What guns, if any, do you own?

[Who Dares Win]

I have a beretta98 (version for civilians), clearly I dont carry it out outside my house given that laws in europe are not so tolerant.

I have a special card that allows me to move the gun in different countries but once in a country I have to drop it in my accommodation.

Unless I have multiple hostiles in my house, I would be much more comfortable with a knife given the tight spaces plus there is always the risk to pass walls and hit those around you.

If I had a villa, I would clearly get more guns for self defence.

 

[spinich]

If you had a villa you could probably afford to hire other people to keep you safe.

 

[FairShake]

I started with the Glock 19 and I can't think of anything better for someone new to firearms. It's small enough to be concealed carry if that's what you want...but a long enough barrel for accuracy and stopping power.

 

[Bible_Belt]

It's pretty much impossible in western and central Europe to get robbed by a criminal with a gun when waiting for green light in your car. It's predominantly something that happens in USA and countries with similar laws regarding gun possession.

Where I live, concealed carry is ok, and pretty much everyone has a gun. Times that your scenario has happened near me number zero. Why would any criminal commit that act when he knows there is a good chance that his victim will shoot back? Concealed carry prevents crime. There was an attempted mass shooter in Texas, and he didn't even make it in the door of the convention he was trying to terrorize. Mass shootings happen when the victims can't shoot back.

 

[touma.akagi]

My thinking is that it's better to have it and not need it than the other way around. Odds are, the cops won't be anywhere close if you find yourself in danger.

Obviously, a person should study the gun laws in their state. Many states have stand your ground laws.

"Problem with carrying a gun is if you have to use it, you will be sued, probably prosecuted. If you don't use it..." If you're not willing to use it when it's needed, you shouldn't have it. Plain and simple. Yeah, obviously, you can be sued if the person lives through the ordeal, which is why you always shoot to kill, in fact purposely making leg or arm shots just make you look worse.

If you shoot somebody in your own home, who came in with his own gun, and he dies, no one feels sorry for him.
Even if he lives, he looks pretty bad in front of a jury. So at best he wins the civil trial, but you should win the criminal one.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Why would any criminal commit that act when he knows there is a good chance that his victim will shoot back? Concealed carry prevents crime. There was an attempted mass shooter in Texas, and he didn't even make it in the door of the convention he was trying to terrorize. Mass shootings happen when the victims can't shoot back.

This... is complete bullshyt. Did you not see what happened at Parkland?

I own a Gen 4 glock. I take consistent girlfriends to my local range but that’s about it. Concealed carry is virtually illegal in New Jersey. As such, our crime and gun homicide rate is low relative to the rest of the country.

 

[Billtx49]

Concealed carry is virtually illegal in New Jersey. As such, our crime and gun homicide rate is low relative to the rest of the country.

Let Chicago in on your secret…

 

[EyeBRollin]

Let Chicago in on your secret…

Where every gun comes from Indiana? Nice try. Where’s all the crime in New York City?

 

[EyeBRollin]

I always have a concealed knife with me and know how to use it so I feel pretty safe regarding any 1vs1 situation w/o weapon.

Regarding guns: I see that Americans still don't get it - if person has a gun and wants to use it and actually does it, this person already has INITIATIVE.

So INITIATIVE (pulling gun @somebody) means step from KO. Wearing a gun for a self-defence from an assault is a phucked up/dangerous idea. Even guys trained with weapons FAIL when being mugged with weapons (approx 95% of times if I recall correctly)

USA should really prohibit any gun ownership or gun possession it would certainly help to limit the number of mass shootings & burglaries committed with firearms.

Don’t waste your breath. The US is ass backwards on a lot of issues. We’re the only country stupid enough to think mass murders are solved by more guns.

 

[glass half full]

After a brush with a nutjob who had a warrant out on him, showing up @ our party with his gf that my then-wife knew...yeah I got my permit and took training from a local police officer. I highly recommend anyone carrying, to do this.

I didn't realize how unprepared I was until taking that class.

 

[glass half full]

I have a beretta98 (version for civilians), clearly I dont carry it out outside my house given that laws in europe are not so tolerant.

I have a special card that allows me to move the gun in different countries but once in a country I have to drop it in my accommodation.

Unless I have multiple hostiles in my house, I would be much more comfortable with a knife given the tight spaces plus there is always the risk to pass walls and hit those around you.

If I had a villa, I would clearly get more guns for self defence.

It has been proven that at close range, a skilled person with a knife who is in decent physical condition, can defend himself against a gunman. It was demonstrated on TV, but a Google search might bring it up.

 

[Bible_Belt]

This... is complete bullshyt. Did you not see what happened at Parkland?.

The only gun defending the school belonged to a security officer who cowered in fear. The first city cops who got there didn't even go in, because they were too scared. None of this was the fault of guns; those were all human failures. The other mass shootings have been in night clubs where guns are prohibited. Vegas sniper picked a spot where no one could shoot back. Show me a mass shooting in a place like Texas, where everyone is armed. Rural Illinois is the same. Guns are largely banned in Chicago, and they have a homicide rate similar to Baghdad Iraq.

 

[EyeBRollin]

The only gun defending the school belonged to a security officer who cowered in fear. The first city cops who got there didn't even go in, because they were too scared. None of this was the fault of guns; those were all human failures. The other mass shootings have been in night clubs where guns are prohibited. Vegas sniper picked a spot where no one could shoot back.

You just made my point so eloquently. They all were armed and the **** still happened. So let’s arm teachers!!!!!! That will show the gunman!!

Show me a mass shooting in a place like Texas, where everyone is armed. Rural Illinois is the same. Guns are largely banned in Chicago, and they have a homicide rate similar to Baghdad Iraq.

Now we’re getting into anecdotal evidence. Chicago’s homicide rate is concentrated in one area. As a city it’s homocide rate per capita is comparable to Texas’ major cities. New York City, where guns are all but banned, is one of the safest large cities in the country.

 

[EyeBRollin]

There are so many incorrect assumptions in here I don't know where to start.

First off, guns are the great equalizer. The only people who want you disarmed are those who intend to have an advantage over you.

Secondly, as far as "mass shooters", there is a 90% correlation between them and the use of SSRI medications. This is why these never occurred prior to big pharma.

Third, the mass majority of violence in the US is gangs killing gangs. We don't have a gun problem, we have a gang problem.

1. Correct, but that’s not necessarily a good thing. I bought a gun for that very reason.

2. Never been a mass shooting before anti-depressants? Are you insane? There’s been massacres ever since the advent of gunpowder.

3. This is a half truth. Gangs are a problem because of guns, not in spite of them.

 

[RickTheToad]

I have a concealed carry permit in CT. I carry a PX4 Storm; Amazing firearm. I practice often and have had to use it a few times in some of the crazy areas of Bridgeport and when I was in Hartford. At least Uncle Sam trained me well. A friend a mine rocks a Desert Storm .50 caliber. That sh!t is nuts. It's a freakin cannon, heavy as fvck too. No way you can conceal carry that on your waist. Technically, Connecticut is an open carry State. However, you'll get a lot of attention from the cops if you open carry.

 

[glass half full]

Where every gun comes from Indiana? Nice try. Where’s all the crime in New York City?

Does Every gun that comes from Indiana =19%?

That was the last figure I saw on the subject, maybe 2017

The rest of them must be coming from elsewhere

 

[EyeBRollin]

1. It is definitely a good thing. People have the right and need for self defense.

2. Give examples.

3. Those gangs would continue to kill and go on crime waves even without guns. But that still misses the point. We should ban guns instead of removing the gangs? That's ludicrous.

1. I only need a gun for self defense because other people have guns.

2. Palm Sunday Massacre

3. Yes, but they can’t kill as efficiently without guns. People will kill when they want to kill. Guns kill people more efficiently than other weapons.

 

[EyeBRollin]

1. Not at all. That assumes everyone has equal power, speed and ability to defend against their attacker(s).

2. That was a cocaine dealer, drug and gang related.

3. All true, but qgain to disarm tge mqss of law abiding populace and render them defenseless because of criminal activity, is a ridiculous idea.

Still all of these does not address that Government is the number one killer of all. Makes no sense for them to be the sole owner of weaponry.

1. Other self defense weapons exist that aren’t capable of killing 50 humans in a matter of minutes

2. Ok? Mass murder is mass murder.

3. Strawman. Removing guns doesn’t make one defenseless.

Tyrannical government has nothing to do with right to gun ownership. The second amendment existed to put down slave revolts.

 

[RickTheToad]

Nothing like a nice warm uzi..

 

[EyeBRollin]

1. You are confusing the bullets. The SSRI mass killings are addressed in bullet 2. Bullet 1 is about the individual right to self-defense.

2. Bullet 2 is for the mass shootings discussion, specifically to SSRI. Those are linked to SSRIs and bug pharma. Your example to counter the SSRI argument had nothing to do with SSRIs.

3. The 2nd amendment was to secure a free state. A free states most capable challenger is the Government.

1. As usual, you’re talking in circles. A gun is only needed for self defense because other people have guns.

2. Show evidence that anti-depressants cause mass murders.

3. Sorry that’s wrong. It was a compromise to allow slave owners to put down slave revolts. Go read some more Federalist papers. You are deluding yourself if you think your guns will protect you from the US military.