Hand Guns - Yes or No

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by sderenzi, Oct 31, 2006.


Hand Guns Are Needed (by me or others)

  1. Yes

  2. No

  1. sderenzi

    sderenzi Banned

    Answer Poll (idea from Baron Max)
  2. Prince_James

    Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog)

    They are the most practical means of defense in any situation. A Colt 1911 or Beretta 9mm.
  3. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    Two quite different pistols you mention there James. a .45ACP with a capacity of 7+1, or an unspecified 'Beretta' model, but you specify the calibre. Very odd. You don't know much about handguns, do you?
  4. Baron Max

    Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    A handgun, carried at all times, is the great equalizer.

    In my opinion, a woman is a damned fool not to carry a handgun. Women are assaulted and/or raped at an alarming rate in the USA and for her to be without protection is the height of ignorance. It's estimated that there are over 500,000 women raped in the USA every single year!

    A handgun is no different to carrying insurance or wearing seatbelts in order to protect oneself in case of harmful accidents, or even locking doors and windows in your home at night. Gambling with ones own life or the lives of their loved ones is a foolish notion ...but it amazes me the number of people who do exactly that ...gamble with their lives as the stake.

    And, yes, for all of those who will argue, I'm assuming that the person is also smart enough to learn how to use the weapon, get the necessary permits AND is careful enough not to let his four-year old kid play with it!

    Baron Max
  5. Baron Max

    Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    What an odd thing to say! Not everyone knows all of the model numbers of every weapon that's made, not even "gun nuts" know them all, for god's sake! I own a Ruger .44magnum, and have had it for years, but I don't know the fuckin' model number of it without going in to look. So what the hell does that have to do with anything?

    I know that you're against handguns, but there's no reason to be nasty or condescending.

    Baron Max
  6. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    I used to shoot a 4" Ruger .38. Nice piece. What model numbers have to do with anything is that 'Prince James' sounded like he was making a recommendation of a weapon for personal protection, without knowing who he was recomending what to. IE, he was talking out of his arse. He said a 'Beretta 9mm', because in films and TV you only really see the model 92, (occasionally in a gangsta movie a 93r, like he'd know the difference) so he appears to getting his information from Hollywood!

    As I used to shoot a Ruger .38, how can you say I am against handguns, Max? Typically, you need polemics in this debate, because you cannot handle shades of grey. I like shooting, I just think all guns shot be registered, and all shooters licensed. I'm not anti-gun, so put down that tar brush!
  7. Prince_James

    Prince_James Plutarch (Mickey's Dog)


    A Beretta 92 (M9). I was thinking of military matters beforehand, and the two sidearms of US forces in the 20th century came to mind. Of course, they are different guns with different usages. However, I was not suggesting them specifically for personal protection, just listing off two guns as an add onto my statement as examples of the type I was thinking of.

    Sorry for the confusion.
  8. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    phlogistician, in every country that has registered guns the access to them has been severely restricted as to mode and type, and done nothing at all to keep them out of criminals hands, and like the Baron I believe that everyone should carry a gun, they don't have to but they should, as the Baron pointed out they ( the gun) are the great equalizer, and as bad as things are in America the amount of violence committed around the world is astounding, it may be hidden in statistics of many other names, but it is on the rise, and shows no signs or slowing, the good person is no threat with a weapon, the criminal is a threat with no weapon, and who do you have the most to fear from, and don't say moment of anger, if you cannot control yourself angry why should a person have to deal with your out burst with their bare hands, and have to wait for the authorities to arrive, do you know how many people die because they were waiting for the police, or couldn't even inform them that they were needed? Hand guns and weapons in general in the hand of the population keeps the peace, the idiot with the self control problem will not know if he will be met with force for his out burst and the criminal will never know when the honest citizen will be able to stop his actions by being able to stop him, and it don't take shooting the idiot to do it, many time the show of force is all that is needed.
  9. Fire

    Fire Registered Senior Member

    If everyone had guns, we'd stand more of a chance of being victims of crime anyway. America is nearly a good example of that.
  10. Baron Max

    Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Huh? What the fuck does that mean?

    I take it to mean that everyone is really a criminal at heart, therefore, if they carry guns, then they'll also commit crimes ...ie., "The gun made me do it!" Is that what you mean?????

    Baron Max
  11. Lord Hillyer

    Lord Hillyer Banned

    Guns don't mean that there will be more violence; it all depends on the people with the guns. Guns don't fire themselves.
  12. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    Er, wrong. Check out the stats on criminal activities with guns in the UK vs USA, and you will see that. It's so hard to get guns in the UK, that criminals often have to re-activate deacts, or blank firers, and load their own ammo.

    A gang that was re-activating MAC10's bought in the states were recently busted, for instance, as well as a gang activating 8mm (yes 8mm) blank firing pistols.

    But they aren't. People's level of training, ability, and levelheadedness in a stressful situation vary considerably. Picking up a gun doesn't even out anything.

    I was trained in the military method of pistol and rifle use. If someone showed me their pistol, and didn't draw, therefore (like TW Scott claims to have done dozens of times) three taps later it would be all over for him. You only draw if you intend to shoot, up to that point, you use assertive body language, calming voice techniques, and do not escalate a situation. Our boy Scott reaching for a piece he did't intend to draw would get a deadly response from any vet or well trained wrongdoer. I've also been trained to take down people reaching for their gun. Within 12feet a shower can kiss his ass goodbye.

    Guns equalise nothing, it's still all about ability, and untrained, undisicplined people with firearms, are what is causing your horrendous death toll in the USA.
  13. Baron Max

    Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Oh, geez, and all this time I thought it was because of criminals and murderers. Now I see that guns just get up and walk around at night killing people and commiting, then hurrying home before the owner wakes up.

    Thanks for the info, Phlog, now I'll never be able to sleep at night!! :)

    Baron Max
  14. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    There you go again Max, stuffing a straw man. Maybe I meant that untrained, undisciplined people were the people that, under the UK system, would not get a firearms certificate, including criminals, are the problem.

    But you have to try and twist my words into something a 'gun grabber' would say. Well, no cigar, you missed by a mile. Is you aim as bad with that .44 too?
  15. Oniw17

    Oniw17 ascetic, sage, diogenes, bum?

    I think the proble in America is that we have so many unregistered or stolen guns running around, rather than how we legally issue them.
  16. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    The problem is that there is no requirement to keep a gun secured, and that guns can be bought 2nd hand no questions asked. So sales, and thefts supply criminals. Law abiding citizens are willingly contributing towards putting guns into the hand of criminals in this way. That is the problem.
  17. Buffalo Roam

    Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    phlogistician, no the problem is the criminal, as you pointed out they will make their own if necessary, and why is the crime rate with weapons going up in any country that has restrictive fire arms laws like Britain, and now Australia, the reports show that there have been a massive increase in gun violence in those countries, and it is increasing.
  18. SoLiDUS




    Educate yourself, people...
  19. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    The stats are misleading. We get headlines that we have had a 35% increase in gun homicides. SHOCK! HORROR! That actually means about a dozen more per year, on top of the usual 40 ish, compared to the 16,000 per year in the United States.

    Stict gun laws keep the death toll down. That is a fact, and no twisting of the stats will ever prove otherwise.

    You might think that 16,000 gun homicides per annum is acceptable. I however don't. But then, I don't have to live with it, and you do. You can stick your head in the sand until they bury the rest of you for all I care.
  20. phlogistician

    phlogistician Banned

    Oh, the whole issue solved by one pro-gun website.

    Get a grip. Countries with strict gun laws have less gun crime. FACT.

Share This Page