Guns

[Imari]

He's not really wrong.

I guess, but the irony is pretty amusing.

 

[Tornado]

Darn, I already had a huge reply typed up at work that I forgot to post before I left. I guess I'll just trim it down.

Both you and Northstar like the idea that no situation exists where a rifle is required for home defense.

Nope. I expressed skepticism that there was ever a situation that it would be the best option, and pointed out that your two examples were not proof of that.

I gave you an example - a jurisdiction where a minor may not legally possess a handgun.

In a jurisdiction where a minor is prohibited from possessing a hand gun.

I get that you blew right by it the first time, but repeatedly going back to the 15 year old (and 12 year old) with unsurpervised, unrestricted access to an AR-15 isn't a really the best argument you could have used.

Reading is not your strong suite

Nope. I understood exactly what you were trying to say. It just wasn't anywhere near as clever as you clearly thought it was.


And it's "suit".

Your choice to not use a semi-auto rifle as home defense weapon is yours. Its a poor choice if you have rifles at your disposal.

I'm 5'10" and weigh 210 pounds. I don't really have to worry about being too slender of frame to properly use a shotgun, but I guess now I'll never know why it is a poor option anyway.

 

[Danoff]

I'm 5'10" and weigh 210 pounds. I don't really have to worry about being too slender of frame to properly use a shotgun, but I guess now I'll never know why it is a poor option anyway.

Since you're interested...

Hundguns are the best option for close quarters and concealment. If you're in a tight space, it's not always easy to swing the boom stick around and not run into a wall or a door jam, preventing you from reacting in time. If you've got narrow hallways, short sightlines and a lot of obstruction - handguns are the way to go. Also if you need to carry in public in a place where open carry is banned. Concealed carry can also offer the element of surprise in a situation where you might be assumed to be the unarmed public - such as a terrorist jihad or a movie theater getting shot up or a bank robbery or somesuch where you might be the first target if you open-carry.

Shotguns are the best option for longer sightlines and more maneuverability but still relatively close to medium range. This is why everyone loves them for self defense. If you have room for the boom stick, it does the job nicely. You get a longer barrel to improve aim and a wide spread of shot to improve your aim even more. A recoil reducing stock should eliminate any problems with kick for slender framed people or just to prevent you from having to do a major re-aim after each shot. Teeth on the end of the barrel is a plus. Buckshot also doesn't travel through walls the way bullets do, so you're less likely to do collateral damage. Also stopping power is good with lots of momentum transferred to the target. Shotguns don't work out in public generally - too scary.

There's another plus for the shotgun which is that the pump action makes noise (noise means they run away) and indicates a deliberate choice to fire the weapon later when you're in court talking about the altercation. It's easier for a lawyer to argue that a handgun or semi-auto rifle had the hair trigger accidentally fired. You can't squeeze off as many shots with a pump action, but that's not always a bad thing. You are more likely to be in that courtroom with a shotgun because the person is more likely to survive a partial shotgun hit than a bullet. That's a good trade though because the partial shotgun hit makes contact whereas the bullet would have missed altogether.

Bolt/Pump action Rifles are not awesome for home defense. Reload times are lengthened, aim is improved over a handgun for long range, but you get one bullet and that bullet is going to travel (as opposed to the shotgun). They're not great for close quarters, and they don't have the stopping power of a shotgun. These are longer range weapons better suited for sniping deer than for responding to an intruder. It's really a better offensive (sniping) weapon than defensive (reacting) weapon. Sometimes the best defense is a good offense, but this is not a great solution.

Semi-Automatic Rifles are not awesome for home defense for many of the same reasons as the rifles above, with the exception that you can squeeze off more shots so that if you miss you can try again. Where semi-automatic rifles excel is in defense of a ranch or larger area of land where you have to shoot across a much larger range and have more targets. If you were a black person in the deep south and saw 12 guys with torches and white hoods headed for your farmhouse, a semi-auto rifle would be your weapon of choice. The precision is also good if you're worried not about going through walls (again, think farmhouse) but instead about hitting someone near the attacker. For example, if the bad guy is in your daughter's room and she's within 45 degrees of your sight, you might think twice about pulling the trigger on a shotgun and not about pulling the trigger on a rifle.

