Self Defense?

johntalin · Mar 29, 2007

All these sound like each case may be a situation where you would say "Could of...", "Should of..."
Having a gun in one type of situation may work for you, and having no gun in another type of situation, also may work for you.
Target practice shooting may help. But, the biggest test would be when you are confronted with danger. Considering that even trained officers may make an error in judgement, would you trust yourself? A person who could live with himself/herself if he/she killed someone (accidentally or justified) would be the person who would like to own a gun.

Tak · Mar 29, 2007

Thank you, I love being reduced to a two dementional stereotype.

eric · Mar 29, 2007

what? i didn't read that at all.

dadude1083 · Mar 29, 2007

Any of you carry Tazers or Stun Guns? Thought about getting my sister one.

moss918 · Mar 29, 2007

Tak said:
I'm glad you didn't write the the constitution.

By that mentality no one should be trusted with automobiles, as we KNOW how many deaths are caused by the drunk and stupid misuse of those, its obvious no one should be allowed to drive either. People just can't be trusted with cars! Auto accidents cause more deaths in a week than handguns in the US do in a year.

Sharp knives? Way too dangerous! People can't be trusted! Its so easy to stab someone in a "crime of passion"! They don't NEED to cook after all, make a law that all food has to be sold pre-cut, too much responsibility, and you know people can't be trusted.....

Sorry Tak but it really annoys me when this argument comes up. Cars and knives aren't exactly the best comparison as they're generally owned for a non-violent purpose, such as driving and slicing veg. Sure an idiot may misuse these and it takes an idiot to misuse a gun but how many uses are there for guns that have no lethal aspect? I mean, what can they do except fire bullets? A line needs to be drawn between items that are only created for a lethal purpose and those that may potentially cause harm - Otherwise we'll all have our hands chopped off so we don't strangle someone.

I understand that in some areas you may feel that you need a gun because the "bad guys" have them but that just means there needs to be better policing - Having everyone armed and ready is never going to stop someone robbing your house but if it's harder for those bad guys to get guns (Like it is here in the UK) then someone breaking into your house will result in a fight where, even if you win or lose there is a much higher chance that everyone involved will be alive.

ToddG · Mar 29, 2007

moss918 said:
Sure an idiot may misuse these and it takes an idiot to misuse a gun but how many uses are there for guns that have no lethal aspect? I mean, what can they do except fire bullets? A line needs to be drawn between items that are only created for a lethal purpose and those that may potentially cause harm - Otherwise we'll all have our hands chopped off so we don't strangle someone.

Bzzzzzt ... sorry, no.

I've fired right around one million rounds of ammunition in my life. I have killed exactly zero living things with a gun in that time. So, there are plenty of things you can do with a gun other than kill people.

While laws in the US vary from state, the general "rule" when it comes to use of lethal force is in self-defense is simple: if you feel like you have no other options available to you, odds are you're justified in using lethal force. While it may technically be legal in some places, use of lethal force to protect property (shooting someone for trying to steal your VCR) isn't really justified.

Remember that lethal force is generally allowable only if you are in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm. If you are in danger of death or grievous bodily harm, running away might be a much better option than shooting it out. Shooting someone -- even if you are justified -- is going to cost you money, get you dragged through the press, and possibly result in jail/prison time. Being right doesn't always equate to being found not-guilty by a jury. It's a serious risk and just one good reason to find other ways out of danger.

Alertness & Avoidance

The best way to defend yourself is to remain alert. Keep an eye & ear tuned to your environment and be smart. If you see something out of place or threatening, avoiding it is much more likely to get you out of there safe & sound. The easiest way to win a fight is to avoid it.

Possessions can be replaced ... most of your possessions are probably insured anyway. If you're not willing to die for it, don't kill for it.

Having said that, I believe that every human being has a right to defend his life. Protecting myself and my family isn't just a right, it's a responsibility. So yes, telling me that I shouldn't be allowed to do that because somewhere there are criminals committing crimes is just ridiculous.

TheCustomer99 · Mar 29, 2007

The bottom line is that banning something never stops it. Banning drugs hasn't helped one bit and banning guns wouldn't either. How about instead of banning them, we start some sort of mandatory education requirement? I took a hunter's safety course before I was able to get my license in Illinois and I learned a lot about responsible gun ownership. If you educate people on how to responsibly use something, you'll have better results than by simply banning it. With a ban, people who really want a gun will find a way to get a hold of it, just as a drug addict finds a way to get a hold of illegal substances.

dadude1083 · Mar 30, 2007

I think we should all just live in boxes, with no items of value. That way, robberies would not be an issue! Huzzah

walmartconnect · Mar 30, 2007

What is it with gun haters? It has been my experience that people who push for gun restrictions and bans generally have little to no experience with firearms of any kind. They base all of their information on the (liberal) news and Hollywood.

Every person that I have ever convinced to come to the range with me has lightened up considerably. All that it takes is some hands on experience and education, then they realize that guns aren't evil death spewing monsters but just another tool. It is only those that wish to harm the innocent that spew death. If they didn't have guns, they'd just do it with something else.

ToddG · Mar 30, 2007

walmartconnect said:
guns aren't evil death spewing monsters

Forget it, then. I don't want mine anymore.

walmartconnect · Mar 30, 2007

Todd,

If my Glock ever has to spew death, I doubt that it will be for evil intentions

moss918 · Mar 30, 2007

walmartconnect said:
What is it with gun haters? It has been my experience that people who push for gun restrictions and bans generally have little to no experience with firearms of any kind. They base all of their information on the (liberal) news and Hollywood.

Every person that I have ever convinced to come to the range with me has lightened up considerably. All that it takes is some hands on experience and education, then they realize that guns aren't evil death spewing monsters but just another tool. It is only those that wish to harm the innocent that spew death. If they didn't have guns, they'd just do it with something else.

I shot guns for a number of years when I was younger up until the gun ban. I agree there are other uses for guns such as target shooting, which is a sport I enjoyed while it lasted, and also as collectors items for display. The point I was trying to make was that comparing guns to knives or cars isn't the best comparison to make due to the other uses of those items and the way in which they can be lethal. Sure you can hunt someone down with your car but if you had a gun in the glove-box that makes it a lot easier. I simply cannot see the logic in everyone being armed incase a bad-guy has a gun as opposed to trying to get rid of guns all together. If you and the burgular have knives instead of guns you're both more likely to live, that way he'll get the prison sentence he deserves. :black:

fleurya · Mar 30, 2007

Tak said:
I'm glad you didn't write the the constitution.

By that mentality no one should be trusted with automobiles, as we KNOW how many deaths are caused by the drunk and stupid misuse of those, its obvious no one should be allowed to drive either. People just can't be trusted with cars! Auto accidents cause more deaths in a week than handguns in the US do in a year.

Sharp knives? Way too dangerous! People can't be trusted! Its so easy to stab someone in a "crime of passion"! They don't NEED to cook after all, make a law that all food has to be sold pre-cut, too much responsibility, and you know people can't be trusted.

You can't let people watch that TV program or read the wrong sorts of books, with those ideas who would know what they might do! People can't be trusted!

Oh those people! They should realize the government ALWAYS knows best! And that the police are always there to protect your safety and stop violence BEFORE it starts! Next thing you know they may even start thinking for themselves! Not self defense! Anything but that! The horror! "sarcasm"

I'm guessing you live in a good neighborhood far from public housing, where the police actually show up in the first hour after a call. : /

The world is packed with things that are dangerous in the hands of the stupid, and the irresponsible. But taking my gun because someone else is a criminal is like taking my car because the fellow down the street is a drunk driver. Or that despite the fact that I don't drink I may someday BECOME an alcoholic with the right provocation.

Your real fear is people, and why you feel they are too incompetent for responsibility. Rather than turning the country into a kindergarten so the stupid irresponsible people don't hurt themselves or others, why not punish the irresponsible and trust the people who HAVE shown sense and good judgment in their histories to have responsibilities? There is something wrong in a nation where if a man comes into a house and commits a rape and breaks his leg on the stairs on the way out he can sue the victim for negligence. And disarming the victims of violent crime is NOT the answer.

Is liberty just that terrifying to you? Or is it only applicable to the abusable activities YOU enjoy?

Actually, I'm a graduate student with no job, so I live in a pretty rough neighborhood for cheap housing.

See, the problem with your argument is that guns differ from all those other things in that they are designed specifically to attack someone with deadly force. Cars are designed for transportation. Television is designed for entertainment. Even if you don't see it, there is a difference.

