daddyb01.bsky.social
To Do list:
- Protect the marginalized
- Hold the administration accountable
- …
157 posts
105 followers
72 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
What I'd like to know is, why?
comment in response to
post
Then you would also know that you don’t implement preventive measures against possums if you’ve never seen possums on the stead before then. First (and only) possum to show up… doesn’t provide much of a chance to protect against it. At least not yet.
comment in response to
post
I’ve learned that you don’t want to have the conversation. You just want to make sure that people know you think you’re right.
comment in response to
post
Again, your scenario implies that my only choice for defense was a gun. And that I sucked at using it, apparently. Not true in either case… just a very flawed scenario.
comment in response to
post
This conversation has taken a really weird turn, too… just saying.
comment in response to
post
If I had had enough time to get a live trap AND protect my livestock, that would have been my first choice. Time was not my friend… or your kind’s, I guess. What can I say, farming is brutal.
comment in response to
post
Well you’re stating that I’m wrong without any acknowledgement that you could also be wrong. How else would you take that?
comment in response to
post
I do not. But are you saying you CAN see that they have a weapon on them and it’s just not visible? Or are you saying if you don’t know the person you will shoot them, whether they were going to harm you or not?
comment in response to
post
Can and will are two very different things. The question is, are you going to be man enough to figure that out first, or are you just going to start firing? Sure the law has justified you if you shoot when you didn’t have to. But are you cool with that?
comment in response to
post
If you can see them well enough to know it’s someone you don’t know, then you can see them well enough to figure out if they’re armed or not. Question is, do YOU take the time to figure that out?
comment in response to
post
You like a dataset, and the responses to very narrow survey questions. That’s not research. What kind of data professional are you, really?
comment in response to
post
So your default position is that you’re not wrong, it has to be the other person who is? That’s not very courageous, is it.
comment in response to
post
There’s more than one to choose from?
comment in response to
post
Have the courage to have the conversation, and you’ll learn just how wrong your statement is.
comment in response to
post
That happens on a farm more often than you’d probably like to think about.
Enjoy your steak!
comment in response to
post
As with most everything in growing up on a farm, nothing is “formal.” I know enough to know that there are more effective methods to defend yourself at home without relying on something as lethal as a gun. Sure, that’s my choice. Just suffice it to say, yours is not the only answer.
comment in response to
post
Wow, you just can’t stay in your lane, can you.
comment in response to
post
And piglets.
comment in response to
post
I think that sounds like a great justification… if what you really want is to hurt people without consequence.
comment in response to
post
I’m just saying, “the military is a better supplier for parts than anyone else” does not sound like a valid argument.
comment in response to
post
Speaking from personal experience, a shovel is more effective at dispatching an opposum than a gun. Their brains are too small.
comment in response to
post
It’s the “and is a threat” part that I think you’re hoping you can just slide in there unnoticed. As I said, only about a third of break-in robberies involve weapons. So where is the threat? It can’t just be that they’re there. Even police officers have to operate by a higher standard than that.
comment in response to
post
I mean, that happens with cars, too. Should we all just start driving military issue humvees?
comment in response to
post
So you are shooting to kill… not defend.
comment in response to
post
And as I stated first, only about a third of break-in robberies involve a weapon. But you’re ready to gun ‘em down either way?
comment in response to
post
So you’re saying replacement parts aren’t available for any other kind of small arms?
comment in response to
post
Complications? Do explain.
comment in response to
post
Actually, only about a third of break-in robberies involve firearms. So I’m not sure you can confidently say they mean you harm. And I’m not even sure many of the armed robbers MEAN you harm; they’re just stupid enough to think a weapon will help them get their way instead of get killed.
comment in response to
post
Sounds like your whole point is killing the other guy. That’s not defense, it’s homicide.
comment in response to
post
I truly can’t tell how that argument relates to the conversation at hand.
comment in response to
post
I’m sorry you had to substitute the “data professional” boast for a flex. Trust me, you’re not bothering me. And you won’t. If you can’t back up your claims with solid information, it doesn’t really matter what you say.
comment in response to
post
Then be courageous enough to have the conversation. Don’t just keep shutting it down with the whine that “All you want is to ban guns.” That doesn’t get us anywhere.
comment in response to
post
Why do you think I said rifles in general are not effective for home defense? Do you think maybe it’s the power they have? They are intended for longer range shooting, as opposed to say a handgun. Heck, even a shotgun would be more effective than a rifle.
comment in response to
post
Why is that?
comment in response to
post
I noticed your use of the word “military” there. Yes, that is a more suited use for rifles like the AR-15. Do you see where this is going?
comment in response to
post
Yes, and modifying the setup to do so presents other potential problems, like jamming, etc. So all you’re really doing is just trying to use a weapon for something it’s not intended to do, and doing it badly.
comment in response to
post
I read it the first time you posted it. It doesn’t answer the question asked.
comment in response to
post
Nice try. As I’m sure you are aware, data is more than just statistics. Stop moving the goalposts.
comment in response to
post
That’s why it has to be part of defining and regulating safe use and storage for each category. In some cases (i.e., sport) that storage may be at the range or club, not at home.
comment in response to
post
As for home defense, rifles in general are not effective. Plus, the AR-15 is so powerful it will tear through walls and potentially harm innocents in the next room.
comment in response to
post
The smaller caliber round does not provide an efficient kill on big game, so is viewed as inhumane. A number of states actually prohibit it for hunting for that reason. And on small game, it generally just destroys the flesh too much, so what’s the point.
comment in response to
post
1. I am, as well. So how did we end up with different data?
2. If you would just have the conversation, we could figure that out.
comment in response to
post
Again, raw data on just one data point does not prove your point.