Guns

[Xulld]

The absolute only reason I carry a smaller weapon is so that it is easier to carry. Thats it. I used to carry a full size modern S&W 45 1911.

No compromise is needed, or wanted in regards to being able to carry it as long as I maintain that privileged under the law. If I choose to pull the trigger I am aiming to kill.

I have one question for Joe and Imerk.

At what Violent death rate, what homicide % of the population would you consider it a wise action to carry a gun legally?

At what percent illegally?

Would those percentages change if someone you loved was murdered?


We are not talking about pascals wager here where no evidence can be shown for gods existence, we are talking about homicide, plenty of proof this occurs, a little too often and close to home for me to disregard.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

At what Violent death rate, what homicide % of the population would you consider it a wise action to carry a gun legally?

At what percent illegally?

Would those percentages change if someone you loved was murdered?

There's no number at which illegal carry becomes necessary. That's a stupid comment on your part, and shows your bias.

Legally, you'd have to show a percentage that corresponded to your specific position. Otherwise, you're just an asshole with a small penis and a need to compensate.

 

[GoodKat]

I used to carry a full size modern S&W 45 1911.

We have similar taste, if I could carry any gun, not considering the inconvenience, would be an ed brown kobra carry.

 

[Xulld]

There's no number at which illegal carry becomes necessary. That's a stupid comment on your part, and shows your bias.

Legally, you'd have to show a percentage that corresponded to your specific position. Otherwise, you're just an asshole with a small penis and a need to compensate.

So if you lived under an unfair and Tyrannical minority government that did not protect its citizens from harm (perhaps even endorsed it) but did not allow them protection you would never ignore that law no matter how dangerous?

Seems foolish given any probability, given ANY situation.

Blanket statements do not make you more rational.

Joe your reduction to personal attacks is telling.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

So if you lived under an unfair and Tyrannical minority government that did not protect its citizens from harm (perhaps even endorsed it) but did not allow them protection you would never ignore that law no matter how dangerous?

Seems foolish given any probability, given ANY situation.

Blanket statements do not make you more rational.

Aww, poor crybaby peeing your pants over nonexistent hypotheticals... I hope you have plent of diapers, and/or plenty of bleach. Otherwise, your piss-stains will let everyone know how much of a stupid coward you are.

Smart people would consider carrying guns based on legitimate probabilities. Chickenshit pussies carry guns based on unrealistic possibilities, most likely garnered from right-wing coward sources and/or 1980's vigilante movies.

 

[Xulld]

Joe why are you getting so upset here?

You where the first to mention any kind of hypothetical, in fact this thread was supposed to be a simple thread on guns.

I happen to carry a gun legally, so the whole mention of illegal carry isnt applicable to me, it was never meant to be anything but hypothetical.

I think what you do not realize is I am not trying to defend, or endorse a position on gun carry here. I explained my rationale thats it . . .

I might understand the position you are taking if this thread where about gun control, but its not . . .

My arguments in that debate are wholly different. I will post up a youtube video on that one here soon, backed up with research and objective evidence, not personal stories and preference for carry.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Joe why are you getting so upset here?

You where the first to mention any kind of hypothetical, in fact this thread was supposed to be a simple thread on guns.

I happen to carry a gun legally, so the whole mention of illegal carry isnt applicable to me, it was never meant to be anything but hypothetical.

I think what you do not realize is I am not trying to defend, or endorse a position on gun carry here. I explained my rationale thats it . . .

I might understand the position you are taking if this thread where about gun control, but its not . . .

My arguments in that debate are wholly different.

My argument is about when it is reasonable to carry. YOU introduced the idea of carrying illegally under ridiculous hypothetical situations.

The point I made, which would have been clear to most people but seemed to have escaped you, is that there is little need for most people to ever carry, but that need does exist for some people. If you work in a bad neighborhood and you get paid in cash, carrying a firearm would make some sense. If you work 9-5 in a good neighborhood, and you live in the suburbs, why would you need to carry besides your tiny penis?

 

[Xulld]

My argument is about when it is reasonable to carry. YOU introduced the idea of carrying illegally under ridiculous hypothetical situations.

The point I made, which would have been clear to most people but seemed to have escaped you, is that there is little need for most people to ever carry, but that need does exist for some people. If you work in a bad neighborhood and you get paid in cash, carrying a firearm would make some sense. If you work 9-5 in a good neighborhood, and you live in the suburbs, why would you need to carry besides your tiny penis?

Actually you are wrong. Look back at the first few posts. I agreed with your point. The chances the average American needs a gun for self protection are not high by most standards.

Joe its ok man. Everything is going to be alright. Most intelligent people I know personally enjoy hypotheticals, that is in some ways what makes them intelligent they are willing to think, heck even your basis of not needing a gun is hypothetical, so I guess whats good for the goose . . .

You can answer my question you brought up probabilities, I asked you what was yours, if you choose not to get hypothetical, then only acknowledge the part about legally carrying and when you would consider that. Heck lets narrow it down, how many people would have to die in your neighborhood, your city, your state?

Is it restricted to bad neighborhoods, and how you are paid? Why result to penis envy attacks personal attacks? Do you really think that is a big reason most people carry? Do you really even know anything about me?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Actually you are wrong. Look back at the first few posts. I agreed with your point. The chances the average American needs a gun for self protection are not high by most standards.

Joe its ok man. Everything is going to be alright.

You can answer my question you brought up probabilities, I asked you what was yours, if you choose not to get hypothetical, then only acknowledge the part about legally carrying and when you would consider that. Heck lets narrow it down, how many people would have to die in your neighborhood, your city, your state?

Is it restricted to bad neighborhoods, and how you are paid? Why result to penis envy attacks personal attacks? Do you really think that is a big reason most people carry? Do you really even know anything about me?

I apologize if I seem to be on the attack. Blame me, or blame the forum where we have to wait for responses and can't see or hear any body language or verbal inflection.

I tell you that based on my experience and my training, guns exist to KILL. Most people have absolutely no reason to kill.

Your question about "how many people would have to die" is not only dishonest, it is an illogical strawman argument. Here's my entire point, and deal with your own penis-issues on your own time: most of us wlll never, EVER be confronted with the need to own a firearm. Some small percentage of people might need to carry a firearm, or keep one in their home for senf defense. The FACTS show that most people don't need them. If you or someone you know happens to fall into that tiny percentage, then fine: carry your gun, and STFU with your whining because no one is talking about you. If you are part of the vast majority who don't need a firearm for any reason other than recreation, or subsistence hunting then you are propping up your low self-esteem, and I have little sympathy for your inferiority complex.

 

[Xulld]

I apologize if I seem to be on the attack. Blame me, or blame the forum where we have to wait for responses and can't see or hear any body language or verbal inflection.

I tell you that based on my experience and my training, guns exist to KILL. Most people have absolutely no reason to kill.

Your question about "how many people would have to die" is not only dishonest, it is an illogical strawman argument. Here's my entire point, and deal with your own penis-issues on your own time: most of us wlll never, EVER be confronted with the need to own a firearm. Some small percentage of people might need to carry a firearm, or keep one in their home for senf defense. The FACTS show that most people don't need them. If you or someone you know happens to fall into that tiny percentage, then fine: carry your gun, and STFU with your whining because no one is talking about you. If you are part of the vast majority who don't need a firearm for any reason other than recreation, or subsistence hunting then you are propping up your low self-esteem, and I have little sympathy for your inferiority complex.

I think you are very immature for your age. You can totally do without the personal references in ALL discussions on this board, I just read the rules and unless your someone special who they don't apply to then you are certainly breaking them.

As for YOUR arugment . . .

The murder rate was your response to me, the probability of needing it is your ENTIRE argument. Which you have now stated over and over and over again.

I have merely asked you to take a stance on YOUR argument.

If you do not want to give me an objective answer ie a number of murders, then tell me in whatever best subjective words you can pull out of your seriously overacting brain to establish a basis for your own argument.

