Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
G@G Community 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
How Do I Look? 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel & Leisure 
Trending & News 
Select age and gender to cast your vote:
Updates:
- Yes I 100% do... And for those that say they don't...
While the OP means guns, anything can be a "weapon" and you don't have to just have a gun to be considered "armed" ... If I'm walking down the street bashing people's skulls in with a baseball bat, I'm gonna be considered "armed and dangerous"...
And the bat is now a "murder weapon"
Same could be said if I'm in the house and bash someone with a rolling pin..
People have a right to defend themselves... And the 5th amendment gives us the right to bare arms...
Those so against guns or "weapons",
If someone breaks into your home and threatens your child, are you going to stand there and do nothing?
Or are you going to find the nearest object to use as a "weapon" to defend your child? But you don't bring a knife to a gun fight, so if "they" armed with a gun, good luck with that...
Lobbying for more gun control isn't the answer... Lobbying for stricter punishment for criminals, lobbying to get more criminals off the streets is1|40|0Is this still revelant?Find a traditional martial arts dojo and become a dedicated student.
My choice is Shotokan karate.
We train to kill an assailant the first time that we hit them.
No firearm required, in most situations.Several have comments about innocent people getting killed in this post, no if you break into my house you are not innocent, you are guilty, and I am going to sue your family for the cost to repair my door or however, you broke in, not to mention the cleanup, stained floor, walls, etc
@bulltaker Right!!! Sadly we live in a society that has more sympathy for criminals than hardworking, law abiding citizens
- Show All Show Less
@Brainsbeforebeauty Protecting children or wife and family! If I am protecting my family, I know how to use a pencil, to kill, yeah, like John Wick, so does that mean we need to ban pencils too?
Some idiots post insanely stupid shit on here!
Most Helpful Guys
- I don’t love guns, but they exist. If someone else produces a gun or weapon of equal and true likelihood of fatality, I’m reluctantly ok with someone producing their own in self-defense.
What I do NOT endorse is people thinking a gun is ok to use instead of defending yourselves in a fistfight. Most serious interpersonal differences and even a lot of hostile situations, you should just box your way out of that, win, lose, or draw, as a first violent resort. “I felt threatened” should not be a reason to pull a lethal weapon of any sort. Basically, don’t bring a gun to a fistfight. And ideally, nobody should relish shooting anyone else. If you’re in the right in the situation, after you shot a guy, you should be like “FUCK, that sucks that I just had to do that”, not “see you in hell, motherfucker!” What makes me nervous about supposed honest gun owners is that I see too many that are way too excited, like they HOPE someone does something that will justify them getting to shoot someone. A reasonable, self-defense-minded gun owner should hope to fire zero shots in their lifetime outside of a controlled range or sport situation. I just see too much cowboy-itis to trust everyone with it without worry.0|00|0Is this still revelant?If you have a gun... Never get in a fistfight... Your gun can be used against you. When you carry a gun the only fight you can have is a gunfight. And no one wins a gunfight...
So if I am minding my own business eating at an outdoor table at a cafe and some big muscle dude comes up and punches me in the face, why should I be responsible to play his game and "box (my) way out of that, win, lose, or draw..."? He should just simply lose, and his welfare should not be my main concern. My main concern is to be safe while eating my lunch.
"Basically, don’t bring a gun to a fistfight." If he attacks me in the scenario above, should i tell him hold on buddy i have to go home and put my gun away and then we can resume? LOL. I mean either you carry a gun with you or you don't, Period! And your quote is wrong, this should be to all attackers, don't bring a fist to a gun fight. Seeing as they are the ones who decide when and where the fight is, they should be responsible for being adequately prepared. They must be dumb to not be.
Lastly, "And ideally, nobody should relish shooting anyone else." if its done in legit self defense why the fuck does it matter what they were thinking? ie you come into my house at night breaking the window open and you have a baseball bat, why does it matter if I enjoyed or didn't enjoy shooting the home intruder?
I think you also misunderstand why people seem like they would enjoy it. They enjoy the idea of being prepared for such a situation. I don't really want to shoot someone, however I enjoy the idea of being prepared and following through in a tough situation. I would be proud asf to be able to defend myself, after all the training and preparation I went through. Wouldn't you be proud if you practiced an instrument and then after years of prep you got an award?@bamesjond0069 I would never be proud of killing another human being. I would always have regrets and wish there could have been a better way. Yes there are scenarios were killing someone is your only choice. But I know of no sane human that wants to kill another. Ask any soldier involved in a war or any cop involved in a shooting.
