Handguns on the Big Island? (live in, dangerous, safe)

[Salty Water]

Originally Posted by Lapaki

Yes, those are my questions. I’ve tried to envision likely situations in which my having a gun would create a better outcome than my not having a gun, and I can’t think of any. Again, I’m not proficient with guns. I’ve often worried about a situation in which I had to make a split-second decision on whether to shoot someone or not shoot — and whether to shoot to wound or shoot to kill. That’s why I wave such empathy for trained police officers who have to make that decision, and who have to deal with Monday-morning quarterbacks who pore over all the details afterward and judge what they SHOULD have done. Read Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Blink” if you’re interested in how our brains make such split-second decisions.

Well, if it is of any help to you, according to the FBI, when attacked by an armed assailant, the response that results in the least chance of death or serious harm to the victim is by drawing a handgun. It is a strong and serious deterrent.


On the other side of the coin, the response to an attempted assault that carries the greatest chance of death or great bodily harm to the victim is passive non-resistance. This info is from the FBI.



Do as you please, but if something bad happens and you are incapable of anything but passive non-resistance, about the best you can reasonable hope for is an instantaneous kill. That way you won't suffer.

[Lapaki]

Originally Posted by KohalaTransplant

I think you made the right decision.

Good luck on your move to the island.
It seems like it is well thought out and planned.

I suspect you will do just fine, despite some of the negativity you will get on this forum.

Thanks. I’ve lurked on this forum long enough to know the tendencies of the regular posters. Most of the advice given is good. I appreciate the reality checks given to starry-eyed dreamers who clearly have no idea of what life in Hawaii is like. (“I’m a single mom with three kids, a thousand dollars saved, and no real job skills, but I’m willing to do anything for a chance to live in paradise!”)

[Hawk J]

@ Lapaki,
Perhaps, put a few bales of hay outside, with targets on them. Take up the hobby of Rifle Crossbow. It's silent...

Best of Luck & happiness to your Lady & you.

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by KohalaTransplant

And, if the next door neighbor had taken out his gun instead of calling the police, what would you suggest he should have done with it?


How do you suppose that would have ended? Seems like it would have just escalated a situation that otherwise resolved itself.

You’re missing the point. The point is, the police response to shots fired was absent.

[Grassyknoll]

Originally Posted by Hawk J

@ Lapaki,
Perhaps, put a few bales of hay outside, with targets on them. Take up the hobby of Rifle Crossbow. It's silent...

Best of Luck & happiness to your Lady & you.

Correct me of I'm wrong, but aren't crossbows illegal to posses in Hawai'i without some sort of special license?

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Grassyknoll

Correct me of I'm wrong, but aren't crossbows illegal to posses in Hawai'i without some sort of special license?

I don’t think they are. Walmart sells them there

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Lapaki

Yes, those are my questions. I’ve tried to envision likely situations in which my having a gun would create a better outcome than my not having a gun, and I can’t think of any. Again, I’m not proficient with guns. I’ve often worried about a situation in which I had to make a split-second decision on whether to shoot someone or not shoot — and whether to shoot to wound or shoot to kill. That’s why I wave such empathy for trained police officers who have to make that decision, and who have to deal with Monday-morning quarterbacks who pore over all the details afterward and judge what they SHOULD have done. Read Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Blink” if you’re interested in how our brains make such split-second decisions.

Good thinking.

[Lapaki]

Originally Posted by Hawk J

@ Lapaki,
Perhaps, put a few bales of hay outside, with targets on them. Take up the hobby of Rifle Crossbow. It's silent...

Best of Luck & happiness to your Lady & you.

Like Darryl on “The Walking Dead”? And thanks for your good wishes!

[Nyfinestbxtf]

Originally Posted by Lapaki

Yes, those are my questions. I’ve tried to envision likely situations in which my having a gun would create a better outcome than my not having a gun, and I can’t think of any. Again, I’m not proficient with guns. I’ve often worried about a situation in which I had to make a split-second decision on whether to shoot someone or not shoot — and whether to shoot to wound or shoot to kill. That’s why I wave such empathy for trained police officers who have to make that decision, and who have to deal with Monday-morning quarterbacks who pore over all the details afterward and judge what they SHOULD have done. Read Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Blink” if you’re interested in how our brains make such split-second decisions.

Police do not shoot to kill or shoot to wound. Police shoot to eliminate the threat. By eliminating the threat often times leads to death of the perpetrator. Police train to shoot center mass. The reason being is center mass is the largest and slowest moving target. Police do not aim for arms or legs for one they are a smaller target and they are a faster moving target. It is nearly impossible to aim at a moving arm or leg and be successful with landing your round at such a target. It is physiologically impossible for the brain to process information that fast and for the body to react.

That is true. While a police officer has a split second to make a decision, that decision they made is poured over by those who determine if that was the right decision or not over a period of months. Look at the Adam Toledo police shooting. All we were shown on the news was a 13 year old boy with his hands up and empty. The last thing that officer saw prior to fulfilling the squeeze of his trigger was a male with a gun that appeared to be turning with it toward him. The brain doesn’t operate in still shots. That’s why that police shooting is a 100% justified.

With that said, there are many situations that would benefit you having a gun, but they are more than not likely to happen. That is why the saying goes “it is better to have a gun and not need it rather than not having a gun and need one.”

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Nyfinestbxtf

Police do not shoot to kill or shoot to wound. Police shoot to eliminate the threat. By eliminating the threat often times leads to death of the perpetrator. Police train to shoot center mass. The reason being is center mass is the largest and slowest moving target. Police do not aim for arms or legs for one they are a smaller target and they are a faster moving target. It is nearly impossible to aim at a moving arm or leg and be successful with landing your round at such a target. It is physiologically impossible for the brain to process information that fast and for the body to react.

That is true. While a police officer has a split second to make a decision, that decision they made is poured over by those who determine if that was the right decision or not over a period of months.

With that said, there are many situations that would benefit you having a gun, but they are more than not likely to happen. That is why the saying goes “it is better to have a gun and not need it rather than not having a gun and need one.”

True.

That said, an airman’s philosophy under fire is: loose as many rounds of the largest caliber possible in the general direction of threat and let large scale obliteration write the obit.

Dark humor aside, the essence of this OP’s conundrum lies in the likelihood of your last two words: “need one.”

And your previous sentence - “but they are more than not likely to happen” - well sums up life in most places in America … and very especially so in Hawaii.

I assume you meant, by the way, that situations calling for firearm protection are “not likely to happen.” The wording as you wrote it is vague.