dazzerfong Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 You ever hear about the guy who brought the knife to a gun fight? *grin* :teehee: Problem is, there's no fight when someone guts you before you could draw your pistol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ1029 Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 You ever hear about the guy who brought the knife to a gun fight? *grin* :teehee: Problem is, there's no fight when someone guts you before you could draw your pistol.Then you probably did it wrong, to be honest. Despite the whole 'twenty foot rule' or whatever it is that the internet rumors now-a-days, I think most experienced shooters will be able to drop you before you cover that last three feet needed to 'gut' me. Now, if you're say... two feet away from me, that's a different ball game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Aurelius, calm down. No-one's accusing anyone of anything, we're just implicating the 'lose-lose' scenarios of self-defense. Though, in my opinion, if you load an entire magazine on someone, that's overkill. One or two, even three is called being 'safe'. Though, if you really think that you could whip out a gun every time someone jumps you, I will pay you $400 up-front. I'm not kidding. I highly doubt one's reflexes are that quick anyway to begin with.I am pretty sure that if someone is charging at you with a knife you won't have enough time to get draw and get your gun ready anyways. I don't even think reflexes matter here. Unless you walk around with a fully loaded gun with the safety off at all times you won't have much luck. You would be absolutely amazed at how quickly I can pull my pistol, and fire off three or four rounds. When I carried an M-16, there was always a round in the chamber. Quick flick of the thumb, and I am ready to rock and roll, if I can't bring it around in time, it also works as a 7.5 pound club. Unless said knife wielder is coming at me with a sword, I have better reach. Thump him upside the head once, and then he will be staring down the barrel of my gun. Do something stupid, and the last thing he will see is a muzzle flash. Also, if someone is coming at me with a knife, it's not like I am gonna just stand there, and wait for him...... I am not rooted to the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Just for the record before our other members begin to think that we all live in a lawless wasteland in the US, my current home outside in the suburbs is amazingly peaceful and crime free, something that a city boy like me finds a very very restful experience. My wife occasionally has to chide me for not locking the doors after letting our setter out for her midnight run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Just for the record before our other members begin to think that we all live in a lawless wasteland in the US, my current home outside in the suburbs is amazingly peaceful and crime free, something that a city boy like me finds a very very restful experience. My wife occasionally has to chide me for not locking the doors after letting our setter out for her midnight run. I haven't locked my doors since I have lived here...... and I have been here for about five years and some change now. Nice peaceful neighborhood, elementary school three blocks away, along with a GA airport... (general aviation, 99% private aircraft.) I grew up in this neighborhood though, about five blocks away, and went to the school that is so close, not much has changed here in 45 years. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shantih Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Very interesting thread (the bickering aside of course). they gave us our right to bare arms, not to defend ourselves from one another, or from an invasion (those are bonuses) but to defend ourselves from them (the government). and i shall use my firearm(s) in any of those instances lol I like the "bare arms" part, only my idea of baring arms is to be wearing a T-shirt (sorry couldn't resist). I think that if you're going back to the second Amendment you have to take into account that the situation back at the end of the 18th century was very different. I've read posters quoting many historical figures and great Americans like Thomas Jefferson or Patrick Henry but I believe we should put their words in perspective. It made sense to have militias and Minutemen armed to fight the British two hundred years ago but things have changed since then. I for one am grateful that I live in Europe where people don't need a gun to feel safe. Over here only hunters own guns and hunting accidents are not uncommon so I would have to say that the downside of having people carry firearms seems pretty obvious to me. No offense but what I find rather disquieting is the idea that you guys in the US need guns to fend off attackers. Either you are living in a war zone or you are being paranoid. I can understand someone having a handgun at home in some cases but I really don't understand the need for an arsenal. I myself find guns rather uncouth and don't care for them that much. I did go to a shooting range once but that was it. I certainly wouldn't like to have a gun at home if only for the reason that it would be dangerous if my kid brother found it while staying at my place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Very interesting thread (the bickering aside of course). they gave us our right to bare arms, not to defend ourselves from one another, or from an invasion (those are bonuses) but to defend ourselves from them (the government). and i shall use my firearm(s) in any of those instances lol I like the "bare arms" part, only my idea of baring arms is to be wearing a T-shirt (sorry couldn't resist). I think that if you're going back to the second Amendment you have to take into account that the situation back at the end of the 18th century was very different. I've read posters quoting many historical figures and great Americans like Thomas Jefferson or Patrick Henry but I believe we should put their words in perspective. It made sense to have militias and Minutemen armed to fight the British two hundred years ago but things have changed since then. I for one am grateful that I live in Europe where people don't need a gun to feel safe. Over here only hunters own guns and hunting accidents are not uncommon so I would have to say that the downside of having people carry firearms seems pretty obvious to me. No offense but what I find rather disquieting is the idea that you guys in the US need guns to fend off attackers. Either you are living in a war zone or you are being paranoid. I can understand someone having a handgun at home in some cases but I really don't understand the need for an arsenal. I myself find guns rather uncouth and don't care for them that much. I did go to a shooting range once but that was it. I certainly wouldn't like to have a gun at home if only for the reason that it would be dangerous if my kid brother found it while staying at my place. I don't leave loaded weapons laying around the house.... nor should anyone else.... That said, its all about if you grew up around them or not. Many places, you walk into someones home, and think you walked in to a gun store...... the children are educated from a very young age about gun safety, so it is just a non-issue. There are more injuries per participant playing baseball, than there are hunting accidents........ (by a factor of 3 and some change......) Shall we ban baseball too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shantih Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 I don't leave loaded weapons laying around the house.... nor should anyone else.... That said, its all about if you grew up around them or not. Many places, you walk into someones home, and think you walked in to a gun store...... the children are educated from a very young age about gun safety, so it is just a non-issue. There are more injuries per participant playing baseball, than there are hunting accidents........ (by a factor of 3 and some change......) Shall we ban baseball too? We don't play baseball in Europe, in fact anyone carrying a baseball bat on this side of the Atlantic is probably up to no good. Besides we could make the same comparison with domestic accidents and say that they cause more deaths but that is not the point I was making (i.e. not advocating banning household appliances). The simple truth is that guns are meant to be dangerous and that accidents do happen. My grandfather had a service weapon and he was very careful about it but one day he had left a bullet in the chamber and accidentally fired it while he was cleaning his gun. It's not that he was negligent or careless but accidents do happen and sometimes it doesn't take much. He never made the same mistake again and nobody was hurt but that could have been tragic. My concern is not just about gun safety per se but about a teenager stumbling upon a gun and taking it to show off or get a kick out of it. I was a kid not that long ago and I know what kind of mischief teenagers are capable of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 The distinction is important to remember if ever you find yourself in a self defense shooting. It wont matter one iota if you shoot to kill in a perfectly legal manner. That intent will be used against you and you can find yourself brought up on murder charges. Logic does not bode well under law. Hostile prosecutors will use whatever they can to secure a conviction. A shot to the head or to the extremities can both be seen as excessive force. If you shoot someone to wound them, a skilled DA might argue that you weren't in fear of your life and as such not protected under self defense laws. Further, if the individual dies, even if they wouldn't have or couldn't have argued the above, they could still bring you up on involuntary manslaughter. Do not make the mistake of thinking the law is on your side, it is not. The point is that the distinction you mentioned in you previous post between shooting to kill and being prepared to kill, will never matter in legal proceedings. Whether you had no intention of killing someone will be beside the point, discharging a firearm will automatically infer that you reasonably could kill someone. It will matter if you shoot to kill in a legal manner, that’s part of my point. The use of deadly force can only be authorized if you have some authority or solid legal ground to kill a person. This is why the distinction is of no practical value. I do not know if I will kill the target, the only thing that I can control is determining whether I am justified in using deadly force. This is why you don’t fire warning shots. Discharging a firearm will always count as use of deadly force regardless of where you shoot. This is why the whole ‘prepared to kill’ idea is pointless. It really should go without saying. If your warning shot kills someone a mile away then, if you get lucky, you will be tried for reckless manslaughter. But as soon as you draw a gun on another and you kill them, then your distinction will not matter. Both the individual with the ‘shoot to kill’ attitude, and the one with the ‘prepared to kill’ mind-set could potentially be charged with felony murder. What I’m trying to get at is once you use deadly force then intent can be inferred. All that ‘prepared to kill’/ Jeff Cooper color code readiness stuff is legally nonsense. The only thing that matters is whether you have some legal right to justify the use of deadly force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 (edited) We don't play baseball in Europe, in fact anyone carrying a baseball bat on this side of the Atlantic is probably up to no good. You do play Rounders..same bat. Besides we could make the same comparison with domestic accidents and say that they cause more deaths but that is not the point I was making (i.e. not advocating banning household appliances). Would that be toasters don't kill people, people with toasters kill people? The simple truth is that guns are meant to be dangerous and that accidents do happen. I was raised with guns and knew without a doubt what they were for and why I should not touch the gun cabinet for any reason what so ever.That included my shotgun and 22 center fire that I owned at age six, without an adult they were off limits.. My grandfather had a service weapon and he was very careful about it but one day he had left a bullet in the chamber and accidentally fired it while he was cleaning his gun. It's not that he was negligent or careless but accidents do happen and sometimes it doesn't take much. He never made the same mistake again and nobody was hurt but that could have been tragic. Well if he was in the service then he should have known you never leave a round chambered in a stored weapon, that was careless I'm afraid.Gun Basics: First you pop the clip or empty the cylinder, then you checked for chambered rounds, then you release the safety, only then to you reduce the weapon to component parts for cleaning...at least thats what my grandfather taught me. My concern is not just about gun safety per se but about a teenager stumbling upon a gun and taking it to show off or get a kick out of it. I was a kid not that long ago and I know what kind of mischief teenagers are capable of. Sorry but I'm with Hey You on this, if you were raised in a household that had guns then the probability is that you were around them since you were very young and knew the do's and don'ts of firearms. In addition we (people who own weapons tend to LOCK our gun cabinets) I personally use a safe for all my guns, ammunition and loading supplies excepting my Walther (which is well out of reach and access of visiting children), in a keyed dead bolted locked closet. @MajKrAzAmTotally valid thesis on the legal distinction of action defining intent. Very well presented. :thumbsup: Edited January 26, 2012 by Aurielius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts