See? ... guns ARE dangerous!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NooNoo

You are, but you don't need a gun to do it.

---

Well, the fact that a gun is available to a law-abiding citizen will curb crime. Additionally, a gun being brought to a knife fight (in self defense of course, as if someone tries to jack you from your car with a knife, and you pull your gun out from underneath the seat) stands to reason that it will eliminate the need to shoot anyone, as they dude with the knife will crap his pants or just run away typically.

I've told this story a few times before here, I'll do it again: a neighbor of my dad's was renting the house, been there for only about 2 months...when a former renter showed up in the middle of the night to get his "stuff" out of the garage…he broke in through the bay door. The perp. was high and drunk, and somewhat unconscionable about his actions. The guy living there heard what was going on and pulled out his piece. At the same moment the perp was entering the house from the garage access door he was meet with the barrel of the law-abiding resident’s gun. Literally the only mess he needed to clean up was the piss that drained out of the guys pants while he waited very politely for the resident to call the police while holding him there at gunpoint. All this went on while his very pretty 12 year old daughter lay sound asleep, completely unaware anything had happened until the next morning when her dad broke the news.

Guns don’t kill, Guns protect good people!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by +Daemon+

damn that reminds me I need to buy more guns before we get invaded by the terrorists

theres going to be a war on US soil soon I need to get ready

---

Isn't there one happening already in the 52nd state of Iraq? :devil:

NooNoo - 10 to 12 feet I would not say is close quarters. Close quarter combat is when you're close enough to touch each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ya_know

Guns don’t kill, Guns protect good people!

---

I can't bring myself to type it, but I almost agree with you.... there did it. :thumbs2:

I'm pretty certain that if someone pulled a piece on me, it would change my point of view very rapidly.....

Yep, I want another gun, now the .44 special will mess someone up but being a fluted barrel police issue revolver, I can't shoot it too much as the rounds are expensive and too hot to put too many through it at once to be really good with it. The .22 rifle is just a small varment and target gun. Needs me a .45 or a 9 and also a shotgun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corturbra

Isn't there one happening already in the 52nd state of Iraq? :devil:

NooNoo - 10 to 12 feet I would not say is close quarters. Close quarter combat is when you're close enough to touch each other.

---

Exactly, 10 to 12 feet is a realistic shooting range, meaning that you really don't have to use the sights to take someone down, and you shouldn't be splattered either, yet it’s a viable self defense claim. Anything beyond that becomes a meticulous effort, in that you have to actually calm yourself down in order to get off accurate shots, get into an aiming position, and fire faster then your opponent will, or faster then he is running at you. Anything over 30 feet becomes much more complicated in that the slightest misalignment or other circumstance will force you to completely miss you're target. Additionally at that distance, you are more vulnerable to an aggravated assault charge, for the simple reason being that this form of self defense was probably not necessary, unless the perp had a gun, or was moving at you at an alarming rate, and that his intentions were to kill you, or someone you wished to protect.

Close quarters is hand to hand combat, plain and simple.

I gather that US cops frequently miss when shooting at baddies, even at very close range. If cops, who are trained to shoot, get in regular range time and have rather more experience of stressful siituations than most of the public, can miss, how do you regular gun owners feel about your chances of hitting a baddie? I'm thinking here of a street situation, mugging etc when you are jumped by a baddie waving a knife or a gun rather than the finding a burglar in your home scenario where you might have more time to grab a gun and aim carefully.

I didn't intend to start a gun thread :) it was just a funny story of idiocy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit

how do you regular gun owners feel about your chances of hitting a baddie?

---

Really good, I would presume. But then when the time comes that I am faced with the choice of killing someone in order to save a life, or my own, I don't want to be thinking about why I didn't have a gun in my hand at the time. I will be much better off with the gun locked and loaded...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit

I gather that US cops frequently miss when shooting at baddies, even at very close range. If cops, who are trained to shoot, get in regular range time and have rather more experience of stressful siituations than most of the public, can miss, how do you regular gun owners feel about your chances of hitting a baddie? I'm thinking here of a street situation, mugging etc when you are jumped by a baddie waving a knife or a gun rather than the finding a burglar in your home scenario where you might have more time to grab a gun and aim carefully.

I didn't intend to start a gun thread :) it was just a funny story of idiocy.

---

You probably wouldn't have to hit. One look of the gun would be enough for 80% to turn and run, 19% would run hard at the sound of the gun going off, the remaining 1% probably wouldn't stop if hit anyways....

One thing that was missed before the thread got hijacked.....people were wondering why the law was so hard on the guy, as he'd already shot himself in the sack.

I'm wondering why the law was so easy on him. It sure sounds like he inteded to blast his friend with that shutgun. He was arguing with the guy, then went home to grab his gun, then came back....and obviously the gun was loaded. He probably even had it cocked on the way back to the pub. Any cop around here would instantly realize he planned to walk into the bar, pull his gun, and blast his friend in the chest...or head, or gut, etc. Maybe I'm just too American, but that's the way I see it.

This all harkens back to a time in late 1982 when the local cops refused to do anything about a fella stalking my soon to be wife (the whole story is as true and scary as any you may want to hear - my wife still has nightmares to this day). That's OK though she emptied a .38 Calibur S/W into his torso when he broke into the house with a 30-30 Rifle to kill my soon to be wife and son, but not until after he tortured them (the gags, ropes, bags and shovel were all neatly arranged in the basement). His detailed plan was in his truck. He had told several people what he had planned to do, but noone believed he was really going to do it. Luckily it takes a couple more seconds to pull a rifle around the corner of a doorway and aim than it does to aim and shoot a .38.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatalException0E

One thing that was missed before the thread got hijacked.....people were wondering why the law was so hard on the guy, as he'd already shot himself in the sack.

I'm wondering why the law was so easy on him. It sure sounds like he inteded to blast his friend with that shutgun. He was arguing with the guy, then went home to grab his gun, then came back....and obviously the gun was loaded. He probably even had it cocked on the way back to the pub. Any cop around here would instantly realize he planned to walk into the bar, pull his gun, and blast his friend in the chest...or head, or gut, etc. Maybe I'm just too American, but that's the way I see it.

---

I think because of the time needed spent in proving his intent ;
"As he was returning to the pub, which had closed by this time, he accidentally fired the weapon. "
and probably hoped the guy had and will suffer from shooting himself enough that he wouldn't likely be a threat in that way again .
and the guy admited having the gun so they to get him for that .
"He admitted possessing a banned firearm when he appeared at Sheffield Crown Court on Tuesday. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatalException0E

One thing that was missed before the thread got hijacked.....people were wondering why the law was so hard on the guy, as he'd already shot himself in the sack.

I'm wondering why the law was so easy on him. It sure sounds like he inteded to blast his friend with that shutgun. He was arguing with the guy, then went home to grab his gun, then came back....and obviously the gun was loaded. He probably even had it cocked on the way back to the pub. Any cop around here would instantly realize he planned to walk into the bar, pull his gun, and blast his friend in the chest...or head, or gut, etc. Maybe I'm just too American, but that's the way I see it.

---

It was a sawed off shotgun I presume from the article, although it didn't actually say. That sort of modified scatter gun is illegal to possess and carry…I think that was all that they charged him for. In other words, the attempted premeditated murder went uncharged. I agree with you, very disturbing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit

I didn't intend to start a gun thread :) it was just a funny story of idiocy.

---

I know , I tried to change it . :devil:
It was funny tho , had needed a laugh yesterday . :thumbs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff the Brit

I gather that US cops frequently miss when shooting at baddies, even at very close range. If cops, who are trained to shoot, get in regular range time and have rather more experience of stressful siituations than most of the public, can miss, how do you regular gun owners feel about your chances of hitting a baddie? I'm thinking here of a street situation, mugging etc when you are jumped by a baddie waving a knife or a gun rather than the finding a burglar in your home scenario where you might have more time to grab a gun and aim carefully.

I didn't intend to start a gun thread :) it was just a funny story of idiocy.

---

What makes you think that civilian gun owners in the US don't get "regular range time" or training?

Grew up with Dad hunting, 11 years USAF to reinforce gun safety and use, and now I have a few rifles of my own plus I live only 2 blocks from the local gun club (complete range setup, 25 thru 100 yards, plinking range, archery, the works).

Quite a few gun owners in the US do the same thing.

As far as the mugging scenario, I'd still rather have a piece of my own in such a case...the "give the criminal what he wants and he'll go away" idea doesn't always work; there's plenty of instances where the criminal in question would still do you in after you hand him your wallet, probably just to experience the "thrill of the kill"; whereas I would only injure or kill another human being in a case of true self-defence.

America's founding fathers allowed for the possession of guns because they realized the very real possibility that ANY government can become tyranical and that a well-armed population is a last physical check to keeping the government in line. The crimes and blunders commited by miscreants and morons is a small price to pay for that check. Just think of the tens of millions that died because of the Nazis and remember that at the dawn of the 20th century the Germans were paragons of an intellectual and rational society. That can happen to any society. Unfortunately, America is teetering on just such a brink now. As tragic as the attack on September 11 was, I personally would rather live with a little less security to retain much greater liberty.