Your opinion of guns

[ROB64]

So are knives. And belt sanders, band saws, and soldering irons.

So are baseball bats and matches.

Who's at fault here? The guns, the kids, or the parents?

The kids "decided" to shoot out the car window.

What if the story read this way: "Two kids in Birmingham who discovered a rock lying about outside their house, and decided to throw it through their car window." OMG more rock-control laws! We can't leave them just lying around! Think of the poor, defenseless children who can't control their impulses!

The gun should've been stored in a safe place, and the kids should've been raised to respect guns and not be stupid jackasses. There were lots of mistakes here by various people, but it's not the gun's fault.

don't forget cars.
they can be extremely dangerous in the wrong hands but they still give away licenses to almost anyone.

 

[TacosTacos]

...What would the shooter really want from you 15 feet away? I think people who use guns only really want to rob or rape, because killing has no gain for themselves, so ti really wouldn't be useful them being far away from you anyway, unless shooting, robbing and then necrophilia is your thing, and I don't think there's that many demented people out there. D:

You've never actually had a gun pulled on you have you?

 

[Gikoku Harakami]

...What would the shooter really want from you 15 feet away? I think people who use guns only really want to rob or rape, because killing has no gain for themselves, so ti really wouldn't be useful them being far away from you anyway, unless shooting, robbing and then necrophilia is your thing, and I don't think there's that many demented people out there. D:

Well, you'd be surprise how whacked out some people are out there. Some will actually find just as much pleasure from shooting someone from far away (out of sight), just as much as a kid who throws various objects off a 10+ story balcony just to see it hit someone's car, or almost hit someone in the head.. just because they think it's "funny".

 

[Frogger]

You've never actually had a gun pulled on you have you?

Look where I live and guess.

 

[sremick]

there is no need to use a gun in self defence because you can just use your fists.

Your fists against someone with a pistol? I'm not a betting man, but...

The only time I think a gun would be suitable for self defence would be if the other person had a gun

No, a gun equalizes the situation and puts a stop to it now, especially if the potential victim has a gun but the attackers does not. You are imagining a world that people without weapons are on equal footing. They are not.

which is why it's okay to kill people in the army, because you have to to survive.

So it's only ok to keep yourself alive if you're in the army? No one is ever faced with life-or-death situations otherwise?

Instead I've been training with a samurai sword and learning Ninjutsu for fighting.

Good luck with that. Going to carry that sword around town? Sword versus pistol, I'd still put my money on the pistol. Something tells me his bullet moves faster than your sword, especially at a distance.

From "Myth of the Sword":

"The katana became the Samurai's last symbolic hold on an ancient warrior system soon to be completely outdated by cheaper and more efficient guns.

The replacement of the elite warrior class by the gun was not a phenomenon known only to the Japanese. The gun in its own time systematically brought about the dismantling of the elite warrior classes worldwide. The Chinese Boxers, the Scots Highlanders, the Zulu, the Aborigines, and the American Indians were among the last holdouts of the warrior elite, and they all fell victim to the gun. For most of these warrior cultures the sword became a symbolic relic of an age far more romantic then it actually was. Since the end of the elite warrior classes the facts regarding the sword and its value as a weapon have been exaggerated far and away beyond its real functions as an instrument of war.

The sword has several weaknesses as a combat weapon. Due to its limited reach or in the case of the great sword, excessive length; one has less time for reaction to an opponent's attack. The sword's edge is fragile and easily damaged so parries need to be made with the flat of the blade, making defense both complicated and cumbersome. The tang of the sword, the blade's extension into the handle, receives most of the impact when parrying and can be prone to breaking..."

And I quote Charley Reese:

"A friend of mine, a South Korean tae kwon do master and a former member of South Korean intelligence, was laughing one day about kung fu schools, which teach students the use of the broadsword and the halberd.

'Who is going to walk around carrying a broadsword?" he said. "Besides, if your life is in danger, use a gun.'"

 

[Bliss]

Im for it. I know if someone came at me or my family i wouldnt think twice about pullin the trigger....kill or be killed....if some has a gun to you they intend on using it otherwise it what good is it? Everything in this world is dangerous and can kill you, its all about who's hands they are in.

 

[Foosoo]

@ sremick, Are you for it or against it? I couldn't tell with your pointless comments.

 

[sremick]

...What would the shooter really want from you 15 feet away? I think people who use guns only really want to rob or rape, because killing has no gain for themselves, so ti really wouldn't be useful them being far away from you anyway,

Who said that the person 15' away from you who just pulled a gun doesn't want to rob or rape you? They can force you to do what they want from that distance... they have the power and control, you don't.

Anyway, I was just giving an example... if you over-analyze it you're going to miss the point: someone with a gun can react faster and from further-distance than the victim without a gun. Whether it's 15' or 5'.

 

[Frogger]

Who said that the person 15' away from you who just pulled a gun doesn't want to rob or rape you? They can force you to do what they want from that distance... they have the power and control, you don't.

Anyway, I was just giving an example... if you over-analyze it you're going to miss the point: someone with a gun can react faster and from further-distance than the victim without a gun. Whether it's 15' or 5'.

I know, so I think the point is to not have them at all...

 

[Bliss]

Who said that the person 15' away from you who just pulled a gun doesn't want to rob or rape you? They can force you to do what they want from that distance... they have the power and control, you don't.

Anyway, I was just giving an example... if you over-analyze it you're going to miss the point: someone with a gun can react faster and from further-distance than the victim without a gun. Whether it's 15' or 5'.

100% right...within that range and a gun pulled to you, your body is froze (left in shock) so basically ur inches away.

 

[TacosTacos]

Look where I live and guess.

I've never been there.....so idk. But, I am guessing the answer is no. If you ever had a gun pulled on you, you would realize that all of these hypotheticals go out the window. You don't stand there and think...."although this person is threatening me with my life, I still have a blindly optimistic and humanitarian view on this situation, and want us all to come out without a scratch."

 

[Frogger]

I've never been there.....so idk. But, I am guessing the answer is no. If you ever had a gun pulled on you, you would realize that all of these hypotheticals go out the window. You don't stand there and think...."although this person is threatening me with my life, I still have a blindly optimistic and humanitarian view on this situation, and want us all to come out without a scratch."

I know, I'd panic, but I wouldn't go for their head, I'd get the legs or something so they couldn't run after me or they'd still remain alive. We basically have a virtually low gun crime rates, because the ways that you need to get ahold of them are difficult, and that's how we should go about it, it prevents the situation from ever happening.

 

[Gikoku Harakami]

Who said that the person 15' away from you who just pulled a gun doesn't want to rob or rape you? They can force you to do what they want from that distance... they have the power and control, you don't.

Anyway, I was just giving an example... if you over-analyze it you're going to miss the point: someone with a gun can react faster and from further-distance than the victim without a gun. Whether it's 15' or 5'.

Within short distance, it depends on if that person has the gun already drawn, or still secured away. But even then, there's alot of people out there who are poorly skilled with a gun, making the chance for survival against them that much easier.

You can have a gun, but it doesn't make you invincible, especially if you don't know how to properly use one.

 

[sremick]

Are you for it or against it? I couldn't tell with your pointless comments.

For or against what?

Just because you don't like that I don't think someone swinging a sword has much/any defense against someone with a gun out of sword's reach doesn't make all my comments "pointless". Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but methinks you've been watching too much anime and have built up illusions of grandeur about ninjas and such. Might I ask how old you are?

 

[sremick]

I know, so I think the point is to not have them at all...

Well when you figure out how to un-invent them, let us know.

Meanwhile, like I said: gun-control laws just ensure that victims don't have guns. They don't keep guns out of the hands of criminals, who by-definition have no regard for the law to begin with. And what they intend on doing with the gun (theft, rape, murder, etc) is already against the law.