Uh, newsflash: unless your assailant is a horrible shot, you'd better be out of his line of sight extremely rapidly, because there's no way you can outrun his bullets. But good luck with that...
This poll is almost even ended, 12 to 13 Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Anyways my solution for all you cry babies that say them having a gun makes things unfair, why not make some sort of metal plated gloves then lug them around in your purse or pocket. Then when the criminal comes an tries shooting you all you need to do is put your hand in front of the gun's line of fire an the bullet will hit your metal plated glove instead, thus making his gun useless. Also just how close are any of you in these imagined scenerios, in any real encounter the guys right up in your face, all you'd need to do is a bicep destruction (take your knuckles an hit his bicep muscle disabling it). This is one thing we learned in Jeet Kune Do, it's really easy to do! You can cause the firearm to discharge over your shoulder, then move in and annihilate his biceps so the hand can't hold his weapon. I see so many ways out of a gun fight that it's not even funny to think a gun is more dangerous then someone unarmed.
I dont know a whole lot about guns although i do want to work homicide when i am older. Its just that i think that as a citizien i should beable to protect myself as i please. The reason why we have an increase in crime is because criminals will steal guns or buy them through the paper. There is no way to stop them.
Are you saying someone unarmed is more dangerous than someone with a gun? WTF?? That's like predicting that WWIII is going to start with Tibet invading America...tomorro
No i dont want to be a hit man and fyi thats sniper. No i want to do kinda what the do on law and oder or csi.
You just want to search for semen with that funky blue light, don't ya? It'll probably be sderenzis you find Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A cop once explained to me the reason there are so many questionable police shootings. It takes a certain finite amount of time to determine whether the person in front of you has hostile intentions and is capable of carrying them out. Then it takes a certain finite amount of time to get your gun out and shoot it. If you take too long doing those things, the assailant will often have enough time to attack you first and render you incapable of using your gun, if not actually dead. This is a problem for cops. They have the aptitude and training to read people and can tell their intentions and abilities more quickly than we can. And cops also have lots of weapons training and can get their guns out of their conveniently positioned holster faster than we can dig ours out of a purse or pocket. And they still occasionally make mistakes and shoot somebody who is merely deranged and harmless, or somebody who acts hostile but has no strength and no weapon. He said this is the reason most police don't really recommend that citizens carry guns. A civilian would have to draw their gun the moment somebody comes within fifteen feet of them and looks the slightest bit suspicious, in order to get the drop on a real assailant. To achieve that, they'd be shooting the wrong guy two or three times a week.
The question is framed wrong. Do I think everyone needs a handgun? No. Do I think some people need a handgun? Yes. This question is too absolute, as if everyone must have a handgun or no one.
It depends. If you live somewhere you're likely to encounter life threatening violent crime, then yes. Just like you buy a 4x4 if you live in the mountains and it snows a lot. You wouldn't go for a rear wheel drive sports car. Here, I think there's more danger of being stabbed. You don't really hear about people getting shot that often. If people do shoot each other, they're usually both crims, known by each other. Ideally you avoid all situations where somebody might try and mess you up. Keep your wits about you. Lock your car doors when you get in so you don't get car-jacked, etc. 9 times out of 10, with a little street smarts and brains, I'm sure you could get out of a dodgy situation or away from a suspicious looking person before it became a problem.
I don't think it has much to do with training, it's instinctive. Cops are human too, they are not machines, they get scared, if you make a human scared that human will attack you with whatever weapon they have, and the more dangerous you are the most likely you are to be shot. Training does not really help, unless you mean martial arts training, but even a martial artistist would want a gun for certain situations. Police officers practice Akido, but honestly I don't think Akido works very well as a martial art. When I was training, honestly, I could never use Akido in sparing, I always would fall back to Jujitsu, boxing, wrestling, wing chun, or just anything which actually worked in the moment. A police officer might not have the intention of harming the attacker, neither would you if you were being attacked, until you get punched in the face and panic and reach for your weapon. It's natural instinct, anyone who is scared enough, and who has access to any sort of weapon, will use it, and gun has nothing ot do with it, people will use a bow and arrow, people will make new sorts of guns, the point is, people need to feel safe. If you don't attack people, you'll be making the environment safer. In reality, the world is not safe. You can go your whole life and never attack anyone, and still get beat up, and still be forced to hurt people. Basically you don't even choose if you get to hurt people or not, they choose, you don't get to choose which weapons you use, they choose, the only thing you get to choose is who goes into the hospital and who doesnt. If you want to end violence, figure out why people bully and attack people for no reason. If you just want to remove the guns, it wont end violence, people get killed in prisons all the time and theres no guns.
Fraggle Rocker, but unlike the policeman, the citizen would have the element of surprise (of being armed). They could evaluate the situation with the appearance of being the underdog in the encounter, and then retreive the gun after their assessment. Spurious Monkey, you're right about the American sheeple. Ironicallly - those with guns (ie the right wing), instead of fighting the government, would be putting pro-government bumper stickers on their pickup trucks and debating on chatboards like this that the new fascism is God's will or some such rubbish.
... and yet, the statistics CLEARLY SHOW that this is not happening. It's not the OK CORAL, it's not blood running in the streets.
Facts, UK, Population, 60,000,000, firearm related homicides each year, 46 ish. USA, Population, 300,000,000, firearm related homicides per year, 16,000 ish. UK, strict guns laws, USA, lax guns laws. Work it out.
Man are you stupid. You are assuming the guy with the gun will hesitate. If he doesn't you're just another victim lying dead in an alleyway. Yes, a few martial arts maneuvers may save you in certain circumstances. However 99% of the time the guy with the gun is going to own you.
Yeah, but overall the total intentional homocide rate is roughly the same per capita. So in UK they are being killed with knives, lead pipes, ropes, drownings, and other weapons. Meanwhile in the US many would be vitims are killing their attackers.
