# Hunting > Firearm Safety >  Yet another shooting incident in the states

## Rushy

This from the NZ Herald website

Gunmen opened fire on dozens of people marching in a Mother's Day second-line parade in New Orleans on Sunday, wounding at least 17 people, police said.  Police spokeswoman Remi Braden said in an email that many of the 17 victims were grazed and most of the wounds weren't life-threatening. No deaths were reported.

Police Superintendent Ronal Serpas told reporters that a 10-year-old girl was grazed in the shooting around 2pm. She was in good condition. He said three or four people were in surgery, but he didn't have their conditions.  Officers were interspersed with the marchers, which is routine for such events. As many as 400 people joined in the procession that stretched for about three blocks, though only half that many were in the immediate vicinity of the shooting, Serpas said.

Police saw three suspects running from the scene in the city's 7th Ward neighbourhood. No arrests had been made as of late afternoon.  Second-line parades are loose processions in which people dance down the street, often following behind a brass band. They can be impromptu or planned and are sometimes described as moving block parties.  

A social club called The Original Big 7 organized Sunday's event. The group was founded in 1996 at the Saint Bernard housing projects, according to its MySpace page. The neighborhood where the shooting happened was a mix of low-income and middle-class row houses, some boarded up.  As of last year, the neighbourhood's population was about 60 percent of its pre-Hurricane Katrina level.

Police vowed to make swift arrests.

"We'll get them. We have good resources in this neighbourhood," Serpas said

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

they definitely did the right thing in knocking back recent gun law amendments. The most ridiculous thing is that the NRA will use this incident to promote even higher gun ownership

----------


## phillipgr

I'm thankful that no one was injured. Still, it is alarming. I hope it will serve as a kick with a spur in tightening up the gun laws over there.

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> injured



You mean killed? ha

----------


## JoshC

When you're in the States or Canada for any amount of time and read the newspapers daily, there are ALOT of shootings that occur regularly. We only hear about a fraction of them.

----------


## phillipgr

> You mean killed? ha


Hah whoops. The forum muppet strikes yet again!

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> When you're in the States or Canada for any amount of time and read the newspapers daily, there are ALOT of shootings that occur regularly. We only hear about a fraction of them.


It cant be justified in my opinion, their gun laws I mean.

----------


## Littledog

What new law would have stopped this shooting? 

There are multi millions of guns in the US currently and many of those millions are in the hands of criminals. Criminals are criminals for the simple reason that they ignore and break current laws. I doubt that adding a few more laws will stop criminals from committing crime.

Why do some people want to harm or kill others? That's what the powers at be need to focus on.

The issue with the last laws were they restricted the law abiding without disarming the criminal. For a law to work then it must target those causing the crime and not the law abiding. Enforcing current laws may be a good starting point.

Cheers.

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> What new law would have stopped this shooting? 
> 
> There are multi millions of guns in the US currently and many of those millions are in the hands of criminals. Criminals are criminals for the simple reason that they ignore and break current laws. I doubt that adding a few more laws will stop criminals from committing crime.
> 
> Why do some people want to harm or kill others? That's what the powers at be need to focus on.
> 
> The issue with the last laws were they restricted the law abiding without disarming the criminal. For a law to work then it must target those causing the crime and not the law abiding. Enforcing current laws may be a good starting point.
> 
> Cheers.


All they basically wanted to do was introduce background checks on people before they were just allowed to buy any gun they wanted to. Granted it wouldnt stop everyone, but if those laws stopped one person from getting one gun and in turn saved one life arent they justified and fully worth it?

----------


## Sidney

And how would you work that out?  Seems like the "policy" of increasing firearm ownership is rather effective at reducing gun crime...  Why don't you just carry on just beating the same drum as the rest of the uninformed opinion out there.....  :ORLY: 

*May 9th, 2013
Major Drop in Gun Crime Not Understood by American Public
A recently-released study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) establishes, without a doubt, that serious gun crime has dropped dramatically in the last twenty years. The BJS Report showed a 39% decline in gun murders from 1993 to 2011 plus a 69% drop in non-fatal gun crimes.

In fact, according to the L.A. Times: “In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.”

A separate independent study by the Pew Research Center, affirms that “National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime[.] Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm — assaults, robberies and sex crimes — was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993.” The PRS findings were based on CDC data (for gun homicides) and on U.S. Justice Department data for “non-fatal victimizations”.

Ignorant Americans Believe Gun Crime is Rising
Ironically, though it is absolutely clear that serious gun crime has dropped while gun ownership has increased, the majority of Americans believe that gun crime is on the rise. According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, the majority of Americans believe that serious gun crime is on the rise.
A recent Pew Research Center survey asked the question: “Compared with 20 years ago, has the number of gun crimes in America gone up, gone down, or stayed the same?” Among those surveyed, 56% said gun crime had gone up, 26% said it had stayed the same, and 12% said it had gone done. 65% of women said gun crime has gone up compared to 46% of men.
As to why most Americans don’t understand that gun crime has gone down, one can only speculate. Certainly, the way firearms-related subjects are reported by the mass media may play a role in confusing the general public.
We recommend that you read the Overview of the Pew Research Center Study, which presents many interesting (and thought-provoking) points. After “crunching the numbers”, the Pew researchers analyzed why gun crime rates have declined so dramatically over the last two decades. A variety of factors are discussed, including demographic changes, increased policing, and tougher laws.*

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> And how would you work that out?  Seems like the "policy" of increasing firearm ownership is rather effective at reducing gun crime...  Why don't you just carry on just beating the same drum as the rest of the uninformed opinion out there..... 
> 
> *May 9th, 2013
> Major Drop in Gun Crime Not Understood by American Public
> A recently-released study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) establishes, without a doubt, that serious gun crime has dropped dramatically in the last twenty years. The BJS Report showed a 39% decline in gun murders from 1993 to 2011 plus a 69% drop in non-fatal gun crimes.
> 
> In fact, according to the L.A. Times: “In less than two decades, the gun murder rate has been nearly cut in half. Other gun crimes fell even more sharply, paralleling a broader drop in violent crimes committed with or without guns. Violent crime dropped steeply during the 1990s and has fallen less dramatically since the turn of the millennium.”
> 
> A separate independent study by the Pew Research Center, affirms that “National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime[.] Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm — assaults, robberies and sex crimes — was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993.” The PRS findings were based on CDC data (for gun homicides) and on U.S. Justice Department data for “non-fatal victimizations”.
> ...


I am very dubious of statistics as they can be manipulated very easily into saying exactly what someone wants. For example lets take your fine country, are you aware that statistically the average New Zealander has one tit and one testicle?

I still believe having mandatory background checks on people will in no way hinder legitimate gun owners and users. We have a fairly rigourous system here in Aus and it works well, I still have guns, so does my brother and all my mates but a lot of drugged out deros who would be dangerous do not. Granted its impossible to completely eradicate gun crime but common sense should take a seat in gun politics in my mind.

----------


## Sidney

No its actually 1.something - and you should have said "statistically less than 2"...

If you understood anything about probability you might be able to draw some conclusions about an almost 50% drop in serious gun crime over 20 years.  If you bothered to check the sources of the information, you might find out they are reputable.  And clearly your opinions seem to be based on popular media.... I think that I would rather use statistics.

You are obviously unaware that much of the states has cool off periods, vetting and checking and waiting periods before people can acquire guns.  But don't let me stop you from recycling popular opinion...

You also fail to understand that criminals don't bother with these sort of proceedures...  So how many people are you going to save by making more rules - give me some statistics.... had enough of the opinion.

----------


## Kscott

> they definitely did the right thing in knocking back recent gun law amendments. The most ridiculous thing is that the NRA will use this incident to promote even higher gun ownership


NRA will probably argue now for armed guards for parades  :Grin: 

_the only thing stopping a bad guy at a parade is a good guy armed_

Also keep an eye on this page *here*, it lists gun deaths in the USA since Sandy Hook shootings.  Overall it makes for pretty horrific and sad reading. 3,695 since Dec 14 2012.

----------


## Sidney

Don't get me wrong its unacceptable, any of it..  but the americans have a system.. a dramatic change to the system will have catastrophic effects... the law abiding will comply, those that don't are by definition not law abiding... more guns in a criminal world, with less fear of the law abiding.  Moving from the cold war mentality of deterence by equal or greater force in the american psyche would take some radical change in direction..

I don't like it, I wouldn't want what they have... but I don't do trite either

----------


## Dead is better

> I am very dubious of statistics as they can be manipulated very easily into saying exactly what someone wants. For example lets take your fine country, are you aware that statistically the average New Zealander has one tit and one testicle?
> 
> I still believe having mandatory background checks on people will in no way hinder legitimate gun owners and users. We have a fairly rigourous system here in Aus and it works well, I still have guns, so does my brother and all my mates but a lot of drugged out deros who would be dangerous do not. Granted its impossible to completely eradicate gun crime but common sense should take a seat in gun politics in my mind.


I watched a show where a leb gang member boasted that he could find a handgun in under 15mins. He did this for the camera in broad daylight. 

I Truly believe that NZ has the best system in regards to firearms. It's not perfect but people have a lot of freedom, while being checked on from time to time by the police if need be.

----------


## Savage1

Just because a law won't stop all crime doesn't mean it shouldn't be introduced. 

The background checks they were pushing for in USA was a perfect example, they wanted to make it harder for criminals to get firearms without effecting the law abiders, sure it wouldn't stop all but it may stop some but still people fought it, crazy.

America is paying for its lax gun laws and culture.

----------


## Kscott

> Don't get me wrong its unacceptable, any of it..  but the americans have a system.. a dramatic change to the system will have catastrophic effects... the law abiding will comply, those that don't are by definition not law abiding... more guns in a criminal world, with less fear of the law abiding.  Moving from the cold war mentality of deterence by equal or greater force in the american psyche would take some radical change in direction..
> 
> I don't like it, I wouldn't want what they have... but I don't do trite either


Yup, it would take a monumental shift in American culture to move away from the answer of violence. Personally I don't think they ever can, it's too deep in their psyche. Their obsession with the word 'freedom' borders on the insane  :Grin: 

What we have here in NZ isn't perfect, but it's pretty good.

----------


## Beavis

> All they basically wanted to do was introduce background checks on people before they were just allowed to buy any gun they wanted to. Granted it wouldnt stop everyone, but if those laws stopped one person from getting one gun and in turn saved one life arent they justified and fully worth it?


The law got shot down because they tried to tack the assault weapons ban and a magazine ban onto it.

----------


## Beavis

Also the background check system in the states is fucked and easily circumvented = achieve fuck all.

----------


## Beavis

> I am very dubious of statistics as they can be manipulated very easily into saying exactly what someone wants. For example lets take your fine country, are you aware that statistically the average New Zealander has one tit and one testicle?
> 
> I still believe having mandatory background checks on people will in no way hinder legitimate gun owners and users. We have a fairly rigourous system here in Aus and it works well, I still have guns, so does my brother and all my mates but a lot of drugged out deros who would be dangerous do not. Granted its impossible to completely eradicate gun crime but common sense should take a seat in gun politics in my mind.


The statistics come from a study done by the Department of Justice (in charge of the FBI)

----------


## Sidney

> Just because a law won't stop all crime doesn't mean it shouldn't be introduced. 
> 
> The background checks they were pushing for in USA was a perfect example, they wanted to make it harder for criminals to get firearms without effecting the law abiders, sure it wouldn't stop all but it may stop some but still people fought it, crazy.
> 
> America is paying for its lax gun laws and culture.


Let me paraphrase that for you....*just because a law doesn't do what it is supposed to, doesn't mean we shouldn't make it anyway...*. :Yaeh Am Not Durnk: 

Where is the evidence that these sort of laws stop any crime?  Everybody talks hypothetically about this issue.  It sounds like a great idea to make it harder to get firearms - perfectly logical....but not backed up by data when it happens... have a look at the UK or Australia... the statistics not the continuation of the mob opinion..

----------


## Beavis

> Let me paraphrase that for you....*just because a law doesn't do what it is supposed to, doesn't mean we shouldn't make it anyway...*.
> 
> Where is the evidence that these sort of laws stop any crime?  Everybody talks hypothetically about this issue.  It sounds like a great idea to make it harder to get firearms - perfectly logical....but not backed up by data when it happens... have a look at the UK or Australia... the statistics not the continuation of the mob opinion..


Lol sounds like Biden

----------


## gimp

> All they basically wanted to do was introduce background checks on people before they were just allowed to buy any gun they wanted to. Granted it wouldnt stop everyone, but if those laws stopped one person from getting one gun and in turn saved one life arent they justified and fully worth it?




JUST ONE LIFE

Ban swimming pools, they kill way more people than guns. It's worth it if it saves JUST ONE LIFE


There are background checks already for all transfers through FFLs, making them mandatory for private transfers

-is unenforceable
-allows FFLs to price-rape the only people who would bother complying, lawful gun owners


Murders in the US are at something like 1/2 the rate of the 1990s and not that much higher than NZ, largely the difference is violence between gangs, mass shootings are statistically insignificant

----------


## Savage1

USA has 5x the murder rate per capita of NZ and 18x the firearms homicide rate per capita over NZ. Source, Wikipedia.

USA is hardly an example to follow.

----------


## gimp

True. I mis-remembered the rates. 

Agree that we don't need the inequality, poverty, corruption, religious fundamentalism, etc, of the US  :Wink: 


Definitely don't need their foreign policy

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> No its actually 1.something - and you should have said "statistically less than 2"...
> 
> If you understood anything about probability you might be able to draw some conclusions about an almost 50% drop in serious gun crime over 20 years.  If you bothered to check the sources of the information, you might find out they are reputable.  And clearly your opinions seem to be based on popular media.... I think that I would rather use statistics.
> 
> You are obviously unaware that much of the states has cool off periods, vetting and checking and waiting periods before people can acquire guns.  But don't let me stop you from recycling popular opinion...
> 
> You also fail to understand that criminals don't bother with these sort of proceedures...  So how many people are you going to save by making more rules - give me some statistics.... had enough of the opinion.


The irony of that is that I got a distinction in the statistics and mathematical probability topic I did at uni. I never said the report was wrong, I simply stated that I am hesitant in believing statistics that are thrown at me because I have seen how they can be easily manipulated. I also don't recall saying that gun ownership or the increase of it will necessarily increase gun crime - that would be a bold statement. When you don't put basic control measures of who can own a semi automatic military weapon though I do believe you are playing with fire. The issue with gun crime is that a higher proportion of people involved in gun crime are fatally wounded in comparison to other weapons. 

And yes gun crime may have decreased over the past few years but so has every other type of violent crime leading to murder. It just means that you have less of a chance to die in general; you still have a proportionately similar chance to die from a gun now than you did in 1993. 

There are a lot of questions you can ask about statistics and for me the most blatant one is why did they choose 1993 as the benchmark to compare todays violence?
I haven't looked it up but I'd be fairly confident you will find that it was the highest peak in US gun crime and anything deviating down from that will give you a much higher perceived percentage drop. It does look impressive I agree, I myself have seen it first hand at uni when we were "fortunate enough" to have a lecture from one of Australia's top "Climate Change Experts". He showed us this damning graph with a huge percentage decrease in rainfall for Australia from 1970 to 2011 which conclusively proved the effects were so disastrous already that more money had to be invested into climate change research and this and that. He then went on quoting that high percentage increase to talk about global warming over the past 100 years. Why 1970s? And why to 2011 when talking about a century of change, why not start your graph from a century ago?
1970s in Australia is the wettest recorded decade over the past 110 years included in his argument. He then linked this to the most recent decade which was the driest, thus giving a exasperated percentage which in no way represented the real difference over the past century  which was around a quarter of the percentage he gave. It may pay to note that I believe in global warming and advocate strongly that we address it, just with genuine fact not twisted stats.
My point is that despite the fact that you believe I am a follower of mainstream media (which I take offense to), I, apparently unlike yourself do not readily accept things that are put in front of me just because they suit my ideals. I also feel compelled to question why because through my naivety of the past have learnt it is dangerous not to do so. It may surprise some that people from politicians to climate change experts and even the humble FBI have their own agendas and will make sure that their best interests are kept in check.
Personally if I were Robert Mueller I too would feel compelled to show a report or some statistics to justify my $8.1 billion annual budget (from 2012).
Lastly for you to attempt to correct my informal syntax on a forum like this is a clear indication that you are trying very hard to assert your intellectual dominance over me; I wont fight you for it, I just wanted to give my opinion.
Cheers,
BH

----------


## Bavarian_Hunter

> JUST ONE LIFE
> 
> Ban swimming pools, they kill way more people than guns. It's worth it if it saves JUST ONE LIFE


Touche' Gimp, I've used that line before (although my weapon was bunk beds not swimming pools haha), very well played

----------


## Littledog

The facts of the matter are that unless we can stop the criminally minded from wanting to harm and kill and also stop those with serious mental disorders from wanting to be like action movie villians we are still going to see gun deaths, knife deaths, cooking pot deaths etc etc.
Adding new laws to the equation will not stop the killings. Its easy to find a clean buyer!

I am dismayed at the democrats for pushing the semi auto ban and magazine ban in with the background check bill as on its own it may have been passed by the senate. The powers at be knew that the AWB and Mag ban bill would be lost but they pushed the background check bill thru with it anyway. It was just bollocks politics so a president could get up on stage and frown alot!

Tackle the crime and the mental health issue and we are on the right path to safer communities. So many of the shooters involved in mass shootings in the US are on psychiatric medicines and a disproportional number of gun murders are from gang and criminal groups.
The gang members currently pay clean associates to purchase for them. Introduce new laws and they will still continue to do the same.

Cheers.

----------


## Sidney

BH... congratulations on your distinction on the statistics topic you studied... I completely understand why you would want to discount facts if they don't suit your opinions.

Yes we all know about statistics, but I have a question... would you consider opinion without fact more or less dangerous?

Perhaps you could explain to me also how Mr Mueller would substantially improve his budget with such a downturn in requirement.  Are you into conspiracy theories as well..  They are great places for opinion in the absence of facts.  Heck that is what the whole anti gun debate is based on.

----------


## Spanners

No offense to anyone but this shit comes up every 5 minutes from where ever in the world it happens- not here. 
Population plays a big place percentage wise but is this topic something we need to draw attention to NZ wise given this forums search engine 'appeal' ?
We rank VERY highly- the anti vote prob isn't the look we're wanting and the position of those making their point chooses what we portray as a whole. 
It's not a vote, but surly this shit isn't in our favor as gun owners as a whole ?

If you want to give those who want to moan about how NZ is just like LAs gang banger suburbs more ammo then by all means go ahead, but end if the day the more attention drawn to this minority US rubbish that's being given in the media etc the worse OUR chances are of a normal firearms existence.

----------


## gimp

Personally I'm sick of hearing about the whole thing and just want to be left alone to have fun and shoot stuff with cool guns. I don't want to shoot people or talk about it.

----------


## Spanners

> Personally I'm sick of hearing about the whole thing and just want to be left alone to have fun and shoot stuff with cool guns. I don't want to shoot people or talk about it.


Hear hear!
My point exactly

----------


## Sidney

Not contributing alternative opinion to the simplistic routine beatup, that happens every time this happens is a strategy you think is working?

----------


## gimp

I'm just sick of having the same argument over and over again every week with different people who have the same dumbass ideas 


BUT PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THOSE SCARY THINGS BECAUSE I JUST WANT A HUNTIN RAHFUL

----------


## lloydcj

With the amount of guns in the U.S. more people die at the hands of doctors than firearms

----------


## Beavis

As I've said before, AR's have been available on A cat for some time now, since they were first imported, but more recently in large numbers, I'm still yet to see an explosion in gun violence. Maybe it's because they are being bought up by people with a firearms license, and being used for hunting and target shooting?  :ORLY:

----------


## Happy

> Hear hear!
> My point exactly


Thought one of you may have pulled the political plug and pushed the leave it alone button by now. Where does this always lead to... NO where..
Deja Vu from last weeks episode ?? Feels like ..

----------


## X-BOLT

Seems to me,that with the world wide "beat up" by media and the negative light that they try to portray Gun owners and shooters in we should be hoping the NRA and pro gun lobbies in the States are successful in there resistance to the Obama admins proposed changes,because any changes or restrictions imposed there also have the potential to effect us down here.
Yes we have a good system here in NZ but lets not kid ourselves that there's still a liberal left wing element in NZ that would love to see our laws even more tightened up,Phillip Alpers and co would be rubbing there hands together in glee at the thought of changes in the US mandated by the UN and would relish the though of implementing more of them here.Therefore i support the NRA in the states in resisting any proposed changes World wide its a slippery slope.Besides they wouldn't make one iota of difference apart from restricting and persecuting legit gun owners the crims will still have as much fire-power as they have always had....look at the gun crime in Aussie if you want examples of that .Below is a link to ponder ,Its not just ARs that are in there sights its clearly all guns.
Philip Alpers demonises legal firearms

----------


## gimp

It was reportedly gang related, likely using an illegal .25ACP Jennings pocket gun piece of shit or similar, and has dropped out of the US news cycle already

----------


## X-BOLT

> Meanwhile my pro gun news feed has 888 stories of little old ladies shooting home invaders and such. 
> 
> Given we live in a country where if you come home and find your door kicked in the police will not come around, even if your not sure if they intruders have left, maybe we should be getting concealed carry instead of gun restriction. 
> 
> The above happened to my mother in law twice.
> 
> If concealed carry saves JUST ONE LIFE is it not worth it?


Absolutely 100% plus one to that.

----------


## veitnamcam

It would certainly make the mobs of pre pubesent boys(and girls) think twice about beating the shit out someone for fun and the change in his wallet.

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

----------


## lloydcj

Just saw the clip on the news , straight away you can see the ape with the hand gun has had no formal firearm or military training , hence no deaths

----------


## Beavis

I'm yet to hear a compelling argument against CCW. Everything I hear is cry baby emotional shit.

----------


## Savage1

How about

-Most people couldn't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in an aggressive situation
-Wouldn't pepperspray be better as it can be used in more situations?
-You would open up a shit load of pistols to be carried in the public bringing about the oppurtunity for them to fall into the wrong hands.
-People will have them used against themselves.
-Situations will escalate out of control very quickly, a bar fight could easily turn into a shooting.
-We would end up in a mess like America.

All so people might be able to use one in the extremely rare situation that deadly force is needed

All of the people I have met that want to conceal carry just want to to make themselves feel better and wouldn't even bother carrying pepperspray if they could, says a lot to me.

I would fight tooth and nail to stop CCW, and I have a much better idea than most about the dangers out there.

----------


## Beavis

> How about
> 
> -Most people couldn't hit the side of a barn with a pistol in an aggressive situation
> -Wouldn't pepperspray be better as it can be used in more situations?
> -You would open up a shit load of pistols to be carried in the public bringing about the oppurtunity for them to fall into the wrong hands.
> -People will have them used against themselves.
> -Situations will escalate out of control very quickly, a bar fight could easily turn into a shooting.
> -We would end up in a mess like America.
> 
> ...


Again emotive shit. You assume that the people that would CCW wouldn't get training, I believe CCW covers everything; knives, torches, tasers, mace, guns etc

----------


## gimp

Pepperspray can blowback on the user, not totally effective, have to get it in the eyes (cool he's wearing glasses), fucked if it's windy, still requires training to be effective, etc

CCW ought to be allowed with required training courses etc


It's generally illegal to CCW in "places that serve alcohol" I believe is the wording in the US

"used against themselves" is pretty hilarious. I've never seen an actual example of that when it's a CCW gun


We'd need totally different social and economic conditions to end up "in a mess like America" ie a bunch of poor black people shooting each other over crack, massive inequality, etc

----------


## Savage1

Mace is the best I can think of for civilian as it gives opportunity for escape and can be used at a very low level, TASER you still need to deal with them once the 5 seconds is up and is easy to miss, your an idiot if you pull a knife to protect yourself but at least there is minimal collateral damage unlike a firearm.

You call those arguments emotive shit because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them so. 

Training is great but most people have no idea how they will act when they get an adrenaline dump, so unless they have quality training a lot or are in high stress situations often then it will be for nothing. 

Do you do martial arts training on a weekly basis so you can protect yourself? If not then you obviously can't be too worried.

----------


## gimp

> Do you do martial arts training on a weekly basis so you can protect yourself? If not then you obviously can't be too worried.


I do it, but not to defend myself. I'm an amateur Muay Thai fighter and train BJJ as well. No fucking way would I want to rely on it to defend myself, too much chance of getting my head kicked in or stabbed etc. 

The only effective method of self defence is something that
-immediately totally incapacitates a threat
-allows use from some amount of range

----------


## Savage1

> Two women get left to either find out for themselves if intruders are still in their house, or just leave and give the burglers all the time they need to clean out the family home. Those were the two options they were given. 
> 
> So as long as your home gets invaded and no one turns up, why should anyone buy this "leave it to the professionals" nonsense.
> 
> You can't have it both ways. You can't ask people not to defend themselves when their police force leaves a lot to be desired. Burglers get no attention and burglers become home invaders. Then it's too late. 
> 
> Also, your average citizen would struggle to be worse with a fire arm than a police officer. We have all seen the footage of a half dozen cops trying (and failing) to shoot a dog that's right in front of them. Whatever they are taught must be barely a hair better than holding it back to front. 
> 
> It's not about people actually shooting anyone. It's about prevention. It's what Cam said. People would think twice about attacking that slight little elderly person or that woman if they thought they were armed. Current measures to prevent crime don't seem to be achieving much. I don't think it's an unreasonable proposition. 
> ...


You can't go and shoot people because they are in your house, it would be murder. Yes you should wait for the Police.

All of the Police officers I have seen are quite capable with firearms, more than enough for our average situation.

The criminals are far more prepared to use force against the lady than the lady will against them, putting concealable pistols into the law abiding publics hand inevitably leads them to being in the criminals hands as well and they are far more prepared to use them. We don't have the gun culture of the USA so few people would carry even if available.

The inevitable repercussions out weigh the possible benefits.

----------


## Savage1

> I do it, but not to defend myself. I'm an amateur Muay Thai fighter and train BJJ as well. No fucking way would I want to rely on it to defend myself, too much chance of getting my head kicked in or stabbed etc. 
> 
> The only effective method of self defence is something that
> -immediately totally incapacitates a threat
> -allows use from some amount of range


Yes but you're talking deadly force, how often is deadly force needed by the average, sober citizen? 

That's where TASERS are great because they incapacitate far quicker than a firearm but they are one shot and need to follow up quick.

----------


## ebf

If you want CCW, my suggestion is you go live in the USA or in South Africa for a couple of years. See how you like it...

The incidence of violent crime here is so low that it is almost a non-issue  :Thumbsup: 

I really like the fact that the average front-line police officer here does not walk around with a pistol. Having one available in the boot of the car is great, but pistols are not seen as the first (or only) option. Escalation works both ways, seriously, think about it calmly for a couple of minutes  :Have A Nice Day: 

And honestly, any talk of CCW or firearms for self-defense purposes in NZ is a complete pipe dream. Given the political climate here, you are delusional if you think the majority of the population will ever go for it.

----------


## Beavis

> Mace is the best I can think of for civilian as it gives opportunity for escape and can be used at a very low level, TASER you still need to deal with them once the 5 seconds is up and is easy to miss, your an idiot if you pull a knife to protect yourself but at least there is minimal collateral damage unlike a firearm.
> 
> You call those arguments emotive shit because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them so. 
> 
> Training is great but most people have no idea how they will act when they get an adrenaline dump, so unless they have quality training a lot or are in high stress situations often then it will be for nothing. 
> 
> Do you do martial arts training on a weekly basis so you can protect yourself? If not then you obviously can't be too worried.


Lol so your answer to taking down an active shooter would be to run up with your can of spray? Sodomize that idea, I'd rather take my chances with a Glock 19 any day. And if I could carry I would train the fuck out of myself, by that I mean attend defensive courses, if they were available. I use to do martial arts but found it a waste of time - as soon as you introduce speed and aggression into the attack, all the fancy stuff you learn goes out the window. Knives are outstanding defensive weapons, especially when used in conjunction with a distraction like a torch, only problem is their use would look real bad in court, you generally have to inflict multiple stab wounds to incapacitate, I can't see a jury being to impressed if you stab an attacker 20 odd times with your Spyderco. Non - lethal weapons are a nice idea, but if given the option, I would rather prepare for the worst denominators - groups of attackers, psycho's, active shooters and people high on meth and bath salts. A firearm and the training to use it gives the defender a much better chance in that regard.

----------


## ebf

> The only effective method of self defence is something that
> -immediately totally incapacitates a threat
> -allows use from some amount of range


Gimp, take it from someone with a bit of real world experience, ok ? 

Pistols DO NOT "immediately totally incapacitate a threat". I don't know if you've ever seen a person being shot. The *very rarely* stop dead.

The average person (police or civilian) when faced with an imminent deadly attack, is so hyped on fear/adrenaline that they can barely shoot straight. Add to that the type of ammunition being used, the caliber, and the "chemical state" of the person being shot, it's a completely different picture.

----------


## gimp

> Lol so your answer to taking down an active shooter would be to run up with your can of spray? Sodomize that idea, I'd rather take my chances with a Glock 19 any day. And if I could carry I would train the fuck out of myself, by that I mean attend defensive courses, if they were available. I use to do martial arts but found it a waste of time - as soon as you introduce speed and aggression into the attack, all the fancy stuff you learn goes out the window. Knives are outstanding defensive weapons, especially when used in conjunction with a distraction like a torch, only problem is their use would look real bad in court, you generally have to inflict multiple stab wounds to incapacitate, I can't see a jury being to impressed if you stab an attacker 20 odd times with your Spyderco. Non - lethal weapons are a nice idea, but if given the option, I would rather prepare for the worst denominators - groups of attackers, psycho's, active shooters and people high on meth and bath salts. A firearm and the training to use it gives the defender a much better chance in that regard.


Martial arts are only effective if you train something that you test regularly at full speed against a resisting opponent - full contact competition. Boxing, muay thai, BJJ, judo, MMA, are good. Most of the rest are Bruce Lee LARPing. Krav Maga etc is Jason Bourne LARPing. 

Mostly unarmed stuff isn't immediately incapacitating except things like chokes which mostly require you to be in a vulnerable position to knives, other people, etc. Anything unarmed on your part is worthless if the other guy has a weapon.

Knifes are terrible. No range, not incapacitating.

----------


## gimp

> Gimp, take it from someone with a bit of real world experience, ok ? 
> 
> Pistols DO NOT "immediately totally incapacitate a threat". I don't know if you've ever seen a person being shot. The *very rarely* stop dead.
> 
> The average person (police or civilian) when faced with an imminent deadly attack, is so hyped on fear/adrenaline that they can barely shoot straight. Add to that the type of ammunition being used, the caliber, and the "chemical state" of the person being shot, it's a completely different picture.


Of course, but more effectively so than anything else.

----------


## ebf

Beavis, Taupo must be a lot scarier than Welly  :Psmiley:

----------


## gimp

I've got a killer headache so I'm going to leave this thread alone for tonight

----------


## Beavis

> Gimp, take it from someone with a bit of real world experience, ok ? 
> 
> Pistols DO NOT "immediately totally incapacitate a threat". I don't know if you've ever seen a person being shot. The *very rarely* stop dead.
> 
> The average person (police or civilian) when faced with an imminent deadly attack, is so hyped on fear/adrenaline that they can barely shoot straight. Add to that the type of ammunition being used, the caliber, and the "chemical state" of the person being shot, it's a completely different picture.


Yea pistols actually suck shit at stopping. Can't really CCW a rifle though.

----------


## Savage1

Knife is a good defensive weapon?!?! You have no idea, martial arts would be far more effective than a knife, same with mace and ASP, knives are just stupid for defence.

You want to carry around a glock just in case you come across an active shooter or a person fried on meth who wants to kill you and you can't get away?! You need to wake up. You want to prepare for the worst situations with a tool that is no good for anything else.

I think you just want to carry a gun because it'll make you feel good, not because you feel you will need it.

----------


## Beavis

> Knife is a good defensive weapon?!?! You have no idea, martial arts would be far more effective than a knife, same with mace and ASP, knives are just stupid for defence.
> 
> You want to carry around a glock just in case you come across an active shooter or a person fried on meth who wants to kill you and you can't get away?! You need to wake up. You want to prepare for the worst situations with a tool that is no good for anything else.
> 
> I think you just want to carry a gun because it'll make you feel good, not because you feel you will need it.


Again, your assuming shit and letting emotion get in the way. Is reading comprehension not compulsory in schools these days?

----------


## Beavis

I'll just leave this here

----------


## Savage1

You've said some stupid things in the last few post so I will make some assumptions, I will also make the assumption that you have very little, if any, experience in confrontational and dangerous situations in the real world but deep down you would love the opportunity to be in such a situation all tooled up. A lot of people get a rush from it.

----------


## Beavis

> You've said some stupid things in the last few post so I will make some assumptions, I will also make the assumption that you have very little, if any, experience in confrontational and dangerous situations in the real world but deep down you would love the opportunity to be in such a situation all tooled up. A lot of people get a rush from it.


Sure thing bro

----------


## ebf

> Yea pistols actually suck shit at stopping.


No Beavis.

IF you have a large caliber pistol, and IF you have the correct ammunition, and IF you manage to hit someone on the pelvic triangle or enough of the brain to cause major damage, then pistols are really good at "stopping". The point is that it is a whole bunch of IFs...  :Have A Nice Day: 

That is the reason most police forces around the world are quite happy to use tasers. You can hit someone ANYWHERE on their body, and the effect is pretty much instantaneous. And best of all, everyone gets to life another day...

And knives are fantastic offensive weapons (not defensive). A knife requires you to be in physical contact or close proximity with the attacker. That is a very bad idea to start off with  :Wink:

----------


## Beavis

> No Beavis.
> 
> IF you have a large caliber pistol, and IF you have the correct ammunition, and IF you manage to hit someone on the pelvic triangle or enough of the brain to cause major damage, then pistols are really good at "stopping". The point is that it is a whole bunch of IFs... 
> 
> That is the reason most police forces around the world are quite happy to use tasers. You can hit someone ANYWHERE on their body, and the effect is pretty much instantaneous. And best of all, everyone gets to life another day...
> 
> And knives are fantastic offensive weapons (not defensive). A knife requires you to be in physical contact or close proximity with the attacker. That is a very bad idea to start off with


True, would be a pretty limited situations to use a knife in self defense, I'd prefer one to open hand though, given the option. Problem with large caliber pistols is they generally take a hell of a lot of skill to use, and even more in a stressful situation. I remember the first time I fired a .45ACP and a .357 I was thinking holy crap, but I have little girl hands.

----------


## ebf

Tussock  :Have A Nice Day: 

Knives really are not a good option for self defence, see post 67

The police are not armed because they "like power"  :Wtfsmilie:  They deal with all the scumbags and lowlife wankers on your and my behalf...

----------


## ebf

> Your really going to suggest that a knife is a bad defensive weapon because it requires you to be in contact with your attacker?


Yes, absolutely




> If they are not in contact with you, you have successfully defended yourself. Run away now.


Running away is the #1 self defence technique  :Wink:

----------


## Neckshot

> Yes, absolutely
> 
> 
> 
> Running away is the #1 self defence technique


wrong..the number one defence technique is to immobilze your target/attacker before getting the fuck out of there........... Infantry 101!!!

----------


## 7mmsaum

> wrong..the number one defence technique is to immobilze your target/attacker before getting the fuck out of there........... Infantry 101!!!


Id chose a concealed carry 454 Casull  and the 240g XPT hornady @ 1800fps  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## ebf

> Id chose a concealed carry 454 Casull  and the 240g XPT hornady @ 1800fps


Dirty Harry is alive and well  :Grin:

----------


## 7mmsaum

Scoped, with CDS turret  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## Neckshot

ten feet up .0001moa cli.....  :Thumbsup:  but stroke the bastard even after hes leaking red stuff i say.

----------


## CreepingDeath

Samurai swords are the gimps natural enemy. It was something I picked up on pulp fiction.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

----------


## scaggly

> The point of all this is that gun control will "save" a few lives. So will no gun control. You could save far more lives by banning fatty sugary foods. Huge numbers of lives by banning alcohol. Restrict vehicle use entirely, make the speed limit 40ks an hour. More lives "saved". Ban sport. People are killed playing sport all the time. 
> 
> *Its all spin and emotive rhetoric. The most dangerous component of all are the people who can not recognize it when they see it.* All of humanities worst atrocities were committed by people that swallowed emotive rhetoric. People who were willing to swallow a line have killed, mutilated, tortured and even eaten, more people, in the history of human society than all the mentally ill people combined. 
> 
> My favorite pro gun news feed. Keeping the balance. 
> Map Of Self Defense Stories Using Firearms | Guns Save Lives


You, sir, win teh internets!

Thank you for very eloquently hitting the nail on the head.  

I'm constantly amazed at how few people recognise when they are being manipulated.   Calls to emotion are generally the last tool in the box when you have no actual evidence or logic to fall back on.  How would I know? Selling unpopular ideas, or creating a halfway believable rationale for someone elses ideas, is a fairly substantial chunk of what I do for a living.   

The day people actually wise up to how often they are manipulated is the day my job gets a lot harder.  Fortunately, the chances of that happening is fairly low.  :Sad:   Sad, but true.

----------


## Littledog

To those who don't want CCW then you have no fear, as no one is forcing you to carry-it would be up to you entirely to choose to or not (not that I think CCW will come to NZ anytime soon).

