Lounge Hillary 2016

I'm not too well versed on BLM. Once I saw such a defense mounted for criminals, I crossed them off the serious list.

This could not be less true.

I do have a line. Somewhere, but it's there. Certainly a weapon which no common man could safely store let alone use, that could in one instant kill millions and leave vasts swaths of land uninhabitable for the next several eons should not be in ANYONE'S hands. Stealth bomber? No, because it in itself contains information we cannot or should not release. But someone wants to buy an F-4? Sure. I mean, we already allow that. Grenades? Easy enough to make.

Where you are completely wrong is that We the People are no match. Have you not been watching the news the last decade? When you have a defined battlefield, one side enemy, one side friend, yeah, you get the Highway of Death in Basra. We'd get run asunder. But We the People aren't going to all be standing out in a corn field in Nebraska. You know at it's height, Al Qaida numbered approx 40,000 individuals? How did all of our might do against that handful of stone chuckers? 40k dudes in pajamas toting 80yr old Soviet surplus, that'd take mighty USA#1, what, like half a day? Maybe done before brunch? So how'd we actually do?

The US SUCKS at guerilla warfare, and that's exactly what you'd have if it ever came to WtP vs .gov. And we ain't no 40k. We ain't using WWII era equipment. And WtP have friends, family, mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters on the "bad" side. A gun needn't be fired to change an action. More often than not, its presence alone is enough.

 

The sooner people realize this, the sooner things will change.

 

Exactly.
If I had no access to a firearm (and was a criminal) - I could easily find 20 other things to take it's place.
At which point - the idiots on the left would start their process to ban each of these items, then the next -
until we are back to throwing stones at one another (and then stones would be outlawed and removed from the planet).
When do people wake up and understand what the bumper stickers say is true ?
Guns don't kill people. No gun has ever once in history decided it was time to commit a crime and shot it's owner.
It's so easy to put the blame on the wrong thing and not take responsibility for actions.
The areas of this country (US) that have the strictest gun laws have the highest crime rates from guns.
The places where guns are "easy to come by" have minimal crime.
Would you (the criminal) try to rob a house when you know damn well someone with a shotgun is waiting inside ? LOL.
Hell no.
On the other hand - if the left has it's way, no one but the criminals will have them. Call the police ? Sorry - you'd already be dead.

 

I don't really have a dog in this hunt, but I feel obligated to point out:

The fact that the places with the strictest gun laws have the highest crime rates from guns is a correlation. A correlation is not a cause and effect. It is more likely the laws are a result of the crime than that the crime is a result of the laws.

What would suggest that? If the crime rates predate the laws, then the laws are more likely a reaction to the crimes.


It's a probabilistic world. Gun advocates believe having guns prevents A, B, and C, all of which are bad. Anti-gun advocates believe the people (and their children) who die from gun ownership outweigh the potential lives saved via gun ownership.

I've lived in a classic "bad neighborhood." If I ran into a bad situation, odds were that having a gun wasn't going to save my ass. This is subjective on my part, but being white in a 95% black area, I can honestly report that having a gun may have saved me in about one out of a hundred situations. It probably would have gotten me killed more often than it would have saved me. And once you pull out the gun, there's no going back. Why would a gun have made little difference? Because I ain't Clint Eastwood in a movie. Most bad situations involve someone having the drop on you from the start or you being outnumbered and therefore outgunned.

 

I agree with the actual "value" of owning a gun. But crimes can be committed with things other than a gun...especially when people "have the drop on you".
I live part time in nevada, and "gun shows" are very popular where you can go into a huge convention center and buy guns from vendors. There is a bill up for a vote this november on requiring background checks for sales at these shows.

I am more fore background checks. But thats as far as I go. Because I dont want a blackmarket created more than there already is....where bad people end up getting rich from selling illegal firearms.

The "bad guys" will always get what they need. And there will always be irresponsible people in this world where people die un-neededly from cars, guns, power tools , boats and prescription medication. Heck there was a 2 year old that died like 20 years ago from eating an entire bottie of flintstones vitamins

 

I'm just in from the cas' and unwinding before I try and catch some Zzz'zzz

Personally, I can fully understand any resentment because he is an outsider. I don't like him because of his close association with the phone hacking scandals that have rocked the UK, however I don't disagree with his message.

I'm not into that like some, a car is a car, those Hoden V8 can pack a lot of grunt, but so do the Fords.

No I'm not savvy to it and don't buy into a 3rd being suicides and a 3rd being accidents, which wouldn't have happened such as the 4yr old shooting his sister or mom.. And why aren't Canadians killing each other like their amerikam cousins.

Unbiased evidence please, oterwise not buying into it.

There is nothing that owning a firearm is going to do to prevent any Government doing whatever they want to do. If the Government wanted to confiscate something from you, you owning a gun is not going to stop them, look what happened at Waco.

Yeah but can you. Some states allow open carry, good luck with that if you are Black. Some states require a special permit to carry a concealed weapon. All that bull about highest crime rates in areas with the greater restrictions, well there are tight gun control laws in the UK, Australia, NZ, most of Europe, guns do exist, criminals and gangs have easy access to guns yet we haven't reached the need for metal detectors at schools. you don't hear about some kid with a grudge against society deciding to get equal in the local burger king or on some university campus. The murder rate via firearms is minuscule compared to the US.

I wouldn't count the Bataclan, Nice incidents as these are terrorist related, the majority of mass shooting in the US are not terrorist related or counted as such. Sleep time beckons.

 

Why Progressive Millennials have retarded or slowed down their own progress. They have been classically trained to look only at the good side of Socialism and the bad side of Capitalism. Because they have not looked at the full picture of both systems they are unaware of their own impoverished perspective that they consider functionally aware. Here is an anecdotal example: Capitalism has done more to bring people out of poverty than all the Socialism experiments wherever it has been tried. The Millennials don't know if this is true or not. Yet they act qualified to say that they know anyway. They have been taught to act as if they know when they have no clue whatsoever. That makes them puppets to their handlers. They are nothing but tools. Just watch how fast they can come up with the good that Capitalism has done.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...s-hell-she-could-and-here-s-how-a7379051.html

"Could Hillary Clinton start a World War? Sure as hell she could – and here’s how"

"Like Donald Trump or not – and I like him no more than, well,Hillary Clinton– there is one thing he might be good for. Peace. A small matter, I know, when set against his serial (alleged), philandering, and worse, but worth pondering for a moment. A hideous, but necessary thought experiment runs something like this.

What is the single most important relationship the United States of America could build to secure world peace? Why, the same one that, when it goes horribly wrong, leaves us all sliding towards testing the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction in a nuclear age. Always a bit mad to end up there. Yes, that’s right, the most important relationship is with the Russians or, as we once knew them, the Soviets. They’re the ones we need to get along with.

Now this is where The Donald scores above his sensible, sane, intelligent and diplomatic Democratic opponent. Donald gets it. He gets that if you decide to run your foreign policy devoid of moral content with the sole guiding principle that “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” (copyright Joseph Stalin), then peace, cooperation, even alliance with Russia is possible, indeed desirable."

 

Maybe because ameriKa is so awash with guns, crime, violence, hatred, mistrust is so high, disparity between those that have and don't, or it is so entrenched that people feel the need to own a gun in order to protect themselves.

With guns everything is immediately at defcon1.

It is now, because they are so easy to get hold of. You can get hold of illegal firearms in the UK. Perform a robbery armed and you are looking at an extra 6 ~ 8 on top, which is why crims generally only use them on each other, not for committing crime.

Really? Al Qaida didn't exist until ameriKa illegally invaded Iraq and left a lot of Bathists disenfranchised, Al Qaida was a amerika's creation, if you had got out of Saudi after the second Gulf War instead of lingering around, who knows, I could go look over NY from the top of world trade centre again. I did use a football analogy, maybe try this; one Indian tribe being invited by a select few of another tribe to set up camp on another's piece of land against the wishes of the majority, or Cribs v's Bloods each being given a little patch on rivals turf to hang out, Italians given a block in Harelem. US soldiers on Saudi territory same thing grander scale, invited by ruling elite which does not have backing of majority, rules via oppression, 13 hijackers emanating from Saudi.

