Rob's Lobs

[Rob]

Skiracer, my NSC post was not a response to your post in particular. In fact I hadn't even seen your post yet as I was composing it.

The NSC ban cars post was in response to anti-gun opinions in general.

According to the National Safety Council, your lifetime odds of dying from a firearm discharge are 1 in 16,155 vs. your lifetime odds of dying as a passenger in an automobile being 1 in 237.

Obviously we need to ban cars.

Its part of the very steep price we pay as a society...ie to have cars. Back in the old days you had a horse which was used for work and transport and fertilizer, and was a slave to its family. Nowadays, people are slaves to automobiles and not only do autos cause global warming, air pollution, obesity and noise pollution, they also kill around 100 people a day...add the number caused by obesity and its associated problems and that numbers even higher. That's a pretty ridiculous price to pay just to get from point a to point b....so I agree with you that we ought to ban autos, or at least work on a replacement so we can eventually ban them. But if we do, then we need to look at ways to keep the population in check.

Why do I think autos cause obesity? I came to that conclusion after vacationing in Venuzuela (sp?)...when you're in a third world country like that, you can't help but notice how beautiful and shapely the women are. I know part of this is genetic but it becomes more obviously once you touch down in the US, land of the fat. Once you get off the plane and start walking through the airport it really hits you....its like seeing your brother or sister and many years after they've put on about 50 lbs since you last saw them.

No money means no cars and other luxuries that while they make life easier, they also make us fatter and less healthy. So that's my empirical evidence of the link between cars and obesity.

I love guns and knives. Have an assortment of hunting rifles for various type of game and hunting. I collect knives, all types, antique and newer just because I like them. I know a little bit about guns and killing. You shoot someone with a gun and kill them it is completely irreversable whether intentional or accidental. I know that I have more bodies out there than anyone of you can count on your fingers and toes and done with both guns and with knives. Having done that I can say that it is the worst feeling taking another human beings life that anyone could experience and it never leaves you regardless of the circumstances you do it under. Self-defense is arguably ok when the situation is life threatening but it still doesn't alleviate your conscience when done under any circumstances. I guess you have to live through it to know what I am talking about. I am an advocate of having the right to own a gun and protect your family and property and would never want to see us lose that right. On the other hand guns kill when in civilian hands. It is what they do and are meant for. The simple fact of the matter is that guns kill and the more of them available, regardless of the supervision and checking out the buyer, is eventually going to escalate the occurences of the type of situation that took place in VA. It's a hard call and a very complicated issue to find an answer that will be equitable to both sides. I don't claim to have the answer but I will tell you this just because you have a gun available on you when someone starts shooting up the joint doesn't mean that you will have the composure to use the weapon properly or to do the right thing. It is just not that easy and definitely not comparable to shooting an animal in the field.

Words of wisdom.

[skiracer]

According to the National Safety Council, your lifetime odds of dying from a firearm discharge are 1 in 16,155 vs. your lifetime odds of dying as a passenger in an automobile being 1 in 237.

Obviously we need to ban cars.

Rob, I respect you and feel that you are a pretty intelligent guy but yet you missed the logic of what I was trying to get across or maybe you didn't even want to consider what I was trying to say. That's the problem with both sides on this question. There is no compromise or common ground. There is no realistic thought in trying to come to grips with the matter. Banning all cars would be a great idea. That would definitely solve the situation. I would like to be there when and if someone started shooting the joint up and you were there and were packing just to see how the outcome would develope. Your answer, coming from and intelligent individual, only reinforces my feelings that there is no premise for talking intelligently about the matter. I'm sorry I brought it up and shared something personal about myself and my feelings on the matter. I won't do it again.

[Rob]

Odds

According to the National Safety Council, your lifetime odds of dying from a firearm discharge are 1 in 16,155 vs. your lifetime odds of dying as a passenger in an automobile being 1 in 237.

Obviously we need to ban cars.

