Printable View
Out here in the midwest deer have become a nuisance. They're a major road hazard and agricultural pest. Nevertheless, I still get excited when I see one walking across my back yard and stopping to steal some apples from my tree. They're an incredible animal. And yummy too.
Wow! Nice guns! I have a CZ SP-01 SHADOW. I am very happy with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
The next shooter I've thought about buying is an S&W .44 magnum or a .45 ACP pistol. Have not decided yet.
Last time I ventured into this thread all you likeable guys rounded on me for daring to suggest that possession of guns causes unnecessary deaths. So I won't say anything except that continues to appall me to see tthe people of such a great nation so obsessed with weaponry.
["American Skin (41 Shots)" Live in Tampa, FL 03/23/12 - YouTube
this is the next rifle i will be getting next week ... i dont buy real guns but 1/1 bb airsoft guns then paint them up to use for porn shoots ..
:)
The FAMAS
NICE!!:dancing: What kind of scope do you have on it? The only rifle I have in .223/5.56 is a Ruger Mini 14.Quote:
Originally Posted by HbgDon
Quote:
Originally Posted by irvin66
Thanks. A buddy of mine has the Shadow, and it's a superb firearm. Very durable and well balanced.
-Quinn
More power to 'ya, Trish. I was able to eat some very good venison sausage when I lived in Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Deer to you sound like coyotes(4-legged ones) to me. A nuisance. We don't have coyotes in my neighborhood but do have raccoons which I've been able to half tame so there's no violence between the different animals on my property.
I had a Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle, loved it, and recommend it to anyone wanting a quality .223 at a great price. Ruger is always a bargain. I sold mine to have money towards my AR.Quote:
Originally Posted by irvin66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
I'm not going to attack you for your position. It's as contentious an issue as you'll find in American politics. No matter what your position, it's possible to find an excess of studies -- not to mention plenty of anecdotal evidence -- to support your argument. As with so many things, in the end, it boils down to personal choice.
The reasoning behind my position is simple. With or without firearms, ours is a fairly violent society and will likely become more so as economic inequality increases due to ruinous fiscal policies, etc. Once one accepts this truth, they have a choice: positive sovereignty vs. negative sovereignty. For my part, I chose not to rely upon the forbearance of other to ensure the continued safety of my friends and family, not to mention myself.
-Quinn
-Quinn
Me too. I like and respect my local PD and Sheriff's Dept but I like to be self-reliant in that area never having to be totally dependent on them for my safety.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
^^^This^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by Quinn
Sadly (unless you break the law, which i would never do), a choice that's been taken away from us over here.
I getting some water guns for a pool party this weekend.
The sad thing is that the decision to carry puts the rest of us at risk. Do you actually feel safer in a tavern or at a park with your family knowing everyone is armed. The risk of being robbed might (and that's a big "might") be lower, but the risk of being accidentally shot increases with the number of people carrying. And why concealed? If you're going to carry, own up to it and carry open, so people know where the damn thing is pointing and can avoid the line of the barrel. (If a pistol isn't holster; i.e. it's in a pants pocket or a purse it may be aimed anywhere. My father taught me never let the barrel pass across the body of a person even if there's nothing in the chamber, the safety's on, the guns empty whatever).
Cool :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet Reflections
Your father taught you well. Safety always first. How old were you when you began to learn to shoot? My first gun was a .22 rifle that I learned safety and fundamentals with. My police officer father was my instructor and I started at 12 years old.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I was about ten when Dad and I shot cans in the back with a BB gun. About twelve when we shot bottle lids with the 22 at the abandoned reservoir just outside of town. I got pretty good. I was probably around fourteen when we hunted for squirrels and groundhogs. Got the shotgun for pheasants. Like I said the 30 ought six was for deer. That was in Pennsylvania. Out here in the Midwest it's to flat (unsafe) to hunt deer with a rifle, hunters here use slugs and a shotgun.
Trish, we've discussed firearms before. Let me say that I am glad that you know how to use one if you had too. This gives me comfort. I worry about all you girls. Possibly too much but that's my nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I remember taking a safety course at a rifle range Dad belonged to. There was a slide with a picture of a bottle and a barrel separated by a plus sign. The whole picture had a big X crossed over it and the caption read "Never mix alcohol and gunpowder." I was too young to under the message and asked what happens if you mix them.
That's good policy that I need to be more consistent with myself. Bullets and Whiskey should not go together like Peanut Butter & Jelly.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I'm not aware of a state that allows civilians to carry in establishments serving alcohol. (I'm not saying there isn't one, just that I'm not aware of such a place.) To answer that question, no, I don't think people should be carrying in a tavern or the like. Fortunately, here in Georgia they are not allowed to due so.
As for carrying in a park or other public place, the answer is an unequivocal "yes." One of the things I do for charity is run a lounge, bar, and dance hall -- the profits of which go to support the charitable efforts of a not-for-profit fraternal order. The property is located on the border between one of Atlanta's most exclusive neighborhoods and one that is run down. For decades it was robbed with surprising regularity. That has changed now that it's known many of my people carry (and, no, not in the bar). This, in turn, has brought back a lot of business to help revive a once failing enterprise.
Violent crime is based upon predation. Criminal elements target those they deem less likely or able to defend themselves and/or their possessions. By that logic, if I am in a room with ten other people and not one of us is carrying, what occurs at any given moment is dependent upon elements of physicality that don't favor women, children, the old, infirm, or even weaker males. Firearms level the playing field and help to ensure safety for the aforementioned should I discontinue adhering to the social contract that protects them.
Most of my local friends, business associates, neighbors, etc., possess firearms and have a license to carry. Knowing how seriously they take the responsibility that goes with that privilage, I do feel safer. The majority have taken classes to ensure proper handling of their weapons and practice at the range regularly.
On a final note, your father was right. All of the concealed carry holsters in my house -- an ankle holster, an in-the-waistband holster, and my wife's carrying purse -- have the firearm pointing at the ground. Allowing the barrel to face an individual whom you do not intend to shoot is considered a serious breach of etiquette.
-Quinn
Nicely argued. You make that case that in some locations legal carry may have a positive economic effect as well as deterring robberies. Though you have not argued the open carry wouldn’t have the same effect. Nor have you allayed my concerns with safety, education notwithstanding.
I am perfectly fine with that fact that your community has found carry to be an effective solution to a perplexing social problem (though I probably wouldn’t agree that it is the only solution or the best solution) ALEC and the NRA, however, are not content to let local communities, towns, cities or states to work out their own solutions to these thorny problems. They would ban every municipality and every state from outlawing concealed carry in public spaces. I think it strange that we can ban beer and wine from parks but not firearms.
Not every community is plagued with crime. There are so few serious crimes in my county that everyone can remember the circumstances of each one. We have had four murders in the last decade. One was a cuckold who brought his gun to work and shot his wife and her lover. One was a woman who drowned her newborn child and in the other the murder weapon was a car. In that same decade two children accidentally killed themselves with their father’s handgun and woman accidentally killed her sister showing her how it works. She took the gun safety course. Those are the events that people remember. I can also tell you that every year during hunting season, you can count on somebody getting creased, shot or peppered and you can also count on someone shooting a cow or a pig and into the picture window of a distance farm house they’re sure wasn’t in the line of fire or was out of range.
I don’t want to ban hunting and sport shooting. But in a town with four murders every ten years, we clearly don’t concealed carry. Arming this populace serves no purpose. There is no crime to suppress. There are no lives and pocketbooks kept safe from thieves that would counterbalance the lives lost and the injuries that would inevitably result if more people toted guns. Why won’t ALEC and the NRA let our town ban concealed carry?
They will argue it’s a second amendment issue. Yet a ban on concealed carry is not a ban on firearms nor even a ban on carry.
They will argue that if crime is not a problem in a community then people can individually decide for themselves not to exercise the ALEC given right to carry. True, they can; but they won’t. There’s a certain kind of guy who will jump at the chance to carry his favorite toy with him wherever he goes if he can be spared the embarrassment of carrying it out in the open. (I’m certainly not suggesting you carry for that reason) Gun related accidents in a community will always rise with the number guns being carried.
Clearly gun safety education is significantly suppresses the rate of gun related deaths and injuries, nevertheless the accident rate will never be an monotone decreasing function of the number of firearms carried.
Thanks, Quinn for your thoughtful response. From day one I always number you among my friends here in these forums.
NO GUNS!!! They scare me...:nervous::nervous::nervous:
These two right here...
Parliament - Bop Gun {Endangered Species} - YouTube
RICK JAMES-LOVE GUN - YouTube
Bravo.Quote:
Originally Posted by StlyeMeCunty
I agree - and you're brave to post that in this thread amid the gunslingers (the few reasonable arguments for gun ownership aside). Too many people here fetishize the ownership of their guns as if they are penis substitutes or extensions and fall back on the constitution as a way of shitting down discussion.
Are you suggesting our penises are only 9mm'sQuote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
A Freudian slip by me in my last post - shitting down discussion!!!
Now, now, Prospero. Most, myself included, of us gun owners have no issue with pacifists. Stlye is a sweet girl.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
:iagree: yep!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino Velvet
Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Likewise on the friendship front. Even when I disagree with an argument you put forth, which is infrequent, I enjoy the edifying discourse that follows. A deeply reflective, contemplative nature is always appreciated.
My schedule is burtal today, so I have to be brief and less thorough than I would prefer. We agree that gun safety does suppress the rate of gun related deaths and injuries. Understanding things like how a firearm has to be suited to your body type for proper handling (much like a motorcycle) and how different types of ammunition interact with flesh and inanimate matter (overpenetration leading to an unintended targets being struck, etc.) are key. Nevertheless, you are right that more firearms will inevitably equate to more firearm related accidents, just like more motorcycles will inevitably lead to more motorcycle related deaths. The same goes for cars, planes, etc. It's a cliched response, I know, but it does beg the question "Just where do we draw the line on protecting the public from itself?"
So far as concealed vs. open carry is concerned, I'm not personally opposed to open carry. However, I do believe making it a legal requirement would be of primary benefit to violent criminal elements as it would allow them to identify with greater certainty those capable of resisting their efforts from those who cannot. Concealed carry removes that certainty, making any criminal action riskier and therefore less likely. To cite one piece of anecdotal evidence, I've seen far fewer road-rage incidents here in Atlanta than when I lived in NYC. Why? You never know who is carrying here. In NYC, it's a safe bet that the other guy is not.
As you've illustrated by citing your county's history, there is no one size fits all answer. There are numerous socioeconomic and cultural factors that make a workable solution in one region of the country injurious to another. Here in Atlanta, most of the police officers I know actually favor concealed carry (the same cannot be said of many other cities). Why? The APD is undermanned, underequipped, and just plain underfunded thanks to a city government that treats them in a manner nothing short of embarrassing. The people licensed to carry aren't the ones they need to worry about, and they know it. Places like the club I mentioned above are sites they don't generally have to apply their limited resources to, and they appreciate it.
-Quinn
I'd like to leave one final remark here. My concern about the private ownership of guns does not make me a pacifist. I do not oppose war when it is the final resort and in defence against such evils as Nazism.
Stlye is the pacifist here. She is the one who fears the object in question. Most here would also stand up against what we feel is evil so we might not be that far apart. If you take on a NAZI make sure you are equipped to take apart that NAZI.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
I have no problems with a person not liking guns or fearing guns. My guns are not an extension of my dick. I enjoy building my rifles and taking them to the range and shooting target. I'm not some crazy right wing clinging to my guns and bible. I'm not some prepper although, I love talking the ZA.
