The Right Way to Keep Bare Gubs

[only_human]

Originally Posted by xilman

Almost, but not quite, a case of autoDarwination.

If the sprog could be persuaded to turn the gun on himself, closure would be achieved.

Toddlers have shot at least 23 people this year

Last year, a Washington Post analysis found that toddlers were finding guns and shooting people at a rate of about one a week. This year, that pace has accelerated. There have been at least 23 toddler-involved shootings since Jan. 1, compared with 18 over the same period last year.

In the vast majority of cases, the children accidentally shoot themselves. That's happened 18 times this year, and in nine of those cases the children died of their wounds.

[schickel]

Whatever the hell she's smoking, I think I'd like some...

Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore: it's OK to point your gun at law enforcement if they point theirs at you first, [and I quote] "once you point your firearm at me, I’m sorry, then it becomes self-defense. Whether you’re a stranger, a bad guy, or an officer, and you point your gun at me and you’re gonna shoot me and I have to decide whether it’s my life or your life, I choose my life."



I wonder if that holds true for young men of color or are they not allowed to exercise their right to self defense?

I wonder what color the sky is in her world?

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by schickel

[...]Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore: it's OK to point your gun at law enforcement if they point theirs at you first, [and I quote] "once you point your firearm at me, I’m sorry, then it becomes self-defense. Whether you’re a stranger, a bad guy, or an officer, and you point your gun at me and you’re gonna shoot me and I have to decide whether it’s my life or your life, I choose my life."[...]

To me, with this quotation the Republican politician is inadvertently providing the reason why arming the general public with guns protects no-one and puts everyone in grave danger. No doubt she did not mean to say this, but it is what it comes down to.

[ch4]

Originally Posted by schickel

Whatever the hell she's smoking, I think I'd like some...

Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore: it's OK to point your gun at law enforcement if they point theirs at you first, [and I quote] "once you point your firearm at me, I’m sorry, then it becomes self-defense.

No, this is an example of a self-serving lie by pro-gun folks.
When one points a firearm at someone else, that is an attack (or threat of attack), not a defense. If the other person pointed a gun at you first, then your pointing a gun at them is counterattack, not defense.
The only way to use a firearm in defense is to turn it sideways in front of oneself, to act as a (pitifully inadequate) shield to deflect an incoming bullet. The pro-gun deceptive substitution of "defense" for "counterattack" in a gun-pointing situation is simply a self-serving lie.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by ch4

No, this is an example of a self-serving lie by pro-gun folks.
When one points a firearm at someone else, that is an attack (or threat of attack), not a defense. If the other person pointed a gun at you first, then your pointing a gun at them is counterattack, not defense.
The only way to use a firearm in defense is to turn it sideways in front of oneself, to act as a (pitifully inadequate) shield to deflect an incoming bullet. The pro-gun deceptive substitution of "defense" for "counterattack" in a gun-pointing situation is simply a self-serving lie.

Excellent point on the nature of "defense."

[Brian-E]

Yes.

And, on a much much larger scale, the same argument applies to nuclear weapons when they are erroneously described as a means of defense.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Yes.

And, on a much much larger scale, the same argument applies to nuclear weapons when they are erroneously described as a means of defense.

In the beginning, the US was far more honest: calling a certain cabinet official the "Secretary of War," instead of "Defense."

[ch4]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

Yes.

And, on a much much larger scale, the same argument applies to nuclear weapons when they are erroneously described as a means of defense.

But in discussions of nuclear weapons the term "deterrence" is far more common than it is in gun discussions.

- -

Hmm... perhaps I could be persuaded that the proper label to use in gun control discussions when referring to the carrying of a gun is "deterrence". That might be more acceptable to the pro-gun folks than "counterattack".

It could be properly said that, before the weapon is fired, the pointing of ones gun at another person, in the "self-defense" scenarios, is "deterrence". Only upon firing would that change to "counterattack".

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by ch4

But in discussions of nuclear weapons the term "deterrence" is far more common than it is in gun discussions.

- -

Hmm... perhaps I could be persuaded that the proper label to use in gun control discussions when referring to the carrying of a gun is "deterrence". That might be more acceptable to the pro-gun folks than "counterattack".

It could be properly said that, before the weapon is fired, the pointing of ones gun at another person, in the "self-defense" scenarios, is "deterrence". Only upon firing would that change to "counterattack".

Your posting is strangely reminiscent of Aron Nimzowitsch's famous pronouncement: "The threat is stronger than the execution." (I think you're very familiar with that.)

Of course, his statement concerned the highly refined and orderly context of a game of chess. Real life doesn't necessarily follow such neat rules, and concepts like "escalation", and "panic reaction", result in far worse than merely loss of a game.

[Xyzzy]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2634153

“I am honored and humbled to announce the sale of an American Firearm Icon,” Zimmerman wrote in his online description of the weapon.

[firejuggler]

yep mike, I have put a link to this sad story into the wtf thread