Guns don't kill people ....

[BigV]

Your complaints sound whiny. There's no "argument".

Am I losing my other "argument" by calling the shooters in CO and WI "fucking homicidal nutball assholes"? Just curious.

Let me ask you a question. Have you EVER carried a concealed weapon? If not, your argument is faulty because you can't speak from experience.

I have not carried a concealed weapon.

I do not concede the point that a lack of direct experience means my argument is faulty. You and I both live our lives, speak and act correctly and with confidence in a multitude of situations where we have no direct experience. It is not a deal breaker. We can debate this point, but only if you insist.

I've been through it, so don't pretend that you know what you're talking about. I had a road rage incident where the guy was literally pounding on the steering wheel trying to get me to pull over. Why didn't I pull over, smart guy? Because I was aware of something called disparity of force as escalation of force. I did not want to put myself in the situation of possibly having to use my gun so I used evasive driving and lost the guy.

What I think you're saying is that by having your gun with you, you knew there was a pretty good possibility you might have to shoot to kill if you faced off with him, and you didn't want that to happen, so you took other measures. Does that sound right? Here's my question: what the fuck does the gun have to do with anything in that situation with respect to being more cautious and conscientious? If you didn't have your gun, would you have pulled over and taken your chances? If you didn't have your gun could/would you have used evasive driving and lost the guy?

Are you less cautious and conscientious when you are not carrying your gun? That's my question.

If your answer is yes, then you fucking scare me. "I need my gun to keep me calm". JFC.

If your answer is no, then your argument is invalid. You're cautious and conscientious WITH your concealed weapon, AND you're cautious and conscientious WITHOUT your weapon. Which was my original point. It isn't the gun. (and if it is, and I think it might be for some people, heaven help us all).

So, if you don't know what you're talking about, don't try to act like you do.

There are lots of things I don't know--talking about them is part of how I learn about them. There are lots of things I know *some* stuff about, and I talk about them too. This subject falls into that category. Specifically, what makes people cautious, and what doesn't make people cautious; things that are dangerous and things that are less dangerous. So, I'm clear to speak and act in this kind of discussion, with authority. I do know what I'm talking about.

You just look stupid.

By your own logic, you're losing your argument. Unless you just think I look stupid. Which is fine, no? You sound whiny, and I look stupid. I'll make you a deal--you stop looking at me and I'll quit listening to you.

[dmg1969]

Originally Posted by BigV

Your complaints sound whiny. There's no "argument".

Am I losing my other "argument" by calling the shooters in CO and WI "fucking homicidal nutball assholes"? Just curious.



I have not carried a concealed weapon.

I do not concede the point that a lack of direct experience means my argument is faulty. You and I both live our lives, speak and act correctly and with confidence in a multitude of situations where we have no direct experience. It is not a deal breaker. We can debate this point, but only if you insist.


What I think you're saying is that by having your gun with you, you knew there was a pretty good possibility you might have to shoot to kill if you faced off with him, and you didn't want that to happen, so you took other measures. Does that sound right? Here's my question: what the fuck does the gun have to do with anything in that situation with respect to being more cautious and conscientious? If you didn't have your gun, would you have pulled over and taken your chances? If you didn't have your gun could/would you have used evasive driving and lost the guy?

Are you less cautious and conscientious when you are not carrying your gun? That's my question.

If your answer is yes, then you fucking scare me. "I need my gun to keep me calm". JFC.

If your answer is no, then your argument is invalid. You're cautious and conscientious WITH your concealed weapon, AND you're cautious and conscientious WITHOUT your weapon. Which was my original point. It isn't the gun. (and if it is, and I think it might be for some people, heaven help us all).


There are lots of things I don't know--talking about them is part of how I learn about them. There are lots of things I know *some* stuff about, and I talk about them too. This subject falls into that category. Specifically, what makes people cautious, and what doesn't make people cautious; things that are dangerous and things that are less dangerous. So, I'm clear to speak and act in this kind of discussion, with authority. I do know what I'm talking about.


By your own logic, you're losing your argument. Unless you just think I look stupid. Which is fine, no? You sound whiny, and I look stupid. I'll make you a deal--you stop looking at me and I'll quit listening to you.

Big V, we will agree to disagree. You'll just twist any explanation I counter with to paint me as a gun-toting psycho. So, we'll just leave it there.