Can the dueling pro and anti gun threads call a truce please?

[ddeclue]

At least as long as they are only engaged in dueling (if you'll pardon the pun) anectdotal stories supporting their POV's...

:eyes:

[Why Syzygy]

1. That's the gun dungeon.

Best stay out if it upsets you.

[ddeclue]

2. I've just seen like 7 different dueling threads on this tonight...

and everyone of them is totally anecdotal not based in statistics.

It doesn't "upset" me so much as it is annoying as a meaningless propaganda exercise masquerading as high minded debate.

[elocs]

37. I do, but saying so evidently upsets some people.

Now they are moving out of the dungeon and into GD. If I could eliminate even seeing the gun forum on the Latest Threads I would.

[anakie]

3. only when there is peace in the Middle East LOL n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

4. That's some funny stuff.

As long as people keep wrongly stating that defensive use of guns only happens one time for every hundred accidental death, etc, then you will keep having people like me posting about defensive gun use. After all those defensive uses are Constitutionally protected. The debate makes us stronger, feel free to take a break if you grow weary. We'll be here when you come back.

David

[ddeclue]

5. Look I'm not on his side and I'm not on your side either...

you aren't making any legitimate point and neither is HE. All you are doing is citing the horror story that provokes the button pushing emotional response you want (and HE is too) when it really is just an anecdote and NOT statistically meaningful. (NOR are HIS anecdotes.)

What you are doing isn't "funny" it's just sad.

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

6. You misunderstood, your request was what was funny.

I always find the criminal activity sad, I rarely find the defensive use of a firearm sad. Different strokes I guess.

David

[ddeclue]

7. No I understood you perfectly - you fail to understand me...

You cite anecdotal uses of guns to defend against crime which are statistically rare events.

He cites anecdotal examples of gun accidents and crimes of passion involving guns which are also relatively rare events.

Neither of you has proved a damned thing nor convinced anyone of anything - yet you have BOTH put up thread after ridiculous thread on this.

Doug D.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

9. Kind of like the Jews and the Palestinians, huh?

or the Protestants and the Catholics.

david

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

8. I posted another one just for you.

[ddeclue]

10. And I satirized it just for you Dave...enjoy...

Look I've shot guns... it's OK, it's not my thing... I know it's other people's fun and I don't really want to take your guns away but I don't really think it is statistically meaningful as a crime deterrent. Consider that John Hinckley managed to shoot Reagan and two others in spite of the Secret Service being the best armed and trained bodyguard force in the history of the world.

On the other hand, the anti-gun guy is just as ridiculous as you - yes people sometimes have gun accidents or commit crimes of passion with a gun but it's NOT normative either.

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

11. I disagree, gun crime is quite a problem in our society.

I'm not worried about people trying to take guns away, the Heller decision has taken care of that for quite some time. It is virtually impossible to completely protect yourself from someone who sole desire is to injure or kill you. Those situations for the average citizen are rare and usually involve a domestic situation. However I believe it is better for people to have a chance to defend themselves and firearms are a good choice for that provided of course that the person in question is legally permitted to possess a firearm and chooses to do so and preferably is trained to do so.

David

[ddeclue]

12. You really don't normally have an opportunity to shoot your attacker

he lies in wait for you and has the drop on you.

It is NOT mutually assured destruction because there is no 45 minute delay allowing you to fire your missiles. It's all over in a split second and there's only the quick and the dead.

You really can blabber all you want about your paranoid delusions of people taking your guns away but that's really never going to happen and you can blabber all you want about gun crime being a meaningful problem but it's really not true (compare it to cancer, heart disease, stroke and diabetes it comes up short). All you really are is a gun nut just like the other guy is an anti-gun nut.

:eyes:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. What are you talking about? Can you read?

