Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

WG DOES have a problem with paranoia, meaning people who have to own lots of guns because they think they have to be fully armed and be able to defend themselves from boogeymen that don't exist.

---

How many is it that allows you to state a person has too many guns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdad

How many is it that allows you to state a person has too many guns?

---

I never said "too many guns." I suggested there might be a paranoia that demands gun ownership.

Disarming the citizens would solve that paranoia problem..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

I never said "too many guns." I suggested there might be a paranoia that demands gun ownership.

---

So what is the threshold you have in mind ? One that reflects gun ownership and crosses the line into paranoia ?


To make this statement you must have had a number in mind:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl
WG DOES have a problem with paranoia, meaning people who have to own lots of guns because they think they have to be fully armed and be able to defend themselves from boogeymen that don't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cdad

So what is the threshold you have in mind ?

---

People can own lots of guns, but leave the paranoia somewhere else.

I'm just curious as to what qualifies as paranoia, because I've seen more on the left than on the right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I'm just curious as to what qualifies as paranoia, because I've seen more on the left than on the right.

---

Were you at the NRA convention the other day?

Is it paranoid to wear a seat belt ? I wear mine all the time and yet have not been in an accident yet where it made a difference. But one day it could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Were you at the NRA convention the other day?

---

No, and that's another in a long line of non-answers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

is it paranoid to wear a seat belt ? I wear mine all the time and yet have not been in an accident yet where it made a difference. But one day it could.

---

Wearing a seal belt and owing a gun isn't a valid comparison, a gun does not automatically deploy when the owner is threatened, it protects against nothing, it is a deterent only when it is visible and so it serves only to pander to the paranoia of the owner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Disarming the citizens would solve that paranoia problem..

---

Yes it might because if you know others don't possess the weapon you don't need one yourself

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

wearing a seal belt and owing a gun isn't a valid comparison, a gun does not automatically deploy when the owner is threatened, it protects against nothing, it is a deterent only when it is visable and so it serves only to pander to the paranoia of the owner

---

Most seat belts do not automatically deploy at least here in the U.S. on most cars the only automatic style system is an airbag. Knowing that there are guns in a given area the criminal will try to pass on those areas to avoid confrontation. So it doesn't have to be displayed to become a deterent. This has been proven time and time again even with the recent shootings in the news.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

wearing a seal belt and owing a gun isn't a valid comparison, a gun does not automatically deploy when the owner is threatened, it protects against nothing, it is a deterent only when it is visable and so it serves only to pander to the paranoia of the owner

---

So by this you verify that firearms have no independent volition; that "Guns don't kill people."

Thus by supporting gun control you are in fact supporting 'control.'

How very authoritarian of you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

yes it might because if you know others don't possess the weapon you don't need one yourself

---

And then we can all trust in our benevolent government to take care of us.

because we know that when we call 9-1-1 ,that the police will always timely arrive in time to prevent an assault on us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

because we know that when we call 9-1-1 ,that the police will always timely arrive in time to prevent an assault on us.

---

I don't blame them. I would be arriving as late as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

because we know that when we call 9-1-1 ,that the police will always timely arrive in time to prevent an assault on us.

---

YOU SEE TOM PARANOIA IN FULL FLIGHT, you know your police will respond maybe if you worked on getting rid of the scum instead of insisting on their rights you wouldn't need guns

Not paranoid... just realist . The cops are good at drawing white lines around the victim .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

not paranoid ... just realist . The cops are good at drawing white lines around the victim .

---

Many cops could not help but think to themselves. " It's better than having a white line drawn around me" That's realism.

I don't like operating from a premise of all Americans are upstanding law abiding citizens because a gun is no toy and a stupid mistake costs lives and I submit the homes that act stupidly and a kid kills or injures a sibling. Just because a nut is undiagnosed he is still a nut, and dangerous.

Yeah I say check everybody as a matter of process and policy before you allow them to exercise their rights and a psych exam would be great as well as some responsible instructions.

And a recognition that criminals are smarter than the public and have no regard for laws and we make smarter criminals every day. I am a realist too, and most criminals are better armed than the cops.