THIS is why people need guns for self defense

Post Reply New Topic

Banning guns is useless.

Spreading guns is also useless.

There is no correlation between regulation of guns and safety. And by no correlation, I mean no correlation at all: Making Guns legal won't make you less safe AND it won't make you safer. Crooks will always have more guns than you do. And if they don't, then they can still throw a bomb at your door and leave your gun collection worthless.

The whole debate is dumb and stupid.

If you want to reduce crime, increase education level and access to wealth.

Actually you do feel the impact of every car accident, not in the literal way you interpretted - safety measures on cars (price of cars), traffic jams because of car accidents (time spent waiting), spilled of resources used in the cars (glass, oil, fuel, etc.), victims and casualties in the car accident (Guess who's paying the paramedics and police through in indirect ways?), damaged surface of the road (guess where those tax dollars go to?) - .
I never talked about banning something, updating to modern times and phasing-out at most.
Since guns are primairly made for killing and electricity is primairly an existing element used as a power source? Consistent logic as you claim, the comparison is flawed.



That's not what I meant by that, firearms only complicate matters and escalate conflicts when added. The chance somebody gets killed skyrockets when added in a situation.
My bad at trying to understand you. Education is informing too, colorless information doesn't exist - whatever you call it. What about the contence 'education' provides do you dislike?



My apologies, I got ahead of myself. Even if the subcultural norms are up to spec, I don't see the neccesity in keeping guns when you live and work in an urban area.


As I started my first post here in this thread I asked this question at the top of the post, if you will what is your answer?:

"Isn't firearm possession in the USA a self-fueled necessity perhaps even a fear? Others have one so I need one, just in case?"

And the "chance" a non-criminal, non-insane gun owner whips out a firearm casually,
in a situation where he or she isn't already fearful for his or her life?
Next to nothing.

I was assaulted last December.
The only "complication" that would have occurred had I been packing as I have every time before and since
would have been me not very nearly being raped at knifepoint.

I don't, to be frank, particularly care if "somebody" got killed in the scenario,
because had I been armed, it sure as f*ck wasn't going to be me,
as it was quite clear going to be me since I wasn't.

Last edited by ValentineWiggin on 31 Mar 2012, 11:28 am, edited 5 times in total.

The CZ-75 is one that I don't own but I've shot a few and they are quite good. H&K P30 would be a nice piece but expensive. I was looking at a P2000 just yesterday. Those are a little more compact than a P30. It was like $800 and change and I really didn't want to part with that much $$.

Well for one thing it's kind of hard to effectively conceal an AK on one's person. I doubt you could tell me very much about any gun without looking it up.

Hard to conceal but in some (most? I'm unsure of how many) states it's perfectly legal to carry an assault rifle around with you.

Wallourdes wrote:

So you're faced with someone that's most likely going to kill or maim you and NOT doing anything to counter that threat it is going to save the day? Or are you saying that lying down and being a good little victim and accepting your fate is preferable to saving yourself?
I'm guessing the latter.



Better the aggressor be killed than his would be victim. The aggressor, by being an aggressor, has decided to put himself at risk to encroach upon my right to live and be whole. That being said, his life is in fact of less value than mine.
That's just how it is and how it will be as long as there are people on this planet, period.

Firstoff, I am sorry to hear about your very bad experience - I am no way trying to demonize your awful experience, I am talking in general situations.
Sadly guns do not solve this kind of behaviour of the assailant it only works as an hurdle - it makes it harder for the assailant to be successful.

People under pressure do strange things especially when their not familiar or prepared by it, let alone caught unaware or not. Predicting how someone who is a "non-criminal, non-insane gun owner" acts is therefor hard to judge.

On your person in public it's considered brandishing in most all states that I'm aware of and a ticket to jail.
Personally, I'm not bothered by the sight of someone carrying an un-concealed firearm but the law usually sees it quite differently.....

My bad on the banning thing. As for car accidents, it's not that I interpreted what you said literally, but that it tied into your message of how because a few people f**k up, the impact on everyone else is big enough for the exclusion of it being ideal. And I say f**k that.

Yes guns have a more specialized purpose than electricity, but the principle of weighing the few who misuse them over the majority that don't still applies.

It's not that there's something I dislike about education, but that a lot of the problems with violence are subcultural. Education is an institution, and an institutional solution is unsuited for handling the informal. And if that "someone" is the person causing the conflict, then good for that person. Prove that the chance even skyrockets, because 92% of times where someone brandishes a gun in self-defense, a shot isn't even fired.

Have you ever lived in an impoverished urban area? And how would guns be less necessary in an area that is more concentrated than a rural area? That doesn't make any sense.

You're asking for a one size fits all answer to a vague question. I dunno, maybe, maybe not. But I would figure most people buy guns for self defense regardless of whether or not they expect to get into an armed confrontation.

Yeah someone who is a non-criminal, non-insane gun owner is unpredictable and yet you can somehow predict that using a gun to defend yourself against an assailant will inevitably amount to nothing more than an inconvenience.

No open carry? I know Arizona has open carry for sure, it's illegal to conceal a weapon though IIRC.

That's not what I said, read closer please.



I am not talking about sides, I'm talking about firearms in a situation or not and it's effects.

A firearm in a situation is an option to end it. Nothing more, nothing less.

And, when it comes down to a "him or me" situation, very few things are as capable of rendering him the loser as a gun in trained hands.

Guns are just another tool to help you survive.

Heh, if its at a 50 ft range where they have a sign stating that you can shoot one round every three seconds and that they have the right to kick you out if you go faster - you'd be bored to sleep (let alone get a lot of funny looks when you bring it in). Aside from being bored to death you, you're correct - you have every right.


What I still wish I had were friends who have friends out in 'God's Country' where you can fire stuff off like that all day, if the neighbor calls the police and complains the police will tell them that the sounds of artillery are music to their ears. For a while my friend had a cottage/cabin down in a rural hunters area in central Ohio where we had a sandpit that I could take aim with my .22 tactical but, anything shorter than that - like the standard 50 ft.... :snoredrool:

That piece:
[img][600:450]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v239/bjgunner/DSCF0943.jpg[/img]

Difference - I do have five of the banana clips, but also a Walthur scope and I typically use the flash guard which isn't shown here as well as a shoulder strap. Fun semi-auto - when you have the range, downside - even with CCI high speed utility it tends to jam every 10th or 11th bullet, part of why I want to get a 9mm next time and heck, kill two birds with one stone - smaller for better short-range plinking challenge and 9mm rather than .22 so I'm not spending half my time clearing jams.

I love shooting guns it's fun.

Ok, thank you for explaining
I'm curious where you got that 92% from, but here's mine:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1 ... illed.html



I live close-by such areas for several years now, where I live it's a bit of borderland between impoverished and prosperous.
Since I didn't equate people using guns on people, I looked at what is necessary in getting basic needs in an urban and rural enviroment. Haven't got all detail round, but to me it seemed logical.



I know, I hope it to be thought provoking and creating an opening for discussions.
Why would people buy guns for self defense?



I never said unpredictable, only hard to judge.

Look, safety is an illussion. You can have all the deterrent and repellent measures you want, but if someone really want to get you he/she will. That's what I mean with a hurdle - it extends time and trouble needed. Sure brandishing a gun can discourage an assailant enough to not try that a second time, but it isn't a certainty.