Stephen Colbert wants to change self-defense laws

[Tguns]

@Supreme_War_Pig

And I pointed out that by this logic, gang shootings should be reducing, as the shooters atrit themselves out. But this isn’t happening. There is no reason to anticipate a similar phenomenon with CC.

What I was getting at is gangbangers (and the like) lie outside this premise. They are not effected by law as they work outside said law, it’s an entirely separate self perpetuating society in that regard.
In normal society governed by law, killings, assaults, etc do not typically perpetuate further violence as it is normally handled through a system of justice. With gangbangers, it’s typically handled from within, which perpetuates more violence and more gangbangers.

[Samm]

@Scratch

Is that why he went there? Was that the grand plan?

If you had watched the interview with him conducted just moments before he ran over to the burning vehicle to put out the fire, you would know why he was there. If you would arm yourself with commonly known facts instead of ignorance and fabrications, you wouldn’t have to keeps asking stupid questions.

[Samm]

@Scratch

@WuWei

Is it possible for this level of cognitive dullness to exist in real life?

You seem to have already proven that it is…

Yes, he has certainly drug it out of you.

[Samm]

@tnt

@WuWei

If you are going to say you are against people defending themselves from rioters and looters; maybe.

Do looters and rioters have a right to defend themselves from an active shooter?

Yes. Do you know of any such instance where that occurred?

[Samm]

@Supreme_War_Pig

@Samm

@Supreme_War_Pig

According to Z. Which again, is the point: the survivor tells the tale, and is incentivized to lie.

No … according to the physical evidence collected by the police investigators.

All that proves is that he was in a fight. That fact is not in dispute. What we don’t know, what we cannot know, aside from Z’ potentially biased testimony, is what he did to initiate the fight, and why it escalated to shooting.

I say Z initiated a confrontation, started to get his ass beat, and therefore killed T.

It doesn’t matter what you say. The fact’s showed otherwise.

[Samm]

@Striker840

@Scratch

@Tguns

attack the kid with a riffle running away

And that brings us back to the second and third victims. How were they to know he wasn’t an active shooter…Did they not have a right to defend themselves?

Was anyone other than those actually attacking him get shot?
Surely he had plenty of “targets” to shoot. Yet he only shot those who attacked him, not much of an “active shooter”.

He had plenty of opportunity to do just that, yet he didn’t. Pretty much shoots the “active shooter” narrative full of holes.

He actively shot the thugs that attacked him. That’s good enough for libs.

[Supreme_War_Pig]

@Tguns

@Supreme_War_Pig

And I pointed out that by this logic, gang shootings should be reducing, as the shooters atrit themselves out. But this isn’t happening. There is no reason to anticipate a similar phenomenon with CC.

What I was getting at is gangbangers (and the like) lie outside this premise. They are not effected by law as they work outside said law, it’s an entirely separate self perpetuating society in that regard.
In normal society governed by law, killings, assaults, etc do not typically perpetuate further violence as it is normally handled through a system of justice. With gangbangers, it’s typically handled from within, which perpetuates more violence and more gangbangers.

Okay, that’s fair, but I am skeptical that this attrition will come to pass. As I have been saying a lot, lately: we’ll see.

[WuWei]

@Supreme_War_Pig

Okay, it’s not like I am saying we shouldn’t because I predict an increase in violence.

But again, we have CC in only 15 states, all of whom already have developed gun cultures of responsibility. What happens when we roll it out to the remaining 35?

Also, that study is from 2005. The America of today is not the same. I would argue that the anger and partisanship of today encourages a more violent country.

So yes, you have a study. I doubt if it is still applicable.

Ok, what evidence do you have to support your competing hypothesis?

[WuWei]

Attrition requires two things, not one.

[zantax]

@WuWei

@Supreme_War_Pig

Okay, it’s not like I am saying we shouldn’t because I predict an increase in violence.

But again, we have CC in only 15 states, all of whom already have developed gun cultures of responsibility. What happens when we roll it out to the remaining 35?

Also, that study is from 2005. The America of today is not the same. I would argue that the anger and partisanship of today encourages a more violent country.

So yes, you have a study. I doubt if it is still applicable.

Ok, what evidence do you have to support your competing hypothesis?

Looks to me like he is saying the increasingly violent left makes letting people own guns a bad idea.

[Supreme_War_Pig]

Not at all. In fact, I defy you to find a single post from me advocating anything of the sort

[zantax]

@Supreme_War_Pig

Not at all. In fact, I defy you to find a single post from me advocating anything of the sort

Who is getting more violent? Not the right.

[johnwk2]

@WuWei

@Supreme_War_Pig

And, if as I predict, we are a mere couple of years to constitutional carry, we really might to revisit that.

As we have here in Texas. Veritable rivers of blood.

And here in Florida we have tsunamis.

JWK

It is absolutely shameful that those in our mainstream media and Hollywood crowd, having achieved fame, fortune and great success under a free market, free enterprise system, now work to destroy that system and impose a notoriously evil, Cuban style government, on America’s future generations.

[Supreme_War_Pig]

@zantax

@Supreme_War_Pig

Not at all. In fact, I defy you to find a single post from me advocating anything of the sort

Who is getting more violent? Not the right.

Well, I am not framing this as a left/right thing. The thread is about self defense laws, and I wonder about what happens when these laws rub up against an up-armed society.

[johnwk2]

@Supreme_War_Pig

@zantax

@Supreme_War_Pig

Not at all. In fact, I defy you to find a single post from me advocating anything of the sort

Who is getting more violent? Not the right.

Well, I am not framing this as a left/right thing. The thread is about self defense laws, and I wonder about what happens when these laws rub up against an up-armed society.

Well then, compare Florida, a highly and legally armed society with . . . say Chicago.

JWK

[Samm]

@Supreme_War_Pig

But again, we have CC in only 15 states, all of whom already have developed gun cultures of responsibility. What happens when we roll it out to the remaining 35?

I presume by CC you are referring to Constitutional Carry, not concealed carry. (I remember not so long ago when it was only two.) But you are right, a culture of responsibly is what makes that work in those States. When (if) the remaining 35 States develops such a culture, they can safely implement Constitutional carry with no adverse effect as well. Thank you for that excellent point.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@johnwk2

Well then, compare Florida, a highly and legally armed society with . . . say Chicago.

JWK

There are numerous cities in Florida with much higher violent crime rates than Chicago.

Miami and Chicago are about even.

[johnwk2]

@TheDoctorIsIn

@johnwk2

Well then, compare Florida, a highly and legally armed society with . . . say Chicago.

JWK

There are numerous cities in Florida with much higher violent crime rates than Chicago.

Miami and Chicago are about even.

What do your unsourced opinions have to do with firearm shootings?

JWK

In every communist dictatorial oppressive country, like Cuba, China, and Venezuela, the people are disarmed. Forewarned is forearmed.