[split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-11-2014, 04:07 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 03:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  What part of 'economic necessity' don't you understand?

I mean run away from the person, I don't know where economic necessity came from, but I need to speak a little better next time.

(14-11-2014 03:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  Criminals already do this. Facepalm

Otherwise law-abiding people would do this. I don't have to wait and see, many gun owners I know would do this.

Legislation that so clearly violates the Second Amendment would be defied by millions of gun owners.

If that is the case why not do gun laws like japan? they have a 0.3 murder rate compared to our 4.9 murder rate.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 04:17 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 03:58 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 03:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  That's not a realistic home defense scenario. Nor is it a situation I am likely to confront.

I have trained for home defense scenarios.

Most home invasions are for burglary. And if there's any plan at all, it's to wait until nobody's home, or failing that, to incapacitate whoever is before doing anything else.

Or is that just me projecting, because that's how I'd burgle?
Consider

Yabut, you're not stupid and probably aren't mentally ill or suffer from impulse control problems or drug addiction. Probably. Consider

Home invasions are a real thing.

Quote:
(14-11-2014 03:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Firing a warning shot is not a good idea.

Sure, but that's extremely contingent on legal particulars.

The obvious counterpoint is that "I feared for my life" is also pretty damn ambiguous and problematic.

Well, meth-addicted twenty-something guy breaks in to my house at 4AM: do I fear for my life? Yup, pretty unambiguous.

Drunk twenty-something woman banging on the front door at 1AM: do I fear for my life? Probably not, but I'd be wary - like maybe the meth-addicted boyfriend is hiding in the shadows.

We can come up with any number of scenarios, but reality usually sorts out pretty well.

Quote:
(14-11-2014 03:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Depends on the number of henchmen and how they're armed. I'm pretty handy with a shotgun and an AR.

Well, of course. The retirement clause doesn't apply to the already-retired. Never underestimate a grizzled, crotchety old man!
Tongue

I ain't retired. Angry

Quote:
(14-11-2014 03:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  True. I think the adults of each household need to make that assessment based on their own situation.

I'm not a big guy and I'm slightly handicapped, getting older, living out of sight of the street and neighbors, I'm usually alone and with no children in the house.
I am experienced in the use of firearms, I store them safely, and I've had some training. I am not a convicted felon.

I think reasonable policy would be that I get to have a gun.

Of course. If anyone's knowledgeable and responsible, you are.

Senses mild sarcasm. Dodgy

Quote:My view is that there is not a qualitative difference between types of weapons . Be it guns, knives, sticks, hands...

Not at all sure of your meaning there. Consider

Quote:
(14-11-2014 03:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  Could I have a firearm accident? Sure, but it is unlikely.
Could my firearm be stolen? Sure, but it is unlikely.
Will I get angry and shoot my spouse? Nope - no spouse.

Firearms policy is probably not one-size-fits-all, but I don't really know what the parameters are.

... but the law does not and cannot fit individual circumstances, either. Like I said, there are pros and cons to every aspect of policy, and there's no single way to decide what's "best".

The law does, in fact, provide for differing circumstances. The courts provide for individual circumstances.
When

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 04:18 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 04:07 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 03:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  Criminals already do this. Facepalm

Otherwise law-abiding people would do this. I don't have to wait and see, many gun owners I know would do this.

Legislation that so clearly violates the Second Amendment would be defied by millions of gun owners.

If that is the case why not do gun laws like japan? they have a 0.3 murder rate compared to our 4.9 murder rate.

... but murder rates for developed countries don't correlate with gun ownership. Nor even do firearm-related homicides. There are a lot more factors influencing (violent) crime rates.

