Gun tangent from Fuckface Trump name thread

Says who?

Ubiquitous gun violence carries great risk to everyone. Why do you get to accept that risk for them? Why are your pronunciations special?

It's hilarious to see you talking about me living in a cocoon, when your non-white population is almost nonexistent.
Also, you're an idiot. I'm not, and never have, advocated banning all guns unilaterally. But you have to claim that or your whole argument falls apart.

It's also ironic that I've never denied that guns can be (and sometimes are) an effective self-defense tool. Whether it is always the best tool for self-defense and whether not choosing a gun means not being able to defend oneself effectively is a complicated, nuanced issue that gets dismissed out of hand by the gun lovers who find it much easier to distort that kind of discussion into accusations of anyone who wants to approach the subject that way as "gun grabbers" or people who don't recognize the right of self-defense.

LOL-I missed that part about the "cocoons".

I literally have no words in how to respond to that given the differences in his and my lives.

Did notice that he tries to go after me for the leather jacket thing from ten years ago... jsut to remind the class, that was in a situation facing off against a 120lb teenager with a four inch blade who was trippin' balls, with the jacket in question weighing in at close too 5lbs. As Mike notes, every situation is unique.. in this case, the location and other items at hand would have served to keep him contained until he could be safely subdued.

I think what UA realizes instinctively and what the rest of you have forgotten is that guns make you look cool. You know, like cigarettes, except guns go BANG and so they're even cooler. Plus killing someone is totally an alpha move.

Bull fucking shit I am. I would lock them away longer than most people here. What I am NOT willing to do us punish people without criminal conviction, which is the REAL complaint you try to hide in rhetoric.

The cause of violent crime is people choosing to commit violent crimes. Their reasons for doing so rank a DISTANT second from the priority of removing them from their ability to repeat their offenses.

That tired old Strawman again. Preparedness is not fear. A firearm is no different from a spare tire or fire extinguisher in that regard. I don't live in fear of flat tires or cooking fires, either.

They shouldn't have access to anything but three hots and a cot in the greybar motel, but that runs contrary to your "coddling shitbags is compassion" programming.

If they commit crimes they are not law-abiding, so I would have to contend exactly that. And they, like everyone else, are innocent until proven guilty.

I am no threat to anyone who doesn't mean me harm. Taking action against me will not mitigate this default risk to everyone. You may fuck RIGHT off with your "presumption of guilt for the good of the collective."

Neither of you know enough to make that assessment. 90% of your "knowledge" is assumption and speculation.

Bottom line, you are guilty of that which you accuse me. I never go on with unverifiable anecdotes of badassery. That is projection on your part.

Vanity is the department of that stunted, insecure man-child who goes by Crosis. He can't get through a day without posting about how superior he thinks he is.

Pointing out how inferior your reasoning is, is not the same thing as saying that he's superior.

His "points" are hollow emotional rhetoric, peppered with " I think I'm smarter than you, therefore I win "

You say you are no threat but that isn't really the case from anyone else's point of view. You carry a non-zero probability of shooting an innocent person. And when one factors in and adds up the probabilities of everyone else like you, there is clearly a real risk - as shown by the statistics.

So, you have no grounds to be declaring who decides what and anyone who wants to uphold the rights of "the collective" has just as much basis to do so as you do.

UA's argument boils down to "trust my Klingon honor code cuz I'm feeling it at you really hard".
No, I won't.
Fucking baby-raping Republicans shovel the same bullshit, and I'm way past done listening to it to from them too.

Well, I am smarter than you, but that's not why I win.
I win because you are incapable of logically refuting my points. You had no argument against the facts.
Fact 1: America has much worse gun violence than any other economically and socially comparable country.
Fact 2: It is possible to institute better gun laws without "gun grabbing", as proven by Canada, Norway, Switzerland, etc.
Fact 3: Even in America, states with stricter gun laws have less gun violence than states without them.
Fact 4: A focus on crime prevention, rather than excessive punishment, is more effective for reducing criminality.

You have no way to refute ANY of this, and it drives you nuts.

That is not a matter of consensus or perception. Either you have damning concrete evidence, or myself and my property are off the table.

That is a fucking absurd standard that would have endless negative consequences in the fantasy realm where you would apply it consistently to all topics concerning personal freedom.

I will never endorse the presumpion of guilt in service of statistics.

The collective has no rights. Individuals have rights, individuals are responsible for their own deeds, and neither scales in priority.

