Gun ownership

Discussion in 'Everything Else' started by supersonic, Feb 26, 2011.

  1. I'm talking about firearms that are most effective for self-defense.

    However, if someone is trying to break into my home, I don't think I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and try to subdue them with less violent methods. I'm more likely than the average person to be stalked and attacked given that I work with the mentally ill as a profession, and I live alone. My boss has already witnessed a murder, and I've had people threaten to kill me. I'm not taking any chances if someone tries to invade my home.
     
  2. And how far away from you is a home intruder going to be? Maybe 60 feet max for most American homes? If you can hit a target, a .22 or .38 is going to work in that situation. I doubt there are many people that would willingly have someone shoot them with those kinds of calibers at close range. Alot of it is just gun manufacturer marketing...
     
  3. I can't speak personally for a taser, but I doubt pepper spray would stop anyone. I was testing the bottle my wife was carrying at the time to make sure it still worked when the wind kicked up and I got some on my face. It definitely stung, but it wasn't that bad. I think it would just piss someone off more than anything.

    Tasers are pretty effective from what I understand, but I think you only get one shot with the prongs. They're also far more lethal than they're made out to be. Many people have died of fatal arrhythmias after being shocked with tasers.

    .38 is an effective caliber, but .22 not so much. You would have to get a chest or headshot, which not everyone can pull off, especially not when nervous, scared, etc. I do agree though on the push for bigger, more expensive calibers being nothing more than a lot of marketing and hype in most cases. .38 and 9mm are more effective than most gun store owners would have you believe. You don't really need .40 S&W, and your average person probably isn't going to be comfortable with its recoil. .40 is actually a lot nastier in terms of recoil than .45ACP, but you'll still see practically every gun store clerk pushing someone to buy something in .40.

    AKS's suggestion for a shotgun is the correct one because most people are terrible shots in tense situations, and you don't have to be especially accurate with buckshot. Shotguns are also cheap. You can pick up a Remington 870 or a Mossberg 500 for under $200 at most non-scammy gun shops.
     
  4. John Hinckley wasn't an expert and nearly took out Ronald Reagan and James Brady at close range with a .22, despite Secret Service protection.
     
  5. Emphasis on nearly. It's not an effective caliber. It's primarily used for cheap target shooting and small game.

    Maybe I just like getting you riled up. You're such a serious, straight-laced dude that your reactions to things are hilarious.
     
  6. I'm persistent about the points I'm making and try to get people to make a coherent argument, but that's about it. "Riled up" is more accurate for your style of posting.
     
  7. Another Virginia Tech Shooting - 2 Confirmed Dead - Man Hunt Continues.

    Must be great to live in a country where any nutter can get hold of a firearm.
     
  8. Guns are necessary though according to Monkey.
     
  9. Anybody calling themselves a nutter would both deserve and NEED a firearm.
     
  10. Need I remind you that the worst mass shooting in history happened recently in Norway with 80 dead where guns are illegal. That was far worse than anything in the US.

    Psychos will get a hold of guns one way or another, but things get really nasty when civilians and police are unarmed and have no way to stop them.
     
  11. Surely Norway have a special police unit that can use guns? Even we do over here.
     
  12. Who knows. From what I recall reading of the incident, the guy basically went around murdering people at the camp until he got bored or ran out of ammo.

    The problem with the US isn't gun ownership. Canada and Switzerland have similar gun ownership. Every household in Switzerland has a sig assault rifle. We have a lot of violent crime in the US because we have serious socioeconomic problems. You could outlaw guns in the US and people would still be killing each other in huge numbers.
     
  13. Yeah you're right. One incident in norway proves gun ownership is necessary whereas the dozens of shooting victims every year in the us don't say otherwise.
     
  14. The shooting in Norway was a whole order of magnitude worse than anything that has ever happened in the US. It was literally the worst mass shooting of its kind in world history. And it happened in a country that had outlawed guns.

    It's a perfect example of what happens when you outlaw guns and only criminals and psychos have them. The guy in Norway shot 153 people, and killed 77 of them, most of them teenagers. He had no fear of any kind of retribution. He just kept shooting until he decided he was done. And now he's been declared insane, so he won't even face any kind of prosecution for what he did.

    Also something to note is that these mass shootings in the US by psychos always happen in places where guns aren't allowed, like schools. That's no coincidence. Psychos know that anywhere else they'd be shot dead in about two seconds.
     
  15. I do kind of see your point though. If guns were legal maybe someone could have taken him down and saved lives, that much makes sense to me. But I still think the idea of anyone being able to walk into a shop and buy a gun is just asking for trouble.
     
  16. You have to pass criminal and psychiatric background checks to be able to purchase a gun in the US. At least that's how it's supposed to work in theory. The US isn't quite the Wild West you're thinking it is.

    In a lot of these mass shooting cases by psychos, there's been a failure by mental health professionals and school officials to properly report what was going on, and have the psycho involuntarily commited, which is reported, and the psycho is then unable to purchase firearms. This was true in both the VA Tech and Arizona cases. Both shooters had long psych histories, had threatened people, and had acted creepy, but there was a failure to report and take proper action.

     
  17. You at least have to admit that if the option to buy guns on the high street wasn't there the chances of this incident occurring would have been drastically reduced.
     
  18. It's hard to say. Psychos can still buy black market guns like the guy in Norway. I'm not sure if you can totally prevent psychos from going on rampages, but better reporting is a start. It just seems like if they're determined to kill a lot of people, they'll find some way to do it.

    But most people aren't psychos, and there are legitimate reasons for owning guns, like living in an isolated rural area where guns are necessary for protection and hunting. Everyone shouldn't be punished for the actions of a few.
     
  19. fact: when the zombie apocalypse happens, it's all over for you guys in the UK