Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
7SacredPools
Trad climber
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Madbolter, no doubt you feel really big carrying a gun around, but I wouldn't trust you or anyone else to use it responsibly. Especially in the heat of the moment brought on by some perceived threat. And if thieves really deserve to die, why not take a stroll down Wall Street and really make a difference?
Man, this gun-toting attitude is sickening.
And it's pretty hilarious that anyone thinks being armed will protect them from the government. Ha! They will smash you to bits need be.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
Wow, ^^^there's some logic.^^^
NOT
Now run off and play and let the grownups talk.
|
|
ECF
Big Wall climber
So Far East I might as well be dead
|
|
If you don't have a gun, the day may come when your opinion won't matter.
"God may have created all men, but Sam Colt made them equal."
I don't remember who said that, but it is as true as the sky is blue.
|
|
7SacredPools
Trad climber
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Even with a gun my opinion matters little. To think otherwise is delusional.
Sorry America, but this is just another sign that your society is devolving and it saddens me.
All the guns in the world won't stop the top-down rape and pillaging.
|
|
TradEddie
Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
, I've now purchased an H&K P30 .40, and I'm open-carrying it everywhere. My wife also shoots it
Great, now the chances of your wife wife being shot have increased by 600%. Surely fairness would dictate that she gets a gun of her own, or perhaps you are not THAT stupid?
Take a very good look at that gun, you are by far the most likely person to be shot with it, next is your wife, followed by your kids, then one of their friends, then one of your friends or neighbors, or someone at the range. But that's okay if it means you're not scared of the homicidal mugger bogeyman anymore.
TE
|
|
7SacredPools
Trad climber
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
|
|
What are Christians doing with guns anyway? My guess is they don't really believe in God's good grace and protection.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Madbolter, no doubt you feel really big carrying a gun around, but I wouldn't trust you or anyone else to use it responsibly. Especially in the heat of the moment brought on by some perceived threat.
In that event, you should also think that cops should not have guns. They typically engage in less training than the typical armed citizen. Furthermore, there are countless incidents of cops engaged in spray-and-pray tactics, emptying their entire magazine and hitting nothing. This is so common among cops that they are as much at risk as anybody else. So, you would prefer to disarm everybody (except, of course, the criminals).
As far as feeling "big," wow, are you ever clueless.
And, Couchmaster, I don't "wave it around."
Regarding the open carry of long-guns, it's tactically absurd, no doubt. And walking into a restaurant with a long gun in your hand (or even strapped to your back) is a much more in-your-face display of a gun than having something like my compact pistol barely visible in a full-depth holster on the hip.
You have to put the whole thing in context. These guys in Texas are basically protesting the fact that only long guns can be carried, and they want the law changed to allow handguns to be open carried. So, yes, they are being over the top. But all forms of protest are over the top in some sense. That's the whole point of a protest.
Do I think they are ultimately helping their own cause? No, it's doubtful. Do I think they are ultimately hurting the perception of open carry in general? Yup, very likely. Target has responded to them by banning guns of all sorts in its stores.
Regarding quoting odds of being shot by my own gun, please offer us, the American public, with the alternative approach to self-defense.
None? No right of self-defense at all? We just wait for the cops to clean up messes after they occur?
Some? We get to throw rocks or other found objects?
Such statistical quoting is really fallacious, as you can turn such statistics on their heads! Compared to the number of guns people own and carry, the odds are infinitesimally tiny that one will be shot with their own gun. Furthermore, the fact that a few goofballs using unsafe guns and unsafe methods shoot themselves is irrelevant to the reality that the vast majority of gun-carriers use safe guns and methods, and that vast majority will never be shot with their own or any other gun.
Again, the cops are NO better off on this score. Even they are far more likely to be shot with their own gun than to shoot a criminal. So, again, do you advocate disarming cops? Give us a bunch of unarmed "bobbies" running around like in England?
No thanks!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
What are Christians doing with guns anyway? My guess is they don't really believe in God's good grace and protection.
What are Christians doing with a job anyway? My guess is they don't really believe in God's good grace and providence.
Ridiculous!
|
|
7SacredPools
Trad climber
Guelph, Ontario, Canada
|
|
"What are Christians doing with a job"?
God ran out of manna.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Yet, even with the best police and the best policing strategy in the world, without better state and federal laws to keep guns off the streets and out of the hands of dangerous criminals, we'll continue to face an uphill battle.
This was my favorite line from the article. It's drips with irony!
Chicago has about the strictest gun control laws in the country. They have about the highest rate of illegal gun possession and use among criminals. They also have about the highest murder rate in the country, not to mention other violent crime.
And exactly WHAT proposed federal gun-control laws would "keep guns off the streets and out of the hands of dangerous criminals?" WHICH proposed federal laws would DO this that Illinois/Chicago does not already have in place (to no avail)?
Chicago is THE classic example of that old saw: Make guns illegal, and only criminals will have guns.
I'll tell you what: Take away all of Chicago's gun laws and restrictions, arm the citizens to the teeth, and you'll have an immediate rash of additional shootings. For awhile it will be like the wild, wild west. And then that will peak and subside, and the criminals will be driven back underground. The incidence of shootings will dramatically decrease, as will violent crime in general. Chicago will become safer, and the job of the cops will become easier.
Unless you want a police state, the cops in principle cannot protect the "flock." The flock will continually be fleeced until it grows some horns and starts actively fighting back. Chicago has been a grand and utterly failed experiment in gun control.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Here's my take on gun control, particularly the idea that people should not be allowed to carry guns in public....
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms accomplish only this:
* They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
* They make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants.
* They serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides.
Bottom line is that an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.
**
Wait, to be honest, that's not MY take on gun control. That's the take of Cesare Beccaria's Essay on Crimes and Punishments, quote by Thomas Jefferson's book: The Commonplace Book.
Here's the whole passage:
"The laws of this nature are those which forbid to wear arms, disarming those only who are not disposed to commit the crime which the laws mean to prevent. Can it be supposed, that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, and the most important of the code, will respect the less considerable and arbitrary injunctions, the violation of which is so easy, and of so little comparative importance? Does not the execution of this law deprive the subject of that personal liberty, so dear to mankind and to the wise legislator? and does it not subject the innocent to all the disagreeable circumstances that should only fall on the guilty? It certainly makes the situation of the assaulted worse, and of the assailants better, and rather encourages than prevents murder, as it requires less courage to attack unarmed than armed persons."
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
God ran out of manna.
Now I see that you are not somebody that can be engaged with seriously.
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
I had a buddy of mine who did some roofing in Chicago among various other cities. They were in the south side, in a rough area, doing a big tear off, replacement, etc. and had decided to work through the night to get on the road as soon as possible. Around dark, two cop cars pulled up to their work site and asked them what the hell they were doing. Working through the night, was the reply. The officers laughed heartily at this and asked them if they had guns. The answer was no, at which point the cops informed them that if they were smart, they would leave now, because that was what they were doing themselves. They had just happened to see his roofing crew on their out of the housing project.
|
|
TradEddie
Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
Regarding quoting odds of being shot by my own gun, please offer us, the American public, with the alternative approach to self-defense.
Your question implies that making it harder for criminals to get guns would somehow eliminate your right to bear arms in self defense. Gun control legislation is not mutually exclusive with the right to bear arms, together they are mutually beneficial to "promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty".
I have carried a gun for self defense when I judged that the risks outweighed the benefits, you are entitled to do the same. Perhaps you are forced to live or work in a high crime neighborhood, and have no other employment or residential options, if so, owning or carrying a gun may genuinely improve your safety. For the majority of the population, this is not the case.
Carrying a gun doesn't preclude you from actively supporting legislation that would reduce the odds of ever needing it. Supporting such legislation would undoubtedly save lives, but your buying and carrying a gun is extremely unlikely to.
TE
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
That'd be fine, except nobody's proposing making it harder for criminals to get guns. All the gun control efforts I'm aware of serve only to make it harder for the law abiding to get guns.
It's already illegal for criminals to possess firearms. And if some law-abiding citizen decides to commit his first-ever crime this afternoon, there's an extra added penalty for using a firearm in commission of that crime.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Supporting such legislation would undoubtedly save lives, but your buying and carrying a gun is extremely unlikely to.
Chicago is the grand experiment that demonstrates your perspective here is incorrect.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Ladies need a slightly smaller frame and a softer recoil for a lot of them, so the 9mm is by far the good choice.
I totally agree. My wife can handle our .40, but she's longer getting back on target than is ideal. Even a 9mm is a very solid weapon, and it's certainly better for her.
I'm looking into the Walther because it is almost functionally identical to the P30 (just lacks a slide release, and the safety up/down is reversed). Any thoughts on that? Best concealed gun for my wife?
In my pre-purchase research spanning months, it appears that there is very little difference between the effectiveness of the 9mm vs .40 vs .45. Ammo matters, and shot placement trumps all. I do love the feel of the P30, though. Best gun I've ever shot, by far! Expensive, though.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Perhaps you are forced to live or work in a high crime neighborhood, and have no other employment or residential options, if so, owning or carrying a gun may genuinely improve your safety.
As the Northglenn mugging a few weeks ago demonstrates (and what motivated me to finally take the plunge), you CANNOT know what is a "high crime area." What seems like a decent and safe area simply is not.
If you grant, as you appear to, that packing a gun can be a good thing in a "high crime area," then its goodness is sweeping, as you simply don't know what is "high crime" and what is just you getting mugged or accosted.
If right next door to our office can be a broad-daylight mugging scene, then it can happen anywhere (and actually does).
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
MB, have you considered one of the new Glocks for the wife? From what I've read the new
double spring lessens recoil noticeably.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!