Our Shoot First Law

[chrisj]

I don't know about any other states, but apparently in Kentucky where I live you can legally shoot someone who is either messing around with your car or house. Of course you would have to catch them in the act, but this law has been tested here a couple of times, I think.

Imagine! You catch someone trying to break into your car, then just pop 'em. Or you could invite your ex over and tell her/him there's a special gift inside your car for them. They go pulling on the door handle and POOF! They're done!

That's a little extreme, but believe me, I am armed and ready to shoot the moment there's some shit going on 'round my still. :laugh:

[silver_echo]

i have been told that montana has a "make my day" law... if someone is found on your property, unannounced, you would be within your rights as a landowner to shoot him...

if this is incorrect, please note that my statement started with "i have been told"

[Dragracer]

Here in Fl, we have the "Stand Your Ground" law. You no longer have to retreat if threatened. Also the "Castle Doctrine" allows us to protect our home and property. I would have to feel threatened before shooting someone just because he's on my property. Same with my car. I can repair or replace it. Not really worth killing someone over. But if I find someone in my home, the deals off!:slice:

[chrisj]

^ The way I look at it, Dragracer, is that if someone is fooling around with my car, they are asking for anything. I don't know what I would do, but I know I would shoot. It depends on whether or not they were just "trying" to get in (warning shot over head) or had done damage (me pissed off, shooting person). LOL!

[tomato]

ahhhhhhhhh... Lucky Luke!! The man who shoots faster than his own shadow! :laugh:

[chrisj]

I am no cowboy! I live in South Jesus where we brew our homemade moonshine, and sit cleaning our guns until the Revenuers show up. Then we are cowboys! LOL!

[MadMax]

It's called Castle Doctrine and 31 states have it, and despite what the anti-gun coalition wants you to believe, it is not a "shoot first and ask questions later" law. It gives law-abiding citizens the right to defend themselves, their families and their property without any requirement to retreat. Basically, it is letting the criminals know they could pay with their lives when they try to hurt or rob someone. We've had it for years and despite what the Brady Bunch want you to believe, the result hasn't been a great increase in shootings. Surprisingly enough, it is a big deterrent for the above-mentioned reasons...

[Black Yaris]

we have the same thing here in Ohio...

currently there is a .45 on my side.... shorty shotgun about 10 steps away.... 380 in the wife's night stand.... and AR15 on my side of the bed.... all loaded, handguns are cocked and one in the hole

[Palmer812]

I envy you guys. Here in North Carolina things are different.

[tomato]

Really? I think even here in California, we have the right to shoot if you enter the home. Outside is a different story, though.

[sqcomp]

As I understand the castle doctrine, it applies to an immediate threat IN your home. Just because you've got some yahoo prowling around your yard doesn't give you the right to kill him...

...that's why I'd unlock the door and wait 'till the eFr steps foot inside the door. Two shots. Bang! "Stop or I'll shoot!" Bang! Just to make sure I popped his mellon.

...now, how to set up one of my favorite .308 platforms at the front door...

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/Army%20Experience/th_JohnMini1.jpg (http://s720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/Army%20Experience/?action=view&current=JohnMini1.mp4)

(testing for function and familiarity) - the 5th SF group are a great bunch of hooligans! I'd follow them to the gates of hell and back.

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/CIMG1252.jpg

^the 5th's ISOF "off duty" shirts. It'd prolly look bad if you were wearing one of these after popping someone breaking into your home.

[djct_watt]

Really? I think even here in California, we have the right to shoot if you enter the home. Outside is a different story, though.

I thought the California law was that you could only shoot (in your home) under threat of imminent harm. But I thought that if they just want to take your stuff, you have no right to fire? I'm not to sure if I'm right or wrong on this one though. . .

[detroiter]

As far as I understand, here in Michigan we have the Castle Doctrine but it's more hastle than it's really worth. Almost like a too good to be true scenario. The criminal must be inside your home and you must have probable reason and cause that you or your families life is threatened. And even after the event...the asshole culprit is going to sue you and probably win because even though he's the one that broke in your home, he now is disabled for life, etc, etc.

I love this country but I hate catch 22 bs things that people get away with due to the legal system.

[chrisj]

Well, that law about the criminal being inside the house is almost everywhere. I am talking about outside your door and outside your car in your driveway. That's what we have here. Lots different...and I like it!

[tonbon]

ahh yeeesss.
the "stand your ground" laws state that you no longer have "duty to retreat".
If you are leagalley allowed to be somewhere, you may "stand your ground" and defend yourself.
In NC (for example), you are suppossed to attempt to retreat and avoid the "conflict". if the "stand your ground" laws pass, you no longer need to retreat.
the castle doctrine pertains to while you are in your house on on your property. in many cases, being in your car or a hotel room is included.
neither of these are "shoot first" laws.

[chrisj]

neither of these are "shoot first" laws.

Oh, we just shoot first anyway... :laugh:

[TLyttle]

Really, you guys are amazing. SHOOT someone? For ANY reason? Man, it makes me glad I live in Canada. We just beat back the NRA's attempt to Americanise our gun laws. The only handguns in Canada are the ones illegally imported from the US, and that is a good thing. We don't need guns to protect ourselves here, we educate our kids that killing people is wrong, wrong, wrong.

[chrisj]

^ I would love to live in Canada. Hell, I'm retired and can live wherever I want! But I can't move there. They have some weird laws about immigrants these days. I would gladly leave my guns at home if I could come there and live. I remember watching a show on TV and it was talking about the extreme difference between Detroit and Windsor right across the river. Light years.

[sqcomp]

I'll tell you what, if someone is willing to bring me or my family harm, whether that be in my home or car...

Be prepared to meet your maker. I don't need a gun. I will be happy to be judged by twelve instead of carried by six.

[Sir A.Y. Atoyot]

Golly gee, what a bunch of tough guys!

For myself, I would cheerfully watch someone shred my Yaris into tiny pieces rather than have that person's life on my conscience.

[detroiter]

I live 20 minutes from the Detroit-Windsor border. I spend quite alot of time in Windsor and it truely is like what you say ChrisJ, a massive difference, seperated literally
by a river.

I always have admired and admittingly a bit jealous when I look at Windsor from the Detroit side, how nice and clean it is over there. And people are ACTIVE! Tons of people running along the waterfront and enjoying hanging out eating lunch, etc.

When I'm in Windsor and look at Detroit, it's like a ghost town except for the homeless that live in Hart Plaza. The city looks like a hell hole, aftermath of a mass exodus.


Detroit is a whole another world though compared to Windsor or Ontario, criminally speaking. I hate talking about Detroit in negative light because their truely is alot of nice things in and around the metro area, but alot of the city itself should be nuked off the map.

In a place like Detroit, thank God that gun and weapon laws are allowed. Because you know what happens when they take away weapons from the people? Criminals don't play by the rules, so who do you think still does have weapons? If guns and weapons were banned here, criminals would run rampant because they know 9 out of 10 people don't have a single thing to fight back with. I myself carry a knife on me and would never, ever use it to hurt someone or intimidate them with it. But it's there incase I need it, God forbid. People can do what they want but I'd rather be safe than sorry.


If I recall correctly, some places like Texas even have open carry laws. Meaning, you'll see people walking down the street
or in a store with a revolver/pistol on their hips or shoulder in plain sight. That would kind of weird me out because Michigan
doesn't have that, just CCW types of laws.

[detroiter]

Beer and Hockey are a part of Canadian heritage, it's greatly respected
in Michigan :D lol (seriously though, I don't drink but you guys have REAL beer, not watered down crap)

Really though, are all weapons banned in Canada like swords, knives, etc
or is it just handguns?

One law that I really disagree with here is the ban on gravity weapons ( like butterfly
knives for instance). A one knife can do just as much damage as any other, but that
one gets banned just because it "looks bad" and is "intimidating". In all honesty, they are much safer to use/carry than a conventional one because the blade locks into the handle, greatly lessening the chance of it opening in your pocket and potentionally making you walk a bit funny after you stab yourself lol.

I believe they were legal for about 4 years back in the early to mid 80's, guess they were imported by the hoards but
then the ban was back up. You can still get your hands on butterfly knives but the laws are strange. Something along
the lines of the knives cannot be shipped by regular mail and they cannot be imported while being completely built.
So some people get around it by ordering and importing seperate parts like the blades, handles, etc and then
put it all together when it gets here. Or theirs some companies here that make them themselves.

I myself would love to get my hands on a true balisong from the Phillipines. One handcrafted from water
caribou horn or some guava/kamagong inlays.



If you want crazy weapons restriction laws, all you have to do is take a look at the UK. I think I'm more scared of
being there than I would anywhere else. I can't even recall all of the new stories about random stabbings for no
reason, just someone walking down the street behind someone and then shanking them then booking it out of there.
That happens commonly as far as I know, very scary!

[why?]

I'll tell you what, if someone is willing to bring me or my family harm, whether that be in my home or car...

Be prepared to meet your maker. I don't need a gun. I will be happy to be judged by twelve instead of carried by six.

I agree completely.
Golly gee, what a bunch of tough guys!

For myself, I would cheerfully watch someone shred my Yaris into tiny pieces rather than have that person's life on my conscience.

I dare you to tell all the world you are a pacifist by posting a huge sign in your front lawn.
I live 20 minutes from the Detroit-Windsor border. I spend quite alot of time in Windsor and it truely is like what you say ChrisJ, a massive difference, seperated literally
by a river.

