A friend is telling the story of a person she met who is fearful. The reasons are what they are. One of the commenters to that thread posted this
( Read more... )
I *refuse* to live in danger of being randomly shot by a deranged killer with easy access to as many firearms as they want. Raped? US gun laws didn't prevent me from being raped. And better raped than dead.
Interesting feels. Though not very useful as a risk management strategy. Please share your realistic plan to "fix" it so that such a thing never happens again. I assume your plan will also address the really big examples, like Mumbai. If this one type of statistically insignificant event is your deal breaker, than your path is obvious. If you live elsewhere, stay there. If you live here, pack a bag.
… Were you armed? If you weren't, whether or not your government grudgingly permits you to carry arms is irrelevant. (As it is to the criminals who prey upon their unarmed victims at will.)
If you had been, if you'd had the tool and the training (and the self-confident skill it imparts), your attacker would have received a VERY nasty shock. Instead, well, medical treatment was needed by the wrong person.
They didn't prevent you from being raped because you didn't have a gun on you.
On the San bernardino shooting, those were TERRORISTS with ILLEGALLY procured guns. So there isn't a single gun law that would have stopped them, because well, they were already breaking dozens.
But let me put it to you in simple terms: I will kill anyone who tries to take my guns away.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/25/kansas_workplace_shooter_goes_on_deadly_spree_through_neighboring_towns.html
Or this:
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/21/us/michigan-kalamazoo-county-shooting-spree/
Or this:
http://www.refinery29.uk/2015/12/104354/san-bernardino-mass-shooting
I *refuse* to live in danger of being randomly shot by a deranged killer with easy access to as many firearms as they want. Raped? US gun laws didn't prevent me from being raped. And better raped than dead.
Reply
Please share your realistic plan to "fix" it so that such a thing never happens again. I assume your plan will also address the really big examples, like Mumbai.
If this one type of statistically insignificant event is your deal breaker, than your path is obvious. If you live elsewhere, stay there. If you live here, pack a bag.
Reply
I'll be waiting to hear that plan as well. Let's see if this person answers either one of us.
Reply
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28934963
So I don't think you traded up, but, to each their own.
Reply
Ow, you linked to the BBC. It's like TV Tropes - it has its own gravity well
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35734889
and it's hard to climb out.
Reply
I'll wait.
I *refuse* to live in danger of being randomly shot by a deranged killer with easy access to as many firearms as they want.
Me too! Good thing I don't know of any such place in the U.S.
Reply
… Were you armed? If you weren't, whether or not your government grudgingly permits you to carry arms is irrelevant. (As it is to the criminals who prey upon their unarmed victims at will.)
If you had been, if you'd had the tool and the training (and the self-confident skill it imparts), your attacker would have received a VERY nasty shock. Instead, well, medical treatment was needed by the wrong person.
Reply
( ... )
Reply
On the San bernardino shooting, those were TERRORISTS with ILLEGALLY procured guns. So there isn't a single gun law that would have stopped them, because well, they were already breaking dozens.
But let me put it to you in simple terms: I will kill anyone who tries to take my guns away.
Reply
Leave a comment