Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4 ... 9  10  11 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

Yes, firearms are the equalizer that allow democratic republics to work.

We assume police should be armed because attackers might be, but no one attacks police. It is actually everyone else except police who really need to be armed. The police can never protect anyone else, so we should all e protecting ourselves, (and others).

Thinking police could or should protect us, is not just wrong, but irrational and dangerous. They will never be there when it is necessary and police actually represent the greatest threat imaginable.



The police have the same right to use guns to defend themselves from violent criminals that women have. The problem is that this society does just about everything short of not allowing women to carry guns to prevent them from doing so.

It obviously doesn't make a lot of sense for women to go around unarmed in this society while the police are fully armed and ready at the drop of a hat to shoot someone. And yet most women don't carry guns or anything else for their own protection. That needs to change.

I agree that women depending on the police to protect them is not at all a good idea. They obviously don't protect women and often seem more interested in harassing them than protecting them.

Women can't rely on the police or 911 but they can rely on a gun. They need to take the responsibility for protecting themselves into their own hands and rely on their own ability to do so.



Women can't rely on the police, 911. These posts are like an end all to be all dependent on cops, is a man without a weapon any more safe/ successful than a woman without a weapon? Why pick on women, they can chose to have a weapon or not just as a man does to say otherwise is a lie.



Men should also have a weapon, because they also can not rely on police and might run into a situation where a weapon is needed and it is their responsibility. For example they could be called upon to protect a child from a venomous snake.
But I would think women are much more likely to get attacked. And relying on police reinforces government corruption that leads to a police state.
4/1/2020, 10:07 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

Yes, firearms are the equalizer that allow democratic republics to work.

We assume police should be armed because attackers might be, but no one attacks police. It is actually everyone else except police who really need to be armed. The police can never protect anyone else, so we should all e protecting ourselves, (and others).

Thinking police could or should protect us, is not just wrong, but irrational and dangerous. They will never be there when it is necessary and police actually represent the greatest threat imaginable.



The police have the same right to use guns to defend themselves from violent criminals that women have. The problem is that this society does just about everything short of not allowing women to carry guns to prevent them from doing so.

It obviously doesn't make a lot of sense for women to go around unarmed in this society while the police are fully armed and ready at the drop of a hat to shoot someone. And yet most women don't carry guns or anything else for their own protection. That needs to change.

I agree that women depending on the police to protect them is not at all a good idea. They obviously don't protect women and often seem more interested in harassing them than protecting them.

Women can't rely on the police or 911 but they can rely on a gun. They need to take the responsibility for protecting themselves into their own hands and rely on their own ability to do so.



Women can't rely on the police, 911. These posts are like an end all to be all dependent on cops, is a man without a weapon any more safe/ successful than a woman without a weapon? Why pick on women, they can chose to have a weapon or not just as a man does to say otherwise is a lie.



I'm not picking on women, katie, I'm merely pointing out that they have been conditioned to not carry and use weapons which could have been used when they were in dangerous situations for self-defense. This society likes to ignore that big elephant in the room. You seldom see any film or TV show showing a woman using a gun to defend herself nor do you hear the police advise that women carry weapons for their protection.

Women can defend themselves with guns and other weapons. That's a mighty big elephant to keep on ignoring.
4/3/2020, 6:00 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

Yes, firearms are the equalizer that allow democratic republics to work.

We assume police should be armed because attackers might be, but no one attacks police. It is actually everyone else except police who really need to be armed. The police can never protect anyone else, so we should all e protecting ourselves, (and others).

Thinking police could or should protect us, is not just wrong, but irrational and dangerous. They will never be there when it is necessary and police actually represent the greatest threat imaginable.



The police have the same right to use guns to defend themselves from violent criminals that women have. The problem is that this society does just about everything short of not allowing women to carry guns to prevent them from doing so.

It obviously doesn't make a lot of sense for women to go around unarmed in this society while the police are fully armed and ready at the drop of a hat to shoot someone. And yet most women don't carry guns or anything else for their own protection. That needs to change.

I agree that women depending on the police to protect them is not at all a good idea. They obviously don't protect women and often seem more interested in harassing them than protecting them.

Women can't rely on the police or 911 but they can rely on a gun. They need to take the responsibility for protecting themselves into their own hands and rely on their own ability to do so.



Women can't rely on the police, 911. These posts are like an end all to be all dependent on cops, is a man without a weapon any more safe/ successful than a woman without a weapon? Why pick on women, they can chose to have a weapon or not just as a man does to say otherwise is a lie.



I'm not picking on women, katie, I'm merely pointing out that they have been conditioned to not carry and use weapons which could have been used when they were in dangerous situations for self-defense. This society likes to ignore that big elephant in the room. You seldom see any film or TV show showing a woman using a gun to defend herself nor do you hear the police advise that women carry weapons for their protection.

Women can defend themselves with guns and other weapons. That's a mighty big elephant to keep on ignoring.




Exactly.
Since women are easier to attack and are attacked more often, logically they should be more armed than men.
By not being armed, women create a problem that then corrupt politicians try to exploit by making this into a police state, that is good for no one.

Last edited by Rigby5, 4/7/2020, 5:47 am
4/3/2020, 7:32 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 7485
Karma: 47 (+62/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

Yes, firearms are the equalizer that allow democratic republics to work.

We assume police should be armed because attackers might be, but no one attacks police. It is actually everyone else except police who really need to be armed. The police can never protect anyone else, so we should all e protecting ourselves, (and others).

Thinking police could or should protect us, is not just wrong, but irrational and dangerous. They will never be there when it is necessary and police actually represent the greatest threat imaginable.



The police have the same right to use guns to defend themselves from violent criminals that women have. The problem is that this society does just about everything short of not allowing women to carry guns to prevent them from doing so.

It obviously doesn't make a lot of sense for women to go around unarmed in this society while the police are fully armed and ready at the drop of a hat to shoot someone. And yet most women don't carry guns or anything else for their own protection. That needs to change.

I agree that women depending on the police to protect them is not at all a good idea. They obviously don't protect women and often seem more interested in harassing them than protecting them.

Women can't rely on the police or 911 but they can rely on a gun. They need to take the responsibility for protecting themselves into their own hands and rely on their own ability to do so.



Women can't rely on the police, 911. These posts are like an end all to be all dependent on cops, is a man without a weapon any more safe/ successful than a woman without a weapon? Why pick on women, they can chose to have a weapon or not just as a man does to say otherwise is a lie.



Men should also have a weapon, because they also can not rely on police and might run into a situation where a weapon is needed and it is their responsibility. For example they could be called upon to protect a child from a venomous snake.
But I would think women are much more likely to get attacked. And relying on police reinforces government corruption that leads to a police state.



I didn't say you are "picking on women" what I do say is women have a choice no different than a man to have a weapon. That millions of women chose that choice does not mean they aren't allowed or even discouraged. It's women who don't feel comfortable with a weapon and women who hate gun violence and associate guns with violence, war, etc., as a man's thing. Women by nature are carers and nurturers for many women, guns are the antithesis of their role. Not really rocket science is it. It may be a "big elephant to ignore" but it doesn't make them stupid and what is it about in the first place, freedom of choice.
4/5/2020, 1:49 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

I didn't say you are "picking on women" what I do say is women have a choice no different than a man to have a weapon. That millions of women chose that choice does not mean they aren't allowed or even discouraged.-katie



They certainly are allowed to carry guns but yet in a society where women are too often targeted by violent criminals they still don't carry them. That's what I find interesting. Why is that?

I believe it is a combination of factors including actively being discouraged from doing so by liberals who don't believe women should carry guns. Many of those liberals appear to believe that women are not competent enough to carry guns in contrast to our police. A very condescending and sexist view of women.

My view is that women could hardly be less competent than the police. They'd have to start running around shooting at shadows to be worse than the police.

quote:

It's women who don't feel comfortable with a weapon and women who hate gun violence and associate guns with violence, war, etc., as a man's thing. Women by nature are carers and nurturers for many women, guns are the antithesis of their role. Not really rocket science is it.



No, it isn't but I don't believe that the complete explanation is simply their nature as females to avoid guns. It's more a matter of conditioning in a society that portrays guns as a man's thing rather than something women could use to protect themselves from criminals. At one time women were discouraged from driving cars or flying air planes, also things which are dangerous for women to use. Women had a reputation largely undeserved for being bad drivers. Eventually that nonsense dissipated. The same thing needs to happen in the case of guns.

quote:

It may be a "big elephant to ignore" but it doesn't make them stupid and what is it about in the first place, freedom of choice.



Of course it doesn't make them stupid. They are simply taking a big risk that they don't need to be taking by leaving themselves vulnerable to violent criminal attacks.