I always have admired and admittingly a bit jealous when I look at Windsor from the Detroit side, how nice and clean it is over there. And people are ACTIVE! Tons of people running along the waterfront and enjoying hanging out eating lunch, etc.

When I'm in Windsor and look at Detroit, it's like a ghost town except for the homeless that live in Hart Plaza. The city looks like a hell hole, aftermath of a mass exodus.


Detroit is a whole another world though compared to Windsor or Ontario, criminally speaking. I hate talking about Detroit in negative light because their truely is alot of nice things in and around the metro area, but alot of the city itself should be nuked off the map.

In a place like Detroit, thank God that gun and weapon laws are allowed. Because you know what happens when they take away weapons from the people? Criminals don't play by the rules, so who do you think still does have weapons? If guns and weapons were banned here, criminals would run rampant because they know 9 out of 10 people don't have a single thing to fight back with. I myself carry a knife on me and would never, ever use it to hurt someone or intimidate them with it. But it's there incase I need it, God forbid. People can do what they want but I'd rather be safe than sorry.


If I recall correctly, some places like Texas even have open carry laws. Meaning, you'll see people walking down the street
or in a store with a revolver/pistol on their hips or shoulder in plain sight. That would kind of weird me out because Michigan
doesn't have that, just CCW types of laws.

Arizona is the only state where true open carry of pretty much anything is legal, quite a few other states allow holster carrying of handguns, which is really very different than open carry.

[Sir A.Y. Atoyot]

........I dare you to tell all the world you are a pacifist by posting a huge sign in your front lawn.........

Who said anything about pacifism? A car is just a thing. I wouldn't kill a fellow human simply to protect a thing. If someone were attacking me or my family, though, I'd do what I could to defend us.

[.Kevin.]

One rule- you dont fuck with a mans car.

[big lo]

As I understand the castle doctrine, it applies to an immediate threat IN your home. Just because you've got some yahoo prowling around your yard doesn't give you the right to kill him...

...that's why I'd unlock the door and wait 'till the eFr steps foot inside the door. Two shots. Bang! "Stop or I'll shoot!" Bang! Just to make sure I popped his mellon.

...now, how to set up one of my favorite .308 platforms at the front door...

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/Army%20Experience/th_JohnMini1.jpg (http://s720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/Army%20Experience/?action=view&current=JohnMini1.mp4)

(testing for function and familiarity) - the 5th SF group are a great bunch of hooligans! I'd follow them to the gates of hell and back.

http://i720.photobucket.com/albums/ww203/sqcomp/CIMG1252.jpg

^the 5th's ISOF "off duty" shirts. It'd prolly look bad if you were wearing one of these after popping someone breaking into your home.

Nuff respect to you brother!!!:headbang::coolpics:

[why?]

Who said anything about pacifism? A car is just a thing. I wouldn't kill a fellow human simply to protect a thing. If someone were attacking me or my family, though, I'd do what I could to defend us.

sorry but I just don't buy that. Sitting and watching someone destroy your property is pacifism. It is sad. I'd rather die defending my property then sit and watch someone destroy it. As far as I am concerned once a person starts committing crimes they stop qualifying as a human, and become an animal to be slaughtered.

[detroiter]

It's people that sit back and don't do anything that encourage criminals to more often try taking advantage of people.

Similar to governments that try to take advantage of it's people. You give them an inch, they'll take a foot.

Best way I can summerize is in the example of, when we were little kids, we all did something that we shouldn't have. And we did it many times, until we got caught and got our butts spanked. We didn't do it ever again because we knew what would happen.

[Black Yaris]

Really, you guys are amazing. SHOOT someone? For ANY reason? Man, it makes me glad I live in Canada. We just beat back the NRA's attempt to Americanise our gun laws. The only handguns in Canada are the ones illegally imported from the US, and that is a good thing. We don't need guns to protect ourselves here, we educate our kids that killing people is wrong, wrong, wrong.

So when one of those illegal guns from the US walks though your front door in the hand of a criminal that wants to rob, rape and/or kill, what is your defense? You would be fucked. Do I wish to shoot someone? Never, but if I were in fear for my life or my wife's I would not hesitate to fire. Killing for the sake of killing is wrong, but killing in defense to a threat to your life is self defense.

[Altitude]

As far as I am concerned once a person starts committing crimes they stop qualifying as a human, and become an animal to be slaughtered.

Surely this is a relative stance! I mean, should a child who steals a pack of gum be considered an animal fit to be slaughtered?

It's one thing to beat the living crap out of someone messing with your stuff, it's entirely different to kill someone for it. Stuff can be replaced, that's why you insure your valuables.

I just don't think it's reasonable to use deadly force unless your life/safety is directly threatened.

There was a situation that happened in my town earlier this year where some drunken student coming home one night actually went to the wrong house and tried to get in the back door. He was shot and killed by the home owner. Completely understandable as the homeowner had no idea who was trying to get in the back door, but it just goes to show that knee jerk reactions can sometimes have really sad outcomes.

[tomato]

I thought the California law was that you could only shoot (in your home) under threat of imminent harm. But I thought that if they just want to take your stuff, you have no right to fire? I'm not to sure if I'm right or wrong on this one though. . .

I believe you're right. Since I don't have a gun on the premises, I never really looked that up.

We had an antique gun around for a while but that doesn't count. I don't think the thing could fire if it wanted to.


I just don't think it's reasonable to use deadly force unless your life/safety is directly threatened.
.

+1

[MadMax]

There was a situation that happened in my town earlier this year where some drunken student coming home one night actually went to the wrong house and tried to get in the back door. He was shot and killed by the home owner. Completely understandable as the homeowner had no idea who was trying to get in the back door, but it just goes to show that knee jerk reactions can sometimes have really sad outcomes.

That's a good example, albeit a tragic one. Should the homeowner be expected to determine the intent of the intruder? To what point? Waking up to someone breaking down a door in the middle of the night is traumatic enough, expecting them to inquire as to the intent of the person doing it is not realistic. The ultimate fault lies with the drunken student, and there is nothing to say he didn't decide to commit a burglary or other nefarious activity in his intoxicated state...

As for our Canadian friends who believe the only firearms in their country are illegal ones brought in from the US, you really live in a dream world. Nearly 22% of Canadian households had at least one firearm, including 2.3% of households possessing a handgun; according to the RCMP (http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/index-eng.htm). Additionally, it has been estimated that as many as five million gun-owning Canadians have not registered their firearms (not that as of the 2006 census, Canada had a population of 31 million residents).

But violent crime has been on the decline in that country since 1993; but did you ever stop to consider that it might be all those unlicensed firearms deterring criminals as well?!?

Cheers! M2

[TLyttle]

Well, Black Yaris, I suppose that is a possibility alright. However, let me make a couple of points: Up here in Canada, we are taught that stuff belongs ot other people and that just because it is available does not mean it is free for the taking. Poor education and lousy courts make for people unable to learn this point.

Except for the firing range, I have only heard gunfire once here, and never where I lived before, Vancouver. Unlike the US, guns are frowned upon here, and the use of guns draws very heavy penalties. I have never felt the need to protect my stuff nor my family, never in my life as a Canadian. I wish I could say the same for the US: gunfire in LA was a nightly occurrence, weekly in rural Arizona! Why? Why is it necessary to use firearms, or even carry firearms? Who is responsible for these people who use them for nefarious purposes? Think about it for awhile, and you will find that you yourselves have built this scenario, and that is why it all stops at the US border. After you have thought long and hard, you will see that it is the education system, and the media, responsible for your ongoing paranoia. Why would anyone use Clint Eastwood or John Wayne as an icon for acceptable behaviour? No other ecivilised country has such a bizarre attitude towards such violence!

[chrisj]

^ Unfortunately there is a little cowboy in us all. Ingrained as we are kids with all those calming cop shows!

[detroiter]

Now I understand why it's always America first who protects everyone else...

[firebob]

Some of you’ll are lucky. In VA you have to let them make it in side your house and have to be “scared for you life” before you can shoot them.

From what I have been told it’s better to kill the person and not leave them living and injured.

[Black Yaris]

Well, Black Yaris, I suppose that is a possibility alright. However, let me make a couple of points: Up here in Canada, we are taught that stuff belongs ot other people and that just because it is available does not mean it is free for the taking. Poor education and lousy courts make for people unable to learn this point.

Except for the firing range, I have only heard gunfire once here, and never where I lived before, Vancouver. Unlike the US, guns are frowned upon here, and the use of guns draws very heavy penalties. I have never felt the need to protect my stuff nor my family, never in my life as a Canadian. I wish I could say the same for the US: gunfire in LA was a nightly occurrence, weekly in rural Arizona! Why? Why is it necessary to use firearms, or even carry firearms? Who is responsible for these people who use them for nefarious purposes? Think about it for awhile, and you will find that you yourselves have built this scenario, and that is why it all stops at the US border. After you have thought long and hard, you will see that it is the education system, and the media, responsible for your ongoing paranoia. Why would anyone use Clint Eastwood or John Wayne as an icon for acceptable behaviour? No other ecivilised country has such a bizarre attitude towards such violence!

