Gun Control

teachercd said:
Ugggg, this is such an issue.

You have a gun and you have not checked on it for "a couple of years", that is not being responsible, you don't even know if it is there anymore.

I guess it is "good" that you don't have it in the house, but, that is a low bar.  

If you don't use it, just turn it in to the police.  Makes more sense.  Take your brothers guns as well and get rid of them.  You clearly don't need them, hopefully they are still in the safe and you can go turn them all in.
Click to expand...
my brother is on the all american trap shooting list.   he buys shotgun shells by the pallet.   i still like to trap shoot and sporting clay shoot when i can.   just haven't for a couple years now.

 
Archy1221 said:
Why would she shoot them?   It’s just property we are always told? The property is Not worth a scum bag human life we are always told? 
Click to expand...
Who are we always told this by? 
 

That’s just ridiculous. Somebody breaks into my house while I’m there, I am going to assume they are there to cause me harm and I will kill them. Notice I didn’t say “shoot them”. I’ll make sure they are done. Bad day for them if they were just there to steal something I guess. And to teach’s chagrin, I do own a few guns.

I would think Harris would be much more concerned about somebody wanting to do her harm than just being a thief or burglar.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JJ Husker said:
Who are we always told this by? 
 

That’s just ridiculous. Somebody breaks into my house while I’m there, I am going to assume they are there to cause me harm and I will kill them. Notice I didn’t say “shoot them”. I’ll make sure they are done. Bad day for them if they were just there to steal something I guess. And to teach’s chagrin, I do own a few guns.

I would think Harris would be much more concerned about somebody wanting to do her harm than just being a thief or burglar.
Click to expand...
100% chance that if I owned a gun and someone broke in that there would only be two outcomes.

1.  I shoot myself by accident in a rush to get my gun

2.  The intruder (probably some wimpy teen) would wrestle the gun from me and shoot me.

Archy1221 said:
It’s been on this board quite a few times and ALL over news stories during the George Floyd riots when people were trying to/wanting to protect their businesses with guns in hand.  We were told that’s not appropriate and that’s what insurance is for and no need for gun protection.  
Click to expand...
I do remember this being a pretty big rallying cry during the "mostly peaceful" riots. 

 
Archy1221 said:
It’s been on this board quite a few times and ALL over news stories during the George Floyd riots when people were trying to/wanting to protect their businesses with guns in hand.  We were told that’s not appropriate and that’s what insurance is for and no need for gun protection.  
Click to expand...
TBF, that is slightly different than somebody unexpectedly breaking into your home. In the middle of a riot, you would just be there to protect property. The need for self defense would be a result of choosing to protect property. I’m not saying that necessarily makes it wrong but it is different than somebody breaking into your home at 1AM when you have no idea what their motive is.

When all that riot s#!t was going on, one of my employees (who owned about 14 AR’s) posted up at a local business for asset protection reasons. I say “owned” because he has since passed. I actually bought (legal transfer) my AR and a 9mm handgun from him at about that same time. He was what I would legitimately call a gun nut.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
teachercd said:
100% chance that if I owned a gun and someone broke in that there would only be two outcomes.

1.  I shoot myself by accident in a rush to get my gun

2.  The intruder (probably some wimpy teen) would wrestle the gun from me and shoot me.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is that chance. But I figure I’d rather go out with a fighting chance than just cede our welfare. All I know is somebody is going to die, hopefully not me, my wife or a neighbor.

 
JJ Husker said:
TBF, that is slightly different than somebody unexpectedly breaking into your home. In the middle of a riot, you would just be there to protect property. The need for self defense would be a result of choosing to protect property. I’m not saying that necessarily makes it wrong but it is different than somebody breaking into your home at 1AM when you have no idea what their motive is.

When all that riot s#!t was going on, one of my employees (who owned about 14 AR’s) posted up at a local business for asset protection reasons. I say “owned” because he has since passed. I actually bought (legal transfer) my AR and a 9mm handgun from him at about that same time. He was what I would legitimately call a gun nut.
Click to expand...






Agreed. Defending your home as you live/exist/sleep and defending a business during civil unrest and riots are wildly different scenarios. I'd imagine most of the sentiment relating to people encouraging others not to defend their storefronts is because your life (and sometimes the lives of others via escalation, even if they're committing a crime) is more valuable than replaceable stuff. This is why bank tellers and store clerks and others are instructed not to resist or try to stop robberies.

In terms of defending a business or not defending a business during a riot, there's a third option of staying home and staying safe. In a home invasion there is no such third option.

 
Archy1221 said:
It’s been on this board quite a few times and ALL over news stories during the George Floyd riots when people were trying to/wanting to protect their businesses with guns in hand.  We were told that’s not appropriate and that’s what insurance is for and no need for gun protection.  
Click to expand...
plus..rooftop koreans. They were pretty cool.

 
teachercd said:
I do remember this being a pretty big rallying cry during the "mostly peaceful" riots. 
Click to expand...


I don't.

I do remember mocking the St. Louis couple standing on their front lawn and brandishing guns at marching protestors, and Kyle Rittenhouse driving 30 miles and bringing his AR-15 to defend a stranger's warehouse during another scheduled protest. They were silly in a way a home invader usually isn't. 

I don't own a gun for the same reasons you don't. I just don't see the scenarios working out as planned. But plenty of liberals I know keep a gun around for self-protection, and I've never considered them a traitor to the gun control cause. I think that's the stake Kamala Harris' has put in the ground. Something short of posing for Christmas cards cradling your favorite assault weapon. 

 
Back
Top