Caring about other people more than themselves may be something women excel at in this country but they need to learn to at least respect themselves enough to take seriously the fact that they are often targeted by criminals. For the sake of themselves, their children and other family members they need to learn to care enough about themselves to see to it that they can take out violent criminals if the need arises.
4/5/2020, 1:08 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


I do not believe people are allowed to carry guns in this current and very hysterical society.

While it is supposed to be legal to carry a gun, the laws, police, employers, business owners, etc., all make it pretty much impossible. It costs a lot for the license, classes, etc.
And then you still can't carry into any posted place, so you have to decide if leaving it in the car is safe enough?
You also have to hide it from employers, coworkers, etc., who have their own prejudices and illegal reactions.
So by what amounts to a lynch-mob mentality, people are denied their right of defense.
4/5/2020, 3:28 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 7485
Karma: 47 (+62/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


You don't believe persons still have their weapons when in actuality gun sales have increased due to the virus? "Make it impossible,"
 really? It does not cost alot! As a raving liberal, I've never had to hide a weapon and I could care less by those who are bothered which in reality, no one has ever said a word that I had weapons, ever. You have to hide it because someone gives you !@#$, wah, you are exaggerating and sound like a drama queen,
4/7/2020, 4:06 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

You don't believe persons still have their weapons when in actuality gun sales have increased due to the virus? "Make it impossible,"
 really? It does not cost alot! As a raving liberal, I've never had to hide a weapon and I could care less by those who are bothered which in reality, no one has ever said a word that I had weapons, ever. You have to hide it because someone gives you !@#$, wah, you are exaggerating and sound like a drama queen,




Gun sales are home defense, sports, investments, etc., not carried.
No one I know carries any more.
Yet 50 years ago, carrying concealed was common, with at least several in ever school being armed.
The PTA made sure there were always at least a few armed in every school.

The carry license used to be $40 and the classes $50, but now you are talking over $300, depending on state, and many states don't allow any carry at all, like NY, NJ, DC, CA, etc.

Obviously school staff that used to be required to have arms, no longer can by law.
Then all the big companies I have worked for, like IBM, HP, Intel, etc., had strict policies against carrying weapons.
They all went that route ever since the incidents of people going postal in the 1990s.
A lot of them put in metal detectors.
We are not talking about someone "giving you !@#$".
We are talking about strict, zero tolerance, written policies.
And the whole staff is usually in on it these days.

As a raving liberal, everyone always assumed I was unarmed. But as a sane and rational person, I know everyone should be armed unless they are doing something contradictory, like drinking.
4/7/2020, 5:59 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 7485
Karma: 47 (+62/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


In this day an age 300 bucks is not a big deal. I don't know what you are talking about, I never experienced where packing was common. I graduated from H.S. in 1966, there were no weapons in school or PTA meetings and to describe it as "common" is not true. School teachers were not required to pack weapons and that is a huge falsehood, why I don't know. you claim such. I disagree you are a "raving liberal" you present as a Libertarian, although you can label yourself anything you want but you by accepted standards are far from a raving liberal! Being a liberal does not mean you don't have weapons or are opposed to weapons, millions upon millions do. What it does mean there are restrictions that are common sense as a gun owner.
4/7/2020, 6:44 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Reply | Quote
Re: Let's replace police officer's guns with cell phones


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

In this day an age 300 bucks is not a big deal. I don't know what you are talking about, I never experienced where packing was common. I graduated from H.S. in 1966, there were no weapons in school or PTA meetings and to describe it as "common" is not true. School teachers were not required to pack weapons and that is a huge falsehood, why I don't know. you claim such. I disagree you are a "raving liberal" you present as a Libertarian, although you can label yourself anything you want but you by accepted standards are far from a raving liberal! Being a liberal does not mean you don't have weapons or are opposed to weapons, millions upon millions do. What it does mean there are restrictions that are common sense as a gun owner.




You are not remembering accurately.
When the movie, "West Side Story" came out, there was a nation wide panic. Every school PTA talked about how schools are legally required to defend the children and keep them safe. And the only way was to have armed security in the schools, at all times.
And the movie "West Side Story" was not fiction. There were 2 deaths in my High School senior year from knife fights. The dangers were just as common back then as now. And then the rational solution was to have armed security. Only back then it was the teachers and janitors. Now we waste money on dedicated security who run the other way if something actually happens.

While $300 is not that much, it also does not buy you much because employers, schools, government buildings, restaurants, retailers, etc., still discriminate, and police act incredibly offensive as well. It no longer is practical, as it once was and still should be.
4/7/2020, 5:07 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4 ... 9  10  11 





You are not logged in (login)