What I would like to see is the ability of a home owner to lawfully defend his or her dwelling and those who live within it without the threat of charges being laid for doing so. Not the outside of the property so to speak but within the actual dwelling if the home owner or resident/s feel they are under threat of serious harm or death.
To often those under threat have been charged for using a firearm which has been deemed unreasonably force when the home owner has been in a darkened house and taken by surprise, scared and unable to exactly know the intentions of the intruder. 

I doubt that will happen either. I have been in a home invasion and it was shit scary. I had nothing to defend myself with but my hands or locking the bedroom door and letting the intruders take what I had worked hard to own. However a stout kick from one of them would have tumbled my door in easily. Luckily for me turning on the lights and calling out made them leave the house, but many others have not been so lucky.

So if feeling good by being able to defend myself makes me power hungry then im power hungry, but it would make me feel far safer to have that option.

It works! Homeowner Shoots Pedregosa Street Prowler The Santa Barbara Independent

Cheers

----------


## ebf

> To those who don't want CCW then you have no fear, as no one is forcing you to carry-it would be up to you entirely to choose to or not (not that I think CCW will come to NZ anytime soon).


Flawed argument littledog. Think about smoking regs. The reason for no smoking in public places is not the harm it does to the smoker, but passive smoke for those who choose not to smoke.

You need to look at the argument from both sides.

----------


## ebf

> But your not making the logical link between those two things? The purpose of the knife is not to attack the person. Thats not defense. Its to keep the attacker away. And for that its an extremely effective tool. No real way around it. If you can only use it when the close with you, then its doing its job. They cant close with you, and thats the objective. 
> 
> Your thinking about offense, not defense.


Tim  :Have A Nice Day:  the moment you pull the knife YOU are escalating the situation and taking on an offensive role. 

As for the rest of your post.... Er maybe a bit more time walking in the bush than worrying about who is out to get you ?  :Wink:  :Psmiley:

----------


## Savage1

> Everyone has that attitude. Everyone thinks they are super man and everyone else knows nothing. You just dismissed a large number of potentially useful items, and not dismissing those items is a fundamental of self defense training. Iv done self defense classes with heaps of cops, soldiers, nurses. Not blowhards, just nice genuine professionals, and they never displayed an attitude like yours. They were open to suggestions and would not have reacted that way to Gimps suggestions. There are not many self defense items better than a knife, they are bloody hard if not impossible to get off someone, and its very hard and dangerous to grab hold of someone with a knife. Cant grab hold of them, cant keep them there, can't do anything to them. Basic stuff. 
> 
> You say that everyone who wants something wants it for the power and the desire to walk round all tooled up, and that people get a rush from it. Equally true of the police is it not? You think our police is free of people who get a rush from the power of the position? I would suggest there would be no "civilians" left who get a rush from the power. They are all already in the police force. Our cops are getting more guns while getting very vocal about wanting the public to have less. Could this not be viewed as the exact same thing? A desire to have all the power? 
> 
> Its the exact same logic your using.


First of all, I do self defence classes and I'm probably one of the 'most open to new ideas' kind of person you would ever meet. Through what experience I have, in my opinion suggesting a knife for self defence is stupid. I was referring to Beavis' not Gimp's suggestions. Pulling a knife is like pulling a gun but less effective and far more dangerous to the defender. However a knife is a great offensive weapon in certain situations.

To me there are much better options than a pistol in NZ for defence in public, pistols and knives can only be used in a life/death situations, while sober, which are extremely rare in NZ.

The Police need the tools to do their job, if you were going to start responding to every armed incident or violent situation in your district then I would say you would need them to. Every person I've met that wanted to CCW had never been in a situation where one could be used nor were ever likely to and when pressed about it, it just come down to them 'wanting' to carry because it would make them feel better. They also dismissed the idea of carrying mace instantly which spoke volumes to me.

I'm sure a lot of Police Officers do get a rush going to armed incidents tooled up, I never said otherwise, they are only human like us.

I don't remember the Police saying they wanted the public to have less guns, I remember them wanting people to have an endorsement for certain types but not saying you can't have them. 

I can understand CCW in relations to pistols in the US but not here in NZ. I haven't made up my mind about others such as mace and taser.

----------


## Sidney

> Flawed argument littledog. Think about smoking regs. The reason for no smoking in public places is not the harm it does to the smoker, but passive smoke for those who choose not to smoke.
> 
> You need to look at the argument from both sides.


You need to take your own advice... :Grin:

----------


## Savage1

> Your just making all this up right? Who said anything about pulling it. Self defence training, which is what the context of this discussion is, is about defending yourself. As in preventing yourself from coming to harm. Your describing it as escalation in the legal sense. Better get raped than jeopardize your legal position right? 
> 
> The current line that your supposed to let anyone do anything they like to you, dont defend yourself because thats "escalating" the situation, wait for the police and then get counselling afterwards does not sit well with me. 
> 
> It would sit better if we had police you could call and they would actually come. Maybe they should stop worrying about rifle magazines and go follow up on a few burglaries. 
> 
> I assume your "worrying about whos out to get you" line relates to my comments on people swallowing emotive rhetoric. It amuses me that humans have a few thousand years of recorded history and through that time, have done the exact same things, in the exact same way, over and over. And then, in 60 years people decide its stopped, and we can just repeal all the laws we put in place to stop it in the first place. Then if you make the rash suggestion that history does in fact have the potential to repeat its self, like it has done for millennia, its implied your a kook and worried about whos out to get you
> 
> A fine definition of stupidity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome.


You are twisting what he said to suit yourself, pulling a knife which is likely to inflict lethal wounds in a normal confrontation in the street is escalating the situation. Read section 48 and 56 of the Crimes Act, you may learn something. There is nothing wrong with defending yourself, but a knife condstitutes deadly force, there are much better tools than a knife for general self defence.

When did you call Police and they didn't come? Circumstances? I know of no Police Officers that have been tasked to find people with large magazines, however I know of plenty that are regularly been tasked to attend burglaries and target burglars. Do some research before posting bullshit, you have no idea.

----------


## ebf

> Your just making all this up right? Who said anything about pulling it. Self defence training, which is what the context of this discussion is, is about defending yourself. As in preventing yourself from coming to harm. Your describing it as escalation in the legal sense. Better get raped than jeopardize your legal position right?


hang on, so explain to me how you are going to "defend yourself" with a knife without pulling it and brandishing it toward this attacker ? are you just going to tell him/her that you have a knife and they will mysteriously stop attacking you ?

----------


## ebf

> You need to take your own advice...


sidney, dude ! come on...

the argument they are putting forward is like saying well it's ok for me to drive at 200 km/h because if you don't want to then you don't have to... actions have *consequences*. saying something like CCW is ok, coz you dont have to do it if you dont want to completely ignores the majority of the population that specifically do not want every second or third person walking around with a concealed firearm. and forget about tactical or self-defense training, what most folks need is to train the muscle between their ears to think clearly and calmly during a crisis.

i am more than happy living in a society where we have a small armed police force, responsible for maintaining order, as opposed to every tom, dick and harry walking around packing. the cops here are very aware of the extremely serious repercussions of shooting someone, and in the majority of cases would rather try to calm the situation than escalate it. that is the balance I prefer, like I said early on, there are loads of places around the globe where you can live with alternate regimes, personally the setup in NZ works fine for me  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## Happy

Take this 



Add two teaspoons of this thread ....

Now you have what this is  Custard .. or just a simple desert ...    :Grin:  

And the winner is .....   :36 1 5:

----------


## ebf

Happy, I think the technical term is "a cluster of custard"  :Grin:

----------


## Scouser

Waited for this thread to run its course................i lived in california for 8 years, an illegal alien (love that term) i had a Glock 17 that my 'legal mate' (green card) bought for me!

we only ever shot it at the local range's (indoor & outdoor) i had a 35 round mag (yes, thirty five) for it that i was allowed to 'brandish' at both ranges, even though (at the time)

california state law prohibited any mag over 15......how, because it was bought before the ban!!!!.......thats how fukin ridiculous the gun laws are over there, almost every gun law

be it state or federal, can be circumvented LEGALLY, so as for 'crims'...........the good ole US of A is totally fuked, dont expect it to change in your grandchildrens lifetime....

pandoras box has had the lid ripped off by the hinges.......Obama or anybody else is only paying lip service....there will be plenty more school, cinema, work ect shootings......ITS NOW PART OF THEIR FUKED UP CULTURE, THATS WHY I GOT OUT!!!!!!

----------


## Eion

Why do we end up constantly debating this topic. Honestly you're a fool if you think that the way it is is fine; you're a fool if you think that you can change it. Barking at each other isn't going to change much. Really none of us have a clue what the f**k we're talking about. Each side is sure they are right and the other is biased. Anyway personally i think self defense ownership is bullshit. If someone has the means to kill you, and is going to kill you, they will kill you. No James Bond shit, by the time you've drawn your weapon (if they intended to kill you) you're dead. plain and simple. Aside from that do many of us have the training that makes us quick enough to react to a situation like this and react appropriately. Try this: You're walking by a house and are armed. A man runs out with a knife covered in what looks like blood, stops screams I'm going to kill them, and starts to run back inside. What do you do, let him run away and maybe kill whom ever or what ever, or do you shoot the man and maybe save a life by taking one.

----------


## Scouser

> Why do we end up constantly debating this topic. Honestly you're a fool if you think that the way it is is fine; you're a fool if you think that you can change it. Barking at each other isn't going to change much. Really none of us have a clue what the f**k we're talking about. Each side is sure they are right and the other is biased. Anyway personally i think self defense ownership is bullshit. If someone has the means to kill you, and is going to kill you, they will kill you. No James Bond shit, by the time you've drawn your weapon (if they intended to kill you) you're dead. plain and simple. Aside from that do many of us have the training that makes us quick enough to react to a situation like this and react appropriately. Try this: You're walking by a house and are armed. A man runs out with a knife covered in what looks like blood, stops screams I'm going to kill them, and starts to run back inside. What do you do, let him run away and maybe kill whom ever or what ever, or do you shoot the man and maybe save a life by taking one.


first part, totally agree....

second part, keep walking and call the police......

----------


## Sidney

> sidney, dude ! come on...
> 
> the argument they are putting forward is like saying well it's ok for me to drive at 200 km/h because if you don't want to then you don't have to... actions have *consequences*. saying something like CCW is ok, coz you dont have to do it if you dont want to completely ignores the majority of the population that specifically do not want every second or third person walking around with a concealed firearm. and forget about tactical or self-defense training, what most folks need is to train the muscle between their ears to think clearly and calmly during a crisis.
> 
> i am more than happy living in a society where we have a small armed police force, responsible for maintaining order, as opposed to every tom, dick and harry walking around packing. the cops here are very aware of the extremely serious repercussions of shooting someone, and in the majority of cases would rather try to calm the situation than escalate it. that is the balance I prefer, like I said early on, there are loads of places around the globe where you can live with alternate regimes, personally the setup in NZ works fine for me



Please feel free to continue offering opinion not subject to you own advice then   :Grin: ...Doesn't matter what people want, that is purely a emotional cultural response...

The issue as debated which you completely have missed, is that the antis use exactly the same argument that could be used to promote CCW.  And guess what... they are both correct.. but where the  balance may fall in terms of loss of life, or deterioration of society is entirely debatable.

What we end up with as a result may or may not be desirable, and we currently don't choose to go down that road.  Personally I don't want to.  The process of the shift is often worse than either position.  I was a police officer, I left the police in 1990 partially because I believed that we were rapidly heading towards having to be armed as a matter of course..that would have changed the dynamic of interaction with the public to such an extent that I was unwilling to stay...  thankfully I am still wrong about that happening..

Having an armed population is unlikely to promote a more trusting culture, as evidenced by the paranoia exhibited by the average american.  However on the other hand attempting to deny people the lawful right or the ability to protect your own person or life, or the life of any innocent that you are capable of protecting - is unconscionable.  And please don't not assume that the police can or even want to achieve that these days in this country.  Response and prevention is a lot further down the list than collecting traffic revenue, and suppressing response from those trying to protect themselves.

Whether you understand it or not, these are the two realities that exist.  Reconciling them is the issue.  Thats when it gets difficult..

----------


## Beavis

So far I condense this thread down to:

Anti-CCW: Someone with a CCW might shoot me or someone else, I don't like people wanting to CCW because they already have the mindset that they want to kill

Pro-CCW: Want to carry to diminish the chance of being killed or seriously injured by a violent criminal, should they ever be confronted by one, realize that when the shit hits the screw, a cop won't be there to save you.

----------


## Beavis

+1 Tussock, I worry about my partners safety more than my own

----------


## Ryan

> They _(edit: ebf is referring to police, I misquoted - Ryan)_ deal with all the scumbags and lowlife wankers on your and my behalf...


Just quietly, the police face the exact same threats as the public.

----------


## Savage1

> Just quietly, the police face the exact same threats as the public.


In a hell of a lot higher rate than the average citizen.

----------


## Savage1

> Im only discussing this for amusement. We have two guys who seem fans of passive citzens. Let the citizens be meek as lambs and give more power to the police? Just because we have a police force we can trust now does not mean we will always have one. Why are people so short sighted?
> 
> Why do we constantly compare our society to America? They are completely different and hopefully they will stay that way. 
> 
> Also, and this is a bit of a broken record but I will give it one more punt. You keep implying I would "pull" a knife. I would not, or carry one. I don't need to. Im huge and Iv been doing various combat sports for more than 10 years. I can also run pretty fast for a big unit. 
> 
> But I have had three friends raped. There is a humorous saying "rapists dont box, they wrestle". Grappling means you need to grapple. I know quite a few women that if they must walk somewhere at night, they do so with their hand around the handle of a knife. Try drag them into the bushes and you will likely lose fingers on the hand you grabbed with. The old "it will be used on you" line is silly. Women dont mess around, give them the tools to do the job and the will to use them and they make guys look like pussies. In the states, some women would have a hand gun, and they regularly use them with success. 
> 
> One friend of mine was sexually assaulted. She was pushed against a wall and pinned, and when the attacker gave up one hand to begin the assault, she smashed the RTD bottle she had in that hand and stabbed him in the ear with it. Full force to the side of the head. Needless to say, that was as far as he got, and she legged it. My other two friends were not armed, they did not get off so lightly. One girl was dragged into a car, she was unable to pry the hand on her loose to attract the attention of other people close by, but managed to struggle for a while before being dragged inside. She could have cut herself loose with ease. 
> ...


Out of your friends that were sexually assaulted, how many had alcohol in their system so couldn't have had a pistol on them? How many were assaulted by a person they know? Which is by far the most common situation. How many were in completely avoidable situations such as walking alone in the dark through a park? I'm in no way implying that it was their fault. Sexual attacks on random sober females is actually very rare, they are normally by a person who is well known to the victim. I don't know where you got the high rate bullshit from. 

At least mace, which is effective at close range(not sure where you got that bullshit from), could be used and would put the attacker off of his game, even if you cop some yourself it has still done its job. But you all seem to be uninterested in a alternative to a gun, which could only be used in very rare situations.

The Police do the best they can with what they have, if there is a real threat of somebody being attacked then the law backs them in defending themselves.

In theory I agree with you, but in reality it won't work in our society in my opinion and would cause a lot more problems than it would solve.

----------


## Savage1

> I think you missed the point. If a cop runs into a lot of nasty criminals, it is because there are a lot of nasty criminals. They achieve nasty criminal status by doing nasty shit to ordinary citizens. 
> 
> You definitely do not get the impression the aim of the police force is to simply have nothing to do.


You forget that Police are actively seeking them so will run into them a lot more, especially since they are constantly encroaching on their home turf. So Police do face more than the average citizen.

----------


## gimp

Examples of abuse of a CCW:

-
-
-

and, most notably,

-

----------


## gimp

just going to leave this here to lighten the mood

----------


## ebf

Ah cool so we've been reduced to being labeled as "anti" or "fans of passive citizens"...

Guess I'll have to add it to the collection  :Grin: 

Name calling really elevates the level of the debate boys  :Wtfsmilie: 

Beavis: wow, saying something along the line of "I'm right and you're wrong" (your "condensing of the thread) does not really constitute an objective discussion

Tussock : I'm still keen to hear how you propose using a knife for self-defense without pulling it  :Psmiley:  Mate, if you want to live in Ethiopia, Somalia, Afghanistan or another shithole where mob-justice and anarchy is the current form of government, pls be my guest  :Grin:

----------


## gimp

> Name calling really elevates the level of the debate boys



You might want to read some of savage1's posts.


This format is too untidy to have a proper discussion and ccw will never happen in NZ.

My stance is that there are no particular downsides to appropriately licensed and trained citizens carrying guns for self defence, even though there isn't necessarily a hugely glaring need. We all wear seatbelts, have first aid training, keep fire extinguishers in the home, etc. Right? Same same.

----------


## Happy

> just going to leave this here to lighten the mood


Hmmm LOL Traction and Co ordination problems ha ha ..  :Grin: 

That's funny .. Kitty needs CCW ... sort that dangerous creature shit right out ..  :Thumbsup:

----------


## gimp

In a handbag? they'd never find it


(handbag carry sucks)

----------


## ebf

not many guys that would admit of a public forum that they carry a handbag gimp  :Psmiley:  but hey, all power to you  :Grin: 

P.S. that kitten is definitely not "fit and proper"...

----------


## Happy

> not many guys that would admit of a public forum that they carry a handbag gimp  but hey, all power to you 
> 
> P.S. that kitten is definitely not "fit and proper"...


You don't even know that Kitten how can you say that... Could be the biggest pacifist in the world..  

How mean ...  :Grin:   :Thumbsup:

----------


## gimp

> not many guys that would admit of a public forum that they carry a handbag gimp  but hey, all power to you 
> 
> P.S. that kitten is definitely not "fit and proper"...


I do actually carry a manbag.

-Fits 2x cans of beer
-Wallet, phone etc don't get sat on
-My arse doesn't look lumpy in my tight jeans, nothing in the pockets.

I'm not ashamed to admit it.

----------


## Ryan

> At some point the general public was deemed completely incapable of doing anything, or looking after themselves.


Catering to the lowest common denominator; a consequence of people being told what to think, by the media, their governments - instead of thinking for themselves (which a surprisingly large proportion of people are actually still very capable of doing).

----------


## Rushy

> Do not engage brain.


For a great many in our society this goes along well with their other characteristics "Open mouth" and "Insert foot"

----------


## Beavis

> Yep. Stay in your living rooms, and absorb the crap coming through your TV, buy shit you don't need and do as your told. Do not engage brain.


I stopped watching TV and following main stream media a long time ago. I got sick of the spin, half arsed half the facts reporting and the condescending "we're telling you what to think" tone. I think I'm better off for it.

----------


## Beavis

> Ah cool so we've been reduced to being labeled as "anti" or "fans of passive citizens"...
> 
> Guess I'll have to add it to the collection 
> 
> Name calling really elevates the level of the debate boys 
> 
> Beavis: wow, saying something along the line of "I'm right and you're wrong" (your "condensing of the thread) does not really constitute an objective discussion
> 
> Tussock : I'm still keen to hear how you propose using a knife for self-defense without pulling it  Mate, if you want to live in Ethiopia, Somalia, Afghanistan or another shithole where mob-justice and anarchy is the current form of government, pls be my guest


Yea but I didn't say that, that was my point of view of the thread thus far.

----------


## Dead is better

I had an experience that totally changed me from a LMOE (last-man-on-earth gun fanatic) to a regular 'leave it in the safe' kind of gun owner. It was just on dark and i was leaving my mates house, went down the stairs and i got my keys out. The rattle saved my life. Just as i neared my car a scumbag in a hoody charged me, armed with a 10' screwdriver. I had 1.5 seconds to react, luckily my brain didnt say "find a weapon". Somehow i sidestepped him and lent backwards. 

No amount of weapon training or owning 500 firearms would have helped. My point is, you may not get a chance so don't place all your faith in your marksmanship. 

The hood evidently just wanted out and I'd inadvertently blocked him in while he was trying to break into my car. 10 seconds later i was telling myself to stop chasing him HAHA. Adrenalin makes you do dumb things eh.

----------


## gimp

I went to the supermarket and my house didn't go on fire while I was out, so I don't need to know first aid.

----------


## Neckshot

> Why do we end up constantly debating this topic. Honestly you're a fool if you think that the way it is is fine; you're a fool if you think that you can change it. Barking at each other isn't going to change much. Really none of us have a clue what the f**k we're talking about. Each side is sure they are right and the other is biased. Anyway personally i think self defense ownership is bullshit. If someone has the means to kill you, and is going to kill you, they will kill you. No James Bond shit, by the time you've drawn your weapon (if they intended to kill you) you're dead. plain and simple. Aside from that do many of us have the training that makes us quick enough to react to a situation like this and react appropriately. Try this: You're walking by a house and are armed. A man runs out with a knife covered in what looks like blood, stops screams I'm going to kill them, and starts to run back inside. What do you do, let him run away and maybe kill whom ever or what ever, or do you shoot the man and maybe save a life by taking one.


Two options option 1=your armed with a shoty said fulla comes out of house with blood on knife...........swing shoty like a baseball bat in self defnce job done!
option 2=your armed with a pistol said fulla comes out house with blood on knife..............tap tap into forehead fulla hits ground like sack of spuds dies you plead he was running at me with a knife that had blood on it so i acted in self denfence......first time offender 12 months home detention job done :Thumbsup: 
some of you guys are  talking hypothetical bullshit! were all gonna act diff and untill your in that situation your just guessing.

----------


## 7mmsaum

Can i still have my casull or are we past that now  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## Rushy

> tap tap into forehead


Come on Neckshot, were you not paying attention? Three shots mate.  Heart, head, head.  All in quick succession.

----------


## ebf

> some of you guys are  talking hypothetical bullshit! were all gonna act diff and untill your in that situation your just guessing.


 :Thumbsup:

----------


## steven

Our secretary is from SA, she left because her dad was shot dead in a breakin, the third time with armed thieves I think she said.   In another incident she shot a mugger in the arm....apparantly on purpose...(the arm). Given she is very good looking I wouldnt have wanted to give odds it was only her wallet they were after. Thank F* we are not in a country like that. Look at the US statistics on "self defence" 800,000+ per year.....10,000+ deaths, many accidental...just as mind boggling.  When all is said and done we are remarkably safe in NZ compared with the rest of the world, yet have reasonable gun laws.  Personally I think our biggest risks are actually a) sensationalist seaking media looking to sell air time and advertising space and not in anyway be rational, fair or honest and not the laws or the cops.  b) Pollies, at some stage of course a nutjob will go shooting crazy here and then our Pollies will be in a lolly scamble for votes to make our voters feel safe, it wont be rational, logical or fair.... c) ourselves, looking at the incidents in NZ I think we should be doing a better job of policing ourselves, our mates and promoting our rights, sounding like the US NRA nutjobs isnt a good look.

----------


## ebf

> Our secretary is from SA, she left because her dad was shot dead in a breakin, the third time with armed thieves I think she said.   In another incident she shot a mugger in the arm....apparantly on purpose...(the arm). Given she is very good looking I wouldnt have wanted to give odds it was only her wallet they were after. Thank F* we are not in a country like that. Look at the US statistics on "self defence" 800,000+ per year.....10,000+ deaths, many accidental...just as mind boggling.  When all is said and done we are remarkably safe in NZ compared with the rest of the world, yet have reasonable gun laws.  Personally I think our biggest risks are actually a) sensationalist seaking media looking to sell air time and advertising space and not in anyway be rational, fair or honest and not the laws or the cops.  b) Pollies, at some stage of course a nutjob will go shooting crazy here and then our Pollies will be in a lolly scamble for votes to make our voters feel safe, it wont be rational, logical or fair.... c) ourselves, looking at the incidents in NZ I think we should be doing a better job of policing ourselves, our mates and promoting our rights, sounding like the US NRA nutjobs isnt a good look.


good post steven

----------


## Spanners

Greg Carvell is someone interesting to chat to on this topic, as he knows 1st hand on how it works in NZ
The whole in the door has been repaired but the one in the glass is there as a reminder

----------


## ebf

> Ordinary people actually do extremely well if they are mentally prepared. 
> 
> They can do appallingly badly if they are not.


And that really is the key. The "average, ordinary" person out there is NOT mentally prepared. The are situationally unaware. But it is these kinds of people who we are talking about arming with concealed pistols.

Not Beavis who is going to train like crazy, or Tussock who is supremely confident, it is Moe and Joe who may or may not have control over their emotions, may or may not be drunk or stoned etc.

Some of you guys seem to find the prospect of a random violent criminal scary enough to want to go down the route of CCW. I've lived in a place where this was the norm, it is not fun... There are negative and positive sides to each argument. For each life saved story Tussock has, I am sure we can find a child killed by finding his dads poorly secured firearm, or daughter shot mistakenly as she crept into the house long after her curfew story.

I find the prospect of the "average" citizen out there being armed just as scary or even scarier than the "random active shooter"  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## ebf

> I dont recall suggesting we hand them out at street corners. Also, my "save just one life" was a reversal of the statement used regarding gun restrictions. It was to demonstrate that the "save just one life" emotive rhetoric can be  used both ways, as you have just correctly pointed out.


But you did comment about your view of the (poor) firearm skills of the police, didn't you ? Now they have specific training both with firearms and with dealing with crisis situations, and get to practice (at least the people skills side) almost daily. Be interesting to hear what training regime you propose and would be willing to accept for Joe Blogs before he is allowed CCW, seeing as you don't seem to be a fan of "government control". 




> I would suggest if the average citizen is not mentally prepared for adversity, it is because society has failed them. Not because the average person is incompetent.


Or you could say the average citizen has actually failed society, depends on how you view life Tussock  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## ebf

> Instead of looking at America, explain how Ethiopia can have concealed carry, and there is virtually no gun crime?


You sure you want to do this ?  :Grin: 

Guns in Ethiopia: Facts, Figures and Firearm Law

Rate of privately owned firearms : Ethiopia is ranked at 174 out of 178 countries...

Tussock, with all due respect, you are talking bullshit  :Wink:  You want to hold Ethiopia up as an positive example ? What are you smoking mate ? Human rights, governance etc. Are you serious  :Grin:

----------


## ebf

you told me to look at Ethiopia instead of America, that's what I did...

now you are telling me to look at America  :Wtfsmilie:   :Grin: 

I though we all at least agreed that we would NOT look at America, because for a variety of reasons they have such a pandoras box of craziness around firearms that none of us want to follow their example ?

----------


## Beavis

I remember when I did my comprehensive first aid course, I asked if we could carry quick clot in our kit to stop serious bleeding. The instructor looked at me as if I'd just insulted her mum. I understand it can cause issues like chemical burns, but surely that's trivial when bloods coming out, and you can't get a tourniquet on the wound. Might be a poor analogy, but I reckon even if you are not a professional, it's better to do something than just watch someone die.

----------


## Gibo

I reckon we are best to NOT follow anyone's example and lead by our OWN and do it well!

----------


## ebf

> I'm deliberately switching between being emotive and objective. And I'm deliberately sighting both incorrectly reported statistics (American example) and unquantifiable numbers (Ethiopia).


Guess I'm on my own just having a straight forward conversation then huh, instead of trying to be smart and flip flopping between the moral high ground and the real world ?

Could also be that you're deliberately switching between the sublime and ridiculous...

Still waiting to hear you actually come up with something constructive that would work. Saying stuff like the training we should give to civilians should be "the exact opposite of the police training" doesn't quite cut it.

----------


## Happy

Here is a little test that will help you decide where this should go.. ?? or not ?? Or make you smile ??
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an obvious drug addict wide eyed and out of his head with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities,  raises the knife, and charges at you. 
You are carrying a Glock cal 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. 
What do you do? 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Democrat's Answer: 
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question! 
Does the man look poor! Or oppressed? 
Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? 
Could we run away? 
What does my wife think? What about the kids? 
Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? 
What does the law say about this situation? 
Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it? 
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? 
Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me and not the wife or kids? 
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? 
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? 
Should I call 111? 
Why is this street so deserted? 
We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior. 
This is all so confusing! 
I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus. 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~ 
Republican's Answer: 
BANG! 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~ 
Redneck's Answer: 
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click.... 
(sounds of reloading) 
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click 
Daughter:' Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?' 
Son:' You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one?' 
Wife:' You are not taking that to the taxidermist!

 :36 7 5: 

source: Gun Jokes | Funny Humor by Joke Buddha

----------


## Dead is better

Found it. Its an old video but it makes the point absolutely clear that most people have no idea how fast a knife wielding loony can be. Even open hand tactics dont look too promising, better be prepared to cut sliced up no matter what happens. Or dont be in that alley with you wife and three kids - that's my tip 

LiveLeak.com - Think you could defend yourself against knife attack?

----------


## ebf

Tim, the stage (thread) is all yours mate - I am stepping away from this, have better things to do with my time than getting into a debate with someone busy channelling Richard Lincoln  :Grin:

----------


## Sidney

> Guess I'm on my own just having a straight forward conversation then huh, instead of trying to be smart and flip flopping between the moral high ground and the real world ?
> 
> Could also be that you're deliberately switching between the sublime and ridiculous...
> 
> Still waiting to hear you actually come up with something constructive that would work. Saying stuff like the training we should give to civilians should be "the exact opposite of the police training" doesn't quite cut it.



By straight conversation do you mean taking one side of an argument and not considering the obvious alternatives?

----------


## veitnamcam

I have faced a knife twice in my life.

First time.

On the piss with a group of mates, going from one pub to the next went into public toilet(renowned shit head hang out) while mates carried on. Come out and some kid with a swiss army knife demanded my wallet.
It went " gimme your wallet". "or what" "or Il cut you up" I pointed at the knife with my left hand and said"what with that" and as he looked down to where I was pointing I smacked him fair in the nose with my right and he fell over backwards dropping the knife which I picked up and said "Now i have your knife what are you going to do?" "you wait here Im going to get my mates" LOL 
I said Il be in the Shark bar.

Second time.

In a club at the bar buying drinks a guy around my age lunges at me with a knife, I have no Idea why.
Maybe I was about to "score" with a chick he thought was his, maybe I just look like a wanker that needs stabbing I dont know.
End result of that was I saw it comming and dodged and used his momentum to slam his face into the bar.
We were both escorted out of the bar obviously and on the street he didnt want a bar of me.

I was legally pissed in both instances, the first the attacker was sober as far as I can tell.
The second was probably more pissed than me.

Even when pissed I am situationally "aware"

First situation I probably could have just bolted instead of teaching a young dickhead to respect his elders.

Second situation I was very lucky not to have been stabbed or cut which I put down to being aware of my surroundings and a pistol would have been no use whatsoever.


Both situations I wouldn't be able to carry a firearm, first I could have easily shot him but in that situation if I had one I wouldn't have drawn.



I dont have a problem with CCW but it would have been no use in both those experiences.

----------


## Rushy

> I have faced a knife twice in my life.
> 
> First time.
> 
> On the piss with a group of mates, going from one pub to the next went into public toilet(renowned shit head hang out) while mates carried on. Come out and some kid with a swiss army knife demanded my wallet.
> It went " gimme your wallet". "or what" "or Il cut you up" I pointed at the knife with my left hand and said"what with that" and as he looked down to where I was pointing I smacked him fair in the nose with my right and he fell over backwards dropping the knife which I picked up and said "Now i have your knife what are you going to do?" "you wait here Im going to get my mates" LOL 
> I said Il be in the Shark bar.
> 
> Second time.
> ...


VC that young fellah in the first incident will talk about you for the rest of his life.  Wasn't fair bro, that big bastard tricked me eh?

----------


## Rushy

> Kids are horrid little things are they not.


I probably was by anyones definition

----------


## veitnamcam

> I got stabbed in the hip once. It hurt. In home ec class. Im not kidding either. A kid just walked up to me and stuck a steak knife in my hip. Kids are horrid little things are they not.


I stabbed myself in the thigh just above the knee to the bone when I was around eight, after a real long day with the old man his mate and his son, Getting close to the hut us youngsters got a second wind and were running ahead and slashing at anything hanging over the track. Nec minit. :Oh Noes:

----------


## veitnamcam

> VC that young fellah in the first incident will talk about you for the rest of his life.  Wasn't fair bro, that big bastard tricked me eh?


The pessimist in me would say he probably learnt to stab first ask later.

Im not a big barstard either.

----------


## R93

> I got stabbed in the hip once. It hurt. In home ec class. Im not kidding either. A kid just walked up to me and stuck a steak knife in my hip. Kids are horrid little things are they not.


Thats coz you were the only male in her class ya juicy fruit :Grin:  WTF is a male doing in Home ec?

----------


## madjon_

Is that where the hair went? :Grin:  :Grin:  :Grin:

----------


## R93

> It was compulsory! Cooking I was hopeless, but sewing I approached like just another building exercise. I can sew pretty well. Fix all my own gear on rainy days in huts. 
> 
> I have actually made a girl a dress before. Picture a red stretchy material, a slit that came up to the top of the hip bone over a long brown leg, and the rest of it, a flea would not have been able to move around under (12 E, bless her). It was for a fancy dress ball and she could not find a red dress to go as the devil (cheap, we were students). She thought she was getting a plain one but she underestimated my talent
> 
> I could whip you one up for your next date with the Gimp R93, use a fabric that doesnt catch the leg hairs. Gimps got pretty hairy legs.



Na! As pretty as gimp is, I just cant be with someone that owns a .243  :Psmiley: 

Besides, he would kick the snot out of me if I was a lousy date :Grin:

----------


## veitnamcam

> Na! As pretty as gimp is, I just cant be with someone that owns a .243 
> 
> Besides, he would kick the snot out of me if I was a lousy date


As long as you put out you should be fine? :Grin:

----------


## R93

Goody! What should I wear Tim? I dont wanna come across to slutty. :Oh Noes:

----------


## Happy

At last change of subject. Who made that happen. LEGeNDARY Gay conversation takes the day.  Redneck YEEHAA

----------


## R93

> It doesnt matter. Just dont forget your Samarai sword in case he gets uppity.


I will slip it into one of my garters :Grin:

----------


## steven

I started off liking the theory of the 2nd amendment, Theory is great until it meets practice as they say,

The Day in Gun Violence - NYTimes.com

My take on our laws is the police need to have a pretty good reason not to grant you a FAL....

----------


## steven

> Thats coz you were the only male in her class ya juicy fruit WTF is a male doing in Home ec?


One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........

I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.

regards

----------


## R93

> One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........
> 
> I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.
> 
> regards


I guess on reflection it is pretty smart but he ruined it, when he said he could and did make a dress. Ha ha

----------


## Willus

And...... Another one in Santa Barbara from a kid that didn't get what he wanted. No person should ever have to go through that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIDGsz_8k_E

----------


## Moutere

That is a chilling insight

----------


## veitnamcam

> Na! As pretty as gimp is, I just cant be with someone that owns a .243 
> 
> Besides, he would kick the snot out of me if I was a lousy date


As long as you put out you should be fine? :Grin:

----------


## R93

Goody! What should I wear Tim? I dont wanna come across to slutty. :Oh Noes:

----------


## Happy

At last change of subject. Who made that happen. LEGeNDARY Gay conversation takes the day.  Redneck YEEHAA

----------


## R93

> It doesnt matter. Just dont forget your Samarai sword in case he gets uppity.


I will slip it into one of my garters :Grin:

----------


## steven

I started off liking the theory of the 2nd amendment, Theory is great until it meets practice as they say,

The Day in Gun Violence - NYTimes.com

My take on our laws is the police need to have a pretty good reason not to grant you a FAL....

----------


## steven

> Thats coz you were the only male in her class ya juicy fruit WTF is a male doing in Home ec?


One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........

I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.

regards

----------


## R93

> One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........
> 
> I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.
> 
> regards


I guess on reflection it is pretty smart but he ruined it, when he said he could and did make a dress. Ha ha

----------


## Willus

And...... Another one in Santa Barbara from a kid that didn't get what he wanted. No person should ever have to go through that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIDGsz_8k_E

----------


## Moutere

That is a chilling insight

----------


## veitnamcam

> Na! As pretty as gimp is, I just cant be with someone that owns a .243 
> 
> Besides, he would kick the snot out of me if I was a lousy date


As long as you put out you should be fine? :Grin:

----------


## R93

Goody! What should I wear Tim? I dont wanna come across to slutty. :Oh Noes:

----------


## Happy

At last change of subject. Who made that happen. LEGeNDARY Gay conversation takes the day.  Redneck YEEHAA

----------


## R93

> It doesnt matter. Just dont forget your Samarai sword in case he gets uppity.


I will slip it into one of my garters :Grin:

----------


## steven

I started off liking the theory of the 2nd amendment, Theory is great until it meets practice as they say,

The Day in Gun Violence - NYTimes.com

My take on our laws is the police need to have a pretty good reason not to grant you a FAL....

----------


## steven

> Thats coz you were the only male in her class ya juicy fruit WTF is a male doing in Home ec?


One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........

I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.

regards

----------


## R93

> One guy in a class of girls.....and the problem is then choice........
> 
> I was dumb I did metalwork and the only girl was built like a tank....its just not the same.
> 
> regards


I guess on reflection it is pretty smart but he ruined it, when he said he could and did make a dress. Ha ha

----------


## Willus

And...... Another one in Santa Barbara from a kid that didn't get what he wanted. No person should ever have to go through that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIDGsz_8k_E

----------


## Moutere

That is a chilling insight

----------

