Self Defense with a firearm

[NoNukes]

I have never found it necessary to carry a firearm for protection..

It isn't about you.

Why not?

 

[Iceweasel]

You see unlike you I can be honest about violence because I have experienced it. You think that because you have been lucky enough to have avoided it that it doesn't exist.

He's just a dumb asshole. That's the only reason why he's here. I filtered him out and the thread IQ instantly went up at least 10 points.

 

[Iceweasel]

I have never found it necessary to carry a firearm for protection..

It isn't about you.

Why not?

I'm not you.

 

[Redfish]

I am a legal CC permit holder. I don't carry all the time but I always have a gun in my car and on my person when going into anyplace that could be risky.

Anyone who physically threatens me or my family will be shot. The threat has to be real, and I know what legally constitutes a real threat.

A real threat will receive two rounds 38 special hollow point ammo in the center of mass. I hope to never have to use it, but I will if necessary.

 

[DiamondDave]

Just the opposite, I was taught to defend myself, WITHOUT A GUN.

Uh huh.. in all scenarios you got yourself handled.. ok, Batman

Guess I never came up against a coward with a gun.

Yes.. because all those who carry firearms are cowards...

And I guess all fights should be on equal ground (progs love selective equality)... so if you're attacked with a knife, a knife is all you can use to protect yourself? A blackjack attack must be met with a blackjack.. and I guess when an enemy attacks our country or citizenry with a IED, we can only fight back with IED's

Idiot

 

[mudwhistle]

I am a legal CC permit holder. I don't carry all the time but I always have a gun in my car and on my person when going into anyplace that could be risky.

Anyone who physically threatens me or my family will be shot. The threat has to be real, and I know what legally constitutes a real threat.

A real threat will receive two rounds 38 special hollow point ammo in the center of mass. I hope to never have to use it, but I will if necessary.

One in the head, and one in the balls, that's my motto.

 

[freedombecki]

This reminds me of the time I was inside a Big Lots store in Tulsa. It was roughly about a decade ago. I heard yelling and then gunfire, I ran to the front and saw that a customer had shot two suspects that had attempted to rob the store at gunpoint. Both suspects were wounded, but one still managed to get away. He was later captured by police. Both suspects wound up in police custody, and no one was hurt, except for the two suspects. A happy ending for all (except for the two suspects).

Oh, my goodness! Those two were a danger to themselves and others, but underestimated their own danger by threatening people in a state that allows people to carry weapons for their own protection, just as the Constitution recommends. If worse had come to worse, they could have killed everyone in the building.

I'm thankful that didn't happen.

 

[freedombecki]

Guy, someone in your household is 43 times more likely to be killed with that gun than a bad guy.

Clearly, you are a scared little man, because someone kicked your ass once. (Again, probably your personality, guy.) So the next time, you are going to shoot someone? Really?

I didn't get attacked in my house Idiot.

It was two guys. One had a bike chain wrapped around his fist and he suckered me when I walked by him. His friend then proceeded to kick me in the ribs repeatedly. I was laid up for a week with a cracked rib and a concussion. All for a few bucks that they stole from me.

It was an unprovoked attack.

And I don't know what I'd do if it happened again but at least I have options now that I didn't have then.

I carry a gun sometimes but i also have other means of defending myself that I carry as well.

You see unlike you I can be honest about violence because I have experienced it. You think that because you have been lucky enough to have avoided it that it doesn't exist.

I've had my share and inflicted my share of violence...

But a gun in those situations would have made a bad situation worse.

Again, can't imagine that this attack was "unprovoked". There's probably more to this story.

There's no excuses for a greed or ego issue that begets armed mischief of any kind. The law is not their neglected psychiatrist's office, it's the court of last resorts in which your pursuit of happiness ends at my nose.

 

[NoNukes]

Uh huh.. in all scenarios you got yourself handled.. ok, Batman

Guess I never came up against a coward with a gun.

Yes.. because all those who carry firearms are cowards...

And I guess all fights should be on equal ground (progs love selective equality)... so if you're attacked with a knife, a knife is all you can use to protect yourself? A blackjack attack must be met with a blackjack.. and I guess when an enemy attacks our country or citizenry with a IED, we can only fight back with IED's

Idiot

You get attacked with knives and black jacks, and I am the idiot?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I am a legal CC permit holder. I don't carry all the time but I always have a gun in my car and on my person when going into anyplace that could be risky.

Anyone who physically threatens me or my family will be shot. The threat has to be real, and I know what legally constitutes a real threat.

A real threat will receive two rounds 38 special hollow point ammo in the center of mass. I hope to never have to use it, but I will if necessary.

That's just crazy and I'd bet the nutter in WalMart would say the same thing because he also would not know or understand that bringing a gun is what make makes the place "risky". And what is it with you fools that you don't seem to be able to shoot what you say you point at? He said he aimed low and yet hit the guy in the chest. You say "center of mass" because you think it sounds all macho and junk but you wouldn't have any ore control than he did.

It used to be that one was required to use the same level of violence - you could not shoot someone for cutting in front of you in line.

Two rude hotheads. It should have ended in bruises and embarrassment at behaving like assholes. If one of the nutters had not had a gun, that is how it would have ended.

If only we could live in a world where you are shooting at each other and leave the sane people alone.

 

[strollingbones]

i am always amazed at city people telling me what i need to defend myself......yall dont have a ******* clue

 

[nodoginnafight]

There is no doubt in my mind that the Second Amendment grants the right for every individual American to own a firearm. And the law clearly allows a person to defend himself with that gun.

I am concerned, however, that so many seemingly minor altercations are winding up with someone shot and killed.

I'm not sure what the answer should be - I don't believe a person should have to let themselves be beaten silly and only at the verge of death be allowed to use a firearm to defend himself.

But I also don't believe you should be able to shoot a guy just because he reacts rudely to your request to turn down your music or silence your cell phone in a movie theater.

There's got to be a happy medium. Unfortunately in today's polarized America - that happy medium is proving to be a very elusive place.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Uh huh.. in all scenarios you got yourself handled.. ok, Batman

Guess I never came up against a coward with a gun.

Yes.. because all those who carry firearms are cowards...

And I guess all fights should be on equal ground (progs love selective equality)... so if you're attacked with a knife, a knife is all you can use to protect yourself? A blackjack attack must be met with a blackjack.. and I guess when an enemy attacks our country or citizenry with a IED, we can only fight back with IED's

Idiot

Yes, carrying a gun is cowardly. Hiding your cowardice is even more cowardly. Millions of people have the courage to go out in the world every day unarmed. You could make it a lot safer for those courageous people if you would just stay home, shivering under your bed.

And, yes, if you're attacked with fists, as in this case, you should not be able to pull and gun and blow the attacker away.

The world has changed since the days when one did not shoot people in the back or use a gun to combat fists. The cowards are winning.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Guess I never came up against a coward with a gun.

Yes.. because all those who carry firearms are cowards...

And I guess all fights should be on equal ground (progs love selective equality)... so if you're attacked with a knife, a knife is all you can use to protect yourself? A blackjack attack must be met with a blackjack.. and I guess when an enemy attacks our country or citizenry with a IED, we can only fight back with IED's

Idiot

You get attacked with knives and black jacks, and I am the idiot?

No shit.

WHAT are these people doing that they get attacked and have to shoot back?

I think they all live in an imaginary Walking Dead world.

 

[Iceweasel]

i am always amazed at city people telling me what i need to defend myself......yall dont have a ******* clue

Just call the cops. They'll be there in less than a minute.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Second Amendment grants the right for every individual American to own a firearm. And the law clearly allows a person to defend himself with that gun.

I am concerned, however, that so many seemingly minor altercations are winding up with someone shot and killed.

I'm not sure what the answer should be - I don't believe a person should have to let themselves be beaten silly and only at the verge of death be allowed to use a firearm to defend himself.

But I also don't believe you should be able to shoot a guy just because he reacts rudely to your request to turn down your music or silence your cell phone in a movie theater.

There's got to be a happy medium. Unfortunately in today's polarized America - that happy medium is proving to be a very elusive place.

You can't shoot someone for those things. In one case the prosecutors overreached but he'll do time like it was murder one and in another, I doubt seriously that he'll get off. In all cases, you must be afraid for yours or someone's life. And as CCWs are more common we are not seeing increases in murder. If anything it's the opposite.

 

[nodoginnafight]

i am always amazed at city people telling me what i need to defend myself......yall dont have a ******* clue

Just call the cops. They'll be there in less than a minute.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Second Amendment grants the right for every individual American to own a firearm. And the law clearly allows a person to defend himself with that gun.

I am concerned, however, that so many seemingly minor altercations are winding up with someone shot and killed.

I'm not sure what the answer should be - I don't believe a person should have to let themselves be beaten silly and only at the verge of death be allowed to use a firearm to defend himself.

But I also don't believe you should be able to shoot a guy just because he reacts rudely to your request to turn down your music or silence your cell phone in a movie theater.

There's got to be a happy medium. Unfortunately in today's polarized America - that happy medium is proving to be a very elusive place.

You can't shoot someone for those things. In one case the prosecutors overreached but he'll do time like it was murder one and in another, I doubt seriously that he'll get off. In all cases, you must be afraid for yours or someone's life. And as CCWs are more common we are not seeing increases in murder. If anything it's the opposite.

So I guess we just have to have a lot more people get shot and killed before there are enough court rulings to provide that guidance and instruction.

Sure hope you or a loved one aren't a victim in one of these test cases.

And I guess your definition of murder depends on how you feel about who is getting killed. Maybe murder prosecutions & convictions are going down (I'd need to see the data on this though) but maybe the number of people getting killed is the same - they are just labeling them different.

 

[Little-Acorn]

There is no doubt in my mind that the Second Amendment grants the right for every individual American to own a firearm.

Well, it doesn't grant it, it assumes the right was there long before the amendment was written (a minor but important point). It merely forbids government from interfereing with it or taking it away.

I am concerned, however, that so many seemingly minor altercations are winding up with someone shot and killed.

Very few, actually. But every one gets blazing headlines when it happens. Unlike incidents where someone uses a gun to ward off a criminal and he runs away - that happens by the millions every year in this country. But when did you last see even one, mentioned in the media?

http://news.investors.com/ibd-edito...olence-study-goes-against-media-narrative.htm

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt

When we have 100% perfect people, we will have NO incidents of minor altercations leading to gunfire. Until then, we'll have to take the (occasional) bad results with the (hugely more numerous) good results of the 2nd amendment.

 

[LoneLaugher]

If you have a gun strapped to your waist, you AVOID CONFLICT.

 

[Dutch]

Man, even in the Wild West the other guy at least had to have had a gun to call it self defense.

 

[DiamondDave]

Guess I never came up against a coward with a gun.

Yes.. because all those who carry firearms are cowards...

And I guess all fights should be on equal ground (progs love selective equality)... so if you're attacked with a knife, a knife is all you can use to protect yourself? A blackjack attack must be met with a blackjack.. and I guess when an enemy attacks our country or citizenry with a IED, we can only fight back with IED's

Idiot

You get attacked with knives and black jacks, and I am the idiot?

Nice try... now try going with what was said

Idiot asshole troll