Author Topic: Firearms Refresher course (Read 2612 times)

john9001 · « **Reply #60 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:52:58 PM »

The sole intent of a pistol is a small, easy-to-carry weapon used to keep people from harming or killing you. Some people have a problem with the high availabilty of this kind of weapon.

hawker238 · « **Reply #61 on:** February 25, 2004, 08:57:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
The sole intent of a pistol is a small, easy-to-carry weapon used to keep people from harming or killing you. Some people have a problem with the high availabilty of this kind of weapon.

Are they not also used to kill non-criminals? Even unintentionally?

beet1e · « **Reply #62 on:** February 26, 2004, 03:09:39 AM »

Scootter - nice crime quote from the Independent - that's Dowding's favourite UK paper.

But whatever you say and whatever newspaper quotes you can come up with cannot change the facts. Crime capital of the west Britain may be (if the Independent is to be believed), but we've still never had more than 100 gun slayings in any calendar year. The US has never had less than 5,000 in modern times, and some years (1992) the tally has been higher than 13,000. That does not include all the deaths not recorded as crimes - accidental discharges etc. No newspaper quote is going to change the facts.

Widewing. I don't think I'm scared of firearms. I've shot three of Lazs's, including the Dan Wesson .44 Magnum. But maybe some people are scared of firearms and don't want to own one. But what does this have to do with the price of fish? Whether or not anyone is scared of firearms changes nothing. The US is still the gun crime capital of the western world. The funny thing is, and what the gun nuts simply cannot understand, is that when you make guns available on the scale that's seen in America, people buy them and use them for their designed purpose: Killing people. Why else do you think their are so many gun homicides in the US? - at least 50 times as many as in Britain in any calendar year you care to mention since WW2. It's patently bleedin' obvious why that is.

Who is doing all the killing? Criminals like drug dealers, gang members, carjackers, pimps... so when I read the rhetoric that claims that gun owner = better citizen, it just makes me laugh!

:lol

Scootter · « **Reply #63 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:20:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hawker238
The sole intent of a pistol is a small, easy-to-carry weapon used to shoot people. Some people have a problem with the high availabilty of this kind of weapon.

Very true

None more then ones who wish to do you harm or wish to take from you what is yours.

Ask a crook why he prays on the elderly and he will tell you "they are the easy ones", ask why linebackers are seldom mugged.

You see it is a matter of your willingness to be a victim that adds to the crime in the world, if everyone refused to be a victim and chose to fight back, crime would drop by a factor of 10.

In a way I blame people who encourage crime by making it so easy and lucrative, how’s that for an indictment? I can say because I was armed there is one less crime statistic in the world and I never fired a shot.

I for one find it amusing when bad guys kill each other they add to the "gun statistics" ok but this is a good thing, perhaps we need to separate these out. Many drug dealers and gang bangers kill each other, I have no problem with this, only that they inflate the numbers and Beetle then uses this to throw back at us.

If I was a mugger I would move somewere that no one was armed, London would be good.

My two cents:)

Nilsen · « **Reply #64 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:30:15 AM »

Be a man. Get rid of our gun and use your fist.

Cowards.

lazs2 · « **Reply #65 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:34:42 AM »

widewing said it all... you can't control your own runaway crime but no one is telling you that you have to get armed even tho it is the obvious solution.

the pistol has the same purpose it allways had but advancements in ammo, accuracy and portability have made it even better than it ever was. The pistol is a weapon that can be easily carried without restricting movement and can easily be brought into play... It is a weapon that can be effectively used one handed and has an effedctive accurate range of from 2 yards to well over 600 yards. It can be carried concealed and the knowledge that people are carrying such weapons cuts down on crime. It is used more than any other weapon in preventing crime... perhaps as many as 2 million times a year acording to FBI studies.

as wide says.... if you are afraid of en... don't buy one. The real 'gun nut' is the person with unreasonable fear of firearms in the face of all the facts.

lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #66 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:36:31 AM »

nielson... would you say the same to your mother or girlfriend? How bout your grandparents? how bout the invalid? do you suggest that you deserve whatever happens to you if your assailant or assailants are stronger?

lazs

Nilsen · « **Reply #67 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:59:45 AM »

Having a house full of guns and claiming its for self defence is rather dumb.

Guns are ok if:

1) You hunt.
2) Are a memeber of a gunclub and compete, but then there really is no reason to take it home... leave it locked up at the club.

If you dont fall under these criteria your gun should be taken from you or not given to you in the first place.

Its a fact Lazs wether you like it or not but countries that allow tons of guns stored in private homes also has alot more gun related accidents and crime. Countries with strict guncontrol has VERY little. You can debate this all you want, but thse facts cant be ignored.

Saying everyone has a right to own guns cause the criminals has guns only makes the problem grow.

An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind.

Nilsen · « **Reply #68 on:** February 26, 2004, 09:12:43 AM »

Btw. Didnt mean that all gunowners are cowards, just those that use them or threaten to use them on other people even if its in self-defence.

