Owning guns is saving your life and property

If you live in a crime infested area without adequate police protection, don’t delude yourself in thinking you will be safe with a handgun. (You would be safer by investing in better locks for your doors and windows.) If you feel that you absolutely must have a gun, then buy yourself a 12 bore double-barreled shotgun; keep it loaded and ready to hand. Unless you are a police academy (or military trained) expert with a handgun, it will not be adequate protection from an intruder or assailant bent on doing you harm; and even if you are a qualified expert, it would not be the weapon of choice, as any police officer or combat veteran will tell you.
 
Hope some bubba shoots your dog asshole

Nah, all the bubbas around here know me. Now if some cajun (especially one who brags about his education) were to TRY and shoot my dog, I would happily return fire.
 
If you live in a crime infested area without adequate police protection, don’t delude yourself in thinking you will be safe with a handgun. (You would be safer by investing in better locks for your doors and windows.) If you feel that you absolutely must have a gun, then buy yourself a 12 bore double-barreled shotgun; keep it loaded and ready to hand. Unless you are a police academy (or military trained) expert with a handgun, it will not be adequate protection from an intruder or assailant bent on doing you harm; and even if you are a qualified expert, it would not be the weapon of choice, as any police officer or combat veteran will tell you.

A handgun is always a compromise. But keeping a 12 gauge shotgun stored safely, and yet readily available is much harder. Not to mention the recoil of the gun, which would mean a lot of smaller men and many women would not enjoy shooting the gun. Not shooting it means not practicing, which means a lack of proficiency. The length of the average shotgun also means a lack of maneuverability inside a home. While a shotgun works great if I am outside seeing what is driving my dog crazy (vermin & wild animals), it is not as good inside. One big plus to a shotgun, especially a pump gun, is that the sound of racking a round in the chamber is likely to dissuade potential attackers.

My personal opinion is that a double action revolver is the ideal home protection gun. It is easily stored safely and still almost instantly accessible. A short barrelled .38 Special or .357 is ideal. Even better if equipped with a Crimson Trace laser grip. My wife's revolver is locked away but accessible in less than a second, has a Crimson Trace grip, and the first round is a .38 shotshell. She is not police or military trained, but between family shooting for fun and her own protective instinct, it will more than suffice.
 
If you live in a crime infested area without adequate police protection, don’t delude yourself in thinking you will be safe with a handgun. (You would be safer by investing in better locks for your doors and windows.) If you feel that you absolutely must have a gun, then buy yourself a 12 bore double-barreled shotgun; keep it loaded and ready to hand. Unless you are a police academy (or military trained) expert with a handgun, it will not be adequate protection from an intruder or assailant bent on doing you harm; and even if you are a qualified expert, it would not be the weapon of choice, as any police officer or combat veteran will tell you.

where does this supremely insane notion that cops and soldiers are highly trained weapons experts come from? Most places I've lived, cops only qualify with their handguns ONE time a year. Marines as well. The extra training that makes them more efficient with their weapons is done on their own time and at their own expense, much like non cops and non soldiers. So WHY do idiots continue to believe that the 'highly' trained government thugs are weapons experts compared to a citizen?
 
Mankind has been a hunter for millenia, but now those who hunt "have issues"?

If you read what I said you will remember I specifically mentioned 'this millenium'. Norms and standards change, at least in civilised society they do. Does you wife/partner still live in a cave and sharpen your spear for you?
In order to maintain a balance in a wild ecosystem, you must have predators. Otherwise, there is no check on the population of animals that evolved as prey. Hunters provide that predation. Your suggestion that the authorities cull animal populations is fine, in a smaller system. But in my state alone, in order to maintain a stable whitetail deer population, roughly 500,000 must be removed annually. Any idea of the cost of such an operation by the authorities? To say nothing of the cost on a national scale. But in our system, not only do we control the wild population, the special taxes paid by hunters are a large part of the funding of the conservation programs. So we provide a culling service for free and pay the lion's share of the conservation programs. Much more efficient.
You still have the desire to kill and maim wild creatures. It is that that I criticise.

The hunt is not just about killing an animal. It is about the challenge of taking an animal with far better senses of sight, smell and hearing. And doing so in it's natural environment. I (and virtually every hunter I know) put a great deal of effort into making the kill as quick and human as possible. But the kill is a very small part of the entire hunting experience. And I have a freezer full of tasty tablefare to show for it all.
Do you not have farms, accredited slaughter houses, hygiene regulations or supermarkets in America?

Every day people in this country are robbed, raped or murdered. You maintain that this is due to our having firearms. But the majority of those crimes are committed by people with felony records, so they do not legally own the guns they use. A free society cannot control the population nearly as well as a gov't which does not allow the same freedoms. Yet nations without our freedoms still have substantial criminal activities. Having a firearm for defense is not paranoia. It is a recognition of the hazards of living in a free society. Of the guns I own, only 3 are what I would call "defensive" firearms. One of those is an antique piece handed down from my grandfather. The rest of my gun collection is for hunting, target shooting, or are antique/collector's pieces. .

You have misunderstood. Deliberately I would guess. The reason for the crime in your country is that your society is, in many respects, broken. You have a disastrous education system, you consume more drugs than any other comparable nation, you have more lunatic religions teaching their adherents that the responsibility for your own actions can be somehow divested to a fairy in the sky. You are obsessed with things that you only partly comprehend, viz: freedom (you have less than we have), democracy (you have less than we have), rights (these are given to you by those who profit from your gullibility) and, because you only partly understand them, you abuse them.
Let me say again, for those of a slow mind. It is the mindset, the belief that violence toward ones fellow man is acceptable, the idea that violence can solve all of society's woes, that lies at the root of the problem. Many Americans seem unable to accept that the standards by which they live are no longer acceptable.
I do not own a gun because I find the idea of taking a life without justifiable cause completely abhorrent. I do not drive a car because I live in a society where cars are more of a hindrance than a benefit. I am free to do anything I want with stress on the 'I'. I fear no man, I owe to no man, I hate no man.
Have a nice day.
 
If you read what I said you will remember I specifically mentioned 'this millenium'. Norms and standards change, at least in civilised society they do. Does you wife/partner still live in a cave and sharpen your spear for you?
Ug, me like'em when wife sharpen spear.


You still have the desire to kill and maim wild creatures. It is that that I criticise.

I have absolutely no desire to maim any wild creature, and take great pains to insure I never do. I hunt. I make as quick and humane a kill as possible. I also provide a very vaulable service for my society.

Do you not have farms, accredited slaughter houses, hygiene regulations or supermarkets in America?

So its ok to pay others to kill, as long as you don't have to get your hands dirty? And have you seen the way the animals are treated in commercial farms? Are you aware of the additives in the meat you buy?


Many Americans seem unable to accept that the standards by which they live are no longer acceptable.

That they are not acceptable to you is of no consequence to us.

I do not own a gun because I find the idea of taking a life without justifiable cause completely abhorrent. I do not drive a car because I live in a society where cars are more of a hindrance than a benefit. I am free to do anything I want with stress on the 'I'. I fear no man, I owe to no man, I hate no man.
Have a nice day.

I also find the idea of taking a life without a justifiable cause to be completely abhorrent. The fact that I own guns does not change that.

I am also free, I do not fear any man. I hate no man.

I have a very happy life. Good day to you as well, sir.
 
How could you be a political dissident in a communist country? I dont follow your logic.
Of course every government action is not a correct action. Governments are made of people and people are fallible. So do you advocate shooting everyone in government with whom you disagree?
Why you have posted something showing Tien an men square I do not know. At the time I was living under the British government not the Chinese one. And what are you trying to prove by posting the article about the Muslims in Xin Jiang province? Urumqi is nearly 3000 km from HK? Do you think the mass ownership of guns would have made one iota of difference?
Perhaps you would like to explain why you have posted those links. I see no relevance to the discussion... unless, of course, like many of your ilk, you are trying to move the discussion from an uncomfortable place to one in which you feel you might have an advantage.

It was your assertion that you lived in a place where the government had no desire to kil people. I disagreed with that premise. Like I said it is a moot point. How dare those upstart farmers ask for more 'compensation'. That they were even allowed to live on the land in the first place is high testament to the great mercy of China. And that they would allow other 'protesters' to live at all is indeed more praise for China. Afterall, how can a all knowing, unquestionable government accomplish its tasks when political undesirables constantly try to thwart it, demanding 'rights'. Unless you are in the government, you have no rights (and RIGHTLY so).
 
