Home Game Gun Etiquette And Other Decisions

[CodyDean 0]

guns are bad mm'kay

[Potomophobia 17]

I don't think any of us would have ended up drawing a weapon if we had one. I'm sure I wouldn't have had enough time to react since my back was to the door they came through. If the door was locked, it would have been a whole different ballgame.The device we really could have used is a phone in the bedroom.

Thanks for the reply Dave.Again, I'm glad you are OK. And none of us know how we would react to a situation like that until it occurs. Even then... things happen so quickly. As they say, hindsight is 20/20.Take care. And lock the door next time!Sorry...... black humor.

[gatortom64 1]

I will reply to this later when I am WAY more sober. And yes, I am typing this with a concealed weapon. No you pervs, a gun!!!!

[Suited_Up 2]

I will reply to this later when I am WAY more sober. And yes, I am typing this with a concealed weapon. No you pervs, a gun!!!!

I'm typing with a concealed ****, and yes I'm drunk too.

[fleung22 1]

what ever happened to badass dogs? anyways, I don't want a gun...seems counter intuitive but owning a gun actually increases the likelihood of harm instead of lowering it.just read an interesting article. in 2005, over half the people who died by guns were killed by their own gun.

[LincolnK 1]

I don't know if my city background has anything to do with it, but I agree with it as well. If you wanna be the pansy and bust out a weapon of some sort, more power to ya, it makes you the jackass, not me. If I'm gonna get jumped by guys with guns and they happen to kill me, that's the way it goes. I could get killed by a drunk driver or a bolt of lightning tonight too...I'll take my chances. I'm not living my life paranoid like that.When a man is down, the fight is over. When the fight is over, you buy eah other a beer.

So if someone attacks me with the intent to kill me, I'm a pansy if I pull a gun to defend myself, but I'm a man if I let them kill me without pulling my weapon? I guess I'll take being a pansy and alive over being a man and having a son with a dead father.A drunk driver or lightning strike give you no opportunity to take charge of the situation. If you get jumped but have a gun, you at least have a chance to determine your own survival.There are a few posts in this thread to the effect of "a real man fights back with his fists." I know a few people that could do as much damage bare handed as I could with a gun. I think I could hold my own against average joe, but if one of these guys came at me and I'm unarmed, I'd be in a heap of shit.

[PezPoisson 0]

I'm too lazy to read this whole thread, and I'm probably going off on a tangent here, but are there any ppl on here (Esp americans) who believe in the saying: "guns don't kill people, people do?"

[fleung22 1]

There are a few posts in this thread to the effect of "a real man fights back with his fists." I know a few people that could do as much damage bare handed as I could with a gun. I think I could hold my own against average joe, but if one of these guys came at me and I'm unarmed, I'd be in a heap of shit.

I don't think a guy with a gun is a pansy. I mean...if a dude with a gun gets beat down by an unarmed man it certainly adds to the wow-factor but that's about it.hey, I'm all about defending myself and if I could be the only one carrying a gun I'd have zero problems. but that's not how it works. if I live somewhere where an average joe like me can carry a gun then that means so can everyone else. I feel like it just increases the radius of danger. other thing though is mistakes and "accidents". I got attacked by a crack head once and it left me with 14 stitches in my head. the guy got desperate for a fix and wanted some cash. sometimes I think back and consider myself lucky. lucky that he wasn't strong enough hurt me more and lucky he didn't have a gun. desperate people do desperate things. I don't think my attacker wanted to hurt me or kill me but I think that places where guns are prevalent often amplify mistakes: times when you might be hurt turn into times you might get shot

[Suited_Up 2]

So if someone attacks me with the intent to kill me, I'm a pansy if I pull a gun to defend myself, but I'm a man if I let them kill me without pulling my weapon? I guess I'll take being a pansy and alive over being a man and having a son with a dead father.A drunk driver or lightning strike give you no opportunity to take charge of the situation. If you get jumped but have a gun, you at least have a chance to determine your own survival.There are a few posts in this thread to the effect of "a real man fights back with his fists." I know a few people that could do as much damage bare handed as I could with a gun. I think I could hold my own against average joe, but if one of these guys came at me and I'm unarmed, I'd be in a heap of shit.

Yeah, totally fine, go ahead and walk around with a gun 24/7, not paranoid at all.

[fleung22 1]

Yeah, totally fine, go ahead and walk around with a gun 24/7, not paranoid at all.

it should be 23.983/7...jerkin off w GSR is some bad shiit

[LincolnK 1]

Yeah, totally fine, go ahead and walk around with a gun 24/7, not paranoid at all.

I was responding to chgocubs99's claim that pulling a gun, even in defense, is a weak move, and that you might as well let yourself get killed even if you could do something about it. That doesn't make any sense to me. Who said I even carry a weapon? chgocubs99 defined the circumstances where we are being attacked while having a weapon available to us.Your reply has no relevance to my post at all. You address nothing I wrote and apply a negative label without countering any of my points. High five for taking the low road and contributing nothing.I don't carry a weapon, as I have neither a concealed carry permit nor a handgun. On top of that, I don't live in or spend time in areas where I feel personally threatened. If my neighborhood changes drastically or I move, I'll have to reevaluate.What do you think your odds of being violently attacked are? For the purposes of discussion I'll go high and guess 1,000,000-1. For every million "paranoid" people who carry a gun with them as regular practice, we could expect 1 of them to be attacked. If that person carrying a gun saves a valuable life, I'll happily call the whole bunch justified for doing so. Is there a flaw with this line of reasoning? I welcome anybody to point it out or provide a different perspective to consider.

[Suited_Up 2]

I was responding to chgocubs99's claim that pulling a gun, even in defense, is a weak move, and that you might as well let yourself get killed even if you could do something about it. That doesn't make any sense to me. Who said I even carry a weapon? chgocubs99 defined the circumstances where we are being attacked while having a weapon available to us.Your reply has no relevance to my post at all. You address nothing I wrote and apply a negative label without countering any of my points. High five for taking the low road and contributing nothing.I don't carry a weapon, as I have neither a concealed carry permit nor a handgun. On top of that, I don't live in or spend time in areas where I feel personally threatened. If my neighborhood changes drastically or I move, I'll have to reevaluate.What do you think your odds of being violently attacked are? For the purposes of discussion I'll go high and guess 1,000,000-1. For every million "paranoid" people who carry a gun with them as regular practice, we could expect 1 of them to be attacked. If that person carrying a gun saves a valuable life, I'll happily call the whole bunch justified for doing so. Is there a flaw with this line of reasoning? I welcome anybody to point it out or provide a different perspective to consider.

Gimme a break, I'm drunk.

[LincolnK 1]

Gimme a break, I'm drunk.

fair enough. have a good weekend

[MadKennedy420 0]

I think that anybody who enters another person's home at any time while armed without getting specific permission of the homeowner should be shot.

word!

[fleung22 1]

What do you think your odds of being violently attacked are? For the purposes of discussion I'll go high and guess 1,000,000-1. For every million "paranoid" people who carry a gun with them as regular practice, we could expect 1 of them to be attacked. If that person carrying a gun saves a valuable life, I'll happily call the whole bunch justified for doing so. Is there a flaw with this line of reasoning? I welcome anybody to point it out or provide a different perspective to consider.

um...I don't even know what or who you're arguing anymorethought I'd point out:USA population = 305 MillionI think there's more than 305 annual attacksthat is all

[antistuff 0]

So if someone attacks me with the intent to kill me, I'm a pansy if I pull a gun to defend myself, but I'm a man if I let them kill me without pulling my weapon? I guess I'll take being a pansy and alive over being a man and having a son with a dead father.A drunk driver or lightning strike give you no opportunity to take charge of the situation. If you get jumped but have a gun, you at least have a chance to determine your own survival.There are a few posts in this thread to the effect of "a real man fights back with his fists." I know a few people that could do as much damage bare handed as I could with a gun. I think I could hold my own against average joe, but if one of these guys came at me and I'm unarmed, I'd be in a heap of shit.

if somebody attacks you and you pull a gun you've just upped the stakes and now YOU have created the very real possibility that one of you isn't going to walk away from this fight. if somebody is that badass where you think your life is in danger from a them just physically assaulting you pulling a gun on them might be the worst thing you can do.if somebody attacks you with a gun you aren't going to have a chance to do anything about it anyway.

[Chris E 0]

People in extreme situations like... being in the presence of a store robbery or in a heated situation at a bar.. CARRYING A GUN!!! will make the situation 10x worse than it already is. I know you'll say that you are a responsible gun owner and a good shot... and you took a class etc. etc. etc. but all that doesnt mean shit in a real life situation like one of those... ALot of innocent people are gonna die when people like you decide to be the hero.

Do you have a source for that? It really annoys me when people use general statements based on emotion, not logic, to try to justify an argument. What if the robbers decide that they would be much more likely to escape arrest for robbery if they shoot the witnesses? You don't know what the robber's intentions will be until it is too late. Who knows, 'being a hero' could save lives instead of take them.

[antistuff 0]

Do you have a source for that? It really annoys me when people use general statements based on emotion, not logic, to try to justify an argument. What if the robbers decide that they would be much more likely to escape arrest for robbery if they shoot the witnesses? You don't know what the robber's intentions will be until it is too late. Who knows, 'being a hero' could save lives instead of take them.

he is thinking about it logically.

[Chris E 0]

he is thinking about it logically.

So it is logical to say that carrying a gun will make a situation '10 X' worse regardless of whether or not it is concealed, regardless of the level of training the person has, and regardless of whether the person decides to actually use the gun? Sounds like he is talking out of his vagina to me.

[Balloon guy 158]

"guns don't kill people, postal workers do?"

fyp

[Balloon guy 158]

he is thinking about it logically.

No he is thinking about it liberally.That's when you take the emotions of the subject and try to interject your opinion into it and come out with the conclusion that is the most like a woman's.In real life, logic would include facts, like the facts that people who own guns prevent crimes.That right to carry states have lowering crime rates.I will let the gun nuts quote the numbers, but they are pretty convincing.Personally I don't own a gun, I prefer dynamite, because it allows for a larger margin of error when aimed.Now if I could just carry a lighter on the airplanes again...

[Squirrelmonger 0]

I knew this board was liberal leaning but damn....I think the thing a lot of people missed was that the kind of person who exercises their right to have a concealed weapon is typically the type of person who would have it at both a poker game and a picnic. Which means he isn't carrying it because he is afraid of what will happen at the game specifically, he is carrying it because he wants it with him at that moment he needs to defend himself, his family, or his property from thugs. If that moment happens to be during a home game he just wants to be ready.As far as the effectiveness of guns in stopping crimes there are two ways to think about this and one of them has already been pointed out:1) We make guns illegal and criminals (being criminals) ignore this and have them anyways leaving the bad guys with guns and the good guys without guns. When the shit hits the fans the bad guys have all the control and have nothing to fear from the good guys so long as they bring a gun.2) We allow people to conceal and carry and both the good guys and the bad guys have guns. Bad guys have to decide if they really want the shit to hit the fan because they have everything to fear when they have no idea who is packing and who isn't...they are playing Russian Roulette just to commit a crime against someone. Now it was pointed out earlier that Canada with strong gun control has lower gun violence, I'll assume this is true for now. The problem of course is that this entire position assumes that the only differentiating factor in crime statistics between these two large nations is their gun control legislation. An assumption that quite frankly is retarded, very retarded. Even comparing factors from state to state there are differences unrelated to regulatory laws that make pinning the statistical differences on one variable damn near impossible.What we can do is look at states where these laws were passed and compare before and after and in literally every case that I've seen crime drops in that state and neighboring states often see an increase. You might say that is coincidence but I say its because even criminals understand basic risk vs reward.I would much rather have every American trained and proficient in the use of firearms than be afraid to use them like most of you are. The entire idea that we should ban a tool because it has been used to commit crimes is astonishingly stupid to me. Why not ban knives? Lets ban cars! Oh I know..hey lets ban planes since you know they used those on 9/11(unless your a conspiracy nut...in which case we should just ban the Government)....or what about Nuclear energy..since nukes use the same principle of fusion/fission it must be bad!.....or maybe we can get rid of the sun...it causes skin cancer AND it uses fusion as well..a double threat!Lets stop being afraid of our environment and instead learn to use these tools to make good things happen instead of cowering away from any tool that might be dangerous. Everything can be harmful if used to do harm, and when we put it up on some high shelf and file it away like something to be feared rather than educating people on its proper use and safe handling we might as well don robes ban technology and go back to live in the dark ages when this idea REALLY took off. Oh and just to help the wackos with making the stereotypes about me, here is a quote for you: "I'm gonna go shoot off by M16 indiscriminately just for fun ayuk ayuk ayuk!!" Sure is fun being a stereotype...oh wait aren't stereotypes something that liberals are always chiding people for using?....hypocrites.PS - Happy 4th, and God Bless AmericaPPS - I know I didn't change anyones mind...but I feel better~

[babylondonks 5]

Why not ban knives? Lets ban cars! Oh I know..hey lets ban planes since you know they used those on 9/11(unless your a conspiracy nut...in which case we should just ban the Government)....or what about Nuclear energy..since nukes use the same principle of fusion/fission it must be bad!.....or maybe we can get rid of the sun...it causes skin cancer AND it uses fusion as well..a double threat!

BANsorry, had to be done :PWell, in Australia guns have been completely banned for slightly more than 10 years and day-to-day not much has changed. Crime is still high in some places, low in others. But obviously our population is different and our population centres are further apart and smaller. Melbourne, for example, can be a great place or a terrible place. Personally I'm against guns, but that could well be a product of spending most of my life without them. Just like some people in the states are for guns because it seems so normal (this isn't an insult!). In conclusion to this short ramble, I have no idea. I just wanted to post saying 'BAN'.

[babylondonks 5]

Edit: Oops, wrong topic

[chgocubs99 0]

So if someone attacks me with the intent to kill me, I'm a pansy if I pull a gun to defend myself, but I'm a man if I let them kill me without pulling my weapon?

I was responding to chgocubs99's claim that pulling a gun, even in defense, is a weak move, and that you might as well let yourself get killed even if you could do something about it. That doesn't make any sense to me. Who said I even carry a weapon? chgocubs99 defined the circumstances where we are being attacked while having a weapon available to us.

What?You need to go reread my post. I said that someone that pulls a gun to attack someons is a pansy. I never made any statements about people in general even carrying weapons for self defense reasons, let alone labeled them. Please go back and quote the part of my post where i said "you might as well let yourself get killed even if you could do something about it"...yet you said that was my claim?