Page 1 of 1

Polite discussion

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:23 am
by LibraLabRat
As my gun thread got locked, I will simplify it to one question at a time.

First question:

Which is more preferrable: more laws that are weak or unenforceable, or stricter enforcement of current gun law?

Second Question: Should each and every town, city, and state be able to make its own firearms related laws that are different than the Federal Governments? If so, should they be allowed to lessen controls that the Fed has in place, or only apply more stringent laws?

Third question: If you were assaulted, would that change your opinion on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:19 am
by LibraLabRat
I found it. I am trying really hard......but when people refuse to even learn the rudimentaries of the discussion, how am I supposed to discuss it?

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:01 am
by Qwertyuiopasd
I think it might be that you come off as being rude, because you're rather... agressive, and even on a forum, intimidating.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:16 am
by LibraLabRat
The funniest thing is that in person, I come across as more of an endearing smart ass. The military thing I think gives people this image that I am some sort of ass kicking thug.....

Im not. I just dont understand how someone can honestly claim that if attacked, they dont feel that they have the right to resist and defend themselves.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:21 am
by Qwertyuiopasd
thats not what they said... they said they'd want self defense, but not neccisarily a gun. there are other effective methods.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:35 am
by LibraLabRat
This is true. However, there has not been any other item in human history that is such a field leveler as the hand gun.

How else would a 98 lb woman be able to effectively defend herself against a 225lb male attacker?

I know that there are those who think that martial arts can defeat anyone....but that is not true. Brute force and mass is an important factor in hand to hand combat.

Also, pepper spray, stun guns, ect. are considerably weaker in civilian models than military and law enforcement use.

I know from experience that being tazed or hit with pepper spray, while painful, is not necessarily incapacitating.

I am just trying to inject some honesty into the discussion. I do not understand how someone can claim equality and empowerment for women, while at the same time holding on to antiquated myths that a woman with a gun will not know how to defend herself.

A gun equalizes the situation when talking about differences in size between male and female.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:43 am
by Qwertyuiopasd
LibraLabRat wrote:How else would a 98 lb woman be able to effectively defend herself against a 225lb male attacker? .

she could kick him in the balls....

but I agree with you, just trying to make sure they were correctly represented. but lets take this to the other thread. lest the Dee Dee beast get angry.

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:11 am
by LibraLabRat

Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:01 am
by DeadPoet
And locked... before someone accidentally posts in here...