Firearm-related homicide is at most 1/3 of all homicides in Canada, for instance - from Statscan:
[Image: c-g04-eng.gif]

Canada's not on this chart, but we're essentially tied with France:
[Image: Guns.png]

France, with the same rate of gun ownership (defined per-capita) has half the gun-related homicide rate; the United States, with three times the ownership rate, has seven times the related homicide rate...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 04:24 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:Well, of course. The retirement clause doesn't apply to the already-retired. Never underestimate a grizzled, crotchety old man!
Tongue

I ain't retired. Angry

I know that.
standard old person joke, okay?

(14-11-2014 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:Of course. If anyone's knowledgeable and responsible, you are.

Senses mild sarcasm. Dodgy

No, I'm actually quite sincere about that, judging from your posting history on the topic.

(14-11-2014 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:My view is that there is not a qualitative difference between types of weapons . Be it guns, knives, sticks, hands...

Not at all sure of your meaning there. Consider

I mean that crime will happen regardless, and that whatever one's response to personal situations one will be legally bound to respond proportionately.

(14-11-2014 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
Quote:... but the law does not and cannot fit individual circumstances, either. Like I said, there are pros and cons to every aspect of policy, and there's no single way to decide what's "best".

The law does, in fact, provide for differing circumstances. The courts provide for individual circumstances.

Well, yes, there are of course varying provisions. But at some point there are generalisations. Now, the point of having a human judge and jury is in part to accomodate the nuance that can't be written into the law...

There's no law that will satisfy everyone and there's no law that won't admit of exceptions, is what I'm saying.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 04:24 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 04:07 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 03:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  What part of 'economic necessity' don't you understand?

I mean run away from the person, I don't know where economic necessity came from, but I need to speak a little better next time.

(14-11-2014 03:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  Criminals already do this. Facepalm

Otherwise law-abiding people would do this. I don't have to wait and see, many gun owners I know would do this.

Legislation that so clearly violates the Second Amendment would be defied by millions of gun owners.

If that is the case why not do gun laws like japan? they have a 0.3 murder rate compared to our 4.9 murder rate.

Why not do like Switzerland? They have a 0.6 murder rate compared to our 4.7 murder rate and the 4th highest rate of gun ownership in the world.

The rate of gun ownership does not directly correlate with homicide rate.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
14-11-2014, 04:49 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 03:03 PM)wazzel Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 02:52 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Keep in mind in dangerous areas many of those people are weak without there guns. In a crime ridden city, a small feeble man with a gun can take something from a large powerful man with no gun. Take away guns and that feeble man won't think about taking on anyone. Keep in mind robbers and murders do want to leave the area without being injured.

Since you consider guns to make absolute difference the invers is also true. Large men are no longer afraid that a small man might have a gun. Now that there are no guns large men have no fear of small men (or women) and take them on at will. Large men rob a smaller man or woman with little risk of death or sever harm.

Look at you. All logical and shit

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
14-11-2014, 05:07 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 04:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 04:07 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  I mean run away from the person, I don't know where economic necessity came from, but I need to speak a little better next time.


If that is the case why not do gun laws like japan? they have a 0.3 murder rate compared to our 4.9 murder rate.

Why not do like Switzerland? They have a 0.6 murder rate compared to our 4.7 murder rate and the 4th highest rate of gun ownership in the world.

The rate of gun ownership does not directly correlate with homicide rate.

Fair enough

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 06:19 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 04:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  Why not do like Switzerland? They have a 0.6 murder rate compared to our 4.7 murder rate and the 4th highest rate of gun ownership in the world.

The rate of gun ownership does not directly correlate with homicide rate.

The Swiss still have a high suicide rate by guns, and have had one mass shooting within the last five years (I can't remember when exactly). They are also trained how to use guns from early childhood, gun ownership is a part of their cultural identity, not just a machismo feeling like in the states. It's a total unrealistic comparison.

Atir aissom atir imon
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 06:32 PM
Re: RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
(14-11-2014 06:19 PM)Im_Ryan Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 04:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  Why not do like Switzerland? They have a 0.6 murder rate compared to our 4.7 murder rate and the 4th highest rate of gun ownership in the world.

