Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?So, what part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?That's all fine and good...Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
But they don't find another way. If they did then most suicides would be successful. They don't on average take pills, get their stomach pumped and then go to the gun, the numbers do not demonstrate that.
So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal. I disagree with you.
YOUR entire argument AGAINST firearms is that there are to many shootings. You can not have it both ways.So how may times should I have to swipe my finger over a reader before I can use a gun if my or my wife's life is in dangerYou never had to swipe your finger more than once?
I highly doubt that
Probably have, but it is used a lot.
3, 4, more?
What if it's cold and I'm wearing gloves ?
Get the kind where you enter a code then. Stop being so scared. Again the stats show there is about a 0% chance you will ever need to shoot at someone. No reason to spend your life paranoid and scared. I carry no weapon and am not scared.Again the stats show there is about a 0% chance you will ever need to shoot at someone.
Except for all those people raped, robbed and murdered by criminals…was there need to shoot someone a 0% proposition?
Again you want to claim there is lots of shooting going on? Shootings are reported you know. You better think about your answer.
Brain357 Here you go buddy, this is an example of what you need to do to show us all you own a gun...
Just agree to admit you are lying and give up being a moderator. Put up or shut up.
Here are examples of your lies. And these are JUST in this thread! Now you can leave....
"No you need a crime. The number of guns doesn't matter when there aren't enough crimes being attempted."
This is a lie of omission. Crimes occur every day that are not reported and you ignore those, that is a lie...
"Im sorry there are only about 1.2 million violent crimes each year. Making your paranoia and defense numbers look even more ridiculous."
And this is simply insane... There are well over 200 people dead in Europe from only TWO attacks. Far from "fine"..
"And again Europe is not armed and they are fine. That kills your crazy theory."
Here you lie by ignoring the Bosnian and Serb experiences of the last 20 years...or did you simply not know about them? Your intellectual capacity is pretty low so it is possible you simply are ignorant of this episode.
"How about you stick with stats for like the last two decades? Or do you prefer to be ridiculous?"
"None this year, last year, the last 40 years...
If guns are needed to stop that sort of thing why is it Europe doesn't have a problem? Most of Europe is disarmed."
You made the right decision not to put up. You would have lost.
You do need a crime in order to have a defense. If we have 100,000 crimes attempted that is the most that can possibly be defended. There being 300 million guns has nothing to do with it.
Most crimes will be reported by lawful citizens. It is the people who are themselves criminals who don't report crimes.
His theory seems to be that we need guns to defend against the government. Those weren't government attacks, they were by terrorists. Armed people really won't be able to defend against terrorists. Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed? Oh right it doesn't matter.
The Bosnian/serb thing was still quite a long time ago. Even then there were not smart phones, internet, 24/7 news. You seem to have completely missed my point.
So you have proven no lies.
Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.I think people use what they have around them.That:What premise?
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of this do you take issue with?
That's all fine and good, doesn't change the fact that Alaska and Wyoming have high suicide rates than New York or California. Are you saying liberals are just happier?
Alaska and Wyoming have horrible winters, low populations, high populations of single men….that increases depression….if they didn't have guns they would use rope……..
Suicide is an intentional act and we have shown that countries without guns do it far more than we do…….
Brain357 Here you go buddy, this is an example of what you need to do to show us all you own a gun...
Just agree to admit you are lying and give up being a moderator. Put up or shut up.
Here are examples of your lies. And these are JUST in this thread! Now you can leave....
"No you need a crime. The number of guns doesn't matter when there aren't enough crimes being attempted."
This is a lie of omission. Crimes occur every day that are not reported and you ignore those, that is a lie...
"Im sorry there are only about 1.2 million violent crimes each year. Making your paranoia and defense numbers look even more ridiculous."
And this is simply insane... There are well over 200 people dead in Europe from only TWO attacks. Far from "fine"..
"And again Europe is not armed and they are fine. That kills your crazy theory."
Here you lie by ignoring the Bosnian and Serb experiences of the last 20 years...or did you simply not know about them? Your intellectual capacity is pretty low so it is possible you simply are ignorant of this episode.
"How about you stick with stats for like the last two decades? Or do you prefer to be ridiculous?"
"None this year, last year, the last 40 years...
If guns are needed to stop that sort of thing why is it Europe doesn't have a problem? Most of Europe is disarmed."
You made the right decision not to put up. You would have lost.
You do need a crime in order to have a defense. If we have 100,000 crimes attempted that is the most that can possibly be defended. There being 300 million guns has nothing to do with it.
Most crimes will be reported by lawful citizens. It is the people who are themselves criminals who don't report crimes.
His theory seems to be that we need guns to defend against the government. Those weren't government attacks, they were by terrorists. Armed people really won't be able to defend against terrorists. Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed? Oh right it doesn't matter.
The Bosnian/serb thing was still quite a long time ago. Even then there were not smart phones, internet, 24/7 news. You seem to have completely missed my point.
So you have proven no lies.
Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed?
They have access to a gun - why would they?But they don't find another way.When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?So, what part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?That's all fine and good...
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
This only supports my "serious about suicide" premise.If they did then most suicides would be successful.
Why use a gun unless you are serious about killing yourself and there are any number of other means available?
Non sequitur.So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal.
Brain357 Here you go buddy, this is an example of what you need to do to show us all you own a gun...
Just agree to admit you are lying and give up being a moderator. Put up or shut up.
Here are examples of your lies. And these are JUST in this thread! Now you can leave....
"No you need a crime. The number of guns doesn't matter when there aren't enough crimes being attempted."
This is a lie of omission. Crimes occur every day that are not reported and you ignore those, that is a lie...
"Im sorry there are only about 1.2 million violent crimes each year. Making your paranoia and defense numbers look even more ridiculous."
And this is simply insane... There are well over 200 people dead in Europe from only TWO attacks. Far from "fine"..
"And again Europe is not armed and they are fine. That kills your crazy theory."
Here you lie by ignoring the Bosnian and Serb experiences of the last 20 years...or did you simply not know about them? Your intellectual capacity is pretty low so it is possible you simply are ignorant of this episode.
"How about you stick with stats for like the last two decades? Or do you prefer to be ridiculous?"
"None this year, last year, the last 40 years...
If guns are needed to stop that sort of thing why is it Europe doesn't have a problem? Most of Europe is disarmed."
You made the right decision not to put up. You would have lost.
You do need a crime in order to have a defense. If we have 100,000 crimes attempted that is the most that can possibly be defended. There being 300 million guns has nothing to do with it.
Most crimes will be reported by lawful citizens. It is the people who are themselves criminals who don't report crimes.
His theory seems to be that we need guns to defend against the government. Those weren't government attacks, they were by terrorists. Armed people really won't be able to defend against terrorists. Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed? Oh right it doesn't matter.
The Bosnian/serb thing was still quite a long time ago. Even then there were not smart phones, internet, 24/7 news. You seem to have completely missed my point.
So you have proven no lies.
Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed?
IN Response to those attacks we armed pilots and added armed guards, called Air Marshals to flights. And the muslim attack on the cartoon festival was stopped by an armed good guy.
Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.I think people use what they have around them.That:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of this do you take issue with?
That's all fine and good, doesn't change the fact that Alaska and Wyoming have high suicide rates than New York or California. Are you saying liberals are just happier?
Alaska and Wyoming have horrible winters, low populations, high populations of single men….that increases depression….if they didn't have guns they would use rope……..
Suicide is an intentional act and we have shown that countries without guns do it far more than we do…….
You are ridiculous. You make excuses whenever the data doesn't go your way.
They have access to a gun - why would they?But they don't find another way.When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?So, what part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
This only supports my "serious about suicide" premise.If they did then most suicides would be successful.
Why use a gun unless you are serious about killing yourself and there are any number of other means available?
Non sequitur.So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal.
Guns in the environment make for more successful suicides. It's a simple fact. Those who try another way usually don't succeed and usually don't end up killing themselves. People with guns, not so much.
YOUR entire argument AGAINST firearms is that there are to many shootings. You can not have it both ways.So how may times should I have to swipe my finger over a reader before I can use a gun if my or my wife's life is in dangerProbably have, but it is used a lot.
3, 4, more?
What if it's cold and I'm wearing gloves ?
Get the kind where you enter a code then. Stop being so scared. Again the stats show there is about a 0% chance you will ever need to shoot at someone. No reason to spend your life paranoid and scared. I carry no weapon and am not scared.Again the stats show there is about a 0% chance you will ever need to shoot at someone.
Except for all those people raped, robbed and murdered by criminals…was there need to shoot someone a 0% proposition?
Again you want to claim there is lots of shooting going on? Shootings are reported you know. You better think about your answer.
Since I don't really believe in the suicide argument, I would like to mention that smart guns won't hinder suicides so they seem misplaced in this thread...
When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?So, what part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?That's all fine and good...
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
But they don't find another way. If they did then most suicides would be successful. They don't on average take pills, get their stomach pumped and then go to the gun, the numbers do not demonstrate that.
So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal. I disagree with you.
19,974 people commit suicide in this country without guns……just about the same rate as people who do……and in countries with absolute gun control….not cherry picked but countries that show that even with zero access to guns, sucide is still committed and at far higher rates than us……….
No.Guns in the environment make for more successful suicides. It's a simple fact.They have access to a gun - why would they?But they don't find another way.When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?So, what part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
This only supports my "serious about suicide" premise.If they did then most suicides would be successful.
Why use a gun unless you are serious about killing yourself and there are any number of other means available?
Non sequitur.So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal.
Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.I think people use what they have around them.
That's all fine and good, doesn't change the fact that Alaska and Wyoming have high suicide rates than New York or California. Are you saying liberals are just happier?
Alaska and Wyoming have horrible winters, low populations, high populations of single men….that increases depression….if they didn't have guns they would use rope……..
Suicide is an intentional act and we have shown that countries without guns do it far more than we do…….
You are ridiculous. You make excuses whenever the data doesn't go your way.
No…the data has gone my way from the start……there are entire countries where you cannot get a gun as a civilian…….these countries have suicide rates higher than we do and we have 357 million guns in private hands…..according to you that isn't possible…..
Country with 357 million guns has lower suicide rate than countries with absolute gun control…….
Why do you not understand that correlation does not equal causation?Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.
That's all fine and good, doesn't change the fact that Alaska and Wyoming have high suicide rates than New York or California. Are you saying liberals are just happier?
Alaska and Wyoming have horrible winters, low populations, high populations of single men….that increases depression….if they didn't have guns they would use rope……..
Suicide is an intentional act and we have shown that countries without guns do it far more than we do…….
You are ridiculous. You make excuses whenever the data doesn't go your way.
No…the data has gone my way from the start……there are entire countries where you cannot get a gun as a civilian…….these countries have suicide rates higher than we do and we have 357 million guns in private hands…..according to you that isn't possible…..
Country with 357 million guns has lower suicide rate than countries with absolute gun control…….
There are entire countries where you cannot get a gun and suicide rates are lower. The US has a higer suicide rate than most countries. However, we can compare states and be more precise. We've done that, gun states are better at suicide.
They have access to a gun - why would they?But they don't find another way.When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
This only supports my "serious about suicide" premise.If they did then most suicides would be successful.
Why use a gun unless you are serious about killing yourself and there are any number of other means available?
Non sequitur.So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal.
Guns in the environment make for more successful suicides. It's a simple fact. Those who try another way usually don't succeed and usually don't end up killing themselves. People with guns, not so much.
Again, you are wrong…the Japanese, Chinses and South Koreans succeed…..more than we do and we have more guns…...
No.Guns in the environment make for more successful suicides. It's a simple fact.They have access to a gun - why would they?But they don't find another way.When did I say that? Oh wait -- I didn't.The part where you think states with more guns are more serious about their suicides. What's going on in Wyoming?
Why are you being dishonest?
Let's try this again:
-Guns likely account for about half of successful suicides because the people who use them are serious about success.
-Absent guns, people who are serious about success will find another way.
What part of my premise do you take issue with, and why?
