Guns suck

[The Mullinator]

I never said anything about shooting ranges. There's a million different ways of training with firearms.
You won't have a chance because you have already told yourself that you won't have a chance and that you will lose. When you've already given up, defeat is inevitable.

Just how many people who own guns for protection actually do anything for training other than firing ranges? Probably not many.

Also I never said give up, I just said that you won't have much of a chance. You probably can do just as much with a baseball bat as you could with a gun, plus with a baseball bat you won't have to worry about stray bullets hurting anyone else in the house.

 

[Cybernoid]

Just how many people who own guns for protection actually do anything for training other than firing ranges? Probably not many.

If they don't train, that's their own loss.

You probably can do just as much with a baseball bat as you could with a gun

Sure, and if wishes were horses then beggars could ride.

plus with a baseball bat you won't have to worry about stray bullets hurting anyone else in the house.

Use a shotgun, then.

 

[NeLi]

And you are certain that a simple stungun will put some crazed crackhead out of comission?

A crazed crack head probably wont stop if he sees your gun either. And if the crazy crackhead got a gun himself, he might just shoot before talking at all.

We have unarmed techniques for that.

Who are you? Some kind of cyborg ninja? We can't all learn martial arts just for the sake of self defense.

Awareness, avoidance and evasion are the first lines of defence. And if you do get swarmed by a gang, what are you going to do? You're probably dead anyway, so there's no reason not to draw your weapon, if that's possible.

You know, gangs often just don't kill people for fun. They may abuse or beat you up, take your money and stuff, but if you don't threaten them, chances are that they wont just blow your head off... However, if you do point a gun at them, they will, by all means necessary, try to end your life.

 

[Immortal]

I just don't see the point why you actually need guns? How many times in your life can you say that you actually desperately needed a gun in a life or death situation?
Their was this one case in Britain where this farmer shot and killed a burglar and the farmer was sent to prison, quite ironic.

 

[Cybernoid]

A crazed crack head probably wont stop if he sees your gun either.

No, he won't stop. That's why you have to empty your magazine into his head.

And if the crazy crackhead got a gun himself, he might just shoot before talking at all.

Uh, yeah, I think everyone knows that. That's why it's very crucial that you shoot first.

Who are you? Some kind of cyborg ninja? We can't all learn martial arts just for the sake of self defense.

I never said that I'm some sort of kung fu expert, I just said that unarmed techniques are used where weapons aren't available.

You know, gangs often just don't kill people for fun. They may abuse or beat you up, take your money and stuff, but if you don't threaten them, chances are that they wont just blow your head off...

Personally, I'd rather not find out what they want or don't want.

However, if you do point a gun at them, they will, by all means necessary, try to end your life.

Again, shoot first.

I just don't see the point why you actually need guns? How many times in your life can you say that you actually desperately needed a gun in a life or death situation?

"It can never happen to ME!"

More famous last words have never been spoken.

 

[Joe]

Sure, when the avarage Joe has a gun, why wouldn't the avarage criminal have one too?

Your point?

heres a potential solution. ban all current lethal guns, make a standard, cheap, non-lethal firearm for civilians. crime will still happen , but at least it wont take as many lives, and it gives civilians a chance to defend themselves and be more confident that the robber just can't go bang and they are dead.

leave the lethal firearms to the qualified, like the army etc.

The problem with non-lethal firearms is that they arn't nearly as effective at stopping a robber, nor do they have the range or typically the rapid fire capability. Secondly, not all self defense situations are one on one. What good are the single shot tasers police are starting to carry (IN ADDITION TO A NORMAL PISTOL) on the market going to do against two men?

You are going to rely on training at a shooting range when you are up against an unknown criminal with a gun? I sure as hell wouldn't.

How do you think the Military/Law Enforcement personnel train to fire their weapons?

If you ask me if they are dangerous enough to harm you then once they are inside you probably don't have much of a chance.

Exactly why it's HIGHLY reccommended throughout firearms boards to take Self Defense courses. What chance will the criminal have with absolutely no training against you, who practices weekly at the range and regularly drills himself in defense practices?

Also how often in the US do home invasions occur where a family with a gun actually helped any?

Countless, search on google for "Firearm Self defense stories"

I just don't think having a gun for protection is any good. For hunting? Sure no problem. For hobby and sport? Sure no problem.

Obviously, 2 million Americans each year who DO have to use a firearm for defense think they are "good".

Now here's what I don't get: How could you possibly think that you putting a gun up an armed criminals face would make your situation safer? Chances are that instead of you getting robbed, you might just end up dead instead.

Not every criminal is armed and even so, anyone who carries/owns a firearm for self defense SHOULD have taken some sort of training course, and should practice it regularly. How could you possibly think that a person who has taken the time to properly prepare themselves for such a situation against an armed intruder who probably has fired his gun very little, if at all, let alone train with it, and shoot it on a regular basis make a situation dangerous?

 

[poseyjmac]

The problem with non-lethal firearms is that they arn't nearly as effective at stopping a robber, nor do they have the range or typically the rapid fire capability. Secondly, not all self defense situations are one on one. What good are the single shot tasers police are starting to carry (IN ADDITION TO A NORMAL PISTOL) on the market going to do against two men?

which is why i said 'make' a standard, cheap, non-lethal firearm. with enough funding and thought, a good non-lethal alternative might be developed.

 

[NeLi]

No, he won't stop. That's why you have to empty your magazine into his head.

Do that with your god damned, newly purchased STUN GUN instead Fry the ****er, but don't blow his brains out. Especially if he's acting under the influence of drugs, since then it's a chance that he might have never done it in a sober state.

I never said that I'm some sort of kung fu expert, I just said that unarmed techniques are used where weapons aren't available.

Yeh, and still, most people can't be assed to spend their days learning some shady "unarmed techniques".

Personally, I'd rather not find out what they want or don't want.



Again, shoot first.

So, you'd risk your life, just like that? Even if they just want some cash?

 

[Joe]

A crazed crack head probably wont stop if he sees your gun either.

No, but after his heart has a .45" hole in it after he refuses to stop coming at me, despite several warnings, maybe he'll take the hint.

Who are you? Some kind of cyborg ninja? We can't all learn martial arts just for the sake of self defense.

And that's exactly what makes firearms that much better for self defense.

You know, gangs often just don't kill people for fun. They may abuse or beat you up, take your money and stuff, but if you don't threaten them, chances are that they wont just blow your head off... However, if you do point a gun at them, they will, by all means necessary, try to end your life.

Again, that's not a gauranteed statement. If I pointed a gun at you and you were unarmed, would you come at me? If you were armed, would you try to withdraw your pistol from where ever you were hiding it, despite the fact that I already had mine out, pointed at you, finger at the ready? Likewise, even a group of gang members probably don't want to lose a "brotha", and would instead piss off rather then start some shit. In the time it takes them to pull their "9milly" out of their pants hanging at their knees, an average "joe" would have already put a round in each of them.

 

[Cybernoid]

Do that with your god damned, newly purchased STUN GUN instead Fry the ****er, but don't blow his brains out. Especially if he's acting under the influence of drugs, since then it's a chance that he might have never done it in a sober state.

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I'd imagine that a stungun is pretty useless againts someone who can take a clip of 9mm bullets into his chest without stopping. Such things have happened.

Yeh, and still, most people can't be assed to spend their days learning some shady "unarmed techniques".

Well... I guess "most people" will be in big trouble when the shit hits the fan, then.

So, you'd risk your life, just like that? Even if they just want some cash?

Probably, yeah.

I've been reading a lot on the subject of kidnapping, and the general consesus among self-defence practioners is that under NO circumstances should you go along with a kidnapper, if he threatens you with a weapon, for example. The almost certain end result is that you get killed (after being repeatedly raped, possibly) or simply disappear. Even if resistance means certain death, it's a much better option.

 

[Joe]

Ok let me understand this,you are allowed to carry a gun openly around with you in one of these states?Or concealed in another?
And a police man cant ask you why the hell you are doing this??

Why should he? It's none of his god damn business unless I'm commiting a crime.

Does anyone else think that doesnt make much sense?

It makes perfect sense to me, do you think a would-be mugger is going to try and rob you when he sees a pistol on your side?

 

[NeLi]

No, but after his heart has a .45" hole in it after he refuses to stop coming at me, despite several warnings, maybe he'll take the hint.

Yeah, but the heart with the hole in it might as well end up being yours and not his. He might have not gotten a hold of a gun if they were not available in the local store down the street.

I've already said that this is a double edged sword.

And that's exactly what makes firearms that much better for self defense.

yeah, let the lazy and ignorant people get the guns. That's great.

Again, that's not a gauranteed statement.

It will be as soon as you pull your gun up. Instead of whatever happening, now only 2 things can happen: 1, you die or get severly injured. 2: you scare the criminal off or kill him.

If I pointed a gun at you and you were unarmed, would you come at me? If you were armed, would you try to withdraw your pistol from where ever you were hiding it, despite the fact that I already had mine out, pointed at you, finger at the ready? [

Dude, the chances are that he will have his gun poinint at you long before you even realise that you are bing robbed.

Likewise, even a group of gang members probably don't want to lose a "brotha", and would instead piss off rather then start some shit. In the time it takes them to pull their "9milly" out of their pants hanging at their knees, an average "joe" would have already put a round in each of them.

YEAH, BUT WHAT KIND OF A ****HEAD WOULD ROB A GUY WITHOUT HIS GUN READY? You'd get 10 bullets in your chest before you could get your own gun up and threaten them.

 

[Joe]

Do that with your god damned, newly purchased STUN GUN instead Fry the ****er, but don't blow his brains out. Especially if he's acting under the influence of drugs, since then it's a chance that he might have never done it in a sober state.

Yes, because in every single self defense situation in history, you're ALWAYS close enough to your opponent to use a stun gun. :upstare:

 

[NeLi]

Yes, because in every single self defense situation in history, you're ALWAYS close enough to your opponent to use a stun gun. :upstare:

I meant a new kind of gun...It fires projectiles, but not lethal ones.

 

[poseyjmac]

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I'd imagine that a stungun is pretty useless againts someone who can take a clip of 9mm bullets into his chest without stopping. Such things have happened.

you're right. you aren't an expert on the subject. :angel: lethality and speed of neutralization are totally different things.

even pepper spray is better at neutralizing some opponents faster than 9mm shots to the torso.

 

[Joe]

Yeah, but the hear with the hole in it might as well end up being yours and not his. He might have not gotten a hold of a gun if they were not available in the local store down the street.

And you still continue this line of thinking that the criminal always comes out on top and has some magical skill that makes him super human.

I've already said that this is a double edged sword.

And instead of making one side sharper then the other, you're suggesting we make it a single edges sword.

yeah, let the lazy and ignorant people get the guns. That's great.

Please tell me you're not suggesting "lazy" and "ignorant" peoples lives arn't worthy of defending themselves.

It will be as soon as you pull your gun up. Instead of whatever happening, now only 2 things can happen: 1, you die or get severly injured. 2: you scare the criminal off or kill him.

As opposed to what? 1. The criminal robs you and walks away 2. The criminal decides he doesn't want any witnesses or wants to "teach you a lesson" and instead robs you and then kills or severly injures you.

Dude, the chances are that he will have his gun poinint at you long before you even realise that you are bing robbed.

And I could say chances are I'll have already drawn my pistol and have it pointed at him first. The point? We're both pulling these "chances" out of our ass.

YEAH, BUT WHAT KIND OF A ****HEAD WOULD ROB A GUY WITHOUT HIS GUN READY? You'd get 10 bullets in your chest before you could get your own gun up and threaten them.

Who says their robbing him? What if they just decide they don't like that "white cracker" loading groceries in to his car and decide to come over and beat him up?

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

I aint gona get totally into this convosation. But one small comment from Cybernoid made me want to point something out for everyones safety...


If you ever go to any self defence class they tell you a couple of things relavent to this convosation:

If they have a knife or bladed weapon you should give them you're money.

If they have a gun or other ranged weapon. ALLWAYS WITHOUT QUESTIONS give them you're money.



Do you really think that you can react fast enough to disarm him when he has the same amount of time to pull the trigger.

Its not gona happen. Even with a knife; if you go to disarm a knife and they just turn their hand often a knife disarm can get one of you're fingers choped off.

I'm not joking....

 

[Joe]

I meant a new kind of gun...It fires projectiles, but not lethal ones.

Sure, I'd go along with that, but only if ALL police, nation wide, are only allowed to carry the same gun. After all, with such a great weapon as this, they wouldn't need a real pistol anymore, or shot gun in between the seats, or rifle in the trunk, now would they?

 

[Joe]

you're right. you aren't an expert on the subject. :angel: lethality and speed of neutralization are totally different things.

even pepper spray is better at neutralizing some opponents faster than 9mm shots to the torso.

You said it yourself, only SOME opponents. I'd rather be ready for ALL opponents.

 

[Joe]

I aint gona get totally into this convosation. But one small comment from Cybernoid made me want to point something out for everyones safety...


If you ever go to any self defence class they tell you a couple of things relavent to this convosation:

If they have a knife or bladed weapon you should give them you're money.

If they have a gun or other ranged weapon. ALLWAYS WITHOUT QUESTIONS give them you're money.



Do you really think that you can react fast enough to disarm him when he has the same amount of time to pull the trigger.

Its not gona happen. Even with a knife; if you go to disarm a knife and they just turn their hand often a knife disarm can get one of you're fingers choped off.

I'm not joking....

And what if they're unarmed? And what self defense classes are these? Most self defense classes I've seen teach how to disarm opponents carrying both knives and firearms. That's the whole point of Self Defense, to eliminate the threat or FORCE it to go away, not hope it goes away.

 

[Joe]

I just don't see the point why you actually need guns? How many times in your life can you say that you actually desperately needed a gun in a life or death situation?

I'm getting very tired of repeating my self. 2 Million people YEARLY use firearms for self defense in the United States alone.

Just because YOU have never PERSONALLY been in a situation such as that, doesn't mean other people arn't. This same line of thinking goes hand in hand with people who think "well, I've never been in an accident because I was driving drunk, so why should I stop now?"

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

And what if they're unarmed? And what self defense classes are these? Most self defense classes I've seen teach how to disarm opponents carrying both knives and firearms. That's the whole point of Self Defense, to eliminate the threat or FORCE it to go away, not hope it goes away.

They teach you how to do it in case you have to.


The whole idea of the clases are to teach you how to get out of a situation alive/uninjured.

Only people who have been doing martial arts for years should attempt things that could get them killed when they could have just backed out. I have been doing martial arts for arround 6 years in total I guess. Right back from when my brother tought me things...

I would never ever try and disarm a knife. Even if I know how and have practised it a million times.


EDIT: By never ever that excludes when they lunge at me. Its obvious but I thought I better include it in the post....

 

[Cybernoid]

If you ever go to any self defence class they tell you a couple of things relavent to this convosation:

If they have a knife or bladed weapon you should give them you're money.

If they have a gun or other ranged weapon. ALLWAYS WITHOUT QUESTIONS give them you're money.

That's strictly a personal choice. Some people would rather give their money, some wouldn't. At any rate, a self defence class that doesn't teach you how to deal with an armed assailant is of no value.

 

[NeLi]

And you still continue this line of thinking that the criminal always comes out on top and has some magical skill that makes him super human.

No, im saying that there's a bigger chance of more deaths happening if anyone can get a hold of a gun anywhere.

And instead of making one side sharper then the other, you're suggesting we make it a single edges sword.

Sorry mate, but you can't make either side sharper. It doesn't matter if civilians get guns. The criminals will only get bigger and better guns if that's the case. It's just a start of a ****ed up circle.

Please tell me you're not suggesting "lazy" and "ignorant" peoples lives arn't worthy of defending themselves.

No, i'm saying that people who can't be bothered to take self security reasons (often lazy or ignorant ones) are the ones to make stupid decisions.

As opposed to what? 1. The criminal robs you and walks away 2. The criminal decides he doesn't want any witnesses or wants to "teach you a lesson" and instead robs you and then kills or severly injures you.

Most robberys does not end up in death when the person does comply with the robbers demands. And the likelyhood of that the robber will just walk away is lightyears more likely than that he suddenly decides TO BECOME A ****ING MURDERER INSTEAD. Jeez.



[uote]And I could say chances are I'll have already drawn my pistol and have it pointed at him first. The point? We're both pulling these "chances" out of our ass. [/quote]

No, because, you see, if you use logic, it's pretty easy to see that a guy comin up from behind will already have his gun ready, when you will not.

Who says their robbing him? What if they just decide they don't like that "white cracker" loading groceries in to his car and decide to come over and beat him up?

better beat up than dying in a hospital due to bloodloss and 5 shells in your back.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

That's strictly a personal choice. Some people would rather give their money, some wouldn't. At any rate, a self defence class that doesn't teach you how to deal with an armed assailant is of no value.

If you read my other posts I say that even If I have learn them, (Which I have) I wouldnt necesserally use them.


And I hav'nt been taught them at all my clases. See I live in the UK where gun crime is very very uncommon and therefore its kinda pointless teaching gun disarms.

I have never even seen a god damn gun carried by anyone other than police. I only know one person who has, a friend of mine.



I have been taught knife disarms everywhere though....



EDIT: But you're right of course. It is most definatly a personal choice. Just make sure you don't go making a stupid decision....

 

[Cybernoid]

No, i'm saying that people who can't be bothered to take self security reasons (often lazy or ignorant ones) are the ones to make stupid decisions.

You yourself have said that

"Who are you? Some kind of cyborg ninja? We can't all learn martial arts just for the sake of self defense."
"Yeh, and still, most people can't be assed to spend their days learning some shady "unarmed techniques"."

The latter quote strongly suggests that you have no interest towards self-defence.

 

[NeLi]

Originally Posted by NeLi
No, i'm saying that people who can't be bothered to take self security lessons (often lazy or ignorant ones) are the ones to make stupid decisions.



You yourself have said that

"Who are you? Some kind of cyborg ninja? We can't all learn martial arts just for the sake of self defense."
"Yeh, and still, most people can't be assed to spend their days learning some shady "unarmed techniques"."

The latter quote strongly suggests that you have no interest towards self-defence.

Well, yeah. I don't. But I'm not getting a gun either... I made those comments based on speculations about people with GUNS. That the "ignorant" people would be the ones to **** up a situation with a gun, because they didn't know better.

I don't believe a gun would save me from anything except some punkass kids with sticks. I'd rather give them the 2 dollars I had in me pocket instead of being a cocky bastard, if that was the case.

I do have experiences with guns and some self defence (In sweden we all go through armed military training for a couple of months) and I just don't think it would serve a greater purpose.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

Alot of people get seriously hurt when they try disarms and fail...


Just before I go to sleep and for interests sakes.


How much martial arts/self defence experience do you have?

 

[Cybernoid]

How much martial arts/self defence experience do you have?

I don't think real life experience has any bearing on this discussion.

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

I never said it should alter the discusion... I said for my own interests sakes...



The point is, Do you think you could disarm a knife or even a gun?

And does the evidence say that you should even attempt it..

 

[PvtRyan]

By the way, if guns kill people then do pencils make misspellings?

I don't remember pencils being made for misspelling, however, the only purpose of a gun is to KILL. There is no other use to a gun, they kill, period. That's what they are designed to do. I haven't seen a gun with a "hugging" mode on it yet.

 

[Cybernoid]

I don't remember pencils being made for misspelling, however, the only purpose of a gun is to KILL. There is no other use to a gun, they kill, period. That's what they are designed to do. I haven't seen a gun with a "hugging" mode on it yet.

You can also wound someone. Or miss on purpose. Or fire at inanimate targets. On the other hand, you can use a pencil as a stabbing weapon.

The point is, Do you think you could disarm a knife or even a gun?

Maybe, but I don't know how much damage I would take in the process. I could die.

 

[Sprafa]

You can also wound someone. Or miss on purpose. Or fire at inanimate targets. On the other hand, you can use a pencil as a stabbing weapon.

Taht's not the point. What he's talking about is the original purpose of a thing, not what it can be used for.

 

[Cybernoid]

Taht's not the point. What he's talking about is the original purpose of a thing, not what it can be used for.

The original purpose doesn't matter. If you kill someone with a gun, is the gun at fault? If you misspell a word, is the pencil at fault?

 

[marksmanHL2 :)]

Maybe, but I don't know how much damage I would take in the process. I could die.

Well, I'm glad you can see this much...


Personally I wouldnt recommend trying. Especially if you're unsure.



Neway, I have to go sleep now. I'll be back sometime tomorrow no doubt. I might look in then. Night night...

 

[PvtRyan]

You can also wound someone. Or miss on purpose. Or fire at inanimate targets. On the other hand, you can use a pencil as a stabbing weapon.

Even the police here is trained to just aim for the body because aiming at the legs or any other non lethal parts is way too risky (with stray bullets). You know as well as I do that a gun is not meant to wound, or miss. It's intended to kill.

A pencil can write, that's its main purpose, sometimes you misspell something, and in a very rare instance it can be used as a weapon. But those are abuses of the object. But with guns, that's the only function, it isn't a mistake like misspelling, it's on purpose, shooting at someone with a high risk of killing them.

Saying a gun can "misspell" is implying that the shooting is undesired, but it isn't, it's 1005 intentional.
When a grenade kills someone, is it the grenades' fault? Sure not, after all, it's not meant to kill someone, you can also play catch with it, or kick it around! It shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

[Sprafa]

The original purpose doesn't matter. If you kill someone with a gun, is the gun at fault? If you misspell a word, is the pencil at fault?

Sure, what a thing is made for doesn't matter. TNT was made for better handling of explosives and was turned into a war weapon.

Do you really look twice at what you say ?

If you kill someone with a gun, it's not the gun's fault, because you can't attribute fault to an innanimated object! If you mispell with a pencil, same thing.

let me show you the point of all this -

Guns = made to kill something - should be banned

Pencils = made to write - should not be banned.

 

[Murray_H]

Can i ask a question to the pro gun owners - if your gun you own for 'self defence' was taken away, how would you cope? Would you become a social recluse for fear of being attacked and having no means to defend yourself?

 

[Cybernoid]

Do you really look twice at what you say ?

Do you?

If you kill someone with a gun, it's not the gun's fault, because you can't attribute fault to an innanimated object! If you mispell with a pencil, same thing.

Yes, that is my point.

Guns = made to kill something - should be banned

Also made to protect people from thugs, murderers, rapists and wild animals.

Pencils = made to write - should not be banned.

"The pen is mightier than the sword" also means that spoken or written words can be used to devastating effect when you want to kill a whole bunch of people. Hitler couldn't have done anything with just a gun. He used words instead.

 

[Sprafa]

Do you?

everytime

"The pen is mightier than the sword" also means that spoken or written words can be used to devastating effect when you want to kill a whole bunch of people. Hitler couldn't have done anything with just a gun. He used words instead.

of course. The SS used words in the Eastern Front. The SS killed millions of Jews with words. Hitler had no guns....

Hitler used words to persuade the people to get more guns.

Also made to protect people from thugs, murderers, rapists and wild animals.

bwhahahah

Their original purpose is to kill. End of story. There are now dozens of non-lethal weapons designed solely for the purposes you described.