2238
2239

I've been so wrong about gun control (self.Libertarian)

wakemeupinsidd が 投稿

For about a year or so I've considered myself to be a Libertarian. I love just about everything about the ideology, except for one thing, gun control.

I'm from a country where the government heavily regulates who can and who can't get a gun, and you can't really get one for self defence. Being from a very protected neighbourhood where crime rarely occurs and having practically never been in a threatening situation apart from a few fights, I never had a problem with the gun regulations. I actually figured it was for the best and despised the idea of how easy some people in the US can aquire them. That was until a week ago.

Around 2am last saturday I was relaxing in my room when I heard some weird noises downstairs. I knew my entire family had gone to sleep an hour ago, so it definetly wasn't them. I stopped hearing things 10 sec later and plugged in my headphones as I thought things were fine. 10 minutes later I hear someone outside my door, and eventually they try to push down my doorhandle. I had locked it hours ago and is now left with the insight that a robber is right outside my door and I'm the only one awake.

This is what we have the police for. But the police is at least 10-15 minutes away, and if I make a phone call the robber will hear me and leave without getting caught, and even if he doesn't, 10-15 minutes is far too late. If the robber has a gun, I could be held at gunpoint and potentially killed, but I don't want to just leave him alone so he can take our stuff and leave either. If I on the other hand had a gun, we would at worst be equally matched, and at best I could keep him at bay and calmly call the cops to pick him up.

This time I was lucky. I picked up a large baseball bat, opened my door and started screaming. The guy fled without any of our stuff, but I can't help to think of how badly things could have gone. Why should I, a law abiding citizen not be given the means to protect myself against criminals? It's absolutely absurd.

I apologize for the rant, but I now see what you have all been talking about. Guns are an absolute necessity for law abiding citizens in order to protect themselves.

Edit: Regardless of the political nature of the topic, I really appreciate all the support. You're all fantastic people.

上位 200 件のコメント表示する 500
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]AcesMethod 584 ポイント585 ポイント  (30子コメント)

I thought you were going to say your grip was wrong. Glad to see you were safe.

[–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 149 ポイント150 ポイント  (29子コメント)

Thank you. I appreciate the concern.

[–]Opan_IRL 89 ポイント90 ポイント  (8子コメント)

I don't think a law abiding citizen should have their rights restricted , because of what criminals may or may not do with a weapon. Also glad your family is safe.

[–]SureKokHolmes 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (5子コメント)

This is hands down the best, most logical approach to the gun control argument I have seen

コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

    [–]CharlieChuu 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (8子コメント)

    Always know your target. In this case, if you had a gun, you'd never want to fire without seeing who it is you're firing at on the they side of the door. I'm sure you are already aware but sometimes this does happen. I follow /r/dgu and you may enjoy this sub now as well. Defensive gun use articles posted daily, as well as "bad DGU" to remind us all to know our targets and practice firearm safety.

    [–]DreOfTheBay 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (6子コメント)

    If you live in California it's very important to realize that you don't only need to know that the person is not a family member but also know that they are armed with a weapon that would justify deadly force. If they are a person who is inside your house breaking down doors (obviously knowing people are home) and they have a bat or something and you fire, you've commited a felony. The criminals have more rights than you inside your own home. So if you have a family and you live in CA then keep in mind that self defense item is a fast track ticket to a federal penitentiary and you might not be able to raise your children. And if you prove in court that it was justified then the family can still start a civil suit against you. You don't have the right to protect yourself in CA. If you fire the gun to scare the attacker and your in a city, boom felony. The only option here is to use it on yourself and maybe they will still sue your family for traumatizing the robber. I've had a ex seal tell me he wouldn't engage an active shooter in a public space even though he's got a weapon because he would get into so much trouble he'd miss out on seeing his daughter. If you are an armed robber reading this, come to CA where your rights are our number one priority!

    [–]ImNotTallerThanU 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    That's some fucking bullshit man.

    Weather's so damn nice though... Decisions...

    [–]AdrianStaggleboofen 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    Is this...are you being serious? Is it really like that in CA?

    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

      [–]sneakpeekbot 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Here's a sneak peek of /r/dgu using the top posts of the year!

      #1: [2017/06/15] (TN) Two escaped convicts who murdered two prison guards captured at gunpoint by civilians | 7 comments
      #2: [2016/09/29] Man With Concealed-Carry Permit Shoots, Kills Armed Robber (Chicago, IL) | 3 comments
      #3: [2017/04/03] No charges against Oklahoma man who killed 3 intruders (Broken Arrow, OK) | 25 comments

      I'm a bot, beep boop | Downvote to remove | Contact me | Info | Opt-out

      コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)

        [–]readonlypdfminarchist 730 ポイント731 ポイント  (166子コメント)

        Sorry that this was event to change your mind.

        [–]wjjeeper 300 ポイント301 ポイント  (162子コメント)

        It's exactly these types of events that change most people's minds.

        [–]arom125 107 ポイント108 ポイント  (13子コメント)

        I had a similar event change my mind (albeit not as close a call). We had just had a hurricane and we had no electric. If an armed looter wanted to take advantage in my home I would have been powerless. I decided I never want to feel that helpless ever again in my home.

        [–]scj1517 210 ポイント211 ポイント  (5子コメント)

        we had no electric

        I would have been powerless

        [–]ThisIsNotJimsName 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (5子コメント)

        Question for you: Why would you need to ever be directly threatened before you feel this way? I have fire insurance even though I have never had a fire...

        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

          [–]jgreth89republican party 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (0子コメント)

          So true. I have a friend who when she moved out with her sister when they were in college, their father bought them a handgun. She was anti gun (hated the nra, thought the 2nd amendment was outdated, etc). Until someone tried breaking into their apartment at 2am. Thankfully she didn't have to use it since he never got in, but she was glad to have it. Ever since she's been much more pro gun and even goes to the range regularly now.

          [–]Death_Bard 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (4子コメント)

          A liberal is a conservative who hasn’t been mugged yet.

          [–]jjohnisme 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I mean, you could replace liberal with any other political stance and it works too.

          [–]fakenate28 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

          I wonder where libertarians come from.

          [–]Death_Bard 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

          They're conservatives who realize that sex and drugs are fun.

          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

            [–]uttuck 28 ポイント29 ポイント  (93子コメント)

            While it is extremely unpopular on this sub, and for good reason as it goes against the libertarian ideal, I have had the opposite experience.

            I've had a few fun related incidents around me (accidental shooting death of acquaintance's kid, kid bringing gun to school to sell to other kid, co-worker killed by a person in an argument on the street, neighbor shooting himself due to depression).

            While I don't think giving up guns solves all these problems, when I hear about knife attacks and vehicle attacks in England, and we get people shooting multiple people here in the States, I'd gladly live in a place where guns weren't allowed without super strict permits for the much smaller chance of dealing with that sort of gun violence.

            [–]LexPatriae 114 ポイント115 ポイント  (31子コメント)

            There are 112.6 guns per 100 Americans. I understand what you're saying, but the cat is out of the bag, and no amount of legislation is putting it back in.

            [–]RolfIsSonOfShepnard 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (6子コメント)

            What if we made a gun magnet that took everyones gun away?

            [–]sa130r 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (3子コメント)

            Shhh, don't give the government these ideas!

            [–]RolfIsSonOfShepnard 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (2子コメント)

            Damn I spoke to soon. Forgot California already existed.

            [–]ChilliWillikers 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            Dude, way to spill the beans on the magnet :/

            コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

              [–]empire-_- 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Not to mention that with the rate 3d printing is evolving it wont be long before metal 3d printers become commonplace.

              [–]TheJucheisLoose 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              There are 112.6 guns per 100 Americans.

              That's only the legal guns, and doesn't count guns owned by the government (law enforcement/armed forces). It's a lot more than that.

              [–]ANoiseChild 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (6子コメント)

              Lex, you are completely right. Even if legislation was passed, the legality of gun ownership has been in state for so long that they'll never be able to remove our guns without doing it forcefully (and even then, that would cause major problems everywhere).

              I'm all for gun ownership and don't find it to be a problem with the exception being who is allowed to purchase a gun. I feel it is every persons right to protect himself but the lack of oversight when it comes to who can purchase a gun bothers me. Yes, I know that 'bad guys' will always be able to purchase firearms on the street but when it comes to other restrictions such as someone who isn't in the right state of mind who can responsibly own a gun but can still buy one, that's where I personally draw the line.

              Obviously, if you have kids, they need to be locked up. Also, the guns should be secured too to prevent any accidents in home (because kids play with anything and everything). On a serious note though, as Lex said, 'the cat is out of the bag' and that cat won't ever be put back in that proverbial or literal bag. Cats hate that shit and will pull a gun on you if you try it

              [–]mikilaai2 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (5子コメント)

              If you have kids....you need to educate them. Locking your guns up defeats the purpose of having one. If someone breaks in they are not going to wait for you to go unlock your gun case.

              [–]Freedom1015 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              The philosophy I was raised with was "remove the mystery of guns". I was never curious about guns because I could break down a rifle to its parts and put it back together since I was ~6 or 7. I never looked for dad's guns because I knew where they were. There was no mystery about it. Every now and then, we'd get out a rifle or shotgun and have fun shooting some targets and then clean them and put them away.

              [–]fakenate28 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              The purpose of my gun is entertainment. I love taking it to the range and shooting targets.

              コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                コメントをもっと表示する (15 返事)

                  [–]Vecusum 47 ポイント48 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  It's probably worth noting that suicide rates in the US are actually lower than a number of European countries that don't have guns. Sweden, France, and Gemany are all around the same rate, depending on how you count it they are marginally higher or marginally lower.

                  Isn't it generally understood that a smaller chance of gun violence often correlates to a much larger chance of general violence? I haven't seen the numbers in some time but, that seems to be the common narrative.

                  [–]dermba 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  2/3 of gun deaths in the US are suicides. Japan has a much higher suicide rate and there are no guns (jumpers mainly). Inner city gun crime, using illegally acquired guns, far exceeds mass shootings in the US. Sadly, most shootings are black on black.

                  [–]RexitarMaxximus 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Its beyond most - its the overwhelming majority

                  http://heyjackass.com/

                  [–]uttuck 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Good point, and thank you for sharing.

                  [–]nuclear_dreams 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  It's probably worth noting that suicide rates in the US are actually lower than a number of European countries that don't have guns. Sweden, France, and Gemany are all around the same rate, depending on how you count it they are marginally higher or marginally lower.

                  Exactly this. I just watched an hour and a half documentary on jumpers from the Golden Gate bridge. Literally all you have to do in order to have a 98% chance of killing yourself (note, higher than shooting yourself in the head) is lift yourself up over a 4 foot tall railing and let go.

                  People who blame suicides on guns have no idea how the suicidal mind works. It's not "Oh man, I feel like killing myself, here's a gun let me do it." Rather it's months of "Oh man I feel like killing myself" and on the day of it's "What's the easiest way to do it?"

                  [–]magic3383 46 ポイント47 ポイント  (25子コメント)

                  If someone you cared about died in a car accident would you want cars banned?

                  [–]Belfrey 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                  Gun laws are not a solution to bad parenting and depression - they just disarm innocent people and empower criminals.

                  [–]aclaec42 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                  I'd gladly live in a place where guns weren't allowed without super strict permits for the much smaller chance of dealing with that sort of gun violence.

                  You could try Mexico.

                  I'm being facetious, but there are far more other, more important factors at play in the shooting deaths in America vs England than gun laws.

                  [–]jgreth89republican party 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                  I respect your opinion but disagree. I'd rather have an armed citizenry than a powerless one. The UK is only a few more van attacks away from proposing legislation to regulate who gets to drive/own vans. Mark my words.

                  [–]DGsirb1978 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  It's already illegal for criminals to buy guns

                  [–]uttuck 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  I disagree but completely understand. It is a really fine line there.

                  [–]nuclear_dreams 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                  I've had a few fun related incidents around me (accidental shooting death of acquaintance's kid, kid bringing gun to school to sell to other kid, co-worker killed by a person in an argument on the street, neighbor shooting himself due to depression). While I don't think giving up guns solves all these problems, when I hear about knife attacks and vehicle attacks in England, and we get people shooting multiple people here in the States, I'd gladly live in a place where guns weren't allowed without super strict permits for the much smaller chance of dealing with that sort of gun violence.

                  As unfortunate as the experiences you've had were, the first two were the result of incompetent gun handling and the second two could have happened anywhere.

                  Also you might have missed the Manchester Arena bombing in the UK recently where 23 people died?

                  Violence happens everywhere. Suicides happen everywhere. There are 40+ countries (including several European nations) with higher suicide rates than the USA. Bottom line, if someone wants to kill someone else or kill themselves, they will do it.

                  [–]Pale_Pen15 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                  You ever been in a fight with a guy with a knife? You're just hoping to god that you are strong enough to not end up like Adam Goldberg's character in Saving Private Ryan.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (7 返事)

                    コメントをもっと表示する (48 返事)

                      [–]BrianPurkisslibertarian party 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      I'm glad it was an event that ended without injury.

                      Some people aren't so lucky.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                        [–]WoodChucking 236 ポイント237 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                        Around 2am last saturday I was relaxing in my room [...] I had locked [the room door] hours ago

                        Can't a man rub one out in peace without getting robbed?

                        [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 135 ポイント136 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Thank you for implying that I last hours:)

                        [–]WoodChucking 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Or 2 min, then rest for a coupla hours and then 2 more minutes...

                        [–]doggobotlovesyou 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        :)

                        I am happy that you are happy. Spread the happiness around.

                        This doggo demands it.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                          [–]PrgjdsaewweoidsmMega-Infrastructurist, American School of Economics 165 ポイント166 ポイント  (47子コメント)

                          Now imagine you're an elderly woman, and you don't even have the ability to use the baseball bat.

                          [–]bluefootedpigLeft-Libertarian I Think 38 ポイント39 ポイント  (23子コメント)

                          We can, old lady shot a black man when hours car broke down and he knocked on her door. She thought he was an invader. His family has no father now.

                          [–]Im-Mr-Bulldops 63 ポイント64 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          [insert story about old lady killing a rapist that broke into her house and attempted to rape her]
                          He thought she was an easy target. He's dead now.

                          [–]TehChid 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (17子コメント)

                          There are unfortunately sad stories like this. But they are few and far between. Guns uses for self-defense do more good than bad.

                          [–]Aiurar 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                          Source?

                          [–]doyouwantapizzarollLeft Libertarian. Orwell fan. For Rojava! 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          A similar story:

                          Georgia woman who shot 15-year-old boy walking by her house claims she’s not ‘an evil person’

                          A Georgia woman who once reportedly complained about "bad blacks" shot an African-American teenager in the head after he walked past her house on Monday evening, officials said.

                          [–]sohcgt96 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          That headline is just a LITTLE misleading, however, it definitely sounds like a case of reckless discharge at a minimum.

                          [–]Hybrazil 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          She certainly has poor judgement.

                          [–]Dremlar 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (22子コメント)

                          Giving people guns doesn't just make everything better. I'm for the right to own a gun, but I wish people did more training. I'm also against killing except when necessary to save yours. Intruders should be punished, but when a gun is involved someone tends to end up dead. Regardless of being a criminal at that moment, it's stuff worth a life? If we train people to use it properly maybe the intruder would flee. We do need to figure out how to reduce crime, but giving people guns doesn't make crime stop.

                          [–]Aero72 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                          but when a gun is involved someone tends to end up dead

                          Hmm. Got a source for that? Or is it just how you imagine the reality?

                          It would be interesting to see some stats on the number of incidents where a gun was present with and without resulting fatalities.

                          [–]samaf 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                          The problem is that there's no record for when guns have helped diffuse a potentially violent situation.

                          [–]F1RST_WORLD_PROBLEMS 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          My old roommate always carries a concealed weapon. He's well trained. He follows proper safety procedures. He seems like the definition of a proper gun owner. He should NOT be carrying a gun.

                          He has a temper. I've seen him start nasty verbal arguments with strangers over parking spaces and other small things that most people just ignore. I remember he felt that a customer in front of him was rude to the staff at a local fast food place. He confronted the guy and the conversation reached a point where he was just repeating "I don't want to escalate the situation." I'm truly afraid he might cause a situation where he feels his life is in danger.

                          [–]steve0suprem0 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          the folks over in r/ccw would agree with you, myself included. that license means more than a responsibility to not escalate a situation, but a responsibility to de-escalate or gtfo. the gun is literally a last resort, for when running awy is no longer an option.

                          [–]Boba_Phat 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          I've always heard and been told, that the ego needs to go away if you're carrying.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                            [–]Redwingsrule6971 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                            The point is, at 3 am you don't know if they're there to just steal your iPad. They could be hopped up on drugs and decide to rape you as well. Why should you have to wait to see what they're intentions are?

                            If you can get out safely...do so. But in the USA, we have the Castle Doctrine and if you're in our home, and you shouldn't be there, we have the right to defend ourselves. We don't have to wait for the harm to happen, we have to reasonably believe that it can.

                            I'm not saying shoot first and then ask questions. But YOU the homeowner are the one who has the right to be there...not the criminal with UNKNOWN intentions.

                            [–]wEbKiNz_FaN_xOxO 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                            Regardless of being a criminal at that moment, it's stuff worth a life?

                            Yes, things people work hours/months/years for are worth more than a stranger who doesn't care about your safety, privacy, or well-being's life.

                            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                              [–]DenPrattvoluntaryist 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              When seconds count, the police are minutes away.

                              [–]davidsmith53 376 ポイント377 ポイント  (97子コメント)

                              Most people (including Americans) don't understand why the US has a right to bear arms in it's constitution.

                              It has nothing to do w self defense, sport, hunting, etc. Just like all the other amendments in the Bill of Rights it's purpose is to control the government. At all levels.

                              There has never been a use of gun rights at a federal level. There have been a couple not very well known incidents where the commoners got mad at local government's blatant criminality, and the politicians literally ran for their lives when a few hundred (thousand?) commoners showed up w their guns.*

                              Joke edit: *and a rope.

                              Correction: I am (arguably) wrong about no federal incidents. But I don't agree and stand by my original.

                              [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 178 ポイント179 ポイント  (45子コメント)

                              Protecting yourself against the government's oppression is a sort of self defence no?

                              [–]Mitthrawnuruodo1337something clever about liberty 104 ポイント105 ポイント  (44子コメント)

                              Yes, but that's a bit of an equivocation. I'd disagree with the statement "it has nothing to do with self defense" however, since I think that was certainly a part of it. The better general phrase would be, imo, that it is about individual empowerment. You are empowered to defend yourself. You are empowered to fight back against an oppressive government. The gun is really just a tool that gives you that power.

                              [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 48 ポイント49 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Well said. I'm not going to argue against that, because you are spot on.

                              コメントをもっと表示する (43 返事)

                                [–]PrgjdsaewweoidsmMega-Infrastructurist, American School of Economics 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                You bring up a good point. Lots of people don't know that guns have frequently been used against tyrannical local governments.

                                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_%281946%29

                                [–]WikiTextBot 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                Battle of Athens (1946)

                                The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of predatory policing, police brutality, political corruption and voter intimidation.

                                [ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.24

                                コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                                  [–]TimmyDeanSausage 60 ポイント61 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                                  What a sight that would be. When I was 18 I stupidly took some bad drugs (as 18 y/o's do) and OD'd. When an ambulance was called the police showed up first and proceeded to beat the living crap out of me in my own bedroom (with no provocation) until paramedics came rushing in to stop them. A month later I saw one of the only "officers" I had a visual memory of and confronted him about it. He responded by threatening to put a bullet in my head if he ever found me on any kind of drugs again. It's people like this who are praised for their "service" and "heroic-ness" in our communities. That was a life changing event for me, but a simple everyday occurrence for him. Who knows how many other innocent people he has senselessly beaten or killed.. I would love to see a mob go after that guy..

                                  P.s. For the angry youth who might read this comment. There are absolutely good men and women protecting and serving our communities. The thugs I described above actively suppress (at least in my city) the real peace officers who would make a difference. Don't waste your energy hating all policeman.

                                  [–]TheSultanOfSwagger 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                  Never been a use at the federal level? Just recently the Malheur Wildlife Refuge occupation in protest to the Bureau of Land Management (a federal entity). If we look further back in time it is easy to find examples, the most obvious of which is the Civil War. Also, just the procession of a firearm is a "use" of second amendment rights. Just the existence of large numbers of arms in civilian hands is a deterrent to tyranny even if they are never fired.

                                  [–]davidsmith53 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  OK, you win. But I claim the right to argue the point.

                                  [–]gnark 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  That's a crap example. They were defending their "right" to use federal land for personal use. Hardly a noble fight for freedom. Perhap you meant people who were actively being violently oppressed by armed government agents using guns to defend themselves, like the Black Panthers.

                                  [–]ten24classical liberal 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  And a lot of other people don't understand that the right to self defense is not predicated on the US constitution.

                                  [–]jdepps113 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  The reason for the 2nd amendment is all of the above. Protecting yourself individually and securing your freedom from tyranny are both part of the rights of free people to be secure in their persons and property, and to ensure that security by force of arms if need be.

                                  [–]One_Winged_RookI Don't Vote 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                  It's not just against your own government tho.

                                  What country could invade a country with an armed populace?

                                  It's "necessary to the security of a free state"... that's both domestic and foreign enemies.

                                  If we were to be invaded, everyday citizens could form militia's rather quickly. (Minutemen style) and with the help of the national guard, form defenses that literally no force in the world could overthrow (even without the use of our other armed forces)... that just so happens to include our own government as well.

                                  [–]LetsGoAllTheWhey 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  Thank you. I came here to say this. It's unfortunate that American students are not taught this in school.

                                  [–]bite_me_punk 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                  That's just not accurate. The second amendment clearly explains that the people have the right to bear arms in order to maintain a well regulated militia. This was about protecting the nation because no one wanted a standard army.

                                  [–]ho_li_cao 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                  Very good point. The existence of a standing army was a hotly debated point even during the formative years of the nation. I lean toward having no standing army, and certainly dislike being the world's policemen/nation building, whatever you want to call the multitrillion dollar ongoing debacle of the past what - 75 or more years? I'm all for helping allies defend themselves, but there's been far too much meddling in foreign lands for my taste.

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)

                                    [–]xv9d 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                    I've recently thought that in terms of US gun control we should move away from endlessly interpreting the 2nd amendment and focus more on the 9th. If the people of California want to have heavy gun control and feel safe that way, that's fine, but don't make me have the same laws in Utah.

                                    [–]WorkingSkunk 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                    While I believe strongly in federalism and the right of states to decide these issues for themselves, the purpose of enshrining these rights in the federal constitution was to protect them for all Americans.

                                    Because the Second Amendment has been made so political and because we libertarian-leaning types don't like to impose our will on others, your position isn't uncommon. But just switch it up a little. Would you ever say: "If the people of California want to have heavy [speech|religion|assembly] control and feel safe that way, that's fine, but don't make me have the same laws in Utah."

                                    I'm hoping not. The freedom of speech, religion, assembly, along with all the others enumerated in the Bill of Rights are protected for all Americans. As much as I want to wall off California and be done with the place, as fellow Americans we owe it to the citizens there to not leave them behind to submit to a tyrannical state government.

                                    [–]Ishiguro_ 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                    Actually the bill of rights protected the people against infringements by the federal government, but not the states. It wasn't until the 14th amendment came along that the supreme court started incorporating certain parts of the bill of rights to apply against the states as well. Some parts of the bill of rights have not yet been incorporated to apply against the states.

                                    [–]WorkingSkunk 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                    Fair enough, I was mistaken on the timeline but clearly the founders considered these rights to be a fundamental part of natural law and intended for states to uphold them. Many states did add them to their own constitutions. Obviously they did not compel it, but they felt strongly about the various rights.

                                    Correct me if I'm wrong but Heller and/or McDonald incorporated the Second Amendment. So the basic sentiment still stands.

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)

                                      [–]Throwaway-Chris 52 ポイント53 ポイント  (13子コメント)

                                      I grew up living about 30 minutes outside of our small town. That meant that we were also 30 minutes from any sort of law enforcement, and, for this reason, my father always kept guns locked up around the house. I hadn't touched a gun until I was about 15 (because my dad thought I wasn't old enough to learn how to use one until then) but it was always comforting to know that we had a way to protect ourselves in the unlikely situation that we would need to. This is something most people in cities don't take into account when talking about gun legislation, and I believe it is largely why there are such different views in rural and urban areas.

                                      [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      I understand that point completely. My grandfather lives in a smaller town, where the nearest ambulance/law enforcement is 40-45 minutes away. Over the last three years, their town and two nearby towns has had problems with criminals stealing their vehicles. The criminals know that a lot of these people are fairly old, can't fend for themselves and the cops won't be able to come in time. They are helpless, and I feel really bad about it.

                                      [–]readonlypdfminarchist 43 ポイント44 ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                      Response time of the Police: Average 15-20 minutes

                                      Response time of a .45 ACP: Essentially instantaneous.

                                      [–]SoMuchMoreEagle 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      This. Except in my case, my family did need them on a couple of occasions.

                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                        [–]Minarchist77Free Banking: You can make your own money 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        Wow. That sounds like a scary moment, glad your safe.

                                        [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        Thank you for your concern. I'm just happy it worked out for the best.

                                        [–]Hexi_NovaAdrestia 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                        Guns have a lot of good uses. Self defense is most certainly one of them.

                                        I'm sorry you'll have to experience increased paranoia in the future. No doubt you will double check the locks on your doors and windows now.

                                        Your home is the one place you should always feel safe. That's why just about every state in the US allows you to kill anyone who breaks into your home.

                                        [–]mishka919 45 ポイント46 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                        The best defense against tyranny is a well armed populace.

                                        [–]caffinated_logic 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        I agree with thay phrase. Also recall "An armed society is a polite society"

                                        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                          [–]shaninator 63 ポイント64 ポイント  (18子コメント)

                                          Many people mistakenly think it's the role of law enforcement/police to protect you. Their role is to achieve justice for crimes with the help of courts. Never assume anyone will be there to protect you, except yourself. Cops find bodies, then use evidence to find the criminal. Justice doesn't matter what lick to a dead person.

                                          [–]bertcox**showmeMORand** 30 ポイント31 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                          Calling the cops has gotten to the point where you really need to think is this bad enough to risk getting them involved. When cops show up all their looking for is to collect evidence and arrest people. You could end up the one they want to collect evidence on.

                                          [–]ijustwantanfingname 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                          Make sure your dog has a kevlar vest before dialing.

                                          [–]StewartTurkeylinkSome dude 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                          I have two dogs and live in fear of this. One of my neighbors calling the cops for me being to loud or something inane and BAM two dead dogs :(

                                          I worry so much for them. One of them is a barker too

                                          [–]VisLegisclassical liberal 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                          Had an incident with my dog once and some police who were at the door (he'd recently run away and there was an issue which has since been resolved). He was very anxious at the time due to recent events, and even though the cops knew he bit someone recently in self-defense, one of them, for some reason, tried to reach out to touch him. He nipped at her, she was fine and okay with it, but what got me was the cop muttering in the back he would've shot him on the spot instead. Anyway, maybe I'm in the wrong here, but that just really angered me.

                                          [–]StewartTurkeylinkSome dude 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          No dude. For me dogs are a member of the family. Someone shooting my dog would be like someone shooting a member of my family. Heck I like my dog a lot more then some members of my family.

                                          コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                            [–]T-banger 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (10子コメント)

                                            Maybe they should change the "to protect and serve" motto then

                                            [–]coyotebored83 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                            That was a motto originating with the LAPD, some other departments picked it up later. They are under no duty to do so.

                                            http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

                                            [–]T-banger 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                            Sorry that is interesting I didn't know that. Guess I watch too much American crime shows

                                            [–]shaninator 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                            I don't know if you are being sarcastic, but yes they should. Many police forces don't have protect in their slogans anyways.

                                            [–]T-banger 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                            Not sarcastic, just a stupid comment by me. Someone pointed out an good article about it so my bad.

                                            I must watch too many American crime shows. I thought it was your motto. Our police have an offical motto.

                                            [–]shaninator 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            I should've said motto, not slogan, but that's probably my cynicism shining though. Around where I live, each police force decorates their vehicles different and use different mottos. I rarely see protect in them, probably because in the South (US) very few are dumb enough to believe that.

                                            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                              [–]DoxBox 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                              Sorry you had to go through that but why would it change your stance on gun control?

                                              You successfully defended yourself and your property without a gun.

                                              That said, I fucking love guns and believe in individual ownership of firearms. I just think there's a bit of a weird disconnect in your story where you just kind of leapt to gun control repeal as a solution to a problem you readily solved.

                                              [–]baguettes_ 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                              I think OP's point was that the intruder could have possibly been armed, and with only a baseball bat OP would be powerless to defend his property and family.

                                              [–]AxesofAnvil 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                              Not only that, but most gun control advocates would likely prefer a system that would make it harder for both participants to own a gun, but nothing would stop him from actually obtaining one.

                                              [–]twilliamsb 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                              I expected this to be a circle jerk and to read. "This time I was lucky. I picked up a large baseball bat, opened my door and it was my friends playing a prank and I would have shot them"

                                              [–]maryjanerx 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                              Sorry in advance if this comment is stupid, but have you thought of getting a dog? If you have an intruder it will bark and possibly deter him

                                              [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                              I don't have enough time to be able to take care of a dog well. I always wanted a dog, but I would like to be able to have the time to take good care of it first.

                                              [–]SoMuchMoreEagle 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                              Or an alarm system.

                                              [–]bertcox**showmeMORand** 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                              Always have had a dog around, house burned down and not a peep out of that dog. We all made it out, including the dog.

                                              [–]StaffSummarySheet 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                              Gun rights are for fighting tyranny. Protecting your home is a secondary concern.

                                              [–]bertcox**showmeMORand** 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                              People have a hard time grasping that concept. Its not even going to war, just the fact that no matter what the government wants to do it has to lead with the consent of the governed. Because the governed have guns it makes doing unjust things much more difficult.

                                              コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                                [–]LocoElRockstar 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                I've learned through the years in my career that people are blissfully unaware at how evil people can be.

                                                Don't get me wrong. We are all aware that terrible things happen. But seeing a picture or video of something is hard to REALLY understand without having the experience necessary to empathize. I've seen first hand what people do to eachother over such petty things when compared next to life.

                                                Before you have a relatable reason to truly believe you are about to die at someone's hands. Or watch someone be killed by, or see the aftermath of, graphic violence it's easy to say that guns are "bad" or any variation of.

                                                Someday you might find yourself opening your front door at 430 in the afternoon, in your nice and quiet middle class neighborhood, to two gunmen and have to FIGHT for your LIFE.

                                                That happened to me. I can't imagine if it was my 4'9" wife. That would've killed me.

                                                A gun in a normal citizen's life should never be considered a weapon. It's a tool. It's not to play with, not to brandish or make you feel strong. It's to stop someone who would, or has a reasonable expectation to, due you or your loved ones harm.

                                                I've had to see so many violent things in my career and most of them share this in some way.

                                                "Won't happen to me." "Hasn't happened yet." Or my favorite, "I won't put myself in that situation."

                                                Even if things go right 99.9999% of the time. That's not what you prepare for. Hope for the best, prepare for the worste.

                                                I have no problem with people who don't want or like firearms. But they should understand and respect that they have a very real application. Know that terrible things happen to people just...because.

                                                A guy went to talk to his neighbor politely about the racist things he was calling his children. Really good man. Small town, everyone knows everyone. Active in the community. Just a good guy. Neighbor told him to open the door and come in. When he opened the door he was greeted by being shot in the head with a rifle. He then called 911, told them to come get the, and I quote, "dead n****r" off of his porch. He hung up and went back eating his dinner.

                                                I'm not saying gun laws shouldn't be different. I'm not saying it shouldn't be that easy for someone like that to have a gun. But you can't account for someone doing something like that. You can't control the guns criminals have access to. They are gonna get them no matter what. All you end up doing is keeping your law abiding citizens from having the means to protect themselves. Look at Chicago, they made possession of firearms illegal in city limits. Hasn't stopped the criminals from getting and using them though. But it has cost some people their lives that could potentially have been prevented.

                                                There are terrible things out there. Horrors 99% of people just can't get. That's the real world.

                                                Sorry, didn't mean to type so much haha

                                                [–]bobjohnsonmilw 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                You did defend yourself. And the situation ended.

                                                [–]flashmedallion 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                So you got scared and changed your ideology. I'm sure your new position is built on as robust a foundation as the one you just abandoned overnight.

                                                [–]pattycake-actual 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (21子コメント)

                                                People who are very strictly anti-gun are all this way. They've had a well off and safe life and cannot wrap their heads around what happens in that situatuon when your life is being threatened cause they think it'll never happen to them in their nice neighborhoods

                                                [–]coyotebored83 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (17子コメント)

                                                My boyfriends BIL is STAUNCHLY anti gun. I found it 'funny' when after he got doxed, he asked to borrow our gun just in case.

                                                [–]jdepps113 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                What do you mean "is"? Are you saying he didn't even change his tune now, even after deciding he wanted a gun for himself?

                                                [–]coyotebored83 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                Yes. He is still very vocally anti gun as is his wife. But for one night he wasn't.

                                                [–]ijustwantanfingname 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                What a complete tool.

                                                [–]coyotebored83 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                Oh yeah he can be. My bf is very middle of the road. His BIL calls him a gun toting redneck. The BIL is very far left.

                                                [–]pattycake-actual 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                I've managed to turn many people onto guns who didn't grow up with them like I did but realized they're not so scary after all

                                                コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

                                                  コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                                    [–]stilllton 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                    Why did you even open the door? You rather have a gun-fight than just yelling to him to get lost and that cops are on their way? I'm sorry your family was attacked, but from an outside perspective, this is bad anecdotal evidence in favor of owning a gun to protect yourself.

                                                    Don't get a gun. The chance of you or someone in your family ending up dead because of it, is much higher, than you using it to save a life.

                                                    [–]ijustwantanfingname 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                    Yeah, his idea of what owning a gun means is just wrong. It's for defense of life and limb, not keeping your shit....if he was only concerned for his property and not in fear of his life, there should be no thoughts of shooting someone.

                                                    [–]deja-vecu 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    . . . if I make a phone call the robber will hear me and leave without getting caught . . . If I on the other hand had a gun, we would at worst be equally matched, and at best I could keep him at bay and calmly call the cops to pick him up.

                                                    This is where I cursed out loud. Guns at best are for protecting your life, not satisfying your sense of justice. THIS IS THE WRONG REASON TO WANT A GUN. If you're not a cop, don't fucking try to play one.

                                                    If this went down in real life and OP ended up shooting the burglar, admitting that he intentionally didn't scare him away earlier would rightfully get OP charged with murder.

                                                    [–]wsdmskr 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (10子コメント)

                                                    I'd actually argue that your story provides only evidence for the argument that a gun is not necessary for self-defense in countries with strict gun control laws.

                                                    [–]youneedananswer 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    Dude, I don't care what your stance on gun control is, I just want to say you're a fuckin idiot.

                                                    I mean, you're afraid the robber has a gun, and instead of just yelling at him from behind a closed door you open the door and charge at him with a baseball-bat? I mean, cmon, how fuckin retarded are you. As soon as that robber knows you're there and you spotted him he's already quite likely to leave because he prefers to not get caught. Don't take stupid risks.

                                                    [–]fonzanoon 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                    Except that's not why we have a second amendment. We have it to protect the Constitution, not ourselves.

                                                    [–]whturprob 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin ..... Sic semper tyrannis

                                                    [–]Goldieeeeee 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    Well if the gun laws were less strict you might've had a gun and he might've had a gun. One of you could've been badly injured or shot dead, which in my mind is worse than what happened to you.

                                                    [–]shadovvvvalker 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (27子コメント)

                                                    You lost all credibility when your thought process is:

                                                    If I call the cops he might hear me and leave and get off Scott free

                                                    At that point you are no longer concerned for your fsmilys safety. You want him to pay for making you feel scared.

                                                    Had you had a gun and done the same thing and then shot him you would have shot him out of spite and not out of fear.

                                                    That's not self defense. That's vigilantism.

                                                    That's why some people don't want you having a gun.

                                                    [–]mc2222 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    Why should I, a law abiding citizen not be given the means to protect myself against criminals? It's absolutely absurd.

                                                    Any law that provides a survival advantage to those who break it (gun control) is a bad law.

                                                    [–]i_like_yoghurtFilthy Statist 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                    "If the robber has a gun ... This time I was lucky"

                                                    So if the robber didn't have a gun, what exactly is the moral of your story? You don't like guns and got spooked in a situation where there were no guns, so now you want everyone to have guns. That makes no sense, dude.

                                                    [–]Banshee90 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                    He changed his thought process from I live a very safe life and why would I ever need a gun that would only make my world more scary. To actually being in a situation that life wasn't safe. His fall back was always well if I every get into trouble the police are a phone call away... Changed to even if I somehow call the police without the perp noticing that is no guarantee that they will get here in time to catch him or even protect my family and me.

                                                    コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                                      [–]plazman30constitutionalist 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (12子コメント)

                                                      Gun control laws only apply to law abiding citizens. Criminals will always have access to weapons through illegal channels. Passing laws to make sure you don't have access to an AR-15 does nothing to make sure a bad guy doesn't have access to an AR-15.

                                                      [–]kmmeerts 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                      And yet in countries with strict gun laws, home invasions usually happen with baseball bats instead of guns, robbers don't carry AR-15's and shootouts rarely happen.

                                                      Perfect is the enemy of good. Of course "criminals" can still get guns, but it's about making it harder for them, avoiding escalation and avoiding a culture in which every crime carries the risk of encountering a deadly weapon

                                                      [–]SaturdaysOfThunder 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                      Right. Most home invasions and other crimes of that sort are done by random idiots, not people with connections to get guns from overseas.

                                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                        コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)

                                                          [–]wkhiejdpkrvmosmx 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          I too am from a country that heavily restricts gun ownership. Very, very few people, even the supposed "conservatives" here understand gun ownership. The reason for the existent of Amendment II is twofold. As you've discovered, it's there to protect law abiding citizens from the likes of the intruder you encountered. But it's original intention, as others here have pointed out, was to act as a last resort for the American people. The first line of defense against tyranny is congress- they should vote against any bills that are unconstitutional. Failing that, the Supreme Court will decide whether or not a disputed law is constitutional. If that fails, the people have a means to forcibly end such tyranny.

                                                          [–]Emorseth 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                          What country are you from?

                                                          [–]GregariousWolf 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          Self defense is a human right.

                                                          [–]TheJucheisLoose 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                          Glad you and your family are safe. Politics aside.

                                                          [–]keweenaw100 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          I'm a firm believer that I am responsible for my own safety, not the police. I'm already present when the situation occurs, the police are not.

                                                          [–]HyperactiveGirl 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                          You say that is what the police are for... but police aren't there to protect everyone in an instant all the time. In reality, they are there to pick up the pieces and investigate after something has already happened, unless you're able to call and they happen to be able to get there before you've been robbed and/or harmed. When i had 3 thugs teying to kick down my door at home when my husband was out of town, they ran like scared little rabbits when i got out my gun. I called the police and they didn't come for 20 minutes. Without the gun they would have boken in and possibly harmed or raped me. 3 on 1 when im a short skinny female... my gun saved my life that day.

                                                          [–]Kutbil-ik 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                                          Are baseball bats sold as weapons in countries where baseball isn't commonly played or are you East Asian?

                                                          The other and actual most important reason we need guns and also why we need military weapons is because of tyrannical governments. It will be damn hard to shoot down predator drones with assault rifles but it'll be even more ridiculous to knock them down throwing rocks. Civil unrest is another one. It could be something as simple as an EMP wave frying the power grid and stopping transportation of food. This doesn't even have to be a result of human action. Large solar flares cause similar EMP waves to the results of high altitude detonation of a nuclear weapon.

                                                          [–]HangisLife 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                          I've heard this reasoning a few times and it certainly applied in older times. Using your weapon to fight tyrannical governments is an obsolete idea. There are enough policeman, with enough military grade weapons, and enough bullshit rules to ruin the life of you and your family for generations. It's just not practical like our founders envisioned anymore.

                                                          What do you think about civil asset forfeiture. For me, thats an example of tyrannical abuse of power but you cant just shoot an officer that decides to take your money

                                                          [–]Kutbil-ik 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                          Under what context could a police officer legally take money from me? Its completely possible to kill me but not to rob me.

                                                          Modern technology would make it harder for me than my ancestors but at the very least I'll make them kill me. I would rather die with honor than live as a peasant. I hate to bring them up because they're an evil group but ISIS and the Vietcong had certain degrees of success. IEDs, remote control armored vehicles armed with explosives and various low tech booby traps like pungi sticks have shown to be effective to a large degree. There are also great prospects for modified civilian drones and various improvised munitions. Aircraft, military drones, ballistic misled and armored vehicles would be the real hurdles. I imagine I wouldn't be alone either and the loyal cops and military would be massively outnumbered. There are millions of crazy rednecks like me and many of them are cops and soldiers. How much damage can a single sniper do? Now imagine a million snipers spread out across a large area. There is great potential to quickly kill off loyalist cops that way.

                                                          If the American people rose up against the government I imagine there would be a correlating and simultaneous military coup. A lot of those guys are associated with civilian militias. We also have national guards and it's highly unlikely all state governors would side with loyalist forces.

                                                          Another thing we could attempt if thing were desperate would be asking for foreign intervention. The American Revolution would have failed without French support. We could offer Alaska, all arctic claims and non state territories to Russia in exchange for full military commitment. We could also agree to form a NATO like alliance with Russia and to unquestioningly support Russian expansion. I think this would be quite attractive to their oligarchs.

                                                          [–]paradox242 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                          A police officer can legally rob you. You should really read up on the bullshit that is civil forfieture.

                                                          コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                                            [–]Ginger_the_Dog 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            I'm so sorry this happened to you, OP. I forget who said it, but this: When every second matters, the police are minutes away.

                                                            [–]CogitoErgoScumplebeian 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            guns are an absolute necessity in order for law abiding citizens in order to protect themselves.

                                                            TL/DR: this can extend to more than just bandits, it works against government violence too!

                                                            You have come to this realization after a personal trauma, so you might want to be extra critical of how you came to your newfound epiphany.

                                                            That said, I would like to let you know I wholly agree with your statement. So may I please point out that American gun rights are codified and protected, not for home defense, but for the reason that a government should not be allowed to become too complacent in the application of force, which is their monopoly granted under some rule of law-fair or unfair, legitimate or not.

                                                            However, this civil right, granted under this condition has the ancillary benefit of allowing you to defend your life and property by negating any physical inequalities that might prevent you. This possibility has a deterrent effect on crime, and in this society people are more inclined to be polite, and disinclined to initiate force on others IMO.

                                                            This effect even extends to the monopoly power on violence that we grant to the government in their crime response efforts. In Texas, an officer was killed in a no-knock raid by the occupant who was not charged. This sort of incident is not isolated. Google results are easy to check. Many innocent people are injured by this dramatic law enforcement tactic. Plenty of google results are available at a click. I hope that the governments attempts to erode this bulwark against their overextension into our lives is not successful. People just need to be made aware.

                                                            I'm sorry that happened to you, but you responded bravely, and that is commendable.

                                                            [–]Poropopperconservative/friedmanite 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            I changed my stance after reading the Rape of Nanjing, which in one chapter told the story of an aggressive little Chinese girl. Her grandfather taught all of his children kung fu, but he refrained from teaching her since he feared she would beat up her siblings. She grew up, and the Soldiers of WWII Japan attacked, three stormed her living quarters armed with bayonets and intent to rape her. She was laid on the bed, pretending to sleep, and when one put his hands on her, she kicked, punched, and bit her aggressor, and then used his body to shield herself from bayonet thrusts. She was stabbed 37 times and left for dead, as she was too much of a hassle for them to rape. Her nose no longer functions properly because it was partly gauged out and would drip continually. If only her grandfather had taught her to defend herself, she could have fought them off.

                                                            People have gun rights in order to defend themselves against invasion, tyranny and criminal intrusion. It is better to be capable of offence and be taught to use it morally than become a useless, scared rabbit with no teeth and claws. There are obviously limits to this right, you clearly don't want to arm criminals and people with mental problems.

                                                            [–]nixfuminarchist 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            When seconds count, the police are only (5-30) minutes away.

                                                            Gun control is taking away someones natural right of self-defense.

                                                            [–]pfpiper0 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                            I am confused. Because it sounds like you resolved the problem without a gun. I feel this discussion should take place; but without gun control being the issue. Seems like one of those propaganda stories that is FOR guns. Thieves do not break into random houses, especially apartments. Looking forward to seeing you on /r/thathappened. Let the down voting fall all over me...

                                                            [–]cure-for-scilence 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                            What do you mean by "thieves do not break into random houses" ?

                                                            [–]mjxii 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            Gun control is people control.

                                                            [–]syrielmorane 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                                            A lot of city liberals don't get this. If you're in the country or even suburbs, police can't get you fast enough before the criminal has time to end you. Hell, even in the city this can happen.

                                                            Point is that it doesn't matter if it takes police an hour to get to you or 2 minutes, if you aren't armed, you're helpless.

                                                            [–]nootmuskaat 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                                                            OP was armed... with a bat, and deescalated the situation without anyone getting shot. Now imagine someone getting antsy and shooting off a few rounds in a multistory apartment building and shooting a neighbor. Does that sound like a nice alternative?

                                                            [–]Gsteel11 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                                            Hmm ...so the robber didnt have a gun. Odd...in the U.S. he probably would have. I guess you would have rather that have been a shoot out?

                                                            Gun crime in other nations with gun control is really rare...common criminals are unlikely to be armed. They're simpley too expensive to get for a common criminal.

                                                            It's a choice of baseball bats vs baseball bats or guns vs guns.

                                                            [–]Delita232 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                            No actually in the US most robbers do not carry guns. Most robberies are done without any sort of weapons in the US.

                                                            [–]bertcox**showmeMORand** 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                            Why bring a gun to a robbery, if you know that encounter favors the criminal. He gets to pick the place, time, weapons, you get what ever you have on hand.

                                                            [–]Gsteel11 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                            They have no idea what they are walking into, you make it sound like they set a trap. Lol

                                                            [–]alfx 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            plus shooting stuff is hella fun.

                                                            [–]DrRonny 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (18子コメント)

                                                            This is an anecdotal incident. I could have an opposite story about how my child found a gun and killed himself with it, which would make me anti-gun. You really need to look at the big picture and how it affects everyone, and not just how it affects you in one point in time.

                                                            (No, there were no shootings in my family, this is an example.)

                                                            [–]phoenix335 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                            Anecdotes are not unimportant. Even if it is one data point, it is still one very relatable and still a data point.

                                                            OP did describe a general principle they recognized during that anecdote and that is fine. Everyone learns through experience, and if the lesson and general principle learned holds up to scrutiny, it's okay.