This only supports my "serious about suicide" premise.If they did then most suicides would be successful.
Why use a gun unless you are serious about killing yourself and there are any number of other means available?
Non sequitur.So, the only conclusion that I see you coming to given that more successful suicides happen in gun rich environments is that gun owners are suicidal.
Using a gun is more likely to result in a successful attempt; nothing about that in any way necessitates that more guns available means there will be more attempts with a gun.
Brain357 Here you go buddy, this is an example of what you need to do to show us all you own a gun...
Just agree to admit you are lying and give up being a moderator. Put up or shut up.
Here are examples of your lies. And these are JUST in this thread! Now you can leave....
"No you need a crime. The number of guns doesn't matter when there aren't enough crimes being attempted."
This is a lie of omission. Crimes occur every day that are not reported and you ignore those, that is a lie...
"Im sorry there are only about 1.2 million violent crimes each year. Making your paranoia and defense numbers look even more ridiculous."
And this is simply insane... There are well over 200 people dead in Europe from only TWO attacks. Far from "fine"..
"And again Europe is not armed and they are fine. That kills your crazy theory."
Here you lie by ignoring the Bosnian and Serb experiences of the last 20 years...or did you simply not know about them? Your intellectual capacity is pretty low so it is possible you simply are ignorant of this episode.
"How about you stick with stats for like the last two decades? Or do you prefer to be ridiculous?"
"None this year, last year, the last 40 years...
If guns are needed to stop that sort of thing why is it Europe doesn't have a problem? Most of Europe is disarmed."
You made the right decision not to put up. You would have lost.
You do need a crime in order to have a defense. If we have 100,000 crimes attempted that is the most that can possibly be defended. There being 300 million guns has nothing to do with it.
Most crimes will be reported by lawful citizens. It is the people who are themselves criminals who don't report crimes.
His theory seems to be that we need guns to defend against the government. Those weren't government attacks, they were by terrorists. Armed people really won't be able to defend against terrorists. Remember 9/11? How many in those buildings were armed? Oh right it doesn't matter.
The Bosnian/serb thing was still quite a long time ago. Even then there were not smart phones, internet, 24/7 news. You seem to have completely missed my point.
So you have proven no lies.
Crimes stopped before they happened…by people using guns….and these will not be reported as rape, robbery or murder because they were stopped……
Burglars call 911 on themselves as homeowner holds them at gunpoint
A pair of men who were breaking into a Woodland, Washington, home Monday night got quite a scare when the owner of the house caught them redhanded.
Bill Lahti was surprised to find his home had been burglarized last week, partly because the home, which belonged to Lahti’s great-grandparents years ago and was handed down to him, isn’t exactly in an easy to get to location. The rural property has been dubbed by the Lahti family as “the hill,” and given the home’s history, Lahti was especially appalled at the break-in.
“I kept coming back periodically to check in,” Lahti told KATU. “So, Monday night, I roll up and there’s their truck backed up to the front door in the yard. (The) door was about – probably – four inches open. I could see the light through there. So, I came out there, jumped out of my truck, kicked the door open and there they were.”
Lahti told the two men to get down on their knees as he held them at gunpoint. He was going to call the police on them, but Lahti couldn’t get his phone to work. With his gun still trained on them, he instructed the crooks to make the call themselves. With few options, the suspects complied.
-----
Concealed Carrier Holds Burglar At Gunpoint With Her FNX .45
CLEVELAND, TENNESSEE — A woman successfully subdued a would-be burglar outside her home using her FNX .45. The suspect, James Jeffrey Dunn, was allegedly trying to break in through her front door late at night. She got her handgun and confronted the burglar, according to WRCB. Once at the doorway, she yelled through the door for him to stay put and not move. Moments later, she confronted him head-on — handgun drawn and ready to go.
via WRCB
“I tried to order him to stay right where he was at and I pointed the gun at him and I came running off the porch and I came within 10 feet of him and he laid the bicycle down and he crumpled on top of the bicycle,” she says.
