Yours,
Wince

Do the several hunters per year who inevitably accidentally shoot themselves (and, sometimes, each other) not realize that their hunting rifles are deadly weapons? Or are they careless despite knowing this. My money’s on the latter, although you apparently disagree.

And in the case of the police, if the mace / pepper spray / taser / whatever proves ineffective, they would still have the gun to fall back on. It’s just that it would now no longer be a choice between zero force and deadly force — which is the current dichotomy, and which serves nobody’s interests.

All of that aside, your arguments against non-lethals are almost exactly identical to the anti-gun arguments you routinely dismiss on this very web site. Personal responsibility and all that.

With those things in mind, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that you were joking. Oops!

I need a nap.

I said no such thing. I said that there would be more of a tendency to use non lethal implements in situations where it was unnecessary. Such a tendency is lessened when lethal implements are used. Afterall, most folks don’t want to kill anyone.

And i am not saying that people don’t have a right to carry non lethal weaponry. I just don’t think it’s a good idea.

And I am used to you coming across as nasty. No offense taken.

Gee, I’m not sure I like that…

*adds to list of things to work on*

I still take issue with the idea that random person X will be more cautious with a handgun than with a stun gun, with all other circumstances being equal.

Just ribbing ya. Not meant to be taken seriously.

Non-lethals are not a panacea. In reality, all they will do is really piss the person off. Civilian non-lethal options are not going to debilitate who you use them on. Hell, the industrial strength stuff the cops use don’t do the job a lot of the time. They are also not good for multiple perps.

But I will admit it takes a lot of something for a person to knowlingly decide ahead of time to end another persons life. If you carry, you have to decide that without question before you strap that gun on. Not everybody can do that.

#2: You say b/c handguns are lethal you are more likely to be apprehensive about using it. That is a good thing I agree, but in what situation would you use it? When is it ok to kill another person? IF there was a situation, wouldn’t it still be better to just incapacitate the person and beat the shit out of them. Hell with a handgun you will probably be defending your life and kill somebody and the jury will find out that the “poor” guy was on crack and didn’t know what he was doing. Then they decide you are the bad guy cause you killed this mixed up bastard.

#3 You say that people with Taser guns are more likely to use them when they are not necessary. Wouldn’t you be less likely to start a fight or be aggressive towards somebody if you knew they may shock your balls off. Worst case scenario is that somebody gets shocked and has a couple puncture marks on them. However if it is wrongful use the Taser’s are made so after use police can tell which Taser was used in the incident and trace it back to the registration. So there is not a lot of anomynity here.

Anyways, just check out the stats on Taser guns. Support the repealing of the concealed weapons laws and protect our Police Officers!!!

A few times I have opined that I think people, particularly police, carrying non-lethal weapons m [...]