SOMD residents and guns

[Ken King]

Originally posted by jlabsher
No, like I said I have no problems with rifles, even shotguns, though those kill a lot of folks, usually after too much alcohol is ingested. Handguns make it way too easy for punks to make life cheap. You probably are an old fart like me and can remember when playground fights were no big deal, when the baddies brought chains <shudder>. Now if somebody gets pi$$ed at me for driving the speed limit on the beltway they may pop a cap in my minivan. Are guns the cause of this, no, but they are an enabler. (I remember that word from a 12 step I stumbled through and failed)

I've never known anybody, except a few business associates from the '80s who have been involved in violent crime, and they lived by the sword....

I moved to SOMD 'cause of the perceived notion that there was not a lot of violent crime here, I've got 2 little kids and would never move to DC or PG. I used to live close to St. Louis (ex-murder city USA) and E. St. Louis (no explanation needed) but the farmers out where I lived never had a need for handguns.

I guess I am scared more by the irresponsible owner than the casual owner, but to me somebody who owns lots of guns and gets a big thrill out of shooting them every day is not someone who I would let my kids play at the home of. Somebody who collects them is not a problem. I've never been obsessed with any collecting bug, the only thing I collect is debts.

I obviously don't want the government to run my life, or yours but I still see no need for the things, sorry. Don't worry though I'm not going to try and take yours away.

Enabler? Guns kill a lot less than automobiles, most of those auto deaths are alcohol related too. Is it the means of causing the death (gun or automobile) that is the enabling problem or the personal behavior of many? Someone bent on hurting or assaulting someone will do it whether they have a gun or not. It might be a matter of semantics, but I don’t see the term “enabler” as being appropriate, now that I think about it, it doesn’t matter.

Yeah, playground fights were nothing, moving into a new area usually guaranteed several instances of proving oneself. Weapons were never employed, there was a different respect for life back then as compared to what there is today. Fights were one on one too, none of this ganging up crap that you see today. Getting into a knuckle buster was about as bad as it used to get. You could even leave windows open and doors unlocked back then, I wouldn’t do that now though. Just as there was less crime back then, it isn’t the same anymore. I think we coddle criminals in prison so much that there isn’t any deterrent to make them think about what they are doing.

@ssholes that would shoot at someone for their driving are lunatics that shouldn’t be armed. They are criminals; criminals shouldn’t be allowed to be armed. Neither should whacked out druggies or the mentally defective. But those are already the law. But we aren’t talking about that. What I am talking about is how I, a law abiding citizen, has taken steps to provide protection for my family and property. I know the police won’t be there when I need them, they show up after the fact. It’s the nature of the beast. Being trained and skilled with the weapons provides me with an ability that someone that doesn’t own and use a weapon won’t have. I look at it the same as obtaining health insurance for my family. We also have a tactical plan in case something does happen. I won’t go into the details but simply I take the lead with handguns and the wife hunkers down with the shotgun.

I, like many, aren’t obsessed with guns, though I will admit that the S&W Model 500 is slowly becoming one (I would say it is more of a lust then an obsession). I know many people that have 20 or more weapons and they have never used them in a criminal act, probably never will. Not all gun owners are psychotics waiting to snap. I don’t shoot every day, but I do shoot often enough to stay proficient. It’s like everything else, if you don’t practice you can loose the skill.

You don’t see the need, I do. Fine, you’ll get no argument from me on that. It’s your right, just as it is my right to have the ones I own. And don’t worry about taking mine away either as you would need one of your own to do it. I just hope that you never end up in a situation where something happens that you could have prevented if you or a family member had and knew how to use a firearm. Good luck on your path.

 

[Bertha Venation]

Originally posted by Ken King
@ssholes that would shoot at someone for their driving are lunatics that shouldn’t be armed. They are criminals; criminals shouldn’t be allowed to be armed. Neither should whacked out druggies or the mentally defective. But those are already the law. But we aren’t talking about that. What I am talking about is how I, a law abiding citizen, has taken steps to provide protection for my family and property.

I've one point to make before I go to sleep; I'll address the rest of the thread I've skimmed another time.

Chances are that an @sshole who'd shoot someone in a fit of road rage was never a criminal before that moment, and obtained his firearm legally. This doesn't mitigate the good point you've made, but it is clear that some people who shouldn't have firearms for whatever reason are able to obtain them legally, and do so.

'night, all.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by Bertha Venation
Chances are that an @sshole who'd shoot someone in a fit of road rage was never a criminal before that moment, and obtained his firearm legally. This doesn't mitigate the good point you've made, but it is clear that some people who shouldn't have firearms for whatever reason are able to obtain them legally, and do so.

Have a good night and when you come back chew on this. I say that the @sshole is a criminal, they just haven't been caught yet to give them a record. A person riding around with a loaded firearm in the car is a criminal in Maryland. And just like many other criminals they have clean records when they start out.

Question, if we were a conceal and carry state do you think that there would be more instances of firearm violence or less? Justify?

 

[SurfaceTension]

Pictures worth a thousand words (?)

 

[migtig]

Originally posted by Ken King
Have a good night and when you come back chew on this. I say that the @sshole is a criminal, they just haven't been caught yet to give them a record. A person riding around with a loaded firearm in the car is a criminal in Maryland. And just like many other criminals they have clean records when they start out.

Question, if we were a conceal and carry state do you think that there would be more instances of firearm violence or less? Justify?

I have to agree with Ken here. I have guns, but not in my car. I work in DC, I would love to be packing there, but I don't. Why? Because I am not a criminal and I obey the law. Yet one of my co-workers was robbed at gunpoint less than a block from work in broad daylight. Gee, I guess only the criminals carry weapons in DC. What a shame.
However, when I lived back home, when I had to work nights or by myself I carried a gun. It was legal for me to do so (with the required permits) and I never had to use it.

 

[migtig]

Originally posted by jlabsher
I guess I am scared more by the irresponsible owner than the casual owner, but to me somebody who owns lots of guns and gets a big thrill out of shooting them every day is not someone who I would let my kids play at the home of. Somebody who collects them is not a problem. I've never been obsessed with any collecting bug, the only thing I collect is debts.

Okay this really bothered me and I had to come back to it. Usually in my experience, the irresponsible gun owner is one who has never owned a weapon, and has never taken a gun safety class, nor even gone hunting.
My father would probably scare the pants off you. Not only does he have a collection (that he never fires cause some still have the original blue on them) but he also has some that he fires on a regular basis.
The thing is, a man like him (and probably like Ken King and Sharon and 2A and many others on here) know what weapons are capable of. One of the first things I remember my father teaching me was about respect for weapons. He enrolled me in hunter saftey courses, and heck when I was little he even taught a gun awareness class to my girl scout troop. The thing is, it's people like this who are the ones you should want your kids to go to their homes. They will get a healthy dose of reality. Guns are not a dirty little secret sin in these homes, so they aren't discovered by kids who act like it's a cool little video game toy to play with. Odds are the kids in these types of homes are extremely aware and well educated and have a good dose of respect for the capabilities of weapons.
I would be worried about sending your kids to somebody's home, who denies keeping a weapon, it's a secret they hide in their home, discovered by kids exploring who have never been educated to the realities of weapons who only know what weapons do on tv or in the video games and who do not know any better, cause they have never been taught.

 

[vraiblonde]

I have a friend who was the victim of a carjacking when he was a young man. It left him paralyzed from the waist down. I wish with all my heart he'd have had a gun in his car that night so things might have turned out different.

JLab, can we agree that we can ban or restrict guns all we want and criminals will still find a way to obtain them? If we can agree on that, let's follow the logic:

The people who will be disarmed will be the honest citizens, who aren't the problem in the first place. The NRA says it best: if you make gun ownership a crime, only criminals will own guns. That is complete common sense.

DID YOU KNOW that, in the majority of violent crime cases, the first charge the lawyer gets dropped is the gun possession charge? Why make laws that criminals will disregard and won't even be punished for breaking?

Surface Tension's photo was worth a million words.

 

[Heretic]

Just a note here, in my hometown there are probably as many guns as people (atleast) and there was a recent road rage incident where a guy got out of his car at a gas station and hit a woman in the head with a claw hammer after she did something stupid on the road.

 

[SamSpade]

Originally posted by vraiblonde

The people who will be disarmed will be the honest citizens, who aren't the problem in the first place. The NRA says it best: if you make gun ownership a crime, only criminals will own guns. That is complete common sense.

DID YOU KNOW that, in the majority of violent crime cases, the first charge the lawyer gets dropped is the gun possession charge? Why make laws that criminals will disregard and won't even be punished for breaking?

I did some research on this for a paper not too long ago. Depending on what metro area you're dealing with, as many as two-thirds of crimes committed with guns are by felons - who shouldn't get them in the first place.

We have something close to 300 *million* guns in this country, and they're fairly easy to make. We have roughly 10 thousand homicide deaths from guns, most of them men under thirty and as many as half of them, minorities in a few major cities. GUNS are not the problem - if they were, try dividing 10 thousand by 300 million. Stop the guns from getting to the crooks. Convict the guys who commit the crimes. KEEP them in jail.

(As an aside, it's also important to notice that violent crime is on the wane, and has been on a relative decline for 20 years).

The Boston Strategy to Prevent Youth Violence should be required reading for anyone who wants to even have an opinion on gun and crime. There, in a liberal, Democratic state, they targetted specifically who, what and where of the guns in youth. They found the channels through which kids were getting guns and shut them down. They didn't take away everyone's guns - they took them from the people committing CRIMES with them, and stopped the supply of guns.

 

[Bruzilla]

I have several guns including a Beretta 96, S&W Model 19, Walther P-38, Erma EM-1 Carbine, M-1 Carbine, AR-15, and an L1A1. Combat pistols and assault rifles, and I don't care a wit about home defense (we don't even lock our doors at night.) I collect firearms for the same reason that people collect beanie babies or Barbie dolls... I like them. Most of the guns that I own have never been fired. I buy them and put them in the rack. With the exception of three years that I was based in Bermuda and couldn't own any guns, I've had between six and ten guns at arms reach. I've also been married for 19 years and neither my wife nor I have ever been shot accidentally or on purpose, nor have we ever found the need to shoot any neighbors (though Lord knows the idea did cross my mind from time to time.) .

I've also raised three kids around guns that were never locked up or hidden away in a closet (the guns I mean.) I took my kids out to the firing range at a very early age and demystified the guns by having the kids load them, shoot them, clean them. They knew what the guns were capable of, and knew there was nothing mysterious or secretive about them. That's how you avoid kids shooting each other after they find Dad's "carefully hidden" gun. (Note to parents: Every kid in the US knows that all of their parent's good stuff is either under the bed, under the mattress, in the night stand, back of the top dresser drawer, and in the back of the top shelf of the closet. If you think your kids aren't ever going to look in those places, you're wrong.)

Bertha, I used to teach a self-defense/firearms safety course for women, and I would not recommend getting a shotgun for a first gun. Most people will tell you about the intimidating sound that a pump-action shotgun makes, but it only makes that sound when you pump it, and it's amazing how many people in a crisis situation forget to do that. My suggestion for women who are new to firearms is a six-shot revolver with a two or four-inch barrel. Load five rounds into the revolver and leave the hammer over the empty chamber. It's perfectly safe, won't jam, and all you have to remember to do is pull the trigger. You can get a nice Rossi or Llama revolver for a little over $200.

My oft-quoted adage about firearms ownership is the story of the young man headed out West in the 1890's, who stops at a General Store to get some supplies. He asks the store owner if he thinks he'll need to get a gun. The store owner replies "Well son, maybe you will need a gun and maybe you won't. The only thing that's for certain is that if you ever do need one you won't have the time to get one."

