Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Would-be robber shot and killed by intended victim in west Houston, police say [View all]AndyS
(14,559 posts)72. Oh Jesus fucking Christ this is so fucking tedious.
I don't like doing cut n paste but you cram so much deflection and red herring into one post there's no other way to deal with it.
What I've written is that people's life experiences and physical attributes impact the statistical odds of a successful defensive encounter. You initially had difficulty accepting that statistics don't predict an individual's odds of success, but you did accept that in post #56 where you wrote:
but under most circumstances you have arguably a better possibility of success than the hypothetical 95 year old woman
You wrote this in response to the statistical fact that people with guns are more likely to be shot. You changed the goal post from the population at large and the danger of having guns to a specific hypothetical that you made up to fit your point of view. We've discussed this yet you do it again.
Now, given that we've accepted that different people, with different levels of experience, training, life skills, athleticism, etc, will have different odds of successfully defending themselves, why would you then regress to your previous position in post #58?
Who is 'we'? Got a mouse in your pocket? I acquiesced to the proposition that given your hypothetical you might be more successful than a 95 year old woman. You're still straying from the fact that people who have guns are more likely to be shot.
You're trying to make your argument while avoiding hypothetical scenarios but given the rarity of gun violence and even rarer defensive gun uses, hypotheticals are a necessary evil. I've only personally been involved in one defensive gun use and I am unlikely to ever be in that same situation, or even a remotely similar situation, ever again.
Well, yeah, no shit. If you want to share that one event (not that I doubt you but context means a lot) we can talk about THAT but it still falls outside the fact that people who have guns are more likely to be shot.
We talk about hypothetical situations we can envision but they're based off real scenarios that can and do happen, like the ATM robbery, or the active shooter at the mall, or the home invasion. Despite the extremely low chance I will ever encounter something like one of those scenarios, they're still far more likely than encountering a similar scenario to what I faced in the previously mentioned defensive gun use and yet that actually happened.
Yes extremely rare that guns are used in self defense. I've been trying to make this point. Guns rarely help a situation and are proven to make most of them worse. Guns do not make you safer at home or in public. As for the ATM incident the fact still remains that it is safer to capitulate to the robber than to resist. I've given you proof that you are 4x more likely to be injured resisting and 5x more likely if you use a gun to resist. Why is this hard to grasp?
I had thought we'd gotten past the herky jerky goal post moving but apparently you missed the memo about guns not making you safe. I'll say again, playing these odds is a losing game for the gun owner. Please don't bet the rent money (or your life) on odds like this!
Once more: you are more likely to be shot if you have a gun. Guns do not make you safer at home or in public.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
95 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Would-be robber shot and killed by intended victim in west Houston, police say [View all]
PTWB
Jul 2022
OP
Exactly!! WWJD?? Most of these people are also religious. Killing someone for $100? That's insane
Pisces
Jul 2022
#2
Maybe, but I would hand that money over quick, not reach for a gun. I also give money to panhandlers
Pisces
Jul 2022
#6
So that's the standard you hold yourself to? Figures. Life's cheap for gunners. nt
AndyS
Jul 2022
#7
Proud of yersef, are ya'? Not sure what ya' mean about me determining society . . . nt
AndyS
Jul 2022
#13
It's a life. Sorry but 6 hours of work is not worth someone's life. I hope that person was going to
Pisces
Jul 2022
#9
Apples and oranges. We are discussing a life. In America life has no value unless you're a fetus.
Pisces
Jul 2022
#15
Assuming that someone who points a gun at you doesn't intend to shoot you...
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jul 2022
#19
Again, fantasizing scenarios that justify killing a human over a few bucks. I'm gonna'
AndyS
Jul 2022
#30
I have not made anyone a hero. I have put human life above cash. You are on record for being
AndyS
Jul 2022
#33
"that needed to happen was to give the guy the money and nobody would die. "
oneshooter
Jul 2022
#66
It is not indisputable that resisting is a better course of action than not resisting.
AndyS
Jul 2022
#45
I've addressed the statistics being twisted in a separate post and will include the link
PTWB
Jul 2022
#82
See as an older woman I would be afraid that he would take my bank card, my car and then
flying_wahini
Jul 2022
#75