Gun laws do they work

[Dick7Access]

You're applauding an individual who thinks it necessary to arm themselves against another forum member.

I don't see him that way. I am applauding and individual who arms himself against anybody forum member, no forum member who would try and harm him or is family, or take away what he has worked hard for, same as I would. I cannot speak for Bob, but I would not hesitate in the right situation (not all) to use force to stop someone from killing a total stranger. I just came back from my local supermarket, which is 1.1 miles from house. The police were there as I shopped. They were looking at the servalence tapes. Yesterday behind the story a man out walking was shot and killed. The reason they were not there this morning was they were tie up with the Bank of America hold up. .2 miles from the store. Please don’t say I should move as I have considered it many times, and still am doing so, but the question is where. I have considered Australia, but people on this forum have said I am naive about Australia being any better than, USA. The second reason I applauded Bob is I don’t get upset by all this banter, not in the least and I thought that was a great short comeback. I also see a lack of communication, probable on my part. You seem to think that I am gun happy cowboys ready to kill at a moment’s notice. I don’t carry a gun with me everywhere I go. Dat check some of my other post I am having a good time, I don’t walk around looking for someone to kill, but neither will I not be cautious. Dat let me give you a little advice, if you will take it. Don’t take all this banter so serious. If I get to KY let me buy you a cup of coffee and we can laugh about it. I think like Bob said you won’t convince me, and I won’t convince you. As the song goes Ca sa ra sa ra, or something like that.

 

[Dick7Access]

Hey Dat,
If we have coffee, I will bring my gun I don’t carry, and you can bring your gun you don’t own.

 

[dan-cat]

I don't see him that way. I am applauding and individual who arms himself against anybody forum member, no forum member who would try and harm him or is family, or take away what he has worked hard for, same as I would.

I have to say, you have me completely confused.

You tell me not to take online banter too seriously, which I can readily accept, but then empathize with an individual who has taken online banter so seriously that they think they have to protect themselves with a gun from certain forum members? That makes no sense to me.

Let me give you an anecdote of mine. As a kid we used to have a game called thunder and lightning. Bang on someone's door and run like hell. I was a pain in the ass to someone but it was funny to us at the time. You say you shot live rounds in the dark at 'people' who threw rocks at your vehicle that you couldn't see. What if you'd put a bullet through the forehead of a pain in the ass kid like I once was.

You see it's about proportion. The only people who agree with you on this thread so far have lost their sense of it. They have either
1) Expressed a regret that they haven't been allowed to lawfully kill some-one yet (which borders on the psychotic)
or
2) Are so insecure about themselves that they think they need a gun to protect themselves from our local rogue Colin who is more full of crap than a Christmas goose.

I'd have no problem meeting up with you and laughing about it. I wouldn't be a bit afraid to. But the people you are sympathizing with are not of the same caliber.

 

[Dick7Access]

I have to say, you have me completely confused.

You tell me not to take online banter too seriously, which I can readily accept, but then empathize with an individual who has taken online banter so seriously that they think they have to protect themselves with a gun from certain forum members? That makes no sense to me.

Let me give you an anecdote of mine. As a kid we used to have a game called thunder and lightning. Bang on someone's door and run like hell. I was a pain in the ass to someone but it was funny to us at the time. You say you shot live rounds in the dark at 'people' who threw rocks at your vehicle that you couldn't see. What if you'd put a bullet through the forehead of a pain in the ass kid like I once was.


You see it's about proportion. The only people who agree with you on this thread so far have lost their sense of it. They have either
1) Expressed a regret that they haven't been allowed to lawfully kill some-one yet (which borders on the psychotic)
or
2) Are so insecure about themselves that they think they need a gun to protect themselves from our local rogue Colin who is more full of crap than a Christmas goose.

I'd have no problem meeting up with you and laughing about it. I wouldn't be a bit afraid to. But the people you are sympathizing with are not of the same caliber.

I have no idea what is really behind the minds of any that post, any really don’t care. Are you really sure they are not just jerking you around. Either way I don’t care. Now if this were a face to face, having to live with situation it would be a different story. (And I just had one) My comments are about the subject not the individual. If I felt a pain in the ass kid was threating my life or my wife they would have to be a dead pain in the ass kid. Do you know that in most states if a person commits robbery with a water pistol they can be tried for armed robbery? Doesn’t matter the intent, but what is perceived. BTW, BTW BTW, by my standards today, I would be a dead pain in the ass kid, many times over. See that’s the difference, this is what I am talking about. Today people cannot take the chance if it’s a pain in the ass kid, or a drug freaked out who knows what. Dat, if you are not concerned of either it’s a Pain in the ass kid or drug freak that’s ok with me. Yesterday in Gainesville, FL, (45 miles from my house) two college girls had someone enter their room and killed one I think and raped the other one. If I was there I would shoot first and find out if they were a pain in the ass kid later. The truth be told I think, (no I know) you would too. The reason I say that is I think more highly of you even though you disagree with me. This is one, and only one, of the reasons we have so much divorce in this country. People can’t disagree without being disagreeable. That face to face situation I mention above was unbelievable, a family member who is jealous of my wife, who just had a leg amputated. I got it straighten out, and I didn’t shoot her. The gun jammed. (Just kidding)

 

[ColinEssex]

2) Are so insecure about themselves that they think they need a gun to protect themselves from our local rogue Colin who is more full of crap than a Christmas goose.

But loveable with it -wouldn't you agree Danielle?

Actually I agree with Larson, this discussion will go on forever, there will never be a "winner". Americans worship guns and cars - but mainly guns and that's fact. It will never change.

Of course we can all cite gun related crime in any country you choose, but I think Americans and America have glorified the gun for so long, they have set themselves up as their own target.

Who knows, if I was American living in America, I may well have a gun for the same reasons as Larson. Being from the UK, it does seem alien though.

I think we should accept it as being "American", that's the way they are. Rightly or wrongly doesn't matter.

Col

 

[Adam Caramon]

It does? He started off by calling me an ostrich. Obviously implying I'm blind to some sort of clear truth. What truth was that? That I am in imminent danger perhaps?

Oh, I didn't make the connection between ostrich and blindness. I thought he was implying something different entirely.

And that is where I take issue with some people. They choose to do nothing voluntarily. And they would rather be killed than to resist (which many who do not resist are also killed).

You actually think that's the case? You think anti-gun people would rather get shot than pick up a gun and defend them self or their family? Most people do not feel the need to carry a gun on their person. That doesn't mean they are willing to sacrifice their lives for their anti-gun stance.

I think you're trying to make the leap to "If you don't do as I believe, you're a victim and deserve what you get". Which is just sad. I disagree with gun people, but I would not want to see one of their kids shoot them self with their parent's gun so that I could say "See, told you so". That's just sick.

Yes, I would. Believe it or not, I would feel safer knowing that should someone attempt a criminal act, there would be more than me who could meet that threat.

You're so focused on the criminal acts (a rare event) that you aren't considering the impact of a society of cowboys. Have you ever seen a driver do something so incredibly dumb that you are just filled with rage? I have. I can honestly say that if I had a gun ready and available within reach, I probably would have shot a few people already. And I don't think I am the only one.

There are countless other examples of otherwise just rage-inspiring events that could end in deaths if everyone was armed at all times.

Now for a reveal of my wife's birthday present (she asked me to get it for her when we were out).

Hope you treated your wife to a nice dinner or something as well. (also, you may want to resize those images, they are causing the page to stretch).

Clear truth - There are people out there who will kill you if given the chance. But you don't care.

You really think people who don't want to carry guns don't care about murderers? Stop, take a deep breath, and really consider that statement.

I'm done here though. I'm not going to change anyone's opinion and you won't change mine, so no value in continuing.

That's too bad. It was interesting to get your perspective.

I think we should accept it as being "American", that's the way they are. Rightly or wrongly doesn't matter.

Guns are very much ingrained in our culture, but that doesn't mean it will always be that way. America is going through rapid changes, and its citizens are beginning to understand that there are other choices out there, other ways of life. The more they see how people in other countries live - their quality of life, the amount of vacation they get, their healthcare, etc, things will slowly change here. Americans will demand better of their government.

Just give us some time to catch up to the other Western countries. We are still very young.

 

[dan-cat]

Are you really sure they are not just jerking you around.

I would be ecstatic if they were. It took me some time to realize Colin was.

Either way I don’t care.

But you see I do because the opinion I'm opposing is packing heat to the local Wal-mart. Not packing heat doesn't threaten you in any way. Why should you care, they're not possibly going to shoot you through a desire to make themselves 'feel' safer.

If I felt a pain in the ass kid was threating my life or my wife they would have to be a dead pain in the ass kid.

You see you don't understand that my argument is addressing how you 'feel' in the first place and whether it's accurate or not. I have no problem with the causal link between how you 'feel' and what you are prepared to do.

See that’s the difference, this is what I am talking about. Today people cannot take the chance if it’s a pain in the ass kid, or a drug freaked out who knows what.

and this is what I'm talking about. You can take media snippets and interpret it anyway you like depending on how you 'feel'. It's actually a reality that millions of 'people' like me 'take the chance' every day by not arming ourselves. We haven't allowed the criminals and the media to diminish our ability to think straight.

Here are three incidents relatively close to me illustrating what I'm talking about. All domestic. Link, link and link

The truth be told I think, (no I know) you would too. The reason I say that is I think more highly of you even though you disagree with me.

No seriously I wouldn't because I wouldn't be armed. Do you see how your imagination is creating a reality that is simply not true in order to protect your personal view of the world?

This is one, and only one, of the reasons we have so much divorce in this country. People can’t disagree without being disagreeable. That face to face situation I mention above was unbelievable, a family member who is jealous of my wife, who just had a leg amputated. I got it straighten out, and I didn’t shoot her. The gun jammed. (Just kidding)

Diplomacy now you're talking. Consider it next time someone throws a projectile at your property. Especially with Halloween coming up.

 

[dan-cat]

But loveable with it -wouldn't you agree Danielle?

Col

I know you have your female fan club, Col, but I'm afraid my subscription got lost in the mail

 

[dan-cat]

Oh, I didn't make the connection between ostrich and blindness. I thought he was implying something different entirely.

Yes he managed to clarify himself before exiting stage left.

 

[Dick7Access]

I would be ecstatic if they were. It took me some time to realize Colin was.



But you see I do because the opinion I'm opposing is packing heat to the local Wal-mart. Not packing heat doesn't threaten you in any way. Why should you care, they're not possibly going to shoot you through a desire to make themselves 'feel' safer.




You see you don't understand that my argument is addressing how you 'feel' in the first place and whether it's accurate or not. I have no problem with the causal link between how you 'feel' and what you are prepared to do.



and this is what I'm talking about. You can take media snippets and interpret it anyway you like depending on how you 'feel'. It's actually a reality that millions of 'people' like me 'take the chance' every day by not arming ourselves. We haven't allowed the criminals and the media to diminish our ability to think straight.

Here are three incidents relatively close to me illustrating what I'm talking about. All domestic. Link, link and link



No seriously I wouldn't because I wouldn't be armed. Do you see how your imagination is creating a reality that is simply not true in order to protect your personal view of the world?

This has really been an interesting post to me. There are so many points of view that I can’t possible address them all. One that is making me laugh is the one above because you are more right than you can know. I have a vivid imagination, but not just on guns. The other point is that most if not all that have posted here also have imagined things about the other side. (both sides)




Diplomacy now you're talking. Consider it next time someone throws a projectile at your property. Especially with Halloween coming up.

My family member was just words, so we straighten it out with words. If someone was throwing things at my house I would first call the police, but while waiting for the police I would then use words myself. If they did not stop I would fire a shot in the air. If that did not stop them, then they would be dead. It would not be me that killed them but it would be the consequences of their own actions.

 

[dan-cat]

My family member was just words, so we straighten it out with words. If someone was throwing things at my house I would first call the police, but while waiting for the police I would then use words myself. If they did not stop I would fire a shot in the air. If that did not stop them, then they would be dead. It would not be me that killed them but it would be the consequences of their own actions.

Do you understand how different this statement is from the one you made earlier...

Where I live and many many areas I know of and beyond the 75 miles they would have shot her the minute she got out of the car

 

[Adam Caramon]

My family member was just words, so we straighten it out with words. If someone was throwing things at my house I would first call the police, but while waiting for the police I would then use words myself. If they did not stop I would fire a shot in the air. If that did not stop them, then they would be dead. It would not be me that killed them but it would be the consequences of their own actions.

Is it legal where you live to respond to damage to your property with deadly force?

 

[Dick7Access]

Do you understand how different this statement is from the one you made earlier...

No, I don't see the difference.

 

[Dick7Access]

Is it legal where you live to respond to damage to your property with deadly force?

I am not sure, but that would not make a difference. If words would not stop him, and a shot in the air would not stop him, now he is threating my life. Certainly you wouldn’t want me to hover in the corner in fright. I have a hard time understanding what the big deal is about taking out a punk.

Adam, what would you suggest I should do in such a situation?

 

[Adam Caramon]

I am not sure, but that would not make a difference. If words would not stop him, and a shot in the air would not stop him, now he is threating my life. Certainly you wouldn’t want me to hover in the corner in fright. I have a hard time understanding what the big deal is about taking out a punk.

Notice how we went from:

"If someone was throwing things at my house:"

to

"now he is threating my life"

How is damaging your property threatening your life? Either you're not explaining yourself very well when you make up your analogies, or you realize how insane it sounds and thus you adjust the analogy to better fit with your choosen reaction.

Adam, what would you suggest I should do in such a situation?

If the situation is that someone is throwing something at your house, then shouting at them to stop or letting them know that you're there tends to make them leave. If that doesn't work, then instead of escalating the situation, I'd wait for the police to arrive. I'd probably try to snap a picture of the individual if I had my phone handy.

Then once the police arrive, they either arrest the individual, or assuming the individual has since left, you give a copy of the picture to the police and file a police report. You then press charges against the individual, and if true damages to your property occurred, you sue them to recover your loses.

If for some reason the lawsuit doesn't work out, you have home owner's insurance to cover the cost of the repairs.

If the situation is truly that your life is being threatened, then you have every right to defend yourself. If you absolutely have to use a gun against a person armed only with rocks (this is what I am picturing when you indicate someone throwing things at your house), then I would try to aim for their leg or arm. This is still assuming that the appearance of you with a gun and firing into the air didn't scare the person off.

Having said all that, I cannot possibly imagine the above situation actually occurring. Who's throwing things at your house? Children?

 

[Fifty2One]

Throwing stuff at someones home is not always taken as a threat on them physically, unless it is something like flaming bottles of gasoline, or one of the occupants of the home is of ill health and the stress will cause them harm.
A lot of people who celebrate by firing guns into the air have learned that what goes up must come down, that is an irresponsible way to handle a firearm. Only a complete idiot would fire a gun into the air with thoughts that it is safer then firing at a target.
If you feel your life or that of your family is threatened, and warning someone to cease and decist is not working, then just take them down with the most effective and efficient use of the firearm, which is a body shot, not going for an arm or leg. Most untrained gun owners would most likely not hit their target anyhow, and a smaller target like a leg, arm or head is hard enough for trained persons who do not keep in practice.
ANd of course you would be trying to summon the police to begin with, though indicating they could follow the trail of blood to the person with a hole in them is more conclusive evidence then trying to take a photograph of someone who is showing agression towards you and your family.
People watch the news and hear about agressors being taken out by persons defending themselves, it should not be much of a surprize to be shot after being warned that you will be shot. If they are stupid enough to continue then they are getting what they are putting themselves in the position to receive.

Notice how we went from:

"If someone was throwing things at my house:"

to

"now he is threating my life"

How is damaging your property threatening your life? Either you're not explaining yourself very well when you make up your analogies, or you realize how insane it sounds and thus you adjust the analogy to better fit with your choosen reaction.



If the situation is that someone is throwing something at your house, then shouting at them to stop or letting them know that you're there tends to make them leave. If that doesn't work, then instead of escalating the situation, I'd wait for the police to arrive. I'd probably try to snap a picture of the individual if I had my phone handy.

Then once the police arrive, they either arrest the individual, or assuming the individual has since left, you give a copy of the picture to the police and file a police report. You then press charges against the individual, and if true damages to your property occurred, you sue them to recover your loses.

If for some reason the lawsuit doesn't work out, you have home owner's insurance to cover the cost of the repairs.

If the situation is truly that your life is being threatened, then you have every right to defend yourself. If you absolutely have to use a gun against a person armed only with rocks (this is what I am picturing when you indicate someone throwing things at your house), then I would try to aim for their leg or arm. This is still assuming that the appearance of you with a gun and firing into the air didn't scare the person off.

Having said all that, I cannot possibly imagine the above situation actually occurring. Who's throwing things at your house? Children?

 

[Dick7Access]

Notice how we went from:

"If someone was throwing things at my house:"

to

"now he is threating my life"

How is damaging your property threatening your life? Either you're not explaining yourself very well when you make up your analogies, or you realize how insane it sounds and thus you adjust the analogy to better fit with your choosen reaction.



If the situation is that someone is throwing something at your house, then shouting at them to stop or letting them know that you're there tends to make them leave. If that doesn't work, then instead of escalating the situation, I'd wait for the police to arrive. I'd probably try to snap a picture of the individual if I had my phone handy.

Then once the police arrive, they either arrest the individual, or assuming the individual has since left, you give a copy of the picture to the police and file a police report. You then press charges against the individual, and if true damages to your property occurred, you sue them to recover your loses.

If for some reason the lawsuit doesn't work out, you have home owner's insurance to cover the cost of the repairs.

If the situation is truly that your life is being threatened, then you have every right to defend yourself. If you absolutely have to use a gun against a person armed only with rocks (this is what I am picturing when you indicate someone throwing things at your house), then I would try to aim for their leg or arm. This is still assuming that the appearance of you with a gun and firing into the air didn't scare the person off.

Having said all that, I cannot possibly imagine the above situation actually occurring. Who's throwing things at your house? Children?

Yes he is threating my life, because the other recourse I have is too dangerous, and that is removing him from my property physically. I will not, I will not, stand by and let a punk destroy my property. Neither do I want my insurance rate to go up because of the actions of others. Wait for the police, you have to be jesting. They may not get to my house because they are investigating the murder down the street from my house (two days ago) http://www.ocala.com/article/20120812/ARTICLES/120819918, or they were at the robbery of Bank of America (1 day ago) http://www.ocala.com/article/20120813/ARTICLES/120819894.
Press Charges, ok I get it. You’re just pulling my leg. You did catch me for a minute. You rascal you. We both know these punks don’t have any money.

 

[Adam Caramon]

Yes he is threating my life, because the other recourse I have is too dangerous, and that is removing him from my property physically.

No. Unless you live in a state that says you have the right to protect your property with deadly force (I know Texas is one state that has a law like this, I'm sure there are others), the "other recourse" you have is to not confront the "punk".

Press Charges, ok I get it. You’re just pulling my leg. You did catch me for a minute. You rascal you. We both know these punks don’t have any money.

I don't know who these "punks" are, so I have no idea if they have money or not. You've been rather vague on the details. It seems that you are placing the value of your property over the value of the "punk"'s life. As you are a religious man, that would seem to me to directly contradict your values. I don't remember Jesus saying to love thy enemy, unless thy enemy is a punk, then fill them with lead.

 

[Adam Caramon]

Throwing stuff at someones home is not always taken as a threat on them physically, unless it is something like flaming bottles of gasoline, or one of the occupants of the home is of ill health and the stress will cause them harm.

Sure, if a gang is attacking your house with Molotov cocktails, then it is a different situation. I guess I'm just not taking the same leap that you and Dick are. Has anyone ever thrown a Molotov cocktail at your house? I mean, I are we discussing reality or the most extreme situations possible?

Just for the record, if Godzilla attacks your home, you have every right to fire your gun at him.

A lot of people who celebrate by firing guns into the air have learned that what goes up must come down, that is an irresponsible way to handle a firearm. Only a complete idiot would fire a gun into the air with thoughts that it is safer then firing at a target.

Agreed. I guess I would fire a gun in the air to scare someone, if all previous steps had failed, before I would intentionally shoot the person.

People watch the news and hear about agressors being taken out by persons defending themselves, it should not be much of a surprize to be shot after being warned that you will be shot. If they are stupid enough to continue then they are getting what they are putting themselves in the position to receive.

With that logic, farmers should be able to shoot kids that steal crops from their farms. Do you think that is justifiable?

Shooting a gun at another human being should be the absolute last resort, IMO.

 

[Dick7Access]

Shooting a gun at another human being should be the absolute last resort, IMO.

Adam we agree.

I still like the line by Katharine Hepburn in the movie Rooster Cogburn
When he didn’t fire right away she said “What were you trying to do, talk him to death”