Just in response to that article Jimro provided, I wonder how far a mirror could be provided for people who are pro-gun ownership. Granted, a lot of the points would end up switched around a bit, but I reckon a good case could be made.
For me, I'm much happier not owning a gun simply because I'd rather not be responsible for killing someone else, accidently or intentionally, and not resorting to carrying a gun for personal security vastly reduces that risk. You do things your way, I'll do things mine, but I'd much rather not have someone telling me that I'm wrong, but in a natural way, for holding certain beliefs that creates a system that works perfectly well.
The mirror technique works fine to expose the underlying reason behind someones choices. However I've never seen the mirror technique used effectively against a gun owner, probably because our arguments are rational.
I'm going to play act what has happened in the past when antigun folks tried to use such techniques on me.
"Why do you feel the need for a gun?"
So that I can hunt, target practice, and defend myself if need be.
"Why do you feel you need to defend yourself?"
All humans have the right to self defense, I've also studied martial arts to gain confidence in self defense and exersise my body.
"Why do you feel that you need to be prepared to defend yourself?"
Because by being prepared I greatly increase my chances to avoid being a victim. Such preparation empowers me to not act like a victim.
"But why don't you want to be a victim?"
Because I don't enjoy being raped, murdered or otherwise physically violated. It tends to give me a bad day.
The truth is that gun owning is statistically safer than going to the doctor. Look up the population of doctors in the US, divide that by the accidental deaths due to wrong diagnosis and doctor error, then look up the population of gun owners and divide that by the number of accidental deaths per year.
The relative risk of death by doctor accident is nearly ten thousand times greater than by gun accident.
Jimro
Penn and Teller don't always use the most delicate of language, so watch at your own risk.
video.google.com/videopla...%$&pl=true
Jimro
Quote:
I could have actually bought a illegal pistol cheaper than I paid for that shotgun. I know two people out here that sell 'em. If they weren't avaliable legally I bet I know three more people that would keep them "in stock".
The issue of quality then comes into play when people make the firearms themselves.
Who said they'd be making them themselves?
Quote:
Who said they'd be making them themselves?
Because the science behind making a basic firearm isn't all too hard. If they are importing them illegally, then there will be some quality.
Quote:
The issue of quality then comes into play when people make the firearms themselves.
I haven't heard of a "zip gun" being used in anything except a history class.
Altho it isn't hard to make a simple firearm, and with todays CNC machine shops it's pretty easy to make a modern firearm. It's just a lot less hassle to buy a stolen pistol than to manufacture one yourself.
It takes discipline to manufacture and assemble even a flintlock. Not that a criminal couldn't do it, just that it would be much easier to steal or buy a stolen gun.
I buy recievers (the serial numbered portion of a firearm) and assemble the rest of the rifle off of that piece, completely legal. But I have to go through a NICS check every time I buy a donor rifle (rifle with a shot out barrel).
Jimro
It'll be great if the world didn't need guns, but to illegalize weapons for the public means putting the people's lives at stake.
to own a weapon doesn't necessarily mean you will kill someone. there's a huge possibility that you wont need to use it. Although I would question the intentions of someone owning a powerful firearm like a shotgun.
Although I would question the intentions of someone owning a powerful firearm like a shotgun.
Of all the weapons you can own, I feel the shotgun is the most reasonable for home defense use. If someone owns an M4 or something equally ridiculous for "home defense" I'm not gonna buy it, but a shotgun I'll forgive them for. Works great indoors, and the hollow "click-clack" noise it makes when you @#%$ it in the dark is usually more than sufficient encouragement for warding off common thieves. And they're perfect for zombie apocalypses.
Basically, I feel safe enough and sufficiently unattached from my possessions that I often don't even bother to lock the doors at night. However, if for whatever reason I felt inclined to buy a firearm for home defense purposes, it would definitely be a large-gauge, pump-action shotty.
Quote:
Basically, I feel safe enough and sufficiently unattached from my possessions that I often don't even bother to lock the doors at night.
the idea is to protect yourself by scaring away a criminal with a gun and only using it if there is no other option.
to let your doors unlocked and to own an excessive firearm, only means your looking forward to shooting someone.
with a handgun you can immobilize the attacker without resorting to killing him.
even if you plan to just use a shotgun to scare an attacker in a real life situation you might get nervous and shot someone. it's too big a gun for an amateur civilian. You don't even have to aim right to kill someone with a shotgun, It's too dangerous to own.
Quote:
You don't even have to aim right to kill someone with a shotgun, It's too dangerous to own.
60,000 people die in car accidents on average in the United States every year. You are infinitely more likely to die in your own vehicle than at the end of a shotgun.
So are cars too dangerous to own?
Quote:
60,000 people die in car accidents on average in the United States every year. You are infinitely more likely to die in your own vehicle than at the end of a shotgun.
I'm sorry I'm not quite following you here.
what does unintentional car accident death rates, have to do with intentioned murder?
to let your doors unlocked and to own an excessive firearm, only means your looking forward to shooting someone.
I don't own any guns and am morally opposed to the gratuitous ownership thereof. I neither own a gun, nor an alarm system, and often don't bother to lock my doors when I'm home because I feel safe enough to do so. I don't preoccupy myself worrying about rapists, thieves and home invasions because that kind of thing seriously f--ks with your chi. The point I'm trying to make here is if I were, for whatever reason, inclined to purchase a firearm, I would probably buy a shotgun.
Quote:
I'm sorry I'm not quite following you here.
what does unintentional car accident death rates, have to do with intentioned murder?
It all comes down to the person behind the wheel...or in the case of the shotgun, the person behind the trigger.
If a criminal invades my home, he officially becomes a threat to my family. He is on my property, when he has no reason to.
I would not take pleasure in his death (should he continue to resist or attack once I reveal my weapon of choice), but there are choices to make in life. His life, or the safety of my family.
What choice would you make, given the situation?
Quote:
The point I'm trying to make here is if I were, for whatever reason, inclined to purchase a firearm, I would probably buy a shotgun.
if your referring to a display weapon, that's fine to own. it's only a horrible choice of purchase if you mean to use it. I suppose i don't need to tell you that, since your against firearms ownership.
Quote:
I would not take pleasure in his death (should he continue to resist or attack once I reveal my weapon of choice), but there are choices to make in life. His life, or the safety of my family.
with a handgun you can cause him injury and stop him from being a threat with less possibility of killing him. with a shotgun your bound to kill a human being.
If you really mean to stop the attacker you won't go to such lengths as purchasing a shotgun. Besides the first shot should put him in shock and make him drop his weapon, these are real people not actors. Aim at his arm or leg, let the police handle the rest.
Quote:
What choice would you make, given the situation?
save my family and avoid needless blood shed would be my priorities. But I don't have to worry about that, I'm not the man of the house ;p
I would probably have a couple of firearms around. Handgun would be my first choice...but for absolute fear factor, it's like Cycle said: the cocking of a shotgun would make practically anyone wet his pants.
Quote:
with a handgun you can cause him injury and stop him from being a threat with less possibility of killing him.
I think you're missing the point here, kid.
The point of having a shotgun is that you don't need to fire it, and shouldn't. The point of having a firearm for home defense isn't to kneecap intruders, it's either to create a mexican standoff long enough for the cops to arrive, or just make the intruder flee.
Saying a handgun is a better weapon for home defense than a shotgun because you can kneecap someone with it is completely ridiculous.
if your referring to a display weapon, that's fine to own. it's only a horrible choice of purchase if you mean to use it. I suppose i don't need to tell you that, since your against firearms ownership.
Owning a gun for aesthetic purposes pretty much falls right under the category of "gratuitous gun ownership".
Quote:
I think you're missing the point here, kid.
The point of having a shotgun is that you don't need to fire it, and shouldn't. The point of having a firearm for home defense isn't to kneecap intruders, it's either to create a mexican standoff long enough for the cops to arrive, or just make the intruder flee.
I'm 21
hardly seems appropriate to be calling me a kid, don't you agree dear?
back to the topic,
with an armed intruder you'll need to take the shot but with your choice of weaponry you will kill him instead of settling the matter in a less risky method. there's also the false alert and panic issues to consider.
Quote:
I'm 21
Aging =/= Maturing
Quote:
Aging =/= Maturing
now now, just because you can't accept my views in a certain topic doesn't mean you can insult my age. Please remain in topic without resorting to disrespect.
I'm not insulting you. Just pointing out that age doesn't necessarily equal wisdom.
Now, to get back on topic...
Quote:
I'm not insulting you. Just pointing out that age doesn't necessarily equal wisdom.
Okay 
Personally, I'd go for the handgun.
I'm not one who would ever purchase a firearm, and I'm not about to come off as a psycho in front of my hypothetical wife and children.
That said, I would hold off firing said handgun for as long as possible. I'd hope to scare the intruder away, hold him off until the police arrive, or keep him locked out until help comes than ever shoot someone.
Now THAT said, I would choose a handgun because if said intruder were to enter my home and find a way to aforementioned hypothetical wife or child, there's not a force in the world greater than God Himself that would stop me from shooting him. And I would aim at the most easily available part of the body.
I choose a handgun because it's tidier than a shotgun, and I'm a neat freak.
-Jake
I am going to get a gun. I'm going to carry it around. Why? Because the criminals are going to get guns no matter what. Does anyone honestly believe a ban on guns is going to stop a CRIMINAL who doesn't care about the government. If he is really going to kill someone, a ban on guns isn't going to do anything, but make the victum vunerable. Unless the victum is smart and gets a gun illegally, which is what I would do. Ebay! 
Anyways, there is the point that, I don't trust the government with that much power. Let's say a group of police officers don't like black people, so they start shooting them. Nobody else has a gun to stop them, they have more power than any man should have, and they could kill quite a few people before anyone realizes, and even if they do, they have guns, nobody else does, so what are they going to do. But if the Black kids had guns, they can shoot the police officers saving countless lives in the process. And the policer officer's lives don't matter since they were willing to start something. You know that old saying "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."
First, Wringthesquirrel, if a citizen gets guns illegally, that makes said citizen a criminal.
Second, while I appreciate and even admire your described form of vigilante justice in movies, we're dealing with real lives. Life isn't black and white, good and bad... Bad guys don't buy guns to be bad. Good guys don't buy guns to be good. People by guns to accomplish a cause.
The last thing we need is a bunch of armed citizens popping caps wherever and whenever they deem necessary. I happen to think Marilyn Manson is a dangerous influence. I don't know what I'd do if I had a gun around him. Does that mean it would be okay to shoot him? And if I do, couldn't his fans shoot me? Or even cops, since I've just broken the law.
No offense, but I hope that response was a joke. I just can't imagine that kind of chaos being a BENEFIT to society.
-Jake
That's really a good point. Pro-gun arguments tend to make heavy use of good guy bad guy dichotomy. The police scenario described would more likely start with a misunderstanding than a bunch of cops deciding to be evil (not that that wouldn't happen). Most people are more complex than that and even the worst have their rationalizations. The worst bad guys are those who think they're righteous.
To me, there's nothing wrong with guns. The problem lies with the people that use them irresponsibly, bascially for reasons other than hunting, protection, and the like.
It's as simply as that, in my opinion.
This is an area in which personal responsibility is critical.
There's nothing wrong with guns, it's the people that are killing and not the guns, heck if guns didnt exist ... wait would hitler rule the world today..? hmmm nevermind that.
But if there was no guns there would be ..... you know what I can really not think of any good purposes for guns, they just help in some positive way's, the main purpose of guns is to protect or thats how I see it.
I see nothing wrong with guns for hunting, protection, or recreational use at the firing range.
Hitler ruled by fear, played off of the fear of the people (ruling the world today, what do you mean?. Guns aren't the problem, it's the people that use them.
Guns help set American free.
Yes, there are terrible things that happen when the wrong people use them, but you have to ask yourself: Is it ALL bad? If you live the U.S., is it right to take away one's right to bear arms (not just in times of war, as people commonly mistake).
Should you really take away the gun from the police officer whose life is in danger?
Up here in canada eh we have it pretty bad, becasue there's murder's with guns everyday eh, but none the less having guns is half good and half bad.
...But if guns didnt exist what would the world be like today?
*looks up into his thought cloud and see's people dancing and holding hands*.