- Show All Show Less
@b5fan but ask any soldier or police if they are proud to be a soldier or police. They are. And thats my point. Im not glad to shoot someone but im proud to be a capable protector.
@bamesjond0069 They are, but they are proudest of ending the war and not having to kill again or protecting someone without any injuries. Soldiers fight to establish a just order, and police officers fight to maintain that order. Order without bloodshed is the goal in both instances.
@b5fan sure but realistically they need to prepare for violence. Police compete for marksmanship awards and such. Of course they will be proud of their abilities. Military are proud to make it to elite units which require they have above average combat effectiveness among other things. They are proud to have better killing abilities. But again thats my point. They are proud to be prepared and capable of combat. Not to kill people. But to someone who doesn't know shit about shit it may appear to be the same thing. Its not.
Im proud asf on my quick draw times as well as my hand to hand combat. If i have to actually fight someone and i win. Ill be happy and proud that i was prepared, not really happy if i kill someone.
- In combat I had to use everything from explosives, firearms, chemicals, my radio for air support and extraction, rockets, missiles, and one funky looking shoulder fired projectile-directed energy hybrid weapon. My point?
Whatever is in my hand is a weopon the instant someone becomes aggressive with me. Since I can put a bullet in someone's leg with a firearm, it's better for everyone concerned that I carry a gun, if I ever decide too renew my CCP. The reason being, that I was naked with nothing in my hand too defend myself when a scumbag with a gun broke into my residence.
He never had a chance. R. I. P. scumbag.0|00|0Is this still revelant?
Most Helpful Girl
- If some crazy person breaks into my house & is threatening my life I should be able to use as much force as is necessary to protect myself. If it means armed defense because he has a weapon so be it.3|90|0Is this still revelant?
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!What Girls & Guys Said
1974- Do you support armed self defense? Yes Do you support rights to bare arms? No
It's a dumb question with 2 contradicting answers that can only be conducted logically. Since there is nothing wrong with shooting a guy who broke into your home, but there is clearly something wrong this Uk In a population of 56 million, that adds up to about 50 to 60 gun killings annually. In the USA, by contrast, there are about 160 times as many gun homicides in a country that is roughly six times larger in population. There were 8,124 gun homicides in 2014. Logic dictates if america had gun laws like Uk there would/should only be 6 times the amount due to size but because it does not it's 160 times.
If them deaths are worth it then you go ahead but in reality it's not hard to see one time gains out weigh the deaths of the masses, which in society gun laws been like they are in america cause. Even if there is nothing morally wrong with shooting a guy who broke into your house.0|00|1You seem to know very little about our laws, you can't just immediately shoot someone for stepping on your property alone, that would be murder in the second degree if they die and aggravated assault if they live, either would yield about 20 years in prison, which is 2 years more than you give people for felony murder in the UK, but I digress. Your view is completely backwards as you can't believe in self defense and not believe in gun rights as gun rights are the best way to defend one's self against criminals and the only way to do it against armed criminals and has a success rate literally over 99% compared to 2% with tasers. Gun violence stats are also skewed because they include justified cases of self defense, justified police shootings, and in a lot of cases suicides are lumped in their as well but we quickly call them on it when they do. Guns are used to save far more lives than take, an estimated 500,000-3,000,000 American lives are saved every year through the defensive use of firearms compared to just 2,000 homicides annually.
So your telling me you cannot even shoot a home invader. Then yup i am 100% ageist it what's the point in a gun you cannot even use to protect your home which i thought was kinda the whole point of protectng your land and property but i guess not. Problem with america is that they think they need guns, england we don't even think about guns most of us have probably never even seen one IRL. American's they see them everywhere.
Funny when one country feels the need to have something to protect them and another country has people who never think that. Shows which has the worse society of the two i think.
But don't matter america screwed themselves over if they want to get rid of guns now they can't it's too estisblished.
Kinda like banning alcohol wouldn't work.No, you can use a gun to defend your home, you just need to be in a situation where you reasonably fear for your life. If someone is trying to kick my door in and comes in with a gun, I can shoot him. If I see someone walking by on my property, I can't shoot them because they aren't a threat at all. UK imprisons people for defending themselves and doesn't allow people the right nor ability to defend themselves at all, that to me shows which has the worse society and makes me even more thankful that the colonials shot at the Brits rather than join them.
- Show All Show Less
That's what i meant by guy breaking into your house smh obviously. And no were allowed to defend are selves. Just we don't need guns for that nor does anyone even think about needing them... Unlike a society that seems obsessed with them.
- A lot of Americans dont realize that outside the US, or the western world, low level ethnic riots, cleansing, pogroms, do happen when the law of order breaks down and when you have an entire mob coming for you and it know that by killing you, looking your property it can most likely get away then the only thing that can protect you is a firearm. Now in such situations you can't leave because public transport shuts down and there are armed mobs roaming the highways and lanes. So you home is your best bet. So yes, I believe that firearms should be regulated, however, some types of basic firearms such as shotguns, revolvers, and single shot rifles should be avaliable after a background check for self defense.0|00|0
- Not under the context of excessive force. If it’ll save your life then yes. If you got your ego burned but aren’t physically threatening enough to win an verbal confrontation so you pull out a gun? No. Most of the time you don’t need a gun.
A lot of gun users can’t fight or aren’t physically challenging enough to stand their ground in an argument. I can see pulling a gun out if you’re getting jumped or being chased by a bear. But one on one? You should only be pulling that gun out if they have a knife or running is impossible.0|00|0 - Yes. Its more important now than ever what with the BLM assaulting people, huge crime waves and the democrats defunding the police. Just having a gun is often enough to dissuade a criminal from f*cking with you. I had to shot a guy last year in my home.
0|10|0 - The right to physical self defense and the defense of your family is probably the most basic human right.
If you cannot own the means to defend yourself, you are being deprived of your most basic human right. There are already far too many restrictions on gun ownership. The fact that you cannot carry a gun on your person to use for self defense in many places is an outrageous violation of rights. We need fewer gun restrictions not more.
I'm for elimination of almost all gun laws AND for increasing penalties for crimes involving the use of guns. Stop punishing the good guys for what criminals do. Punish the criminals not the citizens who are exercising their liberty and basic human rights.0|00|0 - No. When societies start taking that as an applicable option. You end up with messed up countries like America where school shootings are just a hazard of living there.1|64|13
actually many european countries have more mass shootings per capita. its just america has louder www.investors.com/.../media
Lol, when was the last school shooting again?
Not being allowed to defend your life and property is just hazard of living in the UK. Guess women don't really care because they just scream for the nearest man to deal with it.@Celtero 24th November 2020. Henderson Middle School NC. A 13 year old boy fired at an unarmed 12 year old girl.
There have been 66 reported incidences of weapons being fired in schools in the US in 2020.
So tell me again why that makes you laugh out loud?
In the UK we don't have a problem with gun crime of that magnitude because we don't have guns and we have gun control laws that keep people safe.- Show All Show Less
You'll wish you had a gun if a crazy person broke into your house and killed your partner and left you in the hospital.
Only reason school shooting happens is because of a lack of gun safety of individuals.
you just changed your argument, big goalpost move
a school shooting is not a gun going off at schoolAh, that's right. People take school shootings literally. A man shoots a gun in a school parking lot in the middle of night during summer and it's a school shooting. Pretty funny considering nobody seems to have been injured in the instance you're talking about. You know guns are heavily politicized when you can pull up the last "school shooting" but couldn't tell me the last time a kid brought a knife to school.
10 school shootings in 2020 with 8 deaths and 12 injured out of 320,000,000 people? Wow, that's so many
- If I live in a brutal and uncivilized environment, I might consider to support the idea.
But thankfully, my own society is educated enough to not make it necessary to be 'armed' whenever I leave my house.
Sad to see that we still have some primitive spots on this planet.0|00|1Countries that don't allow people to defend themselves against vicious criminals that exist everywhere seems far more primitive to me.
I think that it makes a difference to 'not allow' self protection versus having the population running around like Wild-West gunslingers.
But if that's one's preference, then : ''Yee-Haaaaaah"
- I believe, as it has been said recently, that people need to be taught to deescalate. That should ALWAYS be your first line of defense. However, as unfortunate as things are, between the legal system and and people's state of mind it is a necessity to have the option of force. A caveat to that, it should be mandatory to take a safety course, and as laws change to retake if you continue to own weapons.0|00|0
- My issue woukd be that it is uaed appropriately only when truly needed. There are enough stories involving the police misusing deadly force, and they are highly trained to deal with situations. Citizens being given a green light to use potentially lethal weapons in name of defence, seem rife for misuse through lack of experience or maliciousness0|00|0
They have a very different objective than civilans, police have to engage with the criminals deliberately and stop them, civilans are simply trying to defend themselves. So if someone started kicking my door and when he comes in, I shoot him with a 32 and he runs off (cases like this happen hundreds of thousands of times every year in the US) that's a success because I defended myself and my family and he's probably not going to come back, the fate that awaits him is irrelevant to me after he runs. However that would be a failure for law enforcement because they have to cuff him and take him to jail, so while I'd just stay back and let him run, police have to go after him and stop him.