[skiracer]

I love guns and knives. Have an assortment of hunting rifles for various type of game and hunting. I collect knives, all types, antique and newer just because I like them. I know a little bit about guns and killing. You shoot someone with a gun and kill them it is completely irreversable whether intentional or accidental. I know that I have more bodies out there than anyone of you can count on your fingers and toes and done with both guns and with knives. Having done that I can say that it is the worst feeling taking another human beings life that anyone could experience and it never leaves you regardless of the circumstances you do it under. Self-defense is arguably ok when the situation is life threatening but it still doesn't alleviate your conscience when done under any circumstances. I guess you have to live through it to know what I am talking about. I am an advocate of having the right to own a gun and protect your family and property and would never want to see us lose that right. On the other hand guns kill when in civilian hands. It is what they do and are meant for. The simple fact of the matter is that guns kill and the more of them available, regardless of the supervision and checking out the buyer, is eventually going to escalate the occurences of the type of situation that took place in VA. It's a hard call and a very complicated issue to find an answer that will be equitable to both sides. I don't claim to have the answer but I will tell you this just because you have a gun available on you when someone starts shooting up the joint doesn't mean that you will have the composure to use the weapon properly or to do the right thing. It is just not that easy and definitely not comparable to shooting an animal in the field.

[Rob]

It's Cool

Who hijacked Rob's thread?

I really don't mind. In fact Karel in a private message offered to split the gun debate portion of this thread off into a separate thread, but I told him: no thanks, just leave it here.

[jiesen]

Well...so far I've been able to talk my way out of every bad situation in my life...But then again...I've always felt that I have an Angel In My Pocket...I'm serious...It just seems that way

I've had bad situations where talking didn't help me, but having a sick stick might have, and a neuralizer most definitely would have. Having a Taser would have been slightly better than useless, and having a gun would have made things infinitely worse. Anyway, I guess there aren't any angels in my pockets... but I believe that with a little bit of money one can avoid much unpleasantness.

[IIC]

I'm thinking the future will bring more creative devices like those "sick sticks" in Minority Report... but yeah, it'd have to be better than a Taser to really do the job that a gun can do for you now.

Also, a Neurolizer would be really cool to own. I'm holding out for one of those- that's why I won't buy a gun. If I save the $500 bucks a gun would cost and instead make 10% on it each year, by the time they're available I'll be able to afford one!

Well...so far I've been able to talk my way out of every bad situation in my life...But then again...I've always felt that I have an Angel In My Pocket...I'm serious...It just seems that way

[jiesen]

Tasers and Stun Guns are pretty much a waste of time IMO...Pepper Spray is good tho close up

I'm thinking the future will bring more creative devices like those "sick sticks" in Minority Report... but yeah, it'd have to be better than a Taser to really do the job that a gun can do for you now.

Also, a Neurolizer would be really cool to own. I'm holding out for one of those- that's why I won't buy a gun. If I save the $500 bucks a gun would cost and instead make 10% on it each year, by the time they're available I'll be able to afford one!

[IIC]

reasons for owning guns will become fewer as "less-lethal" alternatives such as a Taser become cheaper and more commonplace.

Tasers and Stun Guns are pretty much a waste of time IMO...Pepper Spray is good tho close up

[jiesen]

Who hijacked Rob's thread?

if you're gonna hijack something, though, it's still best done with guns.

[jiesen]

reasons for owning guns will become fewer as "less-lethal" alternatives such as a Taser become cheaper and more commonplace.

[IIC]

Staying out of the pro/con gun debate...But a few comments to think about.

If guns were outlawed...who would have them?...Who would enforce this?...A "Police State"?

Illegal guns are easy to get...If they were outlawed all that would happen is that the price would go up and people who feel obligated to follow the law would not have them...Criminal types would just pay more. It might reduce the number of Nutso's who get them tho.

Ernie mentioned something like he did not feel a gun was necessary for him to have (correct me if I am wrong)...Now, I'm not advocating that Ernie carry a gun...But, think about this...If Ernie and I were walking down the middle of Manhattan at Midnight...Neither one of us has a gun...Two muggers come up to us with guns to rob us. Who do you think they are more likely to shoot...Me or Ernie???...The answer is easy, they would shoot Ernie before they would shoot me (Unless I opened my BIG MOUTH) because they would consider him more of a physical threat than they would me.

I don't know about the rest of the country...But you used to see a lot more security guards at Banks and other businesses w/ guns 10, 20, 30 years ago around here than you do now...You still see the guards...And even more of them...But most are not armed...'Ya know why???...Because the Banks and others realized that robbers were more likely to shoot if they had to go thru someone w/ a gun...Plus, Banks and other's saw their liability insurance rates go thru the roof when they had armed guards....Why???...Because the Bank or other biz would get sued too often when they were robbed by gunshot.

I don't have the answers...But there is a lot to consider IMO...Doug

[New-born baby]

How come nobody ever hijacks my thread?

Why, because the VTP cannot possibly be highjacked, of course!!

Look at my avatar: that stupid cop shot up my doghouse, too!