Only once. Against any Government agency, they will back-off (perhaps), but will return soon after with more fire-power, then it escalates and you either end up a dead hero or in the big house for a long time.

Yeah, some disgruntled kid is going to climb some bell tower and start throwing rocks at fellow students, that's gonna be real effective. Or takes a blade into school and manage to stab to death 20 children before being over-powered. As I say, it is too entrenched into the ameriKan psyche, it has to be extreme from the onset, a bit like the wild west, kill and ask questions later.

Typical NRA mantra, yes you are right, however the issue is, it is so easy, too easy for screw-balls to get hold of them. Anyway if you are such a fan of owning a gun, why did you once proclaim going to AC with body-guards, surely a 45 down your pants would have sufficed?

Again, it is now too easy to get hold of, there are sticker gun ownership laws in other countries, I don't think in any of those countries are people killing each other on the scale as they are doing in ameriKa, which feeds into "I must own a gun mentality", with the exception of Iraq which was a result of ameriKan action.

If you are a crack addict, or need to eat or even gamble and you know the owner of a house is armed, you go elsewhere. If you're not sure, yet think they might be, then you go armed yourself. Automatically go to defcon1 if they are disturbed, no fisty cuffs, no baseball bat, no knife, bang bang, somebody dies. However I suppose I should clarify, what is alarming to us outside of the US (although we are becoming desensitized to it, just another day in ameriKa), are those going on rampages killing 5, 10, 20 people or more, especially when it comes to kids, why is it so easy for them to get hold of guns (because your society is awash with them), why do people need to own military grade assault rifles, doesn't the circulation and ownership of such weapons make it more difficult for law enforcement? Some of literally can't get our heads around how 20 kids were so badly mutilated in Sandy Hook, yet nothing changed and here we have a few justifying why things shouldn't change. It is sickening and disgusting. A good start would be tightening of background checks (the existence of a black market is not justification for not making say 24/48hr back-ground checks mandatory) or ownership of automatic SLR prohibited, gun amnesty's have worked well in the UK, Australia, even NZ. It's a start, but no, adhere to the 2nd and continue to let parents bury their children because it was too easy for some rejected lunatic to get their hands on a weapon that can inflict fatal damage on a multiple victims leaving little defence that no other weapon can achieve.

You wouldn't even be here, if Trump was in charge during the Cuban missile crisis. Your country would never know peace if somebody like Trump decided to turn Baghdad or Damascus into a parking lot, sounds funny doesn't it such jingoistic talk. Then think about the Boston bombing happening every week, your civil rights and liberties further eroded due to the war on terror, being body searched every time you went into a shopping zone, NYC, I assure you the novelty would soon wear off, anyway it is not just about you, it is also about what kind of world we leave for the next generation.

 

You poor bastard. If Russia and the Socialist States of Amerika get together to wipe out the enemy then it would be something like the article said:

"The Russians, more than a little cynically, have asked the West for decades to join them in a war against “Islamist terrorism”, but which they principally mean the separatist movements in Chechnya and elsewhere. Donald Trump is the first presidential contender, more even than George W Bush, who looks like he’d actually want to take them up on the offer. Trump is fixated to the point of racism on the militant Islamist violence that he tells his fearful audience is “just around the corner”. It is all too easy to imagine a state visit by Vladimir Putin to Washington where he is feted and falls into the arms (we hope no more) of an affectionate President Trump. The US-Russia Strategic Partnership would be the fruit of that particular liaison, with secret provisions, no doubt, on assassinating terrorist leaders, and public pledges on intelligence sharing, with the whole relationship consummated by series of joint bombing raids in Syria. They would share a goal to destroy Isis, even though they have not been able to do so recently, because it would be part of a wider cooperation. Such would be the new world order."

