December 14, 2014 at 5:08 pm #31956December 14, 2014 at 5:30 pm #31959
Having helped the victims of crime, and violent crime for a decade, I will never be without a firearm.
There is one item that can even the odds between a 6’3″ thug and 5’2″ granny gums, and that’s a firearm and the willingness to use it.
Some people recommend martial arts, and these can be great but a disparity of size, age, and more make this unworkable. Some years ago in a martial arts class during full contact sparring, I was paired with a highly skilled young lady. Much better than myself, she may have weighed 90 pounds soaking wet. She performed a perfect roundhouse kick, the problem? I was literally twice her size and stood my ground.
The kick struck, and she fell down. That whole immovable object thing.
Almost every day we read stories of elderly people defending themselves against home invaders, without a firearm most of these people are literally defenseless. A broken bone or serious bruise may be fatal to them because of blood clots, and a general inability to heal. That gun is their only viable defense.
As a former law enforcement officer, I encourage everyone who is able and legal to possess and carry a defensive handgun as much as possible.
Should there be gun control laws?
Yes, but not the ones considered by the gun grabbers.
Felons should not be able to possess.
Those who are mentally a danger to themselves and others should not be able to possess. This means you are locked up because you are suicidal, are seeing dragons crawling out of the walls, or like the Aurora and Sandy Hook shooters are on heavy psychotropic drugs, no guns. A little depression or PTSD, big deal.
That’s basically it.December 14, 2014 at 5:57 pm #31962
Another good one, Selco.
I have followed your weapons advice, and much of Whirli’s too. Great resources! I just need a companion AK, maybe a Draco to round out the set
Like they say, the best antidote to a bad guy with a gun, is a Good Guy with a Gun
"ROGUE ELECTRICIAN" Hoping to be around to re-energize the New World.....
Cogito, ergo armatus sumDecember 14, 2014 at 6:06 pm #31963
Gun control is population control.December 14, 2014 at 6:45 pm #31969
we all know its just a government scam . We all know it makes things worse , look at Russia , they have strict gun control , and their violent crime rate is 3 times what it is in the US .December 14, 2014 at 11:21 pm #31984
We have 100’s of laws against drugs so has it stopped drugs from coming into this country? NO!! So if they stopped selling guns in the U. S. will it stop criminals from buying guns? NO! The new crime will be to bring in some guns with the drugs so they can be sold on the street.
Then there is the government with would love to control us all. No 2nd Amendment = population control.
The defensive of your family against criminals is just one part of the reason we have a God given right to own a gun. The second is to defend against a tyrant government that wants to take the freedoms and liberties that where given to all of us since we were born by God. The founding fathers knew this very well.December 15, 2014 at 12:01 am #31987
Some people recommend martial arts, and these can be great but a disparity of size, age, and more make this unworkable.
Here is footage of O’Sensei, Morihei Ueshiba. He founded the art of Aikido, which I studied and was made mainstream by Steven Segal. For his sparring partners, he would only use 9th or 10th dan practitioners and would often oppose them while kneeling. His last public demonstration was in 1967, at the age of 83. On his deathbed a couple years later, he reportedly threw his most advanced student to the floor as a final lesson..
This footage might be a little zenny for some folks, but O’Sensei is almost 80 in this footage. If anyone thinks these guys aren’t trying, then you don’t know what you’re talking about, nor have you ever studied Aikido.
My father gave me a book of his on Judo. In it, the story is retold about a match that took place during the 1950’s in Japan. The Japanese Judo Champion vs an American Wrestling Champion. The American stood quite a bit taller than the Japanese master, and weighed almost 100 pounds more than him. The match ended in a draw.
It takes 5 years of study just to earn your 1st dan black belt in Aikido. And you never consider yourself a master – the black belt only means you are a serious student. As far as the whole immoveable object thing, when I achieved 2nd dan (as far as I ever went), we had some visitors, to include one of those 90lb females. “No contest”, I thought. I ended up face down, sucking chalk dust off the mat thanks to the humiliating lesson she taught me. My own hubris defeated me before I even started…
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1December 15, 2014 at 12:03 am #31988
I agree with everything whirlibird said.
I think there is a pretty strong case to be made that more gun control results in more gun crime, mainly because criminals know that the odds are in their favor that their victims won’t be armed.
Sadly, political correctness prohibits society having an honest discussion on the relationship of guns and crime. There is something like 100,000,000 gun owners in America but only a very tiny fraction ever commit a crime using a gun. The majority of gun crimes are committed by urban black and Mexican/Central American/South American gang members, usually drug related. Gun control folks in MA and NY do not like VT because whereas they have draconian gun laws, VT has virtually no gun laws. You do not need a license to carry open or concealed in VT. At age 16 you can buy handguns without parental permission. You can possess a handgun under age 16 with parental permission. I don’t think there are any age restrictions on long guns. VT is a liberal “blue” State and so is very much an anomaly in the US in that gun-friendly laws are typically associated with conservative “red” States. What are the results in VT? With Maine, VT is more or less tied for the lowest per capita violent crime rate in the country. We average about 10 homicides a year. The pro-gun lobbies might say that’s because most households in VT have guns. Perhaps, but the reality is likely closer to the fact that we don’t have any large cities (biggest is Burlington at 42,000 people) and that we have virtually no diversity (roughly ties with Maine for being the least diverse State in the US. Just as in every other State, there are plenty of drugs in VT, but we lack the urban gangs that shoot each other up on a daily basis. That’s the key difference. Political correctness doesn’t let us talk about that however when the official answer has to be that we need more gun control. The reality is that little VT is left out of all the national gun control discussions because we represent an inconvenient truth. It is a rare day that anything happens here that makes national news and so we’re easy to ignore. Most Americans probably couldn’t find us on a map let alone care about the reality of guns in VT.December 15, 2014 at 12:07 am #31990
My last comment was not meant to hijack the thread. When I read Whirl say “The whole immoveable object thing”, I just said to myself “As soon as someone says that, that’s usually when you get your a$$ handed to you…”
Back on subject now…
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1December 15, 2014 at 12:27 am #31991
What I have a problem with:
Should there be gun control laws?
Yes, but not the ones considered by the gun grabbers.
Oh? So, only gun control laws that you personally agree with. Okay. Because since before NFA34, there were no federal gun control laws… at all.
Felons should not be able to possess.
Used to be in this country, long before any of us were alive, if a fellow got crossways with the law and went to prison, when he was released, he was considered ‘square with the house’. His debt to society paid in full... His rights that were understandably suspended while he was in the Stoney Lonesome were restored in full. Period. End of story.
Federal prosecutors get felony convictions not based on law anymore, but on violations of regulations. Dig a hole in the wrong spot, and you might end up being convicted of a felony because the EPA recently declared your area some “wetland” or other… or perhaps it has some “endangered” bug or weed that nobody ever heard of…
Then there’s the whole laughable “war on drugs”…. not going to argue that it’s a racket, designed to make certain people very, very rich and increase the power of a select few at the expense of the many…. I’m just going to point out how equally laughable it is to throw someone in prison for years because they happened to have some plant or other, or decided as an adult to consume a particular substance…
The Framers would be rolling in their graves knowing we strip people of their rights – permanently – over such things as growing what George Washington grew on his own farm…
If a person cannot be trusted with all their rights outside of prison, if they are that dangerous, then I suggest we not release them from prison… ever.
Those who are mentally a danger to themselves and others should not be able to possess.
Uh huh… and just who gets to decide what constitutes a mental illness serious enough to revoke someone’s rights? To the point where they’re thrown in a mental institution?
This means you are locked up because you are suicidal.
Being suicidal is not being mentally ill. A person who has terminal cancer or perhaps the human version of Mad Cow… that is a horrifying way to die. If they want to off themselves, then that should be their choice and not you – nor anyone else – gets to make a judgement call on it…
…or like the Aurora and Sandy Hook shooters are on heavy psychotropic drugs, no guns.
So, to play devil’s advocate here…. if someone is on a drug that might – not with 100% certainty, or even “most of the time”, but might – cause them to have a psychotic break, do we really need to have laws on the books for that? Seriously? It says right on the bottle for most of that stuff that there might be some serious side effects. Mostly for kids and young adults. If a parent gives their kids that stuff and lets them have access to not only the gun cabinet, but any sharp or pointy object, then they have no earthly business being a parent.
People who are generally opposed to violence also usually have no problem petitioning the Government to use force in their stead, up to and including shooting someone to death. Which is my problem with the “there aughta be a law!” crowd…
A little depression or PTSD, big deal.
Nice of you to exclude yourself (and me) from that list…. others wouldn’t be so kind…
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1December 15, 2014 at 12:56 am #31993
Gun control isn’t about guns, nor about “controlling” them…
It’s about POWER – who controls it and, through it, controls YOU.
The Social Marxists know the statistics. Probably better than you and I put together. They just don’t care what the statistics say… the only thing they care about is their own personal power. Keeping it and increasing it.
They know that guns are a tangible manifestation of Power. And, whoever controls the most guns, controls the most power. They won’t have true, complete power unless and until you, me, and everyone else in this country is disarmed. Period. So long as we retain firearms, then we retain the means to oppose them in the only real way that matters…
If you don’t believe that, go up to any random house, unarmed, and try to forcefully make the owner give you the contents of his wallet. I double dog dare you. If you try that – and live to tell the tale – please let us know the details.
The statists – usually the “There aughta be a law!” crowd – are usually dupes. The Useful Idiots. They are the ones the Social Marxists are going for when some tragedy happens. They – the Social Marxists – already have bills pre-written, with only the details of the tragedy left out. They sit and languish, waiting and praying for someone to do something heinous and stupid so they can be Johnny-On-The-Spot with their New-And-Improved Bill that will make all future (fill in the blanks) impossible… .which is a lie, but they literally use the bodies of the dead in order to make political mileage… off of outrage. Cue the “THERE AUGHTA BE A LAW!” people…
The Social Marxists learned the lessons taught by their predecessors – the Fabian Socialists – very well. They wrap their arguments up in neat little lies, like “common sense” legislation, or “reasonable” or “it’s for the chiiiiiilllldren”…. which automatically paints the opposition into a blind corner. Opposing them means you are, by default, “unreasonable” don’t care about children and don’t have any common sense… which is the Big Lie.
What they are doing is called “incrementalism”…. eating the elephant, one bite at a time…
Sure, today it might be “Oh, we only want to take away guns from the mentally ill… not YOU personally.”…. okay, but let’s look at who gets to define mental illness. Who controls that narrative? What metric are they using? Will the things covered under “mental illness” stay the same as today?
You can bet it won’t. What happens if some rich Social Marxists get together and fund some super-leftist psychologists or psychiatrists (you think they could find any of those laying around? Bueller?) to come up with some “study” that says PREPPING DEMONSTRATES A PROPENSITY FOR PARANOID DELUSIONS AND A PROFOUND DISTRUST OF AUTHORITY. Your neighbor calls the BATFE or worse – Homeland – because she knows you have some of those evil, icky guns and that you’re a self-declared “prepper”…. bye bye freedom, bye bye guns, bye bye life…
I am morally opposed to all gun control. Not because I’m an agent of chaos or I like seeing dead kids on TV or anything like that… because I know that once the camel’s nose is under the tent, it absolutely will not stop until one side, or the other, is dead.
NB: The IIA in America isn’t about self defense, or target shooting, or hunting, or the Olympics… those are all nice side effects of the IIA. But they are NOT why it was written.
The IIA was written so that in the event a tyrannical government ever arose in this country, that we would stand a fighting chance against it. Period. It is the ultimate firewall against Tyranny and for Liberty… so that we could oppose Tyrannical force with Righteous force…
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1December 15, 2014 at 2:54 am #32020
I have carried most of my life. Some of that time was before Concealed Carry Permits. Being that I worked in remote areas in retail I always had a feeling I would rather be in jail for illegally carrying a gun instead of being in a coffin. I now live in a very rural area and 15 minutes away from the nearest law enforcement.
I have reasons for watching over my shoulder and consider carrying a weapon as being a prudent thing to do.
RobinDecember 15, 2014 at 2:55 am #32021
The first thing that ‘gun coontrol’ promoters try and implement is gun registration.
However, criminals do not register their guns, simple as that. The only people who register their guns are the most law abiding amongst the population who generally don’t commit crimes anyway. So what does gun registration actually accomplish?
The answer to that comes straight from the mouth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin when he said, “A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”
The ‘bourgeoisie’ means the ‘middle class’. We know what happened after that with the terror of the police state and millions dead in work camps.December 15, 2014 at 3:35 am #32025
It’s all about power and control… of you and yours. With the Endgame being mass disarmament (except for the Elites, their goons and enforcers and certain folks with pockets deep enough to influence the Elites).
Political power grows from the barrel of a rifle. Whoever has the rifles, has the power. Once you are disarmed, you are a slave. Actually, worse than a slave. You are a cow to be milked and then discarded when you are of no more use…
Even the ancient Romans knew that an armed man was a free man. An unarmed man was a slave.
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1December 15, 2014 at 3:53 am #32029
In Massachusetts, they already maintain a registry of all guns, including private transfers. I’m sure there are old guns that people have that pre-date the registry plus of course the illegally owned guns but most are in the registry at this point. In addition, every time a gun license holder moves, they must notify the local police of the town they are leaving, the local police of the town they are going to, and the State. Even if you move within a town, you have to notify the local police and the State. I had to notify the local police and the State when I moved to Vermont. Fortunately VT doesn’t do any of that stuff so there wouldn’t have been anyone up here looking for my records. Some of my gun owner friends in MA look wistfully at me up here. This is why my son will be moving to VT too. There are many common handguns that cannot be sold or owned in MA. The State maintains an approved list, the State Attorney General being the person who grants approvals. MA has a very low rate of gun ownership.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.