• 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!

The four safest states are very gun friendly

Wow!

How I envy those people in the first four states mentioned in the video.

Hopefully, they can remain oases of peace.

Their residents probably hope that Americans in other states do NOT move there.

(No surprise that the video called New Mexico the UNsafest state.)
 
PleasantValley said:
The below is not written to be adversarial or snarky. I wrote it as an effort to help you understand my personal need for a gun and why others need them too. I used to be quite healthy, now, due to an unexpected illness, I had to go on disability, sell my house in Deer Park, and move out to the country where i know I will be safer. (knock on wood).

How much safer would they be if we all have individual force fields surrounding us everywhere we went?
My question is equally as unrealistic as yours.
Guns are here to stay. it is unrealistic to wish them away.
There are no laws or draconian measures that will ever make guns disappear.
This is reality.
You have to deal with this reality and quit posting questions like that.

What if.....nothing. Stay in the real world if you would like your questions to be taken seriously.

My sister-in-law asked me in a recent visit, why I don't just use a mortar for self-defense instead of a shotgun.
That question was equally silly and proved she knew nothing about mortars or shotguns.

But, to give you respect and answer your question, " What if there were not guns"?

OK, if there were no guns, then the strong and the fit, and those that travel in groups will prey on the old, infirm, and weak.
Predators would form groups and prey on everyone else unless the prey also formed groups to fight them, but even those groups would have to be as fit, and better led than the predators.

With a gun, I alone can take on and wipe out any unarmed or armed group of six or less if i have adequate warning.
With a gun it requires just as much skill and swords and axes, but it isa different skill.
With a gun you need to be gentle on the trigger to inflict damage down-range.

So, in short, it is guns that keep the weak, old, infirm, and not-so-skilled safe from predators.

ie...I have a five shot revolver in my desk drawer as i write this that I call my " 90 year old gun ", because when i am 90 years old, I will still be able to fire it because it is very light but shoots a .44 Special round. If i am weak at 90, it does not have any slides to rack back, no springs to get weakened over time. it is a revolver and is ready 100%of the time with all its parts at rest.

One day when you are very old and weak, and your neighbor gets beaten to a pulp and robbed by young, healthy and fit teenagers, I hope you will remember my words here.
Click to expand...

My in laws are both in their nineties and don't own a firearm, how did they ever make it that long? I don't own a gun and probably never will, I feel safe where I live and since nothing has happened to me as far as crime is concerned, I think it's a valid feeling. I'm sorry so many gun owners are so paranoid they feel threatened everywhere they go unless they have a firearm on them. In other words, the final say. A gun, for some, makes them invincible.
 
TurtleDude said:
this shows the "thinking" of the gun banners. they really hate anyone who doesn't buy into their fear of an armed citizenry.

and if you really believed this about those who don't buy your BS, I doubt you'd constantly make such claims publicly.
Click to expand...

Funny how the armed citizenry feels they need a gun to protect themselves from the armed citizenry.
 
bongsaway said:
Funny how the armed citizenry feels they need a gun to protect themselves from the armed citizenry.
Click to expand...

Let me know when the criminals don't have any guns.
 
This is just stupid, simplistic reasoning and done by dishonest people to try to support the idiotic "more guns equals more safety" because they lack in actual facts to argue it.

The most safest states and place are very desolate areas. Low population, small town, means little to no anonymity. You break laws, you will get noticed. Everybody is in everybody else's business. In big cities, there is lots of anonymity, thus, more crime. People can get away with wronging another and not be shunned. I would suggest people read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond, it touches a lot on this subject.

Put lots of guns in cities, you get lots of gun deaths. Look at the country, we have an absurd rate of gun related incidents and gun deaths because we have more guns than people. And really high gun death rates. That tells you all you need to know about "more guns equal more safety."

And I'm pretty sure the responses I will get to this won't be an actual argument, but a dumb one line deflection or some copy and paste of some others' hacks opinion, which it seems to be the only thing the majority of consevatives can muster
 
Sampson Simpson said:
This is just stupid, simplistic reasoning and done by dishonest people to try to support the idiotic "more guns equals more safety" because they lack in actual facts to argue it.

The most safest states and place are very desolate areas. Low population, small town, means little to no anonymity. You break laws, you will get noticed. Everybody is in everybody else's business. In big cities, there is lots of anonymity, thus, more crime. People can get away with wronging another and not be shunned. I would suggest people read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond, it touches a lot on this subject.

Put lots of guns in cities, you get lots of gun deaths. Look at the country, we have an absurd rate of gun related incidents and gun deaths because we have more guns than people. And really high gun death rates. That tells you all you need to know about "more guns equal more safety."

And I'm pretty sure the responses I will get to this won't be an actual argument, but a dumb one line deflection or some copy and paste of some others' hacks opinion, which it seems to be the only thing the majority of consevatives can muster
Click to expand...

What do you want to do about "more guns"?
 
Rucker61 said:
Let me know when the criminals don't have any guns.
Click to expand...

I would venture to say there are way more people in prison for crimes that did not include the use of a firearm. That's a guess so if you can prove that to be incorrect please post the accurate numbers.
 
Harshaw said:
Gosh, you could have just watched the first 45 seconds of the video to find that out, but of course, you didn't, because this was never a serious question. This was just a drive-by dismissal, not really caring what the answer is.
Click to expand...

Gosh, you can stop being lazy and actually make an argument. You post a youtube clip with absolutely no argument, and even then you can't defend it, you just say "gee, watch the video". Seems all you guys on the right can do is regurgitate other people's opinions, can't form any actual argument.

And now cue the childish deflection and comments with no substance
 
Sampson Simpson said:
Gosh, you can stop being lazy and actually make an argument. You post a youtube clip with absolutely no argument, and even then you can't defend it, you just say "gee, watch the video". Seems all you guys on the right can do is regurgitate other people's opinions, can't form any actual argument.

And now cue the childish deflection and comments with no substance
Click to expand...

:roll: Yeah. You should know that I don't hold you against the bulk of the board's more leftward posters.
 
bongsaway said:
I would venture to say there are way more people in prison for crimes that did not include the use of a firearm. That's a guess so if you can prove that to be incorrect please post the accurate numbers.
Click to expand...

You're likely correct, but we aren't trying to defend ourselves against pot smokers and car thieves.
 
Rucker61 said:
You're likely correct, but we aren't trying to defend ourselves against pot smokers and car thieves.
Click to expand...

Yeah but who knows? Once the pot smokers become addicts and the car thieves turn into home invaders, then you have your targets. Better to be safe right?
 
bongsaway said:
Funny how the armed citizenry feels they need a gun to protect themselves from the armed citizenry.
Click to expand...

funny how leftwing gun banners think the way to stop crime is to pass laws that only disarm honest people--thinking that will disarm people who don't follow the laws

why do leftwing gun banners push laws that ONLY restrict the legal rights of honest people?
 
Sampson Simpson said:
This is just stupid, simplistic reasoning and done by dishonest people to try to support the idiotic "more guns equals more safety" because they lack in actual facts to argue it.

The most safest states and place are very desolate areas. Low population, small town, means little to no anonymity. You break laws, you will get noticed. Everybody is in everybody else's business. In big cities, there is lots of anonymity, thus, more crime. People can get away with wronging another and not be shunned. I would suggest people read Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond, it touches a lot on this subject.

Put lots of guns in cities, you get lots of gun deaths. Look at the country, we have an absurd rate of gun related incidents and gun deaths because we have more guns than people. And really high gun death rates. That tells you all you need to know about "more guns equal more safety."

And I'm pretty sure the responses I will get to this won't be an actual argument, but a dumb one line deflection or some copy and paste of some others' hacks opinion, which it seems to be the only thing the majority of consevatives can muster
Click to expand...

why is it that almost every single poster, politician, talking head etc, who wants to further criminalize actions that are currently legal and objectively not harmful-when it comes to firearms-is a left winger?
 
TurtleDude said:
funny how leftwing gun banners think the way to stop crime is to pass laws that only disarm honest people--thinking that will disarm people who don't follow the laws

why do leftwing gun banners push laws that ONLY restrict the legal rights of honest people?
Click to expand...

Where in my statement did I say anything about banning guns or taking them away from lawful gun owners? I can only presume you have esp.
 
bongsaway said:
Where in my statement did I say anything about banning guns or taking them away from lawful gun owners? I can only presume you have esp.
Click to expand...

most gun banners currently only push for the "next reasonable step" towards confiscation or bans

once you believe that the way to stop SOME criminals from getting SOME guns is to restrict honest people, you pretty much have bought into the incrementalist gun ban movement
 
TurtleDude said:
most gun banners currently only push for the "next reasonable step" towards confiscation or bans

once you believe that the way to stop SOME criminals from getting SOME guns is to restrict honest people, you pretty much have bought into the incrementalist gun ban movement
Click to expand...

That's why you can't compromise, give them an inch they'll take a mile.

And that's why I like GOA better than NRA.
 
flogger said:
My question still stands so why not just answer it ?
Click to expand...
You asked a 'loaded question' that was also based on false data.
 
Wayne Jr said:
I don't track MSM, what hoax do you speak of?
Click to expand...

What person in america do you hear using the terms witch hunt and hoax to talk about their personal situation? That's a hint.
 
bongsaway said:
What person in America do you hear using the terms witch hunt and hoax to talk about their personal situation? That's a hint.
Click to expand...
Again, I don't follow MSM. The news I follow mostly revolves around technology achievements and space. You know, things that actually matter, unlike a certain wall a certain NY business tycoon is pretending to want to build just so he can quietly fund other pet projects and not the wall at all. MSM doesn't even talk about the South China Sea conflict.

So I ask again, what 'hoax' are you talking about?
 
Last edited:
DebateChallenge said:
That's why you can't compromise, give them an inch they'll take a mile.
Click to expand...
It's an unfortunate truth. Some gun control policies have a chance at making a positive difference, but we can't enact them because gun-grabbers will just use it to undermine gun ownership. We need to get rid of that kind of thinking. Perminantly.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Again, I don't follow MSM. The news I follow mostly revolves around technology achievements and space. You know, things that actually matter, unlike a certain wall a certain NY business tycoon is pretending to want to build just so he can quietly fund other pet projects and not the wall at all.

So I ask again, what 'hoax' are you talking about?
Click to expand...

The russian hoax. For someone who's on here all the time and is interested in tech and space you really want me to believe, what hoax? What witch hunt? Why are you here discussing politics if you don't follow it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom