Original Post
Are guns and melee weapons reasonable defense towards criminals?
In an attempt to raise the activity of discussion…
Please do not make this thread about the USA only. There are more countries than that particular one.
Discuss the topic at hand. Make sure to cite sources, statistics and whatnot if you make claims.
There is no such thing as “it is obvious and common knowledge”.
I will delete may infract posts that are blatantly stupid.
Anyway, here is my personal opinion:
Lack of violence and lack of weapons go hand in hand. There are some distinctions that need to be made, however.
Weapons and guns are a product like any other. Prohibition can only be efficient as long as that product is low in demand. The country I live in (Germany) has a rather low demand for that product, therefore enforcing a prohibition on weapons is no big problem and does not cause much harm.
The USA, however, have a great demand for guns, therefore a prohibition would be harmful. Gun runners would make a lot of profit from a prohibition and that is something that should generally be avoided. Therefore a sophisticated gun control policy would be more efficient to ensure maximum security.
I realize that that is a rather weak compromise, considering how many guns are in circulation, but it's pretty much the best shot.
Please do not make this thread about the USA only. There are more countries than that particular one.
Discuss the topic at hand. Make sure to cite sources, statistics and whatnot if you make claims.
There is no such thing as “it is obvious and common knowledge”.
I will delete may infract posts that are blatantly stupid.
Anyway, here is my personal opinion:
Lack of violence and lack of weapons go hand in hand. There are some distinctions that need to be made, however.
Weapons and guns are a product like any other. Prohibition can only be efficient as long as that product is low in demand. The country I live in (Germany) has a rather low demand for that product, therefore enforcing a prohibition on weapons is no big problem and does not cause much harm.
The USA, however, have a great demand for guns, therefore a prohibition would be harmful. Gun runners would make a lot of profit from a prohibition and that is something that should generally be avoided. Therefore a sophisticated gun control policy would be more efficient to ensure maximum security.
I realize that that is a rather weak compromise, considering how many guns are in circulation, but it's pretty much the best shot.
How are you?
Wait what? Your opinion has nothing to do with the discussion question, you just spoke about gun prohibition in different countries due to the demand on the product of the weapon. Are we discussing prohibition of weapons or whether or not a weapon is okay to use as self defense against your attacker?
In Australia, you can get fined a large sum of money for using a weapon as self defense against an attacker if you attack them first, which I think is bullshit because for rape victims, if they try protecting themselves and cause injury to the attacker, they can get sued with no compensation for the trauma that they could've received from the attempted rape..
Edit: even using pepper spray is illegal tool as self defense in Australia
In Australia, you can get fined a large sum of money for using a weapon as self defense against an attacker if you attack them first, which I think is bullshit because for rape victims, if they try protecting themselves and cause injury to the attacker, they can get sued with no compensation for the trauma that they could've received from the attempted rape..
Edit: even using pepper spray is illegal tool as self defense in Australia
Last edited by Holotor; Aug 7, 2013 at 03:30 PM.
You are right, I should have been more precise.
I do not believe that it's a civilian's job to enforce laws. I do think that defending yourself against a criminal with violence should be the least of all options. The best thing you can do is 1. run away 2. call the police 3. stay out savely.
When those options are not available to you you may fight back, but to do that you do not need a loaded gun, you can use tools that you can improvise with other tools you can find around your house (yes, I realize that that sounds somewhat ignorant, but considering the potential dangers of owning a gun it seems more ignorant to me to arm people who never received proper training).
Guns have the potential to help both the criminals and the victims, leading to a vicious circle.
Therefore I am in favour of a prohibition if that can be enforced, as stated in my first post.
I do not believe that it's a civilian's job to enforce laws. I do think that defending yourself against a criminal with violence should be the least of all options. The best thing you can do is 1. run away 2. call the police 3. stay out savely.
When those options are not available to you you may fight back, but to do that you do not need a loaded gun, you can use tools that you can improvise with other tools you can find around your house (yes, I realize that that sounds somewhat ignorant, but considering the potential dangers of owning a gun it seems more ignorant to me to arm people who never received proper training).
Guns have the potential to help both the criminals and the victims, leading to a vicious circle.
Therefore I am in favour of a prohibition if that can be enforced, as stated in my first post.
Last edited by Redundant; Aug 7, 2013 at 03:31 PM.
How are you?
So you're against the use of weapons if you're the one getting assaulted?
Say you're getting sexually abused and the attacker is a much larger and stronger person than you are, you have a weapon available to you that is in accessible spot, or pepper spray, do you just stand there and let him/her have their way with you and they get away without getting caught or do you use that weapon as a way to protect yourself?
Say you're getting sexually abused and the attacker is a much larger and stronger person than you are, you have a weapon available to you that is in accessible spot, or pepper spray, do you just stand there and let him/her have their way with you and they get away without getting caught or do you use that weapon as a way to protect yourself?
There is a great difference between lethal weapons and selfdefense weapons such as pepper sprays.
I would advocate against carrying a gun in order to protect yourself from assaults. Pepper sprays are reasonably save.
You ignored my point that lethal weapons can be used by both parties. :P
What would stop a rapist from abusing a gun to get his way? Acquiring a gun in a country where no prohibition is in place is significantly easier and criminals benefit from that.
I would advocate against carrying a gun in order to protect yourself from assaults. Pepper sprays are reasonably save.
You ignored my point that lethal weapons can be used by both parties. :P
What would stop a rapist from abusing a gun to get his way? Acquiring a gun in a country where no prohibition is in place is significantly easier and criminals benefit from that.
How are you?