I have my CCW. I have my CCW because on the occasion I do carry, I don't want people to freak out because they see a gun. People tend to get tense when someone open carries, so I opted for my conceal carry. Plus, if I get pulled over for a traffic violation and I have a "loaded" gun in my truck, I don't get in trouble. I never carry any of my guns with one in the chamber. I follow a strict protocol of safety with my guns.
I do get frustrated with people who are against civies owning guns. It's my hobby and one of my passions.
I don't hunt and can't bring myself to kill an animal. I do it because I love to shoot target. It's fun to go to my local gun range on a nice day and sit at the bench and enjoy the fresh air and shoot. It's relaxing, fun and I feel good about myself that I built my own rifle.
Plus, shooting guns has brought my father and me closer together.
The irony of you talking about killing Nazis. The Nazis do not get stopped by individuals owning guns. I'm not saying it's not something that could be useful (or harmful) in terms of personal protection, but you don't take down a military machine because you own a revolver or even a machine gun. In fact, a family member might end up taking his face off with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino Velvet
That is not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
Partisans and Militias -- armed civilian resistance fighters, have stood up to occupiers and invaders from the Nazis to the British Empire and others.
Better to die fighting than walk into a camp to starve to death -- or worse.
That's great if you don't have a family, but those who did have sisters and parents to protect living in the Warsaw ghetto were going to get them killed by making futile attempts to pick off Nazis. This was at a time when they weren't certain what their fate was going to be. There is always the hypothetical situation where you can save your own life by becoming a guerilla fighter, but if you are living a domestic existence with your family in Germany and the Gestapo came for you, you seal your fate by trying to shoot soldiers. People did not know they were facing a certain death by not fighting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkurie
Again, we're talking about fighting your own government's military if they come for you. I agree that a gun may be a very useful weapon if your country is being overrun by an invading force, but the paramilitary fantasy that you could ever destroy the U.S military by holeing yourself up in a cabin with artillery is just that, a fantasy. You have very little chance and you have to weigh that against the sort of oppression you face if you don't fight. But of course some people might think it's exceptionally brave to start shooting a pistol at a bunch of gestapo agents with your wife and kids in the other room. I don't mean this as a vitriolic argument, but I just don't see the logic of it.
I just want to reiterate that I'm not trying to attack anyone's way of life if they're gun owners. I can understand it generally. It just depends on what expectation you have of being attacked. Or maybe all of your family members are extremely careful with guns and have training. Maybe you really don't trust your government or you really think somebody is going to break into your house and take what's yours. For me personally, I don't feel safer if I'm strapping a gun just because the next guy is. I don't feel like the U.S government is going to send a swat team to my house or that I could do anything about it if they did. Most of the situations where you are confronted with somebody with a gun, you have a greater chance of survival by not brandishing one of your own.
Perhaps, there will be that one situation where you face a certain death and your only way out is to have that gun you've been carrying around for decades and haven't used. I'd just as soon own a life insurance policy.
well, I think some of us have digressed into the political... SO, to get back on track... I just got (yesterday) another of my favorites: the H&K USP .45cal
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...WK_HX1fCRzZx50
BTW, I did get it for work
Fine, I won't interrupt anymore but for those who are discussing the pros and cons of gun ownership, it's not really a digression.Quote:
Originally Posted by txsam
Lets just say I disagree with your point of view entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
The right to bear arms has been passed down for over 200 years. Times have changed since the 1700s and they will continue to change. This country has a long history of organized and unorganized violence directed against groups and individuals where law enforcement was no where to be found.
So with that in mind, I would rather preserve the legal right to armed self protection for future generations to make the choice for themselves.
That's a nice sidearm.Quote:
Originally Posted by txsam