Who Shouldnt Have Guns?

[top gun]

That Dan Wessons a neat gun as well. I regret selling a 6" barrel Colt King Cobra in .357, I dig revolvers. Also sold a 92FS Inox in 9mm, I needed money for a new deer rifle. For hand guns, all I have now is a Ruger Competition .22 MarkII and a 9mm P239 Sig.

I've owned Rugers before... very good guns. I bet the 22 is dead on... and I'm a 9mm fan waaaaaay back even to the old toggle top German Luger days. Of course I like the capacity of the newer automatics even better.

When I owned my body shops I liked the Beretta 380 because it was good quality, fairly small & easy to keep in a desk drawer or take with me doing bank deposits and such.

It's funny you brought up the Colt Cobra. Many years ago I was actually at the gun shop with all intentions of buying one when I saw the Dan Wesson and bought it. Truth is the Colt had a little smoother action but I really liked the versatility of being able to change barrel lengths. I could snub it out and carry it or go big and target shot with it. The thing is blindingly accurate especially when you shoot 38's out of it.

Like I said I hardly ever shoot them anymore but a bunch of us used to go shooting all the time. I remember right before they made them illegal I bought a box of 357 armor piercing shells and my buddy had just bought a Thompson 45 semi automatic machine gun. We went out to his dads old abandoned farm house where they had an old junk car sitting off in the weeds. We blasted that thing to hell. The 357 armor piercings would go right through a car rim and the Thompson with a 30 or 40 round clip rocked the car back & forth like it was in a tornado. Good times...

 

[Bunz]

That's and excellent weapon Bunz. One of my old friends who's wife happens to be a deputy sheriff has the 9mm Glock with the laser marker sighting feature. You see that red dot on you... it gets your attention quick...

I sold off most of my handguns and only get out to the farm to target practice a couple times a year now.

I kept two... one light one heavy. A 380 Beretta... nice light & accurate point and shot type weapon but not much knock down power.

Then I have old faithful my Dan Wesson 357 Pistol Pack with it's briefcase and all 4 interchangeable barrels 2.5" - 4" - 6" & 8" and two sets of grips. Powerful, dependable, acurrate... but bulky with the longer barrels.

If I really carried a gun (not for Bear ) I'd probably have a Glock or the 9mm Beretta.

I still own a Colt Trooper in .357 that was given to me when I was 12. I carried it in the woods from then until I was legal to buy the glock model 21.
My choice with a Glock did come after tons of research and shooting them along with several other examples of full sized polymer framed autos.

So for me I knew I didnt want a larger revolver. I wanted the capacity, quick shooting and reloading and packability of an auto. I nearly spent double on an H&K but when I actually shot one, I preferred the Glock. Then when I shot a S&W.500 I knew I made the right decision.

For my glock, I installed a new trigger system, that reduces the pull from 7lbs down to 3.5 in a much smoother pull before it breaks clean. I carry it in a galco shoulder rig holster, that allows quick access and 2 spare mags in addition to the one in the pistol. Less than 7 pounds and I have a pistol, 39 rounds of ammunition, and a sheathed leatherman wave all in one rig that I can wear with anything. With that set up, I feel comfortable spending quite a bit of time fending for myself in the woods if I needed to. I just hope the day never comes.

 

[Bunz]

Earlier I posted a story about a bear that mauled a man who was unarmed. Here is a link and story where a blackie managed to get into this house, right on the outskirts of Anchorage. The bear was quickly dispatched by the home owner after he returned. Sad day for everyone. But it could have been much much much much worse.

http://www.ktuu.com/global/story.asp?s=8344175

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- An Anchorage family had quite the fright Saturday night coming home to find a bear rummaging through their house.

"My leather couch is torn up," said Hillside homeowner David Tisch. "My kitchen is torn up."

Tisch said he left his house for about half an hour and found a bear -- and $500 to $1,000 in damages -- when he returned.

"My wife says, 'There's a bear in the house. There's a bear in the house,'" Tisch said. "And (my neighbor) Richard and I came from his place, grabbed the firearm and had opened the front door and had no other choice at the time other than to dispatch the barrel."

"It's an unfortunate circumstance that any animal has to be killed," he added.

Wildlife Trooper Joe Whitton says something like this is more likely to happen this time of year with limited food.

"Salmon aren't running yet and they're easily attracted to the scent of garbage," Whitton said.

A bear cane can break into a home and head straight to fridge, Whitton said, just because they're smart.

"Bears are probably one of the most diligent animals out there," he said. "They can figure out how to open up a small can of coffee take the lid off without destroying the whole can."

"Keep trash picked up until the last minute," Whitton recommended. "Keep it secured if you can." Those who negligently feed bears or other wildlife can be fined $310.

The Hillside family says they try to follow up all the tips.

"I don't put trash cans out, I take my garbage to the dump," Tisch said. "We don't have bird feeders. We don't have dog food outside."

And their dog wasn't even enough to deter the intruder.

Also worth mentioning: The family spotted another bear a few hours later. And Whitton saw another bear near Muldoon. It's a reminder that you may live in a city, but you're really in bear country.

 

[foggedinn]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Thought it might be useful to actually post the amendment under discussion.

The first time I read this amendment as a child, I saw only the last part of the amendment and argued vehemently with my teacher that we had an absolute right to bear arms. I grew to manhood and put away such childish notions.

I understand the arguements about personal protection and subsistence hunting, but see no such right in the 2nd amendment to the U.S. constitution.

My life has been on the line several times. The Lord was with me and I survived. Due to the peculiar nature of these incidents, if I had had a gun, I would have died.

As for who shouldn't have guns; no one, except maybe some Alaskans

 

[Rhodri]

The first time I read this amendment as a child, I saw only the last part of the amendment and argued vehemently with my teacher that we had an absolute right to bear arms. I grew to manhood and put away such childish notions.

Hmm...wonder why it's been debated for ions and the courts struggle back and forth on the subject ? I mean, you seem to have 'er all figgered out.

 

[PLC1]

Hmm...wonder why it's been debated for ions and the courts struggle back and forth on the subject ? I mean, you seem to have 'er all figgered out.

I't has been debated, and is still debated because it is open to interpretation. First, it does speak of a "well regulated militia." Second, it doesn't say "guns", but "arms." The second term includes guns, of course, but also such things as bombs, grenades, tanks, and missiles. No one, not even the NRA, is saying that every citizen has the right to own RPGs and have a tank in his front yard. Obviously, the second amendment isn't absolute.

Whether a well armed citizenry is a deterrent to crime, or a danger to society, has been and is being hotly debated, thus, threads like this one.

Personally, I think that we're better off with as many law abiding and responsible citizens as possible armed and dangerous to the outlaws who don't care what the gun laws are. As for wildlife, I have no problem hiking the Sierra Nevada unarmed, and have been doing it for many years with no problems. If I lived in Alaska, I would probably want to carry something that could stop a bear if need be. If I were in East LA, I'd want to be armed, too, against the more dangerous predators that roam the streets there.

Whether or not to carry protection depends a lot on where you are.

 

[top gun]

I still own a Colt Trooper in .357 that was given to me when I was 12. I carried it in the woods from then until I was legal to buy the glock model 21.
My choice with a Glock did come after tons of research and shooting them along with several other examples of full sized polymer framed autos.

So for me I knew I didnt want a larger revolver. I wanted the capacity, quick shooting and reloading and packability of an auto. I nearly spent double on an H&K but when I actually shot one, I preferred the Glock. Then when I shot a S&W.500 I knew I made the right decision.

For my glock, I installed a new trigger system, that reduces the pull from 7lbs down to 3.5 in a much smoother pull before it breaks clean. I carry it in a galco shoulder rig holster, that allows quick access and 2 spare mags in addition to the one in the pistol. Less than 7 pounds and I have a pistol, 39 rounds of ammunition, and a sheathed leatherman wave all in one rig that I can wear with anything. With that set up, I feel comfortable spending quite a bit of time fending for myself in the woods if I needed to. I just hope the day never comes.

Oh don't misunderstand what I was saying my friend.

I think to fend off a BEAR a Glock 45 automatic is an excellent choice. My meant I'm a city guy and I never have had to strap one on because I might run across a pissed off BEAR!!!

Revolvers are nice and they never jam... but if I'm battling BEAR I want a lot of shots... a WHOLE lot of shots!

 

[top gun]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Thought it might be useful to actually post the amendment under discussion.

The first time I read this amendment as a child, I saw only the last part of the amendment and argued vehemently with my teacher that we had an absolute right to bear arms. I grew to manhood and put away such childish notions.

I understand the arguements about personal protection and subsistence hunting, but see no such right in the 2nd amendment to the U.S. constitution.

My life has been on the line several times. The Lord was with me and I survived. Due to the peculiar nature of these incidents, if I had had a gun, I would have died.

As for who shouldn't have guns; no one, except maybe some Alaskans

Well on this post I can agree & disagree with you in various forms.

First even as a gun owner I think your interpretation probably is closer to the original intent than is often concluded. There's some comma location issues (differences) in copies that were signed by different states that opens up the argument even more.

All this said you at least have to give a nod to the fact that guns were expected to not be held just by the government. I don't see any evidence that law abiding citizens were not to have weapons as at the time of the document most everybody did posses firearms of some type.

I'm a middle of the road gun owner. Passing serious background checks with no mental health issues or documentation of violent behavior i.e. convicted of stalking or domestic violence... I think it is reasonable and fair for citizens to have the ability to purchase hunting firearms & sporting firearms for sport and handguns for personal protection.

I see the implementation of some kind of additional certification for concealed carry of handguns, and ownership of semi automatic military style assault rifles as a fair additional step on gun control. As well as I think all guns should be titled and legally transfered just like a car has to be to be legally owned.

On the God protecting me thing. If I needed a gun... I'd still want a gun in my opinion.

So I couldn't be for not allowing law abiding citizens to own guns. But I also think it's good that society put a good standard on legal gun ownership.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Well that would do the trick alright. But I have shot one of these monsters, I dont find them practical to the real world in this sense. Strapping something that heavy and long to your hip or chest for long periods will wreck one's back. Plus I am a shooter, I shoot all the time, I have no desire to practice with that wrist cracker.

I carry a full sized Glock model 21 in .45acp. Has worked for me to this point. Ill take my chances with it.

My uncle has a Springfield Sledgehammer (.500 S&W)--it's not nearly as bad as you'd expect. It's a much lighter kick than his .454 Casull (his carry gun for many years), and no worse than his old S&W N-frame .44 Magnum (now mine) with standard loads (it kicks harder with the very-hot handloads he uses). I truly don't understand the people who find a .44 Magnum's kick objectionable...I've seen him put 100+ ropunds through his Casull in one day. They're certainly loud (the Sledge is as loud as his elephant rifle), but the kick isn't bad.

He can put five shots onto a #10 can at 50 yards (with the Casull or the Sledge) twenty times out of twenty, and can shatter 5 cinderblocks lined up at 30 yards about nine times out of ten. Of course, this is someone who shoots wooden blocks thrown in the air with everything from a .22 rifle to an 18lb elephant gun.

He carries the Casull in a Maquis rig, the same way he used to carry the .44 Magnum.

My wife's carry gun is a Beretta 9mm, a model 92 as I recall. (She doesn't like revolvers.)

 

[dahermit]

My life has been on the line several times. The Lord was with me and I survived. Due to the peculiar nature of these incidents, if I had had a gun, I would have died.

This is all very mysterious. It would be interesting if you would tell us about how your, "...life has been on the line several times.", and exactly how, "...if I had had a gun, I would have died.". How did not having a gun save your life?

 

[revolution4PAUL]

Anyone who isn't a member of the armed forces shouldn't have guns.

Thats the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Obviously you come from a different world than me. Go watch the Brady Bunch some more.


RON PAUL- GO LEARN ABOUT HIM!!!!

 

[dahermit]

Thats the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Obviously you come from a different world than me. Go watch the Brady Bunch some more.

Obviously you have not read all of his posts. Read them all and you will see that one is not the stupidest; he has several that contend for that title.

 

[revolution4PAUL]

Obviously you have not read all of his posts. Read them all and you will see that one is not the stupidest; he has several that contend for that title.

Haha!! He has like 1300 posts, I'll just take your word on that

But honestly, if the armed forces were the 'only people ALLOWED' to have guns, that would not prevent the gangsters from owning illegal guns. The only difference is that the gangsters would know that every 'legal' family would not have a gun for their self defence.

Also, the gov't would have a better chance of overthrowing the people if we ever got a extremely fanciest dictator/"president"- almost like Bush would have done if the people were unarmed(its a possibility anyways). Just look at what happened with Hurricane Katrina victims in New Orleans, apparently they had to surrender their legal guns. Where does that leave a little old lady for self defense against looters?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6076118677860424204
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7336845760512239683

I don't know how educated you people are but I would recommend watching the above links to show you why we might need to protect ourself from our gov't. Back in the 30's(I think it was the 30's) the gov't passed a law that permitted the american people from owning gold. They would be fined and/or sent to jail if they didn't sell their personal gold to the gov't for ~15 dollars an ounce. The american people basically got ROBBED BY OUR OWN GOV'T. Corruption and conspiracies are real- just not every one you hear.

Usually the people that commit gun crimes are people that own guns illegally and have no respect for their selves never mind guns safety/laws. The people that own guns legally are the ones that respect guns and laws otherwise they would not be able to own a guns.

Can guns be used to kill people? Of course guns can kill, but a knife, shoelace, water, sticks, stones, fists, dogs, etc etc can also kill people too.

RON PAUL- Go learn about the great man!!

 

[numinus]

Haha!! He has like 1300 posts, I'll just take your word on that

But honestly, if the armed forces were the 'only people ALLOWED' to have guns, that would not prevent the gangsters from owning illegal guns. The only difference is that the gangsters would know that every 'legal' family would not have a gun for their self defence.

Also, the gov't would have a better chance of overthrowing the people if we ever got a extremely fanciest dictator/"president"- almost like Bush would have done if the people were unarmed(its a possibility anyways). Just look at what happened with Hurricane Katrina victims in New Orleans, apparently they had to surrender their legal guns. Where does that leave a little old lady for self defense against looters?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6076118677860424204
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7336845760512239683

I don't know how educated you people are but I would recommend watching the above links to show you why we might need to protect ourself from our gov't. Back in the 30's(I think it was the 30's) the gov't passed a law that permitted the american people from owning gold. They would be fined and/or sent to jail if they didn't sell their personal gold to the gov't for ~15 dollars an ounce. The american people basically got ROBBED BY OUR OWN GOV'T. Corruption and conspiracies are real- just not every one you hear.

Usually the people that commit gun crimes are people that own guns illegally and have no respect for their selves never mind guns safety/laws. The people that own guns legally are the ones that respect guns and laws otherwise they would not be able to own a guns.

Can guns be used to kill people? Of course guns can kill, but a knife, shoelace, water, sticks, stones, fists, dogs, etc etc can also kill people too.

RON PAUL- Go learn about the great man!!

You need to get your education from somewhere credible.

You didn't actually believe that the principle of self-defense necessarily means lethal force, now, did you? Or did you think that everyone will take your word for it that you killed someone in self-defense?

What idiotic nonsense!

 

[numinus]

Obviously you have not read all of his posts. Read them all and you will see that one is not the stupidest; he has several that contend for that title.

LOL.

That is quite interesting, coming from a person who hopes to learn the rigors of physics by firing guns.

Against supreme idiocy, even god contends in vain.