It's just a statistic. People who shoot the bear first tend to die more than those that play dead. A shot grizzly will usually die but not before it does a finishing move on the shooter. If you don't hit the heart in the first shot you are toast and it's almost impossible to hit the heart if the bear is coming head on. A grizzly can beat a horse in a 50 yard dash. Top speed is about 40mph.
I don't think you'd have any problem taking down a grizzly with a .460 Weatherby Magnum. It'd better stop a grizzly at $8/round. Here's the rifle you would use. http://www.weatherby.com/customshop/customrifle/44294
They need to be kept out of the hands of psychos, that's for sure. Our mental health system in this country sucks. Combined with easy access to guns, we end up with situations like the VA Tech Massacre or the Arizona shootings. Although apparently psychos will still find ways to get guns even when they're restricted, as evidenced by the shootings in Norway.
It's really easy to get a firearm in Arizona. I remember seeing a brief vid of someone at the gun store where Loughner bought the weapon he used to go on his rampage. The guy admitted that he was suspicious of Loughner but had no justification to refuse to sell to him. Every state has a different set of gun laws, but overall Arizona's are pretty relaxed. For example, in my state the seller could have denied him if he had a history of violence or emotionally unstable conduct, which I believe he did. He was thrown out of his university, rejected by the military, and had a history of legal problems regarding substance abuse and conduct issues. He would have also have done much less damage if the massive magazine he used wasn't available in his state; it's illegal in other states. He had 33 rounds to fire before he needed to reload, which is the time I believe he was finally subdued. There's really no reason for civilians to have such a high capacity magazine. Police don't carry high capacity weapons like that with the exception of special units like SWAT.
It would be great if it were harder for the mentally ill to buy guns, but that represents a small minority of handgun violence in the United States. It's predominantly non-psycho males using handguns against people they know (friends, girlfriends, relatives, coworkers) as a result of arguments or grudges. Statistically, handguns are rarely used for self-defense.
Murdering anyone by definition makes you a psycho. Sane people don't settle arguments by murdering someone. And we shouldn't throw everyone's second amendment rights in the trash because of psychos. Also, are you really saying we should outlaw handguns completely? Do you have any idea how worthless a rifle is for home defense? Ever tried moving around with a hunting rifle in a tight space like a hallway? Do you have any conception of how heavy a bolt action rifle is? There's a reason defense shotguns are usually sawed off, and shotguns at least compensate for their size and weight by spraying so you don't have to be a crack shot to hit something. Moreover, rifles over-penetrate. Using one in a defensive situation is a great way to inadvertently kill your neighbors. Common calibers like .223 and .308 can easily go through frame or even concrete block construction. Why do you think you can't normally use a rifle at an indoor shooting range? Some of them have special lanes that are reinforced with steel, but most just outright won't let you use a rifle. The people who want handgun bans know fuckall about guns.
No, murdering someone doesn't automatically make you "insane". If that were true, then the insanity defense for murder wouldn't be necessary. No, I'm not saying that handguns should be outlawed completely. However, I am saying that it's statistically rare for them to be used for self-defense. I agree with AKS that allowing people to buy any type of handgun they want is more dangerous to the public at large than a necessary improvement to self-defense use. Your points about rifles being dangerous indoors would also apply to large caliber handguns and certain types of ammunition as well.
No they don't. Large caliber pistol rounds like .45ACP travel much slower than rifle rounds, about 800FPS vs 2500-3000FPS and expand rather than tumble on impact so they don't over-penetrate. Why do you think they're so worthless against body armor, yet rifle rounds go right through? The next generation of military pistols and smgs use scaled down rifle cartridges, like 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm to address the lack of penetrating ability of standard pistol rounds. Large caliber pistol rounds are actually safer to use indoors than small/fast rounds. Like I said, you know fuckall about guns or ballistics. I bet you've never even shot one. Yet uneducated people like you with your knee jerk terrified reactions towards guns think you should be able to dictate gun laws. The insanity defense never works in court. You have to be a nutjob to murder someone, but nutjobs still deserve to be punished.
My stance is that weapons made available to the public should meet a reasonable purpose. Hunting and self-defense are reasonable. 33-round magazines are not needed for such a purpose. A shotgun makes the most sense for self-defense of one's home. My younger brothers all own shotguns, and I may purchase one as well if I purchase property in the future (I'm currently in an apartment). I suppose I'd consider the possibility of ownership of more dangerous weapons by civilians with very stringent restrictions. I do not want someone like Jared Lee Loughner ever getting his hands on an assault rifle. A truly comprehensive, thorough training and licensing program would prevent people like him from getting their hands on these types of weapons, although the NRA would through a fit and do everything they could to block it. My willingness to consider restrictions is not because I'm anti-gun. I can assure you that I'm not. It's almost entirely because I think most people are morons.
Terrified? Of what? You're the one making comments about larger caliber handguns being more manly, which kind of tips me off as to your own level of experience with self-defense. I'm simply pointing out that the majority of handgun violence in the United States is either suicide or men murdering a neighbor/friend/relative over some type of dispute. It's not macho man stuff, and most of them aren't insane. They're just violent. And it's also b.s. to say handguns can't penetrate plaster and drywall.
I talked about a high powered rifle caliber (.460 weatherby) when bfun brought up big game (a grizzly). Learn how to read. He said if a bear attacks you should always run. I said if you have a big game caliber you should shoot. And yes, these kinds of calibers are quite manly. They're actually painful on your end to shoot. Plaster and dry wall, sometimes. Frame, rarely. Concrete block, never. Rifle rounds will pass through all of those things with ease. Rifle rounds pass through body armor with ease. Should we ban hunting rifles now? Because they're actually far more effective against police body armor than handguns.
What you said is below... "If you're carrying some metrosexual little woman's gun, like a .22 or .32 (which is probably what Alterego has in his European carryall next to his ipad), then I probably wouldn't try shooting the bear." You've got the typical male fantasy about guns: it makes you more manly, and the bigger the gun the better. You even seem to think the type of computer you use determines how macho you are.
Are you a woman? Because this sounds like several conversations I've had with my wife. It doesn't? That looks pretty goddamn manly to me.
Yeah, up until the point you get your legs blown off in Chechnya. I'm sure you feel pretty confident capping some posts and cans in your t-shirt though.
I've come to the conclusion that Alterego is a woman. I'm not even joking. I legitimately think I'm talking to a chick right now. I don't know why I didn't see it before. One of the big demographics for Macs and the Wii other than hipsters and retards is chicks. Chicks aren't usually terribly bright with computers, and they're attracted to the fashion accessory nature of Macs.
Surely America must know that there's a difference between self defence and insta-gibbing anyone who comes near your house. What's wrong with using a taser or pepper spray? I'd like to see an intruder kill you or rob you after being hit with one of those, plus it has the added benfit of not killing someone.
As usual, your powers of deduction are pretty much absent when it comes to your pet subjects. It's kind of amazing how bad some of your arguments are in certain topics. I don't even think you believe a lot of it yourself. You just have a compulsion to rant on the forum.