If a bad guy points a gun at you , and you point one back the chanses of you getting killed are higher. If you are scared that he will run of with your stuff then your values are wrong imo.

beet1e · « **Reply #69 on:** February 26, 2004, 09:22:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
widewing said it all... you can't control your own runaway crime but no one is telling you that you have to get armed even tho it is the obvious solution.

I put the question to non-Americans a few weeks ago. People from 16 countries said they did not wish to see gun availability become like that of the US. Read Nilsen's post ^ to see why. I know it's hard to understand if you've never lived anywhere that doesn't have (many) guns, but there it is.

midnight Target · « **Reply #70 on:** February 26, 2004, 11:00:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

MT... knapp vs Schweitzer the court ruled that the fifth and the second were individual rights.

there has been no successful federal attempt to ban individuals from owning and bearing arms.
lazs

Sure there has. The restriction on assault weapons or fully automatic weapons.

Still looking for a reference on Knapp vs Schweitzer... nothing so far.

Still no example of a gun control law overturned on 2nd amendment grounds?

texace · « **Reply #71 on:** February 26, 2004, 01:56:46 PM »

Wait...if they repeal the 2nd Ammendment, will I not be able to wear T-shirts anymore?

Scootter · « **Reply #72 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:10:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
I put the question to non-Americans a few weeks ago. People from 16 countries said they did not wish to see gun availability become like that of the US. Read Nilsen's post ^ to see why. I know it's hard to understand if you've never lived anywhere that doesn't have (many) guns, but there it is.

Beetle, I think it is hard to understand on all fronts, you had fun shooting guns so you may be able to understand a little. Lets just let it go as it is, we don't try to change you and ask you not to try so hard to understand or change us, it really is not all that important is it?

Is not the differences in culture’s what makes things interesting? When you were here did you not enjoy the things you found different? Why must we be like you guys when it comes to guns?

lazs2 · « **Reply #73 on:** February 26, 2004, 02:23:09 PM »

neilson... you are wrong... you are 1.7 to 7 (depending on your sex)times better off defending yourself with a firearm than not defending yourself or appeasing your attacker. I also do not agree that your reasons for owning guns are the only reasons that are acceptable. the only acceptable reason for owning a gun is..... because I want to.

beetle said " put the question to non-Americans a few weeks ago. People from 16 countries said they did not wish to see gun availability become like that of the US. "

shame on you beetle! not one single person on your poll said that. You basicly asked if guns should be left in a huge pile in the center of every town so that people could pick em up as they pleased and a few people said they thought that was extreme.

My poll asked if you thought your countries laws were too strict or not strict enough or ... just right 13 felt... too strict...8 thought just right and 2 felt not strict enough.... see any of a myriad of posts to see why that is so.... most people feel that they are the best jusdge of what they need or want for themselves.

lazs

beet1e · « **Reply #74 on:** February 26, 2004, 03:19:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Scootter
Beetle, I think it is hard to understand on all fronts, you had fun shooting guns so you may be able to understand a little. Lets just let it go as it is, we don't try to change you and ask you not to try so hard to understand or change us, it really is not all that important is it?

Is not the differences in culture’s what makes things interesting? When you were here did you not enjoy the things you found different? Why must we be like you guys when it comes to guns?

Scoott - fair enough. Of course I enjoy my visits to America. I have never suggested that law abiding Americans should be made to give up their guns. Why? Because I am opposed to unilateral disarmament. But a few things: 1) I don't believe that a gun should be treated as a toy. 2) The American policies which have allowed millions of guns to get into circulation will continue to exact a terrible price in terms of the number of lives lost each year as a result. 3) I don't like the way guns are glorified, almost as gods, any more than I would approve of ordinary folk crowing about whatever nuclear or chemical weapons their government had. Can you imagine posts on this board in which the chemical formula for sarin is discussed? Or threads with titles like "Fun with Semtex"? Can you buy Semtex at K-Mart or WalMart? If not, why not? Can you imagine what might happen if you could?

Lazs,

The question I asked (in that other thread) was

Quote

Would you like to see guns and gun ownership introduced to your country, guns to be made freely available at retail outlets, and for gun ownership by private citizens to be all but unrestricted, and guaranteed by contitutional right?

That was the question I wanted answered - not some other question that you might prefer me to have asked. And the question was directed to non-Americans, so your input was redundant. But in point of fact, the first two people to answer had understood the question perfectly, and answered with a simple NO, as did others. Some people gave a more qualified response such as "Unrestricted No, Licensed Yes". I think those answers were clear enough. The question itself described a scenario which would be met by four criteria. In one desperate attempt to discredit it, you pretended it was four separate questions.

:p That thread is here, by the way.

Now I'm going for a drink with some friends at the pub. I might have a gin and tonic. Lazs, I know you don't drink, but a gin and tonic is one drink, not two separate drinks! Nah, sod it, I'll have a pint of London Pride...