Well, I see your POV... But it seams as we live in two different worlds. You may bash our education of what is wrong and what is right, but that is the world I live in. I do not live in a big city, but we have one of the highest unemployment rates in the county. People are desperate, and there are many layoffs in public safety. I have been robbed at gun point more than once, there are many home invasions, car jackings, muggings amongst other crimes of desperation here. My family is armed well in case, and I hope that day never comes. I never wish to take a life, but if it comes down to their life or mine, I will not hesitate.

You live in my world, I am sure you would change your mind.... and if I lived in yours, I am sure I would as well.

[TLyttle]

Point taken. Education is the biggest factor in the American attitude, but how tax money is spent is a close second. Sure, we have unemployment here, and sometimes desperate people as well. But, we have a safety net (sometimes called communism in the US), where we don't allow anyone to starve. We make sure that seniors do not have to work past 65 for lack of pensions. It isn't all beer and skittles, but we all survive without ever having to turn to a life of crime. We do this instead of spending huge amounts of tax dollars running wars to preserve a supply of cheap oil. I know that sounds like a cheap political shot, but really, one must have a close look at how other countries spend their money, and on who. I do wish we followed the European models more closely, but for now we are stuck with a Prime Minister who thinks Bush was on the right track, and we are poorer for it.

Lots of luck, Black Yaris. I think you understand why I live here, and not there...

[Black Yaris]

I fully understand why you live where you do, and I would gladly give up all my firearms for the peace of mind you have.
Can I do anything about the shitty decisions that have been made by leaders in my country? Not really, all I can do is vote for the candidate I feel would do the best job. I just live in this world they have created the best that I can.

[chrisj]

From what I have been told it’s better to kill the person and not leave them living and injured.

Right! And for anyone who isn't dead sure about aim, how about some target practice plunking cans on that next pretty day!

The last thing I want is for some gimpy-legged criminal to come sneaking around again. Best to just end it right then and there.

[DebbyM46227]

I'm single and live alone and I have a 9 mm Glock ready for any intruder. In fact, a policeman recently told me that if I catch someone trying to break in, shoot him and then drag him right inside the doorway and I'll be ok. And then call 911.

I wouldn't hesitate to shoot anyone with the intent to harm me OR my cats. Or maybe even my Yaris.

[detroiter]

America. The only country on Earth that other countries complain if it doesn't help them...and still complains if they do.

[Black Yaris]

Right! And for anyone who isn't dead sure about aim, how about some target practice plunking cans on that next pretty day!

The last thing I want is for some gimpy-legged criminal to come sneaking around again. Best to just end it right then and there.

actually, the reason they tell you to "shoot to kill" is... if you wound an intruder they can turn around and make you pay them for the rest of their life for the injury. That is what they teach in the CCW class atleast.

[Nexus1155]

My instructor also told me to atleast put 5 shots in his torso to atleast know he is down and out. The rules that apply here are that, you need to fear for your life or anothers life around you in order to discharge your firearm. Like if there was a robbery somewhere and you beleived you or someone else would be harmed you can use it.

The main reason I got my license, like some, was that if ever the case someone came and tried to harm my family/friends I want to be able to defend them by any means possible though I never want to take another persons life, it was their doing to begin with.

[chrisj]

I always liked the idea of a sawed-off shotgun. You don't even have to be really accurate with that sucker. :) Just aim in the general direction.

[Black Yaris]

I always liked the idea of a sawed-off shotgun. You don't even have to be really accurate with that sucker. :) Just aim in the general direction.

I have the shortest legal shotty for home protection. Mossberg 500 w/ 18.5 inch barrel, pistol grip no stock, 12gauge loaded with 00 buck

[MadMax]

No other civilised country has such a bizarre attitude towards such violence!

Eh? Every country that I know off has some form of organized defense which includes the use of weapons to protects its interests, even Canada (I do know you still have an armed forces because I am good friends of someone who is in it!).

So it's OK for country's to use violence to protect their interests and "property" but that's not the right of the common man?

If another country invaded Canada, it would respond with force, wouldn't it? Well, just consider Castle Doctrine to be a smaller version of that, I have the right to defend my interests and property from those who threaten it.

Hell, even the Swiss understand this, and they are bigger pacifists than the Canadians!

[detroiter]

Exactly, why buy jet fighters when you always have America to bail you out.

[chrisj]

After Pearl Harbor, Americans stopped being isolationists and started offering their services to anyone who was being bullied. This happened in Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia, the list goes on. I don't necessarily agree with it, but if we are going to help one country, we should also help another...when it's obvious what the "war" is really for, it makes a country in need wonder what they have to offer, and will America help. No oil? No gold? No something else we need? We're busy. LOL!

[why?]

but too many people are too rigid in their belief in the Constitution, it is a great document but documents need to be revised from time to time. I hope i didnt insult anyone.

The problem is that their are many foolish Americans that feel the way you do. With Americans being murdered on the Mexican borders by drug lords, and with said incursions becoming more and more common and the druggies becoming more and more well armed, the people down there would be sitting ducks if they couldn't have guns. The stories coming out of our southern border are sickening.

The other problem is people are far too comfortable nowadays, a lot of people forget what it was like to take care of themselves.Everyone now assumes the police will come instantly or someone else will defend them if the need arises. Never mind if something happens and they need simple things like food or water. No one is prepared for anything anymore. In general, we are all soft compared to how people lived 100 years ago. And God forbid something happens that makes all this tech worthless.

Until you can say there are zero deaths by crime anywhere on the planet, every citizen should own and be well trained on hand weapons, because what humans are best at is creating new, varied, and more horrible ways to kill each other.

[chrisj]

My personal Gun Law is simple, and I think that many people with guns in their homes probably feel similarly. I have guns in my home for protection. I'm not rowdy and go outside and start shootin' (although some do here in South Jesus), but I do want to be prepared if some shit goes down.

The very last thing I want to be is some anti-gun person whose home gets broken into and his head shot off...all without even having anything to fight back with. If I go down, it will be with guns a' blazin'! :)

[frownonfun]

It's called Castle Doctrine and 31 states have it, and despite what the anti-gun coalition wants you to believe, it is not a "shoot first and ask questions later" law. It gives law-abiding citizens the right to defend themselves, their families and their property without any requirement to retreat. Basically, it is letting the criminals know they could pay with their lives when they try to hurt or rob someone. We've had it for years and despite what the Brady Bunch want you to believe, the result hasn't been a great increase in shootings. Surprisingly enough, it is a big deterrent for the above-mentioned reasons...

so theft, trespassing, vandalism, home invasions in those 31 states are substantially lower than the other 19 states that don't have this law right?

[frownonfun]

The problem is that their are many foolish Americans that feel the way you do. With Americans being murdered on the Mexican borders by drug lords, and with said incursions becoming more and more common and the druggies becoming more and more well armed, the people down there would be sitting ducks if they couldn't have guns. The stories coming out of our southern border are sickening.

The other problem is people are far too comfortable nowadays, a lot of people forget what it was like to take care of themselves.Everyone now assumes the police will come instantly or someone else will defend them if the need arises. Never mind if something happens and they need simple things like food or water. No one is prepared for anything anymore. In general, we are all soft compared to how people lived 100 years ago. And God forbid something happens that makes all this tech worthless.

Until you can say there are zero deaths by crime anywhere on the planet, every citizen should own and be well trained on hand weapons, because what humans are best at is creating new, varied, and more horrible ways to kill each other.


the violence on the border has a lot more to do with our dumbass war on drugs than it does people's lack of arms.

also how does being anti gun equate being helpless. would you also consider all the civilizations before the firearm was invented, helpless?

[Black Yaris]

To tell ya'll the truth...... I am just preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse

[.Kevin.]

Mount a gun that comes out of the trunk and you can use it through the back seats being lowered you have your own little tank while someone drives lol

[frownonfun]

My personal Gun Law is simple, and I think that many people with guns in their homes probably feel similarly. I have guns in my home for protection. I'm not rowdy and go outside and start shootin' (although some do here in South Jesus), but I do want to be prepared if some shit goes down.

The very last thing I want to be is some anti-gun person whose home gets broken into and his head shot off...all without even having anything to fight back with. If I go down, it will be with guns a' blazin'! :)

so am i to assume you think everyone who owns a gun CAN'T also have their head shot off by someone breaking in? Is that not also a possibility?

also is a gun the absolute one and only thing that people can defend themselves with? maybe an alarm system. or a dog to help prevent someone from entering your home in the first place. motion sensor lights perhaps.

plus, are ya'll just keeping the gun on your bed side table? that seems like a very paranoid way to go through life.

[LA Yaris]

For all you guys

[why?]

"Why?" I didn't say that the right to bear(or is it bare) arms should be abolished, but simply revised and adapted to the times we live in. What i was trying to say is that there should be clear and logically structured laws that would be easier to interpret and abide to. I understand where you are coming from and you are right everyone should feel safe in their own home , but americans tend to go overboard with their weapons, my cousin's friend from Boston, has a small arsenal in his basement, i mean you can equip the Canadian military and still have stuff left over from his "toy box".Some people should not be allowed to exercise their right to bare arms. And as for the criminals you are talking about , it is the governments fault for being soft on them and letting them play the system whether they are white collar blue collar or no collar , murders,rapist , etc.

Don't get me wrong I love the fact that Americans can be somewhat "really" free, but with freedom comes responsibility and wisdom, and unfortunately not everyone has either of these qualities.

I agree there are too many rules, and they've all been mucked up. Frankly, the 2nd amendment is a federal right, therefor no state or local government should legally be able to restrict it.

In my mind, any civilian should be able to use any weapon not in current service by the US military, unless that person has committed a felony, of which any crime with a gun is.

There is nothing wrong with having an arsenal that most countries cannot match. in fact, I think it is a good thing.

the violence on the border has a lot more to do with our dumbass war on drugs than it does people's lack of arms.

also how does being anti gun equate being helpless. would you also consider all the civilizations before the firearm was invented, helpless?

You do have a point about the foolish war on drugs, but that is only part of the insanity down there.

And while anti-gun does not go hand in hand with being helpless, ones attitude on guns usually changes when facing the business end of one. Very few people who are so hateful of guns are willing to advertise said fact while also saying where they live. Proving they simply are cowards, because they know guns are used to protect them.

so am i to assume you think everyone who owns a gun CAN'T also have their head shot off by someone breaking in? Is that not also a possibility?

also is a gun the absolute one and only thing that people can defend themselves with? maybe an alarm system. or a dog to help prevent someone from entering your home in the first place. motion sensor lights perhaps.

plus, are ya'll just keeping the gun on your bed side table? that seems like a very paranoid way to go through life.

I agree, my favorite defense would be a nuke. Break in and you will cause the death of all life within a 60 mile radius. That sounds like a good defense to me.

[chrisj]

so am i to assume you think everyone who owns a gun CAN'T also have their head shot off by someone breaking in? Is that not also a possibility?

also is a gun the absolute one and only thing that people can defend themselves with? maybe an alarm system. or a dog to help prevent someone from entering your home in the first place. motion sensor lights perhaps.

plus, are ya'll just keeping the gun on your bed side table? that seems like a very paranoid way to go through life.

Actually, I think it a way more comforting way of life. I carry a gun in my car too, and won't drive anywhere without it. It's for peace of mind more than anything else.

Sure, there are different and more humane ways to deal with someone trying to get into your home, but let's say the alarm sounded one night because someone was trying to get in. There would be no peace of mind for me because I would be up every night from then on trying to make sure nothing happened. Sure I'm paranoid, but so are all the people with Pit Bulls, alarm systems, or baseball bats by the front door. I picked the most likely means of getting out of a situation alive. The dog could be shot itself, the cops could take forever to get to me (once we called them because we heard 3 shots outside at 3 a.m. They showed up at 7), or someone could just take my ball bat and beat the shit out of me with it. Same reason I wouldn't consider a knife to be adequate protection. Too close. With a gun you can stand back and take your shot...or shots.

I think it's great to let everyone in your neighborhood know you are armed and maybe even a little crazy. That keeps the assholes off the doorstep and neighborhood spats at bay. I mean, who wants to deal with the crazy f*cker down the road who has guns? :)

I hope to never have to be in a situation like that, where a gun would even be needed. But I also believe in live and let live, and if I'm not bothering you, you sure the hell had better not bother me. If you do, you deserve anything you get.

I don't give one rat's ass about the politics of gun toting or wars or any of that. All I care about is how things affect me and my family...right now. I will take precautions in whatever way I feel is best. Hell, if everyone would be nice, I wouldn't even need a gun!

[detroiter]

If your friend in Boston has a bigger arsenal than the Canadian military, maybe they need to take some notes.

You NEVER EVER want to get into a fight unless absolutely necessary. You always run because you don't know what the other person knows or is carrying. I've been doing FMA for quite a while so I feel pretty comfortable with a karambit if I am ever life or death forced to resort to it...this is what I carry

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y104/maidenfan84/Karambit.jpg

[chrisj]

^ Sweet.

[TLyttle]

Hm? Another lesson the US has trouble with is that any invaded country, including Canada, will resist an occupying force, any way it can. The US has had invasion plans for Canada for many decades (not the least of which is "Code Red" from 1931), and has many times been grouped near the 49th Parallel, just in case things here don't go "properly".

Unfortunately, Canada has a Bushite Prime Minister at the moment, and our role as Peacekeepers has been replaced by aggressive policies, hence our stupid purchase of those F35s. Canada long ago proved its ability to develop and build offensive fighters (some see them in a "defensive" role, haw haw), and after we proved that, we went to what Canadians like to do, build transport aircraft, capable of delivering goods and materiel into remote places... like Northern Canada... and we do that as well as anyone. This suits Canadians.

Like I said, the most likely invader of Canada is the US; no one else is really interested.

[LA Yaris]

:biggrin:

[TEHxFALLEN V1.2]

You have the right to freedom of speech.
You have the right to freedom of worship.
You have the right to freedom from want.
And you have the right to freedom from fear.

I alone have the fifth freedom, the right to do whatever it takes to ensure that your four freedoms are protected and preserved. I alone have full authority to spy, steal, destroy, and assassinate in order to protect America and her freedoms. I alone may go above the law, to protect the law. I commit brutality, to prevent brutality. I may kill, to protect the lives of many. I seek not to drive pleasure by inflicting violence upon others, but rather to dissuade enemies of our nation. I work alone, if captured or compromised, my country and president will disavow any knowledge of my existence and of the fifth freedom. This I understand.























I am Sam Fisher, I am the Splinter Cell.

[1stToyota]

If I'm ever invaded, if I'm able, I'll first ask the high school drop-out to lay his weapon down and we'll just use our fists...but I think it highly unlikely he'll want to part with his little friend, that's why I'll be using my .410 revolver, just to make sure it's a fair fight. :smile:

[chrisj]

^ :)

[Nexus1155]

Exactly, I can fight physically, I can use a knife well, but never ever bring a knife to a gun fight. Unless you can block bullets with a katana, you're getting shot by someone else who has a gun. I have a locking cabinet setup for firearms or trigger locks, no way would i ever leave it under anyone elses supervision but my own that is just unsafe.

[chrisj]

For all you guys

I need a decal like that.

[why?]

You NEVER EVER want to get into a fight unless absolutely necessary. You always run because you don't know what the other person knows or is carrying.

This. Which is why if you are in your home, you shoot with deadly force no matter what.

And if you are not, you do what you can to get away from a moron, knowing that if you are cornered you can beat the crap out of him if you must.

Hm? Another lesson the US has trouble with is that any invaded country, including Canada, will resist an occupying force, any way it can. The US has had invasion plans for Canada for many decades (not the least of which is "Code Red" from 1931), and has many times been grouped near the 49th Parallel, just in case things here don't go "properly".

Unfortunately, Canada has a Bushite Prime Minister at the moment, and our role as Peacekeepers has been replaced by aggressive policies, hence our stupid purchase of those F35s. Canada long ago proved its ability to develop and build offensive fighters (some see them in a "defensive" role, haw haw), and after we proved that, we went to what Canadians like to do, build transport aircraft, capable of delivering goods and materiel into remote places... like Northern Canada... and we do that as well as anyone. This suits Canadians.

Like I said, the most likely invader of Canada is the US; no one else is really interested.

The US has no need to invade canada. And Canada have very little need for crazy defenses since we will do pretty much anything to defend them.

However Quebec will always be a wild card.

[chrisj]

When we go on any kind of trip, we always take a gun with us (it stays in the car). If somehow we are on the way and forget it, we turn around and go back to get it. At the moment we only have 1 gun in the car and we have 2 vehicles, so sometimes we forget to transfer it. It's like our toothbrush...we don't leave home without it.

Now, I'm not going to use the f*cker to go rob a gas station or some other sinister intent. We are law-abiding people who are nice and don't bother anyone. But everyone unfortunately doesn't share our "live and let live" philosophy, so we are prepared. Just like having a spare tire in the car...you may never use it...but you are prepared. I don't see things like that as Cowboy American, I just see it as smart living. I have excellent communication skills, but I sure won't be trying to "talk down" some dope fiend who has a knife or gun and wants my cash. If there were no freaks in the world I wouldn't have to be "prepared".

The other day I had some moron walk right up to my open car window and want money. That's the kind of shit I'm talking about. I told him to get the f*ck away from me, but you know, that idiot could have cut my throat before I had time to say jack. I don't ever count on anyone being as nice as I am. And generally I am correct.

There don't need to be gun laws in this country nearly as much as classes in manners. Act right and you won't get your shit splattered...that's my creed.

Have a good one.

[Black Yaris]

screw it..... this is how I roll
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs801.snc4/68186_10150267917525464_875650463_14728981_1575205 _n.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs295.snc4/41108_1543474943549_1135244900_31539454_4528918_n. jpg

and don't mess with my 5'4" 100lbs wife either :)
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs216.ash2/47953_1562144210269_1135244900_31587043_641793_n.j pg

[chrisj]

I need to put that on my wish list. A 12-gauge pump riot gun. Yes!

[Black Yaris]

ummm....Blackie....how bout starting your wife with just one gun....she doesn't seem t be aiming with the right one...at all...just sayin' hihihihi


p.s the guns look bigger than her

she does ok, and I think she just fired the one in her left hand, that is why the barrel was slightly raised. She has her own Walther .380 (9mm kurz)

I need to put that on my wish list. A 12-gauge pump riot gun. Yes!

Mossberg 500

[Black Yaris]

PK, she is left eye dominate. What eye do you use when you shoot with your camera? same concept.

and that last one is a bullpup, and it appears to be a much smaller round and it has a suppressor

AR15's (what I have) is the civilian M16, they are easy to modify, service and come in just about any kind of setup that fits you.