Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 72. (Read 450482 times)

Thanks to gun control, all our 'ordinary people' are left with are torches and hayforks to defend themselves. I think that is laughable because when protecting ones property for example, a good shot of hail in the buttocks serves more than scaring away 1 intruder. They tend to stay away after.

I'm not an American, I can't say anything about Gun Control.
But as a European I'm glad to come from a country where you can not just buy shotguns.
Also in our country there are many idiots. Hard to imagine, if all had guns  
With the rule here in my country I feel safer.

 i think the use of guns have been abused in many countries especially in the US. It has become very easy to get a license or even purchase it in our local stores. you walk in the streets these days and you come across a young man holding a gun at you . I think Guns must be really controlled to avoid the issues we hear each day .

Now such a situation in the world and even in my own country because of trouble with one of the regions, and more because of the hostile actions of other countries, you want to feel protected. One shotgun in the house is really small, and I do not say anything about the gun. We need to legalize arms.

Since Government isn't trustworthy enough to monitor private gun sales and purchases, why do you think that they want to prevent crimes and hostilities?

Get Government out of the picture, train all the people in using guns, and the people will get rid of the criminals. After all, government isn't doing it. And often Government is the criminals, themselves.

i think gun create to use in self deffence but more people use it to kill some people to have money. 

Buyers that purchase firearms through private sales in the U.S. don't have to pass a background check before obtaining possession of the weapon. This includes sales to criminals, felons, and people with a history of severe mental illness. This should be monitored by the governement to prevent crimes and hostilities in using firearms.

I guess the biggest reason I would choose against the "warning shot" is that I don't see myself in a position where I would feel the need to risk going outside to "face" the threat. Flood lights should take care of all but the most determined invaders (human) and against those I would prefer to have the tactical advantage of knowing their location without them knowing mine.

Also, I hate to have to make self-defense decisions based on laws, but in some states (from what little I've read) it's actually illegal to fire a "warning shot". There is nothing more ridiculous than someone being charged for defending themselves.

Obviously, this is something that depends on the situation and each individual must make these choices on their own.

I agree with all but one thing above, and especially getting professional instruction (though I am remiss in doing so myself.)  I would add that practicing regularly is a good idea and here again I fall somewhat flat.  When we do the next round of training on the 9mm I'll bring along my shotgun and 357 and brush up for my own good.  For a number of years it was hell to find 357 mag ammo, but when it become available again I stocked up.

In my rural area almost everyone has firearms and as a consequence almost all proficient home invaders ply their trade only when they believe that nobody is around.  Firing a warning shot from any gun will dispel that misconception, and a shotgun is easy for the semi-trained ear to recognize.  And again, many criminals have a special fear of the homeowner+shotguns combination.  Even when jacked on meth I suspect.

BADecker is giving such poor advice in this thread that I have to wonder if he has ever been in contact with a shotgun, much less fired one.

Bird shot for home defense. No, you do not use a less than lethal threat when your life, and the life of your family, could be on the line.

Firing to scare off intruders. You like hearing damage for no reason?

Sawed off barrel? No. Barrels on "tactical" shotguns are well suited for their purpose. Not to mention the legality. Ever hear of Ruby Ridge?

Pistol grip? Hell no. The loss of proper sight picture and control of the weapon turns a fantastic home defense weapon into a piece of garbage.

I advise anyone who is serious about defending themselves to ignore everything he's said related to shotguns. Also, don't take my word for it. Take a class (or several) with trained instructors who have extensive knowledge about these things.

They may have jumped him while he was fast asleep.  I don't remember the exact details.  A dog and/or a good surveillance system are, in my opinion, as or more important than a gun.

As for packing a gun around at all times, no thanks.  The cost/benefit is certainly not there for me.  Once in a while I will carry but only when the bears are around in number or when I am specifically investigating suspicious conditions such as a car spending to much time driving on the county road which goes through my property at 2:30am.

Got lucky with the wardrobe. In any case, the weapon must be at home every person. If the gun you need for self defense once in your lifetime, you need to wear it every day. After all, you don't know what day it will happen.

In a practical sense, sawing off a shotgun the wrong way can and has given the state all of the authorization they need to blow your wife's head off.  I keep firearms exactly to avoid such unpleasant events.

There may be a time when the insults against 'our liberty' justifies a fight, but it won't be a winning strategy to whine incandescently and harass people who are for the most part just trying to do their job and pay the bills.  In the mean time I find the 'Sovereign Citizens' most useful for a laugh in the 'owned' vids on youtube.

This is actually kind of a shame.  I'll bet that some of these SC folks are actually on to some things buried deep under their mountain of bullshit.  If only they could come up with a more effective way of communicating.  Oh well.

Legal counts. The Second Amendment says "no infringement."

When you stand as a man in court, with your claim filed inside their complaint against you, you will beat them. A claim trumps a complaint. If it is Government that is the plaintiff, they will not be able to legally have any man or woman get on the stand to oppose you.

See:
143 - Karl Lenz - Karl's Lawsuit; Claim/Complaint; Witnesses; Summary Judgment; Conusance [Consuance; sp.]; etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP8zHINJGxc

I'd point out that there is a big usability difference between a bird gun and a (legal length) defensive shotgun.  The first shotgun I bought was an ancient Browning semi-auto.  It was just something I saw in a mom-n-pop gunshop for what I considered to be cheap so I bought it.  Later I bought a few el-cheapo Chinese shotguns.  The longer gun is genuinely cumbersome.  The Chinese ones are vastly better in this regard and reasonably usable.  The M16 was the same.

After watching footage of how home invasion gunfights tend to play out naturally, I would put a lot more emphasis on how many rounds are available between re-loads.  This argues against a shotgun even though the hit probability and stopping power can be somewhat better in some situations.  In terms of capacity the assault style carbine has the upper hand.

I was surprised at how difficult it was to load the magazine of the 9mm I mentioned.  I could re-fuel my 357 revolver more quickly and the shotgun beats both.  (I do keep one of those elastic butt-stock cartridge holders on my shotguns.)  I would say that it is good practice to have a couple of spare magazines to put in one's pocket when grabbing the automatic.

BTW, the only reason I have several shotguns is that my property is somewhat expansive and if I met problems on one end of it it would be impractical to go to my house to retrieve the shotgun there.

One of the home invasion stories I ran across was three home invaders overpowered a home owner, chocked him out (or thought they had), and threw him in his closet.  They didn't check the closet first and it turned out that this is where he stored his guns.  The result was bad for the criminals.

Of course, you would want a pistol grip on it. But if you do this, practice at the shooting range, first, with only one shell in the thing. There is a lot of kick in a shotgun. Don't allow it to break your wrist by not being ready for the kick.

The gun is a versatile weapon, a shotgun but more impressive. Of course the gun with its barrel is inconvenient, but there is a shotgun with a short barrel.

A shotgun with a short barrel and bird shot, is very suited. The simple blast noise is enough to scare off bad people. But spread-out bird shot won't kill them, generally. Most people don't want to kill if they don't have to... even for their own protection. Yet, at really close range, the short-barrel shotgun will kill... fast and easy.

I agree with you, but the M16 is not very suitable for use in a confined space. It is very long and will be difficult to aim. It seems to me that for home defense is more suitable for 45 ACP M1911 pistol. The shotgun is less suited. As we see in the video below.

My point, exactly. Pay off a professional so that he declares an average person to have a mental disorder, but a politician in a similar mental state to not have it, and bye-bye goes gun freedom.