arma virumque cano (et alia)
Hey, I'm just trying to help you.The GCN is SATIRE. A PARODY to illustrate how silly the gun grabbers are.How you can't see that is beyond me.
What is a good shotgun to buy for the home?
I like simple and reliable, so I actually prefer a good SxS or O/U myself (I have a Stoeger Condor Outback as my do-it-all shotgun). If I was in the market for a new one, I think this is pretty neat:http://www.stoegerindustries.com/firearms/stoeger_double_defense.phpThe top rail is nice if you want to attach a holographic sight (not really my thing), but the bottom rail for a flashlight is key for in and around the home use. Everyone seems to love a pump or semi-auto these days, but the good old SxS has three main advantages:1. Short length--not having to make room for some kind of action knocks a couple of inches off the OAL, even with 20" bbls2. Ultra-reliable--no action to jam, and if the round misfires, just pull the trigger on the 2nd bbl. Clearing it is also as easy as breaking it open and popping out the rounds.3. Ultra-fast--faster to fire than any other shotgun; there's no action to cycle or pumping requiredPlus they just look darn cool, and two 12 ga bores sticking in a home invader's face is really going to make him question his choice of occupation.
There are more reasons to not have a shotgun in the home than to have one. Unless you live in a neighborhood that's prone to break-ins, you have to be nuts to want guns.Colin's last paragraph gave the whole thing away. Folks who live in the macho fantasy world of fending off home invaders, when there are no home invaders, need guns. It's the insecure adolescent's syndrome of imagining the delicious scenario of fighting off an attacker, when there is no attacker.
Yeah, no rich, white folks living in an affluent neighborhood are ever the victim of a horrific home invasion, rape, murder and arson:http://abcnews.go.com/US/911-call-images-depict-jennifer-hawke-petit-withdrawing/story?id=11648639The crime rate in this country tells a different story, and yet you insist that victim disarmament is the solution. I've disproved your "rare as a meteorite" theory solely on the basis of numbers we all agree on (30K gun deaths + 200K gun injuries vs. 567 violent crimes/100K). Seriously, Mike, wake up and join the rest of us in reality.
I lived in Italy where MikeB now resides and now I live in America. As a political scientist and someone who understands all aspects of the US Constitution and not just the Second Amendment, I have the choice to practice all the privlidges I have as an American citizen. While I agree with MikeB on some of his gun views, not living in America has altered his view on gun ownership, universal health care, postal service, and the education system. thanks for the advice on a shotgun. What do you mean by SxS or O/U? Just like my experience at becoming more profient with my handgun, (handling, cleaning, firing)I look forward at learning more about long barrel weapons.
Kaveman:The GCN is SATIRE. A PARODY to illustrate how silly the gun grabbers are.How you can't see that is beyond me.It amazes me that anyone could be unaware that Gun Control Network is parody. The most abject, effete, degenerate Europussy in the world isn't that abject, effete, and degenerate.That sort of thing is mildly amusing, I suppose, but I don't really see the point. Jadefool and his Biggest (Only?) Cheerleader, Laci the Ambulance Chasing Dog, Japete, and the rest parody themselves with every utterance--they hardly need our help, and the fact that they apparently actually believe some of what they spout is even more hilarious.
Colin, When it's convenient for your argument you point out that most gun violence is gang and drug related and takes place in inner-city ghettos. Then when that's not convenient anymore, like when you want to point out how badly you need a gun to protect yourself, you trot out all those stats, the majority of which by your own admission is far removed from you.Violence does happen to white people in good neighborhoods, but for most of you, the need to defend yourself with a gun is never going to happen,ever. Yet, the chances of some mishap with the gun taking place over the course of your lifetime is far greater. That's a no brainer, man. You're the one should come back to reality.
Sorry, Il Principe. Didn't realize that you were kind of a new comer to the gun world. Welcome, btw. SxS = side by side, like the classic Old West coach shotgun. O/U = over/under, like a bird or trap/skeet shotgun. Shotguns are definitely a good way to get started in the world of long guns, IMHO.
Well, I'm not going to rehash my math here, but IIRC the numbers essentially say that I'm 60% more likely to need a gun to defend myself from violent crime (based on violent crimes stats for the US per 100K) than I am to be the victim of gun specific violence (and that was with my assumption that all gun injuries/deaths occur solely within the realm of the law abiding 80 million gun owners on both sides of the equation and occur on a one incident/one individual basis). Of course, despite the fact that I trust myself and my wife with our safe handling of firearms, there exists a minute chance of accidental injury or death as no one, myself included, is perfect. Compare that to the 0.5% or so chance that I might need to use a firearm defensively, and the decision becomes a no-brainer.Remember, a wise man once said that you can prove anything with facts, and maybe guns aren't the answer for everyone. However I know my personal situation, and to me they just make sense. All I want is to be able to make that decision for myself, and not have people like you tell me what to do based on your thoughts or feelings.Your side's whole preventative strategy for gun violence by controlling access to the tool based on some people possibly becoming criminals in the future has no basis in our legal system (innocent until proven guilty, due process, etc, etc) and makes absolutely no sense.Merry Christmas btw.
Colin, My gun control ideas are not "based on some people possibly becoming criminals in the future." There's no "possibly" about it. This is happening now. I admit you're right that there's no legal basis for intervening, at least not in the sense of the great movie "Minority Report." But there are ways to prevent a lot of those "possibly becoming criminals types" from getting guns in the first place.
Yeah, by trampling on the rights of the rest of us. Not exactly a recipe for success, Mike. Nor is it a recipe for gaining the support of the American people, as the sagging Brady Bunch coffers and email distro list prove.