Guns - Pros and Cons

[Zed Head]

Here is a new thread to talk about guns.  Some posts were made in a different thread making fun of people who were stockpiling ammo or buying new guns because of the COVID-19 virus.  People have strong opinions about guns.  So, here's a dedicated thread to talk about them.

Here's where the other conversation ended.

 

[siteunseen]

I read the comments on the conservative news people will use the $1,200 guvment check to buy guns. 

How about them apples? My grandfather always said that. I assume it means "how ironic"?

[Patcon]

As to answer one of the questions in the Covid thread. Yes, I have had more than one time when I wished I had been armed. I have also had more than once when I thought I was going to have to present my weapon. Normally that is all it takes to deter a further confrontation. Obviously we have walked different paths...

As for being surprised from behind, my wife carries and both my older kids carry as well as my coworker. So, someone's got my back  

Deep respect for you, John and the path you have walked!!

[Zed Head]

1 hour ago, Patcon said:

As to answer one of the questions in the Covid thread.

That wasn't actually a question, it was a comment about myself.

The questions were "have you, or any of your family members, had any guns stolen?"  And are you advocating that every able-bodied citizen gets a gun, as a civic responsibility.  To protect others.  Just two basic questions.

Edited April 1, 2020 by Zed Head

[Patcon]

4 hours ago, Zed Head said:

That wasn't actually a question, it was a comment about myself.

The questions were "have you, or any of your family members, had any guns stolen?"  And are you advocating that every able-bodied citizen gets a gun, as a civic responsibility.  To protect others.  Just two basic questions.

I missed that...

I have never had a gun stolen from myself or a family member. I have had neighbors have guns stolen. They were in their cars and unlocked. I would never keep a gun in my unlocked car!!! However I have guns inside my house that are unlocked. Now, mind you, my first line of defense is not me or my weapon, it's the 2 very large Great Danes!

No, I wouldn't avdocate every able bodied citizen have a gun

In self defense speak, there is something called "the hole". "The hole" is approximately 6 ft. The space created between 2 people with their arms stretched out towards each other. It is the distance at which an attacker can touch your weapon. Before you decide to own a weapon or keep a weapon for self defense you have to decide that you will pull the trigger before you let someone get into "the hole" with you. If you don't, you are likely to lose the weapon to the attacker. All the ladies in my life, especially, have had this stressed to them. You have to be prepared to use the weapon or it becomes a liability to you and to others. Not everybody can do that, and that's ok. Also I have met a lot of people who are too careless or not discerning enough to safely handle a firearm. Some of that is lack of familiarity and some of it is lack of respect for the damage they can quickly inflict. They are not toys; they are tools. In the right hands they can be beneficial; in the wrong hands they can be aweful

 

[zclocks]

I wondered when the topic of guns would come up and I guess I'm not surprised. Growing up and was always around guns and taught that is was a great responsibility and not to be abused. I live in the great Anitgun state and it's like living behind enemy lines. 

This is an article I picked up several years ago that was written by a Maj in the USMC.  on why  "Carrying A Gun is a civilized act"

 

The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill, USMC (Ret).

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force.

It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)

 

 

[Patcon]

Well said, summarizes my thoughts on it very well. the only thing I would add is I don't advertise that I carry. So you wouldn't know I was carrying when we meet. If a criminal comes into a restaurant and 1:10 is likely armed but he doesn't know which one, is he going to try to rob it or look for an easier target?

By an individual familiar with the use of force

[scotta]

I would like to see this thread removed. 

[240260280]

3 hours ago, scotta said:

I would like to see this thread removed. 

I agree... this is a car form and guns are not a pandemic affecting our enjoyment of cars at the moment.

[Av8ferg]

 

While I think this is an interesting debate, with passionate opinions on either side, there are forums dedicated to the topic already. I’m never an advocate of squelching the free exchange of ideas. People can choose what to read or contribute to on any forum. The people on this forum seem mature, well-informed and don’t fly off the handle with absurd comments or emotions when people disagree. Zed Head and I disagree on much of this topic but that in itself by no means lowers my respect for him. I don’t harbor any negative opinions about him. Challenging ideas is good for everyone. I don’t don’t dislike someone that loves Buick’s when I think they are garbage. We can differ and still respect each other; something out society’s severely lacking. With that said, I come to this forum for Z car talk. I’d be happy to table the discussion.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[240260280]

I look at things in their essence.  When the legislative documents were penned in the early USA.... a gun was a powder loaded musket. There were no modern day cartridges, or automation, nor scopes, nor barrel rifling.  The spirit of the documents over 200 years ago and the warped interpretation today is simply amazing.

Now stop bugging me as I need to continue work on my personal nuclear warhead collection to defend me in the 0.000000000000000000000001% chance that USA tries to invade Canada.

 

Edited April 1, 2020 by 240260280

[Av8ferg]

Ha!
You can’t hang that raw meat out for me and then want to end the discussion. My wife does these parting shots as she walks out the door so I can’t respond to her. I could write a 5 page essay countering your musket argument but we are on the wrong forum for that. BTW, We don’t need nukes to take Canada just a few Texans. Hey, we can be comrades and disagree....much love from here! I flew with the CF-18 squadron on a Canada set in 2002. Great dudes!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk