quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I am not even sure what is meant in the title to tell you the truth. But knowing you Bama I can guess.

I think we can agree that when it comes to the misuse of any weapon it is not the weapon itself that causes the death or injury but the mind using it. My point has always been that when it comes to a sick mind we should do our best to keep weapons from their hands. The only way to do this is to classify the weapons very specifically according to their effectiveness as killing machines. Yes knives can kill...so can baseball bats...scissors...swords...and any number of devices...but none of them can kill as effectively as a gun...and none have the reach and the ability to kill at distance as a gun. Therefore guns should have more stringent controls in the same way as high explosives and poisonous chemicals for instance.

However... our Constitution guarantees us the right to own guns... But why cannot people be reasonable about the controls that could at least limit the number of sick and evil minds that can posses and use these efficient killing machines? People always seem to complain about all the laws governing gun ownership saying all they need to do is enforce them. BUT the very same people who refuse to enforce the laws are the ones complaining. They refuse to see the real problems the proliferation of guns is causing in some areas of the country...only because they personally do not have these problems in their areas. The only answer they seem to have is more guns rather then sensible laws to at least attempt to keep guns from the hands of the insane and criminals. Instead of moving forward to a safe civilization with the rights to safely own firearms they want to go back in time to the wild west.

The tragedy of all this is the vast majority of the opponents of sensible gun laws are good law abiding citizens. They see gun laws as a masked attempt to take way their guns rather than a way to make our civilization safer and still follow the Constitution of our land.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
On balance, guns here would lead to a reduced burglary rate but a higher murder rate, because we have just as many idiots (per head) walking the streets as they do over there.

You are probably right on the button. [:D]

But because we don't have the prolific spread of guns amongst the populace, our murder rate is a lot lower and obviously guns deaths are almost (but not quite) non-existent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Your words, nobody else's... because that's how you think.... illogically.
You can frighten people off without a gun.

That is not what I said. You told me it was better to injure someone with a yard broom than to scare them off with a gun. I say that is stupid.

I quoted you. So yes, that IS what you said.
Now quote where I said it was better to injure than scare off assailants; because I didn't say that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

You, on the other hand, are not like this.
You believe -
You need a gun... for defense. You think you are defenseless and a numpty if you don't have one.
You need a gun... to deter would-be thieves and criminals. You don't believe anything less will do.
You need a gun... to attack first. Because to do otherwise means they'll get the jump on you and you're dead.
You need a gun... because... you can't think beyond the end of a muzzle. You can't comprehend a life without one.
You need a gun... because the constitution and the law says you can and have the right to. And by golly, you'll exercise that right... just because you can, and will.


You need to give back your mind reading certificate, wrong on every count.
It is too late to talk about level headed gun owners you already declared all gun owners to be crazy.

You have proved your motives, intentions and total gun mindset through many of your posts.
I declared that people like you, with your type of mindset, are crazy and irresponsible - not everyone.

We speak to quite a few people in the US and they don't react like you have described that you do.
To quote our friend in NC, he said "that man is a nutter and shouldn't be allowed to own a gun".

Wrong on every count?? I don't think so.
I'm not the only one that has made such a comment and most of those similar comments have come from US posters.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

To be fair I have only run into one person that I can think of who preaches this, but does he have followers?
If you agree with him please explain why.

Typical of you Bama.... yet another thread to support guns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Your words, nobody else's... because that's how you think.... illogically.
You can frighten people off without a gun.

That is not what I said. You told me it was better to injure someone with a yard broom than to scare them off with a gun. I say that is stupid.

I quoted you. So yes, that IS what you said.
Now quote where I said it was better to injure than scare off assailants; because I didn't say that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Actually, the title shows his usual divorce from logic:

quote:

Anyone agree that it is better to harm with any other weapon than to avoid violence with a firearm?

So his options are:
1) harm with any other weapon [rather than]
2) avoid violence with a firearm

There's no option for using a firearm here. It's a ridiculous straw man.

I think he meant that if you shoot someone dead, you avoid receiving any violence entirely ... verses getting close enough to stab the assailant and exposing yourself. And if you don't stab them in the throat, you just end up wounding them, hence you only harmed them.

Whatever they meant, I'm in the "shoot them all and let god sort them out" category.

