So, what does this say about the gun owners debate?

[Enigma]

ATLANTA (AP) — The Supreme Court's landmark ruling on gun ownership last week focused on citizens' ability to defend themselves from intruders in their homes. But research shows that surprisingly often, gun owners use the weapons on themselves.
Suicides accounted for 55 percent of the nation's nearly 31,000 firearm deaths in 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCxcKGSQ7r7ORZNySqR3F0kP5rOgD91KMM180

[Platapus]

If someone is intent on killing themselves, they will find a way. Instead of a gun, is it better for a person to commit suicide by crashing their vehicle into something....or someone?

In the United States we commit suicide more often then we commit homicide.

Whether we have guns or not, this is not going to change.

[Sea Demon]

ATLANTA (AP) — The Supreme Court's landmark ruling on gun ownership last week focused on citizens' ability to defend themselves from intruders in their homes. But research shows that surprisingly often, gun owners use the weapons on themselves.
Suicides accounted for 55 percent of the nation's nearly 31,000 firearm deaths in 2005, the most recent year for which statistics are available from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCxcKGSQ7r7ORZNySqR3F0kP5rOgD91KMM180

So what do you think should happen Enigma? Take everyone's guns away? Just curious.

[Enigma]

Point missed....

I don't think guns should be taken away, no. I'm also aware that people will find a way to kill themselves. :doh:

The question is: What does this say about a rather high percentage of gun owners?

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.

[mrbeast]

If someone is intent on killing themselves, they will find a way. Instead of a gun, is it better for a person to commit suicide by crashing their vehicle into something....or someone?

In the United States we commit suicide more often then we commit homicide.

Whether we have guns or not, this is not going to change.

True, someone with a deep seated and determinded desire to kill themselves will find a way.

But the numbers suggest is that people who have a gun are more likely to kill themselves after a sudden depression or while drunk. Many people attempt to kill themselves but don't really intend to go through with it but if you pull the triger there is no turning back and compared to other methods of killing yourself its relatively easy.

[MothBalls]

It says that the gene pool is self cleaning. Darwin was right....


They are comparing firearm deaths. Until you look at numbers like the total number of people committing suicide, and how many of them are/were gun owners, it doesn't say much of anything.

Maybe it's easier for a gun owner to commit suicide because they have the tool right there. It's not like they get to think about it while someone tries to talk them off the ledge, or a doctor pumps out all the pills they swallowed, or stitches up their wrists. Suicide by firearm seems to be an effective method with few second chances.

[August]

For guns to be used in defense it doesn't necessarily require someone to die. Suicide however requires it by definition. Apples and oranges...

[Sea Demon]

Point missed....

I don't think guns should be taken away, no. I'm also aware that people will find a way to kill themselves. :doh:

The question is: What does this say about a rather high percentage of gun owners?

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.

I don't know what you're getting at. Please elaborate your point of view as to what it says.

[August]

but if you pull the triger there is no turning back and compared to other methods of killing yourself its relatively easy.

Compared to what other methods? Are you saying that once you jump off that building or bridge you can change your mind? Is it somehow more difficult to open a window or step in front of a speeding train than it is to pull the trigger?

I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean here. If someone really wants to commit suicide they will do so. If someone just wants attention then they will never actually pull that trigger.

[jpm1]

according to many documentaries i've seen US has a high rate of incidents due to firearms because of the easiness to own weapons . don't know but going to the supermarket or to a café pavement area with a 38 or a 45 in the underpants at the 21st century has something insane for me . according to what is told guys who buy weapons could have suicidal tendances it would be psycologically unstable people , quite scary

[Sailor Steve]

The headline reads 'Half Of Gun Deaths Are Suicides.'

It doesn't mention what percentage of all deaths are suicide. Actually the percentage is fairly low, which might give the argument some validity; but there are other interesting factors to consider, such as the leading causes of death overall, which not many people seem to want to stand up and shout about:
http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/causes.html

Or the comparative suicide rates between the United States and other countries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

It seems that taken in either context, guns rate pretty low as a factor.

[Platapus]

Let's assume, for the sake of argument that Gun owners are more likely to spontaneously and successfully commit suicide than non-gun owners.

What does that indicate?