You people are horrifyingly dismissive of the presumption of innocence.

You stating these opinions (no matter how firmly) doesn't will them into facts.

Negative consequences in your opinion. Your bloviations about personal freedom are yours alone. You do not get to force them on the rest of us.

No guilt has been presumed. A risk has been accurately identified, one at odds with your claim to be of "no" danger.

Again, says you. If you were talking to a group of people who share the same starting assumptions as you do, that might mean something.

See? You do fear me.

You'd much rather continue to engage in nonsequitors about presumption of innocence than address the actual facts of the matter.

Well, I went down a rabbit hole to see what UA had to say about Rumeysa Ozturk being returned, and it turns out he laid low until it got buried, and pulled one of his usual distraction plays.
So, if you ever see him pulling out the "presumption of innocence" shield, rub that in his face like lotion until your elbows hurt.

Agsin conveniently ignoring all the other relevant factors in comparing them to USA.

Gonna need to see the specific apples to apples there. A town of twenty people with two shootings will have a higher rate, and you are exactly the kind of lying bullshitter to sneak in an uneven comparison. Places like Detroit and Chicago have all the gun laws you want, and yet all those shootings seem to fly under your radar.

As long as you're not letting violent criminals go free, knock yourself out.

Nothing to refute. We agree that keeping people so firmly under your thumb that they have no free will can prevent them doing bad things. I just don't agree the ends justify the means, and depriving even one person of their means of self-defense in a crucial moment is unacceptable to me.

The only thing that fears you is a buffet table, Truffle Shuffle.

The only reason you care about her is because you agree with her politics. Change those particulars, and it will be "Lay down with dogs and you get fleas." Fuck off.

And my point continues to stand.
You have nothing.

You aren't fooling anyone with your cherrypicking of those comparisons you will acknowledge.

How many guns were in those countries prior to their bans? Does the same percentage of their population have violent proclivities?

Bonus question: How are the rates of knife attacks and rapes doing in those countries now?

I've laid out my statistics. Straight from the CDC.
I've yet to see any actual statistics from you disputing fact 1 or 2. Which relevant factors are you referring to, I wonder?
As for fact 3, you're relying on emotional appeals. To you, Chicago "feels" more dangerous, so it is. In spite of the numbers. You see, I dint have to continually move the goalposts to suit your argument. I said statistically those states are safer. You say it's not. So, prove it. I have my numbers from the government.. Show me yours.

What bans? Sweden, for instance, hasn't instituted any "new bans".
But in general:

And from Visual Capitalist:

So, tell me again about cherrypicking?

Edit: Point being, countries that still allow guns still have a higher violent crime rate than the UK. Your point about knife attacks is nonexistent, because violent crime in the UK is practically nonexistent compared to other countries.

The CDC has nothing to say to a victim who was prevented from defending themselves in service of your curated and cherrypicked stats. It does nothing to address the fact that you would gleefully infringe on the rights of innocent people.

Even if Chicago is a couple percentage points below a smaller city, that's still a shitload of victims to be ignored, and when you add in the fact that it is concentrated by neighborhood, it clearly becomes a problem of culture, which your greasy ratfuck ass will always slither away from acknowledging.

You're happy to throw the baby out with the bathwater on THIS topic, but when it comes to something like illegal aliens, suddenly individual innocents are of utmost importance, the bad actors don't represent the whole, and the ends don't justify the means. Your supposed principles and devotion to facts are just a thin rhetorical facade over your obvious position of "the benefit of the doubt is reserved for people I like, saying things I agree with."

See? All emotional appeals.
"But, but, but, what about all those poor innocent people who weren't able to defend themselves?"
I dint know, maybe if they lived in a country that didn't value gun ownership over civil safety, like Canada, they'd all be alive.
All those guns in America, and they aren't making anyone safer. Fact.
And now you're also trying to pivot to a different point about immigration and unlawful detention. But no. The issue is gun violence. And as your last post just demonstrated, you have nothing, absolutely nothing, to defend your point with. A couple of percentage points in this instance is hundreds of thousands of not millions of people. 6.4 out of 1,000 multiplies to almost 3 million people in the United States. While it's less than a million for 2.4. That's a lot of people dying because you don't want to have to register your guns or get licensed to own them.
And your rebuttal is, "But maybe someday I will kill someone who is possibly a danger to someone else.

says he guy who wants to summarily execute people who frighten him.

your breathing is a threat to oxygen molecules everywhere....won't you think of them and stop this senseless violence??????