• 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!

Banned Super Bowl Add That Will Change Minds

Dittohead not! said:
Well, you did find some interesting anecdotes at least. How many home invasion robberies have been stopped by armed homeowners?
Click to expand...

Statistics don't define or limit rights.
 
Rucker61 said:
Statistics don't define or limit rights.
Click to expand...

Nor did I say it does.


The question was about how many armed homeowners actually stop home invasion robberies.

Even if the answer is zero, the homeowner still has a right to keep a gun to protect his property.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Nor did I say it does.


The question was about how many armed homeowners actually stop home invasion robberies.

Even if the answer is zero, the homeowner still has a right to keep a gun to protect his property.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, a better question would be, how many home invasion robberies have been stopped by armed homeowners? Let' see if that one will find a definitive answer from Google

Nope. Nothing definitive there either.
Click to expand...

The government's own CDC did a survey back in the '90's, which they declined to publish (surprise, surprise!). They did not survey "home invasion robberies that have been stopped by armed homeowners", but they did survey "defensive gun use".

https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o

Seems that defensive gun use happens quite often......
 
dogboy49 said:
The government's own CDC did a survey back in the '90's, which they declined to publish (surprise, surprise!). They did not survey "home invasion robberies that have been stopped by armed homeowners", but they did survey "defensive gun use".

https://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o

Seems that defensive gun use happens quite often......
Click to expand...

That's the sort of study I was looking for. Such statistics are devilishly difficult to dig out:

from the link:
The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense. This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)....CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.
Click to expand...

which would indicate that being armed is a practical safety matter.
 
SoulFire77 said:
I have a black belt in Shotokan (no joke) and I am well armed. "Skilled" criminals might want to pick a weaker target... because this one will absolutely plant you six feet under.
Click to expand...
If a skilled criminal knew that about you they would just shoot you.
 
Captain America said:
Awesome! I trained in Shotokan for a couple of years. I had moved to East Texas, after training at Icochi Budo Kai (Japanese styled,) for 11 years in Houston, and the only dojo, within reasonable driving distance, was Shotokan styled. Good, basic, hard-style karate. I liked it well, advanced quickly, and made a lot of new friends.

Can't say the same about the Taekwon's. Regardless of my past training and rankings, the Taekwon's put me in a white belt, wouldn't allow me to spar until I got their yellow, (what a joke,) and required me to have 30 paid hours before they would even give me the yellow, and THEN wouldn't allow me to compete in tournaments, at their yellow belt level, because they didn't want their school to be accused of "sand-bagging." (As I had Ni Dan black <Icochi Budo Kai> and 3rd Kyu Brown, (Shotokan) and a 1st Degree Brown (A.S.K.) belt rankings in previous styles,) The Taekwondo style was all about getting my money. That didn't last long. LOL!

Still, I don't leave the house without my S&W .40 M&P Shield. I'm way to old to fight anymore. LOL!
Click to expand...

Too old to fight? You should take a page from Helio Gracie's book.
 
Serenity said:
Real stuff? Then perhaps you should consider the sources you are choosing to spur discussion and not post pretend stuff.

The "Banned Super Bowl Ad" reference in your thread title, is just not accurate all, is it.
Click to expand...

Its all this talk about Star Wars which is pretend, not home invasions and how to be prepared should they occur.
 
DebateChallenge said:
If a skilled criminal knew that about you they would just shoot you.
Click to expand...

Nope. They would just find a "gun free zone" and pick off the sheep that reside there. By their very nature, criminals are weak-minded cowards who prey on the vulnerable. If they had an ounce of courage, they would not be "hustling" their way through life... they would get a job, start a business, or find another legitimate way to support themselves. People with guts don't sneak around in the dark.

Contrary to some comments made here about conservatives, I don't live in fear. Quite the opposite, in fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom