Quote from: Phaedrus on June 14, 2006, 03:36:18 PM

Quote from: GS Jenn on June 14, 2006, 03:30:40 PM
Eeek, people having guns just scares a good little Canadian like me.

If somebody takes my bike, I'll be sad, but that's why it's insured. I'm not going to risk getting into a shooting match over a replacable machine.

^ Ohh so THAT is why canadian's have a stereotype for being more sensible than Americans. Because it is true 

"I don't want to own a gun to protect myself. I'd rather be victimized." That's sensible?

No offense Jenn, I know plenty of people who don't own guns, and who think guns should not be legal for private ownership. I know it seems like I'm poking fun at you, but I'm not (more like poking fun at Canada in general.. my roommate's canadian, we have fun picking on each others' countries... lucky for me, he doesn't know anything about Korea... neither do I!)

Sorry to threadjack. I just had to point out Phae's logical fallacy. And make an ass of myself at the same time. That is all. We now return you to your regularly scheduled postwhor.... Err... Programming..

 You need a permit to buy a handgun in Jersey.

Quote from: rangerbrown on June 13, 2006, 07:54:20 PM
i wont feel sorry for the peson that trys that at my place.

16 dogs
12 gauge
and a 9mm


yea thats right 16 dogs, although there chiken shaZam!, they do let you know something going on

I don't think they would even think about robbin the dog pound

Quote from: NiceGuysFinishLast on June 14, 2006, 08:08:26 PM

Quote from: Phaedrus on June 14, 2006, 03:36:18 PM

Quote from: GS Jenn on June 14, 2006, 03:30:40 PM
Eeek, people having guns just scares a good little Canadian like me.

If somebody takes my bike, I'll be sad, but that's why it's insured. I'm not going to risk getting into a shooting match over a replacable machine.

^ Ohh so THAT is why canadian's have a stereotype for being more sensible than Americans. Because it is true 

"I don't want to own a gun to protect myself. I'd rather be victimized." That's sensible?

No offense Jenn, I know plenty of people who don't own guns, and who think guns should not be legal for private ownership. I know it seems like I'm poking fun at you, but I'm not (more like poking fun at Canada in general.. my roommate's canadian, we have fun picking on each others' countries... lucky for me, he doesn't know anything about Korea... neither do I!)

Sorry to threadjack. I just had to point out Phae's logical fallacy. And make an ass of myself at the same time. That is all. We now return you to your regularly scheduled postwhor.... Err... Programming..

Not that I'm anti-gun or anything, but killing someone over a motorcycle isn't so sensible either. 

I would give the guy a few beers and just pray that he totals it or whatever. Call State Farm in the morning and have a new Z-1000 in a week. Doesn't make for as good a story, but hey I'm a lover not a fighter. 

Quote from: NiceGuysFinishLast on June 14, 2006, 08:08:26 PM

"I don't want to own a gun to protect myself. I'd rather be victimized." That's sensible?

And the statistic that the NRA conveniently ignores says that a handgun in the house is more likely to harm someone in the household than a burglar.  A friend of mine had his son blow his head off while my friend was downstairs watching TV.  How sfe did he feel then? 

I don't have a gun and I'm proud not to.  Maybe I don't have enought testosterone (or maybe I have enough that I don't feel a need to own a gun or a Corvette).  But I do have a GS...

I think of owning a gun and owning a motorcycle as similar: both can be deadly, and it's important to have proper training before using either.

<---- The only thing she's ever aimed successfully is a Glock 8MM. 

I don't think protecting one's property is a bad thing. If someone is trespassing on one's property, then they're obviously up to no good. Who knows whether the intent of the trespass is for purposes of stealing, killing, raping....? 

Vote to make California an open-carry state!!!!!

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 14, 2006, 08:33:20 PMA friend of mine had his son blow his head off while my friend was downstairs watching TV.  How sfe did he feel then? 

And how did the child get to the weapon if it was properly stored?

Quote from: pandy on June 14, 2006, 08:44:09 PM

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 14, 2006, 08:33:20 PMA friend of mine had his son blow his head off while my friend was downstairs watching TV.  How sfe did he feel then? 

And how did the child get to the weapon if it was properly stored?

shhhhh.... we dont' wanna take responsiblity... just blame the people who make the gun... it makes it better that way.

Quote from: aaronstj on June 14, 2006, 08:09:32 PM
You need a permit to buy a handgun in Jersey.

to buy or to carry? if to buy wtf? every buyer in every state has that yellow form they HAVE to fill out. cept when buying from individuals 

i don't agree with owning a gun to protect your property, if you kill someone then you have to live with that for the rest of your life. How bad are you going to feel if you shot and killed a 17 year old kid who was trying to steal your motorcycle. Everyone from this position now could say die sucka he tried to steal your bike but when you find he wasn't such a bad kid really it was a once off and youve taken a son from someones family will you be able to live with yourself? over a motorcycle?

This argument has come up here in England, people wanted the right to defend their own house from burglers yet they were getting prison sentances because the burgler was ABH and GBH against the house owner for hitting them with a cricket bat or woteva while they were trying to steal their TV wtf is up wid that burgler shouldn't have been there in the first place. But anywhos, IF someone has broken into my house i would defend my family and scare a burgler away even if it did mean hitting them with a bat or whatever. But i wouldn't be able to beat them to death and do the same as if you shot a burgler in your house. An MP here was recently broken into and thus began a campeign (as with all politicians something only gets done when theyve experienced it) to legalize the ownership of Tazers by home owners. I definatly agree with this. You can imobalise someone without killing them or causing lasting damage in 99% of cases, you have defend yourself without killing or seriously harming someone else and you don't put yourself on the line for prosecution for murder or some other charge. I totally agree with defending your property and i think this is the way forward opposed to lethal force.

one of the worst things about NJ is its strictness on gun laws... before you can so much as buy a rifle or shotgun, you need to go to the police station, pay them a whole lot of money, get finger printed, background checked, and wait 3+ months.  Every time you want to buy a pistol, you have to go and pay them ~$15 to get a permit to purchase.  During all that I know I will NEVER be able to carry my pistol anywhere outside of my house in the state of NJ unless I decide to be a cop.  This is even when the FBI claims EVERY year states and areas with carry concealed laws have consistantly lower violent crime rates then those who don't. 

Most people who are against guns just don't understand them and are afraid of them.  It's on the same line as many cagers out there think they should ban motorcycles because they don't understand them and only see the bad in them.

This is one of the best articles I've read in a long time about the matter.  I'd highly recommend reading it, especially to the ladies out there.

Quote from: pandy on June 14, 2006, 08:44:09 PM

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 14, 2006, 08:33:20 PMA friend of mine had his son blow his head off while my friend was downstairs watching TV.  How sfe did he feel then? 

And how did the child get to the weapon if it was properly stored?

The child was a young adult.  20 or 21 years old.

And how many guns are "properly" stored?  I know of one person (even in a "gun state" like Oklahoma where I live) who has a gun vault or trigger locks and keeps them locked.  Even then, the location of the key is known to the occupants of the home.

I'm not a "gun-blamer."  And I certainly believe in the second amendment.  I'm just saying that the old west notion of "protecting your wife and family" with a gun is pure BS.  The gun is statistically more likely to harm someone in the home than be used to stop an intruder.  That's a risk I'm not taking. 

Why is it harder to get a driver's license than a concealed carry permit in most states that have them?  And do I feel safer in Oklahoma knowing that half the rednecks here have permits?  I've seen how some of them treat their children, their wives, and their animals....yet I should feel good that they can carry a gun and be expected to make rational split-second decisions about whom and when to shoot?  Yeah, right.

Invest in locks, not guns, to protect your property.  And then buy insurance.

Quote from: Kasumi on June 15, 2006, 03:42:40 AM
But anywhos, IF someone has broken into my house i would defend my family and scare a burgler away even if it did mean hitting them with a bat or whatever.

And when the perp comes at you with a gun, are you still going to scare them away? Or are you going to be beaten, robbed, and possibly murdered?

Quote from: Kasumi on June 15, 2006, 03:42:40 AM
But i wouldn't be able to beat them to death and do the same as if you shot a burgler in your house. An MP here was recently broken into and thus began a campeign (as with all politicians something only gets done when theyve experienced it) to legalize the ownership of Tazers by home owners. I definatly agree with this. You can imobalise someone without killing them or causing lasting damage in 99% of cases, you have defend yourself without killing or seriously harming someone else and you don't put yourself on the line for prosecution for murder or some other charge. I totally agree with defending your property and i think this is the way forward opposed to lethal force.

If it's a choice between me killing them or them raping me, harming my family, or taking what's mine, they're dead.

Quote from: LimaXray on June 15, 2006, 06:01:07 AM
Most people who are against guns just don't understand them and are afraid of them.  It's on the same line as many cagers out there think they should ban motorcycles because they don't understand them and only see the bad in them. This is one of the best articles I've read in a long time about the matter.  I'd highly recommend reading it, especially to the ladies out there.

Agreed. Most who are against motorcycles don't own them; most who are against guns don't own them. Thanks for the article!

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 15, 2006, 06:05:08 AM
The child was a young adult.  20 or 21 years old.

This "child" was old enough to know better than to play with guns. Whose fault was this? The gun's?

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 15, 2006, 06:05:08 AM
I'm just saying that the old west notion of "protecting your wife and family" with a gun is pure BS.  The gun is statistically more likely to harm someone in the home than be used to stop an intruder.  That's a risk I'm not taking. 

People are also statistically more likely to be stupid than be a rocket scientist. I think that *most* who are against guns blame the gun (and I'm not saying this is you). It's not the fault of the slimy criminal who carries the gun, and it's not the irresponsible parent who doesn't lock up the gun; it's the evil gun's fault!

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 15, 2006, 06:05:08 AM
Why is it harder to get a driver's license than a concealed carry permit in most states that have them?

I agree that there should be rigorous procedures in place for issuing permits. However, don't forget, you don't need a permit to have a child, either. Why? Too many people that I've known in my lifetime should have been sterilized. 

Quote from: trumpetguy on June 15, 2006, 06:05:08 AM
Yeah, right. Invest in locks, not guns, to protect your property.  And then buy insurance.

Locks don't work. How many bikes do we hear about that are stolen that have disk locks and alarms and tinkerbell watching over them. If locks worked, then we wouldn't have entire columns in newspapers dedicated to the crime sprees of moron thieves.

I do believe that if a thief thinks they could be shot, then they'll be less likely to take what's not theirs, to break into houses, and to commit  crimes against innocent people. That's just my humble opinion, and  I *do* respect the opinions of those who disagree with me, even as I disagree with their opinions. 

Beating the stuffing out of a burgler would make me feel totally at peace with the world.   

Here in Australia uns require licenses. And you must show a good reason to have one, such as being in a shooters club, or a farmer.

Random checks are also put in place  to license holders by officers to ensure guns are locked up.

Here, all semi automatic guns are banned (after a big masacre in Tasmania).


Since having a big gun amnesty, gun crimes and deaths have reduced dramatically. The thing is, crims will get guns either way (banned or not). But the last thing yu want to do is arm a population to get in gun battles with derranged, desperate or drugged up crims.


I like Australia's stance, and don't believe mums and dads need guns. 

I agree with you Galahs, sounds like a very sensible stance. I am guessing a lot fewer people get killed during burglaries in Australia than in the United States.

You have it exactly right, average joe homeowner having a gun just escalates the level of violence.

A Canadian statistic that I found of interest: the Canadian province with the most guns per capita (Alberta, where I live) also has the highest rate of spousal murder. To me this is another good reason not have guns lying around. If a man gets violent with his partner she has a much better chance of surviving if there isn't a gun in the nightstand.

By the way my partner is ex-Canadian army, well training in using guns, and a recreational shooter. But we don't have any firearms in our home. You can be knowledgeable about guns and still not believe that they should be in the home.

If anyone enters my home, without my permission (regardless to why) and I feel threatened enough to shoot him....Then why should I feel guilty?

Those of you worried about guilt, I bet, have never lost someone through your own inaction.

A burglar is a criminal..albiet not a crime that warrants a death penalty......  If you catch an intruder in your home, at that moment of realization that you or your family is in danger....you have no clue what this guys intentions are. burglary? murder?rape? maybe he wants some alone time with your 10yr old daughter?
how long you gonna wait and see?

Unless he is trying to get out of the house and can do so without going near you or your family......If you have a gun...BLAST him.  and be sure to aim center mass...dead guys can't sue.
---------
The right to BARE ARMS is the right to protect yourself.  Laws banning weapons take weapons away from law abiding people.
Criminal will be able to get weapons no matter what.

A household firearm accident is always 100% avoidable. Just cause some jackass let there kid get hurt, don't mean you should remove my right to responsible protect myself.

Where I live, you can care a concealed gun if you have  a permit.  They don't let bad people get permits.  In every state where they have conceal and carry, the crime rate has gone down.  So only good people have legally concealed weapons.  In my City of 450,000, last year 135 people were murdered, plus or minus.  I'd wager that none of them were killed while breaking into a home to rob someone.  One guy did get beat up when he broke into a home, that I recall.   Usually those people are murdered in robberies, drive by shootings, or because they really pissed somebody off. 
But I agree: if somebody came into my home with bad intentions, they better cup their balls, because they are going to be deader than fried chicken. 
I'll deal with the remorse rom that, but I sure won't have to deal with the regret of having not acted and let something bad happen to me or a loved one. 

Quote from: GS Jenn on June 15, 2006, 08:22:42 AM
I agree with you Galahs, sounds like a very sensible stance. I am guessing a lot fewer people get killed during burglaries in Australia than in the United States.

You have it exactly right, average joe homeowner having a gun just escalates the level of violence.

A Canadian statistic that I found of interest: the Canadian province with the most guns per capita (Alberta, where I live) also has the highest rate of spousal murder. To me this is another good reason not have guns lying around. If a man gets violent with his partner she has a much better chance of surviving if there isn't a gun in the nightstand.

By the way my partner is ex-Canadian army, well training in using guns, and a recreational shooter. But we don't have any firearms in our home. You can be knowledgeable about guns and still not believe that they should be in the home.

You should read that article I posted earlier.  She makes a couple points that apply here.  One is that in Canada and Britain where guns are heavily regulated there are fewer gun related crimes and murders, but there are far more rapes, muggings, robberies, beatings, and other violent crimes.  Also, you're making the assumtion that 'spousal murder' means the guy shot the woman.  Look at it this way, we guys are for the most part violent whereas women are not, there's not changing that, it's a fact of nature.  We men are also bigger and stronger.  That said, does a man really need a gun to kill you?  Do you honestly think most women stand a chance against a homicidal rapist or even an enraged abusive husband for that matter?  I'd bet you those 'spousal murders' are more the wife shooting the husband because she got tired of having her ass beaten and decided 'tonight is the night I stand up for myself' and a gun was the only thing that could level the playing field.

edit: I should also add it's not just about the ability to not be able to protect yourself, it's more about the criminal knowing you being a good law abiding citizen do not have the ability to protect yourself and he can do as he pleases