                                                            Your example on the other hand clearly demonstrates how one can come to exactly the wrong conclusion from an anecdote. You describe a general principle that has nothing to do with the story you prefaced it with. Namely, you left out the dozens of things that a competent adult must have done wrong before a kid can shoot a gun they found.

                                                            When a child discovered a gun in the home and shot someone with it, there's tons of stuff that went wrong beforehand. Stuff that someone adult did wrong, criminally wrong. A gun existing in the general vicinity of a kid is only a tiny aspect of it. Parents are another. A thousand things in everyone's home are deadly to kids and a gun is just one of them. If an adult leaves a gun for a kid to find, that adult is an idiot and probably a criminal to be charged and imprisoned. Of course gun control advocates will never accept that, and unfortunately many second amendment advocates won't, either, because forcing people to have a safe storage for a gun is infringement on that, and they're very sensitive on that as they fear every rule encroaching once established. But seriously, do you have a kitchen knife, a car, a cordless power drill? A heavy object in an overhead storage? A tall cupboard not fastened to the wall? A larger street nearby? Secure that. Then we'll talk.

                                                            [–]str8uphemi 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                            Owning a gun is a huge responsibility. If a child finds a gun it is the result of one irresponsible gun owner, not everyone.

                                                            [–]wakemeupinsidd[S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            I've been against the use of guns up until this point, so I'm well aware of the arguments against them. Sure, this might be an anecdote, but it helped me to start thinking about the other side of the issue. As of now, I'm pro-guns but that doesn't mean that I havent spent time weighing the pros and cons of both sides.

                                                            [–]SoMuchMoreEagle 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                                            More children die in swimming pools every year in the US than by guns.

                                                            [–]DammitDan 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            I could have an opposite story about how my child found a gun and killed himself with it, which would make me anti-gun.

                                                            If your kid drowned in a pool, would that make you anti-pool?

                                                            If your kid ran into traffic and got run over, would that make you anti-car?

                                                            If your kid fell out of a tree and broke his neck, would that make you anti-tree?

                                                            Stop blaming inanimate objects. Stop punishing innocent people.

                                                            [–]RetardedFaggotLevel 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                            This is the dumbest argument against freedom and liberty. Dont put ur gun where a child can access it and teach them gun safety as early as possible . Pretty straightforward

                                                            [–]indielib 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            no that would just make me pro free market Search up the NJ child hood protection act. It causes plenty of childhood gun accidents.

                                                            [–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

                                                            [deleted]

                                                              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                                [–]Fyodor007 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                                American here. That sounds like it was a very scary experience and I'm glad you scared the intruder away.

                                                                I grew up with guns. I have old pictures of myself at 4 years old shooting a rifle with my dad. Definitely an archetypal American gun owner. There have been a very few times when I have gotten my gun out because of something. Occasionally I'll hear something that is just suspicious enough for me to grab one of them and check things out.

                                                                One time, I was living alone in a little house and at 5am, just before dawn a guy on a motorcycle rolls up to my house followed by a van. He knocks on my door. I have my gun in one hand when I answer. He's looking for someone I never heard of and starts sounding desperate. In the van is a woman and a child. It was weird. Anyway, he left then came back looking all around saying he dropped his wallet somewhere. This time I go outside with my gun and tell him to get off my property immediately. He left and never came back.

                                                                I have never pointed it at anyone, but have trained with it enough that if I did, it would be with the intent to destroy them.

                                                                [–]MisterChao 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                Must've been scary. People are crazy to do that at odd hours. Was it a handgun long gun? Did they notice it right away?

                                                                [–]nosmokingbandit 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                I think some of the problem is the super zealous gun owners who pretend to be super macho and badass.

                                                                I good gun owner fears the day he has to use it. Most gun owners are like this, but naturally they aren't as loud as the dude-bro gun owners acting tough.

                                                                I'm truly sorry you had to experience something like this. It can be terrifying.

                                                                [–]NotFunnyAlreadyTaken 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                You learned how valid this ideology is through your own real-life experience. The key for you now is to be able to look beyond your own experience to see how valid libertarianism is in so many other aspects of life, most of which you likely won't have personal experience to learn from.

                                                                [–]frosty147 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                I live alone in a large apartment complex and due to the nature of my job I'm home in the middle of the day most of the time. I've had someone jiggle my doorknob and stick something into my lock on at least three separate occasions. Thankfully, I'm religious about locking my second deadbolt that doesn't have a keyhole on the other side so I knew they weren't getting in, but if they decided to kick down the door I'd be waiting there with some hollowpoint .38 Special.

                                                                Liberals arguing for gun control seemingly refuse to acknowledge the logical conclusion to their argument. If the vast majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns (because of the nature of crime and concealability), why aren't liberals in America advocating against handguns? The obvious answer is because that's politically infeasible, but I'd still like an honest answer. I think it's a form of planned obsolescence. You implement a law that's designed to fail and then point to its failure as the justification for the law you intended all along, e.g. a total gun ban, and similar ideas in education and healthcare.

                                                                [–]Amida0616 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                I suppport more safety, more training more responsibility for guns. But safely stored and operated guns are great.

                                                                Sorry you had a rough time.

                                                                [–]WhisperThomas Sowell for President 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                                You make good points, but the right to be armed isn't just about self-defense on a personal level. It's about the citizenry's right to self-defense against the state.

                                                                No genocide in history has ever been carried out against a people who were not first disarmed.

                                                                [–]TheComradeVlad 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                You're obviously not in America, but the thing about gun control in America is that what anti-gunners are striving to achieve is not physically possible. They figure if we heavily regulate guns that bad people won't be able to get them, and that we'll have less guns. Both those points are false. There are already over 300 million guns in America. There's 320 million people or so, so that's almost 1 gun for every person, infants and the like included.

                                                                These guns aren't just going to disappear. Even with the strictest regulations, guns are still going to be stolen and sold on the street by criminals, and all banning them or heavily regulating them would do is create a thriving black market, even more so than there is now.

                                                                Aside from all that, there's everything else you already touched on. Cops are 10-15 minutes away when shit hits the fan. In many of these life or death situations, you have seconds -- not minutes. The criminals already have guns, and they're going to keep having them no matter what laws are in place. And when one shows up at your door, you don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

                                                                [–]chisau 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                First off, Thank God you are OK! I won't say anything on the gun topic beyond welcome,!

                                                                [–]Johnny_blueballs6969 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                Feeling to play the Devil's advocate here:

                                                                If you live in a country (as I do) where essentially no one owns a gun and your primary or at least one is equalisation then surely if no one had guns you would be on level terms with much less chance of people dying?

                                                                [–]TheBaronOfTheNorthfriedmanite 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                                You should also consider women who cant defend themselves and work or live in rough neighborhoods deserve to be safe as well.

                                                                コメントをもっと表示する (224 返事)