Guns For Self-Defence

[Angua]

More ways of killing each other will never make anyone any safer.

As the army guy who had 32 rounds crammed in the barrel would testify. Of all the people killed in battle only about 10% of those in the frontline did the killing.

Having a gun in the house will only increase the number of killings (by victim or criminal doesn't matter a person is still dead).

All of you are talking about moral objections, and stats and other such stuff.

Can any of you actually think of a relistic stituation where having a gun would be a good thing? Remember, for self-defence they would have the first move and that would mean you are unlikely to be in a ideal position to use the gun

[me283]

Originally Posted by Damien

All of you are talking about moral objections, and stats and other such stuff.

Can any of you actually think of a relistic stituation where having a gun would be a good thing? Remember, for self-defence they would have the first move and that would mean you are unlikely to be in a ideal position to use the gun

OK, you are in the house and you hear a window breaking downstairs. You call the police but they will be two hours since there is a purge on tax discs in the area. So you venture downstairs and find someone wielding a knife. As he sees you, he runs at you. Now, do you feel safer with, or without the gun?

Of course, I am forgetting the obvious option - you could sit down with him, ask about his troubled upbringing, blame the Tories, and discuss the merits of regional income tax

[Angua]

Originally Posted by me283

OK, you are in the house and you hear a window breaking downstairs. You call the police but they will be two hours since there is a purge on tax discs in the area. So you venture downstairs and find someone wielding a knife. As he sees you, he runs at you. Now, do you feel safer with, or without the gun?

Of course, I am forgetting the obvious option - you could sit down with him, ask about his troubled upbringing, blame the Tories, and discuss the merits of regional income tax

I wouldn't be fool enough to venture downstairs in the first place. I for one do not reside in a B movie where no one puts the light on and everyone attacks a burglar, usually to their detriment!

[me283]

Originally Posted by Angua

I wouldn't be fool enough to venture downstairs in the first place. I for one do not reside in a B movie where no one puts the light on and everyone attacks a burglar, usually to their detriment!

But if you had a gun, you might be more inclined to. And Mr. Intruder would know that, and hence would be less inclined to be Mr. Intruder.

Personally, I would go downstairs anyway, and one of us at least would end up in hospital. If it were me, then make that two of us. Without wishing to open up a can of worms, the Tony Martin case demonstrates the reasons why we should be allowed to have guns in the home, for protection.

Originally Posted by me283

OK, you are in the house and you hear a window breaking downstairs. You call the police but they will be two hours since there is a purge on tax discs in the area. So you venture downstairs and find someone wielding a knife. As he sees you, he runs at you. Now, do you feel safer with, or without the gun?

Of course, I am forgetting the obvious option - you could sit down with him, ask about his troubled upbringing, blame the Tories, and discuss the merits of regional income tax

Oh give it a rest, I am sick of these kind of responses. We are not talking about the background of criminals, Tories or income tax. Stop trying to make cheap shots at what you see as 'liberal' ideas.

Getting back to the actual question. The example you cited is unlikely to happen exactly as you think it would. When something likes this happens fear can take over which means you could make mistakes. (I.E You hear a noise downstairs and take the gun and shoot as soon as you seen a moving figure. Which you have to do to avoid being attacked yourself, and this could mean shooting a family member).

In the end the likelyhood of you being broken into, hearing it, getting the gun, and being in a position to use the gun safely is remote. However if guns are feely availble then the criminal breaking in is much more likely to have a gun then he is now.

You give the public guns, you are giving the crimical guns. We are back to square one only this time the stakes are higher.

Originally Posted by Damien

Oh give it a rest, I am sick of these kind of responses. We are not talking about the background of criminals, Tories or income tax. Stop trying to make cheap shots at what you see as 'liberal' ideas.

Getting back to the actual question. The example you cited is unlikely to happen exactly as you think it would. When something likes this happens fear can take over which means you could make mistakes. (I.E You hear a noise downstairs and take the gun and shoot as soon as you seen a moving figure. Which you have to do to avoid being attacked yourself, and this could mean shooting a family member).

In the end the likelyhood of you being broken into, hearing it, getting the gun, and being in a position to use the gun safely is remote. However if guns are feely availble then the criminal breaking in is much more likely to have a gun then he is now.

You give the public guns, you are giving the crimical guns. We are back to square one only this time the stakes are higher.

Cool and eloquent post Damien.

As an update on previous posts re crime levels. Seen some stats today, based on reported crime for the year to June. Violent crime up 6%, said to partly reflected police targeting alcohol fuelled crime. Gun crime up 5%, mainly down to imitation firearms but deaths from shootings fell from 70 to 60 (guess it's difficult to shoot to kill with an imitation!).


Overall crime fell 2%, burglary down 11% (less reason to have that gun under the bed now!), car thefts down 8%. Robbery up 4% - suggestion being mobiles and mp3 players being targeted. Drug offences up 25% - suggestion being down to greater use of cautions for weed and, apparently, a crack down on, er, crack houses.

The British Crime Survey - a much better indicator of overall crime - reports overall crime down 5%, burglary down 17%, car thefts down 10% and violent crime static.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by andyl

The British Crime Survey - a much better indicator of overall crime - reports overall crime down 5%, burglary down 17%, car thefts down 10% and violent crime static.

