I have stated as fact that the fear of individuals possibly carrying firearms and defending themselves is not a significant factor in the criminal mind.
Okay, I misunderstood your point. Duly noted.
Studies have also shown that criminals are deterred if they think their victims might be armed. See the decline in violent crime after concealed carry of firearms became more common:
Knives happen to have sharp edges, so trying to take one away is less of a winning proposition.
I'd really like some citations to go along with these claims you are making.
Hint, what you are saying here doesn't square with what my self-defense instructors have told me. The best single tool for self-defense is a firearm; a knife has a place in self-defense but it is definitely not the preferred tool.
We actively discourage vigilantism.
You keep phrasing things in weird ways, but if I'm not mistaken, you and I are in agreement on this point: society is currently telling people that they shouldn't do anything when violence occurs, just sit back and let the police handle it.
At which point you bring up a whole lot of inconsistent research that manage to conclude something with a 312.5% margin of error and with extremely poor experimental design, and from a biased source to boot.
Dunno where you get that margin of error. Professor Kleck's book about his research led to him being awarded the Hindelang Award by the American Society of Criminology. I guess they thought his research was okay.
Did you know global warming is bunk, too? Exxon-Mobil published a study. There is no pollution from coal at all.
Still waiting for you to offer any sort of citation to support your propositions. By the way, I hate coal.
You're a retard.
Huh. I think you are not worth my time and this will be my last comment to you.
Perhaps, however, you misunderstood my comment. If a guy with a gun goes into a school or whatever and starts shooting the place up, all the people in that school are his victims IMHO. The ones he shoots are the worst off, of course, but everyone else can be said to be the victims of assault at minimum.
You ascribed a particular motive to the people who don't attack a school shooter: "Nobody stands up to put a stop to it, because they might get shot a few seconds earlier."
So, did I misunderstand you again? Were you not saying that the people who failed to attack the shooter were motivated out of a willingness to watch others die rather than increase their own personal risk?
I explained the role of society in deterrence, and you claim victim-blaming. I specifically said the victim has NO POWER over the situation, and it's the fault of everyone else in the world.
It's possible for "victims" to take a more active role in their own self-defense, and I'm in favor of that. It's also possible for bystanders to take a more active role in the defense of others, and I'm in favor of that too.
I'm less interested in blaming the bystanders for not acting, than in changing society to make it more likely that bystanders will act.
You claim I'm blaming Sally for getting raped by complaining that Tim, Bob, George, Amanda, Mark, Joseph, and Bill all stood by and did nothing. Are Tim, Bob, George, Amanda, Mark, Joseph, and Bill the victim?
Depends on the circumstances. If they watch some brute assault Sally with his bare hands and they do nothing, they aren't any kind of victims, and IMHO they should do something. If, however, the rapist has a buddy who his pointing a gun at all of them to cow them into inaction, then they are victims as well. I would actually prefer that they do something, rather than standing around; obviously the worst victim is Sally in this horrific scenario.
I'll say it again: if some guy with a gun crashes into a school and starts walking around shooting people, everyone in the school is a victim of the guy. Some of them are victims of gunshot wounds, others are victims of assault and being terrorized. It is unreasonable to declare that the average untrained person is making a cold, calculated decision to watch others die rather than put himself at risk; more likely he is frozen, deer-in-the-headlights, having trouble processing the situation and unsure what to do.
You extended too far with your bullshit art. You got burned.
Or, you misunderstood my point and then were very quick to call me a "retard" and so on.
Well, have a nice life.