The rate of gun ownership does not directly correlate with homicide rate.

The Swiss still have a high suicide rate by guns, and have had one mass shooting within the last five years (I can't remember when exactly). They are also trained how to use guns from early childhood, gun ownership is a part of their cultural identity, not just a machismo feeling like in the states. It's a total unrealistic comparison.

If you are blaming the gun for causing the problem then it is a great comparison. Obviously the gun is not the problem it is the people that are misusing them. Perhaps we need to take a few notes from the Swiss.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-11-2014, 08:11 PM
RE: [split] Firearm Education Thread (lots of pics)
Should this have been in the other part of the Firearm Education Thread? I presume it doesn't matter.
(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  What about the concealed carry laws? What do they do in areas that you're in? What should they do?

I don't understand what you're asking.
Allow me to rephrase the question:
What are the concealed carry laws for? What should they be for/ how would you change them?

(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  -Gun collecting is presumeably a thing you support; do you have a different opinion when the rationale behind owning the weapon is for the sake of owning the weapon as opposed to self defense or hunting or somethong?

'Gun collecting' is generally thought of has owning for the sake of having, not necessarily for use.
Yes. That's exactly what I said. I was asking: If the rationale behind gun ownership being OK is that they serve a purpose, how you you feel about guns that don't serve that purpose?

I asked a couple of other questions in the same vein. The automatics one for example.
(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  -At what point is a, hypothetical, "best gun" (The gun that fires the most rounds, most accurately, with the greatest ability to contain rounds) overkill for the role it was purchased for?
That's too nebulous. Hunting rifles usually have a magazine capacity of 1 to 10 rounds, but may be capable of having larger magazines. It partly depends on what you're hunting.
For defensive weapons, many consider more magazine capacity as better. That's one reason there are extended magazines. For concealed carry, there is a trade-off between size/weight and concealability.
Oh. OK.

(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  Everybody:
-What would people say if the standard bullet type changed to less lethal amunition? (Rubber bullets or beanbag rounds or something.)
There is no 'standard bullet type'. And the criminals aren't going to pay any attention.
True enough. I'm at least demonstrating what I meant when I said that I wasn't particularly well informed on the subject. Rephrasing again:
-If a new type of bullet is sufficient to serve the task the gun has been purchased for and less dangerous in potentially extremely hazardous scenarios, isn't it "better," a nebulous, ill defined "better," for those bullets to be more widely used?

(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  - I mean: If you're purchasing a shotgun for home defense is it a better option to pick SABOT or birdshot?
Neither, although either will be effective at close range.
What I mean is: SABOT is, to my understanding, specifically for armour penitration, doesn't that make it overkill for that scenario? Couldn't that be extended out to a whole host of other guns purchased for the same role?

(14-11-2014 08:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-11-2014 08:15 AM)Stuffed_Assumption_Meringue Wrote:  -Would anybody ever need the more specialised ammo types?

What are these 'more specialised ammo types'? What's 'standard'?

[Image: sound7.jpg]

And that's just one caliber.
I mean things like this:



I know the Geneva Convention doesn't cover civilian behaviour but isn't that the sort of thing that's specifically mentioned in them as being "excessive bodily harm?

(OK. Yes. It looks cool.)
(14-11-2014 10:06 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  I'm on my mobile and it takes forever to delete the parts I'm not responding to.

1) shotguns for home defense - in my and only my opinion - are not that great. While buckshot is effective for close range, I prefer accuracy. I don't want to inadvertently harm anyone else.

And 2)

Hollow points improve accuracy by virtue of stopping in the target instead of passing through the target, and into an unintended target
Points understood.

Soulless mutants of muscle and intent. There are billions of us; hardy, smart and dangerous. Shaped by millions of years of death. We are the definitive alpha predator. We build monsters of fire and stone. We bottled the sun. We nailed our god to a stick.

In man's struggle against the world, bet on the man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: