Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    Sentra's Avatar
    Sentra Posts: 385, Reputation: 55
    Full Member
     
    #1

    Nov 17, 2006, 09:14 AM
    Firearms: Views, Truths and Taboos
    What is your view on owning a type of weapon, used solely for the purpose of defending your property, home, collecting, etc

    *Keep in mind that I emphasize safety first, meaning that proper handling, knowledge, safety, stowing and security of said weapon is an primary MUST.*

    Personally, yes. I am all for it. I do NOT support:


    Minors (or anyone else) handling something without the proper supervision, training, knowledge, etc

    Joe BlowNobody leaving it loaded, out in the open for someone to do something awful with.

    The pawnbroker selling and permitting someone something that requires rounds without taking the proper steps(i.e.: Background check, but not limited to)


    Etc. etc. etc,. you get the picture.


    I want to see what everyone here thinks about this, and be very open about it, that is all I ask:).
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #2

    Nov 17, 2006, 09:43 AM
    A couple of months ago, a couple of thieves broke into a home on LI. The home owner had a licensed gun and opened fire. In the exchange of gunfire a visitor to the home an pre-teen boy, was shot and critically wounded.

    Would anyone have been hurt if the owner hadn't opened fire? I don't know. If a weapon is kept on premises for protection and that weapon is kept safely to protect kids in the home would that weapon be available in case of such an incident? I think it unlikely.

    From what I recall reading, if the victim tries to use a gun to prevent being a victim of a crime, there is a greater likelihood of the victim getting hurt.
    Sentra's Avatar
    Sentra Posts: 385, Reputation: 55
    Full Member
     
    #3

    Nov 17, 2006, 10:00 AM
    I totally understand what you are trying to say, honestly. It shouldn't have happened, no. Did the homeowner understand the threat in his home, or did he just start opening up a few on some people in the dark without really knowing who they were?

    That is what we have security systems for in the event of a robbery, force like that shouldn't be used unless the innocent are fired on first. Was the boy OK? I hope so.

    The burglary shouldn't have happened, either, nor should have the accidental shooting of someone who was there with the knowledge of the homeowner. There is a great possibility those men who broke in could have, sadly, done something terrible to the entire family. Personally, states that have the 'shoot to defend' laws should make it a must for a sign in neon lights saying, "We shoot, care to run?" ;) to be displayed on their properties. Something a tad larger than "Trespassers will be shot".

    And I have to say that a weapon can be available safely to an adult, and only an adult if (I stress the IF) certain practices and precautions are taken to prepare for the event (though heaven forbid) of a break-in or worse, as long as they are capable, rational and not trigger happy.

    I want to add that this thread is for the sole purpose of debate, sharing and exchange of thought and it is not meant to offend anyone. I am not against those who do not believe in handling or owning one, I respect that choice greatly.
    Thomas1970's Avatar
    Thomas1970 Posts: 856, Reputation: 131
    Senior Member
     
    #4

    Nov 17, 2006, 10:04 AM
    Scott is correct. Statistics show that many inexperienced gun owners are in fact injured with their own firearms during home invasions.
    I don't believe in owning them in any regard. As to a home invasion... My thoughts? Takes all the fun out of dropping them with an aptly placed nerve hold or well applied wrist lock. As well as having studied Hapkido, I did successfully complete a weapons disarmament seminar in Combat Sambo. Dislodging a weapon at close range is often easier than many people think.
    Violence begets violence. Displaying a weapon will likely only increase aggresion, perhaps setting the stage for a situation which might otherwise have been avoided.
    Sentra's Avatar
    Sentra Posts: 385, Reputation: 55
    Full Member
     
    #5

    Nov 17, 2006, 10:07 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1970
    My thoughts? Takes all the fun out of dropping them with an aptly placed nerve hold or well applied wrist lock.

    Nice one, I am not against hand to hand or self defense. Finding a pressure point and using it to your advantage can be fulfilling when the moment calls for it.
    Thomas1970's Avatar
    Thomas1970 Posts: 856, Reputation: 131
    Senior Member
     
    #6

    Nov 17, 2006, 10:25 AM
    The only thing about guns is, are you really mentally prepared to shoot someone, even if they enter your home?
    Most people who are intent on shooting someone will typically do so from a distance. Call it, not being able to delay the "gratification", so to speak.
    In a case of robbery, often the gun is simply a means of intimidation. Most criminals don't necessarily want to shoot someone. Likewise, they may see the homeowner in the same light. It only takes a second of hesitation on the shooter's part.
    J_9's Avatar
    J_9 Posts: 40,286, Reputation: 5645
    Expert
     
    #7

    Nov 17, 2006, 11:12 AM
    My husband is a master gunsmith, one of the few still around.

    While I will agree with what everyone is saying, and no I do not want to get into a debate, I still see that there are many instances where a person defends themselves properly, but it is never broadcast on the news. Criminals are broadcast, and people who make mistakes are broadcast, but rarely is the incident where it saved the lives of others broadcast.

    We had an incident here recently where an employee of a grocery store entered and began cutting (and killed 2) other employees with a rather large kinfe (This employee worked in the butcher's department). He grapped an elderly woman and held the knife at her throat. A delivery driver, who had a concealed carry permit, yelled at the assailant to drop the weapon. In his surprise the assailant dropped the knife and the delivery driver shot the assailant wounding him until the police arrived to arrest him.

    That particular gentleman saved the life of this elderly woman, and possibly others. You never see that in the news.

    So, now I quietly unsuscribe from this thread.
    valinors_sorrow's Avatar
    valinors_sorrow Posts: 2,927, Reputation: 653
    Ultra Member
     
    #8

    Nov 17, 2006, 11:16 AM
    Were you around when this thread happened, I can't remember...
    https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/crime/...ht=gun+control
    It was a doosie, I thought!

    I own a handgun even though in many many ways it does not suit who I am. I am certain I am capable of killing someone in the circumstances I envision using it and yes, that will be a horrendous experience (anyone who doesn't think so is being INCREDIBLY naive). It beats dying or being harmed enough for me to do this and I am convinced we live in culture that is upping the odds daily (we did consider moving and other options as well). Because I believe there are a lot of liabilities to it, I hope I have overcome them with the following:

    A comprehensive firearms class (could yield a concealed permit but I don't ever intend on taking it anywhere so I didn't file)

    Timely target practice sessions at the local range which inculde a session where I am timed for how long it takes me to load, point and shoot in very deliberately manufactured stressful circumstance to simulate the real thing (it only took me 12 seconds to load and fire, with at least two of the shots deemed threat stoppable on the target every time I have done that so far).

    Periodic dry runs in various imagined circumstances on what I think will occur in my home should I have to use it.

    I clean the gun every time its fired.

    It is presently loaded with mag safe ammo (does not go through walls or richoet) in an easily accesible but well hidden place in our bedroom. If I were to have any overnight houseguests OMG especailly with kids, I would unload it for the duration of their stay.

    And I agree with Scott in that most gun owners probably don't have a clue nor take these measures, hence the stats. It was a very difficult decision for me to make. Our house, while somewhat remote, is set up so that if someone breaks in here, they will have had to override a lot of incentive not to already so I will be fairly convinced they mean business. Sadly, so will I.

    PS - My hands still shake like Silence of the Lambs after the first shot too.
    ScottGem's Avatar
    ScottGem Posts: 64,970, Reputation: 6056
    Computer Expert and Renaissance Man
     
    #9

    Nov 17, 2006, 11:41 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by J_9
    He grapped an elderly woman and held the knife at her throat. A delivery driver, who had a concealed carry permit, yelled at the assailant to drop the weapon. In his surprise the assailant dropped the knife and the delivery driver shot the assailant wounding him until the police arrived to arrest him.

    That particular gentleman saved the life of this elderly woman, and possibly others. You never see that in the news.
    This account bothers me. I don't know how accurately it follows the facts but certain things stand out. First, is the sequence; "the assailant dropped the knife and the delivery driver shot the assailant". The driver yelled at the assailant to drop his weapon, the assailant did and the driver then shot him? If the weapon had been dropped why shoot? Second, did he, in fact, save the lady or was he just lucky he didn't kill her or get her killed? What if the assailant had been startled and stabbed instead of dropping the knife? If the assailant was holding the knife to her throat, he was probably using her body as a shield. Was the driver that good a shot that he could wound the assailant without hitting the lady?

    My point is simply that for every situation like this, where the outcome was positive, I'm sure you can find similar situations where the outcome was negative.
    Fr_Chuck's Avatar
    Fr_Chuck Posts: 81,303, Reputation: 7691
    Expert
     
    #10

    Nov 17, 2006, 11:45 AM
    I will note that from the radio yesterday of those people having carry permits, meaning not only do they own but they also carry their weapon there has been almost no accidental shootings.

    Gun ownership is a responsibility, if and it happens daily, a unlicensed person drives the car, accidents are much more likely to happen.

    For home defense a short barrel shot gun is still normally the best, since even at night, without your glasses on, all you have to do is get close to pointing in the right direction,

    But as in Scotts story, someone fired without aiming, you are trained never to fire if you don't know where the target is,

    But even at best some shots do miss the target

    And yes time practice is a must from hoslter pulling the weapon to hitting two targets twice can take less than 3 seconds for a skilled person.

    For homeowners a pistol safe with a push buttom system allows you to get to a loaded weaon in seconds. But keeps anyone without the code out.

    And as a police officer with years on the street, yes holds and moves are great but you are dead against someone with a gun, period, no one is faster than the bullet.
    Thomas1970's Avatar
    Thomas1970 Posts: 856, Reputation: 131
    Senior Member
     
    #11

    Nov 17, 2006, 12:18 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
    For home defense a short barrel shot gun is still normally the best, since even at night, without your glasses on, all you have to do is get close to pointing in the right direction,

    But as in Scotts story, someone fired without aiming, you are trained never to fire if you don't know where the target is,
    This seems totally contradictory to me. You say that some people fire without aiming, yet you tacitly imply that the nice thing about a short barrel shotgun is that you don't really need to do so. Or as the old saying goes, "Close only counts with horseshoes and hand grenades." Or, I guess, with short barrel shotguns.
    You also mention knowing what your target is. How about WHO your target is? Can most people really determine this in the dark, particularly without their glasses? Is it worth the risk? I'd personally rather endanger my own life than shoot an innocent person.

    And as a police officer with years on the street, yes holds and moves are great but you are dead against someone with a gun, period, no one is faster than the bullet.
    Yes, but as I stated, most people intent on firing tend to do so from a distance. A second's hesitation on the shooter's part can be more than sufficient. Many of the fellow students I studied with were in fact police officers. Either way, I'd rather die knowing I didn't do more harm than was absolutely necessary. Just my personal philosophies. I believe, in such a case, that I will be back again, in some way, shape or form. Do you believe that upon arriving in Heaven, such actions are likely to be condoned or forgotten? Gandhi sure didn't...
    wildcatgirl's Avatar
    wildcatgirl Posts: 73, Reputation: 13
    Junior Member
     
    #12

    Nov 17, 2006, 01:36 PM
    My husband and I have a hand gun, just a little 22 caliper. We both have permits for it and I know very well how to load it and shoot it. We keep it locked up in a combination safe and the ammo stays in a lock box. But, would I ever use it? Hard to tell. Even though I know how to handle it (actually, I'm a better shot than my husband) and have been around guns all my life (I used to date a guy who competed in shooting competitions who taught me a lot) I still get this "somewhat nervous" feeling when I handle it. I can't quite describe it--endorphines maybe? Anyway, it doesn't make me feel any safer and even though I'm all for protecting your family and your property, my dogs make me feel safer. I have a shi tzu that will chew the ankles off anyone trying to break into the house and a black lab and cattle dog that will take care of the rest! LOL!
    Thomas1970's Avatar
    Thomas1970 Posts: 856, Reputation: 131
    Senior Member
     
    #13

    Nov 17, 2006, 01:45 PM
    I have one that is half Rottweiler, and he's the biggest wuss in the bunch! I'm on my own. It's every man, dog and cat for themselves. :)
    wildcatgirl's Avatar
    wildcatgirl Posts: 73, Reputation: 13
    Junior Member
     
    #14

    Nov 17, 2006, 01:49 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1970
    I have one that is half Rottweiler, and he's the biggest wuss in the bunch! I'm on my own. It's every man, dog and cat for themself. :)
    You might be one who would feel safer with a gun then! :D
    Thomas1970's Avatar
    Thomas1970 Posts: 856, Reputation: 131
    Senior Member
     
    #15

    Nov 17, 2006, 02:08 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by wildcatgirl
    You might be one who would feel safer with a gun then!! :D
    Yeah, maybe a glue gun. At least then I'd know he'd stick by me! :D
    wildcatgirl's Avatar
    wildcatgirl Posts: 73, Reputation: 13
    Junior Member
     
    #16

    Nov 17, 2006, 02:13 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1970
    Yeah, maybe a glue gun. At least then I'd know he'd stick by me! :D
    LOL--Too funny! :D
    valinors_sorrow's Avatar
    valinors_sorrow Posts: 2,927, Reputation: 653
    Ultra Member
     
    #17

    Nov 17, 2006, 02:27 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas1970
    Yeah, maybe a glue gun. At least then I'd know he'd stick by me! :D
    A glue gun... ROFLMAO (I'd rep you but the dang spread message!)

    I read in the book Spirituality of Imperfection (a wonderful collection of spiritual stories) something that made it possible for me to cross the line from total pacifist to potential killer. It was a tale about a sufi monk who urgently explained to his teacher that he accidentally discovered a man who was about to kill a group of people and knowing there wasn't time for fetching the authorities and that killing is wrong, he didn't know what to do. The teacher asked him to consider everything and return the next day. The monk returned the next day and told his teacher he killed the man. The teacher pressed the monk as to why and he said, better to have the stain of his one murder on my soul than the man to have the stain of many more on his. The teacher said this is correct.

    It may be a bit of a perversion to consider it as a basis since we are talking in myself defense case of one against one, presumably. And it smacks of some ego to suggest I should be the one to prevail. But it is, if possible, the same atmospere I am attempting to defend myself in none the less, as strange as that may seem. I am such an admirer of Gandhi but I am not gandhi. In a way, I think Thomas is more correct than I am too LOL.
    Sentra's Avatar
    Sentra Posts: 385, Reputation: 55
    Full Member
     
    #18

    Nov 17, 2006, 02:57 PM
    I really appreciate the input from everyone, its giving me a view of 'the other side', persay.

    And back to the dog reference, why is it that the small pets are going to be more gung ho than the larger ones?
    wildcatgirl's Avatar
    wildcatgirl Posts: 73, Reputation: 13
    Junior Member
     
    #19

    Nov 17, 2006, 03:11 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentra
    I really appreciate the input from everyone, its giving me a view of 'the other side', persay.

    And back to the dog reference, why is it that the small pets are going to be more gung ho than the larger ones?!
    It's all in the attitude--our dog thinks he's 10 ft. tall!
    Fr_Chuck's Avatar
    Fr_Chuck Posts: 81,303, Reputation: 7691
    Expert
     
    #20

    Nov 17, 2006, 06:11 PM
    I will explain the shoot gun issue, I am a marksmen, shoot on the police team for a while, and a marksmen with a long range rifle shooting also.

    But even at best, with a moving target, ( not spinning and timed) but moving right to left, in a combat situation, a hand gun will be about 75 or 80 percent in a expert shooter, In a shoot out with gun men in a waffle house a few years ago, trained police only hit about 40 percent of their shoots, the bad guys did not hit a single shoot,

    But a shot gun allows you to hit a 2 or 3 foot wide area of a direction, and also has a fear factor that stops most people.

    And at 4 foot or 5 foot, the reaction time is just not fast enough, we trained with stoping unarmed and armed people in training, with guns, knives, bats and all sorts of weapons. And what if they have a bat or knife,
    I would prefer to shoot them and know I win, than to see if they are better than I am. I have scars on my left arm that proves I won, but also proves they were pretty good also.

    But I will say from what we were trained most gun shoots and shoot outs are not from a distance, but close up in that 10 ft or less.
    And in today's society with drug adicts and gang members, the idea that they will not shoot at once, is getting less and less true.

    It is normally the citizen with the gun, who will pause, not the bad guy.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Viewing spreadsheets in different views [ 7 Answers ]

I am an intermediate level MS Excel user. I often use my spreadsheet and would like to see different views at the click of a button. By this, lets say I have columns A through Z. I know I can manually MOVE, say columns C, G, L, and P to be the first 4 columns, into position A,B,C,D. And I can...


View more questions Search