She held him at gunpoint until Cleveland Police arrived and arrested Dunn, 35, on charges of aggravated burglary, theft, and burglary of a motor vehicle. Police note that Dunn had an arrest sheet tallying over 40 charges — the most recent being only 6 hours prior to his attempted burglary of this concealed carrier.
“We went over this when we got my concealed carry permit, these types of scenarios. But I had already put that gun up and ever taken it out since, you know?” she says. “Maybe to go the range once.”
When we talk about the new generation of concealed carriers, let’s take a good long look at the realities these people are facing: hardened, career criminals unafraid to bust through the door or do damage to private property and persons. It’s a good thing this woman had the proper training she needed and the right equipment.
Lancaster Woman Scares Off Bat-Wielding Attackers By Pulling Gun On Them
LANCASTER, Ohio - It happened along a walking path in Lancaster.
Dinah Burns is licensed to carry a concealed gun, but she'd only recently started taking her weapon while walking her dog.
Based on what happened, it looks like she'll make a point of carrying from now on.
"I think if they'd gotten any closer, I probably would have fired,” said Burns.
It was Monday when Burns was on a footpath near Sanderson Elementary School.
"Two gentlemen came out of the woods, one holding a baseball bat, and said 'You're coming with us'."
The men weren't deterred by Dinah's dog Gracie.
"I said, 'Well, what do you want?,' and as I was saying that I reached in to my pocket and slipped my gun out, slipped the safety off as I pulled it out. As I was doing that the other gentleman came toward me and raised the baseball bat. And, I pointed the gun at them and said, 'I have this and I'm not afraid to use it.'"
The men took off and so far have eluded police. Dinah posted about the incident on Facebook to alert friends and neighbors, to criticism by some.
"Most of the males' opinion was, 'Why didn't you shoot them?'"
Easy to second-guess a decision made under pressure, based on her concealed carry training, and police agree.
"To get out of a situation, back out, get out of it as much as you can without having to discharge your firearm."
"I will say it's a good thing to go from a place of danger to a place of safety, however you get that done,” said Sgt. Matt Chambers, Lancaster Police.
"Very thankful that it turned out the way it did, and hope it doesn't happen again, but I will be prepared."
---------------------------------
NRA-ILA | Armed homeowner scares off attacker, KTVA, Anchorage, Alaska 11/13/15
A homeowner was in their house in Anchorage, Alaska when they heard a knock at the door. The homeowner retrieved a gun and went to answer the door. Upon opening the door, an intruder pepper-sprayed the homeowner, prompting the homeowner to fire at the criminal. The attacker fled the scene. (KTVA, Anchorage, Alaska 11/13/15)
---------
NRA-ILA | Elderly couple fights off real monsters on Halloween, Helena-Arkansas.com, Helena, Ark. 11/01/15
An elderly couple were at home Halloween night, when the doorbell rang. Prepared to hand out candy to trick-or-treaters, the wife opened the door to find four armed robbers, at least two of whom were armed with guns.
The robbers forced their way inside the home, where the husband was sitting in a recliner. Upon learning of the home invasion, the husband retrieved a gun and fired at the criminals, prompting the home invaders to flee. (Helena-Arkansas.com, Helena, Ark. 11/01/15)
-----
Given the number of gun owners and the number of gun in the US, the 5.9% use rate says otherwise.
That's all fine and good, doesn't change the fact that Alaska and Wyoming have high suicide rates than New York or California. Are you saying liberals are just happier?
Alaska and Wyoming have horrible winters, low populations, high populations of single men….that increases depression….if they didn't have guns they would use rope……..
Suicide is an intentional act and we have shown that countries without guns do it far more than we do…….
You are ridiculous. You make excuses whenever the data doesn't go your way.
No…the data has gone my way from the start……there are entire countries where you cannot get a gun as a civilian…….these countries have suicide rates higher than we do and we have 357 million guns in private hands…..according to you that isn't possible…..
Country with 357 million guns has lower suicide rate than countries with absolute gun control…….
There are entire countries where you cannot get a gun and suicide rates are lower. The US has a higer suicide rate than most countries. However, we can compare states and be more precise. We've done that, gun states are better at suicide.
