Overall yes. America is very diverse country, geographically and culturally. Different people will have different interpretation of what great is and I think America can accommodate the largest ranges of different definitions of "great", more so than any other country on earth.
But why? Anime is such a varied medium, I feel like anyone who claim they hate it just simply haven't been exposed to the anime they would like; they probably saw one type of anime and assumed that it's indicative of the entire media. It's like saying you hate music or you hate books.
No, because doing so would relieve cops of accountability and responsibility to their victims. SWAT are not and should not be robots, regardless of context if a threat isn't obvious and visible there should not be any assumption of imminent danger that would require them to shoot the suspect if command isn't immediately obeyed.
@bmanva: no, what it's a demonstration of is that a man with a knife can take down a man with a gun if he has it holstered or even when drawn depending on the distance. Which like I said contradicts many of the arguments pro-gun nuts make.
What we were discussing was whether it's better if criminals had guns or knifes as their primary tool.and considering how knifes are even easier to get than in the UK yet guns are greatly preferred and the US homicide rate dwarfs that of the UK (and the rest of the developed world) the answer should be pretty obvious.
Yes, and that's a very specific set of scenarios. There's also no physical size and power difference between the two. In a melee, those factors play large roles, but not so in a gun fight. There's no contradiction. I never seen someone making the claim that simply having a gun will be an effective self defense tool. It doesn't. Training plays a huge part and general prevention and avoidance do as well.
Also knives are attackers weapons which effectiveness is based on first strike and surprise. So legally successful self defense stabbing arguments are rare.
yes a knife DOES have a line of fire. its just not the same line of fire as a gun.
the only number based on actual studies though is item number 1 which I will look into. cant find source
Line of fire is path of the projectile. Knife doesn't have a line of fire unless you throw it.
Because that's the only figure provided? Rest is common sense. Knives or blades in fact do not require or expend ammo and there's no learning curve or aiming (you can easily cut or stab someone with peripheral vision or no vision).
it has a line of fire, its only a few feet from its start point to its end point of your movement but it is a line of fire.
but that aside, are we now saying that police officers and military personal in many cases should have a knife instead of a gun?
no wait I know, we are saying no they should have guns because they are safer.
No, line of fire has a definition and it's not what you think it is. You don't "fire" a knife unless it's the projectile.
And no, that's a facetious response to an unrelated conclusion someone else was drawing. The context of which people are saying blades being more dangerous is always in close range. Both guns and knives have their places, which why soldiers carry both (some cops do but it's utilized more as a cutting tool than defensive one). Guns are more flexible in that you can deploy in both close quarter or at range.
The term I used was actually drug problem, not drug uses. Like drug overdose vs drug problem, gun violence is a subset of overall crime rate. One is an accurate indicator of the other, but if it makes you feel better I will revise the statement to say that drug, poverty and education issues are primary contributors to homicide rate.
SIEGEL: First, let me put to you a very common reaction to rising violent crime or rising murder rates. It's guns. It's the number of guns that are out there. Can we say that's a cause?
ABT: I think it's unlikely. The reason is I don't think anything is fundamentally changed in the gun markets in the United States. The second reason is because overwhelmingly gun crime is perpetrated with weapons that are already illegal.
Right. You talk about something in general like "crime" or "drug use", then post some more specific cherry picked stat like "overdose deaths", as if there's some equivalency between the two, when in reality they're completely different and tell us different things. It's deflection.
There you go again posting some guys personal opinion. Great thanks. Most gun researchers disagree with that clown.
There is no equivalency between overdose fatality and drug uses? You serious?
Did you even understand the context? And no, they don't. There's no such thing as "gun" researcher, and there's no such consensus among people who study the data.
They're not equivalent! One is a death; the other is use, which could range from smoking weed to shooting heroin.
It's just more bullshit deflection. That's all you guys ever do - look for something to blame besides the problem, guns. It's "mental illness", or "drugs", or "video games", or "movies", blah blah blah.
I know it's bullshit. You know it's bullshit, and so does everyone else, so why keep doing it?
The context isn't uses, it never was. Drug uses don't equate to drug problems. Overdose however is.
@mighty-lu-bu: none of that's true except for the part about stabbings, but I'd rather be stabbed than shot. So not sure what point you're trying to make.
Within 21 feet and for most of the population (i.e. untrained), knives and blades are more dangerous than guns. If you're cut or stabbed the likelihood of it happening again is very high, compare to gunshot wound being repeated.
i do not think that is factually correct.
I would like to see some numbers on that (which by the way are not cleverly altered because I hone in on that like a friggin hawk..:)
yes a knife DOES have a line of fire. its just not the same line of fire as a gun.
the only number based on actual studies though is item number 1 which I will look into. cant find source
Line of fire is path of the projectile. Knife doesn't have a line of fire unless you throw it.
Because that's the only figure provided? Rest is common sense. Knives or blades in fact do not require or expend ammo and there's no learning curve or aiming (you can easily cut or stab someone with peripheral vision or no vision).
Log in to comment