I don't know how you think the BCS is a better indication of overall crime as it is based on peoples perception of crime.

I don't know.

a) How many people were surveyed,
b) From where they were surveyed,
c) the age of the people surveyed

and so on and so on.

Reported violent crime has gone up. This too is not clear as violent crime covers a large spectrum.

Neither method is satisfactory, however if we are dealing with FACTs - Violent crime has risen

Originally Posted by andel

The British Crime Survey - a much better indicator of overall crime - reports overall crime down 5%, burglary down 17%, car thefts down 10% and violent crime static.

One reason car thefts are down is that new cars are harder to steal. Facts and figures can be quoted all day. I could find some survey and post it on here and say its a better survey than the other. Violent crime is on the up and you dont need a survey to see that



I do not want guns in the hands of the general public. If the public are armed then the criminal is armed, they are the public as well so if you have a gun they have a gun. Where does it stop.

Look at Tony Martin, He put up with years of crime on his farm. Confronted 2 **** bags and pointed the gun at them. They turned tail and ran so what did he do. Shoot them in the back as they ran away. Now think what a frightened householder would do in the same situation.

If someone is in my house at night the least they will meet are my cats, the worst is me and my 2 sons and Mr baseball bat. The last thing i want is a shootout in my house. I have had full training on guns and therefor know how bad they are if they are incorrectly used or in the wrong hands.

Sorry but arming the public will not work.

Rant over

[tkiely]

Originally Posted by Damien

You give the public guns, you are giving the crimical guns.

Are you real? The criminals don't wait for legalisation, they have got all the guns they need since it became illegal to own a licensed gun!

Originally Posted by tkiely

Are you real? The criminals don't wait for legalisation, they have got all the guns they need since it became illegal to own a licensed gun!

Not all of them have guns. The opportunist and the drug taker's who steal to fund a habit i would say normally dont. The career burglar might. The bank robbers would.

[me283]

Originally Posted by Damien

Getting back to the actual question. The example you cited is unlikely to happen exactly as you think it would. When something likes this happens fear can take over which means you could make mistakes. (I.E You hear a noise downstairs and take the gun and shoot as soon as you seen a moving figure. Which you have to do to avoid being attacked yourself, and this could mean shooting a family member).

In the end the likelyhood of you being broken into, hearing it, getting the gun, and being in a position to use the gun safely is remote. However if guns are feely availble then the criminal breaking in is much more likely to have a gun then he is now.

You give the public guns, you are giving the crimical guns. We are back to square one only this time the stakes are higher.

OK, let's add in a few facts that you seem to be missing out on:

Criminals do have guns you know?

A possible scenario was requested, and one was given, however unlikely. The possibility of it being remote - that's your opinion. My opinion is that if the intruder thought the householder was armed, the possibility would be even more remote.

You make a huge supposition about shooting "moving figures". So what if the light was on? Not everyone goes into a panic in fear situations.

Let's just clear one thing up: criminals don't exactly respect the current law on guns. By trotting out the lame old excuse about legalising guns meaning criminals will carry them, you are ignoring the fact that criminals already carry them in a great many cases. If you think otherwise, you are fooling yourself. Look at the wonderful stats that have been reported.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by tkiely

Are you real? The criminals don't wait for legalisation, they have got all the guns they need since it became illegal to own a licensed gun!

All criminals have guns have they?

Not ALL criminals have guns. But stupid suggestions in the OP will make it a **** site easier.... What planet are you people on??????

My dad had a license for a gun and taught me to shoot when I was 8. I regularly went to clay pigeon school at the weekends. I know how to use a gun. 99% of the population don't, and I believe making guns available to all and sundry is a disaster. I'll bet all the tea in china that more accidental deaths occur than anything through 'self defence'.

[tkiely]

Originally Posted by orangebird

All criminals have guns have they?

Clearly not what I meant!

Originally Posted by orangebird

Not ALL criminals have guns. But stupid suggestions in the OP will make it a **** site easier.... What planet are you people on??????

the passion i feel eminating from that rant would make me fear you if you had a gun!!!!! (that's meant as topical humour, dont hunt me down and shoot me with your superior, trained hands!)

Originally Posted by me283

OK, let's add in a few facts that you seem to be missing out on:

Criminals do have guns you know?

A possible scenario was requested, and one was given, however unlikely. The possibility of it being remote - that's your opinion. My opinion is that if the intruder thought the householder was armed, the possibility would be even more remote.

You make a huge supposition about shooting "moving figures". So what if the light was on? Not everyone goes into a panic in fear situations.

Let's just clear one thing up: criminals don't exactly respect the current law on guns. By trotting out the lame old excuse about legalising guns meaning criminals will carry them, you are ignoring the fact that criminals already carry them in a great many cases. If you think otherwise, you are fooling yourself. Look at the wonderful stats that have been reported.

Not all have guns, only some of the worst ones. Remember, when a crimnical is arrested they would also be changed with carry a firearm and not many do yet. Think of the high amount of petty thives and drug users. Car thives and so on and so on.