a question to US gun owners.

[Aoyi]

my fiancees grandmother was shot in the chest with a shotgun point blank. who the fuck shoots a 75 year old woman while robbing a store? my fiance wouldn't touch a gun until that happened and she understood that there are messed up people out there. she also broke her leg in motorcycle accident so she can't really defend herself nor run away. if you see her out of the house, she has a gun on her hip.

tell her she doesn't need it if she is about to be attacked or raped...

As long as there are evil men in the world, there is a need for good men to kill them.

And how good is she with that weapon? And how good is she under extreme stress? I'm not singling her out, but you used her as an example. Having a gun DOES NOT MAKE YOU SAFE. People are hit by misfire all the time. People are killed by stray shots. The 3 people I mentioned who were killed in my post were all killed by family members with guns they had in their own house. Did that gun protect them? No. Two are dead as the result of an argument (Rainbow's mother and friend's uncle) and one is dead because of a check (grandmother). The women who was shot through the arm and into her chest was hit because in real life people are terrible at aiming ESPECIALLY under stress. Guns on the street do not make you safe.

Think about that video of an old man who deterred a robbery that was posted on MMO-Champion earlier this month. Yeah he scared the robbers away, but how many shots did he fire. Really, how many? Did you see how close he was to the robbers? Did you see how many times he missed? What if one of those shots hit one of the dozen people around him? He was just as much if not more of a danger to those people then the robbers were.

[Themius]

my fiancees grandmother was shot in the chest with a shotgun point blank. who the fuck shoots a 75 year old woman while robbing a store? my fiance wouldn't touch a gun until that happened and she understood that there are messed up people out there. she also broke her leg in motorcycle accident so she can't really defend herself nor run away. if you see her out of the house, she has a gun on her hip.

tell her she doesn't need it if she is about to be attacked or raped...

As long as there are evil men in the world, there is a need for good men to kill them.

If shotguns weren't so easy to get.... maybe that wouldn't have happened.

[vaeevictiss]

And how good is she with that weapon? And how good is she under extreme stress? I'm not singling her out, but you used her as an example. Having a gun DOES NOT MAKE YOU SAFE. People are hit by misfire all the time. People are killed by stray shots. The 3 people I mentioned who were killed in my post were all killed by family members with guns they had in their own house. Did that gun protect them? No. Two are dead as the result of an argument (Rainbow's mother and friend's uncle) and one is dead because of a check (grandmother). The women who was shot through the arm and into her chest was hit because in real life people are terrible at aiming ESPECIALLY under stress. Guns on the street do not make you safe.

Think about that video of an old man who deterred a robbery that was posted on MMO-Champion earlier this month. Yeah he scared the robbers away, but how many shots did he fire. Really, how many? Did you see how close he was to the robbers? Did you see how many times he missed? What if one of those shots hit one of the dozen people around him? He was just as much if not more of a danger to those people then the robbers were.

with a pistol she is fine...rifle not so much but that's not important. and the old guy you can't really tell how many times he shot or missed. fact is he hit the bad guys and no one innocent. who knows how it would have turned out the other way. you can throw what ifs and semantics around all day but fact of the matter is gun owners stop way more potential shootings than the ones that happen. you just don't hear about them. what makes more sensational news?

"man stops shooting" or "13 gunned down by pistol wielding madman"

they simply don't become "massacres" when someone is there to stop it.

[Deleted]

I believe the Second Amendment and the principles that origined it are outdated:

-Americans no longer live in the 18th century to fear King George III;
-It's not likely that America becomes a tyrannical government any time soon, unless your economy crashes, and you vote for a nationalistic party;
-No one dares to invade America these days, because of your Army, Navy and Air forces, and not because the civil population have guns;
-Insurrections are dealt by your Police and SWAT teams (and possibly the FBI/Army);
-You can always defend yourself with non-lethal methods and body armor, so why getting fireguns?
-Civilians participating in law enforcement? I cringed at that.
-If you're not going to be invaded in the near future, why organizing militias in the first place?

