no you would see the burglar and call the police, not rush up to him, plus most developed countries breed animals for slaughter and then sell them, why would you ever need to hunt?Generic Gamer said:
How do my fellow escapists feel about guns? (The real kind)
- Thread starter TheFPSisDead
- Start date
Hunting weapons for hunters, for sports it's OK with some SEVERE background check and control. Other then that it should really just be used by the army and some special police units.
I'm Swedish and I really unconfortable that our police officers have guns. We have such a small amount of guncrimes in Sweden, and I don't think you should bring a gun to att fistfight...
I'm Swedish and I really unconfortable that our police officers have guns. We have such a small amount of guncrimes in Sweden, and I don't think you should bring a gun to att fistfight...
We have a rifle in a hidden room on the farm, been there since the 30s.
Only been used for target practice, last time was sometime in the 60s.
I don't want to try it but its nice to know its there in case of the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse.
Only been used for target practice, last time was sometime in the 60s.
I don't want to try it but its nice to know its there in case of the inevitable Zombie Apocalypse.
ahh, guns...well if you take away a citizens right to bear arms. You know who will still have them? Criminals! I do believe the process of buying a firearm should involve some type of test, for mental instability and criminal tendencies, but those of us who are stable folk who just want to have some fun exploding soft targets...like a watermelon, with JHP, that jacketed-hollow-point, ammo should be able to do so whenever we feel like it. CC licenses should be even more scrutinizing and cost less for the actual license.
I'm kinda going both ways with the first argument. For home defense it can be helpful and useless at the same time. Depends on the situation. If the person that breaks into your house is crazy as shit a gun may be one of the few things that makes them stall long enough for police to arrive. Then again, if they're too close they might just intercept you pulling out the gun to begin with. Also, if you kill the robber, rapist, whatever you'll end up with jail time yourself.Macrobstar said:
Police only can be argued against too because it takes time for them to arrive. Sometimes too much time to save you.
For the humane hunting thing I don't really care. Your aim in hunting is to kill your prey quickly. If you're damn good with a bow you can still do that. I also like to mention that hunting has nothing to do with being in a developed country or not. Sometimes it's just a family or cultural tradition. Not to mention you avoid meat full of hormones or that lived in straight abuse by hunting. I like fishing and crabbing. Am I barbaric? I'm still killing animals.
by the time i was 18 i owned 3 firearms (something of an achievement living in the UK)
i feel that there is nothing wrong with guns themselves, they aren't evil, they're tools for hunting or defence, however in the hands of people they become dangerous...
i feel that there is nothing wrong with guns themselves, they aren't evil, they're tools for hunting or defence, however in the hands of people they become dangerous...
There's a direct correlation in countries with extreme economic and cultural clashing that murder and other crime rates rise. I forgot, we're supposed to ignore other factors completely.dunk12345 said:
Okay, I understand. And I thank you for putting your points across so politely.Koroviev said:
However, I just want to point out my opinion.
1.No matter what country you name, it has crime.
2.A criminal could very easily break into my house.
3.I would not be able to defend myself without a gun.
So here's my point. I don't CARE that the US has an extremely high crime rate. I care that there's a chance that I might one day have someone break into my house to kill me or my family. I care about the fact that if I didn't have a gun, I would not be able to defend myself. Me, and my family, would be dead.
So do you understand? Taking away guns is putting a death sentance on anybody in this situation. And it's not like this is rare. This happens all the time, in all parts of the world.
I had to laugh at this. Besides, it your attacker has a gun or any amount of combat skill, a knife is of little use, even in close quarters. The only exception is if you get the jump on him. More likely he'll disarm/shoot you, then you're as good as dead.Housebroken Lunatic said:
From a combat perspective, I think they are rather cowardly weapon myself. I'm not particularly fond of ranged weapons in general, to be honest.
Having said that, I do have a particular fondness for the western style revolver for some reason.
Having said that, I do have a particular fondness for the western style revolver for some reason.
How naive art thou.VulakAerr said:
didn't think about culling, good point, still don't think they should be sold to the general populace thoughGeneric Gamer said:
I feel the reason behind Americans general pride in being able to own guns comes from the fact that they trough off a rather oppressive regime with there own weapons. Not to mention the fact that some of the most oppressive human rights violations have happened in places where the citizens owning firearms is illegal.
I feel everyone has the right to defend themselves, however most people really don't realize the skill needed to effectively use firearms. It is easier to learn and less perishable than skills with other martial weapons, and it is less dependent on the persons physical characteristics. It also takes some intelligence and common sense when selecting a firearm for personal defense. Take the S&W 500 previously mentioned, yes its an extremely powerful handgun. It however means it requires more practice to effectively wield it and it means you have a serious issue of over penetration. Whereas someone could more quickly learn to use a double barrel shotgun, and loaded with bird shot it would be equally or more effective with a much slimmer chance of punching though a wall and hitting an unintended victim on the other side.
As for Tasers and other less-lethal weapons, they can be effective at stopping violence, however they can still kill. So many people have died from Tasers that people are trying to get police to stop carrying them. There have even been deaths from Bean Bag rounds and the FN 303 which is basically a glorified paintball gun. So while effective you still have to be willing to accept the fact that using such an item can end in the death of the target. Is it less likely than with a firearm yes, but its still a possibility.
On the other subject of firearms from the US causing troubles in Mexico. From what I gather most Cartels use military level hardware, Full auto assault rifles, rocket launchers, and hand grenades. These are only legal in the US under very stringent Federal regulations. The likelihood of you finding these devices at a gun store, gun show, or even in a persons home is miniscule.
In short, yes firearms are designed to kill, but lacking them people still find ways to end each others lives. So blaming the tool itself is short sighted. I was a member of the military, I own firearms, if need be I would use them in self defense. However, I own them because I find the act of shooting at the range enjoyable, and I enjoy having fresh game on my kitchen table. So yes I support gun ownership, but I still feel sad whenever I hear about some jackwad using them to take an innocent persons life, just as I feel sad whenever I hear about someone crashing a vehicle into a crowd or going on a rampage with any other weapon.
I feel everyone has the right to defend themselves, however most people really don't realize the skill needed to effectively use firearms. It is easier to learn and less perishable than skills with other martial weapons, and it is less dependent on the persons physical characteristics. It also takes some intelligence and common sense when selecting a firearm for personal defense. Take the S&W 500 previously mentioned, yes its an extremely powerful handgun. It however means it requires more practice to effectively wield it and it means you have a serious issue of over penetration. Whereas someone could more quickly learn to use a double barrel shotgun, and loaded with bird shot it would be equally or more effective with a much slimmer chance of punching though a wall and hitting an unintended victim on the other side.
As for Tasers and other less-lethal weapons, they can be effective at stopping violence, however they can still kill. So many people have died from Tasers that people are trying to get police to stop carrying them. There have even been deaths from Bean Bag rounds and the FN 303 which is basically a glorified paintball gun. So while effective you still have to be willing to accept the fact that using such an item can end in the death of the target. Is it less likely than with a firearm yes, but its still a possibility.
On the other subject of firearms from the US causing troubles in Mexico. From what I gather most Cartels use military level hardware, Full auto assault rifles, rocket launchers, and hand grenades. These are only legal in the US under very stringent Federal regulations. The likelihood of you finding these devices at a gun store, gun show, or even in a persons home is miniscule.
In short, yes firearms are designed to kill, but lacking them people still find ways to end each others lives. So blaming the tool itself is short sighted. I was a member of the military, I own firearms, if need be I would use them in self defense. However, I own them because I find the act of shooting at the range enjoyable, and I enjoy having fresh game on my kitchen table. So yes I support gun ownership, but I still feel sad whenever I hear about some jackwad using them to take an innocent persons life, just as I feel sad whenever I hear about someone crashing a vehicle into a crowd or going on a rampage with any other weapon.
Easy to say. Last I recall guns weren't intended to... make friendly conversations with your neighbors. Their purpose has a direct effect on other people, whether they're used or not.mxfox408 said:
Just because people have the right to do something, doesn't mean they should use it.
The right of the people to bear arms has nothing to do with crime prevention. It is an important check against tyranny in that, should all conceivable peaceful options fail, the ability to resist is preserved.
Right-wing extremists are crazy because they keep talking like the time to use them has come. It's a ploy in the hopes it will get the more votes by looking like valiant fighters against (a non-existent) tyranny and they just kind of hope no one takes the message too literally like the guy in Arizona did... All of that said, the insanity is in encouraging violence for political gain, not in the preservation of the rights of the people.
Right-wing extremists are crazy because they keep talking like the time to use them has come. It's a ploy in the hopes it will get the more votes by looking like valiant fighters against (a non-existent) tyranny and they just kind of hope no one takes the message too literally like the guy in Arizona did... All of that said, the insanity is in encouraging violence for political gain, not in the preservation of the rights of the people.