Anyone Proud to Not Own a Gun?

They could just be having fun? Unless that all they do..

 

Meh, if I go to an outdoor range with a very large backdrop, I set up targets and, when they get boring, I'll rapid fire a few clips just for shits and grins. That's what firing ranges are for. If they're being safe, rate of fire when pointed down range I don't see to be an issue, just money out of their own pocket.

 

I'm not passing off as anything other than a ninja.. I was trained by West Point Rifle Instructors when I lived in NY.. and I was in ROTC until I had to leave 3 days before contracting due to a Medical Condition.. I choose to leave up the army logo as a respect for them which would be why I put 99 Zulu and not 11 Bravo or 12 Alpha.. If it offends anyone I will take it down but so far I havent heard anything.. anyways.. You can stop bashing me whenever you want as all I did was say there is never 0% chance of injury.. But hey if you get off on "picking on" a 20 y/o over the internet then keep on showing your e-balls bud

Edit: and FWIW I do have an ID and I do associate with Military Personnel on a daily basis.. also I'm not going around asking others for thanking me for serving when I never had the chance to do so (shame as its all I wanted to do) oh well I now have an internship in a GS job and will be "serving" in other ways than deploying

 

Usually its all they do, and their stance is all unnatural. No problem with rapid fire fun, but there is also a thing called range etiquette, and when you are enjoying the day, its not always pleasant to have .223 brass flying all over your bench. Of course this was a national forest range in Tennessee. (go figure) lol

 

They do. But just because there is an accident does not mean there is an injury. You have to break more than one rule of basic weapon's safety in order for an injury to occur.

And some people can somehow still accomplish that. Ban stupid people, not guns.

 

We disagree on the "would be more likely to die of an accidental gun death than protecting yourself from an intruder". You see that is a value judgement, and regrettably not based on facts. The fact is that owning guns in America is a remarkable freedom one that is rich and deeply rooted in our nations history. With great freedom comes great responsibility. People who own them should exercise care and good judgement and fully understand how to operate it and store it safely. Teaching kids about gun safety is very important and it is a keystone to a safe house with or without guns, because you know kids may visit a friends house where they might own guns. Etc. Even kids as young as 2 years old can be taught the correct course of action should they encounter an unsecured gun (don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult.)

The handgun is a remarkable tool, and in my opinion it is the great equalizer. It allows the defender to defend themselves against a disproportionate show of force. It is portable, light weight and very reliable. One woman with a handgun will surely cast doubt in the minds of multiple attackers (gang). So that is one reason why millions of American women in free states choose to obtain permits to carry them for self defense. It has been estimated that handguns are used 2,100 times a day in America for self defense, many times without ever even firing a round. In many cases simply displaying the weapon is a deterrent to the attacker.



I would challenge anyone who is "So proud to not own a gun" to put a sign in their front yard and exclaim it to the world. Let the world know that your household is gun free.

 

So you are just "pretty sure"? That's a bunch of garbage. You are making an assumption based on skewed numbers. Perhaps post a link to where you get these stats. I think it will make for entertaining reading. It is interesting how statistics can show accidental deaths and accidental firearm discharges, but NONE of those statistics take into account the number of robberies, murders, or assaults are PREVENTED because someone had a gun, and was able to defend themselves.

Your own logic in this statement, tied into your other posts would support that you think cars are just as dangerous as guns, but I don't hear you crying for car ownership to be regulated or banned.

***This is being said tongue-in-cheek*** If someone were behind you and slit your throat with said knife, you would be too worried about that to be pissed off and attack me back....lol

I gotta jump in and call BS here. See below:

Your bolded statement in the first part says that you never claimed to be anything more than "a ninja", yet the earlier quote that is following above you specifically say you were a "99 Zulu" and added a .... I don't know about YOU, but to me, and I suspect many others, your earlier statement of claiming to be a 99 Zulu is in fact trying to claim you were something that you are not. Trying to add humor to it does nothing. I will drop it at this: The only thing I dislike more than a deserter is a poser when it comes to military service. While I applaud you for making the attempt at service, yet missing out due to a medical condition, calling yourself something that you are not (In this case a 99 Zulu) is insulting to those of us who HAVE served.

We now return to our regular program, already in progress....

 

I see why you would say that and I will take it down as not to offend anyone else.. However 99 Zulu is a joke among the army meaning Ninja.
But like I said I will remove it

 

By all means, support what you chose! I never made an indication otherwise. I just took your comments earlier as claiming you were a 20 year old SNCO. That is why others replied as well I think. Perhaps I am wrong as to why they said something.

 

I wasn't trying to pull myself off as anything no less someone who has served 20+ years. like I said 99 Zulu was a joke among cadre and students of Ninja, Thought that was a known thing as my brother (Army test pilot at Sikorsky) introduced the "MOS" to me. However I admitted to being wrong and would rather not have it up if arguments ensue over it.

 

I told everyone where I got the stats http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hgbanfs.htm. The statement "pretty sure" was sarcasm sorry if you didnt follow. We do regulate who can drive and who can't dont we? If you read earlier that statement was made because someone said there is a zero chance of having a gun accident when he owned a gun. I told him I have a car so there is a chance that I may get in an accident. Its pretty logical. I never said we outlaw all guns I think we covered that earlier. Just agree with more regulation. Should I throw in the statistics from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention too? Or are they part of the liberal anti gun media?

 

Um....uh.... BOOBIES!!!!!!

 

With your sig all over the place now it appears so

 

This guy can break up the fight.

 

The VPC is part of the liberal anti-gun movement.

with money and lobbying rights = VPC

The CDC is not.

However I am not suggesting the VPC does no good, they have caused reasonable legislation to be
passed. It is just that they have their fair share of incompletely researched and stale data they keep pushing.


My stance: OK... banning 50cal is reasonable, no one needs a 50cal. 50cals can be used to
damage infrastructure quite readily (take out power for an entire city for example)

Ban or restrict much else that isn't already regulated ? nope.

 

See, Now you go attacking me. I never said a single word about liberal anti-gun media or the need for stats from CDC. I missed the post on the link. I will enjoy reading it, even though it is apparently 14 years old. And yes, we do have regulations on driving, but we can still drive whatever we want to buy, correct?

I think you may have lost my opinions in the crowd. I believe in some regulation. But it is a VERY fine line we walk when we step into that arena. remember, all it takes is one step, and then another, and another.... History has show this to happen. Germany did this years back when they started talking at first about how there was a master race.... oh it was simple to make the claims and garner support. next thing you know they started rounding up those not "worthy" of being a German and exterminated them.

Yes, that is an extreme, and not EXACTLY the same thing. But look at my point. Step one, get assault weapons banned. Ok, now they start saying "Hey, look at the number of deaths by shotguns! (Let's include accidental deaths to pad the numbers)" Well heck, Now we can pass a law banning shotguns....... You can see where this is going. One has to be cautious when talking about banning or limiting ANYTHING. That is why I totally HATE knee-jerk reactions that get into legislation.

 

After reading this, I'm surprised there are people that would rather not have a gun. I'm pretty sure if you all were getting attacked and in the situation when the attacker had the gun, good luck getting close enough to him with your knife without being shot before you even get your knife out. I sense arguments and politics talk before this is all over with. So

 

You've obviously havent read the past pages if you havent seen the arguments lol

 

I really didnt mean to attack you sorry man. I dont think I agree with the similarities with Nazi Germany though.