When it comes down to weapons, accuracy and maximum effective range are the critical issues; however that is not the case in close quarters, i.e., inside one's home. A pistol may be handy, but simple shotgun is more effective; and when it comes down to your personal safety, you would be wise to choose the latter. Ask any police officer, and they will tell you that a shotgun is the weapon of choice.
 
Perhaps shotguns are too hard to fondle while you stroke your other "barrel"?




h2_1998.440.jpg
 
When it comes down to weapons, accuracy and maximum effective range are the critical issues; however that is not the case in close quarters, i.e., inside one's home. A pistol may be handy, but simple shotgun is more effective; and when it comes down to your personal safety, you would be wise to choose the latter. Ask any police officer, and they will tell you that a shotgun is the weapon of choice.

The weapon of choice for whom? My wife is a petite lady, and dislikes shooting a shotgun. She does, however, like shooting her revolver. She is accurate with it and very comfortable with it, both of which are more important than the weapon of choice for police officers.

Whether the shotgun is more effective inside the home is debatable. The recoil from the first round makes the second one slower to get off. The spread pattern for the buckshot, across an average sized room would be minimal (about 2 or 3 inches). Also, in order to be accurate, you must mount the shotgun to your shoulder. With the Crimson Trace the handgun can be at waist level, with both eyes open and better vision across the entire room.

But the main deciding factor is safe storage. We have a handgun box/safe that can be opened in the dark in less than a second. It takes up a little more space than a showbox.
 
The weapon of choice for whom? My wife is a petite lady, and dislikes shooting a shotgun. She does, however, like shooting her revolver. She is accurate with it and very comfortable with it, both of which are more important than the weapon of choice for police officers.

Whether the shotgun is more effective inside the home is debatable. The recoil from the first round makes the second one slower to get off. The spread pattern for the buckshot, across an average sized room would be minimal (about 2 or 3 inches). Also, in order to be accurate, you must mount the shotgun to your shoulder. With the Crimson Trace the handgun can be at waist level, with both eyes open and better vision across the entire room.

But the main deciding factor is safe storage. We have a handgun box/safe that can be opened in the dark in less than a second. It takes up a little more space than a showbox.

You could always look at getting a Saiga 20 or 410, and converting it. I'm doing that for my wife soon. Nothing wrong with a pistol, but options are always nice.
 
So your wife is also consumed with fear? Sad.



She's more likely to shoot you than an intruder, statistically.







war-0146.jpg
 
So your wife is also consumed with fear? Sad.



She's more likely to shoot you than an intruder, statistically.

Consumed with fear? lol Still trying to play that off?

But no, she will not shoot me. I guess you might marry an idiot, but I didn't.
 
Explain how having a gun would have saved the family in your strawman story, paranoid gunlovers.






Strawman-motivational.jpg







Do you know how many panic-possessed gunlovers have their own weapons taken from them and used against them by criminals?







Do you quake in terror and grab your gun every time somebody approaches your hovel?




Do you get much sleep, or does the penis substitute under your pillow keep the fear monster away?
 
Consumed with fear? lol Still trying to play that off?

But no, she will not shoot me. I guess you might marry an idiot, but I didn't.



You're assuming a woman that married you isn't stupid?




Do you think this gunlover thought he was safe from his wife, too?




A Kansas City woman was arrested Monday night, accused of shooting her husband in the genitals with his handgun.


http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/12/wife-shoots-husband-in-genitals/#ixzz1Nltl7oKX



http://dailycaller.com/2011/01/12/wife-shoots-husband-in-genitals/
 
Explain how having a gun would have saved the family in your strawman story, paranoid gunlovers.
we'll never know, will we? but we certainly know what NOT having a gun in the home turned out, don't we?

Do you know how many panic-possessed gunlovers have their own weapons taken from them and used against them by criminals?
do you have some valid study or research to show how many? or are you going to tell us to google it?

Do you quake in terror and grab your gun every time somebody approaches your hovel?
no, i'm pretty confident when strangers walk by simply by having a gun on my hip.

Do you get much sleep, or does the penis substitute under your pillow keep the fear monster away?
obsessed with male genitalia are we?
 
Back
Top