• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pro/anti-gun -- who is more paranoid?

Who are more paranoid?

  • Total voters
    39
Goobieman

Goobieman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
According to the FBI, in 2007:
-There were 467 violent crimes for every 100k people, representing 1.408 million crimes.
-Of those 1.408 million crimes, 29.35% were verifiably committed with a gun
Thus:
-One in 214 people will be a victim of a violent crime
-One in 730 people will be a victim of a violent crime committed with a gun
Violent Crime - Crime in the United States 2007

Given that, who are more paranoid:
-The people that look at the crime rate and want a gun for self-defense
-The people that look at the crime rate involving guns and want more gun control
 
Last edited:
I went with both. I don't live in fear of guns or crime, and don't understand those who do. I gave the percentage numbers for your crime stats in other thread.
 
I responded those who want more control because as a scientist I cannot avocate more control when there is no data to say such policies would make a difference.
 
Pro second amendment folks live in varying degrees of paranoia. The government could never, and wouldn't try to come to individual gun owners houses and round up guns. So this cold dead hands thing is paranoia in it's purest form.

By the way...I own guns and am pro second amendment.
 
Redress said:
I went with both. I don't live in fear of guns or crime, and don't understand those who do. I gave the percentage numbers for your crime stats in other thread.
Click to expand...
Once you've seen living human flesh carved up like a holiday ham, or shot full of holes, once you've had the victim of a crime die under your hands, one's perspective on these matters, and the reality of violent crime becomes much more clear.
 
Oftencold said:
Once you've seen living human flesh carved up like a holiday ham, or shot full of holes, once you've had the victim of a crime die under your hands, one's perspective on these matters, and the reality of violent crime becomes much more clear.
Click to expand...

Less than one half of one percent chance of being a victim of violent crime. About one tenth of one percent chance of being the victim of a violent crime committed with a gun. I am not going to let those chances affect my behavior.
 
Redress said:
Less than one half of one percent chance of being a victim of violent crime. About one tenth of one percent chance of being the victim of a violent crime committed with a gun. I am not going to let those chances affect my behavior.
Click to expand...

half of a percent for you personally. factor in the people you care about and/or are responsible for, and it goes up a bit.
 
emdash said:
half of a percent for you personally. factor in the people you care about and/or are responsible for, and it goes up a bit.
Click to expand...

Not really. Actually less if we start figuring in other factors. Some people engage in behavior that increases their odds of being involved in a violent crime. Drug users and those involved in the drug trade as one example. Those people are much more likely to be the victim of a violent crime, and inflate the statistics by an admittedly small amount.
 
Redress said:
Not really. Actually less if we start figuring in other factors. Some people engage in behavior that increases their odds of being involved in a violent crime. Drug users and those involved in the drug trade as one example. Those people are much more likely to be the victim of a violent crime, and inflate the statistics by an admittedly small amount.
Click to expand...

so you don't care about drug dealers/users. noted.
 
emdash said:
so you don't care about drug dealers/users. noted.
Click to expand...

They are not me(any more), nor those I care for. That was the premise of the post of yours I replied to. Please do not put words into my mouth, thank you.
 
I think that just like with any group both sides of the issue can have their extremists. Unfortunately, the extremists are usually the only ones who are heard because they are the loudest and most outspoken. I think that both sides of the issue can certainly be paranoid in their own ways. The fact that some of the extremists in the anti-gun crowd actually want all guns to be taken away speaks volumes. They have a completely irrational fear of guns and can't understand why anyone would want them. On the other hand, the extremists on the pro-gun side of the argument think that people should have access to any and all guns and don't understand people who would want to put any restrictions what-so-ever on guns.
 
Goobieman said:
According to the FBI, in 2007:
-There were 467 violent crimes for every 100k people, representing 1.408 million crimes.
-Of those 1.408 million crimes, 29.35% were verifiably committed with a gun
Thus:
-One in 214 people will be a victim of a violent crime
-One in 730 people will be a victim of a violent crime committed with a gun
Violent Crime - Crime in the United States 2007

Given that, who are more paranoid:
-The people that look at the crime rate and want a gun for self-defense
-The people that look at the crime rate involving guns and want more gun control
Click to expand...

It depends.

The people who think that the government requiring a background check is the same as the government leaving you completely defenseless are paranoid. The people who justify the right to bear arms by saying that they need their guns to overthrow a tyrannical government are paranoid. But the average gun owner, who hunts for fun and just wants to be left alone to practice his hobby, is not paranoid.

Similarly, the people who think concealed carry laws are going to result in a wave of Rambos are paranoid. The people who think that a person who owns a rifle is a menace to society are paranoid. But the average pro-gun control advocate, who lives in a big crime-ridden city and wants to ban the most common weapons used to commit crimes in his city, is not.
 
Kandahar said:
But the average pro-gun control advocate, who lives in a big crime-ridden city and wants to ban the most common weapons used to commit crimes in his city, is not.
Click to expand...

Tell that homo to stop being such a ***** and get a concealed carry permit, learn how to use a gun and protect himself.

Then if he spreads the word around and the majority of the population are doing it, gun crimes won't be such an issue because the criminals will have more to fear than just the police, which we all know can't be everywhere and aren't always there when they are needed most (and due to our cluster**** building of these "cities" have a hard time getting there due to traffic clusters, etc).
 
Redress said:
They are not me(any more), nor those I care for. That was the premise of the post of yours I replied to. Please do not put words into my mouth, thank you.
Click to expand...

no sense of humor. noted.
 
I went with those who want guns.

I know as a gun owner I am more paranoid about the government taking away my right to defend myself. :cool:
 
I think neither are paranoid. Each are reacting in understandable ways. The difference stems from a personal opinion, not political. Basically, both believe their opinions are justified due to morals. I think, though, both sides can agree that the unregistered guns are where much of the violent crimes involving guns come from.
 
People who think that a background check amount to a gross violation of their second amendment rights are highly paranoid. You know who you are.

People who want to ban all guns because of crime are highly paranoid. You know who you are.
 
Caine said:
Tell that homo to stop being such a ***** and get a concealed carry permit, learn how to use a gun and protect himself.
Click to expand...

Uhh some of us have neither the time nor desire to learn to use guns and protect ourselves. That's why we hire cops. It doesn't mean we're "homos" or "******s," it just means that we have other interests and priorities and/or don't trust ourselves to use it properly.

You don't call someone a "homo" if they don't personally study medicine to treat their own cancer when there are plenty of doctors available, do you? Is someone a "*****" if they send their kid to school to be taught by a stranger instead of home-schooling them? If not, then why would you expect the average citizen to do YOUR job for you?
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh some of us have neither the time nor desire to learn to use guns and protect ourselves. That's why we hire cops. It doesn't mean we're "homos" or "******s," it just means that we have other interests and priorities and/or don't trust ourselves to use it properly.

You don't call someone a "homo" if they don't personally study medicine to treat their own cancer when there are plenty of doctors available, do you? Is someone a "*****" if they send their kid to school to be taught by a stranger instead of home-schooling them? If not, then why would you expect the average citizen to do YOUR job for you?
Click to expand...

Stop using logic! If you do. Caine might be out of a job soon. And we don't want that.
 
Last edited:
These discussions are markedly tainted with an urban viewpoint. I lived in AK for six years and, other than in Anchorage and other larger bergs, almost everyone was armed. I live at the back of a farm field now in NC and it is pretty much the same. In AK your choice was something of a very large calibre or shotgun to protect against bear mostly. Handguns, even 44mag, were thought by most as a good suicide weapon in a bear attack. An assault weapon would be effective.

In urban areas it's not the bears. The animals shoot back with assault weapons. To have a chance you should be able to be equally armed.
 
Kandahar said:
Uhh some of us have neither the time nor desire to learn to use guns and protect ourselves. That's why we hire cops. It doesn't mean we're "homos" or "******s," it just means that we have other interests and priorities and/or don't trust ourselves to use it properly.

You don't call someone a "homo" if they don't personally study medicine to treat their own cancer when there are plenty of doctors available, do you? Is someone a "*****" if they send their kid to school to be taught by a stranger instead of home-schooling them? If not, then why would you expect the average citizen to do YOUR job for you?
Click to expand...

Learning the basics of a firearm ain't rocket surgery.

You are a pretty intelligent poster even when we disagree, I don't think you would have a problem.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Learning the basics of a firearm ain't rocket surgery.

You are a pretty intelligent poster even when we disagree, I don't think you would have a problem.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sure I wouldn't have a problem learning the basics; my father is a hunter, so I've used sporting guns occasionally anyway. It's just that learning to use a gun is about 9,435th on my list of priorities. I have zero interest in them. And I'd be nervous having a gun around me all the time. And I'm not sure that I'd be able to use it anyway.

If someone else wants to have a handgun for protection in their house or car, I don't really care. But to expect EVERYONE to learn how to properly use a gun (and have a gun nearby at all times) is asking too much.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Oh I'm sure I wouldn't have a problem learning the basics; my father is a hunter, so I've used sporting guns occasionally anyway.

It's just that learning to use a gun is about 9,435th on my list of priorities. And I'd be nervous having a gun around me all the time. And I'm not sure that I'd be able to use it anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, I understand it being a low priority but if you ever get the inclination to do so many of us would be more than happy to offer advice.
 
Extreme pro-gun folks are paranoid, the extreme anti-gun folks are better characterized as hysterical.
 
Goobieman said:
According to the FBI, in 2007:
-There were 467 violent crimes for every 100k people, representing 1.408 million crimes.
-Of those 1.408 million crimes, 29.35% were verifiably committed with a gun
Thus:
-One in 214 people will be a victim of a violent crime
-One in 730 people will be a victim of a violent crime committed with a gun
Violent Crime - Crime in the United States 2007

Given that, who are more paranoid:
-The people that look at the crime rate and want a gun for self-defense
-The people that look at the crime rate involving guns and want more gun control
Click to expand...

If only one in 730 people will be a victim of a violent crime commited with a gun, why do you need a gun for your self defense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom