or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Guns? (do you carry?) revived
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Guns? (do you carry?) revived - Page 5

post #61 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
'Cause they're badass mothafuckas.
No, dude, badass mothafuckas don't need permits. They just carry around whatever they want and bust caps into anyone who looks at them crosseyed.
post #62 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim
No, dude, badass mothafuckas don't need permits. They just carry around whatever they want and bust caps into anyone who looks at them crosseyed.

I didn't think we were talking about getting a permit and whatnot. I thought the original topic of the thread and your response was the question "do you carry" and "why?"

But yeah, you're right. A lot of the true badasses don't get permits. But most of them are friggin little weasels who think they're bad who pack, but actually do get a permit.

Not sure if you saw my edit to my post, but like I said, I work in one of the most dangerous cities in the world and have never had anyone stick a gun in my face and I doubt this is a very common occurrance unless you go looking for it (which, incidentally, carrying a gun will give you that bravery).

Nevertheless, I would not deny any of these people a right to own and carry weapons.
post #63 of 200
not to blow this up, but I am going to say what I said before - I don't think that citizens should carry firearms, not from a philosophical issue, just because I think that the chance that you will be able to use one to actually influence an event in your favor is a great deal slighter than the chance that your firearm will end up stolen or involved in an accident that will cause more grief. my feeling is that if you really need to carry a firearm, you are in troubel to begin with.

that said, if I was going to carry one, it would probrably be along the lines of what kai does - which has a huge effective/practical ratio.
post #64 of 200
I don't carry, but that is a function of my state. It's not allowed in Wisconsin under any circumstances. Well, actually there is one exception. There is a wrinkle in the law. While concealed carry is prohibited, open carry is not - as in, you can legally holster your gun right on the outside of your pants. HOWEVER, most people who do this will get a disorderly conduct citation or some variant of disturbing the peace.

Alternatively, in the next year, I'll probably apply for the Florida concealed carry permit. You can get one as a non-resident, and it's good in quite a few states. Will I ever carry when I'm in one of those states? Unlikely. But I want to have that option.
post #65 of 200
HK P7 M13 Then of course there's the S&W 357 snubnose with ported barrel. I don't carry them around, I just have the HK for collector value mainly...and like shooting them both at the range. The ported barrel on the 357 lessens the recoil, but makes the gun so friggin loud. I love shooting it, people stop shooting and come up and watch me to see what the hell is making such a noise.
post #66 of 200
I'll say this once again. Just because people believe that a gun in civilian hands are more likely to be misused or take away and used by a criminal, does not mean it will. In fact, most of the time, the opposite proves to be true. Most civilians, even the ones without training, do not wind up getting themselves or someone else wrongfully harmed or killed. And before anyone else feel the need to tag me as being overly sensitive to this because I might be one of the unwashed, untrained gun-owning troglodytes, my experience with firearms probably exceeds most Law Enforcement Officials. But I don't feel that my level of training is necessary for one to use a firearm effectively in self defense. This doesn't mean I don't think it's a very smart thing to do. In fact I encourage anyone who wants to own a firearm to get the proper training. However, I know a great number of untrained gunowners and none of them have ever behaved irresponsibly with their guns. Even the most conservative estimates of self defense handgun usage in the U.S. put the number in the mid-six figures. If civilian gun usage is as dangerous as some would like everyone to believe, there would be a great deal more reports of injury and deaths with fireamrs then actually exists. This is one truth that even the Brady group could not twist. The fact is, most gunowners are responsible. No one identifies drunk drivers as respresentative of all car owners, yet those who are for gun control seem to have no problem trying to make criminals and the reckless appear to be representative of all gunowners. Have I personally carried a handgun? When legal and if I felt it was prudent, yes. Just one additional point. In California, getting a legal permit is not just a function of who you know or bribe...excuse me, contribute campaign support to. In some places, like L.A. County that may be true. But there are a good number of counties that will give CCW permits if you have no criminal record and take the required training courses.
post #67 of 200
Quote:
In fact, most of the time, the opposite proves to be true. Most civilians, even the ones without training, do not wind up getting themselves or someone else wrongfully harmed or killed.
Right on, Mute. The frequent stories on the local news about little old widows blowing holes in burglars with double barreled shotguns are quite celebrated here. I'm sure those on the other end of the argument want to say that the burglars are in fact the victims (of society, the status quo, or whatever) and then show a complete disregard for the actual victim of the crime....but hell; gun owners, I salute you.
post #68 of 200
I've never owned a gun or shot one other than a BB gun. Though I gladly support the 2nd amendment and have no qualms with people owning guns.

What I don't get is why people seem to thing of guns as some magical contraption of evil incarnate? Why don't people see them as what they are? They are nothing more than simple instruments. It all comes down to a tube, a projectile, and a charge. This mechanical simplicity is so very appealing to me. Sure, there have been some great advancements, but all just extra frosting.

So to get back on topic. Whenever I get around to learning guns, I can think of nothing I'd rather own than a perfectly balanced revolver. Might as well go for a single action at that!
post #69 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mute
I'll say this once again. Just because people believe that a gun in civilian hands are more likely to be misused or take away and used by a criminal, does not mean it will. In fact, most of the time, the opposite proves to be true. Most civilians, even the ones without training, do not wind up getting themselves or someone else wrongfully harmed or killed.

And before anyone else feel the need to tag me as being overly sensitive to this because I might be one of the unwashed, untrained gun-owning troglodytes, my experience with firearms probably exceeds most Law Enforcement Officials. But I don't feel that my level of training is necessary for one to use a firearm effectively in self defense. This doesn't mean I don't think it's a very smart thing to do. In fact I encourage anyone who wants to own a firearm to get the proper training. However, I know a great number of untrained gunowners and none of them have ever behaved irresponsibly with their guns.

Even the most conservative estimates of self defense handgun usage in the U.S. put the number in the mid-six figures. If civilian gun usage is as dangerous as some would like everyone to believe, there would be a great deal more reports of injury and deaths with fireamrs then actually exists. This is one truth that even the Brady group could not twist. The fact is, most gunowners are responsible. No one identifies drunk drivers as respresentative of all car owners, yet those who are for gun control seem to have no problem trying to make criminals and the reckless appear to be representative of all gunowners.

Have I personally carried a handgun? When legal and if I felt it was prudent, yes.

Just one additional point. In California, getting a legal permit is not just a function of who you know or bribe...excuse me, contribute campaign support to. In some places, like L.A. County that may be true. But there are a good number of counties that will give CCW permits if you have no criminal record and take the required training courses.


Mute,

the first thread that I took part in on style forum was about this subject. I feel pretty strongly about the subject. I am sure that you believe that you are right. I don't believe that you are. I spent a little chunk of my life making my living as a gunman, and training people who made their living as gunmen. this type of discussion usually boils down to a dick contest - and I don't feel any need to start discussing with you who is more qualifiied to make a judgment on this matter, but I would be very very suprised, if it wasn't me.

and let me put it this way - I am willing to stipulate that if we were both standing 20 meters in front of paper targets, with what ever weapon either of us chose, you may very well outshoot me each and every time. using a firearm to influence a situation is not about being able to shoot well at paper, it is a wide basket of skills and capabilities that I don't believe is that common among civillians.
post #70 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by drizzt3117
That's a pretty sweet looking gun, no idea on the ident though.

I personally really like guns in stainless. I'd like a DE if I could justify the cost/weight hehe.

I never liked DEs until I shot one, and later took it apart. Nice platform, remarkable design. As for justifying the weight, that I understand, but I am not going to get justifying the cost from someone who drives a V-12 Merc :-).

As for my pistol, Tokyo got close, it is a Smith Performance Center 3566 Limited, chambered in .356 TSW (a stretched 9mm).

A slight nod towards the current thread direction: Where I would most like to carry is to college, where I have a semester remaining. During the Spring semester, their were a series of muggings/assaults/robberies whatever you want to call them, at the corner I walk through twice a day, 3 days/wk, twice of which are at night. One of them occurred at 2:00 in the afternoon. The last guy was hit in the head with a pipe. Another guy got slammed to the ground by a pair of assailants and got brain damage out of it. Perhaps I am already in trouble for thinking I would like to be carrying when I walk through there, but if so, I did not seek nor did I provoke it.

Regards,
Huntsman
post #71 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter
Mute, the first thread that I took part in on style forum was about this subject. I feel pretty strongly about the subject. I am sure that you believe that you are right. I don't believe that you are. I spent a little chunk of my life making my living as a gunman, and training people who made their living as gunmen. this type of discussion usually boils down to a dick contest - and I don't feel any need to start discussing with you who is more qualifiied to make a judgment on this matter, but I would be very very suprised, if it wasn't me. and let me put it this way - I am willing to stipulate that if we were both standing 20 meters in front of paper targets, with what ever weapon either of us chose, you may very well outshoot me each and every time. using a firearm to influence a situation is not about being able to shoot well at paper, it is a wide basket of skills and capabilities that I don't believe is that common among civillians.
That is entirely a straw man argument. Whether a civilian could be quite capable of that kind of shooting skill, he will absolutely lose if he does not have a gun. Period. Some bad guys will just shoot you simply because he felt like doing so. Cooperation or not. I believe you are the one who believe you are right, but are more than likely wrong. You have no idea of my background or what I'm capable of with a firearm, but that is still entirely besides the point. There are millions of guns in the U.S. Most misuses of firearms in this country are perpetrated by criminals, not your average joe. Just because you are better qualified than the rest of these average joes in the use of firearms doesn't make them unqualified to defend themselves. The fact is, most people don't even have to fire a shot when defending themselves with a gun. Just the mere presence of the firearm caused the danger to go away. You want to tell me that those people would have been better off unarmed? I think not. If you want to talk about bad guys taking firearms away from a civilian and using it against them, you should look at the statistics for take aways from police officers. They have their guns taken away more than private citizens. Granted, that is because they have to engage a criminal as part of their job. They don't have the luxury of being able to retreat from the scene. Nevertheless, I venture to say your takeaway scenario is happens more often in your imagination than in real life.
post #72 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mute
That is entirely a straw man argument. Whether a civilian could be quite capable of that kind of shooting skill, he will absolutely lose if he does not have a gun. Period. Some bad guys will just shoot you simply because he felt like doing so. Cooperation or not. I believe you are the one who believe you are right, but are more than likely wrong. You have no idea of my background or what I'm capable of with a firearm, but that is still entirely besides the point. There are millions of guns in the U.S. Most misuses of firearms in this country are perpetrated by criminals, not your average joe. Just because you are better qualified than the rest of these average joes in the use of firearms doesn't make them unqualified to defend themselves. The fact is, most people don't even have to fire a shot when defending themselves with a gun. Just the mere presence of the firearm caused the danger to go away. You want to tell me that those people would have been better off unarmed? I think not.

If you want to talk about bad guys taking firearms away from a civilian and using it against them, you should look at the statistics for take aways from police officers. They have their guns taken away more than private citizens. Granted, that is because they have to engage a criminal as part of their job. They don't have the luxury of being able to retreat from the scene. Nevertheless, I venture to say your takeaway scenario is happens more often in your imagination than in real life.

To be fair, I think Globe is talking about someone taking a gun away from someone when it's stored at a house, or a child finding one and using it, rather than someone taking a gun away from a civilian while hes carrying it...

I've went over my training and qualifications in the last thread, I feel confident that I'll have an edge over the common criminal in both skill and firepower.
post #73 of 200
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntsman
I never liked DEs until I shot one, and later took it apart. Nice platform, remarkable design. As for justifying the weight, that I understand, but I am not going to get justifying the cost from someone who drives a V-12 Merc :-).

As for my pistol, Tokyo got close, it is a Smith Performance Center 3566 Limited, chambered in .356 TSW (a stretched 9mm).

A slight nod towards the current thread direction: Where I would most like to carry is to college, where I have a semester remaining. During the Spring semester, their were a series of muggings/assaults/robberies whatever you want to call them, at the corner I walk through twice a day, 3 days/wk, twice of which are at night. One of them occurred at 2:00 in the afternoon. The last guy was hit in the head with a pipe. Another guy got slammed to the ground by a pair of assailants and got brain damage out of it. Perhaps I am already in trouble for thinking I would like to be carrying when I walk through there, but if so, I did not seek nor did I provoke it.

Regards,
Huntsman

Fair point about the DE, I'll probably end up getting one but probably wont carry it on a regular basis cuz of the weight.
post #74 of 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kismat
I live in Melbourne that's every third person!

Shit, I live in Texas. Even my Grandmother carries a gun.
post #75 of 200
As far as i know, in Sydney, knives are a lot more common than guns amoungst the masses. Licencising is very strict, especially with pistols; and the police do random checks at people's houses to make sure they are being stored correctly. The percentage of aussie citizens carrying a firearm is miniscule.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › Guns? (do you carry?) revived