You're talking a specific example of home invasion.
Lets say you're in a super market and someone starts to hold up the place with a knife. Are you justified to shoot him claiming self defence if he's not specifically charging you?
There have been a couple of high profile cases where individuals claiming to be protecting their neighbourhoods have approached unarmed people in the street and the situation has escalated and resulted in fatal shootings, the culprits using stand your ground as a defence. Are they justified?If I feel that me or someone else is in imminent danger of serious bodily harm or death, I'm justified to shoot them. In that instance, I'd draw and hold him at gun point. Whether or not they're justified is decided on a case by case basis, it's actually extremely rare for someone to unjustly kill someone else and then claim self defense as they'll just take a plea deal instead rather than trying to make a claim that won't hold up in court and getting the max sentence.
Anonymous28 dIn a nation with an excessive amount of guns that are easily obtainable by criminals and the mentally ill, yeah. However, if you stop manufacturing guns and strictly regulate them, armed self-defense becomes completely unnecessary, like in every other nation where there are no guns and thus no gun violence.1|00|1You should really do your research and look at Mexico, Brazil, El Salvador, and the UK where people have no right to guns or self defense and thus the only people who have them are criminals although I'm thankful to see people in Brazil who have had it with that crap and are getting guns to defend themselves anyways. Here's a surprise, it's easy to get weapons anywhere in the world if you break the law, we're the only country that allows people to get them legally and use them against criminals who are trying to kill them.
- Opinion Owner28 d
I have done my research. 3% of homicides in the UK are gun-related. 73% of homicides in the US are gun-related. In 2019, the US had over 350 mass shootings. In the same year, the UK had zero.
Mexico, El Salvador, and brazil do not regulate their weapons and criminal organizations run most of the nation. Because they don't have government regulation of weapons, they have the same problems that America does in terms of gun violence.
It's actually not easy to break the law when it comes to heavily regulated items, such as guns where the accounted for from the moment of construction, to each exchange of hands, kept strictly in the hands of police and military where they are counted and recounted almost every day, behind locked doors. The military seldom loses their equipment.
And, as an argument, that's not a very good one, even if we ignore how factually wrong it is. That would be like saying "It's easy for a dog to kill a cat if it just doesn't listen, so tie the cat up and put in front of the dog." That some terrible logic. If you honestly believe it's easy (which it isn't in every other country) then you shouldn't make it easier.
You can't kill someone with a gun that doesn't exist. Plain and simple. So how are you going to erase 400,000,000 guns from a country? And it seems to me that your issue is only with "gun" crime but not with other crimes and the ones that will keep happening and in much larger frequencies when civilians are no longer able to stay one level above criminals by arming themselves. And that 350 number is from everytown, which is a propaganda outlet that seeks to confiscate guns and brainwash kids by including negligent discharges and calling them "mass shootings" to sounds scary and decieve them. The real number is much lower and rifles of any kind are used in less than 1% of all homicides in the US and that number has remained steady for over a decade.
- Anonymous19 di voted no because i think everybody could become a good person , i thought that be smart in those situation is better then using violence.
but after thinking a bit deeply about it , now i think that if it's necessary violence should be used too , because maybe the robber could even become a good person , BUT if now he is hurting someone and should be stopped at all cost
so my final tought is , i don't like armed self defense , but it's necessary in SOME situation. i think everyone should try not to use violence until it's 100% necessary.
be nice people.0|00|0 - I do and the reason I do is very much rotted in life experience. I learned at in early age just how screwed up and dangerous people can be. Also I have a couple reminders of that over the years. Such as having a 2nd job at a gas station and being robbed during my shift.0|10|0
- I support the second ammendment and the right to self defense, regardless of stand your ground laws. Armed self defense is the quickest way to end the threat.
I don't want to wait for the police to come save my ass in two to five minutes. Way too much can happen in that time frame. Some guy wants to hurt or kill me, fuck him, I am taking that clown out first.0|10|0 - Yes. Without a doubt... or even a moment of hesitation.
I dont know about you. But I love my life. I've got 30 years of brittle diabetes under my belt. Point being that im staring down the barrel of my own mortality. I refuse to let any minute go to waste.
Besides. Its bad form to die from lack of shooting back.0|10|0 - yes I do and I always carry a knife on me unless im going to an airport because in todays world its just not smart to not have a way to defend yourself. why don't I have a gun you may ask, im in Germany and when I go back to America it still won't be the best idea for me to have a gun because im black and I don't trust the police not to shoot me even if though it would be legal. I saw what happened to Philando0|00|0
Anonymous28 dNo. On the surface it looks a good idea to have a weapon to defend against armed attacks but in reality your more likely to blow 14 year-olds brains out because he's shoplifting. Angry people don't think straight.2|13|12people have a sacred right to defend themselves no matter what, even if it sometimes kills innocent people the right to self defence is more important than human life itself. because its not about defending life. its about defending freedom
- Show All Show Less
All men fantasize about being the hero and if necessary killing the bad guys. That's part of being a man.
If you're a girl maybe. The problem with the feminine centric society we've created is that women think they can do anything. They don't realise men are the pillars of that society and can and do rise to face adversity in a way women cannot physically or mentally.
@007kingifrit
So which one of your beloved family member would you offer up as the innocent who has to pay with their life?@UCrayCray the question is inherently flawed as it implies we know in advance who will die when. we don't
but we know life will be worse without freedom to the point where death is preferable. for everyone.@007kingifrit
There is no flaw. Innocent people will die in this quest for the absolute right to protect yourself. The innocent people in your family are just as vulnerable as anybody else. I’m just curious which of their lives do you see as less important then your need to defend yourself.
Bring it home when you talk about “even if it sometimes kills innocent people the right to self defence is more important than human life itself.”@UCrayCray innocent people MUST die in every system. every action you take in life hurts innocent people. its a basic law of the universe called entropy
every action you take destroys more than it creates. so worrying about every innocent life is not how adults think@007kingifrit
So you are saying if one of your family members got shot and killed by someone who mistakenly thought they were in danger, “ooops” would be enough for you, and you’d be okay with it because “it sometimes kills innocent people?”@UCrayCray i certainly wouldn't want to change our way of life because of a dead family member. what kind of pussy would do that
also if you need to resort to the most unlikely scenario to engage in an emotioanl argument... your point is probably stupidOnly innocent people who are unprepared will die in that quest, armed civilians literally win over 99% of the time against armed assailants.
@007kingifrit
I’m just curious if you think the death of your most loved family member is a reasonable price to pay for your right to defend yourself.
It’s a pretty straightforward question. Not sure why you are having such a difficulty with it.
- Do you think the average female can fight against the average male? No siree, but if she had a gun or a knife then yes she could, and by banning weapons the only people with weapons are criminals who are robbing you with them.0|00|0
- If I have to defend myself from an aggressor who wants to do me harm then I want to be better armed than he or she is. I support the Second Amendment rights of Americans to defend themselves and their families, friends and members of the public.0|00|0
- Yes and no, there's cases where people have taken the. law into their own hands and killed people doing admittedly the wrong thing like shoplifting but shite isn't worthy of death1|10|4
Then show me a case where that happened, because I've never seen a civilian shoot a criminal who wasn't asking for it. With the only exception being in Denver this year when a lefty shot a man for spraying and slapping him, but even in that case, he was attacking him. The solution there is simply don't let democrats have guns
A case where a lefty who didn't deserve to have a gun because he is against others having guns and he's in jail pending charges for murder.
- Show All Show Less
I'm not anti gun either, fun to shoot and there are legit cases for self protection, but I've been around enough yanks to see not all of you are screwed on straight
The fact that you're even using the term "yanks" shows that you aren't screwed on straight at all, but I digress. If you did any research, you'd know that LTC holders are by a very wide margin the most law abiding group in the country
- I see it as an inevitability that we'll have to learn to trust each other even if we have basements full of weapons. I spent enough time in Texas to learn that. Good people there even if they have a borderline military base in their own home.0|20|0
You know, like people can actually print guns now... I don't know how reliable but I'm sure enough for the people who are so afraid of these things. And explosives are easy to make -- horrible things like nail bombs. Information is out there. We'll have to get used to it as I see it.
- I think guns should only be sold in countries where the government (through the police or other law enforcement agencies) is no longer able to provide safety for its citizens. If the government can't protect you, you have the right to protect yourself.0|00|0
- Nope.
I support self defence by equal means. Who the fuck fights with arms alone these days anyway?0|00|1Everyone who acknowledges that deadly force encounters aren't games and it's about survival as such it's wise to use the best tool available to you to ensure your survival, which is undeniably a gun.
- More robberys and attempted mugging and things of that nature are stopped every year by law abiding gun owners than by the police. Not having any guns anywhere doesn't do anything criminals don't follow laws thatsbwhy they're criminals. I carry every day and I have since I was 18 and I always will0|00|0
- Depends, I am all for defending yourself with anything needed to stay alive, but I am against taking that too far (if you shoot someone's hand and he loses his gun, no need to blow his brains out afterwards) and I'm also against guns being normalized and carried around regularly.0|00|1
- Absolutely. If a criminal commits a crime, it will be done and them gone before police can arrive. The criminal might get caught later, but that does not help the victim who is killed by the criminal.0|00|0
- The thing about guns is I wouldn't think they're going away even if you ban them (3d printing/n additive manufacturing and so on and so forth). So in a way, if you can't beat them join them.0|00|0
- Ofcourse, to defend yourself absolutely but with that being said just because something feels threatening doesn’t mean resort to killing someone. Wait until the attempt is made.0|00|0
- Far more guns are used for suicide than in self-defense.1|00|2
that's actually untrue. defensive gun use to prevent a felony is 150k to 4 million uses per year
@slatyb So because some that have mental issues, and commit suicide, does that mean that EVERYONE should be disarmed, and unable to defend themselves, because these FEW didn't get the help they needed?
Every death is sad, and unfortunate, but GET REAL! Tens of thousands are saved, just HAVING A GUN, and never shooting it!- Show All Show Less
A hundred TIMES more gun deaths. You can argue that people should be able to have guns, but you can’t argue that it makes us safer.
Can you do math? 500,000-3,000,000 lives saved through the defensive use of firearms every year in the US compared to 20,000 (surprisingly a massive drop from the 36,000 last year) suicides this year.
That's just an unsupported claim, basically a gun lover's fantasy. It's absurd to imagine that there would be half a million murders in this country if guns were highly regulated and hard to obtain. Firearms are tightly controlled in many developed countries and their homicide rate by any means is a tiny fraction of the homicide rate in the US. Mass shootings essentially never happen.
alright, here are the sources
Guns are used defensively 100k to 2.5 million times per year. Even the smallest measure is 3x the gun casualties per year
https://www.nap.edu/read/10881/chapter/7#112
so let's start with the number 2 million crimes are prevented by a firearm each year; 5,279 times per day. There are about 300,000 gun crimes per year and 13,000 of those are homicides we can say homicides are 4.3% of gun crime; now extrapolating that out to our other stat of defensive gun uses per day we find that 226 gun homicides are prevented per day (4.3% x 5,279)
@007kingifrit And how many of those incidents would occur if we had strict gun control like the UK?
counter factual questions like that can never be answered and don't matter because i just showed that guns are a net gain on American life
you're anti science and anti math@007kingifrit And I showed that countries with strict gun control are much safer than the US.
no you did not, you cited nothing this entire conversation
america is more free anyways and that's more important than safety@007kingifrit That's called freedumb. There is more freedom in other countries like Canada.
nope you're just making up shit for cowards now. go live with the gay soviet union to the north if you don't like it here
also you said you provided evidence of something but you totally didn't. at no point in this conversation have you given evidence of your claims
@007kingifrit Firearm related deaths per 100,000 population:
US 2017 - 12.21 total. Of those 4.46 were homicides, 7.32 were suicides
UK 2015 - 0.20 total, or 1.7% of the number of firearm deaths in the United States
en.wikipedia.org/.../List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rateno really, you just can't use wikipedia as a source. i won't look at it. educated people do not use it as a source
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 39,740
Deaths per 100,000 population: 12.1
alright, its still not a measure of how many lives we save each year with defensive gun use. 150k to 4 million. and our increased freedom is worth the loss of any we do lose
most of the countries you point to as having less deaths have unforgivable lacks of freedoms that will get worse as the bretton woods era ends@007kingifrit I think I will choose their lack of freedom that includes health care for all over Americans freedumb where poor people die of treatable disease and handgun homicides.
Just FROM YOUR REFERENCE, 72,473 POISONING deaths!! DOUBLE the 'gun deaths'!! Are you just wanting to save lives, or are you some biased, and ignorant one AGAINST GUNS?
67,000 Drug overdoses!! Motor Vehicle deaths, 37,455 from the PAGE YOU CITED!!
