Dismiss Notice

STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Guns? (do you carry?) revived

Discussion in 'Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel' started by drizzt3117, Aug 4, 2006.

  1. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    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.

    Wow, that wouldn't fly AT ALL in the US haha.
     


  2. Edward Appleby

    Edward Appleby Senior member

    Messages:
    3,246
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    Cambridge/Texas
    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.

    Globe, you seem to be implying that using a gun for self defence entails some kind of Delta Force tactical showcase. In order to deter a mugger, you don't need to be able to rappel from a Blackhawk and clear a wharehouse in pitch darkness.
     


  3. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim In Time Out

    Messages:
    19,179
    Likes Received:
    13
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    Globe, you seem to be implying that using a gun for self defence entails some kind of Delta Force tactical showcase. In order to deter a mugger, you don't need to be able to rappel from a Blackhawk and clear a wharehouse in pitch darkness.


    Oooh but it helps!

     


  4. Edward Appleby

    Edward Appleby Senior member

    Messages:
    3,246
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    Cambridge/Texas
    Oooh but it helps!


    The bit where the woman's talking an the guy jumps through the window is fucking classic.
     


  5. Arethusa

    Arethusa Senior member

    Messages:
    5,128
    Likes Received:
    72
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    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.
    And the fact that it's a foot long monstrosity. You aren't seriously thinking about carrying a Desert Eagle as a weapon, are you? It's mechanically interesting, but it's really not much more than a big, expensive range toy. You can hunt with it, but that's about as practical as it gets.
     


  6. Tokyo Slim

    Tokyo Slim In Time Out

    Messages:
    19,179
    Likes Received:
    13
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Where Eagles Dare!
    The bit where the woman's talking an the guy jumps through the window is fucking classic.

    Who would you rather face, the guys in my previous post (the "ground" or Army part of the JSDF)

    Or these guys:

    The "Navy" part of the JSDF...

    Click the picture of sailors!
     


  7. DNW

    DNW Senior member

    Messages:
    10,526
    Likes Received:
    4
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Location:
    Recession, Baby


  8. chrysalid

    chrysalid Senior member

    Messages:
    542
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    Who would you rather face, the guys in my previous post (the "ground" or Army part of the JSDF)

    Or these guys:

    The "Navy" part of the JSDF...

    Click the picture of sailors!


    jesus, admiral yamamoto must be spinning in his watery grave.
     


  9. johnapril

    johnapril Senior member

    Messages:
    5,663
    Likes Received:
    6
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    [​IMG]
     


  10. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Likes Received:
    391
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    Globe, you seem to be implying that using a gun for self defence entails some kind of Delta Force tactical showcase. In order to deter a mugger, you don't need to be able to rappel from a Blackhawk and clear a wharehouse in pitch darkness.


    EA, let me tie this in with what mute, D, and huntsman said

    1. I don't think that you need to be able to rappel to use a firearm I think that the ability to store a firearm safly, draw it under pressure, and use it under pressure, while achieving what you would like to do, without hitting any unwanted targets, is a lot harder than most people think.

    2. after having this discussion a number of times on SF, I would say that people like D and Kai who take things seriously, are certainly at a level that I admire in terms of training and safty.

    3. I believe that most people would be better served in trusting at less than lethal weapons for their defence, not because I care about the lives of bad guys, but because they are easier to train with, they are safer to carry, and they force you to know how to use them.

    4. I believe that it comes down to risk assesment - if you are in serious risk of being held up by pistol bearing assailants, I am not sure that you are going to be able to use a handgun to influence events in your favor. if you are most likly to run into a large mean unarmed guy, then you probrably don't want to shoot him, anyway.

    5. what ever you want to say, there are a lot of people getting killed and maimed by gun mistakes. just as importantly, most people who get killed by criminals are falling victem to guns that were stolen from people who didn't keep them securely.
     


  11. Mute

    Mute Senior member

    Messages:
    1,113
    Likes Received:
    52
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    L.A.
    EA, let me tie this in with what mute, D, and huntsman said 1. I don't think that you need to be able to rappel to use a firearm I think that the ability to store a firearm safly, draw it under pressure, and use it under pressure, while achieving what you would like to do, without hitting any unwanted targets, is a lot harder than most people think. 2. after having this discussion a number of times on SF, I would say that people like D and Kai who take things seriously, are certainly at a level that I admire in terms of training and safty. 3. I believe that most people would be better served in trusting at less than lethal weapons for their defence, not because I care about the lives of bad guys, but because they are easier to train with, they are safer to carry, and they force you to know how to use them. 4. I believe that it comes down to risk assesment - if you are in serious risk of being held up by pistol bearing assailants, I am not sure that you are going to be able to use a handgun to influence events in your favor. if you are most likly to run into a large mean unarmed guy, then you probrably don't want to shoot him, anyway. 5. what ever you want to say, there are a lot of people getting killed and maimed by gun mistakes. just as importantly, most people who get killed by criminals are falling victem to guns that were stolen from people who didn't keep them securely.
    I don't disagree with any of the above except perhaps that a lot of people are getting killed or maimed by gun mistakes. I'm sure the number isn't small, but I don't think people are as irresponsible on inept with guns as they are with a great many other consumer products, a good number of which are actually responsible for more deaths than guns. As to training with non-lethal means, absolutely. One should not rely on just a gun to defend oneself. It needs to be a complete picture. One caveat with that is that based on the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, when criminals attack, the victims reactions are broken off into three categories: 1. Those who comply 2. Those who resist with a gun 3. Those who resist by any means other than a gun According to FBI statistics, those who resist with a gun are less often injured or killed than those who respond in the other two manner. Those who resist with any other method actually are injured or killed the most often. IIRC, almost three times more than when they resist with a gun. Now here's the real stinker. Even those who comply are twice as likely to be injured or killed than those who resist with a gun. I will guess though, that most of those in that last category were as untrained with those non-lethal responses as many are with guns, hence the larger number. Let's be clear. I don't advocate anyone defending themselves with a gun just because they don't want to give up their hard earned money. But the fact is, sometimes a criminal will still decide to hurt you even if you do exactly as they say. When that does happen you can't just stand there and take it. You need to do your best to break away or fight back. If the latter is the only option, then a gun is still the best way to do it. As for the stolen guns issue, I don't see how that relates to concealed carry firearms. If you're carrying your gun most of the time, I would think that the number of stolen firearms would actually decrease as opposed to when you leave them at home unattended.
     


  12. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I don't disagree with any of the above except perhaps that a lot of people are getting killed or maimed by gun mistakes. I'm sure the number isn't small, but I don't think people are as irresponsible on inept with guns as they are with a great many other consumer products, a good number of which are actually responsible for more deaths than guns.

    As to training with non-lethal means, absolutely. One should not rely on just a gun to defend oneself. It needs to be a complete picture. One caveat with that is that based on the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, when criminals attack, the victims reactions are broken off into three categories:

    1. Those who comply
    2. Those who resist with a gun
    3. Those who resist by any means other than a gun

    According to FBI statistics, those who resist with a gun are less often injured or killed than those who respond in the other two manner. Those who resist with any other method actually are injured or killed the most often. IIRC, almost three times more than when they resist with a gun. Now here's the real stinker. Even those who comply are twice as likely to be injured or killed than those who resist with a gun. I will guess though, that most of those in that last category were as untrained with those non-lethal responses as many are with guns, hence the larger number.

    Let's be clear. I don't advocate anyone defending themselves with a gun just because they don't want to give up their hard earned money. But the fact is, sometimes a criminal will still decide to hurt you even if you do exactly as they say. When that does happen you can't just stand there and take it. You need to do your best to break away or fight back. If the latter is the only option, then a gun is still the best way to do it.

    As for the stolen guns issue, I don't see how that relates to concealed carry firearms. If you're carrying your gun most of the time, I would think that the number of stolen firearms would actually decrease as opposed to when you leave them at home unattended.


    A lot of it depends on the situation too. Just because you own a gun doesn't mean you're going to cap anyone that steps up (well, at least not in my case) I have a lot of nonlethal weapons as well including area pepper sprays, stun guns, and a tazer in case a lower threshold of force is necessary.
     


  13. Drinkwaters

    Drinkwaters OG Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    2,293
    Likes Received:
    676
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    Location:
    Cambridge, MA
    Ok, by no means am I interested in guns or owning one but I recently was left a hand gun by an old friend who is getting rid of his estate. It is a Walther P.38 ac43 with serial # 1015F. Can anyone tell me if this gun is worth anything and how much should I sell it for, should I find an interested party.
    Thanks for any information.

    Gary
     


  14. lawyerdad

    lawyerdad Senior member

    Messages:
    22,595
    Likes Received:
    7,830
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    And the fact that it's a foot long monstrosity.
    You say that like it's a bad thing.
     


  15. Pennglock

    Pennglock Senior member

    Messages:
    3,244
    Likes Received:
    396
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Im suprised to see most people on SF support carrying guns. Or maybe the enthusiats are just the only people responding? Most of the folks I associate with would look at me like Im crazy if they knew I packed heat.

    Despite my last name, I chose a Rohrbaugh over a Glock. This little gun is so invisible that my girlfriend never even knows when I carry it.

    I got my carry permit as soon as I turned 21. Id be willing to bet that the university I attended has most students victemized per capita than any other in the nation. Every kind of kidnapping, car-jacking, and mugging you can imagine I read about in my school paper. Not long ago some poor little engineering girl got shot in the leg right in front of my apartment as some thugs were in the process of robbing another kid's car!

    Anyway, I think of guns as catostrophic insurance. I did a little math piece on it a few years back. Basicialy, if you dont mind carrying a pistol, and arent incompetent, it can be shown that carrying a gun is a good insurance buy. If I had some time Id think about writing a proper paper on the subject. Ive never heard of anyone approaching the issue from an actuarial standpoint. Even with some very conservative number, my model showed packing heat as a very good buy.

    Big picture issues aside, I would still be for carrying guns even if few people people were effectly defending themselves. I just think it's an individual's natural right to be able to protect his life. The main way criminals kill people in our society is with weaponry, and if they are determined to harm you, you are at their mercy unless you have a weapon of your own. Unless you are some kind of ninja... Obviously avoidence and awareness are your first line of defense, but there are still plenty of people taken by suprise every day. Im kind of rambling, but I just wanted to say I think the individual's right to self-defense trumps any collectivist concern for society (though I do not believe legal use of guns has a net negative effect on society.)
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by