Guns, Guns Guns

Daryl wrote:Lord Skimper, it appears that Canada is virtually identical to Australia from your description. As I have mentioned earlier in this topic I was initially annoyed about having to surrender some of my guns (well compensated financially), but now accept that an inadequate 18 year old loser will find it harder to get a gun to kill me and mine, so ok. I regret that my descendants won't be able to have teenage years like mine riding a horse while hunting with a rifle and pistol, but they have other interests now anyway. My pickup had a gun rack and was left unlocked when I went into the nearest town.
In the event of a home invasion your guns are now useless, as by the time you unlock your cupboard then the ammo box they are in control. One of my many hobbies is making display swords that are hung off hooks in each bedroom. I don't like fakes so they are hi carbon steel and well ground. I believe that I could be excused for grabbing what was handy to defend myself, particularly as they would be found with my cheapest kitchen knife in their hand.

The real issue is what have you gained from surrendering your guns?

Theoretically; you do not have to worry about the 18 year old druggy shooting you, but the homicide statistics for Australia document that the risk in Australia was very low even before you imposed draconian gun regulations. The only murders that you MIGHT be preventing are themass muddlers. However; the only weapons used in the biggest mass murder in the US
committed by a single perpetrator were a match and a pop bottle full of gasoline. Google "happy land social club fire."

As I have pointed out repeatedly, the demographic information on the perpetrators of homicide establish that the problem in the US is not guns. Aside from US police becoming so inept at solving crimes that most of them should be arrested for loitering, we have an explosion of out of wedlock births that result in an extremely high rate of homicides of young children and other assaults on them. These fatherless young boys to often grow up to become feral teenagers with no prospects of becoming husbands and fathers to restrain their aggression. Unless the US addresses these problems, all the gun control in the world will not help us.

The day I moved to England in 1989 I turned on the News and watched the report about the guy who answered his front door and was shot in the stomach with a rusty crossbow bolt. Right there I knew not having guns was the answer.

Lord Skimper wrote:The day I moved to England in 1989 I turned on the News and watched the report about the guy who answered his front door and was shot in the stomach with a rusty crossbow bolt. Right there I knew not having guns was the answer.

Would you habitually answer your door with a drawn weapon? If not, gun control or the lack thereoff would not make a difference...

Would you habitually answer your door with a drawn weapon? If not, gun control or the lack thereoff would not make a difference..

Actually it doesn't necessarily matter if you personally do so. If a sufficient percentage of the population answers the door armed, than Mr Crossbow will be much less likely to attack random people for fear that he himself would be shot.

Lord Skimper wrote:The day I moved to England in 1989 I turned on the News and watched the report about the guy who answered his front door and was shot in the stomach with a rusty crossbow bolt. Right there I knew not having guns was the answer.

I always know who is at the door before opening the door. If they are not someone I know or recognize as having legitimate business, I will not open the door.

I cant imagine being stupid enough to open the door to some stranger armed with a weapons as obvious as a crossbow except of course to shoot them.

This is why God gave me a hydraulic excavator and 540 acres of dirt.

The political aspects of self defence don't matter if they never find the body?

biochem wrote:

Would you habitually answer your door with a drawn weapon? If not, gun control or the lack thereoff would not make a difference..

Actually it doesn't necessarily matter if you personally do so. If a sufficient percentage of the population answers the door armed, than Mr Crossbow will be much less likely to attack random people for fear that he himself would be shot.

I submit that it a significant percentage opens the door with a drawn weapon (note - being armed would not be enough, since MR Crossbow is ready to fire) your society already has significant problems (as in you might be living in Mad Max World).

Eyal wrote:I submit that it a significant percentage opens the door with a drawn weapon (note - being armed would not be enough, since MR Crossbow is ready to fire) your society already has significant problems (as in you might be living in Mad Max World).

What you mean a game where you attack random people on the street?

Not sure that this civilization thing is all that it is cracked up to be.

Have fun,
T2M

thinkstoomuch wrote:

Eyal wrote:I submit that it a significant percentage opens the door with a drawn weapon (note - being armed would not be enough, since MR Crossbow is ready to fire) your society already has significant problems (as in you might be living in Mad Max World).

What you mean a game where you attack random people on the street?

Not sure that this civilization thing is all that it is cracked up to be.

Have fun,
T2M

For all you folks living abroad, that game is already in the us. It has several names. The knockout game and polar bear hunting are two of the more common.