It's a great choice for military who often cannot afford to be as imprecise as a shotgun due to the expectation of bystanders in the vicinity, long range engagement, protracted engagement involving many shots, shots requiring precision due to cover, and the presence of many targets.

Automatic Rifles are an awesome weapon for terrorists or people bent on shooting up a movie theater and not so great for good guys. Even military generally don't go full auto with their weapons, instead preferring burst fire to conserve ammunition and maintain precision.

 

[MatskiMonk]

@Danoff is domestic accessibility a factor? By which I mean, do some of the above groups have to be kept under lock and key, or can you just 'keep them under your bed'.

 

[Danoff]

@Danoff is domestic accessibility a factor? By which I mean, do some of the above groups have to be kept under lock and key, or can you just 'keep them under your bed'.

Depends on your situation and the laws of the state you live in.

 

[Northstar]

Awwe... You just needed your hand held and to be spoon fed?

Actually I want to learn more, but people like you make me wonder if it's even worth it...

Also, how much trouble did that 15 teal old in the one video get into for illegally using a firearm?

 

[Danoff]

I want to know how it is that we start talking about gun laws in the wake (or in the midst) of the San Bernardino shooting. Do we think that someone who has decided to embrace ISIS and pledged to kill any non-muslims suddenly decides that they don't feel like it if certain guns are banned? Do we think that it would have made a difference in that case at all?

I think, largely, people want to ignore the actual impact that any proposed legislation might actually have and just do something, anything, some sort of symbol that suggests that we've taken some step, no matter how pointless, so that we can say we did something.

The idea that the US constitution comes under criticism as a result of, effectively, foreign terrorism is ridiculous. It's blaming the victim.

 

[BobK]

I want to know how it is that we start talking about gun laws in the wake (or in the midst) of the San Bernardino shooting. Do we think that someone who has decided to embrace ISIS and pledged to kill any non-muslims suddenly decides that they don't feel like it if certain guns are banned? Do we think that it would have made a difference in that case at all?

Sort of like this:

 

[MatskiMonk]

The idea that the US constitution comes under criticism as a result of, effectively, foreign terrorism is ridiculous. It's blaming the victim.

Puts me in mind of people who won't leave abusive relationships. You end up loosing any sympathy, or getting frustrated with them.

 

[jimipitbull]

I want to know how it is that we start talking about gun laws in the wake (or in the midst) of the San Bernardino shooting. Do we think that someone who has decided to embrace ISIS and pledged to kill any non-muslims suddenly decides that they don't feel like it if certain guns are banned? Do we think that it would have made a difference in that case at all?

I think, largely, people want to ignore the actual impact that any proposed legislation might actually have and just do something, anything, some sort of symbol that suggests that we've taken some step, no matter how pointless, so that we can say we did something.

The idea that the US constitution comes under criticism as a result of, effectively, foreign terrorism is ridiculous. It's blaming the victim.

How does domestic terrorism, effectively, be called foreign terrorism after a couple of weeks?

 

[Danoff]

How does domestic terrorism, effectively, be called foreign terrorism after a couple of weeks?

What do you think counts as foreign terrorism? Does 9/11 count? Or is that domestic?

 

[TenEightyOne]

What do you think counts as foreign terrorism? Does 9/11 count? Or is that domestic?

Of course - Bush did it!

I think @jimipitbull is pointing out that the perpetrators were living/working in the US rather than a mobile "cell" that came in from outside simply to undertake the act.

 

[Danoff]

Of course - Bush did it!

I think @jimipitbull is pointing out that the perpetrators were living/working in the US rather than a mobile "cell" that came in from outside simply to undertake the act.

We don't think she entered the US to undertake the act? Some of the 9/11 hijackers lived in the US at least as long as she did.

On December 16, FBI Director James Comey said: "We can see from our investigation that in late 2013, before there is a physical meeting of these two people [Farook and Malik] resulting in their engagement and then journey to the United States, they are communicating online, showing signs in that communication of their joint commitment to jihad and to martyrdom. Those communications are direct, private messages.

So... she was planning a terrorist attack before coming to the US, and she was not a US citizen, and she was in the US about as long as the 9/11 hijackers.... so... this is obviously domestic.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Of course - Bush did it!

I think @jimipitbull is pointing out that the perpetrators were living/working in the US rather than a mobile "cell" that came in from outside simply to undertake the act.