No I mean I have intimidated several people with clear hostile intent through the use of a firearm. No one got hurt, isn't that a prime objective? Those who say that the only use of a firearm is to kill don't know what they are talking about. The consistent result has been that while thinking I was unarmed they have been ready to do me harm, when they realized this would end up with them having lead poisoning they remembered somewhere else they needed to be, like right now. Thus the firearm avoided violence. I would consider shooting them to be violent and thus people like music and freedom would be right, but I have never had to go that far.
The idea that if you don't shoot someone it doesn't count maybe an outgrowth of his lack spinal attributes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I have crack heads living less than 500 yards from me - a whole fucking street full of drunken kossovan nutters.
I can assure you that walking down there with my 2x4 with nails seems to keep them at arms length - drunk, stoned, or sober. [:)]

Something else I've been thinking about. We're constantly being told how ignorant and violent we Americans are. How our "gun culture" is dangerous and we're paranoid, and if only we'd do the sensible thing and get rid of guns we'd be far better off. (I'm paraphrasing, but that does seem to be the gist) So why is it that in the sensible and civilized UK, you don't feel safe walking down the street unless you're armed with an improvised morning-star? (And why do the police there allow this?) Or feel the need to keep other improvised weapons always within arms reach? Either the UK is a lot more dangerous place then other posters here have led us to believe, or maybe you're the paranoid one?

You're calling Bama a redneck. He carries a pistol concealed in a holster. You're walking down the street with a spiked club over your shoulder to, by your own admission, intimidate your neighbors. I know which one of those I'd call a dangerous redneck, but of course you're the civilized one because you don't like guns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305

Let's clarify this a bit, for my sake... This thread talks about 'injuring' someone with a gun v another weapon.

Firstly, here in the Communistwealth of Virginia, there is much more chance of me being arrested for walking around town carrying a 2x4 studded with nails than if I were wearing a holstered firearm. (trust me - this is true without a doubt)

Secondly, if my previous post was not sufficient to understand, IF you run into a life or death situation, where it is necessary to resort to weapons, 'injury' is "NOT my goal - EVER! If there were such a situation the only testimony in my grand jury hearing will be from the coroner, not from the wanna-be attacker turned victim.

Too violent? I think not. IF everyone were willing to defend themselves, their family, and their property to such an extent there would be far fewer violent crimes in this country.

In fact, IF I had the power to dictate policy, EVERY child in this country would be REQUIRED to obtain a high school diploma (and a college degree is they have the aptitude).

And, during that mandatory education, in order to get their diploma, every child would be required to obtain a black belt in at least one martial art.

Along with that requirement, every child would be required to become proficient with various firearms.

Then, upon graduation, every child, on their 18th birthday, would be issued one .45 cal pistol and one M-16 with a lifetime supply of ammunition for each.

IF EVERY adult citizen is trained in armed and unarmed combat, and IF every adult citizen is required to be armed at all times --- how many people do you think would continue breaking into homes? How many would assault women? How many would try to rob 7-11?

Sure, there will be a lot of dead bad guys in the first few years. But, once the new system is stable the problem of violent crime in America (and the overcrowding of the prison system) would be all but eliminated...

I'm positive that this post will open the flood gates of insanity - but, those negative replies just show me how right I am in my thinking that the problem with America is the lack of balls to do what is right and necessary to end the fear that our citizens have come to accept.

It is pure and utter bullshit that, in a country built on freedom, blood and ideals, we have become so pussified that any schoolyard bully can run rampant taking what he wants while we wait for someone else to save the day.

So yes, shoot - shoot to kill. And, in the words of my company commander from years ago --- 'sailor, your job is to eliminate the enemy and protect the citizens of the United States, so, shoot, shoot straight, fk em all and let god sort em out'...

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I have crack heads living less than 500 yards from me - a whole fucking street full of drunken kossovan nutters.
I can assure you that walking down there with my 2x4 with nails seems to keep them at arms length - drunk, stoned, or sober. [:)]

Something else I've been thinking about. We're constantly being told how ignorant and violent we Americans are. How our "gun culture" is dangerous and we're paranoid, and if only we'd do the sensible thing and get rid of guns we'd be far better off. (I'm paraphrasing, but that does seem to be the gist) So why is it that in the sensible and civilized UK, you don't feel safe walking down the street unless you're armed with an improvised morning-star? (And why do the police there allow this?) Or feel the need to keep other improvised weapons always within arms reach? Either the UK is a lot more dangerous place then other posters here have led us to believe, or maybe you're the paranoid one?

You're calling Bama a redneck. He carries a pistol concealed in a holster. You're walking down the street with a spiked club over your shoulder to, by your own admission, intimidate your neighbors. I know which one of those I'd call a dangerous redneck, but of course you're the civilized one because you don't like guns.

It's a good point and well raised - unlike how Bama makes his posts.

I never used to carry anything when I was younger, not even a small pocket knife.
But I'm past my half-century, not exactly in 100% health, and until recently, still had no reason to have a weapon of any sort handy.
When those pesky Kossovans moved into the street about 500 yards from us, it seemed to be taken over by them; although it is more likely just a small gang occupying a handful of houses and making the most noise and disturbance than everyone else put together.

We had a sudden spate of garden thefts, cars being vandalized, houses being broken into, manic joy-riders racing around the streets at 3am etc etc etc. The local co-op shop (a bit like a Mini-Mart) was having problems with those particular locals trashing the shop several times a day and stealing booze. A local single-parent lady got mugged and badly injured and her house was set ablaze with fireworks.
Every time anyone went to the local co-op, you had to run the gauntlet of this local lazy, drugged-up mob with very foul mouths and jeering actions. My OH and our neighbour refused to go there in the end.
Instead of hearing a police siren maybe once a month around here, it was getting to be a constant thing all day and all evening every day of the week.
I went down there once and it was very intimidating. Anyone with a less formidable mindset would be extremely frightened by the mob in the street.
Shortly after that, we found one of them trying to steal our lawnmower from our back garden while another was attempting to climb in through the bathroom window at stupid-o'clock in the morning.
I whacked the one half-inside the window with a yard broom (which conveniently hangs on the wall by the back door) but I'm sure he was so drugged-up or drunk that he didn't feel a thing!!
That was enough to scare both of them off my property. No doubt they went elsewhere for their fun.

That was when I decided it just might be useful to have something a little more substantial for that 'just-in-case' scenario. Even if we had guns, I wouldn't have thought about using one even in this situation - it would be overkill.
I have an old hollow-steel broom/rake handle with a 10" Sabatier chef's knife embedded in one end of it and secured it by whipping string, silicon cement, and covered in silver gaffer tape.
I also got a piece of 2x4 (actually, it was 3x3), filed off the corners for a handle, and embedded about a dozen 6" and 4" nails in one end (as you said, 'morning star' fashion) and I keep that with me next to the bed.
I have been to the local co-op twice while carrying my 'spiky stick' and those louts seemed to make an effort to move well out of my way and relocate across the street. Since then, I have been down there several times and they keep well away from me even when it is obvious that I'm not carrying anything.
We've only had two intrusions into our back garden since then and all I do is watch them. Until they try to steal something or use the darkness to try and break in, that's all I do - watch and wait.

Bama has said several times that he confronts people in that situation and boasted that he used his gun as a deterrent.
I don't. And that's the difference in attitude and why I don't remotely consider myself to be a redneck.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Shooting to wound is only in the movies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I stated, I didn't boast.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
If anything it was a complaint that I had to take such action. But there is no way you will accept that because nothing is important enough to change your mind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
I am glad you escaped harm but the various people who pointed this out are right, you would be arrested for that here as surely as if you walked down the street with a shotgun on your shoulder.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Shooting to wound is only in the movies.

Only in America!! [8|]

Anywhere else, shooting to kill gets you a prison sentence because it is considered 'excessive force'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Shooting to wound means firing at a relatively small moving target.

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305

perhaps, but, a prison sentence for me, while my family is safe - AND - that particular criminal is dead and unable to harm or threaten anyone else is a scenario I can live with... Fortunately, in America, you do not get a prison sentence for a justifiable act of self/family defense...

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Shooting is just not necessary at all, in any situation. Period.

Tell that to the millions of victims of violent crime in this country.

quote:


he calls you 'a nutter' - his words, not mine.

And, likewise, I find people who are unwilling to defend themselves (thus perpetuating the victim mentality in this country) to be 'nutters'...