Here is the simple reason why I vastly prefer an AR15 over a handgun for home defense: I am far more lethal and proficient with it. I have my military training and have taken a number of civilian carbine courses with it, and I maintain my proficiency with regular training. I shoot the AR15 *much* better than I shoot a handgun. You see, in a real fight, I will be moving. My target will be moving. I will be stressed out. I will have to make fast, correct decisions. It is very difficult to handle any firearm under those circumstances, but training does make you much better at it. Also, it is much easier to shoot accurately with a rifle than it is with a handgun. I want my shots to be hits, and I want to used the minimum amount of firepower I need to neutralize the threat as fast as possible. My AR15 has a red dot sight on it. I can shoot with both eyes open (for better aiming and target ID) and I am VERY accurate with it at close to medium ranges. It also has a weapons light on it so that I can see who I am shooting at at night. It also has a 30 round magazine. You do not know how many rounds you will need to expend in a fight and you ALWAYS want to have as many as possible. If you have a choice between a handgun and an AR15 with RDS and light you would have to almost have a deathwish to choose the handgun. But as I am sure you've likely never even touched one I don't expect you to get that, it's just a scary "assault rifle", right? This study is completely absurd. It has been making the rounds for quite awhile and has been pretty much shown to be trash. It did not factor in suicides and those who were killed while involved in criminal activity. If you are suicidal and you have a gun in the house, then YES, your risk of getting shot (by yourself) is quite high. If you are a criminal who owns a gun then yes, you are far more likely to get shot than someone without a gun - even someone who legally owns a firearm and is not a criminal, believe it or not. Show me a study that factors out suicides and those who die while engaged in criminal activity and that will be relevant to me. I am not the least suicidal and I am not a criminal, so those to risk factors - which almost certainly account for the majority, likely a large majority, of firearms deaths involved in the study - do not have anything to do with me. If you are suicidal, mentally ill, or involved in criminal activity then I would personally not recommend you owning a firearm, because under those circumstances you are certainly more likely to get shot. Do any of those risk factors describe your situation, NS? Just trying to figure out why you don't trust yourself with a firearm. Another risk factor is, of course, carelessness. Stupidity. Accidental / negligent discharges. You see, it is physically impossible for a firearm to fire itself. It is an inanimate object. But there are people out there who do not take the time or make the effort to safely operate and maintain their firearms. Those people certainly do add to the statistics. To that end I would say that if you are too stupid or lazy to learn proper and safe firearms operation and maintenance, you probably should not own one - for your own good. But if you take safety seriously at all times then it is not difficult to refrain from accidentally shooting yourself. And if you are too stupid to properly secure your firearm with children in the home then you also probably shouldn't own a firearm. For your and your children's own good. As for accidentally shooting a family member, that is also a result of stupidity. The 4th rule of firearms safety is Know your target, and what is behind it. You do not pull the trigger until you have positively ID'ed the target, have taken appropriate aim, and know that the area behind the target is clear. I have lights on all of my home defense firearms to assist in this. Again, those risks are mitigated with proper training and preparation. No, the odds per the study you posted are skewed and as a result are completely worthless. If you are a criminal then you are gambling. If you are suicidal then you are gambling. If you are too stupid to understand and practice safe operation and maintenance then you are gambling. If you are too stupid to properly secure your weapons with children in the home then you are gambling. It sounds to me like the problem is that you don't trust yourself. If YOU do not trust YOURSELF then you probably shouldn't own a firearm - at least until you can get some proper training. Someone adheres to proper safety techniques at all times and is adequately trained has little to nothing to worry about. You literally want to tax a behavior that you don't like. Just because you don't personally like it. Nice, but that's not how things work in this country. My ownership and proficiency with an AR15 increases the chance of death for anyone stupid enough to break into my home, and no one else. Are you saying that I should have to pay for that moron's funeral bills with your tax? Sorry, but no. Here's some light reading for you to pass the time with. http://gunowners.org/sk0701.htm http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=33172 http://www.readyholster.com/blog/stand-your-ground-gun-laws-infographic http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/carbine-vs-shotgun-vs-pistol-for-home-defense/ http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/
I was a 13F02, Fire Support Sergeant (a forward observer). No time behind a desk, lots of time with a ruck on my back and a rifle in my hands. And some time with a GLLD section in my ruck (I was on a COLT, Combat Operations Lasing Team). As you may know FOs are often attached to infantry and armor BNs. Or at least they used to be, I think they're reorganized since I got out and they are indigenous to the armor/infantry unit. I was also in a MLRS unit for awhile and had a secondary MOS 13M01, MLRS Cannon Crewmwmber, but I never actually crewed a SPL, I had the Recon Sergeant slot because of my abilities as a FO. 7 years Army National Guard, 3 of that Active Duty, 2 deployments plus some other **** like Katrina and Rita, few other activations. So that would probably make me a grunt, I suppose. I am guessing by your screenname you were a Rifleman... I was never crazy enough to want to be a Marine.
Don't forget the last decade you spent in BBS exile which was actually a cover for supersecret black ops tread stone missions on behalf of the colonial marines on planet Reach.
ok, so you had a fantasy scenario where the AR-15 might be better than a handgun, while you flat out admitted in your ENTIRE life the one situation a gun was useful for was to chase off a rabid dog, which you could have done with a BB gun, or a stick, much less an assault rifle (???). Now you rattle on and on about how you're trained, and how you lock up the guns, and how you can mitigate risk---while acknowledging that the risk is there, and that those who aren't trained shouldn't be touching those things. I'm going to assume you haven't thought of your individual scenario and applied it to everyone (and that your rhetoric of dismissing risk comes with very little in the way of real benefit) Again, I emphasize, I don't exactly see how your fantasy benefit outweighs the very real risk. As for why I don't carry a gun, I'm not insecure enough to need one. I find myself perfectly happy being who I am, as a person that hasn't found himself in a situation that required a knife, much less an assault rifle. I appreciate your implication that my aversion to weapons is due to my risk factor of being a suicide or a criminal rather than plain common sense of expected value. I can only hope that you don't slip up in your gun safety, or your 4th rule, because then your zero benefit of fantasies in your head will work out for you. Keep it up though, if your posting style is any indication, you're doing a-ok on the chill road to non-gun need As for your barb on taxation, I thought I was being quite generous---seeing as how bans on AR-15s and similar weapons have been, and can be reinforced by judicial rulings. You like those don't you? Well, have a look at a couple more. By the way---http://gunowners.org/sk0701.htm ---your light reading is a paragraph from a gun lobby? http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3488101?uid=2&uid=4&sid=21102170168083 take a gander there instead.
This isn't even speaking of the social externalities (which is really why I like the tax). I happen to live in a place where, among other things, guns are lesser, culture is more diverse, the beer tastes a whee bit better, and beautiful women are the norm. (which helps as well). on the downside, bad roads, and some terrible prejudices---but whatcanyoudo I can't help but think that I can't even think like you, crouching in fear in absurd home defense scenarios that require assault weapons to stop the incoming SWAT team robbing your house, because, well, I wasn't raised in a society that glorified guns, or one where you expected everybody to comeatyoubro and rob the house with multiple assault weapons. I find it liberating, you should try it sometime.
It's not a fantasy scenario, although I'd expect exactly that response from someone who is completely ignorant regarding all firearms and personal defense issues. And I do not mean that as an insult, I mean that you literally don't know what you're talking about when it comes to this. This is my lane, not yours. If you are going to need to use your weapon in a fight it is by definition a gunfight. You ALWAYS want to take the most powerful firearm that you can use most effectively into a gunfight, because your life literally depends upon having a successful outcome. It is VERY difficult to fight with a handgun, but it is relatively easy to fight with a RDS/light equipped AR15 (or M4, just ask anyone who has carried one in service... ever wondered why this is what the military uses?). You want to use the weapon that gives you the best chance to survive the fight. You only get ONE chance to do it right. Your life literally depends upon it. You ridicule my single episode where I had to draw my CCW. You say I should use a stick or a BB gun. So you are saying I should carry a stick or a BB gun on my person at all times, and that is sufficient? You ALWAYS use what you have available at hand in a fight. And I am not about to carry a stick in my waistband or try and shoot an intruder - or a couple of pit bulls - with a BB gun. Again, the fact that you would even suggest this just exposes your total and complete ignorance about personal defense issues. The risk IS there for someone who hasn't had the training, who hasn't taken the time to learn about and understand proper operation, function, and safety issues concerning their firearms. I advise that anyone who is not willing to do this NOT own/carry/use a firearm because they are a danger to themselves. Just like I don't believe that alcohol and firearms don't mix, neither do stupid and firearms mix. Everyone's situation is different. Firearms ownership, and especially carry, is a responsibility, not just a right. You owe it to yourself, your family, and the people around you at any given time to be safe and proficient with your firearms. I highly recommend that anyone who does it takes classes on safe handling and proper operation of the firearm, and follow that up with training in skill development. My "rhetoric" of dismissing risk? Risk can be mitigated very easily. It's not rhetoric. The fact that you think it is tells me that again, you simply don't understand what we're talking about here. My "fantasy" is reality for thousands of Americans every year. You do NOT know if/when something is going to happen, all you can do is either choose to prepare for the possibility (Me, or choose not to prepare for the possibility (You) and accept the outcome. You are totally cool with possibly being a victim because you think it's unlikely. I also think it's unlikely, but I am going to prepare for it anyway, so that if it does happen I and my family do not end up dead. And again, that "very real risk" can be mitigated by your actions. Do you simply not accept that risk can be mitigated, and that we are all at the mercy of whatever statistically possible events might befall us regardless of our actions? If so, you probably should never drive again, because you are FAR more likely to die in a traffic accident than to die at the hands of someone with a firearm. You don't carry a gun because !) you don't know anything about them, 2 ) you (likely rightly) don't trust yourself to carry one, 3) are a liberal, and that would make you NOT COOL, and 4) don't seem to think that you can actually stop bad things from happening to yourself. Good. For your sake I hope you never do. Roll the dice at your own peril. "It hasn't happened to me yet" is not necessarily a good predictor of future events. Especially if we are nothing more than statistics, as you seem to think. I don't know why you are afraid of firearms. I can only guess. Ignorance is usually the reason. I don't mean that as an insult, I just mean that inexperience and lack of knowledge of the area are enough to many afraid. And for those not willing to learn it is honestly probably good that they don't try and teach themselves. That is how accidents happen. I have no problem with you spurning firearms and putting your personal safety completely in the hands of fate and criminals - to each his own, live your life as you want. What I resent is your desire to impose the same upon me. I have a family to protect, and I am not going to leave it to people like you to decide how I go about doing it. I take safety pretty seriously. It is the most basic and most important aspect of firearms handling. As for the "fantasies"... are you starting to get frustrated, or what? I like judicial rulings that reinforce my constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. You bet. And no, your taxation idea is silly, petty, and vindictive, and has no clearly definable policy objective beyond generating more money for your socialist utopia and penalizing those you don't personally like. So you automatically refuse to read it? Nah, you're not biased or anything, eh? Ignore logic at your peril. No matter what garbage you post I will at least read it. Tear it apart on its merits if you can. Same problems as with the other trash study you posted. Victims are often criminals and suicide victims, neither of which are risk factors for me. It seems what you REALLY ought to focus on is eliminating CRIME and SUICIDE. Good luck with that.
Actually, I think you've hit on something here. You CAN"T even think like me. I am a 40 year old man who has had a life full of experiences (or half of one, at least) that you probably can't relate to. I come from a place where people's houses get robbed all the time, home invasions occur, and you are NOT as safe as you want to be. I do not "cower in fear", I am simply ready to deal with more adverse situations than you are. I don't know who you are and don't care to make too many assumptions about your situation or your mindset beyond the information that you have given. But you appear to have bought into the absurd caricature that has been spread by the Left side of the aisle - Tea Partiers are racist, Republicans hate old/poor people, want babies to starve (but oddly not die in the womb), they "cower in fear" in their homes with guns in hand... Life is far different than you think. I was a liberal when I was young, too. I actually spent time arguing against widespread firearms ownership - including "assault rifles" - back in the 1990s. I have literally been on your side of this argument. And then, a funny thing happened. I grew up and learned about real life. And here we are.
I read your article---it was poorly written, and focused on basically the same plank of argument you are espousing---seeing that, I countered on an alternate point that decreasing the number of guns can decrease the number of crimes. Your article cited a bunch of dubious sources from 1994, and is itself dubious---nevertheless, your rebuttal is considered (though the argument of defensive non-lethal uses seems to validate my point that assault weapons are pointless in at least 90% of situations---unless you somehow think pointing an assault weapon gives you more grit instead of a handgun. givemethestatsbro). A tax is better than a ban. If you wish instead to hew to an argument that has been validated in courts as to why a ban on assault weapons makes sense, well, then, I don't exactly see how you can't see a tax is better, and makes sense. Reducing crime and suicide is certainly a possibility. I live in a country where violent crime and suicides are significantly lower. There are also a lower amount of guns. i can't help but think that isn't a coincidence (and I'd find the studies I had to back it up, except it's getting to be leaving time in these parts, and I must be off. tomorrow though, if I have the time)
Have you ever thought that that might be due to the policy environment surrounding your nation, vis a vis guns, paranoia, violent culture, gun culture etc.? as for your real life, I'm older vibe, you got teh bias against the Republicans---I have slammed the President and Democrats just as much as Republicans on many issues of substance. I don't care about the Tea Party as racist narrative, or the Republican "hate for old people"---I care about rule of law, good policy objectives, and solid reasoning, something the Republican Party has not demonstrated on several topics (but on which the Democratic Party has been scantily better). I criticize Randians and Tea Partiers not because they're supposedly racist (which I don't really care about) but because the policy choices they're advocating are terrible. and, to borrow your way of debate, it's my lane not yours As for real life, I do have quite a unique set of experiences so it's good you didn't assume (but then you did anyways by assuming I need to learn about "real life"). we could talk about it if I ever had the pleasure of meeting you personally, which I don't think I will. tall tales on the internet aren't so cool, if you don't have the eye-to-eye contact that sells genuine truth. anyways, you have yourself a good day.
Dammn this thread went off topic fast. I guess demand for gun control topics just hasn't be satiated yet. But seriously, I know people in the 50s, 60s, 70s who live in countries where guns (or even knives!) are banned, and yes some of them are ex-military, and they all seem perfectly happy living in places without guns. The world is a bigger place than America you know.
And how do you propose to decrease the numbers of guns? This is, of course, the crux of it. You want to TAKE them. Don't be coy about it, show your true self in all of your gun-confiscating glory. I know what you are, and I know what you want. Try it. You will not like what happens. The guns are here to stay. But if your goal is to reduce firearms violence, and people like me would rather pay a tax than give them up, and criminals are going to ignore your tax, as are people who are going to commit suicide (since they won't be paying taxes anymore), then how exactly are you going to accomplish your objective? You aren't, and it isn't about that. It is about making you feel like you "did something". Sorry, I missed the part where a court that said an assault weapons ban makes sense. I do understand that courts (SC) have said that restrictions on firearms are acceptable, but as far as I can tell no court has ruled that it's coolio. Wake me up when one does. Sure it is. You aren't going to do it by removing law-abiding citizens' ability to defend themselves. Look no further than UK and Australia for evidence of that. They had their fun with gun band and crime has skyrocketed as a result. Sure, firearms related deaths are down, but guess what? People just started using other tools to kill each other with, and the criminals - guess what - will have their guns. Because, you know, they're criminals and don't give a **** about your law. I live in a country where violent crime and suicides are significantly lower.[/quote] So you live in Lichetenstein, then? I get it, you're a European. Why don't you give me a call after you've lived a few miles from 5th ward for awhile? Then I'll care about your assessment. America is culturally no more like Europe in many ways than it is to South America or Africa. Again, you literally know not of what you speak.
It probably has more to do with blue-model economic policy, illegal immigration, and the destruction of the African-American nuclear family in the 1960s than firearms. This country has always been flush with firearms. They are simply a tool. The problem is the disease. Good for you. You're not a robot. OMG... this thread is already off topic enough, I'll let this one pass. That can is too big to open. I don't do tall tales. I always expect that I could meet anyone I am talking to on the internet. I have met people on this board personally - yes, I am a real person. You clearly do not understand firearms-related or personal defense issues. You admittedly do not understand why people in the USA feel the need to have a firearm. This is common among Europeans, I get that. I actually feel sorry that you guys don't have the same right. But that's spilled milk. I simply think that you are out of your lane on this one and while you are of course free to comment, perhaps you shouldn't. Or at least you should try and learn more about it first. Anyway... Is it even REMOTELY possible to get this thread on track at this point? Was this the obama speech thread? Oh yeah, Lewis Black crapping all over Texas. I remember now...
I would like to thank you guys for taking a moderately interesting thread and completely nuking it from orbit. This is why EVERYONE loves the D&D. Go play invisible pedestrian or something.
Eh, several posters made personal attacks against me, and I defended myself. One thing led to another... Feel free to get it back on track, it's not like anyone will actually go back and read the last 3-4 pages anyway if all they want to do it comment on how classy Black's video was.
Its not like anybody but you and MacBeth give a rats ass about the 5000 word wankfests you're engaging in. Please get it back on track by underscoring how much you are hurting new York's feelings about how you will not deign to visit the various comfort inns that are desperately craving your mileage plus visa card.
