Close

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 76 to 80 of 80
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jdub679 Click here to enlarge
    Not really.
    Well I do. I think it is much more stressful to be a soldier stationed overseas and go through intense combat than it is to eliminate the threat posed by a single breaking into your home.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jdub679 Click here to enlarge
    Yet, soldiers (and police) have to deal with the psychological repercussions from doing that all the time.
    So then you do see a difference as you just undermined your own point.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    27
    Rep Points
    93.3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Well I do. I think it is much more stressful to be a soldier stationed overseas and go through intense combat than it is to eliminate the threat posed by a single breaking into your home.



    So then you do see a difference as you just undermined your own point.

    I see the point you're trying to make here, but stress is relative to the person. I am simply saying that taking a human life will have psychological consequences. Most of us would "like" to believe that in those situations, we would act without hesitation and that based on the justification of protection that we wouldn't be psychologically harmed. I'd like to believe that people aren't inherently able to harm other people, that most people would hesitate (and still come out on top). I do believe that the psychological affect in a normal person is probably more than you would expect.
    JB Stage 2 ISO, BMW Performance Exhaust, M3 front control arms, RPI scoops, CDV delete

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    120,267
    Rep Points
    32,707.2
    Mentioned
    2130 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    328


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jdub679 Click here to enlarge
    I see the point you're trying to make here, but stress is relative to the person. I am simply saying that taking a human life will have psychological consequences. Most of us would "like" to believe that in those situations, we would act without hesitation and that based on the justification of protection that we wouldn't be psychologically harmed. I'd like to believe that people aren't inherently able to harm other people, that most people would hesitate (and still come out on top). I do believe that the psychological affect in a normal person is probably more than you would expect.
    It will have psychological consequences but the only way to even experience any psychological consequences is to be alive by default. That makes the choice rather easy IMO.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by jdub679 Click here to enlarge
    I'd say quite a few US soldiers with PTSD would disagree with that.
    The difference you are failing to see is that soldiers are told by their commander and chief to kill someone. So, as a soldier, you may not feel that the guy you are killing really deserves it. As a (soldier) human, you don't have to agree with who you kill or why, you just have to do it cause your commander and chief gave you an order and you are expected to follow it.
    You aren't at war as a homeowner protecting himself. So, the choice is pretty obvious and there is no one telling you what to do except for your own conscience. It's your decision to pull the trigger or have a conversation and try to "work it out". Personally, if I find someone in my home...they're getting shot in the head after which I take my kitchen knife, stab myself in my leg, cut my hand a few times as defensive wounds, wipe it clean and put it in their dead hand then call 911.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    6,287
    Rep Points
    6,860.3
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    69


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by whoosh Click here to enlarge
    So you are intersted in banning guns to save the lives of children, but you don't comment on the 3x lives lost in automobile accidents? Do you think children don't die in those crashes? Do you think children aren't saved by responsible use of a firearm for self protection against a criminal?

    Im still waiting for you to justify a 500hp vehicle when they are more likely to lead to a fatal accident, and are not at all necessary for transportation.
    Can I combine the 2 just for comparesen sake?
    So, supposed both the assault rifle and the 500hp car are both automatic.
    You managed to get the car through the door of the classroom and all 6 an 7 year old kids remained in their seat.
    My bet is you would be down 7 kids in score before you even managed to get the car started and in D.
    You would not be able to kill all 20 kids in the classroom. Some would escape. Your car would get damaged, while the assault rifle would remain unscratched.

    This off course is a silly comparesen, but comparing the lives lost by gunfire to lives lost in car accidents is equally silly.
    Lives lost in plane crashes is also equally tragic. Kids get killed in those accidents as well. Also completely unrelated.
    We were talking about taking away the opportunity to commit those shootings.
    Not having a (semi)automatic weapon available AT ALL takes away a lot of that threat.
    And for citicens these weapons should not even be available at all, no matter what procedure. That was my argument.

    Also, if semi automatic weapons were used for the same amount of time cars are used the death toll of guns would be exponentially higher than the death toll for car use.
    There are two theories to arguing with women. Neither one works

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •