Home Defense Opinions
POSTED BY: AnthonyT
UPDATED: Friday, October 24, 2025 16:55
VIEWED: 6217
PAGE 6 of 8
I don't have time to read all the replies, so apologies if this has already been said. For home defense, there are two keys: size and ammo capacity. Coach guns tend to be small, so you're good there, but if there are more than two targets, your coach gun is going to become a very expensive club.
________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets
Captain, FFF.net Grammar Police
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by deadlockvictim:Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Common myth perpetuated by anti-gun folk.
Rate of occurance is statistically insignificant.
I am not anti-gun folk, but when you start talking about a single life as statistically insignificant - you do us a disservice....
You mighta skipped the point there. All lives are significant. What he said (or at least meant to say) is that the percentage of guns taken and used against their owners versus the percentage of guns used successfully by owners to deter crime is statistically small.
In other words, having one handy did more good than harm.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
You mighta skipped the point there. All lives are significant. What he said (or at least meant to say) is that the percentage of guns taken and used against their owners versus the percentage of guns used successfully by owners to deter crime is statistically small.
In other words, having one handy did more good than harm.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
Errr actually no. I got into this argument with a "gun nut" about 5 years ago and researched it about as well as I could. At that time only one New England state (Rhode Island??) kept records on the causes of gun deaths. From what I remember the number of folks that died by a legaly held weapon, either having it turned on themselves, accidents or 3rd party accidents (like a kid accidentaly shooting another kid)was significantly larger than self defence shootings of perps.
The gun nut pointed out that a lot of the "accidents" reported are in fact suicides with the gun just being the weapon of choice because it was available.
Still, even he had to admit that the number of successfull self defence shootings per year is far smaller than the number of gun related accidental deaths from legal weapons. That's why the NRA is so keen to use the word "deter" when discussing self defence use for firearms, actual usage figures would be too discouraging.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Not gonna debate it.
It's just a tool.
I'm sure as many folk hit their thumb with a hammer as they do nails.
Is that the hammers fault, or the operators ?
If you're going to pack a piece, a certain responsibility to self-educate is there, and the extra cost of the training is miniscule compared to it's benefit.
Obey the four rules, and exercise good sense, and that problem goes away.
Just remember that you are going to open a can of worms with a lotta folk for choosing self-defense, because it leads to the realization that you can be self-reliant, which leads one eventually down the "path to madness" of realizing governments, and police especially, are just useless parasites on your livelyhood, offering no real benefit, and a great deal of miseries.
Anyhows, it's just a tool.
"Just an object, it doesn't mean what you think." - River.
Two reccommended sites.
http://www.a-human-right.com/
Oleg's a great guy personally, as well, and right handy with a camera.
http://www.corneredcat.com/
Kathy's also a sweetheart.
I tend to avoid "gun nuts" because they're, well.... nuts - but I can vouch for either of the above folk personally as decent respectable folk, and the advice they offer is quite sound.
My personal is the same as it ever was, a puny little Colt chambered in the unlikely and unloved caliber of .380Auto, and it's been a friend in many a tight place, and can put entire mags into a tea saucer at 35-50m, which is more accuracy that I will ever need.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There are two or more sides on this issue, and we can create a new thread to discuss it.
I hope this one will stay friendly with observations and advice on the topic. It has so far.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It is indeed, but when we say tool it doesn't half provoke the idea that it's just a hammer, which is a bit misleading. A hammer can kill someone, but it's not designed too, it's designed for a wholly altruistic purpose, where as a gun has only one purpose, design and practical use and that is too kill.
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
It's just a tool.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:Quote:It is indeed, but when we say tool it doesn't half provoke the idea that it's just a hammer, which is a bit misleading. A hammer can kill someone, but it's not designed too, it's designed for a wholly altruistic purpose
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
It's just a tool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer
Quote:
where as a gun has only one purpose, design and practical use and that is too kill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plinking
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I guess we can equate a nailgun as the samething as an assualt rifle because it has 'gun' in the title. Please.
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer
Quote:You're attempting to disprove my point that guns are a weapon by pointing to their use as practice to make the wielder a more effective marksman? Please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plinking
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Quote:You're attempting to disprove my point that guns are a weapon by pointing to their use as practice to make the wielder a more effective marksman? Please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plinking
I was attempting to disprove your assertion that the ONLY use for guns was killing. Plinking is (usually) done for fun with the side effect of improving marksmanship.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hunting is usually done for fun with the side effect of killing. Guns are a tool designed for killing, their ownly practicable uses are towards that end or the training towards that end.
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
I was attempting to disprove your assertion that the ONLY use for guns was killing. Plinking is (usually) done for fun with the side effect of improving marksmanship.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME