Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
TexasReb - yes, you misunderstood me. Another poster had an issue with semi auto. Non shooters tend to classify guns according to their understanding. Harry homeowner may go to the range occasionally. How will he handle an aggressive armed intruder? Single shot is nice but will it do the job? I doubt it. Stick to your guns in the sense of the word is what a rural sheriff told me years ago:>)
Seems like something urban gangsters would do, but each to their own.
Silly comparison, guns are tools designed to kill and are
Primarily used for that purpose, this is not true for
Cars or knifes.
The most important thing you typed was "guns are tools". All tools can be misused and certainly guns are. Just because they were designed with a goal in mind does not mean that goal is their only appropriate use.
My father used a chain saw to prep building for new roof extensions. I doubt the lumber industry had that in mind when they developed the chainsaw, but it was a very good use for it.
Knives were indeed designed to kill. Their primary purpose and development has been to the goal of self defense and warfare. Modern weaponry has diminished that role, but has not eliminated it. Watch Rambo if you doubt the modern knife design is appropriate for killing.
Cars are, of course, not designed for killing; but they do an extremely good job of it. There are cases every year where the car is intentionally used to kill or injure people. There were two reports this week of cars being used in terrorist attacks against people by being driven intentionally into crowds. Many more are misused as shrapnel in the manufacture of car bombs.
Guns are extremely useful for recreational purposes other than hunting and killing. Target shooting, marksmanship competitions, plinking, Skeet and Trap shooting, etc. Most police will affirm that killing is the last choice when using a gun to combat criminals. The presence of the gun and the ability to use it is often sufficient to deter the escalation of violence. The desire of most (if not almost all) gun owners is to never kill anyone with it. Only those with military intent or criminals with abuse in mind actually have premeditated intent to kill someone.
=Threestep;37168505]TexasReb - yes, you misunderstood me. Another poster had an issue with semi auto. Non shooters tend to classify guns according to their understanding. Harry homeowner may go to the range occasionally. How will he handle an aggressive armed intruder? Single shot is nice but will it do the job? I doubt it. Stick to your guns in the sense of the word is what a rural sheriff told me years ago:>)
Actually, I don't think I completely did (misunderstand, that is). My point was that many "Harry homeowners -- as you call them -- are, in at least my part of the country -- are very familiar with firearms -- and have at least -- if not more competence with their use -- than lots of police officers whose knowledge of them is limited to their police academy training and only have to qualify once a year or so. Especially true of the urban areas of the beltway and west coast. I don't know what rural sheriff you talked to, but in what part of the country was it. I used to work at a sheriffs office in a rural county and know a little about it all.
And who said anything about one shot doing the job?. I said that in actual combat that anyone (or at least most) are going to be scared for their lives and they (civilian or police) are going to react instinctively; and probably even understand what is really going on and what he/she needs to do is going to be governed according to the immediate moment. I really don't understand why you say different unless, perhaps, we are just talking past each other a bit...which is always possible.
But yes, I agree that many anti-second amendment people -- especially in (loosely called "blue-states") tend to classify semi-automatics in language of which they don't know that the hell they are talking about. I can definitely go along with that...if that is what you are saying. They call them (generally) "assault weapons" because they use emotional type language to convince others who share a general fear of guns, anyway.
Can anyone define an "assault weapon."? I have seen so many anti-gun politicians make total fools of themselves in front of audiences who don't have a clue themselves.
Can anyone define an "assault weapon."? I have seen so many anti-gun politicians make total fools of themselves in front of audiences who don't have a clue themselves.
I have asked that question over and over. US law has no definition. Personally I am a believer in Mossberg.
What about the case of murder by stiletto heel in Texas? High heels can be deadly let's wear flats
It's not my anger, my friend.. I'm actually being more sarcastic than anything.. I really haven't lost a minute of sleep over this thread.
And, my example of the madman coming into the house with a knife to murder the guy and his family is not so far fetched.. These things happen. Perhaps, your background is not diverse enough to have been put into a threatening situation where your life or someone you loved was in jeopardy and at short notice needed a very quick solution to save you. I have been in those situations. And, if you are as brilliant as you say, what would you do in the situation that a threatening individual comes into your house and charges into the bedroom with a knife of your children? How fast are you at dialing 9-1-1? You are intelligent, so please either tell me what is wrong with my example or come up with a feasible and intelligible answer to the question.. Thank you!
As for me, I am quite diverse and have been in all types of situations and in all types of places.. Maybe, it is you who are being a bit too quick on the trigger to judge me? No Pun Intended
I am not angry at all.. I just find the people who are so freaked out about guns and fed the blind propaganda to be a bit disconcerting. More for themselves, than for me.
I'm doing just fine.. It sounds to me that you more have a problem with my viewpoints rather than my way of expressing them. Let's call a spade a spade..
Glad your family had a nice birthday celebration!
Those things do happen... overwhelmingly with guns as they empower people to be able to do such things in ways knives never could. Your entire premise is a rather pointless strawman as the thread is debating a possible "gun epidemic," not the value of having a gun in a knife fight.
As for the bold: first part, yep, there sure are plenty of people like that, and they are a problem for having a serious discussion about this issue. You are an example of the same thing on the other side with your ridiculous examples and random attacks on people through political labels (regardless of how they even feel on this issue). The Nazis??? Were you honestly serious with that example? This all ties into the second bold, no, 100% my criticism is aimed at how you expressed your viewpoints; you don't know what my opinion even is on this subject so that's a bold claim.
=Threestep;37182289]I have asked that question over and over. US law has no definition. Personally I am a believer in Mossberg.
What about the case of murder by stiletto heel in Texas? High heels can be deadly let's wear flats
You are correct. There is no definition, because anti-gun demagogues/politicians do not want one. But the appellation appeals to those who know next to nothing about guns at all. It always amuses me when these anti-gun people -- on news or talk shows -- are seriously challenged to define what they mean by the term, and make total asses out of themselves trying to do so! LOL
But anyway, I believe in the Mossberg too. I have one with interchangeable barrels, and the one I keep attached is the "short-barrel." Ain't nothing like the sound of a .12 gauge shell being racked into the chamber to convince the intruder that perhaps he picked the wrong house...and nothing like being blasted with a load of #4 buck to know it for certain!
I support the right of reasonable people to own reasonable guns. No person not in police or millitary needs a semi automatic rifle. I also think it's responsible to chose not to own a gun, if you do to keep them securely locked away. Too many people have been killed because a loaded gun was nearby during a heated argument. In my TV market there are probably 5 husband / wife murder suicides each year.
Bingo! Good, sensible post.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or a hammer, or a knife... 