[vaeevictiss]

I believe the Second Amendment and the principles that origined it are outdated:

-Americans no longer live in the 18th century to fear King George III;
-It's not likely that America becomes a tyrannical government any time soon, unless your economy crashes, and you vote for a nationalistic party;
-No one dares to invade America these days, because of your Army, Navy and Air forces, and not because the civil population have guns;
-Insurrections are dealt by your Police and SWAT teams (and possibly the FBI/Army);
-You can always defend yourself with non-lethal methods and body armor, so why getting fireguns?
-Civilians participating in law enforcement? I cringed at that.
-If you're not going to be invaded in the near future, why organizing militias in the first place?

if you haven't noticed...the economy is crashing. crimes like break ins and robberies are going up because of it. many of these criminals are armed.

as far as you cringing at civilians participating in law enforcement...you do know that police are civilians also. they are no more qualified than anyone else. I'm willing to bet i get more time behind a firearm than most police.

and the whole calling people civilians erks me. they are citizens...the civilian thing started with the rise of the police state. you know...the whole..."bow before me willing subject" thing

[Aoyi]

with a pistol she is fine...rifle not so much but that's not important. and the old guy you can't really tell how many times he shot or missed. fact is he hit the bad guys and no one innocent. who knows how it would have turned out the other way. you can throw what ifs and semantics around all day but fact of the matter is gun owners stop way more potential shootings than the ones that happen. you just don't hear about them. what makes more sensational news?

"man stops shooting" or "13 gunned down by pistol wielding madman"

they simply don't become "massacres" when someone is there to stop it.

I'll just say that we won't ever agree on this subject and that's fine. We've both been exposed to violence or know people who have and reacted to it differently. I've seen far too much violence in my life to want to bring the possibility of more happening and your fiancee is protecting herself in the way she feels helps the most. I only hope that she never has a need to fire it and it never "accidentally" gets used the way I've seen happen in my own experience.

What happened today in NY was a man with a gun opened fire on innocent people. Whether they obtained the weapon legally or illegally doesn't change the fact that people were hurt or killed today because someone used a weapon for its intended purpose. Guns absolutely kill. It's what they were created to do. The BS NRA/Republican line of "now's not the time to discuss gun control in respect for the family's" has got to stop. Not a day goes by where someone somewhere isn't killed by a gun. Some days are just more newsworthy than others. If we don't talk about it now, we'll never talk about it.

[skrump]

As an American I see gun control laws as counter productive.

Honest people want guns to protect themselves and since they follow the law they have to jump through hoops to do so.
Dishonest/criminals however have easy access to stolen and illegal firearms.

As it sits if a crazy person pulls a gun on the street he/she is going to take down several civilians before the police arrive, so of course I am in favor of making it easier for the average citizen to obtain a gun and the permit to carry one in public.

Believe doing so would hinder criminals simply because they lose the upper hand when those who would otherwise be potential victims have their own firearms to level the playing field.

Of course I do think that
#1 psychiatric evaluations should be a requirement to obtaining a firearm,
#2 Anyone who has ever been incarcerated for any reason should not be able to obtain a gun.
#3 Should a firearm registered to you be stolen or misused in any way, you forfeit your right to own one.
#4 You are accountable for your weapon and the actions taken with it "even if it was not in your possession during the actions in question"

[Deleted]

if you haven't noticed...the economy is crashing. crimes like break ins and robberies are going up because of it. many of these criminals are armed.

I won't deny that. Life is getting tougher to everyone.

as far as you cringing at civilians participating in law enforcement...you do know that police are civilians also. they are no more qualified than anyone else. I'm willing to bet i get more time behind a firearm than most police.

It's not about if you have training or not, it's about the judgement of a citizen, whether using a gun or not.
Seems to me, some Americans are way too eager to play the "Vigilante" role.

The way I see it, if someone comes to a store armed with a gun, just comply with his demands. Try to identify and memorize his facial traits/voice/clothing without him taking notice, and call the police afterwards. Let them handle the burglar. That's what they are paid for.

When you pull out a gun Rambo style, you risk: killing the burglar (here is a crime), getting killed by the burglar, and killing nearby citizens as well.

But I understand Americans don't like this way of acting: it's not manly, by your standards.

and the whole calling people civilians erks me. they are citizens...the civilian thing started with the rise of the police state. you know...the whole..."bow before me willing subject" thing

I meant citizens, of course. I don't like that «civilian» term either, as my country suffered a military dictatorship for 40 years.
And yes, we had guns in the 1930's. Meant zero to prevent a tyrannical government, because we elected them.

[skrump]

But I understand Americans don't like this way of acting: it's not manly, by your standards..

Has nothing to do with being manly.
#1 gas station would be much less likely to be robbed if potential robbers knew their was a sawed off shotgun behind the counter.
#2 by the time the police got their the criminal has most likely got away.
#3 The Criminal could choose to shoot me because I've seen his face or maybe he just has the urge to kill
#4 If I shoot the bastard my tax dollars are not wasted housing/feeding and paying for the medical/dental of yet another lowlife who holds no value to society.

Also as for the Civilian/citizen thing, I am in favor of such a social distinction though I didn't grow up in a police state either, But I do think Citizenship status should be rewarded to those who have served in the armed forces and that such people should be the only ones awarded the right to vote on the federal level or to obtain any federal political office.
(I would just require young men to join the military like Sweden however that seems bit sexist so I would instead entice everybody by dangling the right to vote in front of their faces"

Then again if it were up to me I would require doctors to submit dna samples and fingerprints as well as all information related to each patient to a national online suppository that was accessible by any law enforcement agency as well as any medical facility "Medical facilities would need your consent".

[Deleted]

I'll answer those same points with my point of view:

#1 gas station would be much less likely to be robbed if potential robbers knew their was a sawed off shotgun behind the counter.

Well, if he was desperate to get some money, I believe he would try to rob you nonetheless, except this time, since you are armed, he has to employ lethal force.

#2 by the time the police got their the criminal has most likely got away.

True, but if you displayed no aggressive behavior, most likely you would live to tell the details to the Police. The thief wants primarily your money, not to kill you.
Unless, of course, it is a personal vendetta, then you're screwed anyway.

#3 The Criminal could choose to shoot me because I've seen his face or maybe he just has the urge to kill

Most criminals assault retail stores by covering their faces with masks/balaclavas, so this is a moot point. You could however try to identify him by remembering his clothing, voice, possible tattoos, if he is left handed or right handed, if he has a crippled leg, etc.

#4 If I shoot the bastard my tax dollars are not wasted housing/feeding and paying for the medical/dental of yet another lowlife who holds no value to society.

Seems to me that you believe death penalty is the adequate punishment for a mere assault with no victims. That's not justice, that's revenge.
Now if he kills someone, he should be incarcerated for a long time.

[vaeevictiss]

I'll just say that we won't ever agree on this subject and that's fine. We've both been exposed to violence or know people who have and reacted to it differently. I've seen far too much violence in my life to want to bring the possibility of more happening and your fiancee is protecting herself in the way she feels helps the most. I only hope that she never has a need to fire it and it never "accidentally" gets used the way I've seen happen in my own experience.

What happened today in NY was a man with a gun opened fire on innocent people. Whether they obtained the weapon legally or illegally doesn't change the fact that people were hurt or killed today because someone used a weapon for its intended purpose. Guns absolutely kill. It's what they were created to do. The BS NRA/Republican line of "now's not the time to discuss gun control in respect for the family's" has got to stop. Not a day goes by where someone somewhere isn't killed by a gun. Some days are just more newsworthy than others. If we don't talk about it now, we'll never talk about it.

i can agree to disagree, but your line of "not a day goes by where someone somewhere isn't killed by a gun". that can be used for a lot of things. not a day goes by someone doesn't die in a car accident.

to further get into that...antigunners like to say guns were designed to kill and cars weren't...well there are far more guns than cars and cars still kill way more people.

regardless, everyday someone drowns, gets electrocuted, dies from cancer...the list goes on.

[skrump]

Seems to me that you believe death penalty is the adequate punishment for a mere assault with no victims. That's not justice, that's revenge.
Now if he kills someone, he should be incarcerated for a long time.

No But I believe anyone who would threaten someone else with a firearm should be treated the same regardless of if they fired the weapon or not
"unless it can be proven that the action was taken in self defense"

I mean honestly once you threaten to end my life while brandishing a lethal weapon, I Have every right to use whatever means are available to put and end to your life in the pursuit of saving my own. "there is nothing vindictive about it" hell it's a survival instinct.

[greatestlockever]

if a robber comes into my house with a hand gun, i would really prefer to have an ak47 to ensure safety of my family. m16 is my fav tho

[The Madgod]

Its the same way I view nukes. countries would be too smart to use them against one another.. but they are there to have. to say 'dont try and fuck my shit up, i have that same shit' and.. it works.

And yet we see robbers with guns who get shot at by civilians with guns. It doesn't work, it just causes escalated violence. The nuke theory works on a mass scale, but it doesn't on an individual scale.

if you WERE a criminal, and you were going to rob somebody (you have a pistol.) what would make you think twice? the fact they have nothing to protect themselves with? or the prospect that the person you are about to rob, might just have a 12 guage under his bed.

guns good. these laws are great in theory, but in practice all they do is restrict the law abiding people who wouldnt use their firearms badly in the first place!

Did you know that the majority of people who commit criminal acts such as robbery do it out of desperation? They have nothing else to turn to. They're going to rob a place regardless of the chances because in their minds, it's something they have to do. The only difference is that they're more likely to use lethal force to get what they want if they're worried that they're going to face someone with a firearm.

I'm not for the complete banning of guns, but I am for the restriction of access and tightening of regulations. I've shot guns since I was six years old, and it's an enjoyable pastime.. but I don't believe that means we shouldn't have EVERY measure possible to ensure that the people who want guns will be responsible with them as well as make sure that they will be secure. That's what those laws should be for, but they aren't enforced strictly enough. Check out this article, it was fairly interesting. These are the sorts of things that require stricter regulation that will help.

[Deleted]

i can agree to disagree, but your line of "not a day goes by where someone somewhere isn't killed by a gun". that can be used for a lot of things. not a day goes by someone doesn't die in a car accident.

to further get into that...antigunners like to say guns were designed to kill and cars weren't...well there are far more guns than cars and cars still kill way more people.

You can't be serious about this response. Of course you know that cars can kill because people tend to overspeed, drive under influence of illegal substances, don't use seat belts, drive offensively or all of the previously mentioned options.

Now please see on the statistics how many cars were used to ram and kill people intentionally, due to roadrage/vengence issues, and not by accident.

[skrump]

And yet we see robbers with guns who get shot at by civilians with guns. It doesn't work, it just causes escalated violence. The nuke theory works on a mass scale, but it doesn't on an individual scale.

Did you know that the majority of people who commit criminal acts such as robbery do it out of desperation? They have nothing else to turn to. They're going to rob a place regardless of the chances because in their minds, it's something they have to do. The only difference is that they're more likely to use lethal force to get what they want if they're worried that they're going to face someone with a firearm.

The reason why one commits a crime don't concern me if they are pointing a firearm at me and unless the criminals has grabbed diapers on his little shopping spree I would most likely go for the gun.

[Shiny212]

The Taliban and the Viet Cong disagree.

It'd be a horrible thing and I hope it never happens, but history has shown that its damn near impossible to defeat a determined guerrilla force regardless of the technology.

The taliban and viet cong are completely different by some rogue Texan home owners association that goes wild and starts attacking the government. A "rebellion" in the US sure would be funny but regardless of whatever machine gun they get their hands I'm fairly confident they'd get squished by the overwhelming authorities in America

[Kalyyn]

The taliban and viet cong are completely different by some rogue Texan home owners association that goes wild and starts attacking the government. A "rebellion" in the US sure would be funny but regardless of whatever machine gun they get their hands I'm fairly confident they'd get squished by the overwhelming authorities in America

How is the Viet Kong different than American guerrillas? I'd argue that a lot of us would be better fighters than they ever were, in fact. Especially those of us with military training.

[vaeevictiss]

You can't be serious about this response. Of course you know that cars can kill because people tend to overspeed, drive under influence of illegal substances, don't use seat belts, drive offensively or all of the previously mentioned options.

Now please see on the statistics how many cars were used to ram and kill people intentionally, due to roadrage/vengence issues, and not by accident.

if they were doing all of the above then it wasn't an accident...it is negligence.

regardless of how or why it happens, people are still dying from it. if a gun magically jumped out of a holster and shot someone people would still blame the gun. just like the car example. it's the drivers fault not the vehicle.

[Verain]

And yet we see robbers with guns who get shot at by civilians with guns.

Do you see a lot of 60 year old robbers who are women? But a 60 year old woman with a gun is much less likely to be a victim. In fact, many violent criminals are physically advantaged over their victims, and choose them for that reason. Guns change this dramatically.

Robbers with or without guns being shot by civilians with guns? Sounds great to me. Working as intended!