Are you advocating that I (to make it personal) should lose my desire/right/whatever to own a gun just because someone else who owns a gun might

1. Decide to commit suicide
2. Might be successful using a handgun?

That hardly seems fair to me. I am having my desire/right infringed not because of what I might do, but because what someone else might do.

Does this seem right to you?

[Sailor Steve]

Platapus, as I was reading your post, the following suddenly occured to me:

1) If suicide by gun is much more likely to be fatal...

2) If the only way you can commit suicide with a gun is if you have one...

3) If commiting suicide with a gun removes the gun owner from society...

Then shouldn't people who don't like guns be encouraging more gun ownership?

[mrbeast]

Compared to what other methods? Are you saying that once you jump off that building or bridge you can change your mind? Is it somehow more difficult to open a window or step in front of a speeding train than it is to pull the trigger?

Its all down to opportunity.

Well take jumping off a tall building or bridge, there is a certain degree of planning and effort required to find a suitable buildng or structure, to gain entry to a suitable place to jump from etc etc. Now if you live in a penthouse apartment all these obsticles are easily overcome. But most people don't.

Jumping infront of a train, again requires a certain degree of planning and opportunity to do so.

Having an accessable gun around gives greater opportunity to kill oneself. Someone who on a momentary whim decides to end their life can do so easily. If they were forced to leave the house, travel to the nearest tall building etc they might on reflection think better of it.

I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean here. If someone really wants to commit suicide they will do so. If someone just wants attention then they will never actually pull that trigger.

What I'm trying to say is that many people who do commit suicide never really intend to do so, and if they were restrained from doing so to just a small extent then they may well decide against it.

[mrbeast]

Platapus, as I was reading your post, the following suddenly occured to me:

1) If suicide by gun is much more likely to be fatal...

2) If the only way you can commit suicide with a gun is if you have one...

3) If commiting suicide with a gun removes the gun owner from society...

Then shouldn't people who don't like guns be encouraging more gun ownership?

Ah but for most people who advocate gun controls the aim is to prevent people from being killed or injured by guns, so this would rather defeat the object.

[SUBMAN1]

No second chance here either. Doesn't matter the tool:

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_272621320.shtml

A gun just is convenient. So what. Bad argument. Apples and oranges.

-S

[Schroeder]

I think the intention of the OP was, that the thought that a lot of mentally unstable people have guns is uncomfortable.

[Platapus]

Well that is a tricky question.

My opinion?

I am all in favour of helping the mentally ill and making sure that they are not inappropriately discriminated against. BUT

There has to be a point when society (medical field and LE) should be able to state that this one specific person has such a mental illness/disability/what ever PC term you want that they can not be allowed to do XXX (drive a car, purchase a weapon. etc.)

This is what seems to be missing in our society. We seem reluctant to make that final but, in my opinion, responsible step.

"Mr. Cho as of this date you are not permitted to purchase a handgun and all handguns you currently have will be confiscated until competent authority states that your mental state has improved to the point where you can be trusted with weapons.

You have the right to appeal this decision under the following procedures....."

And then this decision is transmitted to all appropriate databases. Everyone has a right to privacy, but when they voluntarily choose to, say, buy a handgun, some aspects of their privacy must be waived (criminal background check, mental health database....)

To me, there comes a point when a person's mental state (illness, disease, disability, ...) may reach a point where society has the right and responsibility to prevent specific activities for the best interests of society.

This decision should not be made arbitrarily but in some cases it must be made.

How many stories do we see in the news about people getting killed, children being killed and the story describes the perp as having mental health issues.

If the mental issues were sufficient to indicate a potential threat to society, then why should not society take the appropriate but humane steps to protect itself????

The kicker is, of course, at what point in the mental health spectrum does a person pass "the point"? Unfortunately the mental health profession is still struggling with that question.

[jpm1]

in France the only weapons which are in free sale are the 22LR and hunting guns caliber 12 , 20 which have a limited range and rifles which can be lethal but which rate of fire is limited even for these weapons you need to declare them at the town hall and during the transport the weapon has to be taken to pieces or jammed with a security system which jams the trigger for example . if you want a dangerous weapon like a M16 for example your need to ask for an autorization at the prefecture and only if your police record is virgin and if it appears that your are somebody stable on a psycological level the autorization's given under some condition use in your property or a in shooting range only

[August]

What I'm trying to say is that many people who do commit suicide never really intend to do so, and if they were restrained from doing so to just a small extent then they may well decide against it.

You'd have a hard time proving that i'd guess.

[Platapus]

What I'm trying to say is that many people who do commit suicide never really intend to do so, and if they were restrained from doing so to just a small extent then they may well decide against it.

You'd have a hard time proving that i'd guess.

Yeah, that sounds like something pretty hard to prove and might be more a bias against the act of suicide (which is abhorrent to some).

[1480]

Suicide is also the leading cause of death amongst police officers. I wonder what the percentage of those gun owners were in law enforcement. In 16 years I've been to my fair share of death investigations (defined as a dead body without numerous gunshot wounds, stab wounds, fatal traffic crash) , half being suicide, a small portion later turn out to be a true who dunnit, the rest natural causes. I can only remember four being self inflicted gunshot wounds (two were fellow police). Some, the running car in the garage, two being defenestration, one accidental auto-erotic axphixyation. The majorty were hangings. The hangings always were found by family, and it was always in the home. 95% of the police suicides that I became aware of were done away from home. It is the second saddest thing to see, I don't what to think about the first. I lost a coworker this morning, shot and killed attempting to quell a disturbance right outside of our station. The savage charged him and during the struggle disarmed him and shot him once in the head. The savage was shot six times by responding officers after the savage pointed the gun at them. The murderer will likely make their court date. Sorry, just needed to pour this weight off my shoulders.

[SUBMAN1]

I think the intention of the OP was, that the thought that a lot of mentally unstable people have guns is uncomfortable.Mentally unstable people are not allowed guns in America, so quit feeling uncomfortable. Any doctor can have your guns removed. Maybe this isn't a good thing. Anyway, only recently, you right wo own a firearm has a course that can be persued to get re-instated. Prior to last year, if some doctor said you couldn't have a firearm (though he may not knowingly have known you had any in the first place and simply said you were mentally unstable), it was pretty much a life sentence.

-S

[August]

Sorry, just needed to pour this weight off my shoulders.

I thank you for your service Sir and I will remember your co-worker in my prayers.

[Yahoshua]

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.

Would you say your hunting rifle is less deadly than an M-16 or AK-47?

Or do you have some fantasy that your rifle is "ok" because your firearm was "designed for hunting" therefore it is less likely to be stuck with the "stigma" of being a "people killer" rifle?

[SUBMAN1]

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.
Would you say your hunting rifle is less deadly than an M-16 or AK-47?

Or do you have some fantasy that your rifle is "ok" because your firearm was "designed for hunting" therefore it is less likely to be stuck with the "stigma" of being a "people killer" rifle?Let me help him!

Hopefully i am not taking the wind out of your sails - but a hunting rifle is MUCH more deadly than an M-16 or AK-47.

-S

[1480]

Sorry, just needed to pour this weight off my shoulders.

I thank you for your service Sir and I will remember your co-worker in my prayers.

Thank you Sir! That was greatly appreciated.

[Yahoshua]

Well that is a tricky question.
There has to be a point when society (medical field and LE) should be able to state that this one specific person has such a mental illness/disability/what ever PC term you want that they can not be allowed to do XXX (drive a car, purchase a weapon. etc.)

This is what seems to be missing in our society. We seem reluctant to make that final but, in my opinion, responsible step.

"Mr. Cho as of this date you are not permitted to purchase a handgun and all handguns you currently have will be confiscated until competent authority states that your mental state has improved to the point where you can be trusted with weapons.

You have the right to appeal this decision under the following procedures....."

And then this decision is transmitted to all appropriate databases. Everyone has a right to privacy, but when they voluntarily choose to, say, buy a handgun, some aspects of their privacy must be waived (criminal background check, mental health database....)



The courts DID find Cho Seung-Hue mentally ill and incapable of caring for himself.

However, the court system did NOT forward this information to the NICS center which would've denied Cho the ability to purchase firearms with which he committed the VT massacre.

Being declared mentally ill already puts you under jurisdiction of a number of other laws (but the logic of how exactly a person whom is determined to be mentally ill can be trusted to follow the law on their own is beyond me).

Had the system we ALREADY had in place WORKED PROPERLY, the VT massacre would not have been committed with legally obtained firearms. That much I know for sure.


This is the court order I'm talking about:


http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k84/yahoshua/Chocourtorder.gif

[Yahoshua]

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.
Would you say your hunting rifle is less deadly than an M-16 or AK-47?

Or do you have some fantasy that your rifle is "ok" because your firearm was "designed for hunting" therefore it is less likely to be stuck with the "stigma" of being a "people killer" rifle?Let me help him!

Hopefully i am not taking the wind out of your sails - but a hunting rifle is MUCH more deadly than an M-16 or AK-47.

-S

A profiecient rifleman will make any of the above mentioned firearms a deadly weapon in his/her hands.

[Yahoshua]

in France the only weapons which are in free sale are the 22LR and hunting guns caliber 12 , 20 which have a limited range and rifles which can be lethal but which rate of fire is limited even for these weapons you need to declare them at the town hall and during the transport the weapon has to be taken to pieces or jammed with a security system which jams the trigger for example . if you want a dangerous weapon like a M16 for example your need to ask for an autorization at the prefecture and only if your police record is virgin and if it appears that your are somebody stable on a psycological level the autorization's given under some condition use in your property or a in shooting range only


Could you elaborate a little more on how Frances' system works?

eg. what form does one fill out, what crimes or conditions exactly would forbid a person from being allowed to possess firearms, and do you have a registration/licensing process?


Here in the U.S., in order to procure a firearm you must:

-Be 18 years old to purchase shotguns or rifles from an FFL dealer
-Be 21 years of age to purchase pistols from an FFL dealer
-Not be a convicted felon (committed any violent crimes or grand larceny that would be deemed a felony) unless your record has been cleared and the felony struck from your records.
-Not have been adjudicated mentally insane (unless your record has been cleared and the adjuciation struck from your record)
-Not be an illegal immigrant
-Not be a fugitive from justice
-Not have a restraining order or indictment of domestic voilence against you

You fill out a form called a 4473 which affirms all of the above and declares that you're the person buying the firearm and provide information that will correctly identify you.

Once you fill out the form, I call teh National Instant Check System and play "mother may...." with the FBI for about 2 minutes than you're either cleared to buy the gun or I tell you "there's a delay in the system please wait about 15 minutes" and wait for the cops to arrive. (smile):D

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k84/yahoshua/th000_0044.jpg


The whole process takes less than 15 minutes.....unless you want a Class III firearm, that takes about 60 days. Because god forbid that I would take a machinegun costing $25,000 to $30,000 to the local subway restraunt and start a massacre there, it'd be even MORE dangerous if I had a sound supressor mounted on it!!

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k84/yahoshua/Smilies/ak47-smile.gif

[1480]

Yahoshua, you have a FFL? It takes 15 minutes to do a name check via NCIS? Wow (not being sarcastic) it took me 60 days to get cleared by both ICE (INS) and the FBI to be elgible for a foriegn adoption. That escapes logic, and I support concealed carry laws.

[Yahoshua]

Yahoshua, you have a FFL? It takes 15 minutes to do a name check via NCIS? Wow (not being sarcastic) it took me 60 days to get cleared by both ICE (INS) and the FBI to be elgible for a foriegn adoption. That escapes logic, and I support concealed carry laws.

I'm a trained gunsmith but when I run out of things to do I become part-time register-jockey and process 4473s' for customers.

But no I don't have an FFL per se, the business (the building itself to be specific) has an FFL.

It takes about 5 minutes to fill out the form, 2 minutes for me to make the phone call, and the other 8 minutes to talk to the customer and give him basic firearm safety instruction, ring out the purchase and tell him to have a nice day.

If you have a concealed carry license I don't even have to call the NICS center to have you checked!! The background check for Concealed Weapons Permits are very thorough and if you get even a couple of minor infractions like a single speeding ticket (seems a bit harsh) within the last 5 years you can't get one.

I completely understand your surprise at how quickly these things move in comparison to being cleared for adoptions, but that's beareaucracy for ya. Like I can purchase an AR-15, I can repair full-auto machine guns, do quick jobs for local Law Enforcement Officers, and play with sound supressors but god forbid that I try to purchase a pistol or buy a beer (I'm 20 btw).

The logic behind all of the above escapes me too but oh well.

I notice your avatar says you live in Chicago, you've been a LEO there for a long time I take it?

[SUBMAN1]

A profiecient rifleman will make any of the above mentioned firearms a deadly weapon in his/her hands.That is true, but military arms primary function is designed to mame, not kill at range. It is a harder task with anything military. A hunting rifle however has one and only one purpose - kill so you can drag the meat home.

-S

[Yahoshua]

That is true, but military arms primary function is designed to mame, not kill at range. -S

Depends on the military rifle in question.

Eugene Stoner designed the XM-15 to wound and therefore take 3 men out of the battle at once (one wounded, two men to drag you out and fix you) and to clog the rear logistics areas.

Mikhail Kalishnikov designed the AK-47 so a chimpanzee could use and maintain the rifle in the field and still perform it's job (killing enemy soldiers).

So it kinda varies (on a shallow range that is) of what the arms' designed purpose actually is, but then I'd just be splitting hairs on a regular basis (that gets old FAST).

[SUBMAN1]

That is true, but military arms primary function is designed to mame, not kill at range. -S
Depends on the military rifle in question.

Eugene Stoner designed the XM-15 to wound and therefore take 3 men out of the battle at once (one wounded, two men to drag you out and fix you) and to clog the rear logistics areas.

Mikhail Kalishnikov designed the AK-47 so a chimpanzee could use and maintain the rifle in the field and still perform it's job (killing enemy soldiers).

So it kinda varies (on a shallow range that is) of what the arms' designed purpose actually is, but then I'd just be splitting hairs on a regular basis (that gets old FAST).You missed the fact that the Geneva convention requires rifles be designed like this. They are designed purposely not to kill - AS a requirement! Enemies like it for the 3 man rule, and combatants like it because they probably won't be killed.

This is not by accident they are not designed to kill.

Problem is, Stoners XM-15 has a habit of killing at short range to to massive internal damage done by a fragmenting bullet when fired from 14.5" barrels or longer. This was by accident.

At any sort of range however, the AR-15 / M-16 performs as designed and will mame instead of kill as intended.

-S

PS. The AK-47 does a much better job at short range than the AR-15/M-16 - entering and exiting like a small calibre weapon with minimum damage.

PPS. Statistics show that crazies that enter a shopping mall toting a 12 guage loaded with buck shot, you've got a less than 30% of survival rate if hit. If these same crazies enter with an AK-47, your chances are 76% even when hit multiple times. You take your pick.

[Yahoshua]

PPS. Statistics show that crazies that enter a shopping mall toting a 12 guage loaded with buck shot, you've got a less than 30% of survival rate if hit. If these same crazies enter with an AK-47, your chances are 76% even when hit multiple times. You take your pick.

Is there a lever for "None of the above" ?

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k84/yahoshua/Smilies/threadjacked.gif

[SUBMAN1]

PPS. Statistics show that crazies that enter a shopping mall toting a 12 guage loaded with buck shot, you've got a less than 30% of survival rate if hit. If these same crazies enter with an AK-47, your chances are 76% even when hit multiple times. You take your pick.
Is there a lever for "None of the above" ?

http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k84/yahoshua/Smilies/threadjacked.gifI wish. Though life is all about 'chances and circumstance'. You are dealt the cards you get. Somehow, all card decks are dealt evenly - each and every last person on this planet has a problem of some sort that eats at them. This can be family, money, happiness, moral choices, you name it - but all are equally difficult to overcome. In the end, we are all equal and the same.

-S

[Yahoshua]

I wish. Though life is all about 'chances and circumstance'. You are dealt the cards you get. Somehow, all card decks are dealt evenly - each and every last person on this planet has a problem of some sort that eats at them. This can be family, money, happiness, moral choices, you name it - but all are equally difficult to overcome. In the end, we are all equal and the same.

-S

But hey, we lived this long in our lives.......don't we at least get a cookie for effort?

[Sea Demon]

In the end, we are all equal and the same.

-S

Very true. And as they say 'we come into this world with nothing, and we leave with nothing".

[Platapus]

The majorty were hangings. The hangings always were found by family, and it was always in the home. .

Of those hangings, in your estimation what percentage of them were suicide and what percentage were accidental (autoerotic asphyxia)?

I am sorry about your loss of your co-worker dying in the performance of duty.

Law Enforcement Officers seldom get the appreciation they deserve.

No medals, no parades, but every day they are out there protecting us.

I am deeply grateful for our LE professionals.

Thank you for your service to our country and society.

[jpm1]

I own firearms of the sporting variety, and I'd prefer to keep them. I don't own fireamrs designed to kill humans, however.
Would you say your hunting rifle is less deadly than an M-16 or AK-47?

Or do you have some fantasy that your rifle is "ok" because your firearm was "designed for hunting" therefore it is less likely to be stuck with the "stigma" of being a "people killer" rifle?Let me help him!

Hopefully i am not taking the wind out of your sails - but a hunting rifle is MUCH more deadly than an M-16 or AK-47.

-S

i don't agree against one personel yes but i let you imagine how a massacre like Columbine's would be difficult to achieve with a hunting rifle

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/Wulfmann/K98-snip-FRclose.jpg

[1480]

Yahoshua- yeah, had I've had a front row ticket to the greatest show on earth for 16 years now. My capacity on the job has changed, and as much as I've seen us get thrown to the wolves by our media, citizens and higher ups, I wouldn't change places with anyone.


Platapus- Only one was confirmed AEA. The rest were gallows humor so to speak. And thanks for the kind words Sir!

jpm1- Charles Whitman killed 14 and wounded 31 at the University of Texas from the 28th floor of the Tower. Impossible to do that with a handgun.

[jpm1]

Yahoshua- yeah, had I've had a front row ticket to the greatest show on earth for 16 years now. My capacity on the job has changed, and as much as I've seen us get thrown to the wolves by our media, citizens and higher ups, I wouldn't change places with anyone.


Platapus- Only one was confirmed AEA. The rest were gallows humor so to speak. And thanks for the kind words Sir!

jpm1- Charles Whitman killed 14 and wounded 31 at the University of Texas from the 28th floor of the Tower. Impossible to do that with a handgun.

you're right but what i wanted to say it's that a rifle holder can be stopped much more easily than an automatic weapon holder , it's also more easy for a victim to escape from a rifle holder that's why this kind of weapon 's more easy to own in France than an automatic weapon . Hunting shotguns canno't contain more than 5 cartridges everything's done so that even with the weapons that are more easy to use if something should happen the maniac could be fastly and easily put out of an harmful state by the order forces . As long as i remember i don't remember a short news item in which an unstable person would kill people with an unauthorized weapon it happens sometimes like anywhere else but with a calibre 12 and in general the maniac in worst cases kills it's family and then kills himself as like if he knew if he goes out with such an "inapropriate" weapon he'll be fastly stopped and could die in a not very glorious way

[SUBMAN1]

i don't agree against one personel yes but i let you imagine how a massacre like Columbine's would be difficult to achieve with a hunting rifle

They used a hunting shotgun instead. No military rifle was involved. So what is your point?

On top of this, every shot fired from a hunting rifle would have been more deadly resulting in less injuries and more deaths. Take your pick! And anyone who knows his stuff can fire a hunting rifle nearly as fast as a semi auto! I have some vid on that - good stuff!

-S

[1480]

jpm1: I kind of get the jist of what you are saying. As a man that has to run towards the armed maniac, my kevlar vest will more then likely keep me alive if that armed maniac is armed with a handgun or shotgun. A hunting rifle for the most part are either bolt action or semi-automatic BUT use a military rifle round. Kevlar vests will just keep a person's intestines from pouring out of the exit wound. The second thing that scares me about long guns, the men armed with them, tend to be very proficient with them!

[SUBMAN1]

jpm1: I kind of get the jist of what you are saying. As a man that has to run towards the armed maniac, my kevlar vest will more then likely keep me alive if that armed maniac is armed with a handgun or shotgun. A hunting rifle for the most part are either bolt action or semi-automatic BUT use a military rifle round. Kevlar vests will just keep a person's intestines from pouring out of the exit wound. The second thing that scares me about long guns, the men armed with them, tend to be very proficient with them!Handgun yes, shotgun with buckshot - no. Any hunting rifle - no. Doesn't matter, kevlar, unless full combat armor as used in Iraq, will not do 'anything' against any type of weapon that isn't a handgun. So that is not an argument. Combat armor stops an AK round just fine, but shatters on impact so you get to stop one or two rds in total. Doubt it will stop a hunting rd however. Dragonskin may be the only armor that can save you from pretty much all rds from rifles, assuming they are not large caliber.

-S

[jpm1]

i don't agree against one personel yes but i let you imagine how a massacre like Columbine's would be difficult to achieve with a hunting rifle

They used a hunting shotgun instead. No military rifle was involved. So what is your point?

On top of this, every shot fired from a hunting rifle would have been more deadly resulting in less injuries and more deaths. Take your pick! And anyone who knows his stuff can fire a hunting rifle nearly as fast as a semi auto! I have some vid on that - good stuff!

-S

what does take your pick mean ? concerning myself i was talking of high rate of fire weapons

http://davecullen.com/columbine/img/Columbine-caf-new.jpeg
(Columbine cameras)

jpm1: I kind of get the jist of what you are saying. As a man that has to run towards the armed maniac, my kevlar vest will more then likely keep me alive if that armed maniac is armed with a handgun or shotgun. A hunting rifle for the most part are either bolt action or semi-automatic BUT use a military rifle round. Kevlar vests will just keep a person's intestines from pouring out of the exit wound. The second thing that scares me about long guns, the men armed with them, tend to be very proficient with them!

i agree long rifles are probably one of the most powerful of the weapons a personel can hold but it's the only way to hunt games "properly" . the authorities hold the excuse of their rate of fire to allow their selling more easily however i still think it's more difficult to perpetrate a massacre with a 7.65 mm long rifle which needs to extract the bullet find the other bullet reload , ream , aim than a M16 which has ready to use 20 rounds magazines (or any automatic weapon with magazines) and doesn't need a precise aiming

[SUBMAN1]

i agree long rifles are probably one of the most powerful of the weapons a personel can hold but it's the only way to hunt games "properly" . the authorities hold the excuse of their rate of fire to allow their selling more easily however i still think it's more difficult to perpetrate a massacre with a 7.65 mm long rifle which needs to extract the bullet find the other bullet reload , ream , aim than a M16 which has ready to use 20 rounds magazines (or any automatic weapon with magazines) and doesn't need a precise aimingWell, I have a video for you if I can still find it! You'd be surprised what one could do with a long rifle! :D

-S

[1480]

Handgun yes, shotgun with buckshot - no. Any hunting rifle - no. Doesn't matter, kevlar, unless full combat armor as used in Iraq, will not do 'anything' against any type of weapon that isn't a handgun. So that is not an argument. Combat armor stops an AK round just fine, but shatters on impact so you get to stop one or two rds in total. Doubt it will stop a hunting rd however. Dragonskin may be the only armor that can save you from pretty much all rds from rifles, assuming they are not large caliber.

-S[/quote]

Mr. Steed, I respectfully disagree with your shotgun buckshot argument. A type II-A, II and III-A (soft body armor) will stop the pellets, from a shotgun shell. Mind you it will not tickle.... The rigid and semi rigid level or type III and IV, that you refer to is not practical for everyday law enforcement duties.

I'm a bit confused, the 7.62x39mm round that is used in an AK, isn't it for all intents and purposes (size and speed) a .308 winchester round?


jpm1: In regards to what you posit. Yes, the guns used in Columbine, VT, and closer to home, my former school, NIU, the semi automatics used, facilitated the large casulties caused in each of those tragedies. But, there is an overlooked common theme to each of these mass murders that is unlike what happened in Texas: the mass grouping of targets. Sorry if that sounds cold and crass but it's the truth. "Spray and pray" is our stock answer when a scenario is thrown out at roll call but it applies to each of these events. The survivors of these horrible incidents just happened to be behind the unlucky ones. If a rifle round was used, then you better hope you are behind 3 people. Trying to say one is better then the other is comparing which poison works quicker. They all kill.

[SUBMAN1]

Mr. Steed, I respectfully disagree with your shotgun buckshot argument. A type II-A, II and III-A (soft body armor) will stop the pellets, from a shotgun shell. Mind you it will not tickle.... The rigid and semi rigid level or type III and IV, that you refer to is not practical for everyday law enforcement duties.

I'm a bit confused, the 7.62x39mm round that is used in an AK, isn't it for all intents and purposes (size and speed) a .308 winchester round?A II-A + might stop it, though you are getting into the bulkyness of a law enforcement type vest. I agree with you on that one. I won't say you won't breaka rib in the process though.

7.62x39 is not a 308. Its much shorter. Enters the body as a small calibre handgun round, entering and exiting with minimal trauma. The reason it always exits is it over-penetrates big time.

-S

[1480]

You are correct about the dimensions on the 7.62 but I kind of simplfied the comparison. I meant diameter.

I've been wearing a level II since day one. My first was a point blank that was like wearing a wooden placard. The 2nd has been much nicer, the range of motion, flexibility and weight are night and day. Been debating between another II or a IIIA as my next one, or another II with a shock plate.

[Yahoshua]

Link to PDF guide to basic selection and application of Personal Body Armor:

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/189633.pdf


Link to an old retired farts website with general testing of ammo penetration:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/


Browse and read at your own liking.

[Yahoshua]

Yahoshua- yeah, had I've had a front row ticket to the greatest show on earth for 16 years now. My capacity on the job has changed, and as much as I've seen us get thrown to the wolves by our media, citizens and higher ups, I wouldn't change places with anyone.

Come on down to Texas, we could use experienced officers down here.

[1480]

Link to PDF guide to basic selection and application of Personal Body Armor:

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/189633.pdf


Link to an old retired farts website with general testing of ammo penetration:

http://www.theboxotruth.com/


Browse and read at your own liking.

The second one is a great resource, thanks much Yahoshua :up: . I've got the first on my HD. I know for a fact they work. A good friend was working midnights in the same district I work now. He went to stop a guy on foot for an ordinance violation. The rectal duct had a .357 crotched and when the officer put a hand on the guy's shoulder to get his attention he ups the magnum, which was loaded with .357 rounds, punched the barrel into his sternum and fired. It was so close it charred the area around the bullet hole in his shirt. The vest saved his life.

Thanks for the offer, happy with being a sgt now. The less work (yeah right) more money thing has spoiled me.

[jpm1]

http://www.hawgsmoke.com/assets/video/IFF.HEAT.OFF.wmv

Shots with the 577 T-rex rifle
http://www.hawgsmoke.com/assets/video/massive-recoil-rifle.wmv

[claybirdd]

I own a Remington 700, 30-06. I guarantee you even at 500 yds a 180 grain round will go through a Law Enforcement vest like butter. I would never want to be hit by a high powered round in combat, there would be extreme tissue damage. Also the 7.62 comes in many varieties of length. The AK round is actually quite short while the 7.62x59 (.308 NATO) is a very nice cartrige for snipers. It is the preferd round for the Marines, though the Army uses the .300 Win mag(:smug: ).

I also own a 9mm for self defense though I am currently on the hunt for a .45 USP. I have serious doubts sbout the 9mm's stopping power. not saying it is a deadly round but knock down powere is of upmost importance to me.

[Platapus]

Rem 700 is a very nice weapon indeed. :up:

[FIREWALL]

You guys jump the track better than any train ever will. :p :rotfl:


I thought the topic of thread was the relationship of easy gun ownership and suicide. :-?

[Platapus]

and I think we pretty much discussed that topic fully. So we move on to another related topic. :)

[Frame57]

in France the only weapons which are in free sale are the 22LR and hunting guns caliber 12 , 20 which have a limited range and rifles which can be lethal but which rate of fire is limited even for these weapons you need to declare them at the town hall and during the transport the weapon has to be taken to pieces or jammed with a security system which jams the trigger for example . if you want a dangerous weapon like a M16 for example your need to ask for an autorization at the prefecture and only if your police record is virgin and if it appears that your are somebody stable on a psycological level the autorization's given under some condition use in your property or a in shooting range onlyGood to know! It does shed a bit of light why the Germans occupied France so easily. The right to arm bears was ordained so that Yogi and Boo Boo could remain free.:D