Firearms thread.

[heartstrings]

Didn't you guys have a lot of "bush rangers"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushranger

[Salyan]

Just a thought on living in 'dangerous places'... I live in a pretty safe community (for a city), in a quiet part of the world. Maybe it's because I'm a woman alone, but I feel the need to have a means of protection wherever I am - home, countryside or city. If in the city, it's because of the people. If the country, wild animals or people. And people are everywhere - no matter where you live. Bevauss you never know which one will turn out to be a threat. 

[heartstrings]

Are y'all allowed to carry weapons up there?

[Salyan]

Haha... not really. Long guns are legal to carry, but I wouldn't want to test the theory in town. :-P They're useful to have on hand for home and the country, though. (I take one when I'm out camping alone.) We're not even supposed to use pepper spray on people. That being said... if I happen to be carrying dog spray, and a two-legged one happens to bother me, well... ;-)

The big issue here is self-defense. If you use any weapon in self-defense, you'll be in trouble. Gov seems to think that police will always be around to help when you need them. Nice wishful thinking in a country this size. Still, what is it they say? Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

[heartstrings]

5 minutes ago, Salyan said:

Haha... not really. Long guns are legal to carry, but I wouldn't want to test the theory in town. :-P They're useful to have on hand for home and the country, though. (I take one when I'm out camping alone.) We're not even supposed to use pepper spray on people. That being said... if I happen to be carrying dog spray, and a two-legged one happens to bother me, well... ;-)

The big issue here is self-defense. If you use any weapon in self-defense, you'll be in trouble. Gov seems to think that police will always be around to help when you need them. Nice wishful thinking in a country this size. Still, what is it they say? Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Absolutely

[swathdiver]

5 hours ago, Invicta said:

Yes, guns have killed many Americans, and not only in wars.  

I am happy living in England and far prefer that to a land which worshipos guns.

Guns don't kill, that's liberal speak.

England like America is a material society and both worship stuff more than they worship God.  

You Brits have lived under socialism for so long, most of you have no memory of individual liberties lost when the government took them over for you.

Our right to bear arms kept the tyrants at bay until the people turned from God and turned towards the devilish ideology of the tyrants without even realizing it.

DaveW:  American history seems to have been exported by Hollywood with regards to the wild west.  Far from accurate or true.  

[DaveW]

3 hours ago, heartstrings said:

Didn't you guys have a lot of "bush rangers"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushranger

Funny, but I thought I mentioned bushrangers in the post just before yours?

When you tour Fremantle prison, which was made into a tourist site in the early 2000's (I think), you hear about the bushrangers. Very few were imprisoned for murdering people.

The history shows that whilst they were armed robbers, they rarely fired upon people.

There are exceptions to that of course, but my actual point is that our history is very different to yours, and guns of any sort hold a very different place in our society than in yours.

If only you (generic you, not personal you) would recognise this you might have a chance of understanding.

And there is another point that Salyan brought up which is different there to here.

I go camping quite happily without a firearm because there are no animals here that will kill you in your sleep.

We don't have mountain lions, bears, or any other big bitey things here to protect from.

The biggest predator is the dingo, and he rarely deals with people at all. Aside from one baby (!?!?!?!?!), and a group of dingos on an island which are aggressive because tourist feed them and they expect it.

The only other dangerous things here are snakes and like most snakes, they would rather be left alone than chat with people. Oh, and a few spiders, but who shoots them anyway?????

Oh and crocs up north, but if you camp on ground level in those areas, you probably deserve to end up in a crocs belly..... there are plenty of signs warning about them but people ignore them and pay the price. And shooting them doesn't do much except make 'em angry.

There are places where I don't feel safe because of the people, but I don't camp there and wouldn't even if I had a gun.

I have thought about getting a rifle for sport, but I am not a hunter kinda guy, and if I want to shoot I can go to a range.

I could get a licence and firearm if I wanted.

 

I meant to add that if I went camping with Slayan and her friends, I think I would want a rifle with me. Bears unsettle me a bit......

(I am not anti gun at all, I just don't need one where I am.)

[Alimantado]

9 hours ago, Salyan said:

Just a thought on living in 'dangerous places'... I live in a pretty safe community (for a city), in a quiet part of the world. Maybe it's because I'm a woman alone, but I feel the need to have a means of protection wherever I am - home, countryside or city. If in the city, it's because of the people. If the country, wild animals or people. And people are everywhere - no matter where you live. Because you never know which one will turn out to be a threat. 

Yeah, including in the home itself. A year or so ago I glanced through a report into the 1,000 or so incidents in the US that year (think it was 2015) where police had shot people dead. Gotta say it made me more sympathetic towards police over there, since although 1,000 a year sounds like a lot, most of the cases I read described police turning up to a call only to find that guns were already out and they or the public were being fired upon. Anyway, the second thing that occurred to me was just how many of these cases were domestic: a husband, wife or child grabbing the household weapon and going postal on their family and neighbours. Perhaps one cost of having a weapon in the home is how easily sudden insanity on the part of a family member can turn deadly.

About 20 years ago, a law was passed here in UK that meant paracetamol had to be sold in small quantities instead of the jumbo bottles of 1,000 pills that were common. Some described it as pointless over-regulation and although I'm not totally sold on that law change myself, I can see the logic. If someone at a low ebb suddenly decides to kill themselves, not having a deadly supply immediately within arms reach might buy enough time for them to get help instead.

My main point, though, is that there are areas--UK is one I believe--where violence, sexual assault, murder etc. is more often caused by family than stranger danger. Of course, you could argue that once you've got your sidearm, cannons on the roof and land mines in the garden then the only enemy left is bound to be within the home, but anyway just offering up these thoughts...

[fastjav390]

On 3/21/2017 at 3:34 AM, DaveW said:

Did you not read my second post?

I am no fool - locking doors and locking cars is reasonable, but where I am I feel no need to arm myself for protection.

 

I AM GLAD THAT I LIVE IN A PLACE WHERE I DON'T FEEL I NEED TO ARM MYSELF.

 

I also feel sorry for you folks who live in places where you feel that you have to arm yourself.

 

Ask yourself - where would rather live?

In a place where you feel so threatened that you have to arm yourself, or in a place where you feel comfortable being unarmed?

I COULD ARM MYSELF IF I WISHED, but I don't feel it necessary.

 

 

 

Famous last words: "I live in an area I FEEL I don't need to arm myself". Hear this all the time before someone is raped or murdered in their own bed.

Crime was virtual unheard of in my area until a year ago when a group of thugs from out of the area went on a crime spree robbing two stores by gun point, breaking in a few homes and highjacking a car while murdering the owner in the process.

Edited March 24, 2017 by fastjav390

[Jim_Alaska]

1 minute ago, fastjav390 said:

Famous last words: "I live in an area I FEEL I don't need to arm myself". Hear this all the time before someone is raped or murdered in their own bed.

fastjav, I am somewhat of the same mind as you in reference to second amendment rights, the need to carry at appropriate times and the general perception of why this needs to be where I live.

But I also understand the reasoning of people like Dave W, who may actually live in places where these things are not an actual problem. I also recognize that there are places in the world that people can go about life in relative safety without the need for being armed.

Are there exceptions to this line of thought? Of course there are, but everyone has to determine their own exposure to danger and either prepare for it, or choose to not concern themselves with the perceived need for self defense, as they choose.

In my case I have always lived in areas that I have felt the need to carry for self defense, or protection from animal threats. the locations I have lived in all had their own distinct dangers. Many times these dangers overlapped, such as the need to defend against bad guys, as well as dangerous animals at the same time.

[heartstrings]

11 hours ago, DaveW said:

Funny, but I thought I mentioned bushrangers in the post just before yours?

When you tour Fremantle prison, which was made into a tourist site in the early 2000's (I think), you hear about the bushrangers. Very few were imprisoned for murdering people.

The history shows that whilst they were armed robbers, they rarely fired upon people.

There are exceptions to that of course, but my actual point is that our history is very different to yours, and guns of any sort hold a very different place in our society than in yours.

If only you (generic you, not personal you) would recognise this you might have a chance of understanding.

And there is another point that Salyan brought up which is different there to here.

I go camping quite happily without a firearm because there are no animals here that will kill you in your sleep.

We don't have mountain lions, bears, or any other big bitey things here to protect from.

The biggest predator is the dingo, and he rarely deals with people at all. Aside from one baby (!?!?!?!?!), and a group of dingos on an island which are aggressive because tourist feed them and they expect it.

The only other dangerous things here are snakes and like most snakes, they would rather be left alone than chat with people. Oh, and a few spiders, but who shoots them anyway?????

Oh and crocs up north, but if you camp on ground level in those areas, you probably deserve to end up in a crocs belly..... there are plenty of signs warning about them but people ignore them and pay the price. And shooting them doesn't do much except make 'em angry.

There are places where I don't feel safe because of the people, but I don't camp there and wouldn't even if I had a gun.

I have thought about getting a rifle for sport, but I am not a hunter kinda guy, and if I want to shoot I can go to a range.

I could get a licence and firearm if I wanted.

 

I meant to add that if I went camping with Slayan and her friends, I think I would want a rifle with me. Bears unsettle me a bit......

(I am not anti gun at all, I just don't need one where I am.)

Sorry bro. I missed it. Yes, just here in the NW Florida pinewoods we have bears, panthers coyotes, and possibly some of those with "coywolf" DNA  and these have all been known to attack human beings., Then in more populated areas we have pit bulls and other "domesticated" slobbering maulers which, unlike your dingoes, have no fear of man which makes them far more dangerous. And we have lots of two legged snakes. I'm good with the knowledge that you feel at ease. The only issue I take is with people who want to scoff at my choice to carry a defensive weapon or try to take my right away. Meantime, I just put it on every morning like a belt, and go about my day. It just hangs there and harms no one, just like a fire extinguisher.

Edited March 24, 2017 by heartstrings

[Alimantado]

5 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Many times these dangers overlapped, such as the need to defend against bad guys, as well as dangerous animals at the same time.

You got attacked by bad guys and a wild animal at the same time? That's really bad luck.

[heartstrings]

A scenario which is entirely possible. A huge number of thugs think it's cool to go around with pit bulls. Sometimes these dogs kill people on their own and sometimes the thugs "sic" them on people, including the police. I understand that "American Pitbulls" are illegal to own in your country. But that doesn't stop people from having them anyway.

[Alimantado]

Well I'd count those as part of the thugs arsenal, not an independent threat. No thugs, no pit bulls. I thought Jim was describing a scenario where, let's say, he was staring down his adversaries when suddenly an angry moose appeared to the side.

[Alimantado]

And since you mention fire extinguishers, I wonder whether one might actually be better than a gun in this scenario where foes are coming from more than one direction at once. Maybe one could create a large CO2 cloud and then sneak away, like a squid.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Alimantado
Missed some words out