Wouldn’t you feel safer with a gun?

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

If there was a way to track how many times a pistol has been used to deter crime I think the numbers would be staggering. The only time you hear about a confrontation is when the shit hits the fan. You never hear about the times when the mere appearance of a pistol by a CCW holder makes the criminals turn tail and run.

That's probably similar to the way the public only hears about the skydiving incidents, rather than the million+ non-incident skydives, so they all think the sport is incredibly dangerous and we're all going to be lawn darts on our next jump.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>The rest of your analysis was crap as a result.

Why are you getting so angry over this?

I dunno (angry is an overstatement). I guess I'm tired of your strawmen, and your avoiding the question by redefining it, and using some of the worst gun grabbing propoganda out there to do it.

The issue was guns being taken and used against their owner. You knew that, but had nothing legitimate to work with.

Not a single person has claimed to be immune from bad things because they carry a gun. Stop pretending otherwise.

I think the issue is people who fail to acknowledge that the simple fact of carrying a gun can have a negative outcome, and often does.

I have been around firearms since my birth, and have used them since I was four years old (with my Father, and Nono's supervision)

It strikes me as very odd you make that claim since you are so adept at mathmatics.

Now John, be a good boy and rethink that statement, now I know you read it somewhere but that does not make it true.


What is the incidence rate of firearms being detrimental to the owner vs. firerams owners over the last 100 years?

I won't even get into the ratio of firearms in existance vs. Bad outcomes.

Please explain to the rest of us less educated, simple folks, what the incidence rate of often is, what is that frequency you speak of?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

your gun may help you, and it may kill you. Use one if you like, but do not pretend that it will always make you safer. It may also make you dead - especially if you are confronting a criminal.

A gun is the way to go if you want to stack the odds in your favor.

You can jump out of an airplane with a bedsheet if you want, but a parachute is going to be far more likely to save you. And that is despite the fact that parachutes sometimes end up hurting their users, rather than saving them.

Rates of Injury by Victim's Method of Protection:


Robbery  Assault

Physical force ............................  51%      52% 

Tried to get help or frighten attacker ....  49%      40%

Knife .....................................  40%      30% 

Non-violent resistance/evasion ............  35%      26%

Threatened or reasoned with attacker ......  31%      25% 

Other measures ............................  27%      21% 

No self protection ........................  25%      27%

Other weapon ..............................  22%      25%

Gun .......................................  17%      12% 


From:   Kleck G, "Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America", 

Table 4.4.

Source: Analysis of incident files of 1979-1985 National Crime

Survey public use computer tapes (ICPSR,1987b).

Note:   Percentages do not total to 100% since any single 

criminal incident can involve several different types 

of self-protection methods. 

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I think the issue is people who fail to acknowledge that the simple fact of carrying a gun can have a negative outcome, and often does.

I don't know of anyone who thinks that guns are perfect and can never produce an undesired outcome. Where did you get that notion?

But nevertheless, you're in favor of law-abiding U.S. citizens having the right to choose for themselves what risks to take regarding guns, correct?

[Nightingale 0]

Rate of injury doesn't really present an accurate perspective either, though.

For example: I used martial arts (physical force) to resist an attacker. I was slightly injured in the attack (sprained wrist), but was a lot less injured than I'd have been had I done nothing. Would I have been better off with a gun? Probably. I was cornered in a back alley by someone who was chasing me. Would I have had to shoot him? Maybe, but he probably would have run away if he saw I was armed.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Faster than a speeding bullet?

[pop 0]

Quote

Wouldn’t you feel safer with a gun?

no. if some dumbass has his gun pulled on me, then pulling out a gun would only escalate a situation. guns give you a false sense of security.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[billvon 2,384]

>You can jump out of an airplane with a bedsheet if you want, but
>a parachute is going to be far more likely to save you.

Yes. But if you decide that parachutes make skydiving so safe that you don't need training, or good judgment, or a good airplane, and just buy a Xaos 89 and jump out of an otter with it - the overconfidence that parachute gave you might just kill you.

Likewise, if your gun gives you the confidence to "stand tall" when a shady character approaches you at an ATM - it just might lead to your untimely death.

[steve1 5]

Quote

>
Likewise, if your gun gives you the confidence to "stand tall" when a shady character approaches you at an ATM - it just might lead to your untimely death.

.......................................................................
It might also save your life....I doubt if packing a gun is a false since of security. It is a very deadly tool that would give you the upper hand if a conflict happened. That is, if you had even a minimal amount of training.

I don't know a lot of people that have used a gun to defend themselves. But I have met hundreds if not thousands of people who have kept a gun at home for self defense.

I know of a guy who when he was a boy. shot and killed an intruder with his family's hunting rifle. The bad guy had a gun to the head of his parents. He got the rifle and shot the guy dead. This boy had been taught to shoot and hunt by his Dad. He wasn't a graduate of any police academy. He didn't have any extensive training. They lived in a remote area and there was no way the police could have saved them in time.

To be honest I have heard of bad things happening from having guns in a home. It is not totally safe to have a gun around. But it is not nearly as dangerous as many people make out. Training is needed, but I don't think it needs to be lengthy or extensive.

To pack a gun on the street, even more training is needed. I think most states require that.

To say that you are more likely to shoot yourself than an intruder or that someone is going to take your gun away from you is stretching things a lot in my opinion. With proper training none of that is likely to happen....Steve1

[billvon 2,384]

>With proper training none of that is likely to happen....

And that's the key. With proper training and good judgment, a gun can indeed help if you are attacked - and is much more likely to do so. Unfortunately, both are often lacking.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

>With proper training none of that is likely to happen....

And that's the key. With proper training and good judgment, a gun can indeed help if you are attacked - and is much more likely to do so. Unfortunately, both are often lacking.

twice a year, apparently.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Hey Bill I have an experiment for you, I am getting older and have arthritis, you can be the mugger, and I will carry simunition.

I wonder what the outcome would be?

1. No paint dots on you
2. I get shot with my own pistol by you.
3. You get shot, and have several dots on your center mass and one to the face.

4. You disarm me and beat my ass to a whimpering pulp.

there could be more outcomes but which of these do you truly think would happen?

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Hey Bill I have an experiment for you, I am getting older and have arthritis, you can be the mugger, and I will carry simunition.

I wonder what the outcome would be?

1. No paint dots on you
2. I get shot with my own pistol by you.
3. You get shot, and have several dots on your center mass and one to the face.

4. You disarm me and beat my ass to a whimpering pulp.

there could be more outcomes but which of these do you truly think would happen?

I think it would all depend on the circumstances.........if he telegraphed you from a block away and gave you time to get prepared he would probably get tagged. But up close and personal it's a wrestling match for the weapon. So if you get attacked from behind, aren't expecting it, or a second aggressor comes in on the side then you're screwed. You're worse off than without a weapon because now you're not just trying to protect yourself, but you're also trying to keep possession and control of your weapon.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[warpedskydiver 0]

Have you ever been trained in CQC?

[sv3n 0]

Quote

Have you ever been trained in CQC?

CQC/CQB tactics will get you a long way...but it also depends on the fact if you are well trained or trained at all. Just because you know that if someone grabs your muzzle you pivot your body to realign the sights with your target...that doesn't mean you will react that way in an actual confrontation.

But let's say all gun owner's get CQC/CQB training for argument's sake...the other thing is your proficiency in those tactics. Special Forces are constantly training in CQC/CQB, they don't just take a once a year refresher to be dead on accurate. So what makes you think that you or anyone else will react that same way without constant training? It's just like any martial art...you can be shown a waza, but without practice you'll never be good or even great at it.

Your average gun owner would focus on the weapon in a face to face struggle over it...but someone with any martial arts or CQC/CQB training will know that all it takes is a little slight of hand. Get your opponent to focus on your hand that's on the weapon and finish things with your open hand...it only takes a split second. That's also why operators carry a secondary firearm like a pistol. That way rather than fighting over the primary weapon that the assailant is trying to acquire you give him a couple of love taps from your secondary weapon, gain control of your primary weapon, and move on. But your regular citizen isn't going to have a secondary weapon, body armor, and a team to back him or her up.

Training is good, train all you want......and as a firearm owner one should. But if there's no weapon to begin with, then there's nothing else to lose focus on or fight to keep control of.

...and you're in violation of your face!

[MattM 0]

Quote

Quote

Have you ever been trained in CQC?

CQC/CQB tactics will get you a long way...but it also depends on the fact if you are well trained or trained at all. Just because you know that if someone grabs your muzzle you pivot your body to realign the sights with your target...that doesn't mean you will react that way in an actual confrontation.

But let's say all gun owner's get CQC/CQB training for argument's sake...the other thing is your proficiency in those tactics. Special Forces are constantly training in CQC/CQB, they don't just take a once a year refresher to be dead on accurate. So what makes you think that you or anyone else will react that same way without constant training? It's just like any martial art...you can be shown a waza, but without practice you'll never be good or even great at it.

Your average gun owner would focus on the weapon in a face to face struggle over it...but someone with any martial arts or CQC/CQB training will know that all it takes is a little slight of hand. Get your opponent to focus on your hand that's on the weapon and finish things with your open hand...it only takes a split second. That's also why operators carry a secondary firearm like a pistol. That way rather than fighting over the primary weapon that the assailant is trying to acquire you give him a couple of love taps from your secondary weapon, gain control of your primary weapon, and move on. But your regular citizen isn't going to have a secondary weapon, body armor, and a team to back him or her up.

Training is good, train all you want......and as a firearm owner one should. But if there's no weapon to begin with, then there's nothing else to lose focus on or fight to keep control of.

So you have or have not been trained in CQC?

Matt

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

Have you ever been trained in CQC?

CQC/CQB tactics will get you a long way...but it also depends on the fact if you are well trained or trained at all. Just because you know that if someone grabs your muzzle you pivot your body to realign the sights with your target...that doesn't mean you will react that way in an actual confrontation.

There's a difference between knowing tactics and training tactics. There's a difference between knowing your cutaway drill, and training your cutaway drill. When it comes down to a stressful situation, you react how you train. I am living proof of this. When someone attacked me, I reacted exactly how I'd been trained, and fought back. Just knowing how to defend against a handshake-grab attack wouldn't have helped me. Training it over and over until I could do it without thinking did help.

When skydivers have to exit a plane at a low altitude, even though we know we should pull silver, most pull their main, because that's the way they train for everyday jumping. We don't practice bailing out on silver, so when we have to exit in an emergency, we still pull our mains.

[udder 0]

would it be legal to open fire on them, or maybe if you saw one reaching into his Fubu jacket?

"In one way or the other, I'm a bad brother. Word to the motherf**ker." Eazy-E

[billvon 2,384]

>there could be more outcomes but which of these do you truly think would happen?

Probably none, because I wouldn't try to mug you and I have zero experience doing so even if I did try - so you could probably stop me without even drawing a gun.

However, if in a more general fight you started to draw, and we were close, I could take out your knee pretty quickly, make sure you hit the ground face-first and run. 80% of my training is defensive.

[warpedskydiver 0]