How does one quantify danger? How does one anticipate murder? How does one know best when they should arm themselves?

You have failed to answer this core idea behind YOUR argument.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I think you are very immature for your age. You can totally do without the personal references in ALL discussions on this board, I just read the rules and unless your someone special who they don't apply to then you are certainly breaking them.

I would whine in exactly the way you are doing, if I were you... and if I weren't 10 years older, and much smarter. You're being a crybaby, which isn't protected under the forum rules as I read them.

As for YOUR arugment . . .

The murder rate was your response to me, the probability of needing it is your ENTIRE argument. Which you have now stated over and over and over again.

I have merely asked you to take a stance on YOUR argument.

If you do not want to give me an objective answer ie a number of murders, then tell me in whatever best subjective words you can pull out of your seriously overacting brain to establish a basis for your own argument.

How does one quantify danger? How does one anticipate murder? How does one know best when they should arm themselves?

You have failed to answer this core idea behind YOUR argument.

If you are in a high-crime area, an area that any reasonable outside observer would consider "unsafe"... then grab all the guns you want. I made that clear from the outset. My point was always that most people DON'T LIVE IN HIGH CRIME AREAS, AND THE PEOPLE WHO CARRY GUNS OUTSIDE THOSE AREAS ARE FUCKING PUSSIES. If you live in one of those areas, you can consider yourself not addressed by me. If you carry large amounts of cash as part of your job, I have already said that I am not talking about you. If you are someone who has a legitimate reason to feel at risk, I AM NOT REFERRING TO YOU. Do you need a singing telegram?!?!

If you don't have a legitimate reason to feel at risk, and you carry a firearm anyway, I would say that you are an alarmist coward. If you DO have legitimate reason to feel at risk, then don't feel offended because I'm not referring to you.

 

[GoodKat]

Un-derailing time:

I'm going to post some pictures of guns that I drool over

Ed Brown Kobra Carry

MSAR STG556 (Modified Steyr Aug)

Robinson Arms XCR

Cylinder and Slide Pinwheeler

Marlin Stainless Guide Gun

CZ 97

Sig P239

 

[Xulld]

Yup sorry about that goodkat.


I use to own a martin 3030, great gun, good resale value. I also used to own a FN-FAL which is similar in the design of the action to the Robinson Arms XCR, extremely reliable fired thousands of rounds through that one in my youth never a jam, it ejects the spent cartridges like 50-60 feet away it has so much strength of action. You could probably jam dirt in the action and have it still reliably rapid fire.


_______

I like your signature goodkat!

 

[COMMUNIST FLISK]

best gun ever invented? (by best i mean most effective etc NOT the most technologically advanced)

 

[boonw]

I have a love for guns, I want to get my hands on one and fire away, but to do that in canada is a bitch.

My personal favorite gun in the MG 42, with the Mauser K 1898 and STG44 right in behind, I would also like to try a Ross, Styer Aug and a C7, along with some brownings.

Oh, and I would have to disagree with you comrade, the AK isnt too effective in combat, its just easy to use, and impossible to break. to an untrained soldier those are two key needs in a gun.

 

[GoodKat]

Wow, I think I found a group of fundamentalist anti-gun activists.
http://www.vpc.org/

They really remind me of creationists, misrepresenting the facts, pulling numbers out of their asses, showing a serious lack of understanding of what they claim to hate. Maybe that have a phobia of firearms.

 

[COMMUNIST FLISK]

I have a love for guns, I want to get my hands on one and fire away, but to do that in canada is a bitch.

My personal favorite gun in the MG 42, with the Mauser K 1898 and STG44 right in behind, I would also like to try a Ross, Styer Aug and a C7, along with some brownings.

Oh, and I would have to disagree with you comrade, the AK isnt too effective in combat, its just easy to use, and impossible to break. to an untrained soldier those are two key needs in a gun.

i prefer the FG 42 over the Mg 42

what about the PPSH-41? (now were talking WWII guns lol)