U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-24-2009, 06:21 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,886 posts, read 12,548,035 times
Reputation: 5210

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Originally Posted by jeepejeep Wrong, killing with a gun is always easier than by hand or with a melee weapon.
All you need to do is point and squeeze the trigger.

Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles Right, are you suggesting that every 11 year old child is so cunning that he would kill a person in their sleep?
It takes real cunning and a malevolent intelligence for a child to come up with a plan like that.
Killing someone with a gun is an act of violence which does not need any particular intelligence or strategy, while using poison or killing someone in their sleep is a premeditated action.
If the 11 year old child shot his mother in her sleep he must be a psychopath and is even more dangerous as having killed his mother in the spur of the moment (read: blinded by rage).
Like I posted before any idiot can handle a gun so you only need to be mad as hell in order to kill with it.

Originally Posted by stycotl LoL you doubt my combat experience?
I may have no actual combat experience regarding firearms but I've enough combat experience with HTH & melee combat.
BTW The Uzi was my personal weapon when I was in the army and because of my experience in melee and HTH combat and the training in the Uzi I'm of the opinion that not every one should be given a gun.


really? did you know that if a person is unarmed and within 21 feet of you that a person who is armed is at a disadvantage?

but whether gun control is right or wrong, where you live also makes a difference. here in the USA we americans pride ourselves on liberty and you europeons like your socialist ways.

please do not try to help the USA down the socialist path, obama is doing enough by himself. I also wish that europeons would stay out of american politics and our Constitutional rights as well.

 
Old 02-24-2009, 08:25 AM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,524,507 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching
Quote:
did you know that if a person is unarmed and within 21 feet of you that a person who is armed is at a disadvantage?
Not necessarily, it depends if the armed person is armed with a ranged weapon (like a gun) or a melee weapon (like club or sword).

Quote:
please do not try to help the USA down the socialist path,
LoL the schools in Russia teach their socialist children how to break down and build up an AK47 blindfolded (all in the name of national safety).
FYI I'm a pragmatist and not a socialist.
But I guess that American capitalists won't know the difference cauz they believe that everyone who isnít fond of guns can only be a socialist, right?
 
Old 02-24-2009, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 641,118 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Not necessarily, it depends if the armed person is armed with a ranged weapon (like a gun) or a melee weapon (like club or sword).

Do you know how to effectively utilize a club or sword in combat? More realistically do you know how to use a knife? Do you even know what the best stance is in a knife fight? Additionally, did you know that knife to knife fights are VERY rare in the street. If somebody attacks you with a knife they typically don't announce the attack from 50-60 feet away, giving you time to draw a gun or knife.

Would you know what to do if somebody charged you with a knife in an overhand fashion? What if they came at you and tried to make a slashing attack? What about a straight thrusting attack?

Unless you're openly carrying a pistol in a holster that is open (has no thumb-break/closed top) you will most likely lose to a knife armed opponent if they attack from within 21 feet. You have to get to your holster which is concealed by a shirt, then open the holster, and draw. It takes more time than you'll have. Using a SERPA style holster reduces the time, resulting in it only taking slightly longer than you need. If you conceal the holster under a coat but not under a shirt, you typically have enough time (especially if you run backwards when the attack starts). If you have a holster that is not covered by anything, and it is a SERPA holster, you can often win against an attack initiated from 10-12 feet as long as you stay calm and have practiced your drawing technique. But then again, how many people want to carry openly in plain view? How many people do that (aside from police).

You don't really know much about self-defense, be it with firearms, knives, or unarmed techniques, do you?
 
Old 02-24-2009, 09:08 AM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,524,507 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles
Quote:
Unless you're openly carrying a pistol in a holster that is open (has no thumb-break/closed top) you will most likely lose to a knife armed opponent if they attack from within 21 feet.
I was talking about an unarmed person and a person armed with a melee weapon.
Or are you claiming that an unarmed opponent is always at an advantage against an armed opponent (whether he is carrying a ranged weapon or a melee weapon)?
 
Old 02-24-2009, 10:24 AM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,834,119 times
Reputation: 1300
Quote:
LoL you doubt my combat experience?
I may have no actual combat experience regarding firearms but I've enough combat experience with HTH & melee combat.
BTW The Uzi was my personal weapon when I was in the army and because of my experience in melee and HTH combat and the training in the Uzi I'm of the opinion that not every one should be given a gun.
sigh. this was the closest i think i've ever come to using an emoticon, because there is no real phrase that describes *smacks head* quite like a picture. as it stands though, i still hate emoticons, and am not planning on making any habits in that direction.

either you are purposefully initiating yet another straw man argument, you are too lazy to look at what i actually said, or you are not bright enough to understand what i said. care to explain which one of the above is correct?

i never said that i doubt your combat experience. if you had actually read my post, you would have understood that. your failure to do so is not hurting my ability to comprehend the conversation in any way, but it is very much hampering your own.

i said that i would be willing to bet that your combat training experience has nothing to do with your views of why americans need to be stripped of liberties that they enjoy.

i'll post it again so that you can see what i said (apparently for the first time).