Stop talking BS, and just come out and say you are against guns! You obviously are NOT AT ALL focused on saving lives!! Seems like you are a controlling Nazi, wanting to ban every gun, making up reasons, and not looking at the data!alright, pick it. get out, of course universal healthcare depends on a certain demographic structure with more young people than old to pay taxes and the birth rates of Canada are declining so that will be gone in 30 years buuuuut hey go for it
@007kingifrit Dude, you have been making good points, all along the way!
Some wise person, though, once said, "Never argue with an idiot (@slatyb) as they bring you down, to their level, and win with experience in ignorance!"but i already demonstrated to you @slatyb that guns save more lives each year than they kill, and here in the SAME CONVERSATION you go back to your stupid talking points
@JackSmy oh i never thought you were talking to me sorry I shuda tagged him. He loves Canada so much why doesn't he move there
@007kingifrit So guns should be legal to protect us from other people with guns? That's just fingers in your ears "tell your facts to shut up" retarded. In the US we have 12 firearm deaths per 100,000 people, or a total of 40,000 deaths from firearms. In the UK they have 0.2. If we had the same rate as the UK, instead of almost 40,000 deaths we would have fewer that 700.
criminals will always have guns, and we should never diminish freedom just because you're a coward
stop being such a weak person@007kingifrit So your position is "We can't do anything." But of course we can. It's unclear what the Supreme Court will or won't allow w. r. t. the Second Amendment. We can certainly ban the sort of weapons used in mass shooting incidents. Just sticking our head in the sand to placate the minority of gun nuts is silly and I expect those days will end soon.
less than 170 people die a year to mass shootings, 320 americans die a year to toasters. you want to ban toasters? of course you don't. your dislike of guns is not driven by data its driven by media manipulation
guns are useful to, they fundamentally change the psychology of our leadership to be more freedom minded and less authoritarian, they are also lots of fun
@007kingifrit Hand grenades are fun too, but they are illegal. It's fun to make chemical explosives but that's also illegal.
technically it isn't you just need a class 4 destructive devices license.
and the constitution uses the term "arms" which does include all military equipment so technically you should be able to have hand grenades, and why not?@007kingifrit Sure, and surface to air missiles in case you need to take down an airliner. Maybe a really wealthy person should be allowed to own a nuclear weapon.
@007kingifrit
Dude, stop wasting your time with this ignorant idiot!! You are NEVER going to change his opinion, because his head is soooooooo far up his ass, he can't breathe, and no oxygen to the brain results in stupid posts, as @slatyb has been making!
He has NO CLUE about reality, and during the riots over George Floyd, this year, and Rodney King, in the early 1990s, the ONLY BUSINESSES NOT BURNED AND LOOTED, were THE ONES WITH OWNERS DEENDING THEM WITH GUNS!! Where were the Police?
During the Floyd Riots, in Minneapolis, I CAN SAY, BEING THERE: THEY WERE HIDING LIKE COWARDS!!! The police ran away, and hid! Then, FINALLY, our IDIOT governor called in the Nation Guard, after two days of mayhem!!
SCREW YOURSELF, @slatyb, you have no idea how NECESSARY those guns were, then!!
- I support armed defense AND offense.The weak and the strong alike are here to perish, not to live forever. 0|10|0
- Yes I strongly agree and support armed self defense. Without such means we are just baby ducklings waiting for the fox to find and eat us.0|00|0
- I'd rather have no armed weapons anywhere at all, like here in the UK.0|00|3
That'd be great if we lived in a perfect world. But we don't. And the more we pretend it is, the less we see the threat of ignoring that reality.
that is a dangerous idealistic thing to want. you have lived through the most peaceful time in human history so your worldview is a little skewed. but the UK won't be peaceful forever
- Show All Show Less
That's exactly why we shot at your Redcoats for years until we drove them out, you don't value self defense and are too naive to understand the concept of limited government
@007kingifrit not sure if I would say I’ve lived through the most peaceful time in human history - I don’t really turn a blind eye to everything that’s been going around the world, especially with the conflict the UK has been involved in. I’m not oblivious to the fact that there’s been ongoing worldwide conflict since I was literally born. My comment was simply based on the fact that we don’t use armed weapons here in the UK, and we seem to feel much safer here than most in the US. I can’t imagine what it would be like to send my kids to school knowing that someone could just enter the building with a gun in their hands. Obviously I recognise that we are two separate societies but this is how I see it.
the past 75 years have been the most peaceful in human history. the fact that you refer to the things going on in your lifetime as "conflicts" at all is naive. the real wars and violence are coming back
@007kingifrit I mean you are entitled to hold whatever opinion and so am I. If anything, that's quite offensive considering all the war and famine going around the world... and even the more recent pandemic. To each their own I guess! :)
what's happening in the world right now isn't war. but i fear you will see real war in your lifetime. you just don't have anything to compare it to
- Yes sir, I'm a black separatist and I'm always strapped. I don't committ crime but being black, you don't have to in order to get police attention. l would easily put down a cop if it's his life vs mine.0|00|0
- This thing called the blackmarket will pop up and then all guns will be sold illegally and undocumented so when people are eventually murdered by said weapons there will be no way to trace the murder weapon back to a source.0|00|0
- We can debate the yes and no for ages but when push comes to shove and someone is holding up a store at gunpoint with you in it you'll wish you had a gun and some skills to use it0|10|0
- Carry as much weaponry that you local laws allow. If you are being attacked, most thugs have weapons as most are cowards and need something more than their fists to cause you to submit. Going unarmed in many areas of the USA is a form of suicide.0|10|0
- Anonymous26 dHell yes. Even the anti-gun people have guns. They just don't want you to have one.0|70|0
- What sane person doesn’t believe that we should be able to defend ourselves? It’s crazy that this is even a debate.1|10|0
- A world famous pragmatic quotation remains:
"God created all humankind and Col. Samuel Colt made them 'equal's." ;)0|10|0 - Yes!
If someone gives me cause to deal with them, I will expedite their face-to-face meeting with God.1|10|0 - In a study people were all told a armed man would come in and start shooting. No one hit the aggressors most just froze. Too many times the wrong person is shot or your weapon is taken from you.0|00|1
Wrong, almost every shooting is justified, over 98% in fact and when seconds count, the police are minutes away, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.
- Anonymous27 dYes I support armed self defence, especially as now as some town/cities are Defunding Police which will make any response times longer, but those same town/cities that are Defunding Police are also making it harder to get a firearms licence or even a firearm.1|10|0
- Only if they are allowed to kill kids behaving badly in their stores
Otherwise NOOOOOOOOOO0|00|0 - Yes. Bad people with guns won't hesitate to hurt you or kill you even if you're unarmed so it's only fair to have a gun to defend yourself.0|20|0
- Yes I do and I think all women should support it, or at least have some sort of self defense training.1|10|0
- I can see in this poll are a lot of brainless USA people0|00|0
- It should still be allowed if u never had a gun charge another words u should be allowed to buy a gun still.
God Bless0|00|0 - If they have gun training. I believe if you wanna get a gun you should have to have gun training with every gun get checked psychologically.0|00|0
- I think it is out of control nowadays, as in more dangerous than ever.0|00|0
- Absolufely. I just hope they amend the laws so that we can shoot anti-vaxxers on sight.0|00|0
Some people have valid reasons not to get vaccines such as pre existing conditions that makes the vaccine very dangerous. It's why my doctors didn't recommend the pneumonia vaccine for me because I have CF and it would put me at serious risk. And I'm armed as well
If you don't know what an anti-vaxxer is that's ok, just ask instead of making stupid assumptions.
- Of course if someone breaks into my house they have forfeited their life.0|20|0
- I do especially after this year Americans with guns is the only thing keeping the government from throwing people in camps right now.0|10|0
- Yup. Especially for filth like this...https://www.youtube.com/embed/AZ9oThRuMVs0|10|0
- Why not?
If some puts me in harms way he should be dealt with severely0|00|0 - Let's solve violence with guns. (More violence)
The use of guns is far too extreme in the US now...0|01|4actually you have it backwards
a strong willingness to go to war is the only way to prevent war. the #1 cause of war is people who value peace too deeply. when you know the other side is ready and eager to slaughter and kill... you don't fuck with them- Show All Show Less
- I once literally poked out an eye of a man that tried to rob my granny.0|00|0
- Yes, you got to protect yourself in situations like that or what else you gonna do, scream?0|10|0
- I believe I should use any and all means at my disposal to defend myself, my family, and my property.1|20|0
- Yes i do. Criminal need to know some of us can stand our ground0|00|0
- As long as it's legit "self defense". None of that hero vigilante shit.
If someone breaks into your house, you should be able to legally shut that shit down with lethal force.1|10|0 - 100% absolutely if someone is trying to rob your store or your house save the taxpayers the burden and put one between thier eyes0|30|0
- Show More (33)
The weak and the strong alike are here to perish, not to live forever. 
Show More(43)
Related myTakes
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Home > Society & Politics > Do you support armed self defense?
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
Yes No
AI Bot Choice
Superb Opinion