It appears they were motivated by a "cause" that was not based in the United States but a foreign country and for "reasons" that benefit a foreign power. It's also likely that Mrs. Terrorist was radicalized long before she got here and the marriage was somewhat of a sham to begin with.

On another note, coming soon to a screen near you:
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...y-uproots-to-montana-to-open-gun/?intcmp=hpff

Louie Tuminaro uprooted his family from Long Island, New York, for greener pastures in Hamilton, Montana. If that sounds like the plot of "Green Acres," that's because it basically is.

Tuminaro and his colorful family turned their move into a reality show called "The Gunfather" on Outdoor Channel. He spoke to FOX411 about his decision to sell his businesses, drop everything and start dealing, selling and restoring collectible firearms.

'Murica!!

 

[Kent]

Just going to leave this here...

 

[Danoff]

It's very good. I disagree with the judge he quotes saying that the 2nd amendment is a doomsday amendment. That's not how the supreme court construes it. It's an amendment preserving a right to self-defense (which I think is a much more defensible construction). That includes doomsday scenarios but it also includes many common scenarios.

 

[TVR27]

 

[A2K78]

the awesome L. Vance perfectly describe the 2nd

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/05/01/ten-thoughts-on-the-second-amendment-and-gun-control/

 

[LeMansAid]

Use for a gun #14678 - almost adding a story to the Darwin Awards.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Use for a gun #14678 - almost adding a story to the Darwin Awards.

Other than you trying to get a rise...not sure what else you expect. It's been covered before, stupid people that don't hide or secure their guns away from young children shouldn't own them. The mother clearly didn't teach the kid proper respect for firearms either, since she clearly sees them as toys by extension he probably does too, but his defense is simply being a child with a dumb mother.

All you've proven is something agreed on all along by both sides, stupid and dangerous people (both sometimes synonymous) shouldn't own them. Thus preventing accidents from happening.

 

[LeMansAid]

trying to get a rise

Nope.

It's been covered before, stupid people that don't hide or secure their guns away from young children shouldn't own them. The mother clearly didn't teach the kid proper respect for firearms either, since she clearly sees them as toys by extension he probably does too, but his defense is simply being a child with a dumb mother.

All you've proven is something agreed on all along by both sides, stupid and dangerous people (both sometimes synonymous) shouldn't own them. Thus preventing accidents from happening.

Yep.

 

[Johnnypenso]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/10/us/mississippi-escaped-murder-suspect-killed/index.html

After more than a week on the lam, escaped murder suspect Rafael Arnez McCloud was shot dead during a home invasion Thursday, authorities said. "It appears at this time that Rafael McCloud entered the home, attacked the occupants of the home and at some point the occupant of the home was able to retrieve their own gun and Rafael McCloud was shot and killed in their own home," Warren County Sheriff Martin Pace told CNN.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/10/us/mississippi-escaped-murder-suspect-killed/index.html

Saved tax dollars?

 

[Swagger897]

Yeah I don't see a significant headline for anything?

 

[CodeRedR51]

Senate Fails To Pass Gun Control Measures Inspired By Orlando Shooting

Hopefully this is in the right thread now.

 

[Swagger897]

Hmmm, by that logic by politicians you'd assume guns' have legs and traveled to the club themselves..

 

[MisterWaffles]

It seems a common logic to pro-gun people is that "guns don't kill people, people kill people". I counter that by stating that it would be much harder to commit a mass shooting with a screwdriver, wouldn't it?

 

[Rallywagon]

It seems a common logic to pro-gun people is that "guns don't kill people, people kill people". I counter that by stating that it would be much harder to commit a mass shooting with a screwdriver, wouldn't it?

And pro gun logic would, it would be a lot harder to stop a massing shooting with a screwdriver as well.

 

[LeMansAid]

It seems a common logic to pro-gun people is that "guns don't kill people, people kill people". I counter that by stating that it would be much harder to commit a mass shooting with a screwdriver, wouldn't it?

Much more difficult with a piece of paper than that deadly screwdriver though, if you're talking relativity.

 

[Johnnypenso]

And pro gun logic would, it would be a lot harder to stop a massing shooting with a screwdriver as well.

It's a lot harder to turn a screw with a gun vs. a screwdriver but nails aren't out of the question.