Ken, the muzzle break on a firearm is not used to reduce recoil. Recoil is induced by the travel of the bullet (every action results in an equal and opposite reaction) and the travel of the firing mechanism. A muzzle break is used to vent gasses off so that they can offset muzzle movement that results from the recoil. Most breaks vent gasses to the left, right, and above to reduce muzzle climb.

 

[justhangn]

GUNS!!!!!

Aren’t the police paid to protect me from those horrible criminals.

 

[huntr1]

Re: GUNS!!!!!

Originally posted by justhangn
Aren’t the police paid to protect me from those horrible criminals.

Sometimes they ARE the criminals, just ask Rodney King.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just trying to get a rise outta some people. I wish Rodney King had been armed. That way the cops coulda shot him and been done with it, and he would not have been around to commit MORE crimes.

 

[justhangn]

Re: Re: GUNS!!!!!

Originally posted by huntr1
Sometimes they ARE the criminals, just ask Rodney King.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Just trying to get a rise outta some people. I wish Rodney King had been armed. That way the cops coulda shot him and been done with it, and he would not have been around to commit MORE crimes.

Rodney IS the victim, the MAN is just tring to keep him down, that's all.

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by Bruzilla
Ken, the muzzle break on a firearm is not used to reduce recoil. Recoil is induced by the travel of the bullet (every action results in an equal and opposite reaction) and the travel of the firing mechanism. A muzzle break is used to vent gasses off so that they can offset muzzle movement that results from the recoil. Most breaks vent gasses to the left, right, and above to reduce muzzle climb.

Well, I wasn't sure the purpose for the vents (I thought flash suppression). Now I know, none of the weapons I have utilize that feature.

 

[Larry Gude]

Ken...

...you might need a napkin to wipe up the drool...

http://www.1911forum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56475&highlight=S&W+500

 

[Bruzilla]

Flash supressors are largely illegal thanks to Slick Willy. My AR-15 and L1A1 have a muzzle break that looks a lot like a flash supressor... it's just that the holes are a different shape. Most people can't tell the two apart, but one is legal and one isn't. Typical "feel good" laws at work.

Police are paid to keep the peace, which usually means investigating crimes and detecting and arresting the guilty to keep them from perpetrating the crime again. Unfortunately, if you're the first victim the police usually aren't much value to you. And thanks to our f'ed up judicial system criminals aren't punished very well. And yes, ultimately, there's never a cop around when you need one.

 

[Ken King]

Re: Ken...

Originally posted by Larry Gude
...you might need a napkin to wipe up the drool...

http://www.1911forum.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=56475&highlight=S&W+500

I just wasted the whole sleave on my shirt I love that last comment, "WHAT NOISE?"

 

[Larry Gude]

The 'felt' recoil...

...comments got me.

A buddy has a Ruger .44 mag with a 8" barrel and it is NO fun to shoot. It hurts. Another guy has a Desert Eagle .50 and he says it in NO fun. I have heard that the .454 Casul is no picnic either.

So, a .50 that is fun? Wow. Seems it is all about the porting.

 

[justhangn]

Re: The 'felt' recoil...

Originally posted by Larry Gude
...comments got me.

A buddy has a Ruger .44 mag with a 8" barrel and it is NO fun to shoot. It hurts. Another guy has a Desert Eagle .50 and he says it in NO fun. I have heard that the .454 Casul is no picnic either.

So, a .50 that is fun? Wow. Seems it is all about the porting.

I happen to know a guy that has a Ruger Super Redhawk .44 7.5" stainless and it's a dream to shoot. :shrug:

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by huntr1
Sometimes they ARE the criminals, just ask Rodney King.

I was just reading a book on police brutality and it was pretty interesting to note the spin from the little Leftist who wrote it. His take on the King thing was that poor, innocent Rodney was just driving along, minding his own business, when the cops pulled him over and beat him senseless without provocation. No mention of the chase, no mention of the PCP he had in his system. It was written fairly recently, yet there was also no mention of King's subsequent crimes.

Anyway, this is but it just annoyed me that a book people might read to get real information would leave out important points like that. I feel like our generation is going to have to stay alive forever just to combat the revisionist history that's out there.