Firearms yes or no - Page 3

03-30-07, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

What's easier to hit? A arm/leg or the torso?

Center of mass.

Death is not assured. Stopping the situation is.

Penelope_Grey · 03-30-07, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waste gate

Ok. What is the unlawfull taking of life? Is self defense unlawfull? Is taking of another life unlawfull when it is self defense?

Self defence is not unlawful, but there is something called reasonable force. And yes killing someone in self-defence is unlawful and the killer deserves to be punished.

Taking another life in the sense we are discussing in this thread is never justified. Not only that how would you sleep at night knowing what you done? I couldn't, if I knew I'd killed someone it would drive me crazy.

1mPHUNit0 · 03-30-07, 07:24 PM

Self defence.....
The most importanti it's the prevention of the crime.
And sometimes you have to resolve the problem that
generates the crimes
Somethimes you have to use repression
Somethimes you have to educate peoples
Somethimes you have to create social partecipation
And so on.
This is defence

Otherwise is far west
Palestinian far west
Lubnan civil war
Iraq far west
Thake a gun in your hand...then you know what i mean

03-30-07, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

Quote:

Originally Posted by waste gate

Ok. What is the unlawfull taking of life? Is self defense unlawfull? Is taking of another life unlawfull when it is self defense?

Self defence is not unlawful, but there is something called reasonable force. And yes killing someone in self-defence is unlawful and the killer deserves to be punished.

Taking another life in the sense we are discussing in this thread is never justified. Not only that how would you sleep at night knowing what you done? I couldn't, if I knew I'd killed someone it would drive me crazy.

How I or anyone else comes to peace with taking someones life is not really the issue. Reasonable force is only an issue for law enforcement., those folks have been trained in such issues. I'm talking about it's my life or yours, self defense. When I am dead the comfort that my killer will be brought to justice isn't much of a cosnolation.

DaMaGe007 · 03-30-07, 07:43 PM

I was under the impression that in America you have the right to shoot someone who enters your property ilegaly, in UK and Australia you dont.
Is the part about america correct ?, If it is the law generates a different thinking about these things.

Recently in Australia a guy stabbed a burgler, and he got into trouble for doing it.

ASWnut101 · 03-30-07, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaMaGe007

I was under the impression that in America you have the right to shoot someone who enters your property ilegaly, in UK and Australia you dont.
Is the part about america correct ?, If it is the law generates a different thinking about these things.

Yes, that's the law.

Quote:

Recently in Australia a guy stabbed a burgler, and he got into trouble for doing it.

That's pretty sick, I think.

03-30-07, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaMaGe007

I was under the impression that in America you have the right to shoot someone who enters your property ilegaly, in UK and Australia you dont.
Is the part about america correct ?, If it is the law generates a different thinking about these things.

Recently in Australia a guy stabbed a burgler, and he got into trouble for doing it.

Not all states have the same laws regarding illeagal entry into ones home. Although in many states the owner of the home has every right to defend his/her life and property his/her use of a firearm it is not an affirmative defense in some states, because the state has left him/her defenseless by not allowing him him/her to own a firearm. The criminal entering the home of course is in a far better position because he/she doesn't obey the law to begin with.

It is unfortunate that people become the criminal by protecting their lives and home in some states.

1mPHUNit0 · 03-30-07, 08:05 PM

Correct....
But if you live in Palestine the situation
it's not common...very rare or none.
Social structure it's too strong

Yahoshua · 03-30-07, 09:52 PM

Ignoring the legal dillemma of firearms vs martial arts and bringing the topic back onto track:

Firearms and martial arts are both viable means of self-defense.

I consider martial arts to be less lethal in principle, as most forms of martial arts are meant to defend oneself against unarmed, armed, and multiple attackers. However, not everyone has the strength, the motivation, or the discipline to maintain proficiency in martial arts. As a quick example: How many of you do rigorous exercises everyday? By rigorous I mean a full plate of exercises like pushups, situps, lifing weights, running etc?

Firearms even the playing field since not everybody is built like Rambo. Firearms are essentially a tool to be used, the true purpose of said tool depends entirely on the user. A 60 year old man has a better chance of fending off multiple agressors with a firearm than he does of using his mad judo skills. And a small statured woman has a better chance of defending her life against a stronger opponent intent on robbing/mugging/raping/ unknown intentions etc. against her than by using brute force against brute force against ehr opponent.

Whether the intruder is the common village thief whom you had the unpleasant surprise of running into, or the neighborhood parolee on an alcohol-driven violent crime spree; both methods are viable means of self-defense. So long as the criminal obeys orders, they'll get out of the situation alive.

If I were to say that martial arts were for everyone*1, it'd be equivalent to me saying that everyone is capable of handling a .600 Nitro Express*2. Which is absolutely untrue, some people have weak wrists that can't handle the recoil, or they're afraid of the unfamiliarity surrounding firearms or martial arts.

So, to each his own so long as they're responsible enough to handle what skills or objects they possess and more importantly: That whatever methods they choose will WORK for them and keep themselves alive.

*1

*2

August · 03-30-07, 11:14 PM

In other words: "God made man but Sam Colt made men equal"

Ishmael · 03-30-07, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

BUT, in a situation where the fight becomes "CQ" (Close Quarters), firearms loose quite a bit of advantage. In all, it depends on the situation you're in.

Not if you use my wife's weapon of choice, a 12-guage pump shotgun. It's the perfect sweeper for close quarters in an enclosed space. Here in the Wild West of New Mexico, the phrase you have to learn that was repeated to us by our local sherriff's deputy was,

"I was in fear for my life."

If an intruder enters your home, you are within your rights to blow his head off. Just make sure he stays within the dwelling.

Yahoshua · 03-30-07, 11:48 PM

12 ga. is a good choice, but I'm restricted by the fact that I live in an apt. So a .45 1911 is my choice of defense.

Takeda Shingen · 03-31-07, 04:53 AM

A firearm is a legitimate outlet for self defense, as are all of the martial arts, swords, knives, spoons and running away. The only requirement for such defense is that it protects you from harm.

At the same time, firearms stand unique among weapons due to their greater destructive power. They can kill from range, and do so more effectively than other weapons. However, any weapon is only as effective as the training and experience of the one who carries it. As such, a firearm in the hands of a novice, like myself, would not be nearly as effective as one in the hands of an experienced individual, like waste gate. It always comes down to the user.

U-533 · 03-31-07, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan_Phillips

Anyway, this is a debate which has been raging for years. Its my opinion that a firearm is a legitamate defense, yet one which should be used as a real last resort. Why make that burglar's death quick?

But seriously, in response to Penelope's post, firearms shouldnt be used for outright homicide. At most, a limb shot would be enough, I'd imagine.

To answer your question: The burglar's death should be as quick as possible.

Reason 1: You never know what kind of firepower it's packing.
Reason 2: You never know what it's intentions really are.
Reason 3: You may have to target a second burglar...or third...or fourth...etc
Reason 4: You don't know what kind of pain killing drugs it's on.
Reason 5: You may suffer a lawsuit and have to support it the rest of your life, and it's family.

Shooting it's limb and wounding it will only cause you tremendous headaches... Kill it and tell the law "I was in fear of my life and my family's I SHOT TO STOP IT "... anything less and your asking for trouble from bleeding heart liberal thinking folk who wish to spend your hard earned money on a rehabilitation programs that never works.

Let me repeat myself here.

Let it live or wound it and you will pay for it to sit in prison for a vacation and when it gets out it may seek revenge.
Kill it and tax dollars may pay for it's funeral and sleep at ease knowing that it will not be coming back.

If it weren't for all that ... I say peel the burglar and dip it in vinegar and hang it outside as a trophy and warning.

Penelope_Grey · 03-31-07, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waste gate

How I or anyone else comes to peace with taking someones life is not really the issue. Reasonable force is only an issue for law enforcement., those folks have been trained in such issues. I'm talking about it's my life or yours, self defense. When I am dead the comfort that my killer will be brought to justice isn't much of a cosnolation.

In a case like your life or his, then I can see that perhaps you have to be brutal, but killing is never right or justified. In the case you describe then I think you would have to be certain that your life was at risk of being lost before you could say, "it was him or me"

A burgler prowling about in your house does not automatically mean you will be killed. In which case you don't have any reason to shoot that person.

03-30-07, 07:24 PM	#33
1mPHUNit0 Chief Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 313 Downloads: 60 Uploads: 0	Self defence..... The most importanti it's the prevention of the crime. And sometimes you have to resolve the problem that generates the crimes Somethimes you have to use repression Somethimes you have to educate peoples Somethimes you have to create social partecipation And so on. This is defence Otherwise is far west Palestinian far west Lubnan civil war Iraq far west Thake a gun in your hand...then you know what i mean __________________

03-30-07, 08:05 PM	#38
1mPHUNit0 Chief Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 313 Downloads: 60 Uploads: 0	Correct.... But if you live in Palestine the situation it's not common...very rare or none. Social structure it's too strong __________________

03-30-07, 09:52 PM	#39
Yahoshua The Old Man Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,493 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Ignoring the legal dillemma of firearms vs martial arts and bringing the topic back onto track: Firearms and martial arts are both viable means of self-defense. I consider martial arts to be less lethal in principle, as most forms of martial arts are meant to defend oneself against unarmed, armed, and multiple attackers. However, not everyone has the strength, the motivation, or the discipline to maintain proficiency in martial arts. As a quick example: How many of you do rigorous exercises everyday? By rigorous I mean a full plate of exercises like pushups, situps, lifing weights, running etc? Firearms even the playing field since not everybody is built like Rambo. Firearms are essentially a tool to be used, the true purpose of said tool depends entirely on the user. A 60 year old man has a better chance of fending off multiple agressors with a firearm than he does of using his mad judo skills. And a small statured woman has a better chance of defending her life against a stronger opponent intent on robbing/mugging/raping/ unknown intentions etc. against her than by using brute force against brute force against ehr opponent. Whether the intruder is the common village thief whom you had the unpleasant surprise of running into, or the neighborhood parolee on an alcohol-driven violent crime spree; both methods are viable means of self-defense. So long as the criminal obeys orders, they'll get out of the situation alive. If I were to say that martial arts were for everyone1, it'd be equivalent to me saying that everyone is capable of handling a .600 Nitro Express2. Which is absolutely untrue, some people have weak wrists that can't handle the recoil, or they're afraid of the unfamiliarity surrounding firearms or martial arts. So, to each his own so long as they're responsible enough to handle what skills or objects they possess and more importantly: That whatever methods they choose will WORK for them and keep themselves alive. 1 2 __________________ Science is the organized unpredictability that strives not to set limits to mans' capabilities, but is the engine by which the limits of mans' understanding is defined-Yahoshua

03-30-07, 11:14 PM	#40
August Wayfaring Stranger Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 23,197 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	In other words: "God made man but Sam Colt made men equal" __________________ Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.

03-30-07, 11:48 PM	#42
Yahoshua The Old Man Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,493 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	12 ga. is a good choice, but I'm restricted by the fact that I live in an apt. So a .45 1911 is my choice of defense. __________________ Science is the organized unpredictability that strives not to set limits to mans' capabilities, but is the engine by which the limits of mans' understanding is defined-Yahoshua

03-30-07, 07:43 PM	#35
DaMaGe007 Watch Officer Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 338 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I was under the impression that in America you have the right to shoot someone who enters your property ilegaly, in UK and Australia you dont. Is the part about america correct ?, If it is the law generates a different thinking about these things. Recently in Australia a guy stabbed a burgler, and he got into trouble for doing it.

03-31-07, 04:53 AM	#43
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	A firearm is a legitimate outlet for self defense, as are all of the martial arts, swords, knives, spoons and running away. The only requirement for such defense is that it protects you from harm. At the same time, firearms stand unique among weapons due to their greater destructive power. They can kill from range, and do so more effectively than other weapons. However, any weapon is only as effective as the training and experience of the one who carries it. As such, a firearm in the hands of a novice, like myself, would not be nearly as effective as one in the hands of an experienced individual, like waste gate. It always comes down to the user.