Home defense... frits is right, a baseball bat and youre set.
To all Gun lovers! - Page 3
Blogs > Talith |
Cloud
Sexico5880 Posts
Home defense... frits is right, a baseball bat and youre set. | ||
Talith
United States1102 Posts
On May 26 2009 01:50 Frits wrote: You do not need a firearm to protect your home (obviously implied in the first sentence), the second sentence refers to a time/situation when a gun would actually be useful to defend your home. Not to turn this into some anti-gun thread but getting a gun for protection is absolutely laughable without proper training. If you like shooting guns, that's fine. I actually have a native american living with me... lol? And I also stated I enjoyed shooting, thus the statement about skeeting. Thanks for reading the opening thread! :D | ||
Talith
United States1102 Posts
| ||
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
| ||
2nd1rst
United States40 Posts
On May 26 2009 01:50 Frits wrote: You do not need a firearm to protect your home (obviously implied in the first sentence), the second sentence refers to a time/situation when a gun would actually be useful to defend your home. Not to turn this into some anti-gun thread but getting a gun for protection is absolutely laughable without proper training. If you like shooting guns, that's fine. I don't know what it is like in the Netherlands , but in the US there are around half a million armed robberies a year and around 14% of those are in homes. Sure, that is a small percentage of the total population but to say that there is no need to have a firearm to protect your home is a little ridiculous. It is better to have a gun and not need it, than to not have it and need it. Edit- Op also mentions he lives in the "Kidnapping capital of the US." I do agree that you should try to find some basic training at your local range or something like that if you are going to buy a firearm. | ||
Cloud
Sexico5880 Posts
On May 26 2009 02:23 Talith wrote: Oh and with a bat I have to be close to them, and with a gun I don't. Logic states that it would be much easier to defend ones home if one does not have to get within striking range of the intruder, am I right? Certainly, then you might then go farther than that and conclude that its safer to not even see the intruder so you set up mines. | ||
Talith
United States1102 Posts
On May 26 2009 02:37 Cloud wrote: Certainly, then you might then go farther than that and conclude that its safer to not even see the intruder so you set up mines. What, and get zealot bombed?! No thank you! ![]() 1,000 POST! HOOORAYYY! ![]() | ||
TS-Rupbar
Sweden1089 Posts
| ||
![]()
micronesia
United States24579 Posts
On May 26 2009 06:59 TS-Rupbar wrote: I'd rather let someone steal stuff than shoot them. You are assuming that the two possibilities are 1) They see you, they laugh, they take stuff, they run out. 2) They see you, they see you have a gun, you shoot them. It's a lot more complicated than that. But you definitely can make the case that you don't want to get into some kind of firefight. | ||
Talith
United States1102 Posts
On May 26 2009 06:59 TS-Rupbar wrote: I'd rather let someone steal stuff than shoot them. I rather would as well, that's what insurance is for, but if they have a weapon and about to hurt a family member I'd have no problem protecting them via shooting. This will 99% never happen and I would much rather call the police or scare them out of the house but at least it would be there for a last resort. | ||
2nd1rst
United States40 Posts
On May 26 2009 06:59 TS-Rupbar wrote: I'd rather let someone steal stuff than shoot them. Buying a gun doesn't mean you want to shoot people. Having a gun gives you an upper hand over the intruder so you can get rid of him. There are many instances were people have scared off robbers just by racking their shotgun. | ||
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
poilord
Germany3252 Posts
| ||
![]()
micronesia
United States24579 Posts
On May 27 2009 00:58 poilord wrote: Buying guns for home protection, how very 18th century :D Lots of things that we do today are very 18th century. | ||
| ||