 

I agree with JK regarding this: I don't know how old you folks are, but when I was a teenager, my girlfriend's best friend ( a lifetime Air Force brat) was "advisor to the Shah" in Iran. That's what started this whole Islamic terrorist ball rolling. The US created its own mess by installing the Shah, and that was the act that has eventually resulted in the current state of affairs. All those stories -- gold fixtures in the bathtubs, hoarding enormous fortunes from the people, and all that. It was true.

 

gizmo I know you don't have any sort of life beyond these forums. Putin is a dangerous megalomaniac that he instigated atrocities so he could justify invading Chechnya, a bit like the Rhodesian slout scouts killing a load of nuns and blaming the Zimbabwe Zanu fighters.

And what's with all this "“Islamist terrorism”", where was “Islamist terrorism” in the 60's, 70's or even the 80's? What caused this sudden resurgence in Islam in the 21st century? Oh yeah that's right, the leader of the free world decided it might be a good idea to destroy, upset the balance in the middle east and northern tip of Africa in the name of freedom,democracy and of course oil interest.
Why didn't you Yanks do something about the genocide in Uganda, oh yeah no oil.

Along with the death squads, after which Ayatollah Khomeini exiled in Paris swore revenge, held on to 52 hostages until Carter left office. Same mode of operandi in 70's Latin ameriKa, 80's Philippines (Marcus) and even 2000 Iraq (sunni v's shia).

I read / watched an interesting article about Shia death squad, operating in Iraq, main advisor amerikan psychopath colonel James Steele, travelling the world's war zones teaching governments how to suppress, kill elements of it's local population, from Latin America in the 70's to the Middle East in 2000. When the Sunni population realised the genocide that was being inflicted upon them, lead to the siege of Fallujah, the birth of Al-qaeda, Isis, deaths of more ameriKa expendable sons and daughters.

https://www.rt.com/usa/steele-iraqi-death-squads-527/

ameriKa literally involved in every corner of the globe.

 

maybe a criminal will rob a house when no one is there BECAUSE THEY KNOW A RIFLE IS INSIDE.

Most criminals dont have a list of all contents within a home, so unless there is a blinking neon sign in front of the home "I have a rifle"..the criminal wouldnt know

When an armed criminal enters your home unexpectedly(like when u are asleep)..they have the advantage. You can get your gun from your nightstand, and as you walk around the house...all they have to do is stay where they are, and soon you will walk to them.....Surprise!!!!

When you are in your car and someone points a gun at your head....lets see you try to reach for your gun to prevent thecar jacking

Very rarely do you hear about a store owner with a gun, getting the best of a gunman who made the first move and has the advantage. And when it does happen...its national news.

Guns are such a part of this culture, and there is so many unsupervised/undicipline/poorly educated children brought into this society...that combination is lethal.

Society accepts women spreading their legs and having children without a stable man in the life of the child. 50 years ago women like that would be shunned. Now they go on tv shows and get 15 minutes of fame getting DNA tests in search of the father. And they get cheered when after the 3rd or 4th man is tested a match is finally found.

In neighborhoods where education and parental responsibility is a high priority....there is no real problem with guns. I grew up in such a neighborhood.

So its not the guns that are a problem...its the fucked up communities that grow the unhealthy vegetation.

Everyone talks about chicago, and all the guns and killings. Do you think if THAT community emphasized stable 2 parent households, education, and care and nurturing of the children.......there would be the massive killing issues? Poor people can still stress education, poor people can still spend time with their children, instill values, discipline ...it doiesnt cost money to do any of these things. There is no excuse.

 

Never mind the way that the nations were all divided up at the end of WWI and the end of the Ottoman Empire. Don't blame the real history. Make up some sophistry and sell that.

"The period of defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire (1908–1922) began with the Second Constitutional Erawith the Young Turk Revolution. It restored the Ottoman constitution of 1876 and brought in multi-party politics with atwo stage electoral system (electoral law) under the Ottoman parliament. The constitution offered hope by freeing the empire’s citizens to modernize the state’s institutions and dissolve inter-communal tensions.[1]

Instead, this period became the story of the twilight struggle of the Empire. Ottoman military reforms resulted in theOttoman Army engaging in the Italo-Turkish War (1911), the Balkan Wars (1912-1913), and the continuous unrest caused by the Counter coup, which preceded the 31 March Incident (Restoration) and 1912 Ottoman coup d'état(Saviours) and the 1913 Ottoman coup d'état) in the Empire up to World War I. The Ottoman entry into World War I in the Middle Eastern theatre ended with the partition of the Ottoman Empire under the terms of the Treaty of Sèvres. This treaty, as designed in the conference of London, gave a nominal land and permitted the title Ottoman Caliphate(compared with Vatican; a sacerdotal-monarchical state ruled by the Catholic Pope), not to be a further threat but just powerful enough to protect Britain from the Khilafat Movement."

 

The establishment has to realize that a NEW WORLD ORDER is on the horizon.


The days of the COLD WAR are over.






































\

 

As compared to them doing the same thing when the home owner doesn't have a gun due to the insane laws and hoops that you have to jump through to purchase one legally ?
Lol.
I'll just assume it's a much better situation for the home owner that is armed (as they have a right to be).
Again - the criminals will have one regardless of the laws... so you can pretend to eliminate the problem by restricting gun ownership all day and you just make the situation worse (as we've all seen in the places that do it)

 

Loving your skepticism, JK, just two things about it. First, I would encourage you to expand it into your left side as well. In fact, since you are a lefty (at least by American terms) you should do so MORE so. Don't let blind hatred of one side blind you from the shit your own side pulls. You have to fight BOTH sides. And second, I've been doing this a long time. It's one of my favorites, for sure. I am NOT some dickbag asshat that needs to win at any cost, or show them pussy libs what a man is, or any of that horseshit. I started doing this because I wanted the TRUTH, including the truths that may bother me. You're welcome to suspect or question or whatever else, just know I ain't doing no slop job and only quoting from the NRA and Fox fucking News. My OPINIONS about the US vs WtP are just that; you're free to consider that trash, no problem. But the rest, that ain't my opinion OR spin. It's just the facts. Anyway, on to the meat...

I've no problem with an "outsider" commenting on us in the US. Fuck yeah a Canadian, an Aussie, a rosbif should have an opinion on what we do. What we do affects damn near the entire planet. One of my favorite people to debate with "over there" is a Canadian, and damn right our culture affects him. I don't hate Piers because he's not from here or because he talks funny. I hate him because he's a silly twat.

Never did understand how we never imported the Maloo, esp with our history with the El Camino and Ranchero. I'd buy one in a heartbeat.

And here we go. It doesn't bother me that "you're not buying it". You're not us. You have no power here. You have no responsibility to know facts. But this same thing gets trumpeted by our left over here, and it fucking drives me crazy. That stat that you "can't believe" isn't some far right blog post, or a result of computing hard to find info from several obscure sources. It's EVERYWHERE. Google it yourself. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Center for Disease Control, just about any medical website, and on and on it goes. ALL verify the exact same thing. Gun MURDERS number approximately 11,XXX per year. Gun ACCIDENTS and SUICIDES make up about 22,XXX. You can't believe it? I'm not surprised. THAT'S what the media has done, sensationalizing tragedy for their own agenda. Making anyone home or abroad who hasn't done a lick of research believing we're all toting big iron just looking for excuses to plunk someone, hopefully someone brown, bonus if they're poor. Sorry, but thems just not the facts.

You wanna really get me fucking started, you can start in on "machine guns" or "assault rifles". You think 0.003% is a piddly fucking number, just wait til you see how many of these turrible, scary, ain't-no-one-need-a-machine-gun type firearms are involved in crime. The number is so staggeringly low that any honest lefty should feel anger and wish to punch their leaders in the fucking mouth for misleading them so. Last I did this, in '14 or so, the percentage of firearms that were RIFLES and used in crime, not just "ARs" or "machine guns" but even your lowly ol 5 shot lever action shottin iron, was something like 0.00015%. Yet the cunts have the GALL to stand before you and I and cry that SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE! Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit, hoss. Seriously.

Red up above posted that "correlation does not equal causation", and I agree 100%. I was sent on that route in this journey, and while the numbers sort of support the gunner side (authoritarian hellholes like Illinois and DC have atrocious gun crime stats, while "free" states with rampant gun ownership like Vermont were sitting pretty as could be), there just weren't any definites. Too many outliers. Too many gun friendly states with high crime, too many gun tight states with few stats. Someone then went LarryS' direction and pointed out culture. And THAT was shockingly revealing. Shame I never saved any of my work (except in written report sans sources and graphs) but the rate of gun violence damn near traced the population of non-white folk. I mentioned Vermont. It's a state so free that a "shall issue state", that is, a state which cannot deny you gun ownership, is referred to as "Vermont class". And this oh so free state with its very friendly gun laws ranks dead last in the amount of gun crimes. It's nearly free of them, totaling in the very low hundreds per year. Annnd... it happens to be 98% white. Compare that to, oh, DC, which blew the fucking roof off my chart with how horrible its gun crimes were, and it is but 38% white. Not wanting to up and post that for fear of how it looked, for fear of PC, I carried on through most of the high ranking states. Probably 20 or so, so not all, but definitely not a cherry pick, and this same trend surfaced in every single one. The less white, the more gun crime.

Now, this isn't me trying to steer this convo somewhere I really don't want it to go. Even with these stats in my pocket, I'll be damned if I point blame on brown folk or suggest it's them that's fucking it all up. But I damn sure will use it for what I think it means, and that is GUNS ARE NOT THE FUCKING PROBLEM. You want to KNOW what the problem is? Read what LarryS posted, then read it a-fucking-gain. We have created a society where every problem is someone else's problem. Unhappy? Forget soul searching to define it and fixing it, that's just too much fucking work. Buy an iPhone and get lost in its wonder for awhile. And when that wears off, don't do some soul searching to find the problem and fix it, take a fucking pill to sort you out. And when the pills wear off and now you're hooked on THOSE, don't do some soul searching to find the problem... just fucking someone else please fix it. Your buddy has a kid? Well, that just fucked your plans, dinit? Fuck supporting him in fatherhood, call him a pussy because he won't go out drinking with you. Maybe if you make him feel like shit enough, he and her will break up. Fuck his fatherless kid, you wanna go boozin and trollin for chicks. And when you find a chick, realize she's temporary. She's gonna get old (ew) and start to sag (yuk) and money can only buy so many titties. Be prepared to dump her when she gets soft. Soft, you know, like after childbirth. After all, being a manly stud ain't about diapers and late nights and soothing caresses. It's about tappin that nubile teen ass, so go getcha some!

Larry's got it nailed. The things that are fucking us over and out as a society are just these simple things. Things as easy, hell, as NATURAL as being a decent fucking person and engaging in healthy relationships. As easy as LOVE. As easy as looking into that little tyke's eye and promising to the world that YOU will be there for HIM. Yet our society puts NO VALUE on this shit. You know how many fucking times I've gone to a school function and have been the ONLY goddamn male there? Or been to a practice and find myself in wall to wall moms? It's a goddamned travesty.

 

Did we need to ban guns in the 1920s or 1930s or even 50s or 60s. ????
It wasnt till liberals drove us to this juncture with their "there is no wrong or right" philosophy. You know those who say...dont critisize others...they can do what they want...its a free country. The "who are we to judge" people. Calling people "racist" or "sexist" in the name of allowing/defending behavior that destroys the fabric of society.
The liberal feminists who sold young girls the bill of goods that they were equal in every way to men. That a 130 lb female fighter fighter was equal to their 190 lb make counterpart. THe bill of goods that their sexual desires and actions are equal to men, and just go with it since you are equal to guys. When I grew up in a more civilized society, "girls" were the keeper of the keys. Boys would try to get as far as they could sexually, and girls would be the ones to say "when"....to say "no". And well raised boys knew that when a girl said "no" then that was it.
Now feminists tell young girls that their sexual needs are equal to boys and being equals......girls can seek sex at any age...just like the boys....and there now is no "keeper of the keys". There is no responsible party. Its all about being "equal" and following your desires.
So this liberal "everyone is equal in every aspect of life" philosophy and "to each his own..there is no right or wrong" leads to 18 year olds with 3 kids and no dad.......high school drop outs raising children who will have a high incidence of high school failure coupled with no male figure or discipline in their lives......

So now that the liberals made their bed....they dont want to sleep in it. They see the effects of the unconditional support of toxic behavior...and instead of changing their views and insisting that society be more responsible in how they conduct themselves......theywant the easy way out.....ban guns, ban spray paint, or anything else that is damaging their neighborhoods......But its not those items damaging the neighborhoods....its the vermin that are prodiced in those neighborhoods that are causing the problem.

If spray paint was banned....other means of damaging property would be used. Maybe acetylene touches burning graffiti on buildings, or regular paint in electric paint sprayers, and does anyonne doubt there would be a replacement for guns.....by these off spring of unfit parents.????

Its amazing how people foucs on guns.....and its the same people that helped produce a society filled with uneducated, undisciplined, uncaring, underparented hoodlums and skanks.

 

Guys, the only criticism of what you've said is something I have no real numbers regarding, so it's subjective.

I don't see guns as providing actual safety except in the rare home invasion situation. I have no idea what the numbers are for home invasion occurrences, but I think home invasion is feared to a degree beyond the number of times it actually occurs. It's some primal, I'm at home with spouse and kids and all I own, and someone invades, I've gotta be armed idea. Primal fears of kids being killed and rape. Culturally prioritized fears, somewhat capitalist, of non-owners taking what is owned and sweated for.


Outside of home invasion scenarios, I think carrying a gun in the real world increases your chances of mortality versus lessening it. Now maybe you don't much care about mortality and you want to feel safe and sound and channel High Plains Drifter. If those are your priorities, carry a gun. But from a practical perspective, I don't see it as a percentage play.

I think, basically, outside of home invasion scenarios, carrying a gun is about assuaging fear. It's a bad world. I get that. Pragmatically, however, I think it does more for your psyche than for keeping you alive.

If there were actual numbers for, "A bad scenario happened, I had a gun, it saved me," we'd see them. But we don't see them.

They just allowed people with permits to carry on the ETSU campus. Tennessee, as you may know, has a state gun. Well, the ETSU ruling is hilarious. You can carry a gun unless you're going in for your job evaluation meeting. That's an actual addendum. Yeah, good one. Also, you can't carry within 200 yards of the grade school on campus or something like that. Pretty funny. A friend who teaches there (and has a nice collection of guns) was pacing off the distance from the grade school to his office. We joked he should put a sign up outside his office, "In case you have a beef, guns not allowed for another 50 feet."

 

there are alot of things in this world that have limited use.....so should someone be the arbiter of what gets eliminated from society based on effectiveness of usage?
How about spray paint. It causes graffiti ...so everyone can just get a can of paint and a paintbrush....that good enough.

there are alot of things that dont work in this world.....and I have the right to buy them and find out for myself if I choose to.

If guns were totally eliminated...bag guys would team up and overpower you physically ...they dont need guns. 4 guys walk up to you and take your car keys....no problem.

But like I said....guns arent the problem....its the poorly educated/unsupervised kids being unleashed on society.,,,and the kids of these kids who use crime as an alternative to hard work in school/ out in the workforce.

maybe a solution would be something like putting a cap on lifetime welfare checks, or making people on welfare share an apartment with roomates, or stop increasing welfare checks as more and more kids pop out of the womb of a welfare mom..... Reduce welfare severely if thereisnt a 2 parent household. Reduce welfare over time thereby encouraging people to get a job.... Reduce welfare if the mother drops out of highschool,,You know..stop being the enabler of bad behavior.And its not just welfare people. Plenty of others are viewed by society as doing just fine by working during the week, and then going clubbing on weekends.....bringing home different men each weekend.....while strangers watch the kids.
Its all about me me me.....and sacrifice for children is not at a premium. And it shows in the finished product.

Its the problem of the finished product......not the guns or the cans of spray paint