But, I'll take your side for a second. Let's take it the other way. Stop me when you think I shouldn't own a particular item. A handgun. A shot gun. an automatic weapon. A 50 caliber, semiautomatic rifle. A grenade. An RPG. A tank. A missile launcher. a c-4 bomb. A small nuclear bomb. A hydrogen bomb. A stealth bomber loaded with nuclear bombs. A chemical weapon that can cause a world-wide epidemic.

Am I making a silly argument? Not any more silly than yours. It's all about limits. You have to draw the line somewhere. My line is different than yours.

fleurya · Mar 30, 2007

Maybe someone can help me out with this one too. Why is it some of the most patriotic and/or religious people are the ones who most want to gun down a fellow American/human being, rather try to find better means of controlling crime and saving lives?

I'm not asking this in reference to anyone here, just a general question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by walmartconnect
guns aren't evil death spewing monsters
Forget it, then. I don't want mine anymore.

That cracked me up! Thanks for providing some comic relief.

TheCustomer99 · Mar 30, 2007

I don't think they want to gun down anyone. I think they just want to own a gun for sport or for protection. I don't think they want to look around for someone to gun down. But there are many conservatives who believe something because they're afraid of being called liberal, and vice versa. I really can't stand either side, but I do support a person's right to own guns. Forget the original intent of the second amendment, original intent means nothing when common law (aka judge-made law) is what really decides these issues. Common law has decided what we can and can't do with guns. Like it or not, that's what really decided what the second amendment meant.

TheCustomer99 · Mar 30, 2007

I'll say this again, bans never have and never will work.

baggss · Mar 30, 2007

fleurya said:
Maybe someone can help me out with this one too. Why is it some of the most patriotic and/or religious people are the ones who most want to gun down a fellow American/human being, rather try to find better means of controlling crime and saving lives?

Because those "other means" have proven to be failures around the world. Criminals still find ways to obtain weapons in places where firearms are banned, and paying criminals to behave is just stupid. I agree with the Florida and Texas laws ands would like to see them more widespread in the US.

I have personally been assisted by simply owning a gun twice in my life. I used to live at the beach in San Diego, in a not so nice neighborhood. First time I was literally sitting in my living room cleaning my 9MM one Friday Night when some guy running form the cops walked in my back door. Between the fact that I had just put the gun back together and was putting rounds in the clip and the fact that I was physically bigger than him, he turned and ran pretty fast out the door he came in. The cops caught him and I ID'd him. Third Strike, he was out.

Second time a buddy of my neighbors parked his car in our lot so as to block everyone else. By noon on Saturday he was not back, So I had him towed. He came to my back door with a baseball bat the next afternoon and started screaming at me. I opened my desk drawer and set the 9MM on my desk. He talked a big story, but once he saw the gun he backed off and I never saw him again. Problem solved.

I still have the gun and I practice on a regular basis.

TheCustomer99 · Mar 30, 2007

Thou speaks the truth baggss. This is why we missed you around these forums.

scooter · Mar 30, 2007

eloquently put baggss!

i still don't believe property = a life, but you bet i will use deadly force to protect myself and those i care about.

ToddG · Mar 31, 2007

fleurya said:
Maybe someone can help me out with this one too. Why is it some of the most patriotic and/or religious people are the ones who most want to gun down a fellow American/human being, rather try to find better means of controlling crime and saving lives?

Because we're realists?

If you can create a magic button that will make all the violence and crime go away, I'd be willing to give up my guns ... but wait, if there was no more crime and no more violence I could keep my guns because I wouldn't use them violently or criminally!

And until you can guarantee me that my loved ones are free from violence and crime, we'll continue to exercise our right to protect ourselves.

Your statement above is a fallacy. You're suggesting that people who own guns don't want to find other means to avoid/prevent crime. That's absurd. Most gun owners I know are in favor of tougher sentences for crimes, more police, fewer loopholes in the court system, etc.

But after three decades of a "War on Drugs" we still have how many millions of people in the U.S. with access to drugs? Sorry, making something illegal doesn't make it go away. Outlawing guns will only disarm the innocent. Do you really think someone who is willing to distribute drugs, rape, assault, and murder is going to wake up one morning and say to himself, "Whoa ... better not carry a gun today, that could get me in REAL trouble!" :blind: