt that would result on the sources of the information rather than the accuracy of the information, which are 2 different things)
          Even if we accept that there are only 10,000 per year, don't those lives have value as well?
          That is more than the number of people murdered with handguns per year by the way.

          Gun crime is a problem, but you can't remove guns from the law abiding and expect gun crime to be affected. It may even increase due to the inability of the weak to defend themselves.
          I would say that number is valid, if a little low.

          I can say that when a homeowner shoots an intruder is has a chart-able ripple effect: criminal interactions with residencies drop drastically in that area for a couple weeks.

          And there are the countless incidents where the presence of a firearm made all the difference. My wife was working late one evening; walking to her truck a man approached her in a suspicious manner. She pulled her pistol but held in by her side. He reversed course and left. In her truck she called 911. We found him a few blocks away, and he was carrying duct tape and a knife; he was currently in violation of parole for Aggravated Sexual Assault.

          When the first unit rolled up he was in an alley approaching a woman watering her garden in her bag yard.

          That sort of thing happens a lot.

          That is the difficult thing to convey to our foreign posters: it is not mandatory to be a victim.
          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
            Who wants to remove ALL guns?

            100,000 to 2.5 million. That is a laughable spread.

            More than 42% of the time, the victim took some action — maced the offender, yelled at the offender, struggled, ran away, or called the police. Victims used a gun in less than 1% of the incidents (127/14,145). In other words, actual self-defense gun use, even in our gun-rich country, is rare.

            It is sometimes claimed that guns are particularly beneficial to potentially weaker victims, such as women. Yet of the more than 300 sexual assaults reported in the surveys, the number of times women were able to use a gun to protect themselves was zero.

            Almost two-thirds of the people in the U.S. population live in homes without guns, and there is no evidence that the inhabitants of these homes are at greater risk of being robbed, injured or killed by criminals compared with citizens in homes with guns. Instead, the evidence is overwhelming that a gun in the home increases the likelihood not only that a household member will be shot accidentally, but also that someone in the home will die in a suicide or homicide.

            http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...730-story.html


            How do you claim to not want to remove guns when you characterize the choice as between one side wanting toys and the other side wanting safety?
            ( "Disgraceful that they WANT their toys instead of placing he safety of their citizen first".")

            Why is the spread laughable? I don't know the exact number of defensive gun uses and neither do you.
            We really don't keep records of crimes that didn't happen or almost happened.

            The fact that many americans live without guns (I'm sure your statistics are pulled from an agenda driven site) but that does not establish that the people who have them do not need them. Most crimes occur in cities and owning a gun there is very difficult if not impossible.

            The "study" that claims having a gun in the house means it will be used against the resident includes suicides, and therefore not relevant. UNless you believe that guns cause suicides.
            I tend to think suicides are related more to the mental state of the individual.

            The fact that the survey you quote (which includes some laughable assertions) argues that women don't protect themselves with guns based on 300 responses is kind of a stretch.
            Your agenda driven study admitted that there were 127 defensive gun uses in their data.
            Even if we simply accept those numbers.
            Do those 127 lives have value or must we sacrifice them?


            As for your article in included this ominous quote:
            "Another study, in 2003, found that counties with higher levels of household gun ownership have higher rates of household burglary, not lower."
            They are trying to imply that having guns increase burglaries without any evidence and also without considering the reverse, that areas with lots of burglaries will cause people to own guns for protection.

            According to actual, objective studies by criminologists (not agenda driven journalists), burglars avoid places where they might get shot.
            Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

            Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
              I would say that number is valid, if a little low.

              I can say that when a homeowner shoots an intruder is has a chart-able ripple effect: criminal interactions with residencies drop drastically in that area for a couple weeks.

              And there are the countless incidents where the presence of a firearm made all the difference. My wife was working late one evening; walking to her truck a man approached her in a suspicious manner. She pulled her pistol but held in by her side. He reversed course and left. In her truck she called 911. We found him a few blocks away, and he was carrying duct tape and a knife; he was currently in violation of parole for Aggravated Sexual Assault.

              When the first unit rolled up he was in an alley approaching a woman watering her garden in her bag yard.

              That sort of thing happens a lot.

              That is the difficult thing to convey to our foreign posters: it is not mandatory to be a victim.


              And those are the incidents they never want to have considered.
              Your wife and the other woman are apparently expendable,
              Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

              Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                And those are the incidents they never want to have considered.
                Your wife and the other woman are apparently expendable,
                And yet you are the guys with the higher murder rate and the mass shooting problem...

                Comment


                • Originally posted by craven View Post
                  no you don't get it do you Ingraham was not criticizing him she was making fun of him. what did Laura say about him that was related to the issue

                  on the other hand what he is talking about is on the issue

                  what so tough about that
                  Let's see.

                  Hogg was complaining about not getting into his preferred college.

                  She told him not to whine about it. Sounds on topic to me. You can't start a topic then cry "off topic" when somebody responds.

                  Just out of curiosity, has whining ever raised YOUR GPA? I'm sure that even bubble wrap schools put at least some emphasis on performance over grievance.

                  If Hogg wants to be successful, he needs to study. That's the long and short of it. You can call it unfair and call me cruel all you want but that's how the world works. And he's going to learn that pretty quick. Whether he learns it in his teen years or as a full fledged adult that reality will hit. Best he learn it now. It will help him in the long run.
                  A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Paddybhoy View Post
                    And yet you are the guys with the higher murder rate and the mass shooting problem...



                    I don't seem to think I denied that nor is it relevant to anything I said.
                    The need for self defense is consistent with a recognition of a high murder rate and mass shooting problem.

                    Unless you are saying criminal shootings mean we have less need for self defense
                    Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                    Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
                      I don't seem to think I denied that nor is it relevant to anything I said.
                      The need for self defense is consistent with a recognition of a high murder rate and mass shooting problem.

                      Unless you are saying criminal shootings mean we have less need for self defense
                      Well it kinda is, you agreed with Arnolds sentiment that non-Americans are somehow passive or more accepting of being the victims of crime.

                      You go even further and suggest that we consider the victims of crime to be expendable.

                      Kind of a shitty thing to say from all the way within that glass house of yours.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                        Let's see.

                        Hogg was complaining about not getting into his preferred college.

                        She told him not to whine about it. Sounds on topic to me. You can't start a topic then cry "off topic" when somebody responds.

                        Just out of curiosity, has whining ever raised YOUR GPA? I'm sure that even bubble wrap schools put at least some emphasis on performance over grievance.

                        If Hogg wants to be successful, he needs to study. That's the long and short of it. You can call it unfair and call me cruel all you want but that's how the world works. And he's going to learn that pretty quick. Whether he learns it in his teen years or as a full fledged adult that reality will hit. Best he learn it now. It will help him in the long run.
                        off topic for her she a national new person him not getting into school not worthy of her notice and is petty. and it is normal. And studying only gets ya so far when applying to school part of it just luck.

                        but to take your argument his reply to her is appropriate and if she loses her job she deserved it.

                        most of the successful people I know whine does not make them any less talented or very good at there job its normal

                        and considering his age and your knowledge of him how do you know he not going to be successful

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                          Let's see.

                          Hogg was complaining about not getting into his preferred college.

                          She told him not to whine about it. Sounds on topic to me. You can't start a topic then cry "off topic" when somebody responds.

                          Just out of curiosity, has whining ever raised YOUR GPA? I'm sure that even bubble wrap schools put at least some emphasis on performance over grievance.

                          If Hogg wants to be successful, he needs to study. That's the long and short of it. You can call it unfair and call me cruel all you want but that's how the world works. And he's going to learn that pretty quick. Whether he learns it in his teen years or as a full fledged adult that reality will hit. Best he learn it now. It will help him in the long run.
                          Says the 35 year old virgin who I am pretty sure works some low paying job in a high school......
                          Last edited by Paddybhoy; 05 Apr 18, 13:45.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Paddybhoy View Post
                            Says the 35 year old virgin who I am pretty sure works some crappy low paying job in a high school......
                            ow that a low blow even if untrue

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Paddybhoy View Post
                              Well it kinda is, you agreed with Arnolds sentiment that non-Americans are somehow passive or more accepting of being the victims of crime.

                              You go even further and suggest that we consider the victims of crime to be expendable.

                              Kind of a shitty thing to say from all the way within that glass house of yours.


                              Cool.
                              Are there any other things that I said, but don't know about?

                              I did notice that rather than actually respond to anything I've said you've just tried to attack me or make up things.
                              But you just keep being you.
                              Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                              Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by craven View Post
                                ow that a low blow even if untrue
                                Addressing mods.

                                Pirateship has confirmed on public forums that he is a virgin.

                                And from the years of his posting here I gather he works a non teaching position at a school. Going by the fact teachers dont get paid enough one can only surmize that his lower status job is also relatively low paid.

                                No insult intended, just posting my observations.
                                Last edited by Paddybhoy; 05 Apr 18, 13:56.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X