a gun to defend oneself

Hollywood wrote:
:: In 35 years of living in almost exclusively urban environments (and
:: high crime
:: ones at that... New York in the 70's, 80's and early 90's, Los
:: Angeles around
:: the millenium and St. Louis when it was the per capita crime capital
:: of the US),
:: it's never happened and I don't know anyone it's happened to. I weigh
:: the risks.
:: Risk of a crack head bouncing into my home intent on harming me or my
:: wife
:: (as opposed to stealing my very old stereo) vs. the risk of a fire
:: arm accident. If
:: you look at the data, you're more likely to be shot with your own gun
:: than the
:: one a criminal brings through your window (funny, criminals also
:: respond to
:: incentives: bringing a gun on a break and entry tends to jack up
:: sentences and
:: increase charges brought).

As one who does not own a gun, the odds do change drastically based on where
you live. If crack heads are walking down your street at night, then
eventually you'll meet up with one (odds-wise). Fortunately, most places
aren't like that. But people like to own guns anyway, for they claim they
feel safer. However, having the gun there increases, IMO, the potential for
violence in the event of a situation. Yes, the deterrent factor is there,
but so is the "run amock" factor (running down the road trying to shoot
someone in the back). Because of that, it's hard to believe that guns
really make us "safer". Meeting force with force doesn't equate to safe.
It's more like being equal. IOW, gun owners don't have to play the victum
because they can deal out deadly force just as well as they can receive it.
Are we all safe when other countries have hoards of nukes pointing at us and
us at them? Yes, it's a balance that, if we are lucky, holds us at bay, but
it doesn't feel too safe. And don't suffer a fool on either side.....

I personallly enjoy shooting targets & things. It's a lot of fun. So far,
however, I haven't felt the need to own a gun for protection. I hope I
never do, but I would if I had to.

::
::: Then again, I don't want to argue gun control here on this group.
::: There's too much on-topic political bull**** to worry about, one
::: example was pointed out by Jackie.
::
:: No doubt.

"Hollywood" wrote

How many crack heads off the street have bounced into your home? And
how
many guns do you own? I don't want to abridge your right to ownership,
I'm
just curious about the rationality.

No crack heads so far. And I don't own any guns (right now). I sold a few
off and had a nice vaca in Hawaii with the cash :-))

I will probably buy another gun sometime. Not for protection, for target
shooting with my daughter. Every girl ought to learn ta' shoot, dontcha
think?



What about you?
I weigh
the risks.
Risk of a crack head bouncing into my home intent on harming me or my
wife
(as opposed to stealing my very old stereo) vs. the risk of a fire arm
accident.

Like, dropping an unloaded pistol on your toe?

People who leave loaded guns laying around the house where there are
children (for example) are fools. If you have any significant data on gun
accidents not caused by sheer, utter stupidity, I'd like to see it.
Otherwise, you're talking about candidates for the Darwin Awards.

People ought to take some sort of IQ test before they can buy a gun. (Or
drive a car, for that matter.)

Hollywood wrote:

On Oct 11, 10:02 pm, Jackie Patti wrote:
Back on topic: guns are low-carb.

You, of course, are welcome to eat your gun.

I only have rifles and they're too big to fit in the oven.

--
http://www.ornery-geeks.org/consulting/

Roger Zoul wrote:

Live by the sword, die by the sword. Or, Gun.

A friend owns a halberd and we've speculated on what would happen if he
were to stroll the neighborhood bearing it. There's no National Halberd
Association to protect his second amendment right to do so.

Halberds are low-carb also.

--
http://www.ornery-geeks.org/consulting/

Hollywood wrote:

I want to amend that. I looked at my goofy reader and thought I was
replying to
JCderKoneHead, not you. My bad, and apologies.

Many might consider this more insulting than the original flame!

--
http://www.ornery-geeks.org/consulting/

Jackie Patti wrote:
Roger Zoul wrote:

Live by the sword, die by the sword. Or, Gun.

A friend owns a halberd and we've speculated on what would happen if he
were to stroll the neighborhood bearing it. There's no National Halberd
Association to protect his second amendment right to do so.

A college friend made a sword at one point. A week before he was
ready to put a pummel/hilt on it a pair of idiots mugged him. He
stiff
armed the not-yet-ground-sharp-but already-hammered-to-shape
blade towards one assailant. It stuck in the mugger's clavicle and
had to be yanked out. He showed it to the other assailant and said
"I suggest you run". The two left and were not seen again in that
neighborhood. He carried the finished sword around with him most
of the time for several years and I don't recall any of the local
police
bothering him about it.

Halberds are low-carb also.

So are the critters skewered on the halberd.

When concealed carry gets more common, crime rates plummet.
Check the stats in states/cities were it has happened. The reason
Florida muggings are against tourists is the thugs don't want to
risk going up against the well armed citizens. Accidents and
having weapons used against the owner all happen less often than
the drop in crime when more guns are in the hands of law abiding
citizens.

But crime was never a part of the reason going armed was allowed
when the US was formed. Nor was the truth of "an armed society
is a polite society". The reason was insurance against a tyrant.
Given how many folks carried assault rifles in Iraq under Hussein,
I would like to see how many were civilians vs police to see how
that old theory held up.

Gun, deer, venison, venison salami, low carb lunch.

"Hollywood" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 12, 8:06 am, Hollywood wrote:
On Oct 11, 10:02 pm, Jackie Patti wrote:



Hollywood wrote:
What a lot of folks see is the home invader holding their very own
firearm
on them.

What others see is a criminal who brought the gun as a threat,
threatened
and forced to use it.

Still others see other "externalities" to the legal gun - legal gun
owner
transaction.

I see someone responding to offtopic posts crossposted here for no good
reason.

Back on topic: guns are low-carb.

You, of course, are welcome to eat your gun.

I want to amend that. I looked at my goofy reader and thought I was
replying to
JCderKoneHead, not you. My bad, and apologies.

Back to topic.


Once again you've shown yourself to be an idiot. Congrats.