gun control in america

Originally posted by normbenign
I don't want to bust your bubble, but carrying that thing in your pocket is a bad idea, at least without a pocket holster. The barrel can be blocked by pocket lint, and then you've got a bomb which can leave your hand in tatters, not to mention the other pieces which may hit other areas.

.22LR is not going to stop anyone with COM hits. The pocket pis ...[text shortened]... you like Taurus products you look into the Millenium series, in either 9mm or .40 S&W.

Ahhh...a firearm expert like me LOL.

Yeah thanks I'm familiar with all the arguments regarding stopping power, etc. That said I think someone with 3 or 4 rounds in their chest from a .22 is going to want to seek immediate medical attention rather than bother me anymore.

The puny .25ACP is inferior to the .22 LR in ft-lbs energy in any barrel length there is no reason for it to exist.

Arizona did make concealed carry legal with no license required one year ago.

Thanks for the recommendation regarding Taurus products, I'm quite familiar with them, bought my first Taurus in 1985 and became an instant fan. I've owned 4 , I believe their guns are as good as any, better than most, and I've owned dozens of other firearms over the past 40 years.

Originally posted by normbenign
What may be the good to come from this thread, is the fact the the 2nd amendment says "the right of the people to keep AND BEAR arms shall not be infringed."

If the poster is correct, then Arizona is I believe only the 2nd State to fully recognize that right. Requiring a license to bear arms, is and infringement on the right.

There would be public outcry if licensing of speech or practice of religion were to be enacted.

correct. if you require a license, it's no longer an inalienable right granted by the 'creator,' it's now a privilege granted (and taken away!) by the government.

but the united states stopped functioning by the constitution a long time ago.

Originally posted by normbenign
I am pretty sure I'm informed, and not so bad a thinker. Certainly not brainwashed. Believing what the state wants you to without question marks the brainwashed, and my stances are certainly not following the crowd, not even the NRA crowd.

You speak of civilization, and remember that for the largest part amounts to specialization and division of labo ...[text shortened]... t is there as are other individual rights as protection against the encroachments of statism.

Personally I think you're confusing 'societal need' with that of the nation in strife...your intimating war torn nations and their need for arming. There are individuals that believe society cannot operate without a deterrent of one kind or another, yours sounds like you're defending against the possibility of a police state...your country is what you make it.

Originally posted by normbenign
I don't want to bust your bubble, but carrying that thing in your pocket is a bad idea, at least without a pocket holster. The barrel can be blocked by pocket lint, and then you've got a bomb which can leave your hand in tatters, not to mention the other pieces which may hit other areas.

.22LR is not going to stop anyone with COM hits. The pocket pis ...[text shortened]... you like Taurus products you look into the Millenium series, in either 9mm or .40 S&W.

a .22 bullet bounces around inside the skull like a hot piece of pop corn, lethal up close, when used by someone who can shoot.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This is just right wing "holding yer breath until you turn blue". The death rates from guns in the US, esp. in those States with few restrictions on gun ownership, are sufficiently higher than in those places with gun ownership restrictions (like say Norway) to render such an argument absurd on its face.

Comparisons between Norway and the USA are perfectly useless. Compare the same places when "shall issue" laws were passed. Crime was reduced including gun deaths in every case. The opposite was true when Australia and the UK virtually banned private ownership.

Death rates in the US from guns are totally distorted as a result of the drug trade in major US Cities. Sometimes upwards of 80% of homocides by guns are "drug related".

It is not the honest citizen owning guns that is a problem, but the insane policy of government regulating what people can use for attitude adjustment.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You are greviously misinformed.

Arizona's almost non-existent gun laws didn't stop Loughner from shooting a bunch of people, did they? And he purchased his gun legally.

"Arizona's almost non-existent gun laws didn't stop Loughner from shooting a bunch of people, did they? And he purchased his gun legally."

Nor did New York's laws prevent John Lennons killing. Laws don't prevent things from happening.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Stop playing the fool. I stand by my statement; "most self-defense situations do not occur AFTER someone has already started shooting. A homeowner who has a loaded weapon or a weapon with ammo easily available is asking for a tragedy as a local homeowner with a ten year old child found out in my area last year.

"most self-defense situations do not occur AFTER someone has already started shooting."

Irrelevant. Self defense doesn't even have to involve a gun assault. Self defense situations are those where a person is threatened with great bodily harm or death, or observes another in such peril. In any such case, there is seldom time to hunt around retrieving the parts of your gun, the ammo, assembling and loading. Often the timing may be in seconds or less.

Accidents can be minimized but never totally eliminated.

Originally posted by Hugh Glass
a .22 bullet bounces around inside the skull like a hot piece of pop corn, lethal up close, when used by someone who can shoot.

Yes, but it's use is primarily by hitmen who walk up and place the muzzle on the temple of the victim. The range and accuracy of those mouse guns is very limited. Bet you don't find many cops using them as backups.

Originally posted by Zapp Brannigan
Ahhh...a firearm expert like me LOL.

Yeah thanks I'm familiar with all the arguments regarding stopping power, etc. That said I think someone with 3 or 4 rounds in their chest from a .22 is going to want to seek immediate medical attention rather than bother me anymore.

The puny .25ACP is inferior to the .22 LR in ft-lbs energy in any barrel l ...[text shortened]... od as any, better than most, and I've owned dozens of other firearms over the past 40 years.

"That said I think someone with 3 or 4 rounds in their chest from a .22 is going to want to seek immediate medical attention rather than bother me anymore."

The perp with 3 or 4 .22LR in their chest may well die from their wounds without immediate medical help, but they probably will not stop him from choking you to death.

In one of my local CCW classes, an NRA film showing an intruder arriving at a bedroom door, with a girl stationed behind her bed armed with a .357 six shooter. The question, what should the girl do, the intruder being armed with a large knife?

a. Warn the intruder she is armed. Tell him forcefully to leave.
b. Wait in silence to see what he'll do.
c. Aim center of mass, and if necessary fire all six until he's stopped.

The correct answer may save your life.

Originally posted by normbenign
Yes, but it's use is primarily by hitmen who walk up and place the muzzle on the temple of the victim. The range and accuracy of those mouse guns is very limited. Bet you don't find many cops using them as backups.

Also - what's the point of concealing it if it's for defense? You want the bad guys to see it if it's for defense.