Quote:
shooting experience actually does count for something in this discussion, because it teaches the normal, intelligent person that guns can be controlled, useful tools that do not warrant fear in and of themselves.

but, shooting experience does not make one an expert on politics or the values of freedom.

either way, if you want to detail how much training you've actually had with those weapon systems, and then explain how you think that your experience with those weapons backs up the completely irrelevant arguments that humanity can't be self-regulated, that weapons are bad, and that ninja kicks are a more valid and moral form of self defense, by all means, have at it.
and lastly, the ongoing argument about whether or not you could whoop someone from 21 feet or not has absolutely nothing to do with the 2nd amendment, and you have been told that numerous times.

further, i find it comforting to note how consistent you are in your refusal to respond to an entire post, but would rather pick one little shiny piece that catches your eye and create all sorts of straw man arguments about it, even while changing definitions and proclaiming numbers and sources that you have yet to back up or verify in any way.

if you were to change that tactic and actually try to respond as if you were actually in a debate (what forum are we in again?), i might not know what to do...

aaron out.
 
Old 02-24-2009, 10:32 AM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,194 posts, read 17,699,095 times
Reputation: 7981
Just have to point out a HUGE error...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickeldude View Post
We need to be responsible with our fire arms, as they are a privilege with dire consequences.
They are NOT a privilege. Keeping and bearing arms is a RIGHT. There's an enormous difference.
 
Old 02-24-2009, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,070,360 times
Reputation: 3717
Default Good point, NV!

NV: you are to be congratulated on your logical decision. I will wager though that if you stop in on the last page of this thread in a few weeks or months (as I have done from time to time), and if the mod still allows it to go on and on and on and on...., that good old TD will still be arguing through his sleeve, actively using his intellect to purposefully annoy and irritate, and to confirm that, yes, those who dislike guns AND also want to further illegally restrict our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, are, in fact, "We Know Best" socialist thugs. By definition.

Thank god we ARE armed and ready for them this time. I'll proudly produce a copy of The Constitution if or when they come for my guns, and then I'll order them off of my private property. Or else.

They won't get away with murdering too many Constitutional defenders, all caught on CNN / Fox, etc. before there's a nation-wide riot.

Simple, within the laws of our Republic, and ethically defensible. "Nuff said. See you all on some other more rational thread!
 
Old 02-24-2009, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,008 posts, read 641,118 times
Reputation: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Originally Posted by OhioUberAllesI was talking about an unarmed person and a person armed with a melee weapon.
Or are you claiming that an unarmed opponent is always at an advantage against an armed opponent (whether he is carrying a ranged weapon or a melee weapon)?

Come at me with a knife and after I've stopped the initial attack, gained control, redirected, broken your arm, sent you to the ground, and taken your knife, you can tell me who had the advantage.

I'm assuming you're not some Army Ranger or Delta Force elite type who knows how to kill with a knife while retaining control over the knife and the situation. The common thug on the street who is going to attack with a knife, will have no idea how to stop a series of disarming moves.
 
Old 02-24-2009, 02:11 PM
 
Location: vagabond
2,631 posts, read 4,834,119 times
Reputation: 1300
sigh. can we get back to the topic and leave the play-by-play karate tournament to another forum?
 
Old 02-24-2009, 02:40 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,567 posts, read 14,524,507 times
Reputation: 1573
Originally Posted by OhioUberAlles
Quote:
Come at me with a knife and after I've stopped the initial attack, gained control, redirected, broken your arm, sent you to the ground, and taken your knife, you can tell me who had the advantage.
LoL, you assume that your HTH combat is better than my melee combat.
It then depends on the individual's combat skills and not the 'superior' weapon.
Gun fetishists assume that a gun is always a superior weapon which, as monkywrenching unintentionally tried to explain, isn't the case.

Originally Posted by stycotl
Quote:
i said that i would be willing to bet that your combat training experience has nothing to do with your views of why americans need to be stripped of liberties that they enjoy.
My opinion has everything to do with the gun fetishist's assumption that a gun is a superior weapon and the fact that a gun is so simple to use that you don't need any real skill or training to kill someone with it.
Like I've posted before it takes more skill and training to kill someone with a melee weapon or with HTH combat than with a gun, while a child armed with a gun can kill an adult without having any proficiency with firearms.
I guess this explains why many Americans believe that the gun is a superior weapon.

Iíve posted way earlier in this gun thread than the most deadliest weapon a man can have is his brain; a superior strategy will beat any opponent who only relies on his weapon ( like most gun fetishists do).
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top