The Non-Political Ramifications of Handgun Ownership Megathread

Why do you guys do this. It always turns ugly... just stop....

Read the fen rules, or stop posting all together...



And stop kidding yourself, what you posted is 100% political. Just because you say it's not, doesn't make it so.

 

We seem to stupid proof our environment. Handgun ownership provides an avenue for natural selection to take course.

Also, if someone breaks into my home AND attacks me I don't have to worry about if they are bigger or faster. I guess this is against natural selection. What a paradox.

Jonathan

 

Ok, i am looking at your quote and i just fail to see how.

Not political?

Really? Social? Well, i guess, but you have to remember all political discussions are also "social". So it can be social and political at same time. IMO this is. It's been done before and always turns ugly.

On that note, i am out. If you want to understand it really, do a search.

 

Ok all politics aside:

There will always be criminals. Criminals will always pursue crime. Even if hand guns are illegal, criminals will have them. So I prefer for them to be legal so I can have a chance to protect my family first, then myself, if one of the said criminals makes his way into my dwelling place.

Semi-auto weapons are a necessity. The premise that someone would try and protect their home with a muzzle loading weapon is preposterous. I'm not one of the people who is going to buy a ton of guns. I'm going to buy one nice hand gun to keep in my car when I'm there, and in a safe place at home when I'm there.

 

First of all I don't really get your argument about semi-automatic pistols not being allowed. I agree that not everyone should be able to buy fully automatic weapons, and that's how it is. You have to have a Class III firearms license to be able to get one, and go through all kinds of hoops and ladders, and then on top of that have the money to buy one. I don't know all the details, but it's not like average joes in America have fully automatic weapons sitting around.

I think handguns should be legal, and your argument that semi-automatic pistols shouldn't be allowed doesn't really make sense to me. Like some others said in the other thread, there isn't much difference between a semi-automatic pistol and a revolver.

And from the quote you posted...

"American history is inextricably linked with guns. No matter how hard we europeans try to convince you that what you're doing is absolute madness, you will never understand what we're talking about."

Well, I have the same kind of feeling about it. I'm pro gun, and it seems like no matter how hard we Americans try to explain to you how important the individual's right to bear arms is to our country's past, present and future, you'll never get it.

 

Did you actually read what he wrote fenderhutz? And what, you think a 12 guage shotgun is somehow "less evil" than a 9mm semi-automatic pistol???

 

So are you saying everybody should be forced to defend themselves with archaic, manually-operated technology? How exactly do you do a follow-up shot on a drugged-up criminal who wasn't stopped by the first round of .22 (and he WON'T be) when you have to work the bolt again before you can fire...?

 

Neither of those can be concealed in my car or in the drawer next to my bed.

I do find it interesting that at 19 I can buy semi-auto full powered versions of the M-16 and AK-47 but I can't own a hand gun...

 

Why does it matter how many people I personally know who have had their homes broken into? The fact is IT HAPPENS, and it happens A LOT. Why not be prepared?

 

Ah, I see. Just sweep it under the rug. Homes don't get broken into. People don't get murdered in their own homes. Nothing to see here, move along.

That wasn't a rhetorical question. I'm asking you: Why not be prepared?