What paranoid delusions are you talking about? You'll notice I specifically said I'm not worried about that thanks to the Constitution. As I said most people don't have to worry about someone specifically trying to kill them, unlike our President. Most innocent citizens who are attacked with guns are the victim of random crime. They are home invasions, armed robberies, etc. In many of those situations the citizen may have the opportunity to access a firearm to defend themselves. Quite different than your assassination fantasies. I'm glad you don't think it's a problem, the CDC disagrees, but at least we won't hear you supporting gun control.

David

[ddeclue]

22. Home invasions and armed robberies are EXTREMELY rare and the fantasy is that you will successfully

defend against this with your gun.

You would be better off exercising and dieting than buying a gun if your goal is to protect your life.

Finally you yourself expressed a fear of people taking your guns away from you.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

24. Where did I do that?

I do diet and exercise. I'm not that worried about home invasions as I have six dogs, always better to be prepared though. Kind of like those flotation devices on airplanes.

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

13. I didn't see your response.

[ddeclue]

14. Put down the gun and look at the computer screen then...

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

16. No one has responded to it, I think you may need some sleep.

[ddeclue]

17. Better check your aim partner...there have been at least 5 responses thus far..

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

18. Not a single one check for yourself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5013513&mesg_id=5013513

[ddeclue]

19. That's NOT my satire... that's YOUR post...

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

20. and there isn't a single response to it. Thanks for admitting you are wrong.

[ddeclue]

26. You are delusional... I haven't admitted "I'm wrong"

all that tells me is that nobody gives a damn abour your post - not even enough to reply to it...

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

27. You said 5 people had replied to it, are you saying that's not the case?

Couldn't have anything to do with the fact it's 5 am eastern time, could it?

David

[ddeclue]

30. My SATIRE is a SEPARATE OP - it is NOT a direct reply to YOUR OP in the same thread.

Your OP has ZERO replies. My Satire of it has SEVEN so far.

Does THAT help??

Doug D.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

31. I would help if I saw your "satire" must have missed it.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

21. How's that job hunt coming?

[ddeclue]

23. What does THAT have to do with your the topic?

:shrug:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

25. Just demonstrating my personal concern for your situation.

Hope things get better for you.

David

[ddeclue]

28. Well thanks.. perhaps I will hear something this week about a job...

I'm supposed to have a phone interview about a job over in Tampa later today but we will see if it amounts to anything...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

29. I hope it works out for you.

[TWiley]

32. I find that the gun enthusiasts are a paranoid and tenatious group.

EVERYTHING, i mean absolutely EVERYTHING threatens their gun. They search the internet for hours looking for an example of how someone killed a suspected villian with a rifle, and then post it here. They rehearse murder in their gun self defense classes and even here in the gungeon. They are desperately paranoid that someone somewhere may limit the legal conditions and therefore deprive them of the opportunity to discharge their weapon and kill someone.

If anyone disagrees with a gun enthusiast here on DU, then they are all over them like a military squad. It seems they have IM on speed dial.

[ddeclue]

34. Some of what you say is true but it's not like DU=NRA

so the gun enthusiasts here are somewhat of an odd duck at DU.

I don't have a problem with responsible gun ownership but I don't really see it as a real way to prevent gun crime NOR was that the Founder's intent - their intent was for the formation of state militias composed of citizen soldiers rather than having a standing army which they felt would lead to more tyranny.

I do get annoyed with the obsessive gun nut but I ALSO get annoyed at the knee jerk anti-gun nut response as well. There is a common sense middle ground to be had here and NEITHER of these two extremes has a monopoly on the truth.

Doug D.

[TWiley]

35. Thank heavens that DU is not NRA

Thanks for your common sense reply Doug. I think we agree on most points here.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

36. I agree with much of what you have said.

I disagree about the Founder's intent, butI do think some common ground can be found. Just not here at DU very often.

David

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

33. I find that the gun grabbers are a paranoid and tenatious group.

They are scared of inanimate objects and their paranoia about them causes them to completely disregard the Constitution. If anyone disagrees with them they pounce upon them and call them lurking freepers only here to disrupt the free exchange of progressive ideas.

David