Guns Go Bang! - C&C

[Kerbouchard]

Well, I'm not contesting the right to own guns, I totally understand the self-defense perspective, and I also understand hunting for food... the point was that the particular gun that started this had nothing to do with either of those things. That gun was built from the ground up to kill people. I agree, that plenty of folks are plenty qualified to own and operate that sort of device, but none of them need it, and it's FAR TOO EMPOWERING for the folks who are not qualified, but can obtain it anyway. As mentioned earlier in the thread, there's a point where it stops being a tool, and starts becoming an ego booster. In an extremely small number of cases, it allows (encourages?) crazy people to do crazy things.

Promoting self defense makes for a safe society... promoting the types of weapons shown in this thread makes for a society ripe with power struggles. People should not feel encouraged to exert their will over others, and assault weapons are engineered for that specifically, exerting force.

So yeah, people kill people, not the guns... but some guns are for protecting people, and other guns for starting sh**, know what I'm sayin?

It's not black and white, it's not an argument anyone can win... from my perspective though, we should be conscious of the impacts of devices, and not just assume they're all the same and all in the hands of qualified people.

If you would have stopped after the first paragraph, I would have conceded that that was the best anti-gun argument I have ever heard anybody make. In any case, I do disagree. I have several so-called 'assault rifles' and none of them have ever killed anybody. I also have some WW1 and WW2 bolt action rifles that most certainly have. I also have a few swords that were captured in combat.

I read about a story this morning about a guy who was beaten to death by a baseball bat. I think we should ban baseball bats.

To put it concisely, my opinion is that there should be no limitations on types of firearms(or baseball bats) that are available. I am also of the opinion that anybody who uses those devices improperly should be tried by a jury of their peers and put to death. I feel the same way about drunk drivers who kill people, and there are a lot more of them than there are nuts who happen to get their hands on a so-called 'assault rifle'.

The thing is, there are already laws against murdering people or shooting at people or hitting people with baseball bats. Making another law to get rid of those guns or baseball bats doesn't change anything. The people who are going to commit such a crime against humanity as murder simply don't care if the tool that they happen to use is also illegal.

My last thoughts; there has never been a mass shooting at a gun range. The only mass shootings in U.S. history were in places where it was against the law to have a gun in the first place...that is why they were mass shootings. The criminals knew nobody would be able to defend themselves.

 

[Gaerek]

My last thoughts; there has never been a mass shooting at a gun range. The only mass shootings in U.S. history were in places where it was against the law to have a gun in the first place...that is why they were mass shootings. The criminals knew nobody would be able to defend themselves.

I just had to quote this. You mentioned that A.U. had one of the best anti-gun arguments. This is one of the best examples of why gun control is bad. I (thankfully) live in one of only 3 (4 next month, woohoo!) Unlimited CCW states in the union. I feel safe knowing that there's likely a good, law abiding citizen, carrying his piece nearby at any given time. I get weary when I visit cities where only criminals will be carrying concealed weapons. Knowing that I would have to rely on the police to correct any active shooter situations. Remember kids, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!"

I just noticed this, but A.U. lives in one of the other Unlimited CCW states. Do you feel safer knowing that non-felon, law abiding citizens could be around to help you should someone "start sh**" (as you put it)?

 

[Netskimmer]

Why should we keep (and learn to responsably use) our guns?

When Japanese Naval Marshal General Isoroku Yamamato (the man that planned the Pearl Harbor attack in WWII was asked about invading the U.S. his response was this. "I would never invade the U.S., there would be a gun behind every blade of grass."

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. >From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. >From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
------------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. >From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
---- ------------- -------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. >From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. >From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

 

[Vtec44]

Knowing that I would have to rely on the police to correct any active shooter situations. Remember kids, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!"

Warren vs DC decision stated that government employees are "not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for a failure to provide adequate police protection". The Supreme Court also ruled in a similar case, Castle Rock vs Gonzales. These are case laws that the court and justices have to follow, not some personal opinion or inflated statistic numbers. I'm glad to see more and more women don't buy in the BS that has been spewing out of the Brady Campaign group for so many years.

 

[vtf]

This thread makes me miss Dallas.

 

[Gaerek]

Knowing that I would have to rely on the police to correct any active shooter situations. Remember kids, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!"

Warren vs DC decision stated that government employees are "not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for a failure to provide adequate police protection". The Supreme Court also ruled in a similar case, Castle Rock vs Gonzales. These are case laws that the court and justices have to follow, not some personal opinion or inflated statistic numbers. I'm glad to see more and more women don't buy in the BS that has been spewing out of the Brady Campaign group for so many years.

There, fixed (you forgot the not before generally). What a shame. DC wants to absolve the police for negligence AND take away an individuals right to defend themselves. One reason I will NEVER live there.

 

[Kerbouchard]

My last thoughts; there has never been a mass shooting at a gun range. The only mass shootings in U.S. history were in places where it was against the law to have a gun in the first place...that is why they were mass shootings. The criminals knew nobody would be able to defend themselves.

I just had to quote this. You mentioned that A.U. had one of the best anti-gun arguments. This is one of the best examples of why gun control is bad. I (thankfully) live in one of only 3 (4 next month, woohoo!) Unlimited CCW states in the union. I feel safe knowing that there's likely a good, law abiding citizen, carrying his piece nearby at any given time. I get weary when I visit cities where only criminals will be carrying concealed weapons. Knowing that I would have to rely on the police to correct any active shooter situations. Remember kids, "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!"

I just noticed this, but A.U. lives in one of the other Unlimited CCW states. Do you feel safer knowing that non-felon, law abiding citizens could be around to help you should someone "start sh**" (as you put it)?

It took me 10 months for the wonderful State of Texas to acknowledge my 'right to keep and bear arms' and see fit to issue me a CHL. I'm glad that there are still some states in the Union that are still free.

FWIW, my favorite is a Kimber Ultra Carry II in a Brommeland Max Con V holster, although occasionally, I'll just take along the LCP. I wish I could find a way to communicate that it isn't about power over somebody else, but instead it is about the knowledge that if push comes to shove, at least I will be able to protect my family.

 

[e.rose]

Have you ever heard of a shoot out at an NRA convention? I don't think so, there are way too many people there that will shoot back! They'll go somewhere that no one is armed, like gun free zones.

Haha, that's exactly what I said to Keith at the gun show the other weekend. They had cops present for obvious reasons but I started entertaining the idea of... *WHAT IF* someone came in here to shoot the place up? They wouldn't get past the door. If the cops at the entrance didn't get him first, the THOUSANDS of people with their endless amount of ammo and their THOUSANDS of shotguns, handguns, rifles and lord knows what else, would get him. And it was then I turned to my husband and said, "You know... we're probably in the safest place we could possibly be in the Philadelphia area right now. No one is gonna come in here and try to f*** sh*t up because they know their gonna go down before their other foot crosses the doorway behind the first. :lmao:

 

[e.rose]

All I wanted was to see some nice photography using firearms as subject matter. Sigh.

Impossible without a gun control debate!

Haha, I giggled when I saw that you had changed your avatar to a picture of a shotgun. That can't POSSIBLY be inspired by *this* thread...

 

[Derrel]

Have you ever heard of a shoot out at an NRA convention? I don't think so, there are way too many people there that will shoot back! They'll go somewhere that no one is armed, like gun free zones.

Haha, that's exactly what I said to Keith at the gun show the other weekend. They had cops present for obvious reasons but I started entertaining the idea of... *WHAT IF* someone came in here to shoot the place up? They wouldn't get past the door. If the cops at the entrance didn't get him first, the THOUSANDS of people with their endless amount of ammo and their THOUSANDS of shotguns, handguns, rifles and lord knows what else, would get him. And it was then I turned to my husband and said, "You know... we're probably in the safest place we could possibly be in the Philadelphia area right now. No one is gonna come in here and try to f*** sh*t up because they know their gonna go down before their other foot crosses the doorway behind the first. :lmao:

e.rose, your little gun show anecdote is spot-on, at the individual criminal level, and at the level of despotic national or military leaders; all three types of tyrants understand that an armed citizen, or an armed population, is one that can NOT simply be overtaken and placed under submission with force, because the people are able to keep, and bear (meaning to hold, aim,and to use) weapons. THis is why the founders of the USA stated very plainly that a well-armed militia was necessary to the security of a free state; the Federalist Papers, which detail the behind-the-scenes discussion that occurred among the founders of this great country make it clear that the "militia" was NOT, I repeat was NOT, a militia in the sense of a national guard, but consisted of all "able-bodied men between the ages of 15 and 60 years of age." Not a regular, organized, military defense corps, but regular,everyday citizens, with firearms in their own homes and on their persons.

 

[Gaerek]

All I wanted was to see some nice photography using firearms as subject matter. Sigh.

Impossible without a gun control debate!

Haha, I giggled when I saw that you had changed your avatar to a picture of a shotgun. That can't POSSIBLY be inspired by *this* thread...

Pure coincidence, actually. It's been like that for a week or so now. Took some shots of my Mossberg 500 Mariner, and thought it made a good avatar.

 

[adversus]

1. Guns are used for hunting (long rifles, shotguns, high-power handguns)
2. Guns are used for sport (target shooting, exhibition, etc.) as a technical/skill exercise (long rifles, shotguns, handguns, assault rifles (or civ version, ala AR-15)
3. Guns are used for self defense (all of the above)

a. Nobody will ever prevent a human from lawfully obtaining food for their family
b. Nobody will ever block a sport that uses a dangerous weapon (archery? javelin?)
c. Until a government can guarantee to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, #3 will never be a valid argument for banning guns.

That's my view. And I think that's a fairly realistic and pragmatic view of guns.

 

[Kerbouchard]

Ok, I have seen the light. You guys have convinced me. I will give up all my guns...

Just one thing...Bad guys, first.

 

[NikonRookie]

Okay at least now I know I'm not the only crazy person on here...

Nope. EVERYONE knows *I'M* totally out of my MIND! :lmao:

:thumbup: for getting out there and spending a day putting lead down range.

Haha thanks. I'm actually going again today... as soon as my husband gets home with the ammo.

[A few things to help with that soreness in your hand: 1) start shooting left (or right) handed so you can switch off (you can also do that Matrix thing with two hands at the same time ) 2) get a variety of guns so you don't spend the whole time shooting one gun and getting sore from it and 3) find someone that reloads and pay them to make your bullets and make them light loads (so they don't kick so much, AND it will be cheaper than buying from a store.)

Well the reason that I was shooting so much with the LCP is because that's the "carry" gun. I want to practice with that and get really good with it, because if I'm ever caught in a pickle... that's what I'm going to have on me. Otherwise we have an AR-15, and AK-47, and a Siaga (sp?) 12. NOOOOOOOOOT really carry weapons. We had a Springfield .45, but he traded that in for the Siaga and now wants a Glock... something or other. I think a 9mm?

*I* want a Kahr. I was looking at the CW9, but we went to a gun show the other week and this dude had a lightly used PM9 for $350... which is nuts, haha. Unfortunately we didn't have the cash THAT day to get it... but we have his card... and hopefully it'll still be there when we call. If not, I might just go back to the CW9 for now. I've never shot one, but it *fits* my hand *perfectly*. It's the first handgun that I've ever picked up and it felt comfortable in my hand. I didn't have to adjust my grip a few times until I got it. It just fell right in place. I have tiny kindergardener hands, so it's been hard to find one that's comfortable, haha.

The LCP isn't *bad*, considering how compact it is, but even with the extended mag, my pinky finger almost hangs off. The CW9 is not *as* small as the LCP, but it's still small enough that I could carry it. Plus Keith said something about the fact that it has a longer barrel than the LCP will probably make it easier for me to shoot. But that's all his thing... I dunno anything about that. I just know how to load 'em, clean them (well LEARNING to), and shoot 'em.

At least some people are preparing for a zombie apocalypse!! All I have is a large stick with a nail in the end.

HAHAHAHA! A friend and I were talking about this today at work. That's it. That's all there is to my story but reading your comment made me giggle. :sillysmi:

I had a LCP and didn't care for the recoil....way too sharp. I instead bought a Kahr MK9.....basically an all steel PM9. The heavier gun has less perceived recoil and is quite pleasant to shoot. With that said, don't let your husband buy a glock. Sure they are good reliable guns, but if he wants one of the nicest 9mm polymer pistols available he should go with the HK P30 or HK P2000 if he doesn't like the grip on the P30. HK guns are basically the Ferrari's of the polymer handgun world. Think of the Glock as a Subaru........


I actually wouldn't mind hearing arguments from the anti-gun liberals if they would humor us and get to a range for an hour and actually shoot some of these "death contraptions" and witness the sport as we pro gun people know it. Maybe they would see that it isn't just a bunch of hillbillies getting their rocks off. I have seen people from all walks of life at the range here in Lower Bucks County. Anywhere from the refined 50 yr old gentlemen with the $100,000 mercedes parked out front walking around in his $8,000 suit to the young poor college couple brushing off a couple hours of study time to relieve some stress and enjoy some solitude with the muffs on and complete focus on nothing but the little bullseye floating around in that narrow path of vision. It isn't about ego boosting, or testosterone swelling power. That is clearly an argument from someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Shooting is one of the most challenging sports I have ever been active in. It requires both an incredible amount of physical and mental ability to excel and become very good at. Try putting a .35" projectile through a 3" bullseye at 25 yards consistently through an entire magazine with a pistol that has a small sight radius. Now do the same under more trying conditions such as the stress of a timer. Consider it golf for those who don't like walking.....or riding in golf carts with "Johnny" after he's had 8 beers

Yes, no one is going to change anyone's mind here. I just amazes me how someone can be so deathly against something that they personally have no experience with. Believe it or not folks, what you see on TV, what you read in the newspaper and what you hear on the radio are simply well executed manipulations of the truth to drive the ignorant masses to one political side or the other. Clearly there are those on this forum who have developed very strong opinions from the media without actually doing their own due diligence and trying to understand the other side of the story......god forbid.

 

[e.rose]

I had a LCP and didn't care for the recoil....way too sharp. I instead bought a Kahr MK9.....basically an all steel PM9. The heavier gun has less perceived recoil and is quite pleasant to shoot.

Yeah, the recoil on the LCP is ridiculous. I made myself shoot way more than I did the other day and my hand KILLED but I pushed through it. There was a huge red imprint on my palm for about an hour and another on the soft part between my thumb and pointer finger. And considering how it hurt yesterday from the day before that when I shot 3/4s LESS than I did today, it's REALLY gonna kill me *tomorrow* when I go to grab that wide-ass water bottle off my desk at work. I *really* can't wait for that Kahr, but there are other things on the list of financial priorities before we go buy another gun. That being said... how do you like your Kahr? Everyone I talk to gives me the same answer: "I dunno... I think they're good guns... I've never shot one... but I've never had one come back through here for repairs, so that says something..." I wanna talk to someone who's actually SHOT one... and not just trying to SELL me one. :lmao:

I actually wouldn't mind hearing arguments from the anti-gun liberals if they would humor us and get to a range for an hour and actually shoot some of these "death contraptions" and witness the sport as we pro gun people know it. Maybe they would see that it isn't just a bunch of hillbillies getting their rocks off.

Definitely not. There's a whole etiquette to it... which is why I haven't gotten the balls to go to the range yet without Keith because I'm not sure I know all of it yet.

I have seen people from all walks of life at the range here in Lower Bucks County. Anywhere from the refined 50 yr old gentlemen with the $100,000 mercedes parked out front walking around in his $8,000 suit to the young poor college couple brushing off a couple hours of study time to relieve some stress and enjoy some solitude with the muffs on and complete focus on nothing but the little bullseye floating around in that narrow path of vision. It isn't about ego boosting, or testosterone swelling power. That is clearly an argument from someone who has absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

That's why I went today. I'm in a "way" right now... I just wanted to think about nothing... concentrate on trying to get tighter groupings (because let me tell you my grouping is AWESOME. Just. awesome. XD ) and not hear from anyone (other than my husband who was coaching me) for a few hours.

I even left my iPhone in the car (and that's HUGE because I'm gravely addicted to that thing! )

If we had a 22 or something I think I'd go more, but the 380 ammo isn't the cheapest thing on the planet, so I